The value of badger populations and control of tuberculosis in cattle in England and Wales: A note

This note reports on the results of a choice experiment survey of 400 people in England and Wales, conducted to estimate the value that society places on changes to the size of the badger population. The study was undertaken in the context of the possible need to reduce the badger population by culling to help control bovine tuberculosis in cattle. The study found that people were concerned about the problem of bovine tuberculosis in cattle, which was reflected in their willingness to pay to control the disease, and gave a relatively low value to changes in the size of the badger population (within limits). However, people did not like the idea of a policy that intentionally killed large numbers of badgers and had a relatively very high willingness to pay not to have such a policy.

Farm costs associated with premovement testing for bovine tuberculosis

Sixty cattle farmers in England were questioned about the costs associated with premovement testing for bovine tuberculosis (TB). On average, the farmers had premovement tested 2-45 times in the previous 12 months, but the majority had tested only once. An average of 28.6 animals were tested on each occasion, but there were wide variations. The average farm labour costs were (sic)4.00 per animal tested, veterinary costs were (sic)4.33 and other costs were (sic)0.51, giving a total cost of (sic)8.84, but there were wide variations between farms, and many incurred costs of more than (sic)20 per animal. A majority of the farmers also cited disruption to the farm business or missed market opportunities as costs, but few could estimate their financial cost. Most of the farmers thought that premovement testing was a cost burden on their business, and over half thought It was not an effective policy to control bovine TB.

Costs to farmers of a tuberculosis breakdown

An on-farm survey of 151 cattle farmers who had experienced a bovine tuberculosis (Mycobacterium bovis) breakdown on their farms was undertaken in 2003 to assess the costs associated with the breakdown. In 90 per cent of cases the cost was estimated to be less than 18,513 pound for dairy herds and less than El 1,462 for beef herds, but with a range from 229 pound to 103,817 pound. The main cost was the slaughter of reactor cattle. For the majority of the farmers, the compensation payments seemed to meet most of the costs of their breakdowns, although a majority was still left with net losses.

Economic assessment of bovine tuberculosis and alternative policies

Break-even analyses of the costs and benefits of six alternative bovine tuberculosis (bTB) control strategies were undertaken. The results show that some strategies, such as zoning, would require relatively small reductions in bTB incidence as a result to be cost effective, whilst for others, such as proactive badger removal, the costs would require a substantial and relatively rapid reduction in bTB incidence to be worthwhile.

A cost-benefit analysis of culling badgers to control bovine tuberculosis

Bovine tuberculosis (TB) is an important economic problem. The incidence of TB in cattle herds has steadily risen in the UK, and badgers are strongly implicated in spreading disease. Since the mid-1970s the UK government has adopted a number of badger culling strategies to attempt to reduce infection in cattle. In this report, an established model has been used to simulate TB in badgers, transmission to cattle, and control by badger culling. Costs were supplied by the UK Government's Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) for badger trapping and gassing. Regardless of culling intensity or area simulated, an overall reduction in the herd breakdown rate was seen. With a high culling efficacy and no social perturbation, the mean Net Present Value of a few simulated culling strategies in an "ideal world" was positive, meaning the economic benefits outweighed the costs. Further work is required before these results could be considered definitive, as it is necessary to evaluate uncertainties and simulate less than perfect conditions. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.