Cull companies and NFU representatives effectively 'directed' police action against protestors, according to leaked information from an internal police report. Still, Defra secretary Owen Paterson has this week called on police in the 'trial' zones to back shooters, ahead of culls which could resume this year.

Previously leaked findings from Avon and Somerset Constabulary and a publicly broadcast meeting last month between senior police officers and Gloucestershire Crime Commissioner Martin Serl appeared to confirm cull opponents' concerns that policing of the highly unpopular trials in the South West last year had been partisan.

Authors of the internal police report, dealing with one specific incident last October, concluded that police in Somerset had taken a "blinkered… approach" to law enforcement, favouring the cull companies and contractors, and that the presence of NFU and cull company officials in the police control centre had given contractors a direct link to the police, meaning they could pre-empt and head off contact from protestors.

The internal report, which was first leaked to The Independent, was written in response to a complaint from a local campaigner, Chris Tasker, who had been observing a badger sett when an altercation began with shooters searching for a missing badger carcass. Tasker made a 999 call in which he claimed to have been assaulted, but the incident was found to have been improperly recorded, and allegations that his car was incorrectly searched were upheld (police looking for a missing badger carcass searched Tasker's glove box, a flask and a crisp packet in his car.) It emerged that, of the six people in the police control room that night, only three were police officers, with the rest representing the NFU or cull company HNV Associates.

Police have said the decision to invite NFU and cull company representatives into the control room was taken out of concern for public safety, though in the official report an officer present in the control room described as "inappropriate" the presence of cull orchestrators, as this meant contractors could radio their people in the control room directly, and potentially quicker than their opponents. In Mr Tasker's case, there was a counter allegation of assault from shooters, which was radioed to the company representatives without being properly logged; this resulted in Mr Tasker being searched by the police officer attending the scene. The investigation recommended "a clear and appropriate division" between police and pro-cull groups in future.

Despite increasing anger at the level of complicity between cull companies and the police during last year's 'trials,' Defra Secretary Owen Paterson has called on police in Somerset to support contractors during this year's culls. Speaking at the Royal Bath and West Show, he paid tribute to cull companies, contractors and the police and said "[protestors] do not have the right to compromise… legitimate disease control policy."

Local Labour MP Kerry McCarthy, on the other hand, has written to the Somerset Police and Crime Commissioner seeking an assurance that police and cull company officials will not share operational control spaces this year, and demanding to know how this came about in 2013. McCarthy said she agreed with the police report author who concluded that the debacle has given "the impression that the police were simply supporting the cull operators at the expense of a freedom to protest by the various badger support groups."

In April, the government-appointed Independent Expert Panel tasked with assessing the culls found that they had failed on the grounds of effectiveness and humaneness. Although Defra Secretary Owen Paterson told Parliament that Defra would not be extending culling in response to the IEP's findings, it has also been confirmed that this year's culls will go ahead without independent monitoring.

Earlier this month the Badger Trust launched a legal challenge in a bid to derail the resumption of culling in Somerset and Gloucestershire, arguing that a lack of oversight on this year's trials would be illegal as there would be no evidence to inform future roll-outs, especially given the poor performance of last year's trials.