Ö÷²¥´óÐã

As we always say here "science is the answer". So what does science tell us about how to tackle the spread of bovine TB and the role of infected badgers?

The short answer is it tells us we need to have more science before we can make a decision.

For those new to the problem you can find a comprehensive guide to bovine TB and the role badgers play . But for those outside farming perhaps the most important fact is that the disease costs us £108m a year and even more in lost agricultural business.

In these financially difficult times it's worth noting that both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats promised to introduce some form of badger control to tackle the spread of bovine TB in their election manifestos.

However the science doesn't appear to support culling badgers. As reported at the time it seems killing badgers actually increases the incidence of bovine TB. It's one reason ministers have been reluctant to authorise a .

While culling reduces the incidence of TB breakdown in cattle herds inside the cull zone, infected badgers who escape then wander off to find a new set which they then infect. And so the bovine TB outside the cull zone actually increases.

And there's more as researchers from Imperial College note in a later ;

"Our findings show that the reductions in cattle TB incidence achieved by repeated badger culling were not sustained in the long term after culling ended and did not offset the financial costs of culling. These results, combined with evaluation of alternative culling methods, suggest that badger culling is unlikely to contribute effectively to the control of cattle TB in Britain."

Eleven thousand badgers were killed as part of the trial which has now finished. Some of the trial took place here in the Midlands. Since it ended those scientists have continued to monitor the health of cattle in and around the various culling areas. And something has changed.

Where once they said culling made things worse, the latest update based on the latest data says something very ;

"These latest results are consistent with a constant benefit of proactive culling continuing through this latest period. However, the effects observed outside trial areas are consistent with no ongoing effects of proactive culling in these areas."

In other words culling would be an effective option to control TB based on this data and a cull wouldn't spread the disease as originally thought.

So now we are left with science that says two conflicting things. Either culling spreads TB or it helps control it, but which is it? The scientists say they need to monitor the impact of this cull for much longer to see which of these two apparently conflicting ideas is correct.

Interestingly both badger groups and farmers say the science is the only basis on which to proceed. And obviously this research supported first one side of the argument and now the other. Eventually it will settle as we gather more data because in the end science is the answer.

Except economics triumphs over science in the political arena. The Government has just decided to scale back a badger vaccination trial to save just £6m over five years. That pales into insignificance next to the £500m we'll spend on compensating farmers for bovine TB over the same period. In the end tackling bovine TB may be less about badgers, farming and science. And more about saving taxpayers money.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?