Badger cull 'immoral, insane and unproven by science'

Brian May is on a mission to prevent our countryside being ‘drenched in blood’ - and he is deadly serious about it.

The legendary Queen guitarist was in courtroom number five in Cardiff last week to again witness proceedings as the Badger Trust’s latest legal attempt to halt the Welsh badger cull was heard.

“I can claim no credit whatever for the successful delivery of today’s arguments in court,” he wrote on his ‘Bri’s Soapbox’ website on the first day of the Judicial Review appeal hearing.

“I was merely a supporter, like a fan at a football match, who feels that by being there he helped to score the winning goal.”

It is fair to say many farmers have not taken kindly to the rock star’s support for the cause. His appearance at the initial judicial review hearing in Swansea in March succeeded in generating massive publicity for those fighting the cull, with quotes comparing the proposed cull to ‘genocide’ plastered across the media. He denied ever using the word.

‘Publicity stunt’

Farmers Union of Wales vice-president Brian Walters dismissed his intervention as a ‘cynical publicity stunt’ of a ‘millionaire rock star dropping in’ to talk about something he had ‘no idea’ about.

The accusation hurt Dr May, who was a scientist before his musical career took off. He went on to complete a PhD in astrophysics in 2007.

He questioned on his website if Farmers Guardian would be ‘brave enough’ to allow him to respond when he read Mr Walters’ comments on www.farmersguardian.com.

His lengthy response to our subsequent emailed queries, stretching to more than 3,000 words, will infuriate many of our readers. But what they do show is an unremitting commitment to the cause.

Dr May has been campaigning to ‘save animals from various kinds of abuse’ for many years, culminating in his current ‘SAVE-ME’ campaign - named, of course, after a Queen song.

“I started the SAVE-ME campaign to give wild animals a voice, but our aim is to improve the way humans interact with all animals, including farm and laboratory animals,” he says.

He insists he is ‘not just beating a drum’, but is prepared to ‘stake my reputation on what I believe, based on the evidence I’ve seen’ - that culling badgers would be ‘morally wrong, scientifically unproven, at best, ineffective and even counter-productive at worst, and economically disastrous’.

“The fact we are even debating wiping out a whole species which had a home in these islands before we did, on the grounds of science or economics is to me a sign we as a race, or as a country, are beyond hope,” he says.

He describes Mr Walters’ comments as a ‘cheap shot’ against ‘someone who has spent much of his life studying issues like these’.

To illustrate his willingness to engage with farmers, he says he subsequently spent a day with NFU Cymru deputy president, Stephen James, during which they ‘disagreed on many points, but had a very healthy debate’.

“We realised our dreams for the world our grandchildren will inhabit were, in fact, very close - a healthy and well-treated population of farm animals in the fields, and a healthy population of our native wild animals in the woods outside,” he says.

But Dr May insists farmers have ‘no proof’ badgers are to blame for their bovine TB breakdowns.

Cattle-to-cattle spread

He says scientific studies have shown ‘time and again’ that cattle-to-cattle transmission is the ‘major factor’ in the spread of bTB. He suggests intensive farming methods ‘known to increase stress’ in cattle are making them ‘more vulnerable to developing symptoms’.

Outbreaks in herds ‘locked up in enclosed spaces where badgers cannot reach them’ and cases where bTB symptoms have ‘suddenly spread hundreds of miles across the UK’ cast further doubt on the role of the badger as the ‘villain’, he says.

“It has never been proved a badger has caused a real-life breakdown. A farmer may see a badger, and think: ‘There’s the villain’ - and feel anger towards it, but it’s a knee-jerk reaction. The cause of his breakdown may well not be due to a badger.

“I feel great sympathy for the farmer who feels powerless in the face of this hidden enemy. But even if the badger were the villain, he must be an innocent one, since he was infected because of our farming practices.”

He denies the suggestion he is implying badgers intrinsically have more right to be protected than cattle.

“This is a complete misunderstanding of what we are saying. We as humans have a duty to treat all animals in our care decently,” he says.

“There are many farmers who are very caring about their animals, but there are also many who turn a blind eye to farming practices which are inherently cruel, especially with regard to pigs and chickens. I’d like to see that change,” he says.

He argues science and history show badger culling does not work as a method for controlling bTB.

He cites the Independent Scientific Group’s (ISG) 2008 report and subsequent updates based on continuing monitoring of the cull areas as the scientific proof.

A paper advocating a cull by former Government chief scientist Sir David King is dismissed as a ‘disgraceful piece of bad science’, based on ‘a few days reading the ISG’s work, which took 10 years to do’.

He outlines in great detail why history also debunks the pro-badger culling argument, beginning with bTB’s arrival in Europe from Asia in the Middle Ages and its ‘spread as cattle trade increased’.

By the 1930s bTB was infecting 40 per cent of the national herd yet by the 1970s incidence was down to 1 per cent on the back of ‘strict’ cattle controls ‘without one badger being culled’, he says.

He blames the reversion to a system of ‘less bTB testing and fewer movement restrictions’ for the diseases subsequent re-emergence as a major problem.

“So much for history. How amazing all this is known, yet we are about to make the same tragic mistake again,” he says.

It is, he says, ‘ridiculous’ to suggest culling badgers could reduce the incidence of bTB in the badger population.

Simple equation

“There will not be a badger population in the end, because the only way to eradicate the disease in these animals, using the method about to be adopted, is to kill them all. This is without question. It is a simple equation.

“If you were going to trap the badgers, test to see if they had the disease or not, and release only the healthy ones, you would statistically be on to a good thing. But the current plan is to trap the animals, and kill them whether they are healthy or not. Do you begin to see the insanity of all this?

“As to whether culling will reduce the level of the disease in cows, I would bet a lot of money, and my reputation, this will never be proved.”

He insists that vaccination of badgers, ‘which have been infected by bTB from our cows’, and cattle themselves is the ‘sane, humane solution, and ultimately the only one which can work’.

He acknowledged the current barriers to both types of vaccination, but insists they can be resolved ‘in the near future’.

After the initial Swansea court case, he felt the system was stacked against the ‘innocent badger’ and that the battle was ‘essentially lost before any of us stepped into that court room,’.

“What next for Welsh badgers. I think I will pray, think, and look for an opportunity to halt the killing?” he wrote.

He told supporters on his website the arguments heard on the first day of last week’s appeal hearing gave him renewed hope.

Whatever happens in Wales, he vows to turn his attention to the coalition Government’s plans for curbing bTB in England.

He attacks Ministers’ plans to ‘smash’ the vaccination programme and introduce a cull which will see ‘the countryside being drenched in blood’.

“Okay - forgive me my moment of drama - after all, I’m probably just another rock star, who has no idea, cynically seeking publicity, right?” he concludes.

Have your say

Please do not complete the following form field for security reasons.

Name

E-mail

Comment

Post as

Anonymously

Display name