With the first forays of the English Badger cull potentially only days away, emotions over the deeply controversial policy are running higher than ever. The government plans to license farmers to kill badgers in two trial areas of Gloucestershire and Somerset as part of its bovine TB eradication policy.

However, although the scheme has the backing of the NFU and British Veterinary Association, opposition to the cull is widespread; the majority of the scientists who worked on the Randomised Badger Culling Trials, on which much of Defra’s evidence is based, have come out in opposition to the cull. They warn the policy is likely to have only a minimal effect on bTB incidences but will come at a huge cost to the ecology of cull areas and the farming sector in general.

The extent of opposition to the strategy may only now be becoming apparent, as are the misgivings of a number of officials involved in formulating cull plans. Whilst NFU president Peter Kendall and several prominent Liberal Democrats, including farming minister David heath and deputy Prime Minister Nick Glegg, have publicly stated their support for culling in the past week, the Labour party and a number of prominent animal welfare campaigners have repeatedly condemned cull plans.

image expired

An e-petition launched by former Queen guitarist, astrophysicist and animal welfare campaigner Brian May surpassed the 100,000 signatures required to secure a debate on the issue of culling in Parliament just weeks after it was launched; Dr May’s petition currently has over 142,000 signatures. If an MP now makes the case for a debate on the issue, the Backbench Business Committee will have to schedule a debate in the Commons. A House of Commons spokesperson said “A further response from the Government on this e-petition will be published in due course;” the committee will make mention of a debate on its website when it is scheduled.

Newly appointed Farming Minister David Heath welcomed such an eventuality. He said a parliamentary debate on the cull would present him with an opportunity to “put right a lot of the misleading information” spread by cull opponents.

Labour party investigates dark side of the cull

However, the Labour Party has today revealed that senior police officers have serious misgivings over the fallout effects of badger culling. Previously, law enforcement officials had warned that policing a cull on a reduced budget and in the same year as other major events with security implications, such as the Olympics, could leave some forces “overstretched.”

In documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, police reveal that culling could lead to an increase in wildlife persecution. One police source said wildlife crime could increase as the result of "a perception that Defra is not really bothered about (badgers’) protected status."

The Badger Trust has claimed that such persecution is already taking place; the warning follows the discovery of a dead badger in Derbyshire with entry and exit wounds typical of a rifle bullet. Badgers are listed as a protected species under the Bern convention. Derbyshire Police said they are investigating the matter.

In letters released by Defra, Detective Chief Superintendent Adrian Tudway, ACPO's coordinator for domestic extremism, said farmers and landowners culling badgers with firearms had potential to place armed farm workers in the near vicinity of protesters and activists, typically during the night-time. This was regarded as a scenario with “clear potential for harm to public safety.” The senior police officer also warned that current culling policy has the “potential to create divisions and therefore conflict in rural communities” and expressed misgivings over the cost of policing protests and free shooting.   

Although Defra has released a number of documents relating to the cull under the Freedom of Information Act, the department has come under criticism for its lack of transparency in other areas. Defra has refused to release either its correspondence with the NFU, on the grounds that this constitutes “internal communication”, or recommendations made by former chief scientific advisor Professor Sir Bob Watson.  

Creagh: ‘Labour government would halt the cull’

Shadow Environment Secretary Mary Creagh told an NFU Food and Drink Federation fringe meeting at the Labour Party conference that, if Labour wins the 2015 general election, her party would be “minded to stop [the cull].” Ms Creagh had previously said the cull is “bad for farmers, bad for taxpayers and bad for wildlife” but  stated that, if Labour comes to power in 2015 it would have to pursue any extant culling policy.

The disease, levels of which have doubled in the past decade, is a serious problem for the farming industry. However, cull opponents, and even government advisors, maintain that vaccination programmes would have a greater effect and carry almost none of the negative effects of culling. In March, the Welsh government abandoned its own cull plans in favour of a vaccination programme, much to the chagrin of the farming and countryside lobby.

Over the past week, two local councils in Gloucester have voted not to permit badger culling on council land. Tewkesbury and the Forest of Dean councils have moved to ban badger culling on their land, which falls inside a 300 km2 cull area, the exact location of which is secret.  

Organic sector comes under pressure

As debate over the cull heats up, animal welfare and rights groups have looked to the organic sector, which has so far refused to be drawn into the dispute. However, on Monday (1st October) a Yougov poll commissioned by Care for the Wild revealed that over a third of organic customers would be prepared to boycott milk produced by farmers.

Of the 51 percent of consumers polled who said they bought organic produce, 35 percent went on to say they would boycott milk produced by farmers involved in culling badgers. Although the RSPCA is advocating just such a boycott, those who said they would support the protest represent just over one in six of the total number of respondents. This is nevertheless a significant number.  

Commenting on the poll, Care for the Wild spokesperson Philip Mansbridge said, “The organic brand means something to people – and this poll shows that it doesn’t mean slaughtering badgers.”

Nevertheless, the Soil Association attempted to maintain neutrality, claiming the decision over whether or not to cull badgers was for the farmer alone to make. A spokesperson for the Organic organisation said, “Bovine TB causes suffering to cattle, has already caused more cattle deaths than foot and mouth disease and causes trauma for the farmers involved. The Soil Association's position on TB and cattle is, first, that the top priority must be to develop a vaccine that will protect cattle and wildlife from this disease.

“We also believe more attention must be paid to increasing the positive health of cattle, through more humane management, so they are better able to resist TB and other diseases. It would not make sense for consumers to stop buying organic milk if they disagree with badger culling when independent reviews have shown that no other system of farming has higher animal welfare standards and government studies have shown that organic farms have up to 50% more wildlife.”

Tweet