I've been at the CLA Game Fair today - always an interesting event!
I met lots of old friends and some people I wouldn't exactly class as friends but are quite interesting.
We had a small reception on our stand which was well attended - including two Defra Ministers, Mr Paice and Mr Benyon. Our Chief Executive, Mike Clarke spoke about Futurescapes and the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust's relatively new Chairman, Ian Coghill, made an excellent speech which majored on collaboration. Ian would, himself, be a very easy person with whom to collaborate.
I was on a panel which was supposed to discuss whether the government's priority should be fox-hunting, badger culling or bird conservation!It was a discussion about badgers!
Because the Minister Mr Paice was on the panel we learned quite a lot - I think I helped to tease out the information. The government will consult in the autumn on the way forward. This will include a review of the science and an approach which will, it seems, include some culling, some vaccination and some controls on cattle movements. The costs of any culling will largely be met by the farming industry.
I think the RSPB can welcome this approach. This issue is very contentious - that much was clear in the room and each time I mention badgers on this blog. To set out the thinking and the science must be a good idea. I am sure that Mr Paice is keen to see some badger culling go ahead, but at least the government is sticking to its election manifesto pledge to be led by science (it seems) and at least there will be a consultation before a decision. We await the consultation with interest.
A love of the natural world demonstrates that a person is a cultured inhabitant of planet Earth.
Hi Meconopsis – you raise the subject of which scientists you should trust -
Professor Bourne – boss of the ISG - was quite open with the EFRAcom, as to WHO STEERED his 'trial' and how:
• "We repeatedly say "culling, as conducted in the trial." It is important [that] we do say that. Those limitations were not imposed by ourselves. They were imposed by politicians."
"At the end of the day I think you have to accept that it is the price society puts on a badger. [ ] In this country there is a price on a badger and on badger welfare".
"Whatever has driven that I do not know but the fact is that a price has been put on the badger in this country which related to the way we were able to carry out our scientific work. That is exactly what we report".
At the time - a CLA representative Mr. Rooney, himself a scientist, expressed his displeasure at Bourne's description of 'political science' most forcefully:
• Perhaps I might preface my remarks by saying that I was brought up as a scientist; it was not in this discipline, but scientific principles hold, whatever the discipline. One of the things that I was taught was that, in designing an experiment to try to address an issue or a problem, you may not like the results, but you accept them.
• I find it deeply shocking that responsible scientists should have been prepared to undertake a research study having been told at the outset that there is a conclusion that they are not allowed to reach.
• I find that utterly disgraceful".
Mark – as RSPB Conservation Director – will be very aware of ‘political science’ and may even have experienced it first hand in the “Bird flu” days.
He who pays the piper calls the tune
I just hope that the RSPB (via Mark) sees the light and is brave enough to at least publicly change its policy / campaign on 'granting access on RSPB' land if asked to by any badger culling project.
Otherwise it may be viewed as the latest act of Greenpeace vandalism:-
BBC website
• Campaign group Greenpeace claimed it had shut off the fuel supplies to all stations in the city. The oil company said about 20 had been closed.
• BP said activists stopped the flow of fuel by flipping safety switches on forecourts, then removing them to prevent the filling stations reopening.
• A BP spokesman said the fuel stations would be reopened as soon as it was safe to do so. He described the stunt as "an irresponsible and childish act which is interfering with safety systems".
To a cattle farmer / owner such as I – I see no difference in the charities’ ‘actions’ – one is ‘active’ the other is ‘passive’ – the net result in both instances is negative and destructive and does harm.
It’s too soon to suggest that the RSPB distances itself from a fellow member of the LINK Wildlife & Countryside Group – that’s another fight for another day – but it’s Board may discuss the matter in the context of its policy regarding bTB in wildlife.