An environmental politics and ethics blog, for: genuine prosperity; a circular economy; health & wellbeing; respecting environmental capacities; optimum efficiency; renewability; fairness & equality for current & future generations, the world over; empowered, resilient local communities; a safer, more secure, sustainable world.
On badgers the Government and the National Farmers Union state that the scientific evidence backs culling. The Humane Society, The Wildlife Trusts and the Mammal Society amongst others dont think the evidence is there to support a cull. The contrast in views of the scientific evidence is pretty stark eg Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman saying 'We can't escape the fact that the evidence supports the case..' whilst Mark Jones, of Humane Society International UK refers to 'compelling scientific evidence that it will be ineffective...'. See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16183926. If there are likely to be 'no end of difficulties', as PM David Cameron said on Countryfile last weekend, is the policy of culling trials a good one?
Why the differences in assessing the science? When can we and do we trust science and scientists? Here's my screencast on some questions to ask on this topic: