when cattle found to have TB are destroyed actually i thought farmers were compensated for the loss of the cattle, just something i saw on the countryfile programme some time ago, i seem to remember adam on the programme saying he wouold be compensated by the government when his cattle proved positive for TB , is it not so (perhaps i misheard him), or if they are do they get full market value, would be interested to know which it is.
To Cull or not to cull.
- Thread starter hog
- Start date
-
Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.
when cattle found to have TB are destroyed actually i thought farmers were compensated for the loss of the cattle, just something i saw on the countryfile programme some time ago, i seem to remember adam on the programme saying he wouold be compensated by the government when his cattle proved positive for TB , is it not so (perhaps i misheard him), or if they are do they get full market value, would be interested to know which it is.
Farmers are very heavily subsidised,which if it comes from the Gov, it then comes from the people so they are getting compensated from us already.
just checked and yes farmers do get compensation for cattle with TB, this llink explains http://www.defra.gov.uk/animal-diseases/controls/compensation/cattle/
There is compensation - but its highly abritary - my neighbour lost a pedigree bull and compensation was under two grand - the bull was worth far more than that.
And no, farmers are not "heavily subsidised", the idea is absurd. They are paid to grow certain things or carry out certain management activities. Most I know would far rather all the stupid regulations - and the fees that go with them - were removed.
If it comes to it - and we are opposed to killing animals - why slaughter cows with TB? Because they are disease vector to humans. It has been proven that badgers are also a human disease vector. So why kill one and not the other? Wheres the logic there (other than bunny hugging logic)?
And no, farmers are not "heavily subsidised", the idea is absurd. They are paid to grow certain things or carry out certain management activities. Most I know would far rather all the stupid regulations - and the fees that go with them - were removed.
If it comes to it - and we are opposed to killing animals - why slaughter cows with TB? Because they are disease vector to humans. It has been proven that badgers are also a human disease vector. So why kill one and not the other? Wheres the logic there (other than bunny hugging logic)?
I disagree, i havent got details but the farmer on the land i used to live,and help out admited/told me he got subsides.(and one of the ones he told me the amount given certainly was'nt a small amount).
Disagree away. Theres a man works down the chip shop swears he's Elvis as well.
The whole cull thing is utterly absurd. Two animals both of which can infect humans and each other. One is a food source, one is not. Either can communicate a disease to people (who can of course be vaccinated against TB). When there is an outbreak, we kill the food source, leave the fluffy wild animal and allow it to continue infecting humans and re-infect the food source.
A clearer example of an absurd emotive logic failure is hard to imagine. It may help the eco consience of the fluffy bunny brigade, but its not a basis for legislation.
The whole cull thing is utterly absurd. Two animals both of which can infect humans and each other. One is a food source, one is not. Either can communicate a disease to people (who can of course be vaccinated against TB). When there is an outbreak, we kill the food source, leave the fluffy wild animal and allow it to continue infecting humans and re-infect the food source.
A clearer example of an absurd emotive logic failure is hard to imagine. It may help the eco consience of the fluffy bunny brigade, but its not a basis for legislation.
Right had no idea. I thought it was a case of if left outside for longer periods they would have nothing to eat after killing off all the grass and not giving it time to recover.
I dont post on here very often, im more of a listener, but as a dairy farmers son can I just point out that the 'subsidies' we recieve are to do with improving the countryside for wildlife. We get a payment for the amount of hedges, woods, field margins, wetlands etc that we have on the farm. If you remove the sfp then the countryside would look different very quickly as this is what it would take to compete with the big european farms. As regards the badger issue the best way would be to take them of the protected list, that way only the problem animals would be affected.
ps. the above post is rubbish. If grass grew all year round then cows would be out all year round.
ps. the above post is rubbish. If grass grew all year round then cows would be out all year round.
Last edited:
They should be dug , if they can prove they are carrying tb, culled.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
but if badgers are shown to be causing a problem then they're not protected, so as it stands at the moment ..."only the problem animals are affected."
cheers
stuart
Nothing against Farmers myself, hang I eat their produce, just against the cull.
I am sure that fresh produce farmers will have a different outlook to livestock Farmers.
Indeed they do. They amount of shooting and spraying that happens over "produce" fields exterminates anything larger than bacteria. Livestock pasture fields and the stock hedges are havens for wildlife. Vegetable fields are monoculture deserts.
British Red, I agree, no I was talking about their attitude towards Mr Badger, I was thinking that they would not regard the TB as a threat...perhaps.
Sure - they kill other things (pigeons, beetles, butterflies, dragonflies, collared doves, mice, rats etc.) which livestock farmers don't worry about. But you can't farm without controlling predating lifeforms - be in something as simple as blight or as complex as deer. Its part of farming.
I was one of the people to be asked if I'd trap and vaccinate badgers. I declined as I believe it would be a fruitless task, same goes for shooting them - you can't trap them all and you can't shoot them all. I think the root cause and not the spread needs to be looked at. Why is there TB in the first instance?
Similar threads
