The Badger Benefit Corps, BBC - at it again.

We are used now to the stream of 'fake news' coming from the UK's self pronounced premier broadcaster. And today is no exception.

An ex chairman of the group charged with examining the badgers culls overseen by Natural England, Professor Ranald Munroe posed a FoI question and received an answer which he then passed to the BBC' Pallab Ghosh.

The startling headline - [link] indicates the 'suffering' of a shot badger, which takes (the report says) 5 minutes to die.

Really?

No. Not a bit of it. The protocol written in the NE Bible which shooters on the culls have to follow to the letter, explains what happens after the shot is fired and crucially, the time allowed for this:

"After shooting a badger and in the belief of correct shot placement, regardless of first impressions (unless it is obviously still alive), an assessment needs to be made to confirm that it is dead. A final check for signs of life must be made within 5 minutes of the final shot to that animal and before the animal is bagged up."

That "5 minutes" is in bold font too - it are not ours. But that is what Prof. Munroe has fixated on.


This is the protocol.

 * After discharging his firearm, the shooter's banksman clicks a stopwatch.

 * The shooter then watches the target for at least a minute to check for movement (through telescopic night sights)

 * Then he dons his bio secure TB proof gloves and overalls, and makes his way across often difficult terrain, in the dark, to where the carcase lies.

* He then has a check list of what to look for, including tickling the eye's cornea with a stick, to assure himself the animals is really dead.

 Only then can he give a thumbs up to his banksman, who stops the clock.

So the 5 minutes mentioned in bold, and thoroughly misrepresented, is not the time it takes a shot badger to die. It is the time is takes the shooter, jumping through all these hoops, to ascertain that death has occurred. And that is quite different.

 The rest is mischief.

Wales is bleeding

The situation of zoonotic Tuberculosis in Wales, is not only a national disgrace, it was totally avoidable.



 


(Apologies - blogger doesn't like the video link, so it's added as a URL  Click the link below to view)

The instigator of this carnage, having done a spectacular U turn on her proposed badger cull, is CVO, Christianne Glossop. Pictured above, the lady had it right in her 2010 video clip, but these are comments she would now rather forget.

On the video, She gave a   stunning overview -[video link] of her plans to eradicate TB in Wales. And then reneged on them, in favour of more brutal cattle measures and vaccination of badgers. 

Beginning two years ago, by signing farmers up for 'Enhanced Measures' the Welsh Assembly Government's hatchet squad have set about decimating the cattle population, while admitting that they do not have the resources to even begin to tackle the wildlife testing regime which was supposed to run parallel to it.

This is studiously ignoring documented historical evidence, which we quoted from the CVO reports for England in this posting. - [link] Only when action was taken against resident badgers, did the incidence of cattle TB begin to drop 1972 - 76. But no amount of carnage, testing and bio security even made a dent.

So we set out below the stories of some family farms now affected in South Wales. Presently one third of cattle farms in the area are under restriction.

The first breakdown for one family dairy herd was 2004: the farm would lose a few cattle, subsequently go clear, often over the winter housing period, only to fail again when the cattle grazed.

From June 2006, no bought in cattle entered this particular herd, which was protected from neighbours by double fencing and had its own slurry spreaders.

For the milking herd to remain at around 150 animals, the owners decided to use expensive sexed semen to enable them to breed their own replacements from the very best cows in the herd and a decision was made to buy no cattle in at all.

So this farm has operated a completely closed herd, for the last thirteen years.

In late 2017 another breakdown restricted the farm, and after 18 months of testing and slaughter, the APHA vets told the farmers that their cattle would be subject to 'Enhanced Measures'. This meant that all cattle would be tested under severe interpretation every two months, and all animals over 6 months blood tested annually.

Although a risk assessment form would have been filled out for this breakdown, APHA declined to inspect or map the badger setts on the farm, even though farmers involved in these 'Enhanced measures' had been given the impression that badger control, (trap test and remove any positives) would be part and parcel of the programme.

 Due to limited resources (for badgers at least) only a very few farms (6 ?) are enrolled in testing badgers. One third of farms in the area are under TB restriction at the time of writing and along this valley over 600 reactor cattle have been slaughtered..

Early this year, the farm tested under these measures, and 21 animals failed. Of those, 9 were pregnant, two due to calve within the month. Following a meeting with APHA, the case officers (having refused before) did inspect the badger sets on the farm, finding one rotten carcase within 300m of the farm buildings. There was evidence of considerable badger activity, including latrines, runs and sets.

The farmer was assured that his case would be put forward for the promised badger sampling. To date this has not happened, and in last month a further test at severe interpretation revealed another 30 cattle to be shot. Eighteen of these were confirmed as pregnant.

It may be pertinent here, to remind readers that when a heavily pregnant cow is shot, her calf can take up to ten minutes for its placental blood supply to fail, and for it to die. During that time, it will kick, adding greatly to the distress suffered by cattle owners of seeing a lifetime's work destroyed before their eyes.

 Currently, the milking herds on some of these farms have been reduced by almost half, some farmers have received no written action plan and on many farms, no one has trapped or tested any badgers due to 'lack of resources'.

Those same lack of resources mean that the blood tests (Gamma ifn / IDEXX) have not yet been carried out on cattle either. But that is no bad thing, as the blood tests have a false positive rate said ( optimistically in our opinion) to be around 5 per cent, and if they are instigated, that means another bunch of cattle for the chop, the vast majority of which will be NVL (No visible Lesions).

In the year to April 2019, Christianne Glossop and her gang of hit men (and women) have diligently stuck to their guns and shot 12,000 reactor cattle. However, from their recent report - [link] we read that just 26 badgers may have suffered the same fate, using a penside test (DPP) with only 55.3 per cent sensitivety.

 The badgers released but subsequently testing +ve to laboratory screening of their bloods, were not recaptured again. Well that's just great then isn't it? Ten days to shoot a pregnant reactor cow confined in isolation, on a severe interpretation of the skin test or gamma bloods, but release badgers which subsequently were found to be +ve for zTB? And vaccinate them into the bargain ?

 And the cost to the taxpayer of that exercise in futility? £395,802. 10

 Our co editor and many veterinary pathologists (although obviously not Ms. Glossop) have pointed out that as badger densities increase and with them, the opportunity to spread the disease that is endemic within them, by taking a brutal line with cattle which may have met the challenge - and fought it off, we are leaving an very 'naive' population of cattle to face an increasingly contaminated environmental challenge. Madness.

 Finally, this week's Farmers Weekly Opinion piece - [link] by Will Evans hits the nail on the head.

Will points out that 19 per cent rise in cattle slaughterings to April 2019 as evidence of farmers' co operation with the zTB programme. And describing current policy as 'dreadfully wrong',  he calls for the Welsh Assembly Government to face up to its responsibilities and control the disease in badgers.

We agree. And would point out that Ms. Glossop's legacy will not be the outcome of that video she would rather forget, but the picture below.

Uncompensated costs of a TB breakdown

We have spoken of the effects of zoonotic Tuberculosis (zTB) in depth on this blog, but rarely have we touched on the little 'extras - link that farmers have to accommodate while under restriction. These are side effects, uncompensated for and unwelcome.
We listed them on the posting linked to above, but will do so again as in the years since we wrote the list, many things may have changed - and not for the better.

 * Testing cattle 4 - 6 times / year instead of once (or as directed by Defra). 2 days per week x 6 = 12 days labour for up to 4 people.  Adding up to 300 hours / year.

 * Gamma ifn used in non veterinary circumstances, and regularly requiring retests. Gamma tests are not tied in with skin tests and may delay their usefulness.

 * Stress on cattle during confinement and testing. Weight loss on beef cattle, and growing dairy heifers is estimated at about 7 - 10 days each time tested. Six / eight weeks loss of growth in a year.

 * Abortions and early embryonic death in pregnant cattle after testing.

 * Loss of her calf and breeding value of a slaughtered pregnant cow.

 * Extended calving index for dairy herds and barren suckler cows. Herd genetic losses.

 * Trauma and even death to animals resisting penning and needles. Suckler calves particularly at risk.

 * Injuries to stockmen / vets involved in handling these cattle.

 * Slaughter of unsaleable calves costing £15 - £17.50 head to knackerman. ** (see below)

 * Sale but at much reduced price of calves, under licence to avoid shooting. Now mandatory under welfare rules and pressure from milk processors. (see below)

 * No sale for store or breeding stock or newly calved dairy/beef heifers/ bulls except under very limited Defra license system and often at much reduced prices.

* Compensation for animals bought in under license to a herd under restriction, which subsequently become reactors, halved.

* No licensed 'On' movements until at least one herd test completed after a breakdown. Leaves a gap in fattening units' cash flow.

 * No entries into Agricultural Shows or specialist sales for exceptional breeding stock.

 * Cancellation of farm sales, extended farm tenancies and retirement planning in tatters.

 * Overstocking on home (Tb restricted) holding, extra cattle need extra food, bedding and even housing.

 * Conversely, loss of volume and profile bonuses on level milk payments from milk buyers. Can be substantial amounts.

 * Replacement stock, especially with organic, rare or endangered breeds of cattle - unavailable.

 * Bio security risks of bringing in replacement cattle from other herds to a 'closed herd' under restriction.

 * Insurance premiums for Tb up ten fold, with cover reduced by half for existing policies. In the event of a breakdown, cover will not be re instated, and new policies as rare as hens' teeth. 'Exposure to risk is too great', the man said. Most livestock farmers now un-insurable for zTb.

 *Sales of 'green top milk' or unpasteurised cheeses / yoghurts - banned. Product in store destroyed.

 * Sales of all raw milk into food chain from 'reactor animals' - banned. Disposal - difficult.


 So what has prompted this reminder of the uncompensated costs of a TB breakdown?

Many farmers who have experienced a breakdown in the last few years will have received a letter, inviting them to quantify these uncompensated costs. The project partners include Defra, Apha, Welsh Assembly Government, Scotland's Rural College, Edinburgh (SRUC) and assorted data processors.

 One of our main contributors receiving this letter is in the middle of a nightmare restriction, involving the different arms of Apha which have yet to find a way of communicating with each other, let alone the farmer concerned. And so was keen to let rip - until he read on in his letter that the breakdown SRUC were investigating was in October 2014.

Now I don't know about most of our readers, but events last week sometimes pass me by, so almost 5 years ago??? Seriously?

 Nevertheless, he dutifully put a price on the extra labour for testing, pedigree animals sold on the hook instead of for breeding and many of the other 'advantages' of TB restriction we have listed above. There was also an opportunity to add extra comments, which you will be unsurprised to learn, he added with a vengeance. Especially the brutal wording of some Defra phone calls and letters.

** What else has changed in more recent times, is pressure from Farm Assurance desk jockeys and some milk buyers re the disposal of surplus calves from a dairy herd under restriction. Defra have kindly made existing calf isolation units pretty nearly unworkable, and new ones difficult to licence.
Once in one of these units, any animal remains in the slaughter-only system for its lifetime (Finishing Units only) and cannot be sold on the open market, further reducing its value.

Do dairy farms stack them up? double-decker calf units maybe?

We also have that EU Directive - [link] coming in on 21st April 2021, and applying both to 'third countries' or Member states, which gives the Union the powers to ban products from any country which they deem to be a risk. And that we most certainly are.

With disparate groups of farmers trying to chase badgers for 42 nights annually and catch around 70 per cent of them, while all the above rain down on our cattle and restricted farms, 365 days a year.

And in Wales, the situation is even worse, with vaccination having taken the place of a proposed cull. This despite the fact that four separate trials in two countries have vaccinated badgers - [link] ( pre screened ones too) and as far as numbers of cattle breakdowns were concerned, achieved absolutely nothing. Zilch.

Your contributor inquired of the questioner operating this latest survey, as to its purpose.

"To help shape future TB policy" was the answer.

Well that would be a first. Defra have no policy - [link] regarding zTB apart from dreaming up more imaginative ways of reducing our cattle population. Their collective heads remain firmly in the sand on eradicating the disease we know as zoonotic Tuberculosis from any other source.