I write in response to the letter from Michael Morland published in last week’s Herald concerning the now postponed badger cull.
Firstly, I would agree completely with his assertion that more should be done to support the diminishing numbers of dairy farmers in this country.
However, the simple fact is that the proposed badger cull would not have helped the farmers in dealing with one of their problems i.e. TB amongst cattle.
There is a significant body of scientific argument against the cull on the basis that the proposed cruel and unnecessary slaughter of up to six thousand of these innocent creatures would have no perceivable impact on the numbers of cattle affected by TB in the pilot areas.
Lord Krebs who originated the Randomised Badger Culling Trial now says himself that “the scientific case is as clear as it can be: this cull is not the answer to TB in cattle.”
All that would be achieved, in fact, would be the reduction in an important part of British wildlife in these areas for generations to come.
As far as the undoubted presence of TB amongst badgers is concerned, the answer may well lie in inoculation as is currently being undertaken in Wales, where this whole matter has been debated at length in law and by government, and where the concept of a cull was abandoned.
As for the diary farmers, a proper price for a pint of milk would help considerably, as a start.
Finally, as someone who is generally apolitical, I find the endeavours of Stephen Lloyd in investigating the issues behind the cull, and then arguing against his own party’s policy, to be refreshing.
It demonstrates that not all MPs are party slaves, and are prepared to stand up for maters of principle. I doubt it will catch on though.
G H DAVIES, Old Mansion Close.