Cull Campaign update

This week two more letters returned from government bodies I have contacted regarding the Badger cull.

I will post these responses below so you can make your own mind up about the responses. I have also removed the and address lines as well as any references to local people. I do not think it right to make these public.

The first response was from Natural England.

This letter pretty much follows the party line given by DEFRA, it just offers reassurance that they are doing the right thing in the right way.

I also wrote to Warwickshire County Council. I know they have no power over national policy but the cull will be happening in their county and they have a responsibility to at least have a view on the matter and hopefully be persuaded to oppose any culling on county-owned land.

I m not sure what this response leads to, it backs up my general feeling that local government had no idea about the cull expansion but also seems to suggest that they will support the cull... although it could mean they are willing to consider all options such as vaccinating badgers along the lines of the programme once led by Warwickshire Wildlife Trust. At my next local surgery I will have a clarification chat with my local councillor.

Thats all for now on the cull. A lot of data and information had been released about last years cull and I am formulating a post regarding my take on the data they have released.

Global Warming – Are we missing the point?

Global Warming – Are we missing the point?

As a conservationist for nearly 30 years, the issue of global warming despite its topicality has often faded into the background. When I was growing up in the 80’s and 90’s whilst global warming was a looming threat the danger to the ozone layer was more imminent. Ironically ozone is a part of the complex picture that global warming presents but with the ban on CFC’s the crisis was averted something that cannot be said for global warming.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Annual_Average_Temperature_Map.jpg

Global Warming is a contentious and occasionally divisive issue. It is a complex issue with a multitude of intricate physical and chemical interactions that feed into one another. As a biologist, I am well aware of my limitations with regards to chemistry and physics and have been content to align my views with those of the majority in the scientific community, up until now. With global warming continuing to be mired in the debate over the causes I decided it was time I did a deeper dive on the issue and get educated. To do this I have begun a course on Coursera called Global Warming 1: The science and modelling of climate change by Professor David Archer of the University of Chicago.

The course is exceptionally well put together and informative even if it is operating right at the limits of my understanding. The units are well arranged and help you build up an understanding of how climates are regulated and modified, this new found knowledge, however, has not changed my fundamental viewpoint that even after all this time we are missing the point about global warming.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Climate_science_opinion2.png

For years scientists have clashed with pseudo-scientists, industrialists and deniers and despite a worldwide consensus between the majority of scientists and reputable scientific bodies that global warming is occurring and is caused by man, it is this second fact that has caught the current debate in a thick syrupy trap. Few would disagree that the climate is warming, nor that we are still coming out of an ice age. We are already seeing changes in species distribution, loss of some glaciers and the defrosting of permafrosts. These things are happening now and are measurable. The practical among us would say that we need to be looking at are strategies to mitigate climate change and/or to reverse it but this is not going to happen at the appropriate scale until we shutdown the deniers and end the current debate, and this is the way to do it.

For many, the controversial point is the belief that global warming is not man-made and therefore we should not concern ourselves with our production of carbon dioxide and methane. Alternatively, deniers point to the fact that the climate naturally shifts over time and this is normal, that sun cycles, and sunspots account for the rise, the earth’s eccentric orbit, natural carbon dioxide release from volcanoes and so on. You can counter each of these points scientifically to show how they fit into climate models but the average man on the street is never going to understand the complexity of the models.

The simple answer to me as to why we need to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases like methane is linked to timescales and what is achievable. Regarding timescales, the issue is the short timeframe that these changes are occurring on. Yes, the climate changes, yes carbon dioxide in the atmosphere shifts but these changes are usually on the tens of millions of years scale not like we have seen in the 300 or so years since the start of the industrial revolution. Such a short timeframe is insufficient to allow natural processes such as evolution in organisms to occur or for the planets own regulatory system to adjust to the change nor is there necessarily the time available to protect those nations under threat of higher tides or other devastating effects.

Achievability is the key. What can we do to avert the threats coming from a rise in temperatures; the obvious answer is to cut emissions before we reach brink points. The barriers are the people who believe that this is all natural. The bottom line is temperature is rising and this will have a drastic effect on human populations, but what can we have an effect on? Can we alter the sun cycle, move up the cooling period to counteract the rise? No. Can we change the sunspot cycle, global dimming, and volcanic eruptions? No, no and no. We only have control over the quantities of greenhouse gas we are pumping into the atmosphere. This is the way we should be focusing our arguments. We need practical approaches to mitigate and reduce the negative effects. Act on the issues we can control to counteract the ones we cannot.

We can’t all follow the science behind climate change and not everyone will trust the scientists who study this for a living. We need a smarter more nuanced approach to the climate debate to move outside of the arguments that are going round in circles and move onto a more constructive argument that concerns practicalities. My piece of advice to end on is keep on fighting and educate yourself.

Britain's Mammals 2018: The Mammal Society's Guide to their Population and the Conservation Status - A review

It was with a mixture of excitement and trepidation that I opened my latest book purchase, ‘Britain’s Mammals 2018: The Mammal Society’s Guide to their Population and Conservation Status. This latest publication by the well-established organisation was published alongside much fanfare regarding the success and failures of our mammal species. National news picked up on the headline facts that one in five British mammals are at high risk of extinction and it is the findings of the review that this book is based on.

As one would expect from the Mammal Society the publication is well presented and illustrated with first-rate photographs of all the species. There is a breakdown of key findings in the first few pages before each species, in turn, is assessed. There is also a very interesting section on future priorities that should help guide and focus conservation efforts in the future. As someone interested the practical application of ecological theory and data this section alone is worth the reasonable cover price.

In the species accounts, each species’ IUCN status is listed and its population calculated with upper and lower limit estimates where possible. Past and future trends for the species as well as indications of changes to its range are also accounted. There is a written description of the fortunes of the species between 1995 and 2008 and details of the key threats. There is some information on habitat preference and this may seem scarce at first but there are many other publications which cover the specific ecology of these species and this is definitely not the thrust of the publication.

This publication is a status update and it does exactly what it does on the tin. Information is presented concisely and colourfully. One can be confident in the credibility of the data and appendices deal with the methodology. This is a must buy for any mammal enthusiast and the only negative thing to say is that it almost seems too colourful and well presented to contain such depressing news on the state of our mammals.

The publication is available from the NHBS priced £17.99.

A response at last

I have finally recieved a response from DEFRA. I will post it below. It did't really satisfy me. They did, to their credit, give links to the supporting materials. What annoyed me the most is the lack of public consultation on the expansion of the cull zone. Yes one was carried out in 2010, 8 years ago. A lot has changed in that time.

I leave you to formulate your own opinions:

Dear Mr Smith,

Thank you for your email of 9 March to the Secretary of State regarding bovine TB and badgers. I have been asked to reply and I apologise for the long delay in doing so.

Bovine TB is one of the greatest animal health threats to the UK. Over the last 12 months over 33,000 cattle have been compulsorily slaughtered in England to control the disease. That is why we are taking strong action to eradicate the disease and protect the future of our dairy and beef industries, with a comprehensive strategy including tighter cattle movement controls, more cattle testing and badger control in areas where badgers are an important factor in spreading disease to cattle. There is no evidence to suggest TB in other wildlife species is a problem that is driving the epidemic in cattle.

We are carrying out a review into what we should prioritise in the next phase of our strategy for achieving Officially Bovine Tuberculosis Free (OTF) status in England by 2038. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/a-strategy-for-achieving-bovine-tuberculosis-free-status-for-england-2018-review

In response to your query regarding the scientific validity of badger culling, The Randomised Badger Culling Trial (RBCT) provides scientific evidence that proactive badger culling in areas of England with a high incidence of bovine TB reduces levels of the disease relative to similar un-culled areas.

With regard to your comments that the outcome of previous badger culls were not made public, the results from the 2017 cull show that the culls were carried out safely, humanely and effectively in all 19 badger control areas. The Chief Veterinary Officer's (CVO) advice states that data gathered from the 19 areas showed that industry-led badger control can deliver the level of effectiveness required to be confident of achieving disease control benefits. Results of badger control in previous years can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/bovine-tb-controlling-the-risk-of-bovine-tb-from-badgers

Regarding biosecurity, the encouragement of better on- and off- farm biosecurity (i.e. measures to reduce the risk of transmission of TB between cattle and between badgers and cattle) was one of the commitments in the Government's TB Strategy in 2014. It is a key part of our strategy (alongside tougher cattle measures, badger vaccination and culling where the disease is rife). A biosecurity initiative is the five point plan. This practical biosecurity guidance was collectively agreed by Government and industry. It sets out basic good practice for TB biosecurity. The guidance contains five key recommendations that farmers can implement to help protect their herd from TB, which can be found at http://www.tbhub.co.uk/biosecurity/protect-your-herd-from-tb/

In response to your concerns regarding other TB reservoirs, cattle and badgers are the two main reservoirs of infection in this country. Other species are considered 'spillover' hosts and so play an insignificant role in the persistence of bovine TB in England, particularly when compared with cattle and badgers.

Cattle measures - including reducing the disease transmission risks from cattle movements - are the foundation upon which our Strategy is based. As we tackle the disease in wildlife, we must reinforce our cattle measures to sustain the benefits we expect to achieve. We continually look for opportunities to enhance them. In recent years TB cattle controls have been tightened considerably. For example, in 2016 we introduced compulsory post-movement testing of cattle moved from annual (or more frequent) surveillance testing areas of England and Wales to the Low Risk Area (LRA) of England, the compulsory pre-movement testing of cattle from such herds has been in place since 2006.

Regarding your concerns of the welfare of the badgers being culled, the CVO's advice remains that the likelihood of suffering in badgers culled by controlled shooting is comparable with the range of outcomes reported when other culling activities, currently accepted by society, have been assessed, such as deer shooting. We publish a report of humaneness each year which makes clear that the likelihood of suffering in badgers culled by controlled shooting is comparable with other culling activities accepted by society. The report can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/bovine-tb-controlling-the-risk-of-bovine-tb-from-badgers

In response to your concerns that culled badgers were not assessed for the presence of TB, as part of the evidence base to support an adaptive TB Strategy, it is important that we understand TB disease in both cattle and badger populations. To supplement the existing comprehensive TB surveillance in cattle, in the 2016 badger control operations we initiated development of a TB surveillance program on badger carcasses obtained from the culling operations. Tissue sampling, followed by culturing and genotyping is the most reliable method for diagnosing TB in badgers, but challenges remain with this technique when the quality of the carcasses is variable. Once the method has been optimised, the data obtained will not be used to inform short term decision-making, but to provide a longer term view of the disease pattern in the cull areas. The information on the 2016 surveillance project is available on the GOV.UK website: https://www.gov.uk/go vernment/publications/bovine-tb-surveillance-in-wildlife-in-england-2016-to-2017

Finally, in response to your comment on Natural England's "Opportunity to Comment" consultation, a consultation was previously run in 2010 which allowed individuals to comment on the social, ethical and scientific aspects of badger culling.

Kind regards,

TB Correspondence Team

Ministerial Contact Unit

Three days of Wildlife

This long weekend is the last before I return to work tomorrow for the final 7-week haul to the Summer Holidays.

As part of my action against the badger cull I started Friday by posting off 13 letters to the heads of DEFRA, Natural England and Warwickshire County Council. I am not expecting a reply but I have to say something. Additionally,
my welcome pack from the Badger Trust arrived and I got in touch the Warwickshire Badger Group to tell them of the setts I knew of.

Several weeks ago I discovered a large network of holes not far from me and so in the afternoon I set up on of my trail cameras to see what I could find. I continued my cycle up to the top fields where sometimes I see Little Owl, sadly none were in evidence but I did spot a vibrant Greenfinch and the local Buzzard wheeling casually in the sky carrying his dinner, a rabbit from the looks of it.

The following day I went back to the camera to see if the sett was being used and retrieved the camera. I was pleased to discover that it is in use and had at least one cub. In the clip below you can see play-fighting behaviour.

Last night with my battery recharged I put out my moth trap. I was a little disappointed with the results this morning but I did get some interesting non-moth inhabitants including an Alder Fly and 3 Mayflys Ephemera danica. 

I collected 8 moths in total. 4 Heart and Darts (Agrostis exclamationis), 1 unknown Pug, 1 White Spotted Pug (Eupethicia tripunctaria), 1 Marsh Pug (Eupethicia pygmaeata) and 1 micro moth Eudonia pallida.

Heart and Dart

White Spotted Pug

Mayfly