Examination of Witnesses (Questions 160
- 179)
WEDNESDAY 20 JUNE 2007
DR RICHARD
YARNELL, MR
TREVOR LAWSON,
MR COLIN
BOOTY AND
MS CLAIRE
ROBINSON
Q160 Mr Williams: Can you put a number
on a handful?
Mr Booty: No, my recollection
is that something of the order of 1 or 2% might go on—
Q161 Mr Williams: How many badgers.
It is very easy to talk in percentages, but are we talking about
50,000 badgers having serious effects of TB?
Mr Booty: No, you are probably
talking about a matter of hundreds.
Q162 Mr Williams: So more than 100?
Mr Booty: Probably in that region.
Why I said it was one of the $64,000 questions in this equation
is because the last national badger survey that was undertaken
was over ten years ago, so there is no current baseline data to
inform that part of your question. There is a range of estimates
that are put out that are between 300,000 and 400,000—it
is in that sort of area—and the population in some areas
has shown signs of increase, in some areas has shown signs of
stability.
Q163 Mr Williams: Anecdotally people
would say the badger population is increasing rapidly, but you
do not believe that that is the case?
Dr Yarnell: The long-term studies
have very accurate data on publishing dynamics of badgers. In
the Woodchester Park study, which I am sure you are all aware
of, the population did increase in the 1990s, it plateaued off
around 2000 and I believe that now the population is actually
starting to decrease, and I believe they are going to publish
that data shortly. It is very difficult to know what is happening
with the badger population. There is a lot of anecdotal evidence
and a feeling of what is happening based on what people see on
the roads and so on, but it does not correlate very well to actual
numbers.
Q164 Mr Williams: The behaviour of
badgers visiting cattle sheds, for instance, is a relatively new
phenomenon, or not? Some people would say the increase in the
badger population is forcing badgers into positions and territory
that they have not taken up before.
Mr Lawson: It is new in the sense
that is has been filmed for the first time. What was curious about
that research at Woodchester Park is that the farmers, when they
were asked by the scientists, said that they did not think badgers
were getting into their buildings, and when they were shown the
footage they said, "My goodness." They had no idea what
was going on on the ground. On the issue of population, let us
be clear about one thing, there are two factors that are going
to govern badger population dynamics in the round. The major one
is habitat availability. Unless there are major shifts in habitat
availability in the countryside as a result of major changes in
agricultural practice, then populations will remain largely stable,
unless you cull them or some other large scale element from outside,
say, for example, climate change leading to more prolonged, dry
summers having a negative impact on badger reproduction, but even
then wildlife will compensate and take advantage of the habitat
to the maximum by breeding faster; so it is unlikely that there
is a major shift in that regard. We have seen figures bandied
around of badger populations in excess of one million, then it
goes up to two million the next week and three million the next
week, but on average the overall figures coming in are around
300,000 to 350,000. Can I just add, on this issue of how many
badgers are ill with bovine TB, when you look at the ISG's data
one of the other things that that makes clear is that TB varies
enormously in terms of its intensity in both time and space, and
so badgers in one area may have higher levels of TB than in others
but that is not consistent over time, so you could not look at
an area of the country with any degree of accuracy and specify
whether three badgers or ten badgers in that thousand square kilometres
had TB at that time.
Q165 Mr Williams: Do you believe
that bovine TB in badgers is an animal welfare issue and, if it
is, do you think there should be any priority for developing a
vaccine to deal with that animal welfare issue?
Mr Booty: There are two related
elements to that question. I will take the first one first and
come back to the vaccine. Generally speaking, we take the view
that TB in badgers is not a significant animal welfare issue.
Society at large (and I do not mean just our society but it was
a point that came out in one of the Defra consultations on the
wider animal health and welfare strategy) takes the view that
disease in wildlife is part and parcel of wildlife, it is one
of the challenges and one of the drivers behind what causes species
to evolve. Society does not get involved with wild animals that
have many diseases intrinsically. There is, particularly from
our perspective, a nasty little parasite that burrows away into
the nasal cavity and brains of stoats and weasels, but there is
not an animal welfare strategy to deal with that parasite that
has that effect on stoats and weasels. Society becomes involved
with disease in wildlife really for two reasons. One is because
it has a zoonotic effect. In the case of badgers it is having
implications into cattle disease and, potentially perhaps, human
disease. The other scenario is where a wildlife disease is having
a biodiversity impact, something like the squirrel pox virus.
Those are the situations, not usually because of disease per
se in the wild animal. The other element of your question
was about a vaccine.
Q166 Mr Williams: For badgers?
Mr Booty: I think for badgers,
yes, but not just from the perspective that it would be good for
badgers. I think, broadening it out, ultimately a vaccine may
help provide a solution for this problem. It is the approach that
is being developed and researched in New Zealand, it is also the
route that the teams in Ireland are investigating and it is also
a route that is being investigated in this country and, fortunately,
there is collaboration between the various parties and I think
that ultimately is the route that we need to go down. I am aware
not only that the Chairman is watching the clock, or whatever,
but that one must be wary about making simplistic comparisons,
but if you consider the situation with the rabies virus in Europe,
where for many years the problem of wildlife rabies occurred and
it was attempted to be dealt with by a slaughter policy of various
species of wildlife on the Continent, that singularly failed to
address the spread of rabies and it was not until an oral bait
was developed to deal with it that we have seen a dramatic decline
in the incidence of rabies throughout the European mainland?
Chairman: Mr Drew had a question on wildlife.
Q167 Mr Drew: Again the problem is,
and this is one of the difficulties, in a sense we are obsessed
with bovine TB in badgers, but, of course, bovine TB is carried
by a number of species, particularly roe deer. I know you do not
like hypotheticals, but if we were to see domestic animals become
more subjected to bovine TB, which would then have an impact on
the human species, would that change your mind? I know that is
a difficult one for you to say yes or no to, but there are reasonable
scenarios out there if the spread of bovine TB was to carry on
uninhibited?
Mr Booty: If I can take the element:
does the spread of bovine TB cause us concern? Yes, of course
it causes us concern, but I think what follows from that is how
does one effectively address that spread of TB, and that is where
we wish to get to; so action that would effectively prevent that
spread is where we need to be.
Q168 Patrick Hall: There has been
speculation about possibly the effect of a Government decision
not to cull. In fact, as long ago as December 2005 the Deputy
Chairman of the ISG, Professor Donnelly, was reported as saying
that if the Government banned badger culling it could end up with
a serious problem of patchy, illegal culling. As we all know,
the badger is a protected animal species and there are possible
criminal sanctions, including imprisonment, if someone is found
guilty of an offence. I am glad to see that Mr Raymond, the Deputy
NFU President, said last October that some badger culling was
already taking place in certain parts of the country by desperate
people. Could I ask the two organisations before us now, does
illegal badger culling take place and, if so, would a ban put
the pressure on to increase that and, if so, what should be done
to tackle that? Maybe Mr Booty could start.
Mr Booty: In relation to your
question about patchy, illegal culling, the evidence that we have
before us shows that organised legal culling can make matters
worse, and, therefore, it follows from that that anything less
than that in terms of patchiness or illegality is likely to make
a situation worse rather than better. One can certainly sympathise
and understand the concerns of farmers, we are not unsympathetic
to farmers, who are in a mess on this, but what I think has not
been well undertaken so far is the translation of the sort of
science that is coming out of this work. What is this perturbation?
What does that involve? What are the implications for that? I
think that needs to be more clearly and concisely conveyed.
Q169 Chairman: Can we just come back
to the question that was asked instead of having a lecture on
perturbation?
Mr Booty: I am sorry, my train
of thought wandered from where it started.
Q170 Chairman: You perturbated. Can
you come back now to the question Mr Hall asked you. Have you
got any evidence that any illegal culling has been going on?
Mr Booty: The RSPCA routinely,
throughout the course of the year, receives a number of complaints
about illegal badger activity and persecution. It is always, in
whatever field of endeavour you are talking about, difficult to
judge how much illegal activity is going on? How much of the iceberg
are you picking up?
Q171 Chairman: Simply, the answer
is you have had some complaints but you have got no evidence?
Ms Robinson: In terms of illegal
badger culling or just general complaints about badger—
Chairman: Illegal badger culling.
Q172 Patrick Hall: The question is
illegal badger culling. You are an organisation that would be
at the centre, I guess, of hearing about this and may in fact
prosecute.
Mr Booty: The RSPCA regularly
undertakes prosecutions of those involved in illegal badger digging
and illegal badger baiting. That has been the case for a number
of years. There are not a large number of cases each year, but
there are a steady number of cases.
Q173 Mr Gray: Those people that are
allegedly badger baiting, that is quite different?
Mr Booty: Yes, I said badger digging
and badger baiting.
Q174 Mr Gray: That is quite a different
thing, a different group of people.
Mr Booty: Oh yes.
Q175 Chairman: Before we get into
too much speculation, the short answer is you do something, but
you have not got any specific examples of what Mr Hall was asking
you about?
Ms Robinson: I am not aware of
any cases having been reported.
Q176 Chairman: So the answer is no.
That is very good. What about the Badger Trust? Have you got any
proof that there has been illegal badger culling going on? It
is yes or no. Have you got any?
Mr Lawson: Can I raise the issue
of the definition of "illegal", and it is an important
issue, because the protection of badgers—
Q177 Chairman: Let me put it in rather
more layman's language. What we are talking about is people going
out with various forms of firearm on their farm and doing whatever
they want to do to badgers: shooting and killing them to put it
in straight language.
Mr Lawson: There have been documented
cases of this behaviour taking place, on occasion broadcast by
the individuals involved on the media, and the question has arisen:
should they be prosecuted? Our understanding of the issue is that
it poses a difficult area for the Crown Prosecution Service insofar
as there is—
Q178 Chairman: Before we get into
the Crown Prosecution Service, I think Mr Hall was interested
to know if anything had been going on. We will worry about prosecution
at another time. We are trying to get an idea if there are a lot
of people going out and doing DIY culls?
Mr Lawson: I think the short answer
to that is that we do not know.
Chairman: Fine. Mr Hall, back to you.
Q179 Patrick Hall: We will move on
then, because if you have not got any evidence, or if the NFU
seems to think it has been going on, the question was, would a
total ban increase the pressure for illegal activity, but you
have left that hanging in the air, which is entirely up to you.
Could I turn to another matter? Mr Booty, you said a few minutes
ago that the issue that we are talking about today is not a significant
animal welfare issue, and that was, I think, with regard to the
badger; but is this not, in fact, an animal welfare issue, certainly
with regard to cattle, I would have thought perhaps badgers too,
but maybe there is a different definition because some are wild
and others are domesticated animals. Certainly the NFU seems to
have a view about the RSPCA's position on this. There has been
a recent comment from the Director of Communications saying, with
regard to the RSPCA, that in resisting action to deal with the
disease in wildlife, the RSPCA was turning a blind eye to the
welfare of tens of thousands of cattle that are either slaughtered
prematurely each year because of TB or which are subject to near
intolerable levels of stress caused by almost continual testing.
How should we fairly balance the animal welfare issues that legitimately
arise in this difficult question?
Mr Booty: I think, in terms of
animal welfare, my colleagues in the Society's farm animal welfare
department would rank much higher up the scale of animal welfare
issues problems such as lameness and mastitis, which affect a
far larger number of cattle and have a far greater welfare impact.
In terms of the cattle that are slaughtered, the question of whether
that slaughter is premature or not is not in itself an animal
welfare issue because the slaughter will be undertaken humanely,
so the slaughter itself is not a welfare issue. There may be welfare
issues associated with the consequences of the restrictions on
the farmer's operations, that perhaps he will have to retain more
stock for longer, et cetera, problems with sufficient feedstuffs,
et cetera, those sorts of miscellaneous consequences on how they
operate their farming business, but in terms of direct cattle
welfare, no, my colleagues in the farm animals department do not
believe that it is a significant cattle welfare problem itself.
It is not as if the disease is progressing in the cattle to a
clinical state. The testing mechanism is endeavouring to pick
it up in the earlier stages.
Ms Robinson: To come in on the
end of that, I think Colin has hit the nail on the head there.
In terms of welfare, if you are looking at culling strategies
or how you deal with animals that are potentially infected, in
terms of the cattle it is in a very controlled environment, it
is done with somebody who is competent at humanely dispatching
cattle. With regard to a possible cull of badgers, obviously in
the trials you have had skilled, trained people who did it humanely;
whereas the concern for us in terms of welfare of the badgers
and any possible cull is that there have been rumours that they
might not necessarily be the same kind of trained people, but
it is a real dilemma in terms of balancing cattle welfare against
badger welfare.
| 
