On 15 October, 2013 the Morecambe & Lunesdale MP, David Morris, led a Westminster Hall debate calling for the vaccination of badgers.
 
David Morris MP is currently working with Team Badger which is offering to fund a vaccination programme and will be recruiting volunteers to administer the vaccine. This will offer a cheaper and more humane alternative to the cull, David Morris hopes that DEFRA will adopt this approach.
 
Speaking from Westminster David Morris MP said:
 
“I will be asking DEFRA to consider Team Badger’s proposal of the community vaccinating badgers.”
 
“ This is a more human and less expensive alternative to the cull and I will be keen to hear the Minister’s thoughts during the debate.'
 
The debate can be read at: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/?id=2013-10-16a.306.0 or at https://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=685496568127466

Does anyone know if there is any evidence in the accuracy of Paterson's statement (from response to question Angela Smith see http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmhansrd/cm131010/debtext/131010-0001.htm#13101061000025) 'that some of the animals we have shot have been desperately sick'.
 
Our understanding, based on all previous research with badgers, indicate that just 1% show any clinical symptoms and so signs of being 'desperately sick' would be rare. As Defra is refusing to conduct PMs/check for bTB in the sho animals we can't understand how Mr Paterson could know that any animals were TB-affected.
The enclosed paper describes TB pathology from RBCT badgers. Very few of them had advanced disease. This is clearly apparent from the conclusions in 'The prevalence, distribution and severity of detectable
pathological lesions in badgers naturally infected with Mycobacterium bovis'.
 
Comments received my email (18/10/13) from Dr Richard Meyer.
 
If the MAFF autopsies I witnessed at the VI Centre in Polwhele, Truro are anything to go by back in the 80s, I’d have doubts even about any confirmation of infected status coming from that quarter. I suspect things haven’t improved much. I’m talking about sloppy culturing, samples dribbling down the outsides of vials,and being scooped up back in. Bear in mind these were autopsies done under the observation of about 20 badger group members. So what the protocol was like when not witnessed I shudder to think. The pathologist (a pro-cull vet known to me) told us, “They’re pretty nasty animals these you know.” I must say I was staggered by that comment from a Ministry employee.
 
In my considerable experience of studying badgers, I have never seen an individual that could possible be described as “desperately sick” from bTB. Desperately sick, yes, from being traumatised by motor cars and humans.
 
And from my 3 years on the Consultative Panel and the shenanigans of Ministry double-speak, I wouldn’t trust Paterson to help me cross the road.

---

'Don't extend shameful badger cull says Mark Jones, Executive Director of Humane Society International UK. His full piece can be read at http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mark-jones/badger-cull_b_4115607.html.
 
He is just one of the many wildlife experts, scientists, veterinarians and local residents, who is speaking out against the pilot badger culls currently being held in parts of Somerset and Gloucestershire.
 
Another is Chris Cheeseman. Talking to GlocalPost's, Corinne Purtill (http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/10/19/21027458-uk-badger-wars-beloved-national-mascots-or-bovine-killers?lite) Chris Cheeseman, a biologist and former head of wildlife diseases at the government-run Central Science Laboratory, says, of the fiasco of the current culling trials,“It would be a joke if it wasn’t so tragic for the farming industry. The result of all this is it will make [TB] worse”. Cheeseman participated in a 10-year government study on badgers and TB. Its 2007 report found that reducing the badger population in a given area by at least 70% rates of bovine TB by 23%.
 
Yet TB rates on land immediately outside the cull zone actually rose by 25%, the study noted, as agitated badgers fled to new territory.
 
“I am not a bunny hugger,” Cheeseman said. “I’m a carnivore. I eat meat. All sorts of meat. I’ve even eaten badger, back when it was legal to shoot them. I don’t have any problem at all with killing animals for good reason. But in the case of TB culling, there is no scientific justification. And for me, that’s the end of the story.”

---

The conclusions of scientific experts stress a maximum 6 week badger culling period to avoid perturbation SO WHY ARE THE CULLS BEING EXTENDED?
 
http://archive.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/farmanimal/diseases/atoz/tb/documents/bovinetb-scientificexperts-110404.pdf

A thought provoking piece is ' An Indian perspective on Cameron’s ill-conceived badger cull' at http://www.ifaw.org/united-kingdom/news/indian-perspective-cameron’s-ill-conceived-badger-cull

Cattle to cattle transmission of bovine TB accounts for 94% of cases, new data suggests. Published recently the new research is included in the report 'The Contribution of Badgers to Confirmed Tuberculosis in Cattle in High-Incidence Areas in England' (http://currents.plos.org/outbreaks/article/the-contribution-of-badger-to-cattle-tb-incidence-in-high-cattle-incidence-areas/).
 
The role of badgers in the transmission and maintenance of bovine tuberculosis (TB) in British cattle is widely debated as part of the wider discussions on whether badger culling and/or badger vaccination should play a role in the government’s strategy to eradicate cattle TB. The key source of information on the contribution from badgers within high-cattle-TB-incidence areas of England is the Randomised Badger Culling Trial (RBCT), with two analyses providing estimates of the average overall contribution of badgers to confirmed cattle TB in these areas. A dynamical model characterizing the association between the estimated prevalence of Mycobacterium bovis (the causative agent of bovine TB) among badgers culled in the initial RBCT proactive culls and the incidence among sympatric cattle herds prior to culling is used to estimate the average overall contribution of badgers to confirmed TB herd breakdowns among proactively culled areas. The resulting estimate based on all data (52%) has considerable uncertainty (bootstrap 95% confidence interval (CI): 9.1-100%). Separate analyses of experimental data indicated that the largest estimated reduction in confirmed cattle TB achieved inside the proactive culling areas was 54% (overdispersion-adjusted 95% CI: 38-66%), providing a lower bound for the average overall contribution of badgers to confirmed cattle TB. Thus, taking into account both results, the best estimate of the average overall contribution of badgers is roughly half, with 38% being a robustly estimated lower bound. However, the dynamical model also suggested that only 5.7% (bootstrap 95% CI: 0.9-25%) of the transmission to cattle herds is badger-to-cattle with the remainder of the average overall contribution from badgers being in the form of onward cattle-to-cattle transmission. These estimates, confirming that badgers do play a role in bovine TB transmission, inform debate even if they do not point to a single way forward.

---

The Glos Citizen (http://www.gloucestercitizen.co.uk/Badger-cull-campaigners-fear-countryside-free/story-19938059-detail/story.html#!) has reported that A 27-year-old man from Altrincham has been reported for summons to court for driving without a licence after a crash in Worcester Street last month. Early on Sunday, September 29, a Volkswagen Transporter van crashed into a bus stop. The driver was taken to Gloucestershire Royal Hospital with fractured ribs and cuts.
It is understood the van was on its way back from an unnamed part of the badger cull zone in Gloucestershire and that he was carrying badger carcasses from the cull zone for post-mortem examination and disposal.
 
Steve Tomlin is a key county campaigner against the cull, which is aimed at helping to cut incidents of tuberculosis in cattle.
"This arrest is just more evidence that this cull is half-baked and descending into a 'free-for-all'," he said.
"We were told that there should be three-man teams with a marksman at all times. We believe this is not the case and many are stretched.
"This van could have been taking infected badgers to an incinerator in Stroud or Gloucester.
 
"There is a strict code of practice for the cull, and allowing a van to be driven by someone without a licence is worrying.
 
"Resources for this operation are threadbare and this is another example of it becoming even more stretched with those involved taking dangerous short cuts.
 
"By extending the cull, the poor old badgers have had the goal posts moved. It sounds as if those organising the cull would not even know how to put on a football match."
 
Police costs for the badger cull are also said to be spiralling out of control. Police and crime commissioner Martin Surl has said the figure is about £1million, twice the original estimate.
 
Campaign group Gloucestershire Against Badger Shooting (GABS), is concerned an extension to the badger cull will lead to an increasing breakdown of law and order.
 
The group, whose members all agree to act peacefully and within the law, have reported a number of incidents to the police since the cull started five weeks ago.
 
Its wounded badger patrols were organised in response to a Defra report that many would be injured and not killed outright.
 
GABS spokesperson Jeanne Berry said: "While we all know that the badger cull is an emotive subject, there is a real risk that these incidents could cause a deep divide among communities in the county if the cull is extended.
 
"Over 500 people have signed up to the wounded badger patrols here because they are concerned about the cull."
 
Natural England is considering an application to extend the badger cull in Gloucestershire. It has already extended the licence in Somerset.
Defra and the NFU were approached for comment but refused to discuss operational matters.

BADGER KILLERS WALLOW IN NEW CONFUSION says the press release from the Badger Trust today.
 
The Prime Minister, the Defra Secretary of State and the National Farmers’ Union are wallowing in even more confusion over killing badgers. Every day brings more news of muddle in their misguided methods.
 
• The requested massive extension of the killing period widely reported for Gloucestershire more than doubles the original six weeks to 14. This is yet another contemptuous and wilful swipe against science following an extension and gerrymandering with badger populations in Somerset presided over by Owen Paterson, Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
 
• Extensions of the time allowed for killing risk an even lower benefit by splitting up the culling areas into too many sectors, which may cause more disruption of the badger population and therefore a higher prevalence of bTB [1]. The keynote Randomised Badger Culling Trial (RBCT) [2] emphasised that any culling would have to be done quickly across the areas – 12 days in that case against the six weeks in the licences for the current “pilot” culls and the nine and fourteen now contemplated.
 
• The Coalition’s allies in the National Farmers’ Union are restive – from its reportedly embattled president to the farmers and landowners who could face a massive bill from the Coalition.
 
• A U-Gov poll has shown an almost three-to-one verdict against badger culling [3].
 
• Now there is open discussion of gassing and even snaring – both grossly inhumane – in thrashing about to find a cheap and nasty way of attacking a hitherto protected species.
 
Killing badgers is a sideshow
 
The Badger Trust again calls for a sense of proportion: killing badgers is at best a sideshow. It can make no meaningful contribution to the eradication of bTB in Great Britain, according to the RBCT.
 
The real answer should be vaccination of cattle when available and the rigorous application of measures of the kind the cattle industry resisted for 20 years, but which have now been imposed only this year by the European Union.
 
The current pilot trials have already been claimed to cause a substantial increase in illegal killing. There can be no doubt that persecution of badgers will escalate. The licences are seen by some as a green light to slaughter badgers.
 
Owen Paterson would like the legal protection of badgers to be removed and has also said that in order to eradicate bTB, hard culling of badgers will be required for the next 25 years.
 
NOTES
[1] Woodroffe et al (2006), Control efforts influence tuberculosis risk for badgers, National Academy of Sciences, USA, page 36.
 
[2]
 
[3] /
3,766 adults, October 8th-10th, 2013.

The RSPCA is horrified at new figures which reveal the pilot badger cull in Gloucestershire is even more of a farce than the one in Somerset (press release today). It has been confirmed that the number of badgers shot during the pilot badger cull in Gloucestershire is only 30% of the target they were set. This is less than half the minimum 70% target set by the Government itself to make sure bovine TB in cattle is not spread further.
 
The Government have now said they want to extend this cull for a further eight weeks, more than double the original trial period. RSPCA chief executive Gavin Grant said: “The situation was a farce before – but these new revelations about how off-target in Gloucestershire cull has been are even worse.
 
“The Government is making a mockery of scientific opinion and their own targets by continuing with this cull – it is a complete shambles. Badgers are dying in their hundreds and it is likely that bovine TB in cattle in these areas is being made worse not better.
 
"The six-week trials were intended as a way of testing the effectiveness and humaneness of shooting badgers as a means of controlling bovine TB in cattle and this has clearly failed.
 
“An immediate stop must be put to this fiasco before more animal lives are lost and the spread of this devastating disease made worse.”
 
The trial in Gloucestershire killed 708 out of a planned 1,650 badgers in the cull area.
 
Last week Defra revealed 850 badgers out of a planned 1,020 had been shot in Somerset, which works out at around 58% rather than the 70% target. This pilot cull was subsequently extended for a further three weeks.
 
Extending both culls means they will be longer than the period recommended to Defra by a group of scientific experts based on the original Randomised Badger Culling Trial (RBCT)[1].
 
It was using these recommendations that the current cull methods were developed, so any extension would go against these recommendations and could potentially make the situation worse.

Tweet from Rethink bTB yesterday:
Gloucester bTB stats
Herds under restriction:Jan09 274 Dec'12 274 July'13 264
Going thru the roof? Don't think so.
 
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/incidence-of-tuberculosis-tb-in-cattle-in-great-britain
 
So why is so much money and effort being put into culling badgers in that area?

WHAT’S WRONG WITH THE PILOT TRIALS? says the Badger Trust, in its latest press release.
 
Many people would say “what’s right with the pilot trials”. It is farcical to continue to refer to the mass execution of badgers currently taking place in both Gloucestershire and Somerset as “pilot trials”.
 
Badger Trust is appalled that Natural England has granted a 50% extension to the length of the cull currently taking place in Somerset. This can no longer be called a “pilot trial” because the period of the cull was firstly increased (from 8 to 11 nights as per the RBCT) arbitrarily to 6 weeks, and is now being extended yet again, against a background of ever-changing population estimates which appear to have been randomly plucked from the air. DEFRA has reduced the estimated number of badgers within the licenced cull area in Somerset from 4,300, to 2,972 to 1450 which is perceived by many as a means of helping the cullers to achieve their target. It is anticipated that there will shortly be an announcement of a similar extension to the Gloucestershire licence.
 
The “pilot trial” was supposed to test safety, humaneness and efficacy of free shooting but cage trapping was introduced after only 3 weeks. Why? Because as forecast by Badger Trust and many experts from other fields, free-shooting of badgers is very difficult to achieve in accordance with the licence conditions.
 
DEFRA have continually refused to publish the criteria by which the so called pilot trials will be judged. Neither will they reveal the boundaries of either of the two cull areas. So much for transparency!
 
Policing costs alone are estimated to be £1,000 per badger although free-shooting was promoted as being the cheapest option – why aren’t the landowners required to pick up this bill rather than the taxpayer? Police resources have been drafted in from other areas – it is not known how that has affected those areas or at what cost.
 
Simultaneously with the news of the extended licence period for Somerset, a substantial number of additional cages were delivered to the area – if cage trapping is being used as a fail-safe method of executing badgers, why can’t they be vaccinated instead?
 
David Williams, Chairman of the Badger Trust said: “David Cameron and his Ministers ignore the best scientific evidence and pursue their own agenda. Defra should immediately admit failure of these trials on the grounds of cost and efficacy, the humaneness remains deeply buried in a cloak of secrecy.

A Glos farmer has recently written to Natural England as follows and we await sight of the response with interest:
 
Dear Natural England,
On your website it states "Natural England has today [11 Oct 13] confirmed that criteria have been met to allow control of badgers to continue under licence in west Somerset for the purpose of preventing the spread of bovine tuberculosis (bTB)" http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/about_us/news/2013/111013.aspx
 
But, at the bottom of your press release, you include a link to the Guidance to Natural England - Licences to kill or take badgers which states on page 5 "a minimum number of badgers must be removed during an intensive cull which must be carried out throughout the land to which there is access, over a period of not more than six consecutive weeks."
 
Please explain in detail the criteria which you consider supercedes that laid down in the original guidance as issued to you by the Secretary of State.

Interesting article summarising all main points involving slaughter and culling: http://beforeitsnews.com/eu/2013/10/englands-wildlife-killing-fields-h-m-governments-badger-culls-kill-scientific-honesty-englan...

A very powerful message in this short video by a young lad who loves nature,
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rf5PqQTO9bI&feature=player_embedded&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DRf5PqQTO9bI%26feature%3Dplayer_emb...
 
.. but the needless killing goes on ... Natural England has issued a licence under section 10(2) of the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 further to the application from the Licensee in Somerset, the duration of licence is with immediate effect to 12:00 hours on 1st November 2013.
 

---

I was aghast to learn that the badger kill could be extended by three weeks.  When Patterson was asked if the Government had moved the goal posts the reply was ‘no, the badger has’. (Can anybody make sense of that?).  However a question was allowed in The Lords yesterday afternoon when the view was that ‘those behind the cull were incompetent.’.  Now if I was a farmer who had put money up front to either the Gloucester or Somerset pilot I’d demand a return of my money.
 
AND who is going to fund the extra three week cull?
 
AND why in the course of the morning were the number of badgers in the Somerset reduced, and reduced and reduced again AND why was the percentage target increased from 40% to 60% in the same short time frame.  This coalition Government is  treating the electorate with utter contempt.
And why does the Chief vet and the NFU claim that even this unsuccessful kill will reduce the figures of bTb when the pilots were only set up to assess the HUMANENESS of the badger kill and NOT the effect of the badger kill on bTb figures
 
I could go on and on and on.
 
Suffice to say that the badger is NOT overrunning the country side as the NFU claimed and WHERE is the proof that 50% of badgers carry bovine TB as some farmers claim?.  They didn’t even test the dead badgers for bTb.

LETTER TO NATURAL ENGLAND
 
Bindmans LLP, the solicitors acting on behalf of Badger Trust, issued the following letter to Natural England on 9th October 2013:
 
Dear Sirs
 
Proposed Claimant: Badger Trust
 
Proposed Defendants: Natural England and Secretary of State for
DEFRA
 
We write further to our correspondence prior to the cull, which was to
have been conducted under strict adherence to the licence conditions
authorised by Natural England and DEFRA’s guidance to Natural England
under section 15 Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006.
Despite the undisputed fact that the shooters have failed to reach the
mandatory 70% targets within the permitted pilot timeframe, and the
widespread reports of animal cruelty and serious public safety concerns,
and the fact that it was necessary to resort to expensive cage-trapping
during the cull term, we now learn that the shooting companies are
proposing to apply to Natural England for an extension of the licence
period beyond the maximum 6 weeks permitted.
 
DEFRA’s guidance to Natural England is quite clear in its terms:
“10. Applicants must satisfy Natural England that they are able to deliver an
effective cull in line with this policy and have arrangements in place to achieve
this. To deliver an effective cull, the following requirements must be met.
 
a. Culling must be co-ordinated on accessible land across the entire
control area.
b. Culling must be sustained, which means it must be carried out
annually (but not in closed seasons) for the duration of the licence
(minimum of 4 years). The killing/taking of badgers must be limited to
a six-week cull period specified in each licence. Culling will not be
permitted during the following closed seasons:
 
i. 1 December to 31 May for cage-trapping and shooting badgers;
ii. 1 February to 31 May for controlled shooting; and
iii. 1 December to 30 April for cage-trapping and vaccination.
 
c. Culling must remove a minimum number of badgers in each year as specified below:
 
i. in the first year of culling, a minimum number of badgers must be removed during an intensive cull which must be carried out throughout the land to which there is access, over a period of not more than six consecutive weeks. This minimum number should be set at a level that in Natural England’s judgement should reduce the estimated badger population of the application area by at least 70%” [emphasis added]
Given the clear criteria in the guidance and the DEFRA December 2011 policy document, there is no legal power to extend the culling period in these circumstances.
 
Furthermore, even if this were not so, or if Natural England were asked to grant a new licence, it would be necessary to consult lawfully given the clear deviation from the fundamental terms of the published policy, which resulted from a consultation process. If there is serious consideration being given to an extension, please confirm in your reply that there will be proper consultation before doing so.
We set out below reasons why granting an extension, which deviates even further from the RBCT methodology, would be likely to result in the spread of disease, and not meet the licence conditions. We hope that reports of an extension have been exaggerated and that it will not be necessary to seek injunctive relief to prevent such a harmful course of action. We seek confirmation of your position on the matter.
 
In the RBCT, proactive culls were completed across entire areas in 8-11 nights. On the four occasions when culls were conducted non-simultaneously and hence were prolonged (lasting 33, 107, 150 and 207 days from start to finish), there was an increase in the proportion of badgers infected, over and above the “background” increase in badger TB prompted by culling. The associated odds ratio was 1.7 (95% CI 1.18-2.56) (Woodroffe et al. 2006)[1]. Subsequently, DEFRA sought other explanations for this effect, but it remained evident despite the small sample size.
On the basis of the published analyses Sir David King agreed with the ISG[2] thus:
“Sir David confirmed that conducting badger culls simultaneously over such an area would have to be an essential element of any culling programme that was deemed to have been undertaken competently” (ISG 2008)
 
And Defra’ science advisory committee[3] said this:
“There is little useful data on the issue of what time period should be considered as “simultaneous”. The Group advised that if culling was carried out in a period of up to 6 weeks (although preferably less), that is likely to reduce the adverse effects of non-simultaneous culling; this advice is based on opinion and not on evidence. The longer the period that culling is carried out in, the less confident one can be that the deleterious effects seen with non-simultaneous culling as carried out in the RBCT will be minimized.” (Science Advisory Council/Bovine Tuberculosis Science Advisory Body Joint Group on Defra’s Bovine TB consultation 2010)
 
To grant any extension or licence fresh culling in these circumstances would further undermine the purported purpose for which a licence under Protection of Badgers Act 1992 was granted – prevention of the spread of disease.
We look forward to hearing from you by close of business on Monday.
 
Yours faithfully
Bindmans LLP
 
[1] Woodroffe, R., Donnelly, C.A., Jenkins, H.E., Johnston, W.T., Cox, D.R., Bourne, F.J., Cheeseman, C.L., Delahay, R.J., Clifton-Hadley, R.S., Gettinby, G., Gilks, P., Hewinson, R.G., McInerney, J.P. & Morrison, W.I. (2006) Culling and cattle controls influence tuberculosis risk for badgers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103, 14713-14717.
[2] ISG (2008) Meeting between the Independent Scientific Group on Cattle TB and the Government Chief Scientific Adviser 13th December 2007. Defra.
[3] Science Advisory Council/Bovine Tuberculosis Science Advisory Body Joint Group on Defra’s Bovine TB consultation (2010) Advice based on the consultation questions.

There will be a debate in Parliament on Wednesday October 16. Details below.
 
Westminster Hall
 
4.30pm - 5.00pm: Badger vaccines (David Morris MP, Con, Morecambe and Lunesdale)
 
This is a debate without a vote, but a Defra Minister has to attend and reply to the debate. Other MPs can intervene with permission of the MP in charge and the chair of the debate. Public can attend.
 
David Morris has previously stated he voted for the cull “through gritted teeth”.

Email from AC 10/10/13:
 
Badger persecution is 'alive and kicking' outside the Somerset Cull Area.  I guess this is no surprise to you given that Patterson et al have deliberately created an 'open season' on badgers.
 
To follow up my report of four dead badgers found in a remote  Somerset river by youngsters completing a Duke of Edinburgh Award;  today I removed the bodies with the Police.
 
Subsequent x-rays proved shotgun injuries to the heads, and it was considered to be from close range, so perhaps cage traps were  involved. The images are shocking, but  it is becoming a too frequent occurrence.
 
The Police are investigating, but unfortunately there is little to  go on. This is the tip of the iceberg and is most likely the result  of action by a desperate farmer combating Btb.  I would like to  think it is born out of ignorance, but the NFU have continued to  brain wash farmers, demonising badgers and not condeming illegal  killing.

According to a local Glos paper ((http://www.stroudnewsandjournal.co.uk/news/10727795._/) GLOUCESTERSHIRE Police and Crime Commissioner Martin Surl has expressed his concern about the possible extension of the pilot badger cull in the county. In a statement released today, Wednesday, he said: "I was disappointed when I heard Owen Paterson's statement to the House of Commons earlier today.
 
In a statement released today, Wednesday, he said: "I was disappointed when I heard Owen Paterson's statement to the House of Commons earlier today.
 
"I know we have to wait for an announcement from Defra about any plans for Gloucestershire but I have made my concerns and unease at any possible extension known to the Home Office today.
 
"I have to consider and ensure safe and sustainable communities in Gloucestershire.
 
"I am committed to less crime, more peace and good order and any extension to what has been such a divisive issue in the county is certainly not going to help us achieve that."

Sky News (http://news.sky.com/story/1152010/badgers-culled-in-illegal-gassing-trials) has uncovered evidence that farmers have been gassing dozens of badgers to death illegally to try to control the spread of bovine tuberculosis.
 
The development comes as the Government said culls in west Somerset and Gloucestershire could be extended by three weeks because marksmen have failed to reach the target of killing 70% of badgers in those areas.
 
Sky's Isabel Webster learned that unofficial trials of gassing using a hosepipe and vehicle engines have been carried out on 14 farms in the south west of England.
 
A farmer, who wanted to remain anonymous, said: "We have done unofficial trials but we want to do official trials to prove that it does work and is humane."
 
Gassing wildlife is illegal and gassing a single badger - a protected species - carries a possible prison sentence and fine of up to £5,000.
 
Dominic Dyer, of Care For The Wild, said there have been no prosecutions in recent years but the idea has been openly discussed in farmers' meetings.
 
"Farmers think they can act with impunity," he said.

THIS DEADLY PANTOMIME MUST STOP NOW says latest press release from Badger Trust.
 
The Coalition's badger culling trials are collapsing into chaos with official guesses at population likely to be cut yet again, says the Badger Trust. This, with the appalling news that the six-week periods of the pilot culls are likely to be further stretched means Ministers are gerrymandering key scientific conditions. They are again seeking to placate a petulant and vengeful cattle industry which ignores science and denies its own past shortcomings in letting bovine tuberculosis (bTB) get a stranglehold.
 
There is likely now to be a THIRD “pilot” in Somerset. The FIRST plan was based on a badger population of 4,300. The SECOND estimate was 2,972 [1]. This is to be being lowered further making the effective minimum killing target of 70 per cent supposedly more attainable. However, these manipulations would make it even harder for Ministers to claim the “pilot” had reached the stated aim of effectiveness, safety and humaneness. In addition we have not yet heard what will happen in the other “pilot” area of Gloucestershire, where gerrymandering has also occurred once.
 
David Williams, Chairman of the Badger Trust, said: “This amateurish performance destroys any confidence in the competence of Minsters to control bTB by culling by either free shooting or cage trapping and shooting. They will never be able to justify the 25-year assault on a protected species that the Defra Secretary of State has promised. This pantomime is the creation of politics, and Ministers should never have even begun on such a grotesque perversion of science”.
 
Prof Rosie Woodroffe, a member of the Independent Scientific Group overseeing the Randomised Badger Culling Trial, rightly calls for the whole scheme to be suspended immediately to await the verdict of the independent assessment panel [2]. The Badger Trust says that so imprecise was the original estimate of numbers in both areas that “successful” culls would have wiped out the populations as now estimated. That could have constituted a breach of the Bern Convention on the Conservation of Wildlife and Natural Habitats.
 
A serious omission in this latest debate is of any sense of proportion about the supposed benefit of culling. It would only at best limit the rise in bTB by 16 per cent after nine years. Far greater would be the benefit from cattle-based restrictions which have succeeded in the past in the UK and more recently in Northern Ireland, both without culling schemes. Happily the European Union insisted that the Coalition introduced from this year new testing and movement restrictions which the industry had resisted for 20 years.
 
[1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24443110 and http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/ws-authorisation-letter2013-redacted_tcm6-35329.pdf
 
[2] BBC Radio 4, Today. October 9th.

Press Release today from RSPCA
The RSPCA is outraged at the loss of thousands of badger’s lives in what has proved to be a ‘farcical’ pilot cull.
 
It has been confirmed that numbers of shot badgers during the pilot badger cull in Somerset are well below the target*, which science has shown could potentially make bovine TB in cattle worse not better.
 
"The six-week trials were intended as a way of testing the effectiveness and humaneness of shooting badgers as a means of controlling bovine TB in cattle. If they have failed to kill the numbers needed in the set time frame – then surely it can clearly be judged to be ineffective,” said Gavin Grant, RSPCA chief executive.
 
“Frankly this whole situation is a farce. They keep moving the goalposts on how many badgers exist and how many need to be killed, but whatever the figures it is clear that the system has failed,” he added.
 
The RSPCA also highlighted the fact that if an extension was granted, the pilot cull would be longer than the original randomised badger cull trials - which lasted six weeks.
 
It was against this trial that the results of the current cull were due to be compared, so any extension would invalidate the scientific accuracy of any data gathered from the current pilot cull.
 
The RSPCA was appalled when the first shots were fired against badgers at the end of August. The charity remains committed to persuading the Government to put a stop to a misguided, unethical and unscientific attempt to control bovine TB in cattle, which will not help solve the problems caused by this devastating disease or benefit cattle, badgers or dairy farmers and rural communities.
 
Despite the apparent failure of the pilot cull in Somerset, there are indications that further culls could be rolled out further and wider. This could happen early in 2014. The RSPCA is very concerned these plans to extend the scope and scale of the cull will be made without asking Parliament for their views and without all the information from the culls being made public.
 
The RSPCA is calling for any decision on a wider roll-out of the cull to be brought back to Parliament for debate and to be subject to a vote in the House of Commons.

Dozens of scientific experts warned in 2012 that the badger culls are a 'costly distraction' and as we come to the end of the two trials in Somerset and Glos the Guardian today (www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/oct/07/badger-cull-bovine-tb) reports that fewer than half the number of animals intended to be culled have been killed. Experts say cull's failure may well result in increases in bovine TB infections.
 
Professor Rosie Woodroffe, a badger expert at the Zoological Society of London and a key member of the RBCT team, told the Guardian: "If the [Somerset] badger population estimates are correct, then culling 800 badgers would be in the region where I would expect cattle TB incidence to be elevated rather than reduced by culling." Earlier work by Woodroffe showed large uncertainties in the estimates of the initial badger populations, on which the minimum cull target was based.
 
Wildlife disease expert Chris Cheeseman, also a member of the RBCT, said: "If the 750-800 numbers are correct, then I would expect the perturbation effect to be marked. It would be utterly stupid to roll this cull out as a policy. I would expect environment secretary Owen Paterson to try some other means of culling, but that will take time to develop. What a farce." An unofficial Defra source said Paterson had been repeatedly warned of the risk of failure by officials: "It is hard to feel sorry for him, as this is a spectacular own goal."

'Sainsbury's Justin King backs farmers involved in badger cull' says the Farmers Guardian (http://www.farmersguardian.com/home/hot-topics/bovine-tb/sainsburys-justin-king-backs-farmers-involved-in-badger-cull/59087.article).
 
This has caused an outcry among those who are against the culling of badgers, including farmers as the letter below to the Farmers Guarddian and Farmers Weekly shows.
 
Dear Editor,
Here are some points for supermarket bosses to consider when consumers who oppose the badger cull ask them to provide Badger Friendly labels on farm produce.
 
Firstly, it would be best if the CEO's of these supermarkets got the full facts of the badger cull from an independent source and this can be achieved by reading the blogposts on the subject by a Somerset Councillor, Mike Rigby - see 'What I have learned about the badger cull' http://mikerigby.org/2013/09/13/learned-badger-cull/ and 'The badger cull 2 - an update' http://mikerigby.org/2013/09/27/badger-cull-2-update/
Secondly, the badger culls are optional. No farmer is under any obligation to allow the indiscriminate shooting of badgers on his land. There are other more humane options available such as badger vaccination and this service is being offered to farmers by trained vaccinators around the country at a payment rate which is subsidised by charitable contributions, rather than by the taxpayer.
 
Thirdly, all farm assurance labels, by their very nature, discriminate against some producers. Farmers can choose to adapt their farming practices to become eligible to profit from the label or else opt to stay out. If any supermarket boss rejects the principle of Badger Friendly labels then he/she must also reject all other assurance labelling.
Last and by no means least, it is public opinion and consumer choice which must be the key focus for any retailer, be it a supermarket or farm shop. It is the customer who buys the goods, the customer who creates demand, and the supplier, in this case farmers, is obliged to meet this demand. It's no good expecting people to 'Buy British' if our production methods are considered unethical.
 
Yours sincerely,
 
DG & GE Purser
on behalf of consumers who support Badger Friendly Farms
https://twitter.com/badger_friendly

There have been confirmed reports of live bullets being left around on public footpaths. 16 live rounds were left by a shooter while out culling badgers. Photographs and video were taken and given to the police. Chief Superintendent, Gary Thompson, said 'We take this very seriously because as we have said public safety has been our key objective throughout the operation.'
 
In another incident a pet dog was injured by two men during a badger patrol.
 
Further details re both above incidents are at http://www.b-r-a-v-e.co.uk and also http://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/news/10717893.Badger_cull_latest__Ammunition_found_and_four_arrested/?dm_i=1NFN,1VTUL,906LDO,6R788,1

---