Defra's claims to be pursuing badger culling trials in Somerset and Gloucestershire in order to assess the efficacy and humaneness of the department's pet policy have been delivered another blow, this time in the form of revelations that there are "no definitive criteria" for judging the humaneness of 'free-shooting'.

image expired

Following controversies over the lack of transparency, Defra's transgression against a ruling by the Information Commissioner's Office, and reports from a number of sources that markspeople are failing to fulfil their quotas using the government's untested free-shooting method, fresh reports have this week suggested that no "hard and fast" criteria exist for judging the humaneness of a kill.   

Two national newspapers have obtained a letter from Government Chief Vet Nigel Gibbens, in which he admits that Defra has no strict rules on what constitutes a humane kill or how culling will be assessed in terms of humaneness. The Chief Vet effectively said this means the final decision on rolling out culling will be taken by government ministers, rather than the independent panel of vets and scientists advising them.

The revelation raises further questions about the government's "objective, science-led" policy, which architects of the original culling trials dismissed as a political diversion from genuine control measures that farmers would find less palatable. In June, John Bourne, who led the influential RBCT trials under the previous government told the Guardian, "The [TB controls] in operation at the moment are totally ineffective," including cattle testing. "It's an absolute nonsense that farmers can move cattle will nilly after only two tests. Why won't politicians implement proper cattle movement controls? Because they don't want to upset farmers," he said.

Once again, Defra was forced into damage control mode, when the letter from Chief Vet Gibbens to the Humane Society International was leaked to the press on Saturday. The Deparment responded on Tuesday, "Ministers will be provided with independently assessed evidence from the pilot culls, as well as advice from a range of experts on humaneness, before making a final decision on controlled shooting. All of this information will be made publicly available after the pilot culls finish."

Wildlife groups slam catalogue of errors

However, the Badger Trust broadsided Defra's cull as "a sham – an exercise in secrecy, deceit, and incompetence." The government maintains that, in order for the rest of its bTB eradication strategy package to have an effect on the disease, TB must be controlled in "the wildlife reservoir." Defra Secretary Owen Paterson has repeatedly cited culls in Australia, New Zealand and Ireland as positive examples, the results of which he believes his policy can replicate, though experts have stated that even culling on the Emerald Isle is not an appropriate comparison to the situation in the UK.

On Tuesday, Badger Trust Chair Dave Williams said, "This is scandalous. For the public to have any faith in the outcome of these widely condemned trials the verdict has to be dispassionate, objective and expert. Owen Paterson fails on all three counts."

"He claims to care about badgers but admits he would like to see their legal protection removed. He has ignored the overwhelming opposition of independent scientific opinion. He promised robust monitoring of the pilot culls, but we learn that the six-week trials will be overseen by only a handful of monitors and that only a tiny number of carcasses will be examined by experts to assess slaughter efficiency and humaneness."

Williams concluded, "This is an ill conceived, cruel and futile DIY culling campaign that exposes farmers to public hostility and which even if successful would barely dent the bovine TB problem."

Also reacting to the Chief Vet's letter, Green Party Animal Issues Spokesperson and qualified vet Caroline Allen demanded an immediate halt to culling. She accused Gibbens of being neglectful and claimed Defra could not now meet one of the cull's key stated objectives.

Earlier controversies

Although Defra and the NFU have vehemently denied the suggestion, reports emerged last week suggesting that culling in Somerset, where the first trial began on 27th August, is way behind schedule. If this is found to be the case, cull companies would have to adopt other methods of dispatching badgers, such as cadged shooting, which is ten times as expensive as free-shooting.

In June, the department published a document as part of its TB Eradication Strategy in which it moots gassing badgers as a means of control, a method of killing that was outlawed in 1982, having been deemed to be inhumane.

Defra officials have been backed in their proposals by some farmers who suggest using anoxic gas, rather than cyanide as was previously used. However, the impact that a resurrection of gassing would have on the public perception of the government and farming community should make ministers think twice before taking their suggestions any further.    

The questions around the cull itself also have wider implications; ahead of the cull, senior police officers warned that the policy could usher in a wave of wildlife persecution and there is already evidence that persecution is on the rise in cull zones.

Over the weekend, Secret World animal sanctuary in Somerset published photographs of a badger found dead, with injuries suggesting the animal had suffered, rather than having been dispatched 'cleanly'. Defra denied that the badger was a victim of cull company markspeople on Monday, suggesting therefore that it had been killed illegally.

Simon Childs, who was covering the Gloucestershire cull for Vice magazine, reported earlier this week that the only shots herd during his time in the South West turned out to have been lampers, shooting animals mesmerised by their car headlights.