How should the English countryside look in future?.............. "It's mad that we protect the countryside (where hardly anyone lives) and cram buildings into every nook and cranny in the cities which are already rammed full."

There has been a lively debate on the comments pages of the BBC - which has just reported on the government's consultation on "how the Common Agricultural Policy should shape the future of farming and the rural economy in England."

How should the English countryside look in future?

1 November 2013 Last updated at 09:07

COMMENTS (538)

By Roger HarrabinEnvironment analyst

The UK government now has more control over how it spends EU farming funds

Continue reading the main story

Related Stories

• Q&A: Reform of EU farm policy
• EU farm subsidy reform criticised
• Farmers 'need EU's CAP subsidies'

People are being asked to offer their views on how the English countryside should look.

The government has opened a consultationon the priorities for spending nearly £20bn of EU subsidies over the next seven years.

The budget has been cut overall and there is huge controversy about how it should be shared between helping farmers and protecting wildlife.

The decisions will have an impact on hedgerows, trees, wild flowers, birds, bees, water quality and the appearance of the landscape.

An EU settlement in the summer has given individual nations more discretion on how to spend funds.

Some countries want to prioritise direct help for farmers, but the UK government says farmers should have to earn their cash as much as possible by working in a way that benefits the environment.

'Significantly disadvantaged'

Ministers want to divert the maximum amount of 15% into rural development and green schemes.

They aim to help hill farmers and to create shelter for pollinators, such as bees and moths.

But this has worried big farmers, who they say they will lose out and get less direct payment than some of their European counterparts.

The National Farmers' Union (NFU) president, Peter Kendall, said: "English farmers are already significantly disadvantaged in comparison with their near neighbours in the EU."

Environmentalists are not happy either. They argue the government's plans have failed to ensure that whole landscapes are farmed in a way that safeguards water quality and the environment.

Helen Perkins from the Wildlife Trusts said: "We need to see farming for nature mainstreamed - with environmental standards raised on every farm so that exemplary practices aren't restricted to pockets of the countryside."

Campaigners are perplexed that the government has given the public just 28 days to respond to the consultation on an immensely complex reform.

Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have their own processes over farm budgets.

Follow Roger on Twitter @rharrabin

Your comments (538)

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination

• Editors' Picks
• All Comments (538)

•  

  -66

  Comment number248.

   waitedtoolong 
  1ST NOVEMBER 2013 - 12:11
  As per 237 build houses on just 1% of the countryside and solve the housing and employment crisis overnight.
  
  Its mad that we protect the countryside (where hardly anyone lives) and cram buildings into ever nook and cranny in the cities which are already rammed full.
  
  We have an older generation who have done very well out of the debt they ran up and now they are pulling up the drawbridge
  
•  

  +20

  Comment number219.

   Diana_France 
  1ST NOVEMBER 2013 - 11:51
  Live in France in cheese area where to be called "Comte" only milk from hay-fed cattle can be used, despite fields being under snow from Nov to Apr and cows living indoors. Result, every space is used for organic grazing and hay growth, stored for winter feeds.Incredible wild flower meadows, excellent cheese. Intensive farming and silage shouldn't get financial support.
  
•  

  -92

  Comment number183.

   bored23 
  1ST NOVEMBER 2013 - 11:24
  Just build on it! Its going to happen eventually so we might as well accept it now, its just boring space at the moment, get houses on there to help with the overpopulation of the country
  
•  

  +127

  Comment number40.

   Bindweed 
  1ST NOVEMBER 2013 - 9:56
  No houses built on green fields, woodlands or any other site that belongs to the countryside. Use the redundant industrial sites - there are so many. Preserve our beautiful countryside -the most beautiful in the world!
  
•  

  +59

  Comment number34.

   Freetalk 
  1ST NOVEMBER 2013 - 9:55
  Just leave the countryside alone - along with everything else.The Tories are selling our country off, Labour are giving everything away and the libs will say and go with anyone that will have them. Just once can't we just leave things alone! Change doesn't always mean progression it can mean regression. If anyone of those 3 are involved then guaranteed a costly mess and destruction will ensue.
  REPORT THIS COMMENT(COMMENT NUMBER 34)

  LINK TO THIS(COMMENT NUMBER 34)

Comments 5 of 6

• Show More

Sign inwith your BBC iD, or Register to comment and rate comments

BBC News - How should the English countryside look in future?

A consultation is launching today on how the Common Agricultural Policy should shape the future of farming and the rural economy in England.

The future of farming, the rural economy and the natural environment in England will be shaped by responses to a consultation on the Common Agricultural Policy which opened today.

The new EU rules set the framework for how Common Agricultural Policy funding may be spent, but the UK government successfully pressed the Commission to agree that each country within the UK may make choices on how CAP is implemented from 2015.

Defra is now seeking views on how the Common Agricultural Policy should be implemented in England in order to deliver value for money for the public.

Farming Minister George Eustice said:

The UK ensured that we have choices in how we implement the Common Agricultural Policy, rather than having to work with a one-size-fits-all approach from the European Commission.

This gives us the flexibility to target funding in ways that will deliver real benefits to the environment, boost the competitiveness of our farming industry and grow the rural economy. It’s vital that the new system is designed with the input of the people whose lives it will affect. That’s why it’s so important that people give us their views on how we can best achieve this.

Defra is inviting input into the design of a straightforward system that is effective, easy to follow and avoids the significant fines charged to UK taxpayers under the current Common Agricultural Policy.

The consultation responses will also shape the future of the Common Agricultural Policy in England, particularly with regard to transferring up to 15 per cent from the budget for payments made directly to farmers to payments to improve the environment and projects to improve farm competitiveness and boost economic growth. This is subject to evidence from the consultation that additional funding in these areas would prove value for money.

The consultation is wide ranging in its scope:

• Growing the rural economy. The consultation sets out the potential to grow the rural economy, for example through business grants and investment in rural tourism.
• Improving farm competitiveness and making things simpler.
  Views are sought on how the Common Agricultural Policy can be implemented in England with minimal burdens and how CAP can support businesses to thrive and become less reliant on subsidies.
• Protecting the natural environment. Defra has proposed that a new environmental land management scheme should replace existing environmental stewardship schemes and also cover forestry. The consultation invites responses on how the Common Agricultural Policy can best benefit wildlife and improve natural landscapes.
• Protecting pollinators. The consultation will explore options for the Common Agricultural Policy to do more for pollinators, including shaping the new environmental controls that are part of direct payments, voluntary action under the Campaign for the Farm Environment and the new environmental land management scheme.

Responses to the consultation can be made:

• Online at https://consult.defra.gov.uk/communications/cap-consultation
• Via email to capconsultation@defra.gsi.gov.uk
• By post to CAP Consultation, Area 1D, Defra, Nobel House, 17 Smith Square, SW1P 3JR

Defra will also host social media debates and regional engagement events (including workshops) which will inform the formal consultation. More information on workshops being held around the country and how to register your interest

Common Agricultural Policy: how will it affect you? - News stories - GOV.UK

See also: Consultation: how should the English countryside look in future? | Sidmouth Independent News
.
.
.

Going, going, gone?......................................................... Developers are 'extremely interested' in the views of Gittisham people

In the light of  the newly-launched national campaign by CPRE
Futures Forum: Going, going, gone?......................................................... "Evidence from CPRE branches across England demonstrates that there is a growing threat to our most important landscapes from inappropriate development."
there are questions about whether the latest proposals for housing in East Devon mount to 'inappropriate development':

Site location fears for hundreds of homes at Honiton are voiced

By Exeter Express and Echo  |  Posted: November 01, 2013

The proposed development

 Comments (0)

Residents in the Honiton area of East Devon have until November 8, to have their say on plans for 300 homes on green fields on the outskirts of the town.

The development will be spread across 28 acres on land west of the town and outside the town boundary, just over one mile from the town centre, off Hayne Lane.

In East Devon District Council’s draft Local Plan, which sets out where around 15,000 homes could be built between 2006 – 2026, Honiton is allocated 450 homes.

However this particular site has been identified as a “reserve” site which means that it should only be considered if no other suitable sites come forward.

Devon councillor for Gittisham, Claire Wright has criticised the location of the houses on a reserve site branding it “a total mockery of planning”.

“A reserve site, which should be considered “if no other suitable proposal comes forward” appears to be meaningless, as this site is one of the first to come forward in the Honiton area,” she added.

She has also expressed concerns about the impact of the development on the existing community.

“Gittisham it is probably one of the most beautiful chocolate box villages you could see,” she continued. “And although the proposal is some way from the village itself, there would undoubtedly be an impact if the application is approved, in terms of traffic, at the very least.

“There are also the impacts on schools and medical services, among other issues, to consider.

“And looking through the literature, there are the usual lovely pictures of people cycling through countryside, people picnicking in pretty gardens and the developers appear to be suggesting that dormice and other protected species will be better off surrounded by 300 houses!”

The development will also include green space, a community orchard and allotments, and will predominantly be comprised of family homes with the percentage of affordable homes between 25 – 40 per cent.

A series of public consultation meetings have already been held by the developer behind the scheme, Welbeck Strategic Land, and a spokesperson said the firm is “extremely interested” in the views of local people.

Honiton Town Council has received a presentation by the developer and a public exhibition has been staged in the town.

A further event is being in the nearby village of Gittisham on Tuesday, November 5, between 6pm and 8pm, and parish councillors are due for the same presentation the following evening.

The chairman of the parish council, councillor David Fallows, said in response to the Local Plan, the council had pledged its opposition to development at the Hayne Lane because of concerns including the impact on the surrounding Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and on the road network.

Honiton Town Council, although not objecting to this specific site, also objected to ribbon development, or an extension of the town, preferring its housing allocation to, where possible, be within the existing town boundary.

Both councils will make a formal response to the scheme when an application has been lodged with the district council.

As part of the scheme, there will only be pedestrian and cycle access onto Old Elm Road with the vehicular access on Hayne Lane. The developer is consulting with the county and district councils and the Highways Agency to agree suitable mitigation of the development’s impact on the road network.

In addition, Welbeck is in discussion with Devon County Council highways department regarding being involved with potential future improvement work at the nearby Turks Head junction which leads onto the busy A30 and becomes very congested.

Residents can email their comments to, honiton@welbeckland.co.uk by Friday, November 8.

Site location fears for hundreds of homes at Honiton are voiced | Exeter Express and Echo

Public consultation Hayne Lane development

By FIONA | Published: 20 OCTOBER 2013

Welbeck Strategic Land is holding  public consultations regarding its proposal to develop 300 homes near Hayne Lane in Gittisham parish.

The first is on Thursday afternoon (24th Oct) at the East Devon Business Centre, and the second on Friday afternoon at the Mackarness Hall.

A further exhibition is to be held in the Village Hall at 6pm to 8pm on Tuesday November 5th.

Please go along to find out more. 

Public consultation Hayne Lane development


See also: welbeckland.co.uk
Claire Wright - Your Independent East Devon District Councillor for Ottery Rural
Susie Bond | Independent District Councillor for Feniton and Buckerell ward, EDDC
Honiton Town Council - Town Council
.
.
.

Town Hall Secrecy Blamed for Decline in Local Democracy

A prescient report from 2010:

Town Hall Secrecy Blamed for Decline in Local Democracy

15 April 2010

Council decision-making is more secretive today than ever, making it increasingly difficult for the press or public to scrutinise the workings of local government and thereby undermining local democracy.

That is the conclusion of a paper given by James Morrison, senior lecturer in journalism at Kingston University, to the 60th Political Studies Association Annual Conference in Edinburgh recently.

Despite a “blizzard of legislation” aimed at improving the appearance of local service accountability, “council decision-making in many areas… is more secretive today than in the past,” Morrison says in his paper: ‘Spin, smoke-filled rooms, and the decline of council reporting by local newspapers: the slow demise of town hall transparency’.

He points to the Local Government Act 2000 which led to the introduction of Westminster-style council cabinets and executives and the appointment of political assistants modelled on ministerial special advisors.

Local newspaper editors, the Newspaper Society and the Campaign for Freedom of Information campaigned successfully during the passage of the Act against the Government’s original intention that the new cabinets should be under no obligation to meet in public at all – reversing long-standing public rights of access to traditional council and committee meetings. The legislation was amended to require cabinets to meet in public for discussion of key decisions. But as the paper points out, a loophole identified by the CFOI in 2001 can still be exploited which enables private cabinet discussions of decisions which have been delegated to individual cabinet members.

The combined effect has been to maximise councils’ ability “to take policy decisions in secret, while minimising that of the press, public or indeed councillors shorn of ‘frontbench’ roles, to scrutinise or challenge their actions.”

The paper highlights the recent scandal about child protection procedures in Doncaster which was “exposed only after a tenacious local newspaper, the Doncaster Free Press, doggedly followed a trail starting with a reference to ‘deep-rooted’ issues around its services for children and young people in an otherwise routine Audit Commission CPA report.”

A series of follow-up stories eventually led to the newspaper’s revelation nine months later about a serious case review involving a ten-month-old baby. Six further serious case reviews emerged, the town’s elected mayor was accused of presiding over a ‘culture of secrecy’ and he eventually resigned.

“While the story did eventually get out – through the efforts of the local press – how much sooner might it have been exposed if the case reviews had been discussed more openly in council meetings?” asks Morrison.

His paper argues that the spread of cabinet government has in fact acted as a disincentive to the local media. “Meetings of council committees and the full council – once energetic arenas for public debate and knife-edge votes on controversial issues (not to mention sources of lively news copy) – have been reduced to little more than a rubber-stamp… With council meetings downgraded to the status of talking-shops, it’s little wonder that today’s local newspaper editors – faced with ever-tighter budgets and 24-hour deadlines for their web operations – are voting with their feet and ceasing to cover them.”

It draws on existing research, including a 2009 Press Association survey of local newspapers which found that nearly two-thirds of titles were using fewer local government resources – from press releases to meeting papers – than ten years previously, and more than one in five were employing fewer council reporters.

“One of the most common reasons given for newspapers’ failure to attend meetings routinely was the fact that, with the advent of cabinet government, many newsworthy decisions are no longer made in public,” says Morrison. “After all, why send a reporter who could otherwise be providing vital copy for the web and overnight editions out of the office to report from a meeting at which little of value is being debated or voted on – and anything that is will merely be rubber-stamped, having been all-but decided on in the privacy of the cabinet room beforehand?”

The paper presents new evidence including his own survey of local newspaper journalists and editors. This confirms the impact of the LGA 2000 on their ability to keep tabs on council decisions, although the view from many respondents was that “most commercial newspapers were savvy enough to overcome barriers to scrutinising the workings of their council.”

Council-funded publications are exacerbating the problem, according to Morrison. His research, including evidence from the Newspaper Society and FOI requests, demonstrates “the genuine threat some commercial newspapers are facing as a result of the competitive recruitment, advertising, and editorial policies adopted by a new generation of professionally produced, council-funded publications,” such as East End Life(Tower Hamlets), Greenwich Time, Hackney Today and H&F News (Hammersmith & Fulham).

While some local authorities such as Doncaster have axed their expensive “council propaganda” sheets, others such as Tower Hamlets continue to publish despite repeated calls to close down the weekly East End Life and save the council £670,000 a year.

“Just as more and more local authority publications are starting to look like ‘real’ newspapers, so, too, is the content of some titles mimicking that of the traditional press,”says Morrison. “Set alongside professional-looking production values, this can add to the impression in the minds of less media-savvy consumers that they are reading a genuine newspaper, rather than a council PR bulletin.”

All this means that “the most prevalent interpretation of many councils’ policy decisions and their effectiveness is the inherently one-sided, invariably positive, yet increasingly journalistic output flowing from their own spin machines.”

Morrison concludes that local authority accountability is being jeopardised “primarily because of a succession of recent changes to the way in which councils conduct their business.” But he believes that new initiatives from the local press do give some cause for optimism that thorough and objective reporting of council issues will continue into the future.

Notes:

• James Morrison’s paper, ‘Spin, smoke-filled rooms, and the decline of council reporting by local newspapers: the slow demise of town hall transparency,’ is available on the Political Studies Association website.
• The 60th Political Studies Association Annual Conference, ‘Sixty Years of Political Studies: Achievements and Futures’, was held in Edinburgh (29 March – 1 April 2010).

• James Morrison will also be speaking at the Press Gazette Local Heroes Conferenceduring Local Newspaper Week on 14 May.

• The Newspaper Society is conducting an Editors Survey for Local Newspaper Week(10-16 May) which examines local newspapers’ coverage of courts, councils and other public bodies.

For further information please contact Lynne Anderson on 020 763 27421 orlynne_anderson@newspapersoc.org.uk.

Town Hall Secrecy Blamed for Decline in Local Democracy | newspapersoc.org.uk

Thanks to: Town Hall Secrecy Blamed for Decline in Local Democracy | Sidmouth Independent News

See also: 
Futures Forum: Future Councillors: Where next for local politics?
Futures Forum: Concerns for corruption in Local Government
Futures Forum: Concerns for corruption in Local Government: part two
Futures Forum: Concerns for campaigning: The Local Authority Publicity Code
.
.
.

Going, going, gone?......................................................... "Evidence from CPRE branches across England demonstrates that there is a growing threat to our most important landscapes from inappropriate development."

The latest campaign from CPRE:

31 October 2013 England's masterpiece under threat You may have read about our latest research on the threats to our most treasured landscapes. Our new report, Going, going, gone? England's disappearing landscapes, reveals how our countryside is under unprecedented development pressures. We now need to persuade the Government to strengthen national planning policy by giving greater weight to the protection of nationally designated and locally valued landscapes. CPRE's charter to save our countryside We've had over 12,000 people sign up to the Save our Countryside charter. But we need to increase this support to demonstrate our strength in the fight for the countryside and to persuade politicians at a local and national level that they must listen to public opinion. Together we can protect our most treasured landscapes. Sign our charter today  Find out about threatened landscapes near you Our new report, Going, going, gone? England's disappearing landscapes, demonstrates that there is a growing threat to our most important landscapes from inappropriate development. We have gathered evidence from around the country creating a snapshot of the most significant threats to National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. We have also highlighted the dangers faced by the countryside that lacks national protection but is, nevertheless, deeply valued by local communities. Once it's gone, it's gone forever. Find out more Go to our website to find out more about threatened beauty spots around the country and how you can help stop England's masterpiece disappearing. Going, going, gone? England's disappearing landscapes Thank you for campaigning with us and helping us save the countryside we all love. Best wishes, Tony FawcettCampaign to Protect Rural England www.cpre.org.uk Campaign to Protect Rural England, 5-11 Lavington Street, London, SE1 0NZ Tel: 020 7981 2800 Fax: 020 7981 2899 CPRE fights for a better future for the English countryside. We work locally and nationally to protect, shape and enhance a beautiful, thriving countryside for everyone to value and enjoy. Founded in 1926, we're a grassroots organisation, with more than 200 local groups, a branch in every county and 60,000 members and supporters. CPRE is a registered charity (1089685) and a company registered in England (4302973).

Going, going, gone? England's disappearing landscapes - Campaign to Protect Rural England


A local example:

Gittisham Parish councillors to hear proposals for 300 houses

Claire | Thursday, 31 October 2013

Developers will set out their proposals for 300 houses to Gittisham Parish Council next week, following an exhibition last week.

I was unable to attend the exhibition but have acquired the paperwork as Gittisham is in my county council ward.  Cllr Susie Bond is the EDDC ward member.

In this latest major planning proposal (there have been so many major planning applications in my ward!), the fields targeted by developers, Welbeck, were designated as a “reserve site” in EDDC’s local plan.  But “reserve” which should have meant “if no other suitable proposal comes forward” appears to be meaningless, as this site is one of the first to come forward in the Honiton area.

For those of you familiar with Gittisham it is probably one of the most beautiful chocolate box villages you have ever seen and although the proposal is some way from the village itself, there would undoubtedly be an impact if the application is approved, in terms of traffic, at the very least.

There are also the impacts on schools and medical services, among other issues, to consider.

Looking through the literature, there are the usual lovely pictures of people cycling through countryside, people picnicking in pretty gardens and the developers appear to be suggesting that dormice and other protected species will be better off surrounded by 300 houses!  It states:  “The retention and bolstering of the hedgerow network together with the inclusion of extensive open space areas will provide enhanced habitats for dormice and maintain dark corridors for commuting and foraging bats….”

The area is over 28 acres and is over one mile away from the centre of Honiton.

Welbeck says it is in discussion with the Highways Agency and Devon County Council about the increasingly snarled up Turk’s Head junction, which is now regularly causing tailbacks well onto the A30.

Gittisham parish councillors will hear a presentation from developers, Welbeck, at their monthly meeting next Wednesday, 6 November. The meeting starts at 7.30pm.

A planning application is expected to be submitted before Christmas.  The link to Gittisham Parish Council’s website is here - http://gittisham.org.uk/parish-council/meetings/

Claire Wright - Your Independent East Devon District Councillor for Ottery Rural

• Welbeck Strategic Land, forming partnerships with landowners, throughout the UK, to enable sustainable residential development.

www.welbeckland.co.uk

BRITAIN NEEDS MORE HOMES

Almost everyone will agree with this statement. But new homes must be the right kind, in the right location, to meet local demand. Additional housing should also bring additional benefit to the local community and to the local economy as a whole, and it must be sustainable.

It all begins, though, with land itself – and therefore with people who own the land. Whether brownfield or greenfield, land is the raw material without which the need for families and individuals to have their own homes cannot be met.
To address these issues, of getting the future housing ‘mix’ right, on behalf of landowners, and communities, Welbeck Strategic Land provides specialist expertise, based on many years of experience and success.
Welbeck Strategic Land works with landowners, communities and local authorities to help meet the objective of sustainable development, while helping to plug the housing gap. In doing so, we follow government planning policy guidelines.

www.welbeckland.co.uk/welbeck-strategic-land2.html
.
.
.

Badgers update

A very useful overview of the issues from the AutumnWatch blog this week:

Badgers update - autumn 2013

Tuesday 29 October 2013, 20:46

Tim ScoonesExcecutive Producer Springwatch

21

• Share
• Facebook
• Twitter

COMMENTS (118)

On Autumnwatch, we’re well aware that the issues surrounding the on-going badger cull have remained in the news and continue to be an emotive subject for many of you.

As usual, we are asking you to use the comments section below to have your say on the subject. We ask that you respect the views of others, even if they differ from your own. In the past we’ve found that people from both sides of the issue have brought interesting and useful extra insights and information to our blog, and we encourage this kind of contribution to a respectful discussion.

Some of you have asked why Autumnwatch and Springwatch hasn’t covered more of the badger cull story and asked why we haven’t taken a position on one particular side of the debate. As a BBC programme, Autumnwatch has to remain impartial, however much the subject impacts on audience feeling. To state a position on any political situation would compromise our ability to bring you high quality information that everyone can trust. This is vital for all BBC programmes, ourselves included.

It’s also worth clarifying that Autumnwatch is a nature series designed to give our audience insights into the science and biology of UK wildlife. It’s not a platform for political or topical debate regarding public policy, which is covered elsewhere on the BBC, particularly on BBC News output. The decision to licence a badger cull and the interpretation of the scientific results behind this decision are now matters of politics and policy and therefore out of scope for this series. We have, and will continue to, report on the science and biology.

With this remit in mind, we have set out below a series of links to short films, guest blogs, BBC news articles and official government documents that describe the scientific and biological background to the story. We’re also pointing you to the output of other BBC colleagues for further information on the issue and the latest news and debate on the politics and policy aspects of the story. We have set out to give you the impartial information that allows you to be fully informed and help you make up your own mind as to where you stand on the issue.

Autumnwatch 2013 has filed a new report where Martin Hughes-Games takes things back to the basics, looking at what it is in the very nature and ecology of badgers that has got them into trouble in their relationship with us humans – more than once - over the years, from badger-baiting to bovine tuberculosis. You can watch that here.

Back in 2010, We covered the original scientific research into how a cull might work. This was known as the Krebs Randomised Badger Culling Trial. Kate Humble talked to Dr Rosie Woodroffe, one of the scientists who undertook this work from 1998-2005, and looked at the results in some detail. You can see this film here. 

Since then, there has been a robust debate around the interpretation of the science behind the badger cull. To bring both sides of the issue right up to date, we have commissioned two new guest blogs to provide expert views of the scientific results that influence both government policy and the views of those opposing the cull. Two eminent scientists, Dr Rosie Woodroffe and Prof James Wood both work extensively in this area, and have contributed significantly to relevant scientific research. They recently co-authored a Royal Society review of scientific evidence surrounding badger cull trials. Read the blogs from Dr Woodroffe and Prof Wood below.

Many people from both sides of the debate have suggested that vaccination – of either cattle or badgers – may provide solutions in the future. In 2011, we looked at how badger vaccination might work – Martin Hughes-Games investigated. You can see this film here. More recently, our colleagues at BBC Countryfile have covered the cattle vaccination story – you can see this film here. 

For the official government position at the start of this process, we are linking to [hyperlink] the government’s approach to tackling bovine tuberculosis and the consultation on a badger control policy as well as DEFRA’s information about bovine tuberculosis - .

For even more background to the science and the cull, please click here for a BBC News Q&A on the badger cull.

As the cull began, the story turned to aspects of politics and policy. These have been covered extensively by our colleagues in BBC News Online. To give you easy access to these - from a special search page which constantly updates itself to give you the very latest stories - please click here. 

In addition, the BBC’s Inside Out West programme has covered the recent issues around the implementation of the cull, including a perspective on what it has been like to police the situation. You can see this film here.

Finally, bringing things right up to date, with the announcement last week that Natural England has granted a licence extension for the pilot badger cull in Gloucestershire, BBC Points West News covered the story here.

In this blog post, we have set out to present all of the films, blogs, news articles and official documents linked to above to provide the all broad, balanced and impartial information and insight you need to reach your own, informed decision on where you stand on this ongoing, complicated and emotive issue.

If you feel you have more to add, do please have your say in the comments section below. Once again, may we remind you to please be respectful of the opinions of others.

Many thanks,

Tim Scoones, Executive Producer, BBC Natural History Unit

.........

Dr Rosie Woodroffe is a senior research fellow at the Institute of Zoology, London

Bovine tuberculosis (TB) is a major problem for cattle farmers, which deserves an effective solution. There is strong evidence to show that badgers transmit infection to cattle. Paradoxically, though, culling badgers contributes little or nothing to TB control.

Left undisturbed, family groups of badgers remain within their own fiercely guarded territories, prevented from wandering far by their equally territorial neighbours. Infected badgers interact mostly within their own groups, and so disease does not spread far. Culling, however, removes these natural constraints on transmission. This means that the proportion of infected badgers increases, and disease spreads across the landscape.

Even where culling reduces badger numbers substantially, declines in cattle TB are much smaller. This is because each remaining badger ranges more widely, so can interact with more cattle herds and is also more likely to be infected. As a result, where culls kill fewer badgers, cattle TB is increased.

As farmers in Somerset and Gloucestershire have been learning, culling large numbers of badgers is a challenge, but the stakes are high because culling too few will worsen the problem. So, culling is a risky proposition.

By contrast, vaccination is likely to drive infection in badger populations down, not up. Vaccination is also cheaper. The benefits for cattle are not yet known, but the only way to find out is to try.

......... 

Professor James Wood is Alborada Professor of Equine and Farm Animal Science, Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge

Much has been stated in the polarised debate over killing badgers to control bovine tuberculosis (TB) in cattle. Both sides of the debate claim to have the support of science.

Scientists should produce and interpret scientific data. An individual can make moral judgements, but this needs to be done explicitly, distinguishing such views from scientific interpretation. Thus, it can be valid to believe that culling badgers is effective in controlling bovine TB, but that this fact does not provide a moral justification for doing so.

In high-incidence areas in Britain, bovine TB spreads in cycles between cattle and badgers. A recent review of the scientific evidence relevant to bovine TB control demonstrates the importance of the pattern of disease transmission, illustrated by a reduction of around 60% in incidents of bovine TB on farms involved in the random badger culling trials, 18 months after culling ended. No other control of the disease in cattle has been shown to have anything like such strong an effect. There is no study that has shown specific on-farm biosecurity measures reduce bovine TB. Although there are measures that can help to exclude badgers from farm buildings, it is unclear whether most transmission is inside or at pasture.

Controls that include badger culling have a scientific evidence base, and l describing the impact of culling as just 16% for bovine TB in cattle understates its importance. Many farmers are now being caught in the middle of the badger cull controversy with little evidence to guide their husbandry, despite what is widely claimed. This means they have no real ability to influence the risks to their herds from wildlife. More stringent cattle measures, such as radial testing around infected herds in the ‘edge area’, are already being implemented, but to date the media have not reported on these. Their impact may also take some years to become apparent.

Comments

Sign inwith your BBC iD, or Register to comment and rate comments

All posts are reactively-moderated and must obey the house rules.

• All Comments (118)

BBC - Blogs - Autumnwatch - Badgers update - autumn 2013

See also: Futures Forum: Badgerlands
.
.
.

November hedgerow

AutumnWatch tells me that this has been the best season in a decade for nuts and berries:
BBC Two - Autumnwatch

Trees » Hedgerows » The Hedgerow Year

November Hedgerow

Sandra Chalton

The Late Autumn Hedgerow

Can you spot the green lacewing? (Hover over the image to see the names of the insects and berries)

---

For more information email Sandy Chalton. Sign in to see more contact details..

Sustainable Crediton - November Hedgerow

See also: Futures Forum: October hedgerow
.
.
.

Keith Owen Fund: one million bulbs: community planting: reports

Last Saturday saw a huge turnout:

Mass planting for million bulbs project

Stephen SumnerSunday, October 27, 2013 

The Sid Vale Association’s (SVA) goal is to fulfil the dying wish of Keith Owen, who left the town a £2.3million legacy, and see a valley covered in flowers.

Sports teams, schools and community groups have all been backing the million bulb project, planting more than 100,000 since September.

SVA chairman Handel Bennett said: “We are inviting the community to help by joining with others to plant bulbs together."

Over the last year the small working party has contacted land owners for planting consent and selected more than 50 sites.

They have met with some 20 voluntary groups and ordered 150,000 bulbs from British nurseries, so the project is already well under way.

Handel added: “We are a community engaged in a single purpose – to play its part in creating the Valley of a Million Bulbs. We hope it will fulfil Keith’s hope of an iconic spectacle to be enjoyed by both residents and visitors.”

Mass planting for million bulbs project - News - Sidmouth Herald

BBC Spotlight carried the story this week:
BBC One - Spotlight
BBC News - Banker Keith Owen leaves Sidmouth £2.3m and a 'million flowers'

And today's edition of the Herald carries a full centre-page report with lots of photos: 
Home - Sidmouth Herald

See also: Futures Forum: Keith Owen Fund: one million bulbs: story goes international
Friends of Byes plant 1,700 blooms! - News - Sidmouth Herald
Futures Forum: Friends of the Byes: final bulb-planting sessions ...................... Weds 16th and Sat 19th October...................... Plus: sessions from Sidmouth College... Sidmouth WI... ...
.
.
.