It has long been an approach of
government to publish bad news amongst worse news or at least use the
smokescreen of a major event to smuggle out news. Five days ago, the Government
published the results of the Godfray Report, an investigation into the efficacy
of the Badger Cull in England. Sadly, the findings of this report did not
garner the news time it deserved due to the ongoing development of Brexit.
The BBC at least ran a short
piece on the findings, but anyone not already involved in the debate could easily
have missed it. So, what did the report say and what were its aims?
Sir Charles Godfray is a population
biologist who was commissioned by Michael Gove, the Environment Secretary, to review
the Government’s 25-year Bovine TB strategy with a view to gaining a better
insight into planning the next step in the aim to eradicate TB by 2038. Godfray
was walking a fine line in his report and when I saw him interviewed, I felt
him choosing his words very carefully. The thrust of his findings was that
whilst Badgers do transmit bovine TB to cattle and are part of the problem the
farming industry must take more responsibility for biosecurity and develop
safer trading practices. This may not sound like much but Godfray is providing
more evidence that whilst there is a reservoir of TB in the wildlife the
primary transmission vector is between cattle themselves.
True the culling has had a modest
effect, modest is the key word the report uses. Its obvious, if you kill any
reservoir of the infection then there will be some effect, however we know that
the perturbation effect reduces this benefit and does not stop reinfection from
cattle.
Even I, an environmentalist understands
that the fight against TB is a holistic one. It needs many parts for it to work.
You must tackle the reservoir in the wildlife as much as the reservoir in the
stock. What has happened so far is an over emphasis on the wildlife and the use
of culls rather than vaccination. Farmers are easily demonised in this response
and I certainly get angry with the NFU’s blinkered view, but this ire needs to
be tempered by the realisation that farmers are business men and that this
needs an element of business behind the decisions. Farmers need to be rewarded
for good biosecurity and compensated for loses. Biosecurity needs a legislative
footing and powers to prosecute more easily alongside the assistance for those that
are trying. Because of these points I applaud Godfrays suggestion of an independent
body for disease control, if the cull has taught us anything DEFRA, Natural England
and the NFU have an inability for a coherent scientifically backed approach.
This report is a small but
significant step in ending the cull and still moving towards TB free status, we
just need to keep up the pressure. I would urge all interested to read the report
and then contact you MP requesting that the cull be replaced by a vaccination
programme, biosecurity is increased and that an independent body is
established.
