The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) has stated it would be in favour of an extension of licenced badger control into low-risk areas (LRAs) to prevent the spread of TB.

It comes after a public consultation over the proposal to allow culls in these areas in the rare event that an outbreak of TB in herds was linked to the presence of disease in badgers. These culls would take place only after all evidence has been examined on a case-by-case basis.

The consultation attracted over 800 responses and 30% of respondents were from individuals or organisations that stated that they supported wildlife welfare or conservation. Just 3% were from farmers or from farming organisations.

Veterinary associations

Those who expressed support for the policy said they did so in order to stop the spread of the disease in the LRAs and they agreed with extending badger control to all areas of England.

They included the National Farmers Union, the British Cattle Veterinary Association and the British Veterinary Association.

The majority of respondents opposed the proposal, overwhelmingly on the basis of their opposition to badger culling, with a high proportion stating that they had an issue with the overall policy of culling and the scientific evidence on which it is based.

Despite the large number of responses advocating against the decision, the department's view was that none of them provided new or compelling evidence to change their stance.

Both the Badger Trust and Born Free criticised the proposal, stating: “The only sure way of eliminating infection in the badger population using culling would be to remove the entire population in the area.”

Some respondents identified vaccination as an alternative control method. However, the department felt it was unlikely to lead to disease eradication in the badger population within an acceptable time period.

The extension of culls is only one part of the 25-year strategy for achieving official bovine tuberculosis-free status for England by 2038.

Read more

Lukewarm response to new TB group

TB persistence highlights need for new plan