Brock Stars

It’s over a year since I first wrote about the government’s proposed cull of badgers in South west England intended to reduce the incidence of bovine tuberculosis in cattle.  Although the timetable has been pushed back by around a year from the original plans because of various legal challenges, and although one environment secretary has gone and a new one taken office, the cull will go ahead starting on June 1^st this year.  It almost seems as if government ministers don’t read my blog!

I don’t intend to rehash the arguments I made last year.  The blog post, “Stop This Pointless Cull”, remains as valid now as it was then.  Suffice to say that the science clearly indicates that culling will not prove effective as a means of controlling the disease. Culling has been tried before and failed.  It’s been rejected by the devolved Welsh government as cruel and ineffective.  And an alternative in the form of vaccination is available at a cost effective price.

With that in mind, I read two interesting pieces on Twitter this week.

The first is the launch of a new website dedicated to tracking and debating the issues around badgers and bovine TB. It’s called BadgerGate.  I particularly like their principles, clearly stated, which begin with the paragraph:

“We are not about ‘farmer bashing’ or anyone else bashing. Bovine TB and its management are complex, sensitive and controversial matters. Not surprisingly, feelings on both sides of the debate often run high. However, that’s no reason why people shouldn’t be able to debate the issue in an informed and civil manner.”

 Part of the problem here is that both sides, the farmers and the protestors, have become entrenched in their respective positions, to the point that facts just get in the way of a good argument.  It threatens to turn in to a rerun of the fox hunting debate which became characterized, wrongly, as a fight between town and country.

The site includes a link to a Government E Petition started by Queen guitarist, Brian May, demanding a Parliamentary debate on the issue, which incidentally has now reached over 200,000 signatures, double the figure needed to force a response.

The second tweet to catch my eye was from DiscoverWildlife.com.  I confess I’ve never heard of this publication but it seems to be the digital version of the BBC’s Wildlife Magazine.  It has some nice photographs and interesting features.  The tweet was a link to a poll to nominate a ‘national species’ for the United Kingdom.

“Unlike many other countries around the world, the UK has never had a national species to call its own. BBC Wildlife Magazine thinks that Britain deserves a national plant or animal of its own – so we have launched a public poll to find a wildlife icon we can all be proud of.

Australia has the kangaroo, New Zealand the kiwi, South Africa the springbok, America the bald eagle, and Russia the brown bear. But what about Britain? What should our national species be? Which species best sums up the UK’s national character, and our history and aspirations?”

It seemed like a bit of fun so I followed the link, and guess what was the very first nomination vying for this prestigious accolade:  of course it was the good old brock!

Wouldn’t it be marvelous if in the same month that the government launched its barbaric and useless attack on badgers the British public announced that this was our national animal?