|
Back to Environment Homepage
15 April 2003
Conservation and the Misuse of Science
Hedgehogs, Bats and Badgers
Dr James Irvine
FRSE, DSc, FInstBiol, FRCPath, FRCPEd
Teviot Scientific Consultancy, Edinburgh
Teviot Agriculture, Cultybraggan Farm, Comrie, Perthshire
(Filed 15 April 03)
www.land-care.org.uk
©Teviot Scientific Consultancy
The manner in which Scottish Natural Heritage
(SNH) is handling the problem of the multiplying, egg-eating hedgehogs
that threaten waders and other birds in North Uist (1,
2) raises serious concerns about how science is
being applied by Government Departments or their agencies involved
in conservation. These same concerns also pertain to the problems
of bats transmitting rabies to man (3) and badgers
transmitting tuberculosis to cattle (4).
Uist Hedgehogs and Waders
Protracted, expensive and inappropriately detailed
research would appear to have taken over from common sense. Instead
of constructively helping to solve such problems, the delays that
occur before applying a predictable remedy have been highly damaging.
Surely a better balance needs to be struck between ultimate political
correctness and competent management.
The problem with hedgehogs in Uist was recognised
as long ago as 1985 following the introduction of four of the creatures
to the Uists by private individuals in 1974 to keep pests down in
a garden. There were not any hedgehogs there before. It has long
been known that hedgehogs eat birds’ eggs and that the numbers
of hedgehogs on Uist was escalating, being essentially unchallenged
in the presence of an abundant food supply. Experienced observers
noted that bird numbers (including waders) were declining. Normal
conservation practice would be to cull the hedgehogs before their
numbers got seriously out of hand (5). There are
now stated to be some 5000 hedgehogs in the Uists. But what did
SNH do? They set about proving “categorically” that hedgehogs
were to blame (2). That took them to the year 2000,
according to the SNH spokeswoman quoted in the article by John Ross
(2). This was followed by a three-year Uist Wader
Project to look at ways of tackling the problem. In 2003 SNH decided
that the hedgehogs needed to be culled (which must surely be no
great surprise) and that there was no other acceptable way of doing
it in their opinion other than by trapping them and administering
a lethal injection. Others, while understanding the need to reduce
the number of hedgehogs, wanted alternative methods to be available
such as transferring them to the mainland. The matter was the subject
of a Petition to the Scottish Parliament (6). To
my knowledge the total cost of this eight-year SNH saga has so far
not been made readily available to the public, but must be horrendous.
But then SNH has over 700 staff (7) many of whom
are sulking as they do not want to shift out of their multiple offices
in Edinburgh to relocate in Inverness (8).
Gamekeepers have been keeping the balance between
predators and prey for generations. In spite of the odium poured
upon them by SNH and RSPB in the event of any indiscretion, it is
the gamekeepers who have been the ones mainly responsible for the
good state of much of Scotland’s wildlife. That their advice
has been ignored by SNH is the subject of a further Petition to
the Scottish Parliament with regard to birds of prey (9)
that is currently ongoing. It could equally apply to Uist hedgehogs.
Ian Mitchell’s letter (Scotsman April 15, 2003) admirably summarises
the situation with the experience of Uist crofters on the one hand
and the so-called ‘science’ of RSPB and SNH on the other
(10). There is a lack of integration between crofters
and conservationists.
Bats and Rabies
Writing in SNH’s magazine (11)
on the subject of bats and rabies, the Director of SNH Scientific
and Advisory Services, Professor Colin Galbraith, is at the same
game. His article is reproduced in full HERE.
The following comments are based on that article.
It is manifestly obvious that rabies-related
virus (European Bat Lyssavirus) is in the Scottish bat population
because a bat handler working under their own direction in Angus
in Scotland died of rabies on 24th November 2003 in Ninewells Hospital,
Dundee (3). That the virus came from a bat was
unequivocally proven by typing the virus in the victim. It is an
established fact, well known to SNH, that rabies-related virus has
been present for at least some years in bats in Continental Europe
(10), and indeed DEFRA issued a warning that rabies-related
virus had been detected in Lancashire, England earlier in the year
(12), but still SNH did not insist that their
bat handlers must be vaccinated against rabies - a simple procedure
with minimal complications recommended to travellers going to certain
countries where rabies-infected bats are well recognised and are
now the main cause of death from rabies in man (13,
14). To illustrate, a member of my staff who went
earlier this year to work in Mexico as a VSO required, as standard
practice, to be vaccinated for rabies before departure. Not so with
SNH registered bat handlers when rabies was known to be in bats
in neighbouring countries (including England and Northern Continental
Europe) and it was known that bats can migrate or be transported
such distances without too much difficulty (15,
16). It had to take a fatality to bring SNH to
see commonsense.
SNH is disingenuous when it says anyone worried
about bats and rabies should ring the bat helpline number, when
they (SNH) are uncertain whether or not they can maintain what they
refer to as the Bat Team (11). So just what advice
is the Bat Helpline going to be able to provide to those who phone
to express their understandable and well documented concerns when
they have bats in their homes (17, 18).
It is well known that under such circumstances bats may come into
the bedrooms during the night where there may be young babies or
elderly or sick persons in the house. SNH need not research the
world literature much further than using GOOGLE on the Internet
and find that the Center for Infectious Diseases has a wealth of
information on the subject, including convincing evidence that persons
can indeed be bitten by rabies-infected bats without knowing and
with disastrous consequences (13, 14).
Such a quick literature search would also lead them to an article
on that very subject in the Lancet in 2001 (19).
It frankly does not require a three year study
by SNH or anyone else to reveal the essence of the problem, the
hazard involved and the need to urgently reduce the risk. The commonsense
action would be to eradicate bats from homes. People come before
bats, however rare any particular type of bat might be (18).
According to the Bat Conservation Trust to refer to rabies-infected
bats in people’s homes as vermin is to be “emotive”
(20), but of course that is just what potentially
rabies-infected bats are. The emergency arrangements for protecting
persons from potentially rabies-infected bats can subsequently be
adjusted in the unlikely event that the findings of further research
turn out to be sufficiently reassuring.
The following statement was on the Bat Conservation
Trust (BCT) website in November 2002 (21), but
seemingly has since been withdrawn:
“The treatment of people bitten by bats infected with EBL
1 and 2 in the UK and Europe has been completely effective. For
example, 180 people bitten by EBL bats in the Netherlands have
been treated with 100% success over the past two decades.”
www.bats.org.uk (20th November 2002)
It is not surprising that the BCT withdrew this
information. Not that its validity is in doubt, but it does spell
out that in neighbouring Netherlands plenty of people were being
bitten by EBL-infected bats such as to cause major concern. Apparently
they all knew they had been bitten and so they all presented as
such for vaccination, and the statistic was derived accordingly.
Those that did not know they had been bitten (21),
and the bat happened to be carrying EBL, would be likely to present
with bizarre symptoms many months afterwards which are notoriously
difficult to diagnose clinically - the attendant physicians may
not even consider rabies in the differential diagnosis (13).
The statistic such persons would contribute to is death from a neurological
cause that was obscure and somewhat empirically labelled as best
guess.
SNH with its narrowly focused dedication to conservation
and biodiversity is unlikely to give objective unbiased advice to
the Department of Health regarding any species they feel may be
endangered, or at possible risk of becoming endangered. Under present
legislation bats of any type cannot be killed or their roosts disturbed
unless under very special circumstances. Some types of bats in Scotland
are not under any risk of being endangered (22).
Those persons who are unfortunate enough to have bats in their houses,
and invading their living quarters, just have to make adjustments
to live with the bats - that is what the helpline will say. The
so-called Bat Team will not remove the bats, even when their members
are appropriately vaccinated. It is possible that SNH may use the
opportunity of the distressed person’s call to further their
own research project. In his article Professor Galbraith makes no
reference whatever to bats in peoples houses, especially where vulnerable
persons sleep. It is not good enough to simply say “do not
handle bats”.
With regard to “developing in detail field
methodology for sampling bats” (9), are we
to believe, with rabies-related infection in bats being so well
known in many countries, that such technology does not already exist?
Is it a matter of reinventing the wheel? Why should the technology
be any different for Scottish bats compared to any others? Have
we not suffered enough in other areas from organisations insisting
on validation of methodology that has been available for years but
over which pedants with other vested interests cannot agree - e,g,
diagnostic tests used in the management of Foot and Mouth Disease
in livestock (23).
A review of the literature taking perhaps a morning
spent on the Internet, and perhaps another in one or more of Edinburgh’s
excellent reference libraries, will reveal that others have found
that in their countries there is no evidence that the rabies related
virus has a predisposition for any particular species of bat, and
that the incidence of rabies in bats can change quite quickly from
time to time with a marked tendency in the Americas for it to be
increasing alarmingly (11, 16).
Diseased bats may behave more aggressively than healthy bats.
Certainly lets have the Scottish situation kept
under continuous review, but let’s not wait (a further three
years in the first instance according to SNH) for this review to
be completed before taking action to protect ourselves through adjusting
the bat conservation laws.
What should be happening is that conservation
orders regarding bats that can or might gain access to living quarters
of humans should be rescinded, until such time as SNH or others
have done their research and shown that there is no risk of transmission
of rabies to man under such circumstances. Commonsense in the light
of present knowledge tells us that no matter how long they extend
their research projects they will not be able to achieve such an
assurance. What would bring SNH to its senses would be another fatality
- this time perhaps a baby unknowingly bitten during sleep by a
bat carrying rabies-related virus. It is an event waiting to happen.
When it does it will not only be tragic for the family, but would
have devastating consequences for SNH on account of their negligence
through poor advice to the public (24) and other
Government Departments. They would face the charge of putting their
obsession with conservation and biodiversity before the welfare
of people.
Tuberculous Badgers
The same problem of prolonged procrastination
on the grounds of scientific “correctness” is manifest
with regard to tuberculosis in badgers, contributing as they surely
do to the marked rise in the incidence of tuberculosis in cattle.
There are conservation orders on badgers (25),
as there are with bats.
As long ago as 1980 Lord Zuckerman was commissioned
by the Government of the day to write a report on the problem. He
did so with exemplary efficiency, professionalism and promptness
(26, 27). He recommended that,
along with other measures, sets of tuberculous infected badgers
should be culled. This amounted to good commonsense. Instead, increased
legislation, achieved by lobby groups interested in the conservation
of badgers, succeeded in extending badger conservation orders (25).
The subject was revisited by Professor Krebs
in 1997 (28) on account of the fact that the problem
was getting worse. He stated that in all probability badgers were
contributing to the problem of the increasing incidence of TB in
cattle and the risk of its spreading to man. He recommended a cull
of TB infected badgers, but said that he did not have absolute proof
that badgers were involved in the causation trail.
That resulted in the Independent Scientific Review
Group on Cattle TB (ISG) being set up in 1998 which still has not
finally reported (29). While esoteric trials (in
which few people have confidence) are conducted, the problem of
TB in cattle has now reached very serious levels (30)
with great economic consequences. There is also a risk to human
health in the form of bovine tuberculosis, that was previously almost
eradicated in the UK. Commonsense that was articulated so well in
1980, and again in 1997, still has not been allowed to operate (31).
The costs to the taxpayer are horrendous. There can be little doubt
that the culling of sets of tuberculous badgers will eventually
have to happen, but the endless delays will have made the problem
much worse than it need have been - as with hedgehogs, as with bats.
When New Zealand observed a rise in TB in its
cattle, it found that possums were carrying TB and were thought
to be a reservoir of infection - just like the badgers in the UK.
It appeared probable that the possums were at least partly responsible
for the problem. There was no endless prevarication as in the UK.
The infected possums were culled. That measure, along with others
implemented at the same time, sorted the problem of TB in their
cattle (26). Cattle are important to the economy
of New Zealand. They are also important to the economy of the UK,
and in particular Scotland. Scotland’s economy is presently
in dire straits (32, 33). It
can ill afford to endlessly prevaricate over what to do with TB
infected badgers.
Conclusion
Whether it be hedgehogs, bats or badgers it would
appear that SNH and others are happy to”fiddle” at taxpayers
expense “while Rome burns” in terms of damage to human
and animal health and to the economy. It is time that a stop was
put to this form of self-indulgent and extravagant pseudo science.
Dr James Irvine FRSE
© Teviot Scientific Consultancy
References
1. Mitchell, Ian (2003). Hedgehog
Problem is not new. The Scotsman, 11 April 2003.
(Filed 11 April 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
2. Ross, John (2003). New doubts
raised on cull of hedgehogs. The Scotsman, 12th April 2003.
(Filed 14 April 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
3. Irvine, James (2002). Bats
and Rabies, No. 1. First Death from Rabies in the UK for 100 years.
(Filed 12 December 2002, www.land-care.org.uk,
click here to
view).
4. Badgers and TB in Cattle: the
view of a dairy farmer.
(Filed 27 February 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
5. Gamekeepers’ Association
Official Joins Growing Row over Hedgehogs. Oban Times, 9th January
2003.
(Filed 13 January 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
6. Land-Care Editorial (2003).
SNH told to think again. This time about hedgehogs
(Filed 29 January 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
7. Scottish Natural Heritage Annual
Report 2001/2002.
Link: http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/publics/1853973335.pdf
8. SNH’s New Hielan’
Hame. Quango moves out of Edinburgh 'to get closer to its Customers'.
Fresh Air http://www.ileach.co.uk/freshair/two.html
(Reproduced with permission on Land-Care,
click
here to view).
9. Land-Care Editorial (2003).
Scottish Gamekeepers Association Petition to Scottish Parliament.
The Impact of Predatory Birds, January 2002.
(Filed 25 March 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
10. Mitchell, Ian (2003). Crofters
ignored. Letters Scotsman April 15, 2003
(filed 15th April 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
11. Galbraith, Colin A. (2003).
Bats and Rabies. Scotland’s Natural Heritage Magazine Issue
22 Spring 2003, page 5.
(Filed 15 April 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click here to view).
12. DEFRA News Release. Confirmed
case of bat rabies in Lancashire. 1st October 2002.
(http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2002/021001d.htm).
13. National Center for Infectious
Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (USA) (2001).
Bats and Rabies. (http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvrd/rabies/bats_&_rabies/bats&.htm).
14. Twelve Common Questions About
Human Rabies and Its Prevention. National Center for Infectious
Diseases. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (USA) (Download
[pdf]).
15. www.bats.org.uk/batinfo
16. Irvine, James (2002). Bats
and Rabies; No 2.
(Filed 16 December 2002, www.land-care.org.uk,
click here to
view).
17. Land-Care (2002). Letters
reproduced from the Dundee Courier regarding rabies in bats.
(Filed 12 December 2002, www.land-care.org.uk,
click here
to view).
18. Macleod, Kirsty (2002). Bat
advice from SNH - Letter published in Oban Times. Reproduced on
Land-Care under "Further concern about SNH advice re Rabid
Bats"
(Filed 23 December 2002, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
19. Jackson, Alan C and Brock,
Fenton M. (2001). Human Rabies and Bat Bites. The Lancet, 357: 1714.
(Reproduced with permission Filed
22 January 2003, www.land-care.org.uk, click
here to view).
20. Land-Care (2003). Rabies
and Bats: Correspondence with Dr Colin Catto, Director - National
Bat Monitoring Programme, 20 November 2002
(Filed 15 April 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click here
to view).
21. Irvine, James (2002). Bats
and Rabies, No. 3.
How can Rabies be transmitted from Bats to People?
(Filed 18 December 2002, www.land-care.org.uk,
click here to
view).
22. Haddow, Jon F. & Hereman,
Jeremy S. (2000). Scottish Bats. Volume 5, ISBN 0 9520182 4 1 (http://www.abdn.ac.uk/~nhy031).
23. Irvine, James (2003). Commission
proposes improved Directive to control outbreaks of foot-and-mouth
disease. Comments on the Use of Vaccination and Rapid Serological
Diagnostic Tests.
(Filed 11 February 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
24. Irvine, James (2003). Bats
and Rabies. Poor Advice from Prof Colin Galbraith, SNH Chief Scientist,
on Landward Programme.
(Filed 10 February 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
25. National Federation of Badger
Groups (2002). Badgers and the Law.
http://www.badger.org.uk/questions/index.html
(Filed 15 April 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
26. Lord Zuckerman (1980). Badgers,
Cattle and Tuberculosis. Report to the Right Honorable Peter Walker,
Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.
Her Majesty's Stationary Office, London.
27. Irvine, James (2003). TB
in Cattle and Badgers: Zuckerman Report (1980) Revisited.
(Filed 10 March 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
28. The Krebs Report (1997) and
the Independent Scientific Review Group
(Filed 27 February 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
29. Editorial, Land-Care (2003).
Independent Scientific Group (ISG) on Cattle TB. From 1998 to the
present
(Filed 27 February 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
30. Irvine, James (2003). Just
how bad is the TB problem in UK Cattle?
(Filed 25 February 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
31. Tuberculosis in Cattle: DEFRA
in no hurry to review Strategy
(Filed 10 March 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
32. Beach, Andrew (2003). A Profile
of Professor Derek Reid. The Scotsman 11th April 2003.
Reproduced with permission in Land-Care
(Filed 14th April 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
33. The Scotsman leader (2003).
Growing the economy - instead of milking it. The Scotsman 15th April
2003. Reproduced in Land-Care with permission.
(Filed 15th April 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
|
