Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The War Against Nature Resumes
There's a story that almost all of us believe: that beyond a certain state of development, we relearn a respect for nature. It is true that some of the excesses of the early modern age - attempts by gamekeepers to kill all competing species, mass slaughter by white hunters in the colonies, the grubbing up of hedgerows and ancient woodlands - have lessened, though we still eat endangered fish and buy timber from clear-cut rainforest. It is also true that we give more money to conservation projects and spend more time watching wildlife films than we have ever done before. But as soon as we perceive that our economic interests are threatened, our war against nature resumes.
2010 is the International Year of Biodiversity. The Welsh assembly is celebrating the occasion by launching a project to exterminate the badger. I won't pretend that this story ranks alongside the catastrophe in Haiti or the meltdown in Afghanistan, but it casts an interesting light on humanity's continuing impulse to conquer nature, and shows how, even when cloaked in the language of science, our relations with the natural world are still governed by irrationality and superstition.
Last week the Welsh rural affairs minister, Elin Jones, announced what her government calls "a proactive non-selective badger cull" in west Wales. What this means is the elimination of the species, beginning when the cubs emerge from their burrows in May. Badgers carry the bacterium which causes bovine tuberculosis. The purpose of the experiment is to discover whether the number of cows with the disease is reduced when the badger is exterminated. It it works, the method might be applied elsewhere. But even before the experiment begins, I can tell you that it's a waste of time and money.
In 2007, after nine years of research, the Independent Scientific Group on Cattle TB sent its final report to the UK government. It discovered that "badger culling cannot meaningfully contribute to the future control of cattle TB in Britain". Rather than suppressing the disease, killing badgers appears to spread it.
The researchers had killed badgers across 30 areas, each of 100 square kilometres. They found that when the badgers were culled in response to local outbreaks of TB, the slaughter "increased, rather than reduced" the incidence of the disease in cattle: the level of infection rose by some 20%. When badgers were killed proactively (culled annually, regardless of whether cattle were infected), the incidence of TB inside the killing zone was reduced by 23% - but the incidence outside increased by 25%. The reason is that the killing changes the behaviour of the badgers: they travel more and mix more, either to escape the slaughter or to investigate the ecological space it opens up. The economic costs of proactive culling, the study found, were 40 times greater than the benefits.
But the old reflex dies hard. As the scientific group pointed out, "agricultural and veterinary leaders continue to believe, in spite of overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary, that the main approach to cattle TB control must involve some form of badger population control". It noted "considerable reluctance to accept and embrace scientific findings". The Welsh government shares this reluctance. In announcing her extermination policy last week, Elin Jones claimed that the cull would be conducted according to "the requirements outlined by the Independent Scientific Group". But the ISG couldn't have made itself clearer: badger culling of any kind won't work. Instead, governments should do more to control the way that cattle are kept, tested and moved. This was a message that farmers and the Welsh government didn't want to hear.
The policy Elin Jones announced last week is even worse than this suggests. Her culling experiment is actually testing two variables: exterminating badgers and better management of cattle. Yet there are no experimental controls (study areas in which one or both methods are not being tried), so there is no means of telling which of the two measures is working, or whether changes in the incidence of the disease have anything to do with the experiment. There's a scientific term for a study that simultaneously tests two variables while using no controls: worthless. The Welsh experiment has nothing to do with science and everything to do with appeasing farmers.
The Farmers' Union of Wales has been furiously demanding that time and money should be wasted in this fashion. It has lobbied the assembly government for a scheme that will damage its members' interests and alienate the people who buy their milk and butter and cheese. It appears to be impervious to evidence or reason: last week it announced that "badger culling works. Any talk about farming practices being a significant factor are unfounded."
But even if extermination did work, the effect could be sustained only by killing any badgers that re-entered the area: in other words, rendering the species extinct there. Were the same approach to be rolled out across a wider area (the policy the experiment is designed to test), the badger would have to become extinct not only across that zone, but also in all neighbouring zones. Because badgers will move into areas from which the species has been erased, the only logical outcome of this approach is to exterminate the badger throughout the United Kingdom. As this is politically unacceptable, the Welsh experiment is pointless as well as worthless.
This exercise in wilful stupidity betrays an approach to the natural world that has scarcely altered since the dark ages. We still act as if we have been granted dominion over it. Those with an economic interest seem to regard any species that might compete or conflict with them as a threat not only to their income but also to their power. They still treat the natural world as fungible: nothing is too precious, too great a source of wonder and delight to liquidate. There appears to be no point of regret beyond which we won't venture, no lesson in ecological collapse that we are prepared to learn. The Christian worldview, which places humankind at the apex of creation, is hard to shake, even in the most secular nation on earth.
All industries strive not only towards monopoly but also towards monoculture: domination of the natural or cultural landscape. This is what George Orwell meant when he remarked that "the logical end of mechanical progress is to reduce the human being to something resembling a brain in a bottle". Industry, if left unchecked, tolerates no deviance. It seeks to shrink both the range of human experience and the wonders of the natural world until they fit into the container it has made for them.
We could lose badgers and - except for those of us who spend summer evenings watching them as they shuffle out of their setts - suffer few tangible losses. But the urge to destroy them springs from the same pathological instinct for power which would deprive us of almost everything.
23 Comments so far
Show AllIf badgers weren't native to England they MIGHT have a case for culling, as with the red squirrel. But this is political expediency combined with a resistance to science. We see this in the global change doubters and hoaxers. I blame poor education. especially the science classes, if any. No trust of the scientific method is taught. Experiments are just chores to get through for a grade. There's no depth is teaching the history of science, if any.
So we trust "common sense" over science. Though of course "common sense" is often "common nonsense."
Gary
The native red squirrel is in decline due to the introduced outcompeting grey squirrel which has been culled, to little effect.
Some introductions were inadvertent but some were just accidents waiting to happen, like the Asian carp that now only need to transit the Chicago river to infest the entire Great Lake system.
Badger culling in Wales should be looked at as a political response to a constituency--farmers--and not as a rational response to solving a problem. That is the way most governmental actions are--science counts for nothing and prospective votes count for everything.
Too often it is the moneyed big agribusiness that wins out over rationality and compassion.
Sometimes, the squeakly little wheel, though, gets the oil.
My city was putting out traps for beavers in a pond behind my house and when I saw the trapper out there, I immediately confronted him. He, with the grizzly weaponry, of course, was brutish and all-powerful in his attitude.
I called my city official and made clear that I would try to remove the traps myself or chain myself to the tree (none of which I probably would have done) if he did not remove them.
He came right out, I talked to him and suggested wire fencing around the willow trees (neighbors complained they were being chewed) rather than risking harm of children or killing the beavers.
I told my husband that the city official probably wanted to avoid my going to the local newspaper and stealing the headline "Local woman arrested for protecting beaver". Sometimes you have to find the humor in situations.
The official of course tried to talk me out of it but I persisted with my appeal to his compassion and common sense.
The next day there was fencing around the trees.
Problem solved.
He also said he would adopt the same solution for the rest of the ponds in the city.
Of course, this was much smaller scale and I was not up against big agribusiness, but I was a thorn in the side of my homeowner's association.
Well, I can tell you the biodiversity of the Florida coral reefs is approaching the big 0!
Ask the Christian conservatives. They believe they truly DO have "dominion over nature" granted to them by God. They believe if the earth is heading towards a big destructive crack up that they, being "the righteous," will not suffer but will be raptured up out of the way. You can't talk with them about this. They are absolutely adamant and unshakable in their beliefs. They look at you with know-it-all pity if you try to show them why ideas like this are bad ideas.
Since more people who think and feel like this are in decision making Powers That Be positions, the "show nature who's boss" movement will not cease and desist. It will grow and a lot more is in danger than some Welch badgers.
If you want to see Christian Conservatives heads spin around, point out that the doctrine of the "rapture" dates only from the middle of the 19th Century. They won't believe you but ask them for any one like Calvin or Knox or Luther (no use pointing out Catholics have never believed in the rapture.) who believed in the "good guys" getting swooped up and saved. I guess God didn't think it an important point of dogma.
"But the old reflex dies hard. As the scientific group pointed out, "agricultural and veterinary leaders continue to believe, in spite of overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary, that the main approach to cattle TB control must involve some form of badger population control".
And there you have it. Bah, we don't need no stinking evidence.
What is striking is how they don't seem the least bit embarassed to openly admit their denial of scientific evidence. There can only be one explanation for this display of hubris; cash. They're being paid by ranchers to eliminate the little pests, science be damned.
Just like our own noble exterminator, Interior Sec. Ken Salazar. Ranchers spending cash for Salazar to kill the lower 48 wolves, despite long established scientific proof that wolves actually help by culling the sickly animals, leaving a healthier herd.
What's most egregious about Salazar's mass murder is we actually re-introduced wolves back to the lower 48 in the 1980's. Now Salazar is killing them off with a vengence. No surprise, there. He's on a campaign to exterminate anything on four legs.
freepressmyass,
I have also read that Salzar is removing the wild horses in Colorado as well.
The government's excuse is that there is an overpopulation and they will starve.
Poppycock! This is all about the ranchers and wanting to use more land to graze cattle.
Sheryl Crowe and other celebs are protesting the removal of the horses.
It's true, Salazar is "exterminating anything on four legs", all to benefit ranchers.
I have to say it, it is in our power to stop it by eating a plant-based diet.
Boycott meat and you boycott the killing of the wolves, the wild horses and the rest of the 1 1/2 million wild animals murdered each year to protect cattle.
We also end the senseless extreme confinement, mutilation of teeth, tails, genitals, beaks, skin, torture and beating, forced-breeding by machine and brutal slaughter of 40 billion animals on factory farms each year in the U.S.
Each of us has the power to stop all of the senseless killing.
Please try to adopt a plant-based diet today.
Seems they are eradicating the wrong species. Looks like they should be eradicating agricultural and veterinary leaders as well as the Welsh government officials.
If they really want to eliminate TB in cattle, perhaps they should just eliminate the cattle. Then there would be no problem with cattle TB.
That would be much easier to do, would be much more effective than eliminating the badgers, and would solve the problem completely.
Refusal to accept facts, evidence, and science... claiming to follow 'guidelines' when doing just the opposite... abject stupidity vehemently defended...
When did the Republicans take over the Welsh government?
Actually common sense would suggest that *bovine* TB is a problem for *bovines* not badgers, which may be secondary carriers because they are infected by the cows. There are other courses of action which have been ignored because they are not appealing to farmers and their all-powerful Union. These include far more stringent regulation of movements of cattle, far more rigorous physical care of these cattle and vaccination - of both cattle and badgers. A small trial of this last method is, I think, going to take place in England. Predictably the farmers are complaining about the cost involved.
"Indian Chief, "High Horse," was asked by a white government official, "You have observed the white man for 90 years. You've seen his wars and his technological advances. You've seen his progress, and the damage he's done."
The Chief nodded in agreement. The official continued, "Considering all these events, in your opinion, where did the white man go wrong?"
The Chief stared at the government official for over a minute and then calmly replied. "When white man find land, Indians running it. No taxes, no debt, plenty buffalo, plenty beaver, clean water; women did all the work, medicine man free. Indian man spend all day hunting and fishing; all night having sex."
Then the chief leaned back and smiled. "Only white man dumb enough to think he can improve system like that."
Too bad badgers can't fight back.
The wrong species are ALWAYS being culled. The species that does the "culling" (killing) is the one that's out of control. Does the species that's out of control merit reaping what it sows when the forces of Nature -- Katrinas, tsunamis, earthquakes -- turn the tables and use their superior power to cull the human herd? I think so. Unfortunately, innocent nonhuman beings are also harmed in the wake of Nature's awesome power. Want to end the badger "culling"? Stop breeding, raising, and eating cattle. Period. For the sake of the badgers AND the cattle. Not eating other animals . . . . not a problem!
Yes, the white man is stupid, and his rational civilization. Q. Why are badgers, cattle, chickens, squirrels, earthworms, trout, crows, bison, sheep, coyotes, antelope, elephants -- all the other animals who share planet Earth freely with one another (until humans interfere) -- why are they abundantly wiser and smarter than civilized humans? A. Because only civilized humans pay other civilized humans to live on the planet.
I hate to say this, but coyotes don't share planet Earth freely with bison (say) To a coyote, bison are lunch. Have you ever seen the result when a hungry fox meets a chicken? It isn't sharing. The only reason we humans are environmentally unsound, is that we're too good at killing. And we breed at a rate that is virtually unknown in a species our size. Civilization should realize that we have to fit into an ecological niche.
Have you ever seen an elephant kill another animal, or a gorilla?
You would not because both incredibly strong animals are herbivores.
Some animals are carnivores, humans are not.
Humans are good at killing because we are conditioned to believe that we are superior, and just because we can.
This is an excuse, not a reason for our gluttony and defensive clinging to bad habits that hurt the entire population, the environment and obviously, animals.
Breaking free of our conditioning to accept that animals are "meat" is necessary for our health and the health of the planet.
Mother Natures bats last... Ma Gaia will do her best to survive !
"as soon as we perceive that our economic interests are threatened, our war against nature resumes." George Monbiot
George Monbiot makes the case for a plant-based diet.
The sheer lunacy, or is it greed or both, of all the senseless killing has got to be a wake-up call for every human being.
We kill one animal to protect another animal to turn around and kill that animal.
This is in our hands.
We are directly responsible for 51% of the greenhouse gases caused by factory animal farms.
1 1/2 million wild animals are killed each year to protect cattle in the U.S. alone.
Cattle grazing is the number 1 factor in the destruction of rain forest.
It takes 2500 gallons of water to produce 1 pound of beef.
A plant-based diet contains protein, high fiber, antioxidants, vitamins and minerals and is low in saturated fat.
Advantages of a plant-based diet: clear skin, healthy weight, absence of disease, nutritious and delicious food great for the body, the mind and the soul.
Who is willing to try?
I have badgers at the bottom of the organic farm where I have also lived for most of the last two decades. They dig deep holes and sometimes come close to my crops. I must admit that I delight in their wildness. Though they make extra work for me, I am glad to co-habit this place with them. They uproot some of my berry plants. But it is a small price to pay for the blessings that they bring. I was saddened to read that the Welsh--one of my ancestral lineages--might cull them. As for me, I support that underground creature.
Badgers are a good sign. They are courageous, tenacious, and defensive. They have some relationship to cows. They also have warrior medicine, doctor power, and protection power so it would be a mistake to kill them needlessly because you don't understand what it means to live with them.
And one day in the not-so-distant future, Mother Nature will cull all of us. We are the most destructive species put on this Earth.