Archive for the ‘Wildlife’ Category

‘TimTam Orphans’ in UN Year of Forests

Saturday, June 4th, 2011

In Indonesia, bulldozing rainforest for profitable palm oil plantations for western diets has become highly profitable due to western corporate demand…

In Indonesia’s Borneo (Kalimantan) the rainforest habitat of orangutans is being destroyed, largely to make way for palm oil plantations due to western diet demand

Arnott’s relies up on palm oil in its popular western ‘Tim Tam’ biscuit product

Just like these other western brands do:

The palm oil driven rainforest deforestation in Borneo (Kalimantan) thanks to unethical palm oil demand from the likes of Arnott’s…

Try finding a shrinking rainforest map on the wrapper of a packet of Tim Tams!

Indonesian unethical destruction of orangutan rainforest habitat continues to provide for palm oil plantations.

This is costing the lives of about 50 orangutans every week.

Arnott’s knows this, yet continues to buy the palm oil and drive the Indonesian palm oil deforestation.

Arnott’s is expanding its sales of palm oil Tim Tams with new product offerings:

2011 has been declared by the United Nations as the International Year of Forests.

Arnott’s knows this.

It won’t be long before human demand for Tim Tams and other palm oil consumer products have driven the orangutan into extinction.

Tim Tams have become the western addiction driving orangutan extinction.

Arnott’s chocolate biscuits are more than a weight gaining guilt.

You eat them, you kill a species.

Will someone make clear to the Arnott’s Board that for Orangutans THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR QUALITY HABITAT.

Tags: arnott's, Borneo, fragile forest ecosystems, Kalimantan, no substitute for quality habitat, orangutan, palm oil plantations, pringle orphans, rainforests, tim tam, tim tam orphans, UN International Year of Forests, World Environment Day 5th June
Posted in Kalimantan (ID), Orang-utans, Threats from Deforestation, Threats from Farming | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

Dingo Ecology deserves respect on Fraser Is

Tuesday, May 3rd, 2011

Fraser Island Dingo

[Source: ^http://widebaygreens.org/fraser-island/]

.

‘The dingo population on (Fraser) island is regarded as the most pure strain of dingoes remaining in eastern Australia’.

~ ^UNESCO World Heritage

‘Dingoes were once common on the island, but are now decreasing. They are some of the last remaining pure dingoes in Eastern Australia and to prevent cross-breeding, dogs are not allowed on the island. There was no recorded history of dingoes attacking humans on Fraser Island up until 1995.

In April 2001, a boy wandered away from his family and was discovered dead, with indications of a dingo attack. Thirty-one dingoes were killed by authorities as a result of the incident. In 2004, a dingo entered a hotel room on the island where a baby was lying on a bed. It was chased off before any incident occurred. Feeding or attracting the attention of dingoes remains illegal.

The remaining number of dingoes on the island is estimated to be 120 to 150 as of January 2008 and sightings are becoming rarer.’

[Source: ^http://widebaygreens.org/fraser-island/]

.

Need to Control Humans

.

Given the recent history of parental negligence on Fraser Island, has it got to the point of mandating an ‘Adults Only’ responsible presence on Fraser Island?

Such a respectful ecological policy would ensure that only responsible human adults share and respect Fraser Island without risking more starving dingos to be shot in some twisted vengeance by so-called ‘wildlife officers’.

Australia’s national disgrace – starving dingos cornered on their native Fraser Island

[Source: ^http://www.care2.com/news/member/525884267/1440667]

.

What is the Queensland Government’s latest brand name for its agency responsible for Fraser Island’s supposed World Heritage values? – ‘Department of Environmental Resource Management‘ – who’s flaming resource? Is Queensland still redneck about tourism revenue and exploitation of this World Heritage tourism brand?.

Dingos are wild Australian animals.

Why haven’t Australian tourists learnt from Australia’s Azaria Lesson that children and wildlife don’t mix?

“The Fraser Island Dingo is believed to be the purest strain of Dingo on the East Coast of Australia. It is illegal to feed or touch the Dingoes as it causes the animals to become “humanised”. There have been recorded instances of Dingoes attacking humans with the fatal attack of a 9 year old boy. This is not a regular occurence and if people are aware of the danger then these instances can be minimised.”
[Source: ^http://ozmagic2.homestead.com/dingo.html]

.

Need to Restore Dingo Ecology on Fraser Island

.

The problem of the health, viability and survivability of Fraser Island Dingos is a joint responsibility of the Queensland Government and Australian Government.

Why the deliberate slaughter of dingos by the very Government agency charged with Fraser Island’s ecological integrity: ‘Department of Environmental Resource Management‘?

‘The recent slaughter of a very large number of one of the last genetically pure populations of dingoes in Australia (on Fraser Island) has prompted an overwhelming call by our member organisations to press for better protection for dingoes, both from acts of State-sanctioned cruelty and from the extreme and urgent threat of extinction.’

[Source: ^http://www.awpc.org.au/other_fauna/dingo1.htm]

Starved dingo pup found on Fraser Island

Photo by local resident Judy Daniel, 2010

[Source: ^http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/03/30/2859757.htm]

.

The Badger – a native to Britain

Most people in Britain only know of badgers as road kill mess from their cars and trucks as they drive fast along country roads. Most people in Britain live in the warmth, convenience and security of an urban environment closely in their urban social groups.

Badgers live closely in their own social groups in the warmth, convenience and security of their underground ‘setts‘. Badgers live a whole world away from people, or would if they could – they have become nocturnal in places with high human populations. Over the centuries, as human numbers have exploded across Britain, people have spread further and further taking over and destroying wildlife native habitats, including the world of the native badger.

Few people in Britain will know much about the badger and its ecology, save of course wildlife ecologists, zoologists and the growing number of dedicated ‘badger watchers‘.

Badgers remain one the largest wild animals left across the British Isles. They are beautiful animals. They are native and deserve human respect.

.

Says wildlife photographer from Lancashire, (Michael S):

“As a wildlife photographer, I’m lucky enough to spend a good portion of my time observing the wildlife of this country. Nothing – and I mean NOTHING – is as magical to me as the moment, after much silent waiting around in cold, damp woodland, that the first badger tentatively emerges from its sett, shortly followed by the rest of the family (presumably once the “all clear” has been given). I’ve often been so transfixed just watching them interact and play that I forget to take photos.”

[Source: BBC website, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-11380921 [Viewed 20110318]

.

‘The European Badger (Meles meles) belongs to the family of mammals known as Mustelidae (possessing musk glands), otherwise known as the weasel family and includes the otter, stoat, polecat, ferret and pine marten. The badger is indigenous to most of Europe including the British Isles, with the largest abundance found within southern England.

‘The name ‘badger‘ is believed to come from the French word ‘becheur‘, meaning digger. Across Britain, badgers occupy a large range of habitat types and they are often found in what’s left of Britain’s native woods and copses, as well as in scrubs, hedgerows, quarries, moorlands, open fields and even in housing estates as the developers encroach on pastoral areas. They are however more abundant in areas where a mosaic of features are present such as deciduous woodland, pasture and arable habitat types. Remember that the badgers and their native habitat existed before the property developers.

Badgers live in setts, a network of underground tunnels, which they dig using their strong claws. Badger density increases with hilliness and a survey undertaken by the Mammal Society has found that 92% of setts in Britain were dug into slopes. Badgers prefer slopes for a variety of reasons. Firstly slopes help the excavation of soil, which can spill down the slope as it is dug. Sloping land is also well drained and more likely to be warm and dry. In colder climates badgers can easily dig to a depth with is frost proof.

As social group has about five badgers in winter and is typically headed by a dominant male and female. Male badgers patrol their territory boundary during the early spring breeding season (February – March) and mark the borders of the territory with dung. If a stray boar (head male) from another colony is encountered the ensuing fight can be particularly fierce.

Although badgers are members of the order carnivore, they are in fact foraging ominvores, meaning they eat a wide range of plants and animals. This has aided their adaptability, as humans have destroyed the natural landscape. Badgers have a varied diet depending on what food available and on the time of year. A badger’s diet mainly consists of earthworms and a large boar can eat as many as 200 earthworms in a single night. Their diet is supplemented with insects, birds, small mamals, fruits and berries, cereals , reptiles and amphibians.

[Source: The Badger Trust, November 2008]

.

Badger – a history of human persecution

.

Badgers have an excellent sense of smell and can find human scent particularly disturbing. Badgers have an elusive nature, inculated from centuries of human persecution.

In England prior to the 19th Century, the badger is believed to have had a wide distribution, but heavy persecution in the 19th Century caused numbers to drop dramatically and by the end of the 19th Century badgers were considered rare. Badgers were largely poisoned, trapped and shot by game keepers and farmers who mistakenly saw the badger as a threat to livestock. Between 1960 and 1972 numabers also were in decline due to increased road construction and vehicle numbers as well as trains causing escallating roadkill of badgers aand other wildlife. In addition, badger persecution has extended to gassing of badger setts, shooting and increased overuse by farmers of pesticides causing badgers to be poisoned and causing reduction in fertility rates.

The passing of the Badger Act 1973 (and amendments in 1981, 1991, and 1992) has helped badger number to recover and today across Britain there are an estimated population of 300,000.

Badger Baiting

‘Badgers were also cruelly persecuted through the 18th Century by the wicked blood practice of ‘badger baiting‘ . Badger baiting was outlawed in the United Kingdom as early as 1835, with the introduction of the Cruelty to Animals Act and the Protection of Animals Act 1911. Badger Baiting was made illegal in 1835 and is currently an offence under the but it has never died out. Sadly, it is the badger’s tenacity, its apparent ability to absorb almost any punishment and still go on fighting, which has made it a target for people who get their kicks from inflicting cruelty upon animals, even today.

Every year, hundreds of badgers meet a horrific death in the name of ‘sport’ in the UK at the hands of terriermen. Many of those who have been caught digging into badger setts have used the excuse that they were after foxes – and many have escaped prosecution by so doing. More than 10,000 are caught, tortured and killed in the UK each year by huntsmen with terriers – with almost a third of these illegal acts being carried out in Wales. Alarmingly, this figure is rising constantly. Terry Spamer, a former RSPCA inspector, believes that there are around 2,000 people involved in badger baiting currently. However, only around three people are caught and convicted of badger baiting each year, while the majority carry on breaking the law.

Small terriers, such as Lakelands, Patterdales, sometimes Jack Russells or a cross-breed are sent down into a badger sett to locate a badger and hold it at bay. The men then dig their way down to their quarry and drag the badger out of the sett. Many diggers attach a radio transmitter to the dog’s collar before sending it below ground then all they have to do is use a radio receiver/locater to determine the exact location of the dog.

There are essentially two types of badger baiters. The first who do it just for the pleasure of killing the badger on the spot and no money is involved. If it’s lucky the badger will be shot but usually the men will set their snarling terriers on the badger and watch it suffer a long and agonising death stabbing it with shovels for good measure. At times, the dogs and the badgers may die when the sett collapses and suffocates them.

The second type of badger baiting involves gambling where large sums of money can change hands. The badger is dug out of the sett in the manner described above and then it is put in a bag and taken away to be baited later on. The badger is taken somewhere quiet for example a barn, shed or cellar and placed into a makeshift arena, a ring or pit, from which it cannot escape. Dogs are then set upon it. Even if the badger is lucky enough to get the better of one dog, the owner may hit or otherwise injure the badger in order to ‘protect his pet’. Ultimately, no matter how well it tries to defend itself, the badger’s fate is sealed. The badger, through injury and exhaustion, will not be able fight any longer. Its back legs are held by a chain to prevent escape. The animals multilated head, minus nose and lower jaw, finished up mounted on a plaque. The baiters will then kill the badger usually by clubbing or shooting it. Gambling is always involved and a winning dog’s value will rise – along with the price of its puppies. An anonymous letter received by Badger Watch & Rescue Dyfed states that badgers are being caught and sold for about £500 for baiting.

Badger Baiting, London, circa 1824

[Source: Henry Thomas Alken, this image is free in the public domain due to its age,

Wikipedia, ^http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Badger-baiting3.jpg]

Badgers are shy and peaceful animals and not normally aggressive, but will defend themselves if cornered or provoked. A badger has great strength and a blow from one of its vicious claws can do serious harm. Many dogs seriously injured during badger digging and baiting go untreated as their owners are more concerned vets will become suspicious of the owner’s illegal activity.’

(Read More)

Badger Hunting

‘People kill more badgers than predators and natural causes. In most of the countries where badgers live, they are hunted in great numbers for several reasons. Several thousands of badgers are targeted for their fur, meat or just a cruel ‘sport’. In some countries like Germany, USA and Canada, the hair of badgers are used in shaving and painting brushes. In Britain, Badgers are legislatively protected. However, killing badgers in Britain rather continues secretly.

Badgers are hunted in several ways. Through illegal and cruel methods, people dig out badgers from their setts. In several cases, badgers are also snared, shot or poisoned to death. Very often, badgers also accidentally get trapped in snares set up to catch foxes. Quite a many times, the snares are left unchecked for hours or days and the badgers caught up in them are left to their cruel fate of suffering a long agonizing period of capture, starvation, and dehydration, eventually facing a horrible death.

Urban sprawl and intensive agriculture are two main threats to the life and population of badgers. Badgers are creatures of rather a set habitual pattern and are not good in adapting to any change. Under disturbances from people or developments, badgers are forced to quit their habitat and move on or just die out in a helpless state. Quite unknown to people, badgers can also come to the gardens, cultivations and parks of the suburban area in search of food.

Badger hunting in the name of fun or sport or under the belief that they damage livestock has seriously devastated the badger population in some areas like South Yorkshire. In certain regions like Essex, agricultural intensification has resulted in the decline of badger population.

Some people use modern technology to hunt badgers. Night vision equipments enable the poachers to trace the poor animals in the dark, at the same time evading from the eyes of gamekeepers and police personnel. The other technology used in hunting is lighting. In this method, the criminals carry a high-intensity searchlight and locate the animals. Once the animals are disoriented at the sight of bright light, they either shoot the animals or capture them using hunting dogs.

There are also cases of poisoning the badgers, both accidentally and purposefully. Quite often when the poison is meant for killing other wilder life and pests, many poor badgers become unfortunate victims and die. Badger hunting is a serious offense. Unintentional killings of badgers can invite heavy fines and warnings, while intentional killings can lead to jail sentences.’

[Source: http://www.savethebadgers.co.uk/badger-hunting.shtml]

.

Badgers and British Law

Why are badgers protected?

Badgers and their setts are legally protected from intentional cruelty, such as badger-baiting, and from the results of lawful human activities, such as building developments. The legislation, mainly the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 (the 1992 Act), has provided a useful tool in deterring the abuse of badgers and in prosecuting those who continue to break the law.

However, it is a sad fact that many thousands of badgers are still killed illegally each year, and the incidents appear to be increasing. Also, due to the nature of the crimes, there are relatively few successful prosecutions.
These notes are intended to provide some background to the law relating to badgers. However, the issue is complex and more detailed information can be obtained by contacting Badger Trust

Threats to badgers

.

Badgers in the UK are threatened by both legal and illegal activities.
Legal activities, subject to compliance with conditions in the 1992 Act, include:

Road and housing development;
Forestry and agricultural operations; and
Badger culling by the Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs and the Welsh Assembly Government in relation to bovine TB in cattle;

Illegal threats to badgers include:

Badger-digging and baiting
Snaring
Poisoning (including the misuse of pesticides)
Lamping, and
Sett interference

.Relevant legislation

The main legislation protecting badgers in England and Wales is the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 (the 1992 Act). Under the 1992 Act it is an offence to:

wilfully kill, injure, take or attempt to kill, injure or take a badger;
possess a dead badger or any part of a badger;
cruelly ill-treat a badger;
use badger tongs in the course of killing, taking or attempting to kill a badger;
dig for a badger;
sell or offer for sale or control any live badger;
mark, tag or ring a badger; and
interfere with a badger sett by:
damaging a sett or any part thereof;
destroying a sett;
obstructing access to a sett;
causing a dog to enter a sett; and
disturbing a badger while occupying a sett.

The 1992 Act defines a badger sett as: “any structure or place which displays signs indicating current use by a badger”

.

DEFRA’s position on Bovine TB and British cattle as at 6 April 2011

.

[NOTE: This data has been extracted, rather than referenced as a link, due to the changeable habit of DEFRA changing its website. If DEFRA wishes to retain public access to its referenced documents, then members of the public ought to be able to access these freely from DEFRA’s website ].

DEFRA’s website (as at 6 April 2011): http://www.defra.gov.uk/food-farm/animals/diseases/tb/

.

‘Bovine tuberculosis (bTB) is an infectious disease of cattle. It is caused by the bacterium Mycobacterium bovis (M. bovis), which can also infect and cause TB in badgers, deer, goats, pigs, camelids (llamas and alpacas), dogs and cats, as well as many other mammals.

Bovine TB is a zoonotic disease, which means it can be transmitted from affected animals to people, causing a condition very similar to human TB. However, the risk of people contracting TB from cattle in Great Britain is currently considered very low.

This page aims to provide a comprehensive introduction to our work to tackle the disease.’ ~ DEFRA.

Latest news

31 March 2011 – Cattle testing positive for TB to be DNA tagged
28 March 2011: Bovine TB surveillance reports for Great Britain compiled by the Veterinary Laboratories Agency (VLA)
18 March 2011: Provisional TB statistics for Great Britain are now available for December 2010
28 February 2011: Bovine disease compensation payable during March 2011
31 December 2010: Statistics for TB in non-bovine species are now available
11 November 2010 – Defra launches new support service for TB affected farmers
8 November 2010 – the following material has been made public:

* Safety and efficacy data from the studies used to license the injectable badger vaccine, BadgerBCG
* Computer modelling comparing badger control strategies for reducing bovine TB in cattle in England.
To view this material, and supporting information, please see the Research section of this page

15 September 2010 – the following material has been published:

Government’s approach to tackling bovine TB and consultation on a badger control policy (this consultation has now closed. We will be announcing a comprehensive and balanced TB Eradication Programme for England as soon as possible)
Changes to cattle testing policies
Review of the pre-movement testing policy in England and Wales – April 2006-March 2009
Bovine TB and the use of PCR: Summary of 12 July meeting chaired by Defra’s Chief Scientific Advisor

Key facts and figures

Bovine TB is a largely regional problem, concentrated in the West Midlands and South West of England.
91.9% of cattle herds in England were officially bTB-free on 31 December 2010.
24,899 cattle were slaughtered for bTB control in England in 2010 (compared with 25,557 in 2009).
Government spend on bovine TB in 2009/10 was about £63 million in England.
Monthly statistics are published

What is the case for government action?

Alongside maintaining vigilance over risks to public health, the main rationale for government intervention is to mitigate the economic impact of the disease on the farming industry and to meet EU legal requirements.

The original reason for government’s involvement in tackling the disease was to protect public health. Pasteurisation of cows’ milk, together with a comprehensive cattle testing/slaughter programme, and inspection of cattle carcases at slaughterhouses, have significantly reduced (to a very low level) the risks to human health.

Bovine TB is having a serious impact on many farm businesses and families, especially in the West and South West of England. Thousands of cattle are slaughtered each year at huge financial and emotional cost to farmers. The area of England affected by bovine TB has grown from isolated pockets in the late 1980s to cover large areas of the West and South West of England. The costs to the taxpayer are rising year by year and there is a strong case for early effective action to turn this around.

No single measure will be enough to tackle the disease on its own. We need to use every tool in the toolbox. There is a significant reservoir of infection in badgers and evidence suggests, without addressing the problem in the badger population, it will not be possible to eradicate bTB in cattle. Cattle measures will remain the foundation of our bTB eradication programme but we also need to deal with the disease in badgers. The farming industry, the veterinary profession and government need to work in partnership if we are to eradicate the disease.
Current situation and background

There has been a long-term (over 25 years) increasing trend in bTB incidence in cattle, driven by both cattle-to-cattle and badger-to-cattle transmission.

A wide range of measures is in place to tackle, and reduce further spread, of the disease, including:

Regular cattle herd surveillance testing
Slaughter of test positive ‘reactor’ cattle
Herd movement restrictions on bTB breakdown herds
Zero tolerance of overdue herd tests
Use of additional, more sensitive diagnostic tests
Pre-movement testing (paid for by farmers) of cattle from high risk herds
Farmer advice, including husbandry guidance

Badgers and bovine TB

The Coalition has committed, as part of a package of measures, to developing affordable options for a carefully-managed and science-led policy of badger control in areas with high and persistent levels of bovine TB.‪‪‪

Defra has been looking at all the key relevant evidence, including published scientific evidence from the Randomised Badger Culling Trial (RBCT) and subsequent post-trial analyses, to draw up proposals, which have been published for public consultation.

The government’s proposal is to issue licences to farmers/landowners who wish to cull and/or vaccinate badgers at their own expense. These licences would be subject to strict licence criteria to ensure badger control is done effectively, humanely and with high regard for animal welfare.

We welcome your comments and responses to the consultation (our website also contains details of how to submit your response):

* Consultation documents

As part of Defra’s commitment to tackling the issue of bovine TB, government has invested in a significant research programme looking into the development of vaccines for both cattle and badgers.

* More information on vaccination

A Badger Vaccine Deployment Project (BVDP) is being funded by Defra to assess and maximise the viability of using injectable badger vaccine and to help us move towards the long-term goal of an oral badger vaccine. Badgers on up to 100km2 of land in Gloucestershire are being trapped and vaccinated over 5 years using the injectable badger vaccine licenced in March 2010. The deployment project aims to build confidence in the principle and practicalities of vaccination.

Testing for bTB

The primary screening test for bTB in cattle in Great Britain is the Single Intradermal Comparative Cervical Tuberculin (SICCT) test, commonly known as the tuberculin “skin test”.

This is used throughout the world to screen cattle, other animals, and in a modified version, people for bTB. It is the internationally accepted standard for detection of infection with M. bovis. All cattle herds are subject to regular ‘routine’ testing, the frequency of which is based on the local disease incidence e.g. herds in high bTB risk areas are tested annually.

The more sensitive gamma interferon blood test (g-IFN test) is used in addition to the SICCT test in prescribed circumstances. In addition, Pre-Movement testing is a statutory requirement: cattle 42 days old and over moving from a 1 or 2 yearly tested herd must have tested negative to a bTB test within 60 days prior to movement.

Cattle Compensation

Government compensation is paid to owners of cattle compulsorily slaughtered for bTB control purposes. Since February 2006 compensation in England has been determined primarily using table values, which reflect the average sales price of bovine animals in 47 different categories. The categories are based on the animal’s age, gender, type (dairy or beef) and status (pedigree or non-pedigree).

* Cattle compensation table values
.

Other farmed/domesticated species

In England, bTB is rarely self-sustaining in most species other than cattle and badgers. Nevertheless, DEFRA has controls in place to deal with suspected or confirmed cases in other species.

TB in wild and captive deer is a notifiable disease under the Tuberculosis (Deer) Order 1989 and suspicion of disease should be reported to Animal Health (AH). Following investigation, movement restrictions can be imposed on farmed animals. Defra is currently reviewing the controls for non-bovine species, in particular South American Camelids (llamas and alpacas), goats and deer.

Bovine TB occasionally affects cats and dogs and owners should seek advice from their vet. More about TB in other species.

Research

A significant amount (over £8.7 million in 2009/2010) is spent on a wide-ranging bovine TB research programme with a portfolio comprising projects looking at vaccine development; licensing studies; new diagnostic tests and disease epidemiology to support vaccine use.

Vaccination of either cattle or wildlife is considered a potential long-term policy option for reducing the risk of bTB in Great Britain. As such, a substantial part of the Defra research programme focuses on this.

The injectable badger vaccine, BadgerBCG, was granted a Marketing Authorisation by the Veterinary Medicines Directorate in March 2010 to be used for the active immunisation of badgers to reduce lesions of tuberculosis caused by Mycobacterium bovis. The safety and efficacy data required for licensing the vaccine were generated from the following studies:

SE3216 Development and testing of vaccines against badger tuberculosis (Project report to Defra on GLP captive badger safety study)
An investigation into the safety of BCG vaccine in badgers (Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) captive badger study) (PDF 393 KB)
Vaccine Efficacy Study with Bacille of Calmette and Guérin (BCG) Vaccine Administered Parenterally to Badgers (PDF 1.22 MB) – Safety data (Captive badger studies)
Vaccine Efficacy Studies with Bacille of Calmette and Guérin (BCG) Vaccine Administered Parenterally to Badgers (PDF 4.83 MB) – Efficacy data (Captive badger studies)
CB0116 Research Project Final Report – Efficacy testing of BCG vaccine in badgers (Project report to Defra on captive badger studies) (PDF 505 KB)
Field trial to assess the safety and efficacy of Bacille Calmette Guérin (BCG) vaccine administered parenterally to badgers (Good Clinical Practice (veterinary) study on wild badgers) (PDF 630 KB), plus additional supporting data in Appendices (PDF 1.89 MB)

The laboratory studies with captive badgers demonstrated that vaccination of badgers by injection with BCG significantly reduces the progression, severity and excretion of Mycobacterium bovis infection. A key finding of the field study, conducted over four years in a naturally infected population of over 800 wild badgers in Gloucestershire, was that vaccination resulted in a four-fold (74%) reduction in the proportion of wild badgers testing positive to the antibody blood test for TB in badgers. The blood test is not an absolute indicator of protection from disease so the field results cannot tell us the degree of vaccine efficacy. While the findings indicate a clear effect of vaccination on badger disease, data from the laboratory and field studies do not lend themselves to giving a definitive figure for BadgerBCG vaccine efficacy.

A scientific paper summarising the results of the injectable BCG badger vaccine research has been published in the scientific journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

Computer modelling (PDF 478 KB) by the Food and Environment Research Agency (Fera), completed since the publication of the consultation document, examined the strategies contained in the consultation proposals. These were using badger culling combined with vaccination (i.e. ring-vaccination around an area of culling) and comparing these to culling-only, vaccination-only and do-nothing strategies. The Fera modelling assumed a vaccine efficacy of 70%.

The results of the modelling were that:

a) A combined strategy of vaccination in a ring around a culling area was more successful than the cull-only strategy, which in turn was more successful than the vaccination-only strategy, both in reducing the number of TB infected badgers and cattle herd breakdowns. Ring vaccination partly mitigated the detrimental effects of culling. However, the combined strategy requires about twice as much effort than either single approach done in isolation.

b) Culling of badgers should continue for at least four years to realise a clear benefit. However, low rates of land access for culling, or low culling efficiency, or the early cessation of a culling strategy was likely to lead to an overall increase in cattle herd breakdowns (whilst this is not the case for vaccination).

An injectable badger vaccine was authorised for use in March 2010. Work to develop useable cattle and oral badger vaccines is ongoing. Cattle vaccines are currently prohibited under EU legislation as they are based on BCG, which interferes with the statutory primary diagnostic test, the tuberculin skin test. Vaccinated cattle would therefore react as if infected and herds could not be declared Officially TB Free (OTF).

We are therefore developing a diagnostic test to differentiate between Infected and Vaccinated Animals (a so-called ‘DIVA test’). Changes will be required to EU legislation to allow this test to be used in place of or alongside the tuberculin skin test to confer OTF status.

Further details of Defra’s TB research projects:

Current research projects (PDF 210 KB)
Completed research projects

The Bovine TB Eradication Group for England (TBEG)

TBEG was established in 2008 to make recommendations to the Secretary of State on bovine TB and its eradication. The membership of the group includes representatives from the farming industry, the veterinary profession, Defra and Animal Health.

* More information about the Group
* Highlights of the thirty-first meeting on 15 December 2010

Advice and support for farmers

The provision of better support for bTB-affected farm businesses has been identified as a priority by TBEG. In October 2009 TBEG recommended a number of new measures aimed at helping owners of bTB restricted herds to maintain their businesses and avoid some of the practical problems created by movement controls.

Farmers wishing to find out more about bTB should contact their local AH office and/or refer to any of the TB In Your Herd publications.

For bTB affected cattle farmers we are also developing a package of government-funded advice (based on the latest scientific evidence) covering veterinary; biosecurity; and business issues. Farmers can now access free business support, through the Farm Crisis Network (FCN). FCN agents will provide practical support, sign-post businesses to sources of other more specialist advice, and for those in greatest financial need a dedicated FCN Business Support Group will advise farmers on their options.

Working in partnership, Defra, NFU, Animal Health and Fera have developed TB biosecurity training events for farmers which will be rolled out, across England, later this year.

We are also working with the profession to deliver enhanced private veterinary support. A pilot scheme has been launched in the South West where farmers under TB restrictions for 12 months or more, as well as those experiencing their first breakdown, will qualify for a visit from private vets trained in all aspects of TB: the vets will provide tailored advice to help farmers understand how TB spreads and what can de done on their farm to reduce risks. Joint TB meetings for private vets and their farming clients are also being trialed with two events held in the Midlands so far.

Support provided under the advice scheme complies with EU state Aid rules.

* England support/advice scheme for TB affected farmers (PDF 125 KB)

Defra has worked with NFU and Animal Health to develop a series of ‘quick guides’ for farmers affected by TB, sign-posting them to a range of additional support and providing contacts for further TB advice. These form part of the ‘TB In Your Herd publications’

Relevant legislation and regulations

* EU Directive 64/432/EEC (consolidated version) (PDF 600 KB)
* The Tuberculosis (England) Order 2007 SI No 740
* The Cattle Compensation (England) Order 2006 SI No 168

Key publications and documents

Government strategic framework
Krebs report: Executive summary Government’s response
TB Eradication plan 2010 (PDF 8 MB)
Independent Scientific Group final report (PDF 2.5 MB) on the Randomised Badger Culling Trial
TB Eradication Group progress report (PDF 800 KB)
TB guidance published by Animal Health

.

Slaughter risk to badgers in Wales [2010-2011]

.

“On 13th January 2010, the Welsh Assembly Government announced that they had given the final go-ahead for a “cull” of Badgers – we use the word “cull” here, but we feel murder, kill, or slaughter would be more accurate words to describe their plans. The Badger Trusthas mounted a legal challenge to this outrageous decision, but despite opposition from some Welsh Assembly Members, who wanted to at least respect the judicial process and halt preparations until the latest challenge is resolved, the Rural Affairs Minister, Elin Jones decided that the slaughter of badgers in Wales will go ahead, regardlessIt seems there is no doubt, Eldin Jones and those in the Welsh Assembly Government who support this action are determined, bullish even, to carry out the slaughter of badgers in Wales.Why? Well, you may rightly ask. Would it possibly be because a number of Welsh AM’s live in rural constituencies and want to appease the powerful farming lobby – a life of a badger, for a vote, perhaps!?Or, could it be that the WAG are anxious to “flex their muscles”; to “show the world” that they can do what theywant; to grab attention and put themselves in the media spotlight by making a massively controversial decision like this?Of course the Welsh Assembly Governments appear to have chosen to ignore a huge amount of scientific opinion and study which shows that such action is not only unjust, as badgers are not the main problem in relation to bovine TB, such a policy would also be incredibly expensive, extremely cruel, and would not work!Rather bizzarely, they have seemingly also chosen to ignore the results the Westminster Governments own research into this matter who concluded that a cull of badgers was not the best way to deal with bovine TB. As a result of their research, the Westminster government have advocated a programme of the vaccination of badgers and the enforcement of stricter controls of cattle as the best methods to deal with the problem.

News of the Welsh Assembly Government’s decision has shocked the world, and reaction from leading animal welfare and wildlife organisations has been swift.

The RSPCA has condemned the Welsh proposals saying that: “a badger cull could cause enormous suffering and actually increase the spread of disease.”

[Source: ^http://www.savethebadger.com/]

.

‘Badger Culling in the Intensive Action Area ‘

On 9 March Elin Jones, the Minister for Rural Affairs, laid the Badger (Control Area) (Wales) Order 2011.

‘This Order allows for a Government managed cull of badgers, alongside stricter cattle measures, in the Intensive Action Area in west Wales as part of the Welsh Assembly Government’s TB Eradication Programme.

If eradication of bovine TB is to be achieved in areas where the disease is endemic, and where the majority of cattle are slaughtered in Wales, need to be addressed. Stringent cattle controls alone will not achieve eradication and need to be implemented with effective badger intervention to deal with that source of infection.

The evidence presented to the Minister to help her make this decision is available here. This included a report on the responses to the Consultation on Badger Control in the Intensive Action Area (IAA) and the scientific evidence that is available on the options considered.’

[Source: Welsh Assembly Government, http://cymru.gov.uk/topics/environmentcountryside/ahw/disease/bovinetuberculosis/intensiveactionpilotarea/badgercullingiaa/?lang=en (viewed 20110411).]

.

“The evidence is that a badger cull on a scale or level of efficiency that seems feasible will not solve cattle farmers’ problem – that problem is truly serious. Understandably, the feeling is that something must be done, but the evidence is that it should not be a badger cull.”

– Sir David Attenborough.

.

“It is shameful that the Welsh Assembly Government proposes the protracted slaughter of thousands of badgers apparently with no clear idea of what benefits, if any, could be expected. Even the latest apology has no foundation in science. The broad policy proposals have been missold to the public and, crucially, to farmers. The subject, and the badgers, deserve careful science, not the politics of blunderbuss.”

– David Williams (January 2010), The Badget Trust

.

‘Wales to press ahead with badger cull’

[9th March 2011, The Guardian]

‘Welsh rural affairs minister Elin Jones gives go ahead to much-delayed move intended to control bovine tuberculosis

A badger cull in Wales to curb tuberculosis in cattle could finally be launched, just weeks after the Welsh assembly government said the necessary powers would come into force from 31 March.

The controversial cull was delayed last year after wildlife campaigners won a legal battle over previous plans, but rural affairs minister Elin Jones has always intended to press ahead – mainly in north Pembrokeshire – despite recognising what she called the “genuine concern” of opponents.

About 1,400 of the estimated 35,000 badgers in Wales are likely to be trapped and shot by contractors, the government has said previously, while insisting population levels would recover. TB-infected badgers are seen as prime conduits for TB in cattle, prompting Queen guitarist Brian May to attack “an apparently insatiable lust to take revenge” on the animals.

Separately, ministers in England are gearing up to licence farmers to kill badgers in specified areas, including the south-west, where many dairy farms have been hit by bovine TB, but there have been delays in announcing finalised plans..

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said: “Bovine TB is a devastating disease and tackling it is complex, so … we need to make sure we get it right. We will be announcing a comprehensive and balanced TB eradication programme for England as soon as possible.”

Expressing “extreme disappointment” at the Welsh decision, the RSPCA said the cull could lead to the “virtual elimination of badgers” from an area of nearly 300 square kilometres. “We believe that this is a dead end policy in every respect,” said Colin Booty, one of its wildlife scientists. “Not only will it result in the death of at least 70% of badgers from the cull area, but it will not resolve the problem in other areas of Wales.”

The Badger Trust, which successfully challenged the original plans, also criticised what it called the Welsh government’s “misconceived and counterproductive proposals … despite significant reductions in bovine tuberculosis over the past two years.” It would study the evidence presented to Jones and “will seek legal advice in relation to the latest decision, which may also be subject to a challenge in the Welsh assembly”.’

[Source: ‘Wales to press ahead with badger cull‘, by James Meikle, The Guardian newspaper (UK) 20110309, , http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/mar/09/wales-press-ahead-badger-cull-tuberculosis)

.

Slaughter risk to badgers across England [2011]

.

‘Badger cull decision faces delay’

[BBC News, 18th February 2011, by Richard Black,Environment Correspondent]

The UK government’s decision on whether to allow badger culling to curb cattle TB in England is to be delayed. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) had planned to announce its completed policy around the end of this month.But BBC News understands it could come as late as May – raising doubts over whether a cull could begin this year.

One source said DEFRA did not want to “mess up” again after abandoning its plans to sell some public forests. Defra came under heavy fire over the plans for England and announced on Thursday that it was scrapping them.

The latest government figures suggest that numbers of cows infected with tuberculosis are falling in England and Wales, which campaigners say makes the case for culling more difficult.

Agriculture Minister James Paice told the National Farmers’ Union (NFU) conference this week that there would be a delay. Sources suggest a number of factors make an announcement before May unlikely.

There are practical issues to be sorted out over how farmers would be licensed to conduct the cull – details that may be crucial to the chances of culling reducing bovine TB, and to the government’s chances of surviving any legal challenge to its plans.

But one source close to the issue said the department’s experience with its plans for the forests were also behind the delay.

“They’ve messed up on forests – they don’t want another one,” the source said.

On Thursday, Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman was forced to apologise to MPs over plans to transfer 258,000 hectares of state-owned woodland in England into private management, acknowledging the government had “got this one wrong”. What’s happened does demonstrate that the disease can be controlled without the necessity of killing wildlife” – Jack Reedy, Badger Trust.

The government launched a consultation on bovine TB management in September, Mr Paice telling reporters: “Bovine TB is having a devastating effect on many farm businesses and families… we can’t go on like this.”
Before and after the election, he assured farmers that his government would introduce badger culling.

The NFU is keen to see it begin. But Kevin Pearce, the union’s director of regions, told BBC News it was important that the government took time to get the details right.

“Clearly we want a decision as soon as possible, but this has to be done properly,”

“Defra has to consider all of the responses and all of the facts before making any announcement in response to its consultation.”
Badger cubs playing A “closed season” for shooting would aim to protect badger cubs

The government’s interpretation of the scientific background is that to be effective, culling would have to be done over large areas with as many landowners as possible taking part in a co-ordinated way, and must sustained regularly for five years.

Critics suggest this will not be possible, and that some farmers are likely to drop out if they find they are spending money to hire marksmen without seeing a benefit. The science suggests that fragmenting the cull in this way would lead to a rise in TB incidence, as badgers scatter from their habitual runs and infect new herds.

The NFU wants groups of landowners to form into collective legal entities and apply for collective licences. This idea is under discussion, as is what measures the government could use to force farmers to finish the job if they tried to withdraw.

A further issue that Defra wants resolved is security, with the NFU’s submission to the consultation acknowledging: “There is concern within the industry that by participating in a cull, farmers and landowners will be targeted by activists wishing to disrupt a cull by damaging property and/or by harassment of farming families”.

Delaying the announcement until May could put the chances of beginning to cull this year in jeopardy.

The NFU says it could be done. Cattle screening Opponents say more frequent testing of cattle and curbs on their movement are tackling the disease

But opponents such as the Badger Trust are likely to seek a judicial review, which could mean substantial delays. And if data continues to indicate a reduction in the numbers of cows contracting TB, that would boost the trust’s case that culling is not scientifically merited.

Provisional figures for the first 10 months of 2010 show that for the UK overall, a smaller number of cattle confirmed as TB carriers were slaughtered than during the same period a year earlier – 25,924 compared with 29,243.

England and Wales separately show a similar trend; and this follows a fall between 2008 and 2009.

“If culling had been introduced two years ago, everyone would now be leaping to the conclusion that the reduction was down to culling and saying ‘we told you so’,” said Badger Trust spokesman Jack Reedy.

“Plainly, what’s happened does demonstrate that the disease can be controlled without the necessity of killing wildlife.”

The English delay may also have implications for the Welsh Assembly Government, which – in a separate move under a different law – also wants to introduce culling this year.

[Source: BBC News, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12500468 [Viewed 20110411]

‘Sussex farmers in call for badger cull’

[BBC Sussex, 18th March 2011]

‘Sussex farmers have called for a badger cull after eight cases of bovine tuberculosis (TB) in cattle last year. Farmers want a badger cull to tackle bovine TB but wildlife

groups say it will not eradicate the disease. Sussex farmers have called for a badger cull after eight cases of bovine tuberculosis (TB) in cattle last year. The National Farmers Union (NFU) said each outbreak cost farmers thousands of pounds and the national herd was being “devastated”. Wildlife groups have objected to any badger cull and have argued the move will not affect levels of bovine TB.

Defra issued a statement which said an eradication programme would be announced as soon as possible.‘Reservoir of infection’The statement said: “Bovine TB is a devastating disease and tackling it is complex, so we need to make sure we get it right.”We will be announcing a comprehensive and balanced TB Eradication Programme for England as soon as possible.”

James Mulleneux, from the NFU, said: “Despite a huge amount of cattle controls in terms of testing and culling, we still have this reservoir of infection within badgers.”

He said the average cost to the individual farmer was £30,000 per confirmed outbreak, which was “huge” for any farming business.

He also said the disease cost the taxpayer £90m a year.

‘Larger herds’

He added: “It’s not just the financial cost, it’s actually the numbers of animals that are being taken out of the national herd.

“In 2008, we lost 40,000 head of cattle. In 2009-10, an average of 30,000. That’s not sustainable.”

But Colin Booty, a senior wildlife scientist from the RSPCA, said: “Defra’s own estimates suggest that even if culling could be undertaken according to a strict set of criteria, the best that one might achieve would be a 16% reduction in disease, not an eradication of the disease.”

And Jack Reedy, from the Badger Trust, said there were more cattle than badgers and cattle were being kept in closed conditions and larger herds, which was “a perfect prescription for passing round highly infectious diseases”.

He said: “In most of the past decade, there was a randomised badger culling trial that cost £50m.

“The main conclusion of that was that killing badgers could make no meaningful contribution and cattle measures were sufficient to do the job.”

[Source: http://www.save-me.org.uk/news/badger/article/sussex_farmers_in_call_for_badger_cull, [Viewed 20110411]

.

A badger ‘cull’ is an ignorant perversion.

It will only result in mass slaughter of native badgers.

It won’t control the spread of bovine tuberculosis throughout Britain’s cattle.

There are more effective smarter solutions.

If only the handful of backward badger biggots in DEFRA, the NFU and the WAG wised up.

.

Vaccinate the badgers!

.

According to an article of The Royal Society ‘Bacillus Calmette-Guérin vaccination reduces the severity and progression of tuberculosis in badgers’ published in September 2010, ..

‘the Control of bovine tuberculosis (TB) in cattle has proven particularly challenging where reservoirs of infection exist in wildlife populations.

In Britain and Ireland, control is hampered by a reservoir of infection in Eurasian badgers (Meles meles). Badger culling has positive and negative effects on bovine TB in cattle and is difficult, costly and controversial. Here we show that Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccination of captive badgers reduced the progression, severity and excretion of Mycobacterium bovis infection after experimental challenge.

In a clinical field study, BCG vaccination of free-living badgers reduced the incidence of positive serological test results by 73.8 per cent. In common with other species, BCG did not appear to prevent infection of badgers subjected to experimental challenge, but did significantly reduce the overall disease burden. BCG vaccination of badgers could comprise an important component of a comprehensive programme of measures to control bovine TB in cattle.’

[Source: The Royal Society, http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2010/11/24/rspb.2010.1953, (viewed 20110411)]

.

Stop the dodgy farmers spreading TB!

Repeated reports continue to emerge of some unscrupulus cattle farmers hiding and spreading TB infected cattle. These criminals are the ones destroying Britain’s cattle industry and reputation, not the poor old badger. Read the following articles on the problem.

‘Farmers accused of cheating on TB slaughter rule by swapping cattle tags’

[by James Meikle, The Guardian, 31st March 2011]

‘Defra plans DNA tests for TB-positive cattle after farmers ‘disguised affected cows’ identity to avoid sending them to abattoir.

Tagged cows at a Leeds slaughterhouse. Some farmers have hidden the identity of TB-infected stock by switching ear tags, says Defra. Photograph: Christopher Thomond for the Guardian

Farmers in England face DNA checks on their cattle to prevent illegal swapping of their animals’ identities, an action the government says increases the risk of TB spreading to other herds and wildlife.

The environment department, DEFRA, said evidence was emerging that some cattle farmers in the south-west and Midlands could have been changing cattle ear tags to prevent TB-positive animals being sent to slaughter.

It is alleged that tag-switching has allowed farmers to send less productive cows to the abattoir in place of TB affected cattle.

A spokesman said three cases were already on their way to prosecution and investigations were continuing.

Cattle carry ear tags so that authorities can track their movement across the country, but from mid-April any that test positive for bovine TB will also have a DNA sample taken which will be retained by the government agency Animal Health. These samples will be cross-checked at random, or, where fraud is suspected, against the DNA of animals sent to slaughter.

The agriculture minister, Jim Paice, said: “I am absolutely appalled any farmer would deliberately break the law in this way. The vast majority of farmers with TB in their herds are doing the right thing, and it’s reprehensible that anyone should be trying to get around the tough measures helping to control TB in cattle. Anyone doing this sort of thing will be caught and have the book thrown at them.

“We are introducing this extra safeguard to minimise spread of this devastating disease to other herds and wildlife.”

The alleged evidence of fraud has emerged from an investigation instigated by Gloucestershire trading standards officers who reviewed TB cattle sent to two slaughterhouses. Investigations there and at slaughterhouses in the south-west and Midlands are continuing.

People convicted of such offences face fines of up to £5,000 and six months’ imprisonment under orders to prevent spread of TB, or 10 years’ jail and unlimited fines if prosecuted for fraud.

In 2010, about 6,000 of the 57,000 registered cattle herds in England were under TB restrictions. The new DNA measures come as controversial culls of badgers are threatened in parts of England and Wales as a means of trying to stop cattle contact with the wild animal, which is said by some observers to be an important factor in the spread of bovine TB.

Harvey Locke, president of the British Veterinary Association, said: “This fraudulent activity by a small number of farmers is shocking. Worryingly, it puts the national TB eradication strategies at risk, and urgent action is required to prevent it happening in the future.”

[Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/mar/31/farmers-cheating-tb-swap-tags (viewed 20110411)]

.

‘Fines for bovine TB offences’

[BovineTB.co.uk, 22nd Feb 2011]

‘In January 2010 the largest dairy herd in the west country, Wills Bros Ltd, was put under movement restrictions following the discovery of an inconclusive reactor on their premises at Pawton Dairy, near Wadebridge, Cornwal during a pre-movement TB test. This restriction should have prevented any unlicensed movements onto or off the premises until a second and negative TB test had been obtained at least 60 days after the initial test. However, Defra vet, Cliff Mitchell, noticed an article and photo in the local paper, The Cornish Guardian, showing the Wills family with show results from the National All-Breeds Show at Stoneleigh, Warwickshire. This prompted a joint investigation by Defra vets and Cornwall Council’s Trading Standard’s animal health team. They discovered a range of errors in the herd’s records.

During the investigation it came to light that cattle had been moved between premises run by Wills Bros Ltd without appropriate TB pre-movement testing, in contravention of TB restrictions, without passports being completed and without the British Cattle Movement Service (BCMS) being informed of the movements.

Also 58 passports were found on the premises for cattle which had died more than seven days previously, the time limit for registering deaths.

In relation to the inconclusive reactor animal, it was discovered that at the time of the pre-movement test it had no official identification, and at the re-test 60 days later the animal was still not identified.

Trading Standards arranged for a DNA test of this pedigree animal and it was found that there was no biological link between it and the animal that was registered as its mother with both the BCMS and Holstein UK, the pedigree society.

John Pascoe, of Cornwall Council’s Trading Standards, said: “During the investigation of this case, serious deficiencies in the recording, reporting and monitoring of cattle births and deaths were uncovered. It is vitally important for the farming industry to adhere to these controls, which enable rapid tracing of animal movements. Non compliance, such as those found, can have devastating effects for the whole of the farming industry if a disease situation develops.” He also said it had not been the first time his inspectors had found problems with cattle passports. They should be returned within seven days of the death of an animal under the Cattle Identification Regulations 2007

Investigators from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and Cornwall Council Trading Standards found:

Cattle had been moved between premises run by the dairy without TB pre-movement testing; passports had not been completed;
58 cattle passports were found on the premises for cattle which had died more than seven days previously;
The British Cattle Movement Service (BCMS) had not been informed; · DNA tests of the suspect animal found no biological link between it and the animal registered as its mother;
At the re-test 60 days later the animal was still not identified.

In February 2011 Wills Bros pleaded guilty to seven offences under the tuberculosis and cattle identification legislation of 2007, which is part of the Animal Health Act. The company was fined £7,200 and ordered to pay costs of £7,140 at Bodmin Magistrates Court after a report about a prize-winning cow appeared in a local newspaper when the herd was under a disease movement restriction order

The only comment we have found on the case comes from the Badger Trust. Patricia Hayden, Vice Chairman of the Badger Trust, said:

“These offences were committed in the heart of a major bTB hotspot. They risked the health of prime stock at a major cattle show and the wellbeing of pedigree herds and farm businesses all over the country. The discovery of so many passports overdue for return to the British Cattle Movement Service also raises serious questions about the reliability of the system. Transparency is crucial when bovine tuberculosis is causing serious economic harm to farm businesses.

“If other cattle at the show had been infected, unthinking advocates of culling badgers would have been quick to claim their case had been proved. As it is, many farmers in Cornwall could yet be licensed to shoot badgers in the mistaken belief that it will help to eradicate the disease.

“We have been warning the industry for almost 30 years about the danger of moving untested cattle and we have welcomed the belated controls of the last five years. As happened 50 years ago those controls now seem to be succeeding without killing any badgers.”

Source: http://www.bovinetb.co.uk/article.php?article_id=77, (viewed 20110411)]

.

Our Value Judgment:

.

Britain’s national problem of Bovine Tuberculosis infecting cattle is one of a contagious disease caused by Mycobacterium bovis. The solution lies in controlling the disease in cattle, through vaccination, thorough and frequent testing and strict controls on cattle movement.

That the disease has spread from cattle to wildlife, reflects an ineptitude of the farming community to self-regulate and weed out the criminal cattle operators amongst them and the failure of governments to control and eradicate the disease across Britain’s cattle industry. It also reflects an ineptitude of Britain’s environmental authorities to prevent the spread of the contagion amongst Britain’s wildlife.

That the native badger has been singled out and targeted for mass slaughter is pointless and senseless. Science has demonstrated that mass slaughter of badgers will not control bovine tuberculosis. A few backward terriermen with cruel 18th Century mindsets continue to demonised the badger. What these handful of badger bigots propose is nothing short of a hate crime against Britain’s wildlife. The union dues used the National Farmers Union and the British taxpayers funds financing DEFRA are being grossly misused to pursue this perverted policy.

Those public servants doggedly advocating mass slaughter of Britain’s badgers, Welsh Rural Affairs Minister Elin Jones, UK’s Agriculture Minister James Paice, and NFU president Peter Kendall should be sacked for incompetence and for inciting hate crime against protected wildlife.

Leave the badgers alone!

Stop the senseless slaughter of badgers!

.

Badger Protection League

“For me, Badgers represent everything that I love about the English Countryside and I am saddened and appalled that the slaughter of thousands of badgers is planned for England and Wales from May 2011. Whilst I have empathy with farmers struggling to control the spread of Bovine TB it has been irrefutably proven that culling badgers will not resolve this issue. A more cost effective, and certainly more humane, way of managing this disease would be to trap and vaccinate badgers before releasing them back into the wild but instead they are to be culled. Farmers/landowners are to be given licenses to cage trap and shoot badgers, or to shoot free running badgers.”

[ Anthony Head, Badger Protection League, UK, 20110328, http://www.badgerprotectionleague.com/article.php?id=34)]

The Badger Protection League ‘is an independent website supported by many societies, groups, VIP’s and Celebrities. We need you to help us in fighting against the proposed killing of thousands of badgers in England and Wales. Unless we make our voices heard, badgers will be killed from May 2011. They will either be cage trapped and shot or shot free running despite the protection legislation afforded to them.

It cannot be emphasised enough as to how important each of these actions are in the fight against badger culling – Please show that you care.
Badgers need you more than ever TODAY!’

Visit their website: ^http://www.badgerprotectionleague.com/

.

The Badger Trust

“Letters sent to David Cameron, Nick Clegg, Caroline Spelman and James Paice. Defra’s sudden, massive and expensive response to the scandal of farmers switching ear tags to foil bovine TB (bTB) controls suggests these crimes are widespread rather than local. Following the disclosure of these frauds the Badger Trust has called for all plans to kill badgers in England and Wales to be abandoned.

An investigation instigated by Gloucestershire Trading Standards exposed the deceptions when reviewing TB cattle sent to two slaughterhouses. As a result of the switching of ear tags, infected animals were being retained in herds. Claims by agriculture industry organisations that only “some” farmers were involved are clearly optimistic with the Midlands and the South West already implicated.”

[Source: The Badger Trust, ^http://www.badger.org.uk/Content/Home.asp]

Badger Trust ‘promotes the conservation and welfare of badgers and the protection of their setts and habitats for the public benefit. We are the leading voice for badgers and represent and support around 60 local voluntary badger groups. Badger Trust provides expert advice on all badger issues and works closely with Government, the police and other conservation and welfare organisations.’

Visit their website ^http://www.badgertrust.org.uk/

Native Badgers

~ a diet of earthworms

.

Footnote

.

‘Until recently badgers did little to damage the hedgehog population because the smaller animals had plenty of places to hide.

However, the loss of hedgerows and the spread of intensive farming has reduced cover.

Although badgers prefer a diet of earthworms, they will eat hedgehogs when they are hungry enough.

The study found that the eastern counties of England are the best place in Britain for hedgehogs.

Fay Vass, of the British Hedgehog Preservation Society, said badgers were only part of the problem.

“The main reason numbers are falling is the loss of habitats and the fragmentation of their habitat,” she said.

Native Hedgehog

~ diet of earthworms

“They like to roam two miles each night, but there are more walls and fences to block their way.”

Preferred badger food …if the badgers are left alone.

.

Somerset badgers fall victim to poisoning campaign

.

‘SECRET World Wildlife Rescue carers are astounded by the amount of badgers admitted to the charity showing signs of poisoning in recent days.

Volunteers at the East Huntspill centre have seen several badgers taken in with neurological symptoms caused by poison. One badger died soon after arrival, another is on a drip and a third is seriously ill. A fourth was revived and carers hope to release it back into the wild.

Centre care manager and veterinary nurse Sara Cowan said:

“I have not seen such critical signs of poisoning in all my years as a nurse. The faeces from one badger was florescent green from the poison – it was that bad. We suspect people are putting poison in food and leaving it near badger setts.”

The situation has been reported to police who are investigating.’

[Source: http://tohatchacrow.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.html]

.

References and Further Reading:

[1] The Badger Trust ^http://www.badger.org.uk/

[2] Save the Badger ^http://www.savethebadger.com/

[3] Protection of Badgers Act 1992, ^http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1992/51/contents

[4] Worcestershire Badger Society ^http://www.worcestershirebadgersociety.org.uk/

[5] Badger Protection League ^ http://www.badgerprotectionleague.com/

[6] ‘NFU publishes position on badger culling‘, Farmers Guardian, 13th Dec 2010, http://www.farmersguardian.com/home/livestock/livestock-news/nfu-publishes-position-on-badger-culling/36166.article

[7] ‘Bacillus Calmette-Guérin vaccination reduces the severity and progression of tuberculosis in badgers’, The Royal Society, 10th September 2010, http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2010/11/24/rspb.2010.1953

[8] DEFRA on bTB http://www.defra.gov.uk/food-farm/animals/diseases/tb/

[9] Badger Watch and Rescue Dyfed http://www.badger-watch.co.uk/

[10] Scottish Badgers http://www.scottishbadgers.org.uk/

[11] Essex Badger Protection Group http://www.essexbadger.co.uk/

[12] Herts and Middlesex Badger Group http://www.hmbadgergroup.org.uk/

– end of article –

Tags: Bacile Calmette Guerin (BCG), badger, Badger (Control Area) (Wales) Order 2010, Badger Baiting, Badger Control, Badger Cull, badger destruction order, Badger Protection League, Badger Trust, badger vaccination, Bovine TB, Bovine TB Eradication Programme, British Cattle Movement Service, British Hedgehog Preservation Society, DEFRA, existence rights, hate crime against protected wildlife, hedgerow removal, Independent Scientific Group, Meles meles, Save the Badger, The Krebs Trial, Worcestershire Badger Society
Posted in 07 Habitat Conservation!, 23 Conservation Funding!, 34 Wildlife Conservation!, 36 Tests of Harm!, Badgers, Threats from Farming, Threats from Poaching and Poisoning | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

Introduced fire & cats killing The Kimberley

Thursday, March 24th, 2011

Golden Bandicoot is under threat of extinction in The Kimberley.

“Australia has the worst extinction record for mammals of all countries in the world (Johnson 2007), and has international obligations (Convention on Biological Diversity 2006) and national commitments (Commonwealth of Australia 1999) to avoid species extinctions. Meeting these obligations will require effective and ongoing conservation management.”

[Source: Priority threat management to protect Kimberley wildlife, p47,CSIRO Ecosystem Sciences, Feb 2011, Australia]

.

At 6am on 1st June 1990, I started my prepared and serviced HT Holden outside my father’s place in Melbourne and executed my planned drive mission across to Adelaide then up the Centre to Kununurra in the East Kimberley. I was 26; I had saved up. I was on a mission to get my commercial helicopter license and to work in cattle mustering in the Kimberley in the process to ‘get my hours up’.

The Kimberley was a very hot and steamy; a world away from temperate urban Melbourne.

Well, after some months and growing up in a remote landscape, I did achieve my license with Golden West Helicopters, then did some mustering. I took risks, recalling pivot turns over isolated beaches and I learnt a lot…what city kids should.

Some memories that will remain with me (until my memory doesn’t) are the waking to East Kimberley bird calls from the pilot shack at the red dusty caravan park down the road from Kununurra Airport. When building my cross-county and low-level endorsement hours up, I will never forget flying the R22 low over wild rivers full of long lizards (crocs), or slowly navigating the thick mist at 50 foot AGL at dawn, or flying free over the wide rugged red rock landscape, or finding the eagles nest on a remote hill miles off in some north westerly direction from Kununurra. My memory of the Kimberley is of a wild special place, like Emma Gorge and the amazing remote drive to Wyndham – so isolated – so free. But it is the unique bird calls that recur in my memory of the magic natural tropical home of The Kimberley.

So when I now later learn that the Kimberley and its scarce wildlife are under threat, I have no hesitation posting the following article to advocate the urgency of the Kimberley’s wildlife conservation.

The Kimberley is indeed like nowhere else!

~ Editor

.

According to the findings of a current ecological study and report published in February 2011 by the CSIRO and The Wilderness Society:

“up to 45 native species in the Kimberley region will die out within 20 years if no action is taken”.

The report found that the two most destructive threats to survival of native species are:

Feral cats
Frequent large scale fire regimes (deliberate or neglected)

It has called for an immediate cash injection of $95 million to save wildlife like the Golden Bandicoot, the Scaly-tailed Possum and the Monjon Rock Wallaby from extinction. Even with the current $20 million per year spent on Kimberley conservation the region is still set to lose some 31 native animals, according to the report.

The report is a culmination of collaborative ecological research and workshops was undertaking across the Kimberley region by scientists with the CSIRO’s Ecosystem Sciences, along with The Wilderness Society, Australian Wildlife Conservancy, Fenner School of Environment and Society (ANU), and The Ecology Centre at the University of Queensland. Its authors from these organisations include Josie Carwardine, Trudy O’connor, Sarah Legge, Brendan Mackey, Hugh Possingham and Tara Martin. Regrettably, the only contributing organisations permanently based in the Kimberley appear to be the Kimberley Land Council and Environs Kimberley. Perhaps this is half the problem; the other half being ye ol’ lack of political will, because surely Australia has plenty of taxpayer funds in circulation.

If ever the ecological precautionary approach principle was a vital precondition of human actions, the Kimberley is the place where it most applies. The recurring theme throughout the report is the lack of comprehensive survey data from the region. Ecologically, the Kimberley is grossly data deficient. Consequently, humans know not what they do, nor what the impact of what they do is, nor how close the thirty odd threatened and endangered native animals are to regional extinction.

The Scaly-tailed Possum (Wyulda) , Monjon Rock Wallaby and the Cave-dwelling Frog are thought to be uniquely endemic to the region, so if they are wiped out from the Kimberley, as a species they will become globally extinct, like the Tasmanian Tiger (Thylacene) and the Dodo.

Wyulda, or Scaly-tailed Possum (Wyulda squamicaudata)

endemic to the Kimberley, and highly sensitive to bushfires

.

Due to human encroachment and habitat destruction across northern Australia and the ferals and destructive practices they have brought with them, the still mainly wild Kimberley remains the last survival refuge for many of Australia native at-risk species.

Native vertebrate fauna of the Kimberley like the Northern Quoll, Golden-backed Tree-Rat, Golden Bandicoot, Gouldian Finch, Spotted Tree Monitor, Western Chestnut Mouse, and Stripe-faced Dunnart are at serious risk of extinction.

.

Priority Threat Management Actions for The Kimberley

Experts identified key broadscale threat management actions for improving wildlife persistence (p5):

1.   Combined management of fire and introduced herbivores! – feral donkeys, cattle, horses, pigs
2.   Eradication, control, quarantine of weeds! – rubber vine, gamba grass, mesquite, passionfruit
3.   Control of introduced predators! (particularly feral cats)

“The single most cost-effective management action would be to reduce the impacts from feral cats (at $500,000 per bioregion per year) with a combination of education, research and the cessation of dingo Baiting.” [p.6-7]

While anticipated to have low feasibility of success, the feasibility has not been started nor tested.

“The next most cost-effective action is to manage fire and introduced herbivores (at $2–7 million per bioregion per year); this action is highly feasible and, if implemented effectively, would generate large improvements in probabilities of persistence for almost all wildlife species.” [p.6-7]

Northern Quoll (Dasyurus hallucatus)

Native to the Kimberley, but seriously at risk from feral cats and bushfires

.

Natural Integrity and (Human) Threats

Threats to The Kimberley from ‘Bushfire Management’

“Frequent, extensive and very hot fires in the Kimberley affect its ecosystems in several ways. They change the structure and composition of vegetation, endangering some species of plants and removing important wildlife habitat refugia. They also leave the ground unprotected from the heavy monsoonal rains, causing soil erosion and later stream sedimentation.”

Inappropriate fire regimes pose a threat to biodiversity in the Kimberley and across northern Australia (e.g. Bowman et al. 2001; Russell-Smith et al. 2003). Historically, Indigenous people managed fire throughout the region, which included fine scale prescribed burning across a variety of vegetation types and around important cultural and food resource sites, such as rainforest patches. This most likely resulted in a mosaic of burnt and unburnt vegetation and provided buffers against unplanned wildfires around critical biodiversity refuges (Environmental Protection Authority 2006).

Broadscale State-sanctioned Arson of the Kimberley

(Photo: Ed Hatherley, Western Australia Department of Environment and Conservation)

[Source: ^http://www.australiangeographic.com.au/journal/new-fire-plan-for-the-kimberley.htm]

These fire patterns have been replaced in the past few decades with one that is increasingly dominated by extensive and intense mid to late dry season fires. As a consequence, the mean age (and variance) of the vegetation has declined (Legge et al. 2010).

Altered fire regimes interacting with other degrading processes, especially over-grazing, have led to structural and floristic change in vegetation, declines in vegetation cover and critical resources such as tree hollows. They are also associated with increased soil erosion after heavy rains (doubled erosion rates have been recorded in similar situations in the Top End of the Northern Territory (Townsend and Douglas 2000), leading to increased sedimentation in stream beds. These changes have severe negative impacts on native flora and fauna (Vigilante and Bowman 2004; Legge et al. 2008). Extensive flat savanna areas are more vulnerable to large intense fires, as there are fewer inflammable refugia such as rocky areas.

Without appropriate management, the impacts of fire are likely to increase as the region is predicted to become even more fire prone with ongoing climate change (Dunlop and Brown 2008)”. [pp.11-12]

Floodplain wetland of the Hann River

as it leaves the Phillips Range,Marion Downs Wildlife Sanctuary, The Kimberley.

Threats to The Kimberley from ‘Feral Cats’

.

“Invasion by feral predators has contributed to range reductions and population declines of many native animals in Australia; small to medium sized mammals have been particularly affected. The primary feral predator in the Kimberley is the domestic cat. Cats have possibly been present in the region since the 1880s and were established by the 1920s (Abbott 2002).

The number of cats occurring in the Kimberley is unknown due to difficulties in survey, although a radio-tracking study at Mornington Wildlife Sanctuary suggests there is one individual per 3 km², each eating 5–12 native vertebrates daily. If this population density of cats occurred throughout the region there would be over 100,000 individuals present, consuming at least 500,000 native animals every day (Legge unpublished data).

There is some evidence that dingoes, as a top predator, can help control the negative effects of smaller predators like foxes and cats (Glen et al. 2007; Johnson and VanDerWal 2009; Letnic et al. 2010; Kennedy et al. 2011). The regular baiting of dingoes is therefore likely to exacerbate the problem of introduced feral predators (Wallach et al. 2010).” [pp.13-14]

Cat killing wildlife

[Source: Australian Wildlife Carers Network, ^http://www.ozarkwild.org/cats.php,

Photo: Australian Government]

“The Kimberley is a national priority in this effort to avoid further extinctions due to its intact suite of wildlife species, including many endemics, and its role as a refuge for an increasing list of species that are declining or have been lost in other areas of northern Australia.” [p.47]

.

– end of article –

https://www.habitatadvocate.com.au/?page_id=13848

Tags: Australian wildlife, Cave-dwelling Frog, conservation, CSIRO, Golden Bandicoot, Golden-backed Tree-Rat, Gouldian Finch, Kimberley, Monjon Rock Wallaby, Northern Quoll, Priority threat management, Scaly-tailed Possum, Spotted Tree Monitor, Stripe-faced Dunnart, The Wilderness Society, threat management, Western Chestnut Mouse, Wyulda
Posted in Bandicoots, Kangaroos and Macropods, Kimberley (AU), Mice (native) and Antechinus, Possums and Gliders, Quolls, Reptiles, Threats from Bushfire, Threats from Colonising Species | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

An ignorant crime against wildlife in NP

Friday, February 4th, 2011

The local Blue Mountains Gazette newspaper of the Blue Mountains (west of Sydney) yesterday reported the harming of wildlife in the Blue Mountains National Park (read below).

$100 REWARD

Disgusted at this wildlife crime, the editor is offering a one-off reward of $100

for the identification of the offender(s) responsible for this wildlife bashing

and its reporting to the National Parks and Wildlife office at Blackheath, which secures a conviction.

Contact the editor : info@habitatadvocate.com.au

.

‘Snake bludgeoned at Blackheath‘

by Krystyna Pollard (journalist), 20110202, page 11.

.

‘National parks officers have condemned the brutal bludgeoning of a female (eastern) brown snake carrying 19 eggs at Blackheath’s Evans Lookout.

The snake was found on January 13 by a member of the public in her nest alive but with a broken back, according to National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) ranger Vanessa Richardson.

“This brown snake had lived in the vicinity of Evans Lookout for over five years and lived harmoniously with many visitors who appreciated observing her in the natural environment,” she said in a statement.

“She was well known to NPWS staff and many tour operators enjoyed taking visitors to the site to see a real Australian snake in the wild.”

The snake was taken for treatment, however vets were unable to save her, Vanessa said.

“She was carrying 19 eggs, which were taken to a licensed reptile carer but unfortunately the eggs have collapsed and all eggs have failed,” she said.

“The end result of this is not the death of one brown snake but 20.

“The event has saddened local NPWS staff and wildlife carers and I would urge anyone with information on who may have harmed the snake to come forward.”

While snakes were not as popular with the community as other native wildlife, the NPWS reminded people that all native animals in NSW were protected and each had an important role to play in the ecosystem, Vanessa said.

“I understand if some members of the community are concerned by snakes if they happen upon them inside their homes,” she said.

“However in their natural environment they are overwhelmingly docile unless provoked. In fact most people that get bitten by snakes do so when trying to catch them, annoy them or kill them.

“Snakes preserve their venom to kill prey not people. If you leave them alone it is extremely unlikely they will do you any harm.”

Those caught harming wildlife face on-the-spot fines of up to $500. Higher penalties can be imposed by courts.

Anyone with information about the attack should contact the NPWS Blackheath office on 4787-8877.’

.

Comment:

This is a deplorable crime against wildlife in native and protected habitat. All flora and fauna in National Parks are protected from harm or disturbance.

In New South Wales under the National Parks and Wildlife Act (1974) Section 98(2), it is unlawful to harm protected fauna. Do do so attracts 100 penalty units and/or a6 month custodial sentence.

As at 7th December 2010, under the Crimes (Setencing Procedure) Act 1999 Section 17, this fine equates to $11,000 (100 penalty units multiplied by $110).

Hopefully, witnesses will come forward so that the perpetrators may be brought to justice, charged and convicted.

The introduced settler culture of Australia’s colonial history, ignorantly perceived Australian wildlife as vermin. The Australian bush and its native flora and fauna, rather than being respected, have long been detested by new arrivals. Such has been the immature misunderstanding due to ignorance. The abnormal fear of snakes (‘ophidiophobia‘) has been at the extreme. Henry Lawson’s 1892 short story ‘The Drover’s Wife’ most famously fueled this cultural fear as he described the snake in the story as having “an evil pair of small, bright bead-like eyes“, as “the enemy” and as the ..”original curse in common with mankind.”

In 2011 in national parks, most of us have surely developed a healthy respect for wildlife and its existence rights. As wildlife habitat shrinks and comes under increasing human threat, is it not humans whom are nature’s vermin?

Australia’s Eastern Brown Snake tends to inhabit grasslands and Dry Scheropyll forests situated in dry locations especially with rocky outcrops.

“It is a highly nervous, swift moving and alert snake which usually prefers to prevent confrontations with home owners. It is very quick to flee when seen or threatened but when cornered or attacked can be an explosive snake which will repeatedly lunge and defend vigorously.”

It’s diet is preference to lizards, frogs, other snakes, bird nestlings and baby rabbits, and small rodents such as rats and is therefore valuable in controlling pest species. Mating occurs in October to late Spring females oviduucal eggs are seen in late November to December.

Eastern Brown Snake

Cresent Head NSW

http://habitatnetwork.org/PhotoPages/Member-and-AnimalPhotos.htm#E

References:

[1] Blue Mountains Gazette, p.11, ‘Snake Bludgeoned at Blackheath‘, by Krystyna Pollard, http://www.bluemountainsgazette.com.au/news/local/news/general/snake-bludgeoned-at-blackheath/2064355.aspx

[2] Snake Handler.com.au, http://www.snakehandler.com.au/?pid=main&p=30

[3] HabitatNetwork.org http://habitatnetwork.org/PhotoPages/Member-and-AnimalPhotos.htm#E

[3] National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974, Specific Penalties and Orders, Judicial Commission of NSW, http://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/publications/benchbks/local/National_Parks_and_Wildlife_Act.html

[4] CRIMES (SENTENCING PROCEDURE) ACT 1999, Section 17 ‘Penalty Units’, http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cpa1999278/

.

Tags: eastern brown snake, NPWS, snake bludgeoned at Blackheath, wildlife protected in National Park
Posted in 34 Wildlife Conservation!, Blue Mountains (AU), Reptiles, Threats from Poaching and Poisoning | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

Getting Scarcer

Thursday, February 3rd, 2011

Spotted-Pardalote (Pardalotus punctatus)

http://www.ozanimals.com/Bird/Spotted-Pardalote/Pardalotus/punctatus.html

.

Ben Esgate [1914-2003] from an interview in October 2002 [Jim Smith PhD]:

.

“Birds and everything like that are getting scarcer.

I reckon that since I have grown up, the bird life on the Blue Mountains has receded by 80%.

Too many bushfires destroy the breeding grounds of many birds, particularly Kookaburras and birds that use hollows. Clearing of land unnecessarily, and always killing the big trees, not the little ones. The big ones make the nests of tomorrow. In the smaller bird line, feral cats are causing no end of trouble. Pardalotes and all that sort haven’t got a chance, anything that builds a nest low in the trees.

Burning off National Parks, and areas adjacent to National Parks, just because the mob squealed because they have gone a built a house near the National Park, and now you have to keep fire from getting it.

The first things that happens then is that you have got to keep burning off around where people live…It might only destroy a bit in this place and a bit in that place, but it is still destroying things.”

“I reckon that I shot every third fox that I ever saw, never mind the ones I went hunting for, in my life. One in every three bit the dust and I’ve shot dozens and dozens and dozens of them. That meant that, including the offspring, there were several hundred foxes less to feed on our native wild life and wipe them out.

I saw them wipe our Rock Wallabies out in the Megalong completely…I shot foxes for many years, right up until I was 80.

I was knocking over 20 a winter up there (Galong Bluffs), when I was 79.

I never shot in a National Park. They knew up there, the National Parks mob, they knew I was knocking them off and they thought it was wonderful.”

.

[1] http://www.survival.org.au/birds_spotted_pardalote.php

[2] Blue Mountains Bird List, by Carole Proberts, http://www.bmbirding.com.au/bmlist07.pdf

[3] ‘The last of the Cox’s River men : Ben Esgate 1914-2003‘ / by Jim Smith, (NLA).

– end of article –

Tags: Ben Esgate, bird life, Blue Mountains wildlife, burning off, bushfires, feral cats, foxes, getting scarcer, hazard reduction, Jim Smith, Kookaburras, Megalong, Pardalote, Rock Wallabies, tree hollows
Posted in 07 Habitat Conservation!, 34 Wildlife Conservation!, Birds (Australian), Blue Mountains (AU), Threats from Bushfire, Threats from Poaching and Poisoning | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

Sydney’s remnant urban wildlife

Wednesday, December 22nd, 2010

Tawny Frogmouths, Glebe (Sydney inner suburb)

It is pleasing to learn that the City of Sydney council is funding $100,000 into its first serious biodiversity survey of inner Sydney, which is expected to take three months.

The aim is to support biodiversity information for an “urban ecology strategic action plan to conserve indigenous plant and animal species and identify ways to improve their habitats.”

The council has engaged the Australian Museum (located in the Sydney CDB) and specifically ecologists Henry Cook and Glenn Muir to identify all the native animals and plants living in inner Sydney. According to an article in the Sydney Morning Herald today, Sydney has long lost most of its native fauna to 220 years of urban development and habitat destruction.

Amazingly, Native Green and Golden Bell Frogs and Grey-Headed flying foxes still exist in one or two isolated locations but are endangered. Brush-tailed possums, Ring-tailed possums and native water rats are amongst the more adaptable to human incursion, albeit often persecuted.

The ecologists expect to find about 60 indigenous bird species and several reptile and frog species and the survey results are due in mid-2011.

[Source: ‘Old-time residents cast eyes over a changing city‘, by journalist Kelsey Munro, 20101222, Sydney Morning Herald]

Tags: biodiversity, City of Sydney, Green and Golden Bell Frog, Grey-headed flying fox, Tawny Frogmouth, urban sanctuary, urban wildlife, urbanisation
Posted in Threats from Development, Wildlife | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

The Planet’s Critically Endangered Birds

Thursday, August 26th, 2010

by Editor 20100826.

‘Critically Endangered Birds: A Global Audit’ is a summary review by ^Birdlife International as a product of its BirdLife Preventing Extinctions Programme. It presents the science underpinning the programme and the actions needed by other organisations, agencies and governments to complement it.

It reports the state of the world’s Critically Endangered birds as they were in 2008, highlighting the pressures they face, and the actions needed to prevent their extinction. The report is drawn from material developed for State of the World’s Birds, a broader report which is available for download and as an extensive searchable database at ^www.birdlife.org/sowb

The ‘Critically Endangered Birds: A Global Audit’ report (PDF, 3.36 MB) is available by clicking the following link :

^Critically_Endangered_Birds_global_audit_(Birdlife_Intl_2008)

Tags: critically endangered birds
Posted in Birds (Migratory) | No Comments »

Add this post to Del.icio.us - Digg

Habitat Topics

Recommended Links

Action Bioscience

Activists Rights

African Wild Dog Conservancy

African Wildlife Foundation

Amazon Rainforest

Ancient Forest Alliance

Animal Defenders International

Animal Info. on Endangered Animals

Animal Justice Party

Antarctic Ocean Alliance

Arid Lands Environment Centre

ARKive (endangered species)

Australia World Heritage List (UNESCO)

Australia's Threatened Species

Australian Conservation Foundation

Australian Fauna.com

Australian Geographic

Australian Native Plant Society

Australian Paper Watch

Australian Platypus Conservancy

Australian Registry of Wildlife Health

Australian Seabird Rescue

Australian Stable Population Party

Australian Student Environment Network

Australian Wildlife Carers Network

Australian Wildlife Conservancy

Australians for Animals

Badger Protection League

Badger Trust

Badger Watch and Rescue

Bagheera (Endangered species)

Ballaarat Wildlife Park

Biodiversity International

Birdlife Australia

Birdlife International

Birdwatch Ireland

Blue Marine Foundation

Blue Mountains Bird Observers

Blue Mountains Birding

Blue Mountains Conservation Society

Blue Mountains Wildplant Rescue Service

Bob Irwin Wildlife Fund

Bookend Trust

Born Free Foundation

Borneo Orangutan Survival Foundation

Botanical Gardens Conservation International

Buffalo Field Campaign

Buffalo Field Campaign blog

Bush Heritage Australia

Bush Warriors

Butterfly Conservation

Cairns and Far North Environment Centre

California Gray Whale Coalition

Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society

Cat Action Treasury

Cave Hill Conservation Campaign

Center for Earth Jurisprudence

Center for Plant Conservation

Chipstop

CITES

Coalition Against Duck Shooting

Code Green Tasmania

Colong Foundation for Wilderness

Conservation Council ACT Region

Conservation Council of South Australia

Conservation Council of Western Australia

Conservation Evidence

Conservation International

Convention on Biodiversity

Cool Forests

CREO (recent extinctions)

Cruelty Free Shop (The)

CSIRO Publishing

Cybec Foundation

David Suzuki Foundation

Defenders for Wildlife

Defenders of Wildlife (savewolves)

Devils in Danger

Eaglehawk Wildlife Rehabilitation Centre

Earth Justice

Earthcare St Kilda Inc.

Earthwatch Institute Australia

Earthways

Earthways Foundation

ECO

Eco Ranger

Ecology Project International

Ecos Magazine

EDGE of Existence Programme

EnAct International

Endangered Species Link

Endangered Wildlife Trust

Environment East Gippsland

Environment Institute ANZ

Environment Tasmania

Environment Victoria

Environmental Defenders Offices

Environmental Defense Fund

Environmental Law Foundation

Environs Kimberley

Essex Badger Protection Group

Ethical Paper

Eurobodalla Regional Botanic Gardens

F.A.M.E.

Fauna & Flora International

Film Makers for Conservation

Florentine Protection Society Inc.

Forest and Bird

Forest Media

Forest Network

Forest Peoples Programme

Forest Policy Research

Forest Protection Portal

Forest Rescue

Foundation for Critical Thinking

Foundation for National Parks and Wildlife

Foundation for Rabbit-Free Australia

Four Paws International

Friends of Five Forests

Friends of Narrabeen Lagoon Catchment

Friends of the Box-Ironbark Forests

Friends of the Earth (UK)

Friends of the Earth Australia

Gilbert's Potoroo Action Group

Ginninderra Catchment Group

Global Raptor Information Network

Global Trees Campaign

Goongerah Environment Centre

Great Barrier Reef Blog

Green Belt Movement

Greenpeace Australia

Gunns 20 Case

Habitat Destruction

Habitat Network

Hancock Watch

Hawk Mountain Sanctuary

Healesville Sanctuary

Help for Wildlife

Herts and Middlesex Badger Group

Humane Society International

Huon Valley Environment Centre

Iberia Nature

Indigenous Flora and Fauna Association

Inland Rivers Network

Institute of Wildlife Research

International Anti Poaching Foundation

International Fund for Animal Welfare

Intl Community of Ecopsychology

Intl Union for Conservation of Nature

Invasive Species Council

IUCN Red List of Threatened Species

Kakapo Recovery

Kanuguba

Keep the Habitat

Kew Gardens

Keystone Conservation

Kimberley (Save the Kimberley)

Kimberley Wildlife Carers and Associates

Kimberley Wildlife Rescue

Lake Pedder Restoration Committee

Lawyers for Forests

Leicestershire & Rutland Wildlife Trust

Linnean Society of London

Markets for change

Mass Extinctions

Melbourne Water Catchment Network

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

Molonglo Catchment Group

Moon Bears (Korea)

My Environment

National Birds of Prey Trust

National Geographic

National Geographic Network

National Geographic Wild

National Institute for Amazonian Research

National Parks Association of NSW

National Parks Conservation Assoc.

Native Forest Action

Native Forest Network

Native Forests

Natural Edge Project

Natural History Museum

Natural Resources Defense Council

Nature

Nature and Society Forum

Nature Conservation Council of NSW

Nature Conservation Trust

Nature's Crusaders

Naturschutzbund Deutschland

Nepenthes (defending rainforest)

North East Forests Alliance

NZ Birds

NZ Ecological Restoration Network

NZ Ecological Society

NZ Native Forests Restoration Trust

NZ Trust for Conservation

Observer Tree

Orangutan Foundation International

Otway Ranges Environment Network

Our Common Ground (Tasmania)

Photos and Feathers

Preserve Our Islands

Primate Info Net

Purves Environmental Fund

Queensland Conservation Council

Quercus

Race Against Extinction

Rainforest Action Network

Rainforest Rescue

Rainforests (mongabay global website)

RAMSAR Convention on Wetlands

Raptor & Wildlife Refuge of Tasmania Inc.

Rhino Resource Center

Rising Tide Australia

Royal Forest & Bird Protection Society

Royal Society for the Protection of Birds

Sahara Conservation Fund

Save America's Forests

Save Biogems

Save Ralph's Bay Inc.

Save the Badger

Save the Blue Tier

Save the Cassowary

Save the Kimberley

Save the Koala

Save the South Sister

Save the Tasmanian Devil Program

Saving Rhinos

Saving Species

Sea Shepherd

Sierra Club

Sierra Forest Legacy

Six Degrees

Smithsonian Museum (Natural History)

Society for Conservation Biology

Society of Wildlife Artists

South East Forest Rescue

South East Region Conservation Alliance

Southern ACT Catchment Group

Still Wild Still Threatened

Strait 4 Devils

Sussex Wildlife Trust

Ta Ann

Taiga Rescue Network

Tarkine National Coalition

Taronga Conservation Society Australia

Tasmanian Conservation Trust Inc.

Tasmanian Land Conservancy

Tasmanians Against the Pulp Mill Inc.

Terra Nature

The Central Highlands Alliance

The Change Agency

The Forest Activist Network

The Forest History Society

The Kerulos Center

The Kimberley Toadbusters

The Last Stand

The Last Tree

The Monkey Sanctuary

The Nature Conservancy

The Rainforest Information Centre

The Wild Foundation

The Wilderness Society

THINKK

Tigers in Crisis

Total Environment Centre

TRAFFIC (wildlife trade)

Tree Council (Ireland)

Tree Council (UK)

Tree Project

Trees for Life

Trees Not Gunns

Trust for Nature

UN Environment Programme

UN FAO on Global Forests

UNESCO World Heritage

University of Ulster (Natural Science)

Vegan Society (The)

Victorian Rainforest Network

Voiceless

Vulturejam

W.I.R.E.S.

Water S.O.S. Tasmania

Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists

Western Alliance for Nature

Western Wolves

Wielangta Forest

Wild Futures

Wilderness Truths

Wildlife Art Society of Australasia

Wildlife Australia

Wildlife Conservation Society

Wildlife Mismanagement

Wildlife New Zealand

Wildlife Preservation Society of Australia

Wildlife Protection Association of Australia

Wildlife Trust of South and West Wales

Wildlife Victoria

Wildscreen

Wolli Creek Protection Society

Wolves and Humans Foundation

Wombat Awareness Organisation Ltd

Woodland Trust

World Commission on Protected Areas

World Database on Protected Areas

World Land Trust

World Rainforest Movement

World Society for the Protection of Animals

World Wildlife Fund

WWF New Zealand

The Habitat Advocate

Archive for the ‘Wildlife’ Category

‘TimTam Orphans’ in UN Year of Forests

Will someone make clear to the Arnott’s Board that for Orangutans THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR QUALITY HABITAT.

Dingo Ecology deserves respect on Fraser Is

.

‘The dingo population on (Fraser) island is regarded as the most pure strain of dingoes remaining in eastern Australia’.

.

.

.

Need to Control Humans

.

.

.

.

Need to Restore Dingo Ecology on Fraser Island

.

.

.

Further Reading:

.

.

The Australian Dingo (or ‘Warrigal’) – a species deserving protection

.

.

Dingos are wild native animals

.

.

.

Saving Fraser Island Dingos

.

.

.

Native badgers’ existence rights

.

…Native badgers are under threat across the United Kingdom from misguided State-sanctioned poaching.

.

“People come–they stay for a while, they flourish, they build–and they go.

It is their way.

But we remain.

There were badgers here, I’ve been told, long before that same city ever came to be.

And now there are badgers here again.

We are an enduring lot, and we may move out for a time, but we wait, and are patient, and back we come.

And so it will ever be.“

.

The Badger – a native to Britain

.

.

.

Badger – a history of human persecution

.

Badger Baiting

Badger Hunting

.

Badgers and British Law

Why are badgers protected?

Threats to badgers

.

Illegal threats to badgers include:

.Relevant legislation

.

DEFRA’s position on Bovine TB and British cattle as at 6 April 2011

.

.

Latest news

Key facts and figures

What is the case for government action?

Badgers and bovine TB

Testing for bTB

Cattle Compensation

Other farmed/domesticated species

Research

Further details of Defra’s TB research projects:

Relevant legislation and regulations

Key publications and documents

.

.

Slaughter risk to badgers in Wales [2010-2011]

.

.