An advert which appeared in newspapers on Monday has sparked controversy and even attracted condemnation from a government minister. The Metro ran a full page advert for the RSPCA which was highly critical of the government's badger culling policy.

The ad suggests that, faced with the choice of "vaccinate or Exterminate," the government has chosen to kill badgers in a bid to tackle the problem of bovine TB in badger populations. Research suggests the disease passes between cattle and badgers in "complex, interwoven patterns."

The RSPCA advert reads, "The government wants to shoot England's badgers. We want to vaccinate them – and save their lives."

Use of the word "Exterminate" has drawn criticism from farming groups and Environment minister Richard Benyon. On Thursday, the Farmers' Union of Wales wrote to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), urging the watchdog to "deal with" complaints about the advert.

FUW said the situation has a precedent in the struggle over the aborted Welsh badger cull, championed by the previous Welsh government.  In 2010, the union complained over use of the same word by campaign group Save the Badger. The complaint was upheld, but cull plans were eventually overturned. In March 2012, the incumbent government elected not to pursue culling as part of Wales' bTB control strategy, after reviewing the scientific evidence around the issue.

On Monday, Defra minister Richard Benyon described the situation as "a disgrace" and said the RSPCA's claims were "inaccurate". By Friday morning, ASA had received 114 complaints over the advert, mostly related to use of the term "exterminate". A spokesperson said, "We have now launched a formal investigation into this ad. We'll publish our findings in due course."

Brian Walters, FUW vice-president said on Thursday, "The RSPCA's advert is just the latest example of a campaigning group misleading the general public on the issue of badger culling, and the RSPCA has previously been found guilty of using untruthful and unsubstantiated adverts to oppose badger culling." Mr Walters was referring to an ASA ruling from September 2006, the result of another spat between RSPCA and FUW.

In response to FUW's complaint to ASA, and threats to contact the Charity Commission over the adverts, RSPCA spokesperson Andy Robbins said, "The word 'exterminate' accurately describes what will happen to in excess of 70 percent of the badgers in the pilot cull areas - and beyond if the disastrous policy is rolled out."

The hunting lobby attempted to discredit RSPCA earlier this year, when the charity took members of the Vale of Avon hunt to court over violations of the hunting act. Apparently conscious of accusations related to the organisation's use of funds, Mr Robins added, "These adverts were all placed free of charge - so have not cost the RSPCA anything."

He continued, "The RSPCA Freedom Food standards are explicit in that the killing of wild animals to protect farm animals from harm is only allowed in exceptional circumstances after all non-lethal alternatives have been exhausted and where the use of lethal force is conducted in an humane manner. This is clearly not the case with the badger cull.

"We sympathise with farmers over this devastating disease, but share the views of Professor Lord Krebs and other leading scientific experts that a cull would be of little help in eradicating bovine TB in cattle and could even make it worse in some areas. We stand ready to work with the farming community to deliver more effective alternatives including the vaccination of both badgers and cattle and improved biosecurity."

In April, ASA threw out another complaint brought by FUW and the National Sheep Association, this time over a food hygiene advert by the Food Standards Agency. The advert, urging customers to look into food hygiene standards of restaurants they visit, showed a beautifully presented lamb chop in a urinal. FUW argued that lamb had been "singled out to portray such a negative and extreme message."

However, an FSA spokesperson told Farming Online in March, when the complaint was filed, that the meat industry had "completely missed the point," adding, "The advert does show some delicious looking lamb in a strange setting. The point is that this is about food establishments, not the food itself – We trust the intelligence of the public on this one. We don't think anyone will be put off eating lamb by this advert." In the event, ASA were inclined to agree with the Food Standards Agency and rejected the sheep industry claim outright.