Comments(1079)
Loading Intraday chart...
News Comments
04-04-2013 16:24 PM
04-04-2013 17:42 PM
| Posted by Mark
Was only wondering if CCTV could help monitor these farms the other day. Good use of technology should surely help with this. Following with interest as we are teaming up with a USA software solution that is used in capturing data via the use of technology during livestock management which includes automated vet checks making the process simpler
05-04-2013 16:20 PM
| Posted by Clued-Up
I hope this exercise is linked to providing one to one expert advice and some funding for the farmers on ALL ASPECTS of farm bio-security (eg double-fencing to reduce the potential for cattle to cattle bTB transmission). If so, it'll be useful.
06-04-2013 08:53 AM
| Posted by MJ
When badgers are successfully fenced OUT of farms where are they going to feed - cricket pitches and graveyards maybe?
01-04-2013 10:56 AM
02-04-2013 20:45 PM
| Posted by Vivien Morey
I am a farmers daughter whose parents farmed on the Isle of Anglesey and I have an understanding of the difficulties of farming and all the challenges which arise. I have great difficulty putting into words on how I feel about this current situation about the loss of so many animals and the plight of so many farmers. They have my greatest support and admiration for the wonderful work that they do. I shall be sending a donation to one of the sites for farmers in crisis. I feel so grieved by all that I have heard about this terrible sitauation. Yours sincerely
28-03-2013 16:55 PM
28-03-2013 17:09 PM
| Posted by Tim Acheson
It's not just livestock farmers! Livestock farmers face the most immediate, obvious and visible losses. But agriculture is also impacted, with arable crops and hay either still not planted/drilled or facing disastrous growing conditions. These losses have not yet hit the balance sheet, but they will do by the end of 2013 and agricultural losses are no less real.
28-03-2013 16:28 PM
02-04-2013 21:30 PM
| Posted by Kev_C
It strikes me as odd that an article like this claims there is no evidence of harm to bees from neonicotinoids yet that is not what the research actually said. What it said was that because of the widespread use of neonicotinoids across the entire UK the research could not be conclusively accepted because it was impossible to produce a control group free from neonicotinoids pollution.
Now here is another little taster for those who understand these things, which clearly those with vested interests choose not to. The French government has restricted theuse of these chemicals and yet ere has not been any improvement in bee health.
Well consider this. The residues of neonicotinoids have been accumulating since day one. This has been conclusively proven by Bayer themselves when they conducted field trials in St Albans and Wellesbourne.
So if you stop using the neonicotinoids e effect will not be seen until residue levels have fallen below the effective threshold that causes the bees to experience disorientation like the termites do in tropical climates (according to Bayers own sales literature) and loss of sensory faculties like their sense of smell as recently discovered in another piece of ground breaking research.
So there are several things that need to be done regardless of this incomplete FERA research.
1. Suspend all neonicotinoids insecticides with immediate effect as per 'The Precautionary Principle'.
2. Establish the levels of neonicotinoids toxicity in the soil from field centres to their margins.
3. Test the hedgerow vegetation for uptake of these same neonicotinoids and establish the impact it is or may be having on more than just pollinator insects but also on hedgerow foraging bird life. It is already an established fact that the Grey Partridge is susceptible to neonicotinoids poisoning at extremely low levels and this is a large bird. What impact is it having on the much smaller songbirds (which have been in serious decline for the last few years).
4. Establish who it was who first approved the use of these chemicals when the evidence of soil accumulation was self evident.
Oh and let's stop all this nonsense about the loss of crop production. Its all hype. The levels of crop production have never altered from pre neonicotinoids days with regards to oilseed rape.
Yet the loss to productivity of food would suffer immeasurable damage beyond the minute financial loss due to the suspension of neonicotinoids. Check out the study via the link below.
http://www.scidev.net/en/agriculture-and-environment/farming-practices/news/loss-of-wild-pollinators-would-hit-crops-finds-study.html
Now who wants to argue further?
Now here is another little taster for those who understand these things, which clearly those with vested interests choose not to. The French government has restricted theuse of these chemicals and yet ere has not been any improvement in bee health.
Well consider this. The residues of neonicotinoids have been accumulating since day one. This has been conclusively proven by Bayer themselves when they conducted field trials in St Albans and Wellesbourne.
So if you stop using the neonicotinoids e effect will not be seen until residue levels have fallen below the effective threshold that causes the bees to experience disorientation like the termites do in tropical climates (according to Bayers own sales literature) and loss of sensory faculties like their sense of smell as recently discovered in another piece of ground breaking research.
So there are several things that need to be done regardless of this incomplete FERA research.
1. Suspend all neonicotinoids insecticides with immediate effect as per 'The Precautionary Principle'.
2. Establish the levels of neonicotinoids toxicity in the soil from field centres to their margins.
3. Test the hedgerow vegetation for uptake of these same neonicotinoids and establish the impact it is or may be having on more than just pollinator insects but also on hedgerow foraging bird life. It is already an established fact that the Grey Partridge is susceptible to neonicotinoids poisoning at extremely low levels and this is a large bird. What impact is it having on the much smaller songbirds (which have been in serious decline for the last few years).
4. Establish who it was who first approved the use of these chemicals when the evidence of soil accumulation was self evident.
Oh and let's stop all this nonsense about the loss of crop production. Its all hype. The levels of crop production have never altered from pre neonicotinoids days with regards to oilseed rape.
Yet the loss to productivity of food would suffer immeasurable damage beyond the minute financial loss due to the suspension of neonicotinoids. Check out the study via the link below.
http://www.scidev.net/en/agriculture-and-environment/farming-practices/news/loss-of-wild-pollinators-would-hit-crops-finds-study.html
Now who wants to argue further?
23-04-2013 21:21 PM
| Posted by Jenepher
Defra had the conclusions of their study before it even got started.
26-04-2013 08:20 AM
| Posted by Terry
PRESS RELEASE
Bee Farming in crisis
Bee farmers throughout the UK are reporting huge colony losses – up to 50 per cent in some areas. This will have severe consequences for honey production this year and for pollination of crops throughout the country.
So grab that jar of local honey while you can. It will be hard to find in a week or two. You will all remember how disappointing the weather was last summer and now with spring being at least a month later than usual our honey bees are in serious trouble. At least half of the nation's colonies are dead and many of those that are still alive are very weak.
It is normal for a small number of colonies not to make it through the winter. This year, however, the problem has been that colonies just did not build up as they should last summer so went into winter weaker than normal. Small colonies struggled to generate enough heat to keep their brood warm (think how hens look after their eggs) and without a succession of new young bees coming through a lot have just dwindled and died. On top of that many of the new queens could not get mated properly because of the adverse conditions. They could produce enough brood to sustain the colony.
Murray McGregor, chairman of the BFA, the “Voice of Professional Beekeeping” throughout the UK, said: “This is a crisis from bee farmers and for the country. It does not just mean that British honey will become scarce, the consequences for pollination are enormous.”
There will probably be less than a quarter of the normal numbers of hives producing honey this year and, because beekeepers reserves have almost all gone, it will be quite a job to find that jar of your favourite honey. Beekeepers will do their best to refill their hives but it will probably take two to three years to get back to normal. So enjoy that sweet taste of summer while you can!
Note to Editors: Further information can be obtained from BFA General Secretary Margaret Ginman
on 01892 864999 or email margaret.hendal@btconnect.com
28-03-2013 10:55 AM
29-03-2013 06:19 AM
| Posted by KK JAIN
Sir, What is the right time of subsoiling?
Curved tine subsoiler or straight tine subsoiler which should be preferred under different types of soils?
Curved tine subsoiler or straight tine subsoiler which should be preferred under different types of soils?
27-03-2013 09:14 AM
27-03-2013 11:52 AM
| Posted by Clued-Up
As Dr Drewe says, research is urgently needed to investigate whether bTB can be transmitted by either species (cattle and badgers)simply by both species using the same land area.
I understand researchers have long held the view that bTB is most likely to be an airborne disease, transmitted by cattle in close proximity to each other.
In view of what we know about TB as a human disease, it seems unlikely the typical indirect contact between cattle and badgers at latrine areas could transmit bTB.
I understand researchers have long held the view that bTB is most likely to be an airborne disease, transmitted by cattle in close proximity to each other.
In view of what we know about TB as a human disease, it seems unlikely the typical indirect contact between cattle and badgers at latrine areas could transmit bTB.
29-03-2013 13:10 PM
| Posted by MJ
@Clued-up "...... research is urgently needed to in........"
http://bovinetb.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/repeat-repeat-and-repeat.html
http://bovinetb.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/repeat-repeat-and-repeat.html
29-03-2013 13:36 PM
| Posted by t bayly
It worked pre legislation of c. the 1980. It is working in Ireland. Where there are no badgers there are far fewer outbreaks of bovine tb. The rest of the world look on in incredulity to the absurd situation of preference given to badgers over cattle. Get real. reinstate what worked.
29-03-2013 20:30 PM
| Posted by Experienced
Clued up . . . You are clearly not !
As t bayly states above, until the 80s control of infected badgers meant control of bovine TB
Vets know this and farmers know this
Also infected badgers are a danger to clean badgers
As t bayly states above, until the 80s control of infected badgers meant control of bovine TB
Vets know this and farmers know this
Also infected badgers are a danger to clean badgers
29-03-2013 22:53 PM
| Posted by MJ
@Clued-up
I understand researchers have long held the view that bTB is most likely to be an airborne disease, transmitted by cattle in close proximity to each other.
..........
Not so. Look up the Pathman project
snip
And they conclude:
"The overall conclusions of this Defra published report have increased our grave concerns regarding the ISG recommendation that controls on cattle alone would be relied upon to reduce the incidence and the spread of bovine Tb. We believe the ISG has seriously overstressed the importance of cattle-to-cattle spread, and the adoption of this recommendation will not control the disease. Progress will only be made when the original source of cattle infections is addressed and that means facing the reality of the large reservoir of Tb in wild badgers."
I understand researchers have long held the view that bTB is most likely to be an airborne disease, transmitted by cattle in close proximity to each other.
..........
Not so. Look up the Pathman project
snip
And they conclude:
"The overall conclusions of this Defra published report have increased our grave concerns regarding the ISG recommendation that controls on cattle alone would be relied upon to reduce the incidence and the spread of bovine Tb. We believe the ISG has seriously overstressed the importance of cattle-to-cattle spread, and the adoption of this recommendation will not control the disease. Progress will only be made when the original source of cattle infections is addressed and that means facing the reality of the large reservoir of Tb in wild badgers."
30-03-2013 21:52 PM
| Posted by Jude W
Would your commentators please look at the stats and graphs-there is the same downward trend in Northern Ireland as in the Republic-where they have had badger culls since 2004-NI achieve the same and probably more healthy cattle through cattle measures-movement/bio-security and improved animal husbandry-note-A BADGER CULL WILL SOLVE NOTHING!
30-03-2013 23:10 PM
| Posted by MJ
Be afraid of Tuberculosis - be very afraid
http://www.news.com.au/national-news/queensland/outbreak-of-deadly-tuberculosis-strain-a-disaster/story-fndo4ckr-1226498899517
http://www.news.com.au/national-news/queensland/outbreak-of-deadly-tuberculosis-strain-a-disaster/story-fndo4ckr-1226498899517
31-03-2013 21:06 PM
| Posted by JohninCornwall
I find it telling that the minister refused to support action against pesticides which it is thought could be a cause of the catastrophic collapse in the bee population - claimed he needed more scientific evidence. Yet when it comes to the culling of badgers, a move which finds few supporters in the scientific community, or elsewhere, he claims the science is on his side.
A cynic might wonder who is whispering in his ear. I expect he's looking towards a future outside of politics because even he must realise what a disaster any attempt to push through the badger cull will be, reflecting badly on the whole government. Not a way to make friends or influence people.
A cynic might wonder who is whispering in his ear. I expect he's looking towards a future outside of politics because even he must realise what a disaster any attempt to push through the badger cull will be, reflecting badly on the whole government. Not a way to make friends or influence people.
01-04-2013 09:12 AM
| Posted by MJ
@JudeW
http://bovinetb.blogspot.co.uk/2004/07/cattle-to-cattle-irish-way.html
http://bovinetb.blogspot.co.uk/2007/07/tale-of-two-countries.html
maybe some in N. Ireland have since learned from Eire?
http://bovinetb.blogspot.co.uk/2004/07/cattle-to-cattle-irish-way.html
http://bovinetb.blogspot.co.uk/2007/07/tale-of-two-countries.html
maybe some in N. Ireland have since learned from Eire?
05-04-2013 16:14 PM
| Posted by paul forrester
it could have been florence nightingale who determined that human tb spread if beds were closer than 18"
25-03-2013 12:40 PM
26-03-2013 00:08 AM
| Posted by tob
the EA are a joke toothless and useless!! imo
sack the lot of them and give the money to the farmers to de-silt ditches rivers etc the EA are over paid jobsworths!! They dont care about our losses only there cushy jobs this country is a joke the world over brought on by a string of weak leaders imo.
sack the lot of them and give the money to the farmers to de-silt ditches rivers etc the EA are over paid jobsworths!! They dont care about our losses only there cushy jobs this country is a joke the world over brought on by a string of weak leaders imo.
22-03-2013 15:51 PM
25-03-2013 19:26 PM
| Posted by Tommy
Have you ever work for a company that gave you a turkey for thanksgiving and then come home to hear your wife was giving a turkey from her work and then a neibor gives you a turkey for thanksgiving.. Thats exactly what is happening in the Eroupe and other countries there is more horsemeat floating around than beef so criminals have found a way to make more profits by mixing the meats and leaving the lablels as is.. NOT mentioning the drugs of brute, steriods and wormers in the horses that are coming from the US to Mexico and Canada for slaughter.. STOP THE SLAUGHTER and you stop the criminals and irresponsible breeders in America..
26-03-2013 17:31 PM
| Posted by Debbie
Finally, it is happening what we all said would happen IS !!!! What goes around ALWAYS comes around, I am so happy it is ALL being exposed!!!! Horse Slaughter needs to STOP they are NOT LIVESTOCK they are not BREED TO EAT!
26-03-2013 21:15 PM
| Posted by Margaret
And here we thought that the EU would be the US's answer to the Bute issue. Once again American horses are being victimized because people would rather get their pockets lined with gold than do the right thing.
Happily I'm working on being vegetarian. I did this as a response to a judge's decision to the wild horses a few years ago. It lasted about 6 months. This time I think its safe that this person is NOT WILLING TO TAKE THE WORD OF HER GOVERNMENT WHO WILL NOT TEST FOR HORSE. No its kill kill kill. We'll worry about side effects later. Later is here and people are running around with their heads in the sand.
Happily I'm working on being vegetarian. I did this as a response to a judge's decision to the wild horses a few years ago. It lasted about 6 months. This time I think its safe that this person is NOT WILLING TO TAKE THE WORD OF HER GOVERNMENT WHO WILL NOT TEST FOR HORSE. No its kill kill kill. We'll worry about side effects later. Later is here and people are running around with their heads in the sand.
20-03-2013 07:04 AM
20-03-2013 08:36 AM
| Posted by George Monbiot
Paterson seems to be grinning sarcastically like a buffoon in every photo. It's easy for him to grin, with his generous public sector pay package and pension. Many smaller farmers don't even have a pension and times are tough. Other European governments support farmers, while their public sector bureaucracies take a profoundly relaxed view of monitoring enforcement, milking the EU for as much cash as possible. Meanwhile in the UK our MP for farming is openly anti-farming and the RPA is run like the Gestapo.
14-03-2013 11:22 AM
14-03-2013 18:58 PM
| Posted by Clued-Up
The minister said a cull was 'backed by science'. He's telling porkies, he knows that and we know it too.
There's near universal agreement from UK's science and animal health experts that a badger cull will do damn all to reduce cattle bTB and may even increase it. Those same experts have told Heath and co that tight cattle controls WILL control the disease but that the best way to get rid of it is by introducing cattle vaccination ASAP.
Sadly, Heath appears to be wilfully deaf and blind to informed advice.
The badger cull isn't going ahead - it's not politically or economically possible - but until Heath and co are finally convinced it's a non-starter he'll carry on spouting about it.
There's near universal agreement from UK's science and animal health experts that a badger cull will do damn all to reduce cattle bTB and may even increase it. Those same experts have told Heath and co that tight cattle controls WILL control the disease but that the best way to get rid of it is by introducing cattle vaccination ASAP.
Sadly, Heath appears to be wilfully deaf and blind to informed advice.
The badger cull isn't going ahead - it's not politically or economically possible - but until Heath and co are finally convinced it's a non-starter he'll carry on spouting about it.
18-03-2013 19:21 PM
| Posted by Graham
Well he keeps saying this, but what science is he referring to?. Does he mean the Crebbs trial which concluded a cull would be pointless?
Were there really any increased cattle controls, additional pre-movement testing and stricter on-farm biosecurity, or were there just some rules saying it should happen?
Were there really any increased cattle controls, additional pre-movement testing and stricter on-farm biosecurity, or were there just some rules saying it should happen?
25-03-2013 13:51 PM
| Posted by Graham
TB i "one of" the biggest threats to the industry.
So why not concentrate on the other, BIGGER THREATS such as lameness and mastitis, giving more time to develop testing which actually works, and which differentiates between TB and vaccination.
So why not concentrate on the other, BIGGER THREATS such as lameness and mastitis, giving more time to develop testing which actually works, and which differentiates between TB and vaccination.
13-03-2013 10:33 AM
13-03-2013 14:54 PM
| Posted by Clued-Up
Jones and the FUW seem to believe that presenting several facts (eg increased numbers of cattle bTB tested and found to be reactors) together with unproven assumptions about badgers proves badgers cause cattle bTB. They are either unable or unwilling to think scientifically ...
With the new more rigorous, better enforced cattle management controls, you test more cattle (in larger herds) and you test them more often. Unsurprisingly you pick up more cattle bTB cases.
There is NO evidence about which way round bTB transmission works between the species.
We know cattle to cattle transmisssion happens (that's been demonstrated in a properly controlled experiment).
We know that cattle bTB exists in areas where THERE ARE ABSOLUTELY NO BADGERS.
We know that the percentage of badgers infected with bTB is very small, the percentage of badgers which are infectious (ie capable of infecting other animals) is even smaller.
We know from the epidemiological data that peaks and troughs in the amount of cattle bTB follow what happens as regards the movement of cattle (eg a peak after F & M when cattle from bTB hotspots were used to re-stock clean areas).
Take the above sets of facts together and you can be pretty sure that badgers are almost irrelevant to cattle bTB and the problem to focus on is how you MANAGE CATTLE to kill off bTB.
Personally, I've never understood why farmers haven't been chasing DEFRA much harder to get on with the UK trials of the cattle bTB vaccine and with negotiating a deal with the EU that would allow them to use it.
With the new more rigorous, better enforced cattle management controls, you test more cattle (in larger herds) and you test them more often. Unsurprisingly you pick up more cattle bTB cases.
There is NO evidence about which way round bTB transmission works between the species.
We know cattle to cattle transmisssion happens (that's been demonstrated in a properly controlled experiment).
We know that cattle bTB exists in areas where THERE ARE ABSOLUTELY NO BADGERS.
We know that the percentage of badgers infected with bTB is very small, the percentage of badgers which are infectious (ie capable of infecting other animals) is even smaller.
We know from the epidemiological data that peaks and troughs in the amount of cattle bTB follow what happens as regards the movement of cattle (eg a peak after F & M when cattle from bTB hotspots were used to re-stock clean areas).
Take the above sets of facts together and you can be pretty sure that badgers are almost irrelevant to cattle bTB and the problem to focus on is how you MANAGE CATTLE to kill off bTB.
Personally, I've never understood why farmers haven't been chasing DEFRA much harder to get on with the UK trials of the cattle bTB vaccine and with negotiating a deal with the EU that would allow them to use it.
11-03-2013 15:16 PM
12-03-2013 10:09 AM
| Posted by Cristina Parker
Pesticides are decimating our wildlife, not badgers. I was walking in a field next to one that a farmer had changed from ploughed (with lots of Willow herb and other wild flowes) to grassed. In the field I was in bees were dying in their hundreds, obviously from the effects of the weedkiller the farmer had sprayed. Don't blame the wild animals, blame the farmers.
Hedgehogs and birds and all beneficial pollinating insects have been decimated by the irresponsible farming methods used over the last few decades.
Hedgehogs and birds and all beneficial pollinating insects have been decimated by the irresponsible farming methods used over the last few decades.
12-03-2013 13:33 PM
| Posted by Clued-Up
"We know from a variety of sources that badger numbers in Wales have increased many-fold since the 1970s".
Jones doesn't name the sources saying there's been a "many-fold" increase in badger numbers so we can't judge whether these claims have ANY credibility. I've read there hasn't been any authoritative, scientifically credible national survey of badger numbers.
Jones doesn't seem to appreciate that badgers are territorial while (at least some)deer species are not. That difference matters because territorial animals are subject to natural control of their population density - they don't need culling.
Jones suggests badgers decimate wildlife. They don't, in the view of most authorities. Badgers mainly eat snails, slugs, earthworms and so on, though they'll enjoy the occasional rat, hedgehog or fledgeling too.
The drop in the number of native ground-nesting birds (eg skylarks) has much more to do with past and current agricultural practices than with badgers. It's possible to say that with conviction because the number of skylarks and other ground-nesting birds has increased where farmers have introduced more wild-life friendly ways of managing their fields.
Hedgehog numbers have been dropping mainly because of human activities (eg the use of poisonous slug and snail pellets in gardens; the vogue for "hard landscaping", low maintenance gardens; and so on).
Jones doesn't name the sources saying there's been a "many-fold" increase in badger numbers so we can't judge whether these claims have ANY credibility. I've read there hasn't been any authoritative, scientifically credible national survey of badger numbers.
Jones doesn't seem to appreciate that badgers are territorial while (at least some)deer species are not. That difference matters because territorial animals are subject to natural control of their population density - they don't need culling.
Jones suggests badgers decimate wildlife. They don't, in the view of most authorities. Badgers mainly eat snails, slugs, earthworms and so on, though they'll enjoy the occasional rat, hedgehog or fledgeling too.
The drop in the number of native ground-nesting birds (eg skylarks) has much more to do with past and current agricultural practices than with badgers. It's possible to say that with conviction because the number of skylarks and other ground-nesting birds has increased where farmers have introduced more wild-life friendly ways of managing their fields.
Hedgehog numbers have been dropping mainly because of human activities (eg the use of poisonous slug and snail pellets in gardens; the vogue for "hard landscaping", low maintenance gardens; and so on).
12-03-2013 13:38 PM
| Posted by Ant
Funny these 'afraid' scientists were not scared to oppose badger cull. Probably because it went against sound science. Scientist tend to object to that.
13-03-2013 11:49 AM
| Posted by beeline
The badgers are responsible for bumble bees now?? Not agricultural methods, pesticides etc.? Like neonicotinoid chemicals for example?
Increasing scientific evidence links this agent with decline in bee populations.
Increasing scientific evidence links this agent with decline in bee populations.
Most Read News
08-05-2013 14:27 PM
13-05-2013 13:39 PM
13-05-2013 14:23 PM
08-05-2013 06:49 AM
09-05-2013 14:32 PM
Categories
Agri Safety
Alpacas
Animal Health
Appointments
Arable
Bees and Beekeeping
Cattle
Cereal
CLA
Crops
Dairy
Deer
Diversification
Education
Farmshops
Feed and Forage
Finance
Forestry
Grassland
Housing and Storage
Husbandry Advice
Husbandry News
LAMMA
Livestock Equipment
Machinery and Spares
Market Reports
Meat Processing
News
NFU
Organic
Pigs
Poultry
Poultry Husbandry
Poultry Veterinary
Produce
Products
Property News
Renewable Energy
Sheep
Shows and Events
Slurry and Irrigation
Supermarkets
Top Tips
Veterinary News
World News
