It is understood that UK government officials are preparing to give the green light to a badger cull with the aim of eradicating bovine tuberculosis in England. Controversial plans to allow farmers to shoot tens of thousands of badgers are expected to be approved by ministers at a Cabinet meeting later in the week, although a Defra spokesperson revealed a decision had not yet been reached. He said a bTB eradication programme for England would be announced by the end of July.

Government scientists explained in a report that a cull would reduce the incidence of bTB, if carried out in a “co-ordinated, sustained and simultaneous” way, however, the scientists also warned that a cull carried a risk of increasing the spread of the disease. bTB, which led to the destruction of 25,000 cattle in 2010, currently costs UK taxpayers around £63million per year.

The last government rejected plans for a cull, believing it was not cost effective; experts said the net reduction in bTB incidence resulting from a cull would be between 3 and 22 per cent. Last year, the Welsh Government saw plans for a cull rejected in the Court of Appeal on the grounds that it would not result in a "substantial" reduction in disease, and killing badgers was therefore unjustifiable. However, the Coalition government revived the plans in September.

Although culling trials have shown a decrease of 16 per cent in cull areas, they also resulted in an increase in infected herds in the area immediately surrounding the cull zone, as the badgers moved and spread the disease. This rise did eventually die down.

Animal rights groups have vowed to oppose a cull through protest and legal action if the government decides to push ahead with its plans. Springwatch presented and Vice-President of the Royal Society for the Protection of Animals, Chris Packham, has spoken out in protest against cull proposals. He asked members of the public to write to their MPs and express their opposition to the cull.

The RSPCA has also offered its opinion on the issue; the society said a cull would not work, and licensing farmers and landowners to carry out the scheme, which could include shooting free-running badgers as well as trapping and shooting, may prove inhumane.

Welsh Government eradication plan amounts to ‘betrayal’

Former rural affairs minister Elin Jones has accused Environment minister John Griffiths of ‘betraying farmers’ after Mr Griffiths announced a halt to proposals for a cull, passed by Jones under the previous Welsh Assembly Government, pending a scientific review.

Ms Jones said the Welsh Government’s actions amounted to “a slap in the face for Welsh farmers and other interested parties who have worked extremely hard over the past four years to develop a comprehensive bovine TB eradication programme.”

She continued, "There had already been delays due to court decisions and this announcement will result in another terrible setback for our agricultural community and solely of the Labour Welsh Government's making. Farmers have co-operated with the stricter requirements of the first part of the plan and I am sure they will feel severely betrayed by a decision to look again at the plans for a pilot controlled cull."

However, animal welfare campaigners in Wales have stepped up calls to reject the cull. Opponents to the cull, including The Badger Trust, have cried foul over scandals which have marred bTB restriction efforts in parts of the country. A farmer in Wales was convicted of switching eartags on cattle subject to bTB controls last week, leading to questions over the prevalence of such activity, and in May undercover footage shot by Viva! showed visitors to several cattle markets in bovine TB hotspots ignoring bio-security measures.

Supporting Mr Griffith’s announcement to postpone the cull, the Badger Trust pointed out that there was a 44 % reduction in the number of cattle slaughtered due to bTB from 2008 to 2010. A spokesperson for the Trust said, “No badgers have been killed to achieve these figures, and there has been a welcome and much-needed emphasis on stringent cattle-based measures.”