Parliamentary Questions

24 Feb 2004: Column 331W

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the natural predators of the badger are, other than man; and what effect they exert on the United Kingdom badger population. [153961]

Mr. Bradshaw: Adult badgers have no natural predators, other than man in Britain. It is not unusual, however, for badger cubs to be killed by dogs, foxes and sometimes by adult badgers1.

24 Feb 2004: Column 332W

The impact of non-human induced mortality on the national badger population has not been quantified.

1 The Handbook of British Mammals (1991). Third Edition. Edited by G. B. Corbet and S. Harris. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.

24 Feb 2004: Column 332W

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many badgers have been culled in each of the (a) proactive and (b) inactive cull areas in each of the selected trial zones in each year since the trials commenced. [155081]

Mr. Bradshaw: The Randomised Badger Culling Trial compares 30 areas of 100 km 2 , grouped into 10 triplets. One of the following three "treatments" is allocated to each trial area:

'Proactive' culling where badgers are trapped and culled at the outset of the trial and at intervals afterwards.
'Reactive' culling where badgers are trapped and culled from social groups associated with farms which have a confirmed incident of bovine TB during the course of the trial.
'Survey only' areas where no trapping or culling takes place. Setts are surveyed regularly to check for signs of unlawful removal of badgers. These areas act as a scientific control against which the impact of the two culling strategies can be measured.

Culling in the reactive areas of the trial has been suspended.

Details of the badgers culled in the proactive and reactive treatment areas are given in the following table:

Badgers taken
to 12 Jan
2004
Triplet Proactive (P) May 1998
to Jan
1999 May 1999 toJan 2000 May 2000 toJan 2001 May 2002 to Jan 2003 May 2003 to Jan 2004 Total
or Reactive (R) P R P R P R P R P R P R
A 55 0 0 34 149 47 52 36 256 117
B 238 0 85 73 74 34 49 84 172 110 618 301
C 246 0 111 178 126 115 132 101 615 394
D 293 0 368 122 661 122
E (1)744 0 96 62 258 126 1,098 188
F 451 0 248 145 103 290 802 435
G 428 0 205 172 144 84 777 256
H 162 0 231 16 71 143 464 159
I 219 0 175 94 394 94
J 441 0 187 0 628 0
Sub total 238 386 73 1,970 246 2,057 641 1,662 1,106 6,313 2,066
Total (P and R) 238 459 2,216 2,698 2,768 8,379

(1) Combined total for initial and follow-up cull completed in the same culling year
Note:
No data for May 2001-January 2002 when trial suspended due to FMD

24 Feb 2004: Column 332W

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what targets have been set for the bovine TB testing of herds in the last five years for which figures are available; how many have been completed; and how long it will take to clear the backlog of required tests. [155082]

Mr. Bradshaw: The State Veterinary Service has two targets relating to TB testing of cattle herds:

(a) 95 per cent. of herds to be tested within one month of the due date, and
(b) 100 per cent. of herds to be tested within three months of the due date.

The following table details the performance figures for the years where figures are available.

2001 2002 2003(2)
Number of herds due to be tested 12,207 19,877 15,524
Completed tests within one month of the due date (percentage) 14.5 47.4 78.7
Completed tests within three months of the due date (percentage) 22.7 65.0 92.7
(2) to end September

The number of tests overdue at the end of December 2003 was 3,623 of which only 163 were more than 12 months overdue (provisional data). This is similar to the number of overdue TB tests recorded before the FMD epidemic.

24 Feb 2004: Column 333W

The number of overdue TB tests has remained more or less stable since April 2003, with no significant trend up or down. It is therefore considered that the clearance of the backlog of TB tests, which accumulated during the FMD epidemic, has been completed.

24 Feb 2004: Column 333W

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what budget was set by her Department for each year for all aspects of bovine TB research, testing, culling, compensation,

24 Feb 2004: Column 334W

fieldwork and other costs for the last five years for which figures are available; and what the actual spending was in each year. [155083]

Mr. Bradshaw: Historical information on the budgets originally set for various elements of the bovine TB programme is not readily available and can be provided only at disproportionate cost. However, a breakdown of the actual spend for the last five financial years is shown in the following table:

Expenditure on bovine TB in Great Britain: 1998–99 to 2002–03 Expenditure in £000
1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03
Compensation(3) 3,491 5,303 6,632 9,243 31,146
TB testing 7,247 8,329 8,675 3,571 12,398
Randomised Badger Culling Trial (RBCT) and associated research 2,988 4,392 6,630 6,001 6,479
Other research (not including RBCT) 2,541 4,114 5,266 6,112 6,824
Other costs(4) 8,617 9,002 8,996 5,557 17,055
Total (rounded figures) 24,883 31,141 36,199 30,485 73,902
(3) Includes compensation paid for cattle and deer slaughtered as a result of TB control measures.
(4) Includes State Veterinary Service staff costs and diagnosis carried out by the Veterinary Laboratories Agency.
Fieldwork costs are included in the expenditure shown for the RBCT and associated research.