This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/sci/tech/6762513.stm

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Badger cull 'not cost effective' Badger cull 'not cost effective'
(about 3 hours later)
Culling badgers is unlikely to be a cost-effective way of controlling cattle tuberculosis, scientists advising the government have concluded.Culling badgers is unlikely to be a cost-effective way of controlling cattle tuberculosis, scientists advising the government have concluded.
Farmers say the spread of cattle TB is destroying the industry. Farmers say the spread of cattle TB by badgers is destroying the industry and that culling would control it.
Many say that research proves the badger population is spreading the disease and that culling controls that. But independent government advisors said that, while badger culling did reduce cattle TB, it would have to be so extensive it would be uneconomical.
Independent government advisors on the issue said that, while badger culling reduced cattle TB, it would have to be so extensive it would be uneconomical. Conservationists say the movement of cattle, not badgers, spreads disease.
The government is currently considering whether to introduce a cull.
If they do embark on a badger culling policy, it is quite clear that will have no impact Professor John Bourne
It set up the Independent Scientific Group on Cattle TB (ISG) to examine the links between TB in cattle and the spread of badgers in the countryside.
ISG chairman Professor John Bourne told BBC Radio 4's Farming Today: "One has to recognise that what we are dealing with is primarily a disease of cattle, although badgers in hot spot areas do make a significant contribution."
The dilemma for farmers and ministers is that there was no sustainable way of treating the badger issue, he said.
"If they do embark on a badger culling policy, it is quite clear that will have no impact - direct impact or meaningful impact - on controlling the disease in cattle, and it could make it worse."
Instead, he proposed a method of cattle control which would reduce the incidents and prevent its geographical spread.
But National Farmers' Union president Peter Kendall said he would seek urgent meetings with ministers and officials to devise a culling strategy that would make a worthwhile difference to the disease situation.
THE KREBS TRIAL 30 areas of the country, each 100 square km10 culled proactively, 10 reactively, 10 not culledBadgers culled through being caught in cage and then shotIncidence of bovine TB measured on farms inside and outside study areasReactive culling suspended in 2003 after significant rise in infectionTrial cost £7m per yearTHE KREBS TRIAL 30 areas of the country, each 100 square km10 culled proactively, 10 reactively, 10 not culledBadgers culled through being caught in cage and then shotIncidence of bovine TB measured on farms inside and outside study areasReactive culling suspended in 2003 after significant rise in infectionTrial cost £7m per year
The government is currently considering whether to introduce a cull, though a consultation mounted recently by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) suggested public opinion is firmly against such a move. "I simply do not accept that the industry cannot devise a culling strategy that will reduce the reservoir of TB in badgers," he said.
Data for the research came from the Randomised Badger Culling Trial, sometimes known as the Krebs trial after Sir John Krebs, the government scientist who instigated it. He added that better testing and tighter controls on cattle movements would be worthless unless something was done to stop the "relentless cycle" of re-infection of cattle in the TB hot spot areas by disease spreading from badgers.
That data showed that culling was associated with increased TB in the badgers; areas which had received four culls saw a doubling of the rate. Trevor Lawson, from the conservation group, the Badger Trust, said that the problem lies with the way cattle are tested.
What appears to be happening is that badgers move more freely and more widely in culled areas, increasing contact with each other. "It's been missing large numbers of infected cattle, and because we've had large herds and we move cattle around so much in this country, that's spread it countrywide."
A consultation mounted recently by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) suggested public opinion is firmly against a cull.
Past research has shown that culling is associated with increased TB in the badgers; areas which had received four culls saw a doubling of the rate.
It appears that badgers move more freely and more widely in culled areas thereby increasing contact with each other.
The data comes from the Randomised Badger Culling Trial, sometimes known as the Krebs trial after Sir John Krebs, the government scientist who instigated it.