Badger culling is due to resume in two areas of South-West England this summer. However, the exact date remains to be set, as wildlife groups objecting to the policy have mounted a series of challenges intended to prevent a repeat of last year's culls, which cost taxpayers millions of pounds and were rejected as "a costly distraction" from the real issues of bovine TB by expert scientists who designed earlier culling trials.

Late last month the Badger Trust filed a High Court challenge, contesting the legality of Defra's plans to continue culling badgers in Somerset and Gloucestershire without independent oversight; the Trust argues it would be illegal for Defra to roll-out culling to new areas in the absence of independent assessment of the unpopular policy's second year, especially after the Independent Expert Panel concluded that the 2013 cull had failed on the grounds of both humaneness and effectiveness.  

On Monday, as the cull licenses issued by Natural England came into effect, meaning culls could theoretically resume, the Humane Society International appealed to Defra, arguing that the department is breaching its own policy commitments by refusing to investigate badger populations in the cull zone.

Badger populations were revised dramatically up and down three times in the twelve months before culling began in 2013. This led to criticism that Defra and cull companies risked causing local extinctions of badger populations in the 'trial' zones.

On Monday, vet and HSI Director Mark Jones warned that the Government is failing to comply with its own badger cull policy commitments by refusing to assess whether severe flooding between December and February has had an effect on badger populations in the two cull zones. Jones recommended that cull activity should be "postponed until an independent local badger population survey has been conducted in both areas."

According to the Government’s badger control policy, it is committed to "prevent local disappearance of badger populations", and in RFI 5834 DEFRA states that "Any signs of localized extinction will be acted on, for example by withdrawing local areas from cull zones." However, in a letter to the Humane Society, Farming Minister George Eustice said the Government "would not require a further assessment of the badger population in those areas" though flooding in both cull zones will likely have had an impact on badgers, and despite the prior record of wildly fluctuating badger population estimates. Eustice added, "There is currently no evidence that the national badger population has been significantly affected by the recent flooding."

However, HSI maintains that the national badger population is irrelevant, whereas local population health must be considered under Defra’s own policy commitments and its obligations under the international Bern Convention.  

Jones commented on Monday, "Both Somerset and Gloucestershire were badly affected by adverse weather conditions including severe flooding and freezing temperatures only weeks after badgers in these areas had already endured shooting during the government’s culls. Many badger setts will have been engulfed by water, and cubs will have been at risk of drowning. Some of the badgers who survived the culls will undoubtedly have perished. We know that the bodies of drowned badgers were reported, including by farmers, and a few lucky but exhausted badgers were rescued. We fear these few may have been the tip of the iceberg."

The HSI director continued, "Notwithstanding our contention that badger culling is unnecessary, inhumane and ineffective as a means of controlling TB in cattle, it would be irresponsible of DEFRA to allow further culling to take place without first carrying out thorough surveys in the cull zones to assess the combined impacts of badger culling and adverse weather on badger numbers."

Defra has been contacted for comment on this issue.