Setback for Wild Justice.
- Thread starter Orion
- Start date
Mick Miller
Well-Known Member
If they regard badger shooting as inhumane, then they regard all shooting as inhumane. Badgers are heart shot, or at least as I understand it. Slightly contradicts the fat ones previous utterings on deer stalking.
The rules of JR say that you can JR most anything EXCEPT Government Policy which is unchallengeable in the courts- the badger cull is government policy.
However, and whatever their beliefs which I most certainly do not agree with - they had the cahones to try - some people dont even try.
However, and whatever their beliefs which I most certainly do not agree with - they had the cahones to try - some people dont even try.
Orion
Well-Known Member
Probably basing their challenge on the report of the ‘Independent Expert Panel’ following the pilot culls.
The conclusions reached in section 10.6 regarding suffering and humaneness and % numbers potentially affected seem a bit suspect to me, and IIRC I thought the methodology used to come to those results was a bit suspect when I read it all first time around (I can’t be bothered to go through it all again). Interesting and maybe not surprising that the DI had a hand in it though - see Appendix 12 for panel members.
Given the propensity of WJ to challenge and knowing Government Policy is a no-no then if, as Orion says they used the IEP report, then they were also always on a hiding to nothing but decided to make a point and try.
I would love to know whether it was turned down at pre-action protocol, as I suspect, so it wont have cost much.
It is a real shame, as Enfield says, that 'others' found something else to spend their money on when medicals was clearly the most important issue and therefore worth at least a shot at pre-action protocol (excuse the pun with shooting - Voice of). I cannot and will not accept BASC's unverified excuse, for it is nothing else or pre-action would have been attempted.
I also live in hope that someone at DEFRA will see the virtue, given the cost of BTB, compensation and culls and legal actions etc etc that Badgers are put back on a seperate GL, hedged about with whatever protection is necessary but controlled simply, cheaply and effectively.
I would love to know whether it was turned down at pre-action protocol, as I suspect, so it wont have cost much.
It is a real shame, as Enfield says, that 'others' found something else to spend their money on when medicals was clearly the most important issue and therefore worth at least a shot at pre-action protocol (excuse the pun with shooting - Voice of). I cannot and will not accept BASC's unverified excuse, for it is nothing else or pre-action would have been attempted.
I also live in hope that someone at DEFRA will see the virtue, given the cost of BTB, compensation and culls and legal actions etc etc that Badgers are put back on a seperate GL, hedged about with whatever protection is necessary but controlled simply, cheaply and effectively.
Probably the best possible outcome but I can't ever see it happening. Perhaps a case could be made with examples of what happens when you allow a predator to breed and spread out of control, not in a financial term but in a conservation term. Badgers eat anything and everything and they're absolutely everywhere. Poor hedgehogs don't stand a chance. I wonder how many other species will suffer before they realise that more predator control is needed? IMO the culls are not doing enough but I've only got anecdotal experiences and not numbers that I've based that opinion on.
Seeing as how Connor O'Gorman did his PhD on meles meles (European Badger), I wonder whether he has any studies to recommend related to BTB transmission, predation of invertibrates (WJ favourite) Hedgehogs, ground nesting birds and so on ?
Probably not, since he has been at BASC for (was it) 17 years and would have done it before now - how long has BTB been a problem ?.
Have you tried Connor - since we all know you watch every reference to BASC ?
Probably not, since he has been at BASC for (was it) 17 years and would have done it before now - how long has BTB been a problem ?.
Have you tried Connor - since we all know you watch every reference to BASC ?
FrenchieBoy
Well-Known Member
With reference to Kes's last post (#8) has there ever been any reliable studies done of why Hedgehogs numbers are in such a decline throughout the UK?
I believe that the decline in the hedgehog population is mainly due to predation by Badgers, but I would be quite happy to be corrected if I am wrong.
(This post is not pointed at Connor O'Gorman, BASC or anyone else in particular, just a general question to the masses)
I believe that the decline in the hedgehog population is mainly due to predation by Badgers, but I would be quite happy to be corrected if I am wrong.
(This post is not pointed at Connor O'Gorman, BASC or anyone else in particular, just a general question to the masses)
deerstalker.308
Well-Known Member
FrenchieBoy
Well-Known Member
palmer_mike
Well-Known Member
Interesting reading!
FrenchieBoy
Well-Known Member
Thanks Kes, very interesting reading! I am particularly interested in the part that reads:-
"In areas of preferred habitat (amenity grassland), counts of hedgehogs more than doubled over a 5-year period from the start of badger culling (from 0.9 ha−1 pre-cull to 2.4 ha−1 post-cull), whereas hedgehog counts did not change where there was no badger culling (0.3–0.3 hedgehogs ha−1). This trial provides experimental evidence for mesopredator release as an outcome of management of a top predator."
I think the above part of the study/report says it all in regards to the ever constantly decline in the UK hedgehog population! Maybe the "Anti Badger Cull" should read and try to understand that if they are truly interested in the bigger picture and protecting wildlife in general throughout the UK!
"In areas of preferred habitat (amenity grassland), counts of hedgehogs more than doubled over a 5-year period from the start of badger culling (from 0.9 ha−1 pre-cull to 2.4 ha−1 post-cull), whereas hedgehog counts did not change where there was no badger culling (0.3–0.3 hedgehogs ha−1). This trial provides experimental evidence for mesopredator release as an outcome of management of a top predator."
I think the above part of the study/report says it all in regards to the ever constantly decline in the UK hedgehog population! Maybe the "Anti Badger Cull" should read and try to understand that if they are truly interested in the bigger picture and protecting wildlife in general throughout the UK!
It would be a great start but to have a truly compelling point we might need more that "because the hedgehogs", some research on population health of other species that are predated by badgers must be out there.
Then again, no matter what case is put forward spineless politicians wouldn't dare put forward any case for further killing of badgers even if there is scientific proof that it is beneficial to the wider ecosystem because the rabid "animal loving" antis can't see science and kick and scream loud enough that no one in Westminster would back it.
FrenchieBoy
Well-Known Member
I agree with you about only using hedgehogs as an example isn't enough, if only some of these "blinkered/tunnel visioned" people could be made to see what damage Badgers can do to the entire eco system/natural food chain/wildlife population (Call it what you like) as well as to the farming community then attitudes might (Just might but doubtful) change towards cuddly harmless old brock and the overall harm he can do!
(Maybe not the best choice of wording but i'm sure that you can see what I am getting at)
I would hope our orgs, GWCT is a bit of a good example, commission some independent research by Universities or contribute to current research projects, either anonymously with no control or input or as a financial contributor with no directing input.
If we are sure of our 'truths' let others find them out - far more weight carried by independent studies. CP has said that anything carried out by e.g. BASC "would say that wouldn't it" ?
Having an Edinburgh Uni /Oxford supporting their own study results would carry immeasurably more weight and damage CP's extreme and inaccurate comments e.g. plovers/puffins.
It wouldnt cost anywhere £9Million to fund a couple of University based PhD posts for example at arms length. Frenchie is correct when he says a rounded study of the badger - food, habits, range, etc. would highlight predation levels, damage caused - plenty of photos out there, undermining of roads etc due to high populations and limited 'traditional setts' I'm sure someone who had studied badgers should be able to scope such research ?
If we are sure of our 'truths' let others find them out - far more weight carried by independent studies. CP has said that anything carried out by e.g. BASC "would say that wouldn't it" ?
Having an Edinburgh Uni /Oxford supporting their own study results would carry immeasurably more weight and damage CP's extreme and inaccurate comments e.g. plovers/puffins.
It wouldnt cost anywhere £9Million to fund a couple of University based PhD posts for example at arms length. Frenchie is correct when he says a rounded study of the badger - food, habits, range, etc. would highlight predation levels, damage caused - plenty of photos out there, undermining of roads etc due to high populations and limited 'traditional setts' I'm sure someone who had studied badgers should be able to scope such research ?
Ade8mm
Well-Known Member
I think what it is needed is a conservation org that supports and promotes the positive benefits of culling and pest control as an effective and justified tool in the conservation armoury, as opposed to a so called "voice of shooting" that has "conservation" in it's title if it is to stand any chance of getting traction in the wider community . imho
Similar threads
