Annex B
Note of a Meeting between Minister of
State (Ben Bradshaw) and Group Chair (John Bourne)
PRESENT
| Minister of State |
|
| Mr Ben Bradshaw (and his private Secretary)
|
| ISG | Defra |
| Professor John Bourne (Chairman) | xxx
|
| Dr Alan Patey (Note Taker) | xxx
|
1. Mr Bradshaw welcomed Professor Bourne and asked how
the ISG was progressing its work. Professor Bourne said that it
had, at times, been a difficult 9 months although it was also
encouraging that Field Trial data were showing that its design
criteria had been met and that the outcome of the Field Trial
was soundly based. The difficulties arose from the ISG and the
RBCT being subjected to a large amount of unwarranted criticism,
much of it extremely personal in nature. He believed that a great
deal of this was because of the misinformation on RBCT culling
efficiency (ie 20-60% effective) promulgated by Defra last year
in its public consultation document on badger culling, and the
answer given to a Parliamentary Question on RBCT trap interference.
Although the latter was accurate in the data it presented, it
gave the impression, in the way it was worded, that trap interference
had seriously damaged the RBCT, which it had not.
2. In answer to questions from Mr Bradshaw on where the
erroneous set of figures had originated and had these matters
now been resolved, Professor Bourne said that he was very pleased
that the Minister had wished to counter such criticism, eg in
his rebuttal letter to the Secretary (Dr L Thomas) of the Veterinary
Association for Wildlife Management. The origin of these figures
had been described in the minutes of the May ISG Meeting. These
represented an attempt by CSL to provide data for use in their
economic model and were not intended as a reliable or true measure
of trapping efficiency in the RBCT, and related solely to the
first cull in Proactive Areas. There was now evidence that culling
efficiency was much higher and about 75% of badgers had been removed
from RBCT Areas over the course of the Trial as reported in two
papers, in preparation, one from CSL and one from the ISG.
3. Stressing recent progress, Professor Bourne said it
was reassuring that the design criteria of the RBCT had been entirely
met and the quality of data obtained from it was assured. He said
that his Group were presently actively involved in the production
of scientific papers describing the Trial and related research
and highlighted the forthcoming trapping efficiency and pathology
papers. In answer to a question from Mr Bradshaw, Professor Bourne
said that the trapping efficiency paper should be forwarded to
Defra in the following few days prior to submission for publication.
4. Professor Bourne said that Trial findings were scientifically
soundly-based, localised culling made things worse and Proactive
culling over 100 km2 had a zero impact. However extrapolation
of Trial data was raising uncertainties. It has been suggested
that if a badger culling policy was to have a positive effect
of reducing cattle tuberculosis, such culling would have to be
on a large scale, far larger that in the RBCT, and done systematically
for a long time. Two questions had been raised. If culling efficiency
was increased would this have a greater positive impact and also
would this reduce the edge effect. The answer to both questions
was probably no. Asked by Mr Bradshaw to expand on this statement,
Professor Bourne said that models had shown that if culling efficiency
of 90% had been possible in the RBCT, this level would have had
only a limited further impact on TB reduction recorded in the
RBCT. With respect to the edge effect, the problem was unculled
badgers, both within and particularly outside culled areas. Professor
Bourne said that there was a consistency of findings from badger
removal in the 1970's and 1980's, the ROI and the RBCT, in that
only elimination or near elimination of badgers could maximise
the impact of culling. Localised culling made matters worse.
5. Prompted by Mr Bradshaw to consider possible badger
culling by farmers, Professor Bourne said that such culling would
not be systematic, there would be access to land problems and
he doubted if all but a few farmers had the persistence to carry
out such operations. However, he believed that more and more farmers
were beginning to appreciate the findings of the ISG and now recognised
the value of biosecurity measures and cattle controls and felt
that it would be helpful if Defra supported the Trial findings
and attempted to shift the debate with the NFU and veterinary
profession, in particular, away from badger culling to improved
cattle controls. An interesting and important finding in ROI and
the RBCT was the very small numbers of infected badgers on the
ground (1 per 4-5 km2, or fewer in ROI) that were responsible
for cattle breakdowns, again suggesting that near to elimination
was necessary.
6. Professor Bourne asked xxx and xxx if they disagreed
with any of the statements he had made. xxx said that s/he agreed
entirely, but opined that there could be a modest gain in tuberculosis
control if a culled area was as large as 300 km2. Professor Bourne
said that there would be winners (farmers in the area but away
from the edges) and losers (farmers adjacent to the area), but
extrapolation of Trial data suggested that overall there would
only be modest positive gains, and if farmers culled in a patchwork
and inconsistent way it was likely to make matters worse. xxx
said that Defra would have to consider the granting of a culling
licence if one was applied for an area of such a size and a refusal
to issue one would need proper justification. Professor Bourne
said that data from the RBCT would allow justification for refusal.
Mr Bradshaw said that the ISG might have to defend their position
in a court of law.
7. In answer to a question from Mr Bradshaw on any further
areas that should be brought to his attention, Professor Bourne
said that the ISG had now started spatial analysis, but there
was nothing to report at present and reiterated papers in preparation.
Sir David Cox was considering the possible modelling of a rigid
focus on cattle controls. xxx asked if this would be on a National
or Regional basis and Professor Bourne said he would ask Sir David
Cox for this information. xxx opined that this would relate simply
to high incidence areas.
8. In answer to a further question from Mr Bradshaw on
the timing of the ISG's final Report, Professor Bourne said that
he hoped this extensive document would be ready by next Easter
and it could include the cattle control model, if it was possible
to do.
9. The Minister thanked Professor Bourne for his advice
and asked he pass his thanks to the other Members of his Group.
ISG Secretariat
December 2006
|
