As one Defra agency appears to be finally learning the painful lessons of IT rollouts gone wrong, another seems to have walked into the same trap. Exclusive: Brian May vows to fight ‘insane’ badger cull plans
LEGENDARY Queen guitarist Brian May has outlined why he believes culling badgers to control bovine TB is morally wrong and scientifically flawed.
In an exclusive interview with Farmers Guardian, he insisted badgers were ‘innocent’ victims in Britain’s bTB crisis
“The fact we are even debating wiping out a whole species that had a home in these islands before we did, on the grounds of science or economics, is to me a sign that we as a race, or as a country, are beyond hope,” he said.
He claimed it had ‘never been proved that a badger has caused a real-life breakdown’ and that it was ‘ridiculous’ to suggest culling badgers could reduce the incidence of bTB in badgers or cattle.
“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.
“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?” he said.
He insisted that cattle-to-cattle transmission was the ‘major factor’ bTB spread and that vaccination was the only ‘sane’ and effective way to deal with the disease in cattle and badgers.
The rock star, who attended the Badger Trust’s judicial review appeal hearing in Cardiff last week, said he was prepared to stake his reputation on his belief that badger culling is wrong.
Dr May, who has a PhD in astrophysics, has vowed to continue fighting moves to introduce badger culling in Wales and England, policies he insisted would ‘drench the countryside in blood’.
Farmers Guardian has also published an article by Farmers Union of Wales director of agricultural policy Nick Fenwick arguing that badger culling is ‘scientifically justified, legally sound and has political backing’.
He argues that vaccination, while having obvious attractions, is a ‘solution which does not yet exist’, and which ‘we cannot afford to wait for’.
He said cull badgers in north Pembrokeshire is expected to produce results ‘far better’ than those found in England’s Randomised Badger Culling Trials (RBCT) as the area identified is one-and-a-half times the size of the RBCT areas and has ‘significant boundaries’.
Both articles can be seen here:
View results 10 per page | 20 per page
Readers' comments (17)
Anonymous | 9 July 2010 8:23 am
Contrary to popular belief TB vaccines for both cattle and badgers do exist and could be used immediately.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 9 July 2010 9:15 am
What a tosser
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 9 July 2010 11:26 am
Unfortunatly though the TB vaccine for cows means that we will no-longer be able to tell if the cow has TB or not through testing so if we start vaccinating now cattle with TB may still be out there. bTB is not just a problem concerning cattle and badgers you know, it can also affect deer, boar, bison, buffallo, goats, llamas, alpakas and even cats and dogs. Not knowing which animals have the disease so they can be culled might spread the infection even more!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
jane | 9 July 2010 3:56 pm
Unable to report the above comment because of FG page error.This comment refers to the killing of badgers by feeding them ****************************************************************************************. These kinds of comments which effectively instruct farmers on how to use cruel and illegal methods of destroying badgers bring the Farmers Guardian into disrepute, Comments should stay within the law or be moderated.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Editor's comments | 9 July 2010 3:56 pm
Thanks Jane - we have removed the offending comments now - as well as your reference to the feed. You're right, such comments should not be posted. While we are keen to have debate on the site we can't allow such comments as tey promote what is an illegal activity.
Brien Comerford | 9 July 2010 4:57 pm
Brian May is indisputably correct. There is no compelling scientific proof that verifies badgers causing cattle TB. The killing of indigenous and sentient badgers is a moral abomination. The people who want to kill badgers are the same people who are inhumane to cattle. Enlightened humans do not eat meat because it derives from cruelty. The irreverent killing of animals for food causes more environmental and ecological damage than any other destructive human activity. Save badgers now !!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
geoff | 9 July 2010 10:14 pm
brien comerford, are you on drugs?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Rowena | 9 July 2010 11:14 pm
I agree with Jane, comments advocating illegal action should be moderated or removed. Also, this message board would be improved if it was possible to post links that work without having to copy & paste.
Geoff, would you say the United Nations is on drugs when it advocates a global move to a meat and dairy free diet?
'UN urges a move to meat & dairy free diet':
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jun/02/un-report-meat-free-diet
Intensive farming is the source of MOST contagious diseases affecting humans, causes MOST pollution of watercourses, produces MOST greenhouse gases and is extremely wasteful of primary foods, such as the soya and grain in dairy cattle feed concentrates, which can be made into milk much more efficiently and hygienically without exploiting cows.
There is no cholesterol in a plant-based diet and meat consumption is linked to numerous 'diseases of affluence'.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 10 July 2010 4:56 am
I would have said that arable is far more destructive. It destroys and displaces everything in it's path. I cannot understand why people who want a meat free diet because of animal rights reasons think that the arable produce they eat comes without a price to animals / wildlife.
I'd love to know how many young deer are mown to death each year, plus obviously hare and ground-nesting birds. Livestock that live mainly on a plant-based diet, especially on land that cannot be arable, is the best overall solution.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
the peasant | 10 July 2010 3:19 pm
2 pages facing each other, Brian May v nick Fenwick. One page with well prepared logical discourse on the known facts, the other couched in emotive language with wild exaggerations and biased interpretation of the facts. Brian May does his cause a disservice.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Rowena | 11 July 2010 4:38 pm
I agree that everything we eat comes with a price, but feeding primary plant nutrition to animals and then consuming the animal produce, wastes nutrients on a vast scale via the animals' metabolic processes. Most of the soya grown in Brazil on cleared rainforest is fed to livestock. The barley and maize grown in the Welsh cull area is all fed to livestock. Most arable land is in fact producing animal feed and the cultivated area could be much reduced by 'cutting out the middle man' and converting harvested nutrients directly into plant milk, which would also allow for a reversal of the ever-decreasing forest cover. The Welsh Assembly policy is to increase woodland cover in Wales by thousands of hectares over the coming years and to encourage livestock farmers to diversify into fruit and vegetable production.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment