You don't need to be signed in to read BMJ Blogs, but you can register here to receive updates about other BMJ products and services via our site.

Public health

New study investigates farmer attitudes towards the vaccination and culling of badgers

1 Aug, 13 | by Assistant Editor


Controversy persists in England over the best way to control the spread of bovine tuberculosis (TB). According to Defra, approximately 28,000 cattle were slaughtered in 2012 for purposes of TB control, and it may cost up to £1 billion to control the disease over the next decade.

Mycobacterium bovis may be transmitted from wildlife, including badgers, to cattle, and several schemes have been proposed that aim to curb the rate of these transmissions.

In 2012, the government announced a pilot badger cull in two areas in England. This gained large amounts of media attention and became a highly controversial topic, with outspoken arguments voiced both for and against culling.

A proposed alternative to culling is vaccination of a critical mass of badgers using a strain of the Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine, and this approach was adopted in 2011 by the National Trust (NT) on the Killerton Estate in Devon.

A paper recently published in Veterinary Record aimed to find out about attitudes towards badger vaccination among farmers on the Killerton Estate and, incidentally, to assess their views of other bovine TB control measures.

Of the 18 farm tenants on the 2000 ha estate, 14 agreed to take part in the study. All of the farmers included in the study owned cattle and all had been affected at some point by bovine TB. All participants were interviewed, and they were asked questions about their attitude towards TB control measures, the impact of TB, where they sourced information about TB and the ways that the NT had handled TB control. The interview transcripts were then analysed for recurring themes. The results are summarised below:

  • All respondents reported both significant financial and personal costs due to bovine TB, including additional workload, loss of milk sales, stress and worry.
  • Asked whether vaccination of badgers would be effective in controlling TB in cattle, two of the 14 participants said no, two were unsure and the remaining 10 were positive. However, many of the positive responses were conditional, for example, on how many badgers it would be possible to vaccinate. The authors note that the overall attitude towards vaccination was ‘one of tolerance, rather than optimism’.
  • Half of the farmers interviewed felt that there was a positive advantage to being involved in the NT’s vaccination scheme and only one thought that it may be a disadvantage. The majority of farmers were supportive of the NT’s decision to pursue the vaccination trial.
  • There was general agreement that the vaccination of cattle would be a good solution to the problem, but there was an awareness that a viable vaccine would take time to develop and that this would not be a feasible option for some time.
  • Half of the interviewees thought that culling badgers would be more effective than vaccination, two were against Defra’s culling proposals, and the other five gave no clear opinion.
  • Seven of the respondents cited gassing and destruction of badger sets as a more effective method of controlling TB than vaccination.


The authors conclude that the study was conducted at a time when there was vigorous debate surrounding control of bovine TB and that the potential impact of this study upon policy will depend heavily upon how successful the Killerton vaccination trial is. There are two more vaccination phases in the trial in 2013 and 2014 and the farmers will be interviewed again after the final phase to assess whether their attitudes have changed.

The authors also note that the study highlights some important issues that may be relevant for the formulation of policy. First, the views of famers in the study tended to be more nuanced than the widespread media coverage has suggested, and while they were for bovine TB control in general, they were also willing to take into account the potential social and environmental impacts of control measures. Furthermore, the authors state that the attitude of the farmers toward vaccination is one of ‘resigned acceptance’ – they don’t believe that vaccination will be effective on its own, but they are glad that something is being done.  Finally, some respondents stated that they would prefer a combination of effective vaccination and culling programmes in order to reduce the population sufficiently that vaccination would be effective. 

Matt Lobley, one of the study authors, states:

“When the National Trust announced plans to undertake a badger vaccination experiment on its Killerton estate we were pleased to have the opportunity to undertake in-depth face-to-face interviews with the majority of the tenants. Bovine TB can have a debilitating impact on a farm and it has become such a highly politicised issue that opinions and options are often presented in a highly polarised manner. Talking to farmers under conditions of strict anonymity revealed a greater diversity of attitudes towards the control of bovine TB. Like farmers elsewhere, the Killerton tenants have been living with TB or the threat of TB for years and there was general appreciation that at least something was being done. On the other hand, expectations were low and there was a feeling that the badger population had been allowed to ‘get out of hand’, which meant some questioned the efficacy of vaccination alone. Even though our research was based on a small sample it is important that policymakers recognise that farmers attitudes are more nuanced than the public debate over TB often suggests.”


Bark more likely than bite? Sterilisation programmes in India

9 May, 13 | by sarahbrown


Human dog bite injuries are a major public health problem, particularly where there are large populations of free-roaming or street dogs. In countries with endemic rabies, the bites of animals are the main means of transmission of this disease and dogs are accountable for 91.5 per cent of all bite wounds in India. Bites by dogs were also responsible for 96.2 per cent of human rabies cases in India. But despite the public health importance of dog bites, there has been little research into the causes or means of prevention.

In India, control of free-roaming dog populations has been attempted using animal birth control (ABC) programmes. Jack Reece and co-authors have previously reported that the ABC approach has been successful in controlling both the street dog population and rabies. The objective of their current study, recently published in Veterinary Record, was to determine if a relationship exists between the reproductive behaviour of dogs and human dog bites.1 Reece and his co-workers at Help in Suffering, Jaipur, had noted that the dispersal of pups of street dog litters from the dam occurred between 90 and 120 days after whelping. Anecdotal evidence from animal control personnel in the city indicated that bitches would often try to protect their two-to-three-month-old pups by biting personnel.

Canine reproduction has been found to be seasonal in Jaipur, with peak whelping activity in November. Humans being bitten by animals, as reported by the main government hospital in Jaipur, showed a seasonal trend with peaks in January and June; approximately 10 weeks after the seasonal peak of street dog breeding.

The authors found that, following the start of an ABC programme in 1996, the percentage total of the female dog population that had been spayed, rose quickly and has remained at between 70 and 80 per cent since 2003. They also observed that the number of human animal bite cases has declined since then, despite a rapidly expanding human population.

Children represent the biggest proportion of bite patients in India

They conclude that, whereas sterilisation could not have led to an immediate halt in the growth of the dog population, the rapid increase in the percentage of spayed females may have prevented the further increase in bite frequency, if dog bites are indeed primarily due to bitches trying to protect their puppies.

They add that the results of their study suggests that, in addition to the benefits of rabies control, ABC programmes may have an effect on the numbers of human animal bite cases that far exceed the effects of reducing the dog population to the same level by indiscriminate culling.

Jack Reece explained, ‘The ABC programme at Help in Suffering (HIS) was set up to gather data about the effects of such programmes. HIS is an animal welfare charity, not a veterinary research institute, which is why my colleagues and I not only sterilise and vaccinate large numbers of street dogs (3199 sterilisations last year; 81 in the last week), but also monitor the effects and record data on many aspects of the work, including the street dog population and biology. Animal welfare is clearly a driving force for veterinary surgeons and animal welfare charities such as HIS, but it is unlikely to influence political leaders or bureaucrats. It’s for this reason that the HIS team have tried, where possible, to show human health benefits to ABC work; by publishing such benefits in peer-reviewed international veterinary journals, we hope that these decision makers may change their policies from ineffective culling and removal to more effective humane dog population control. As ordinary practicing veterinary surgeons, rather than academic researchers, it is pleasing to be able to suggest that our veterinary work has a direct and measurable affect on the health and the safety of the public – an example perhaps of the currently fashionable ‘One Health’ concept.

Reece, J. F., Chawla, S. K. & Hilby, A. R. (2013) Decline in human dog bite cases during a street dog sterilisation programme in Jaipur, India. Veterinary Record doi: 10.1136/vr.101079

Vet Record blog homepage

Vet Record blog

Highlights and insights into the research featured in the Veterinary Record. Visit site

Creative Comms logo

Latest from Vet Record

Latest from Vet Record