Shambo the bull.

[fizzwheel]

I thought it was petty, but then I asked Liz yesterday about what TB does to a herd of cattle as she used to work on a farm she knows more than I do about it.

Now I think it was the right decision to put the bull down.

Originally Posted by jambo

Its...A...Cow.....

I've eaten enough not to be too attached. Give it a decent last rites ceremony and then let it wander off to cow heaven....

Plus of course a lot of us use dead cow hide to protect our own hide

I think the fact that badgers carry tb is a much bigger issue than one bull being kept alive. Tb can be transmitted from badgers to cows, they roam freely and they're a protected species which is becoming more numerous...I've seen loads on the roads this year...

Bottom line is, its the law. The law may be wrong but you can't risk that by bending the law because it upsets someone. Do the necessary research then change the law.

This was only an issue because of a religious belief. A bit like those that wear turbans (spell?) don't have to wear crash helmets - that just doesn't make sense.

Lets see a scenario of a lone bullock in a none religious setting tested fo TB and see if there is an outcry... I suspect there won't be because health will then come first?

Some interesting views!

I've no knowledge of bovine TB or how easily or not it spreads. I take it strict segrigation is no garuntee of preventing it?

Originally Posted by Swiss

My whole ethos on this is that religion is a choice, the law is not.
I get very hot under the collar on subject matter such as this but my take on it is this. You are free to practise your religion, whatever it my be but you must practise it within the boundarys of the law.
If the relegion you "chose" to practise cannot be done within the confines of the UK laws then there are often many places/countries where it can be, so therefore you have another choice.

The Bull posed a risk, sacred or not. It therefore must be put down for the good of all., end of.

I'd tend to agree with you. But just to make things interesting, if it were theoretically possible to reduce the risk of the TB spreading from this bull to near 0 such that no harm to anyone/thing could be expected, should it still be put down? That wouldn't be granting an exception for a religious group, but to anyone prepared to go to the lengths needed to eliminate the risk that the law was there to prevent.

cows are herd animals and should be mixing with other cows not shut away however comfortably with only humans for company

[northwind]

It all hinges on the risk, doesn't it? I've seen a few independant experts say that there was no risk of contagion, because of the remoteness from other animals. But I don't know much about bovine TB, so...

Living in Spain I am aghast at the manner in which Shambo has been treated. Here we know how to honour and respect such animals.

I would then suggest an amendment to the law to theoretically factor such circumstances.
There should be no exceptions to the law! As Jugde Dredd (except for speeding bikers)

Originally Posted by Flamin_Squirrel

Some interesting views!

I've no knowledge of bovine TB or how easily or not it spreads. I take it strict segrigation is no garuntee of preventing it?



I'd tend to agree with you. But just to make things interesting, if it were theoretically possible to reduce the risk of the TB spreading from this bull to near 0 such that no harm to anyone/thing could be expected, should it still be put down? That wouldn't be granting an exception for a religious group, but to anyone prepared to go to the lengths needed to eliminate the risk that the law was there to prevent.