Plan to cull badgers met with dismay by animal-rights activists

Animal rights campaigners criticised the Government's chief scientific adviser last night after he recommended badger culling to control tuberculosis (TB).

The recommendation by Sir David King contradicts a report earlier this year by the Independent Scientific Group (ISG), that said a cull would be ineffective and overly costly. In June, the ISG concluded assessing the results of a nine-year experiment analysing whether culling would slow or stop the disease being spread.

It found that badgers did play a role in spreading TB, but such extensive culling would need to take place in order to take effect, that it would be too expensive. It also found the disease can spread to adjacent farms from those involved in a cull, shifting the problem rather than resolving it.

But Sir David yesterday concluded a cull was the "best option available at the moment to reduce the reservoir of infection in wildlife," in areas where there was a "high and persistent" level of the disease in cattle.

His advice, to the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), was based on the ISG research that used randomised badger-culling trials in 30 areas of England.

Sir David's report said culling would be designed to reduce but not entirely remove badgers in the affected areas – within 100 sq kim – and must be done humanely and "within conservation considerations".

But he said the scheme, which would be reviewed after four years, is the only way to halt the spread of TB. "It is clear badgers are a continuing source of infection for cattle and could account for 40 per cent of cattle breakdowns in some areas," Sir David said.

"Cattle controls remain essential but I consider that, in certain circumstances and under strict conditions, badger removal can reduce the overall incidence of TB in cattle."

Professor John Bourne, who wrote the earlier report, acknowledged that the two reports were scientifically inconsistent, but said they were "consistent with the political need to do something about it". He added: "If you wish to go down the culling route, you have to do what the Irish are doing in large parts of their country and that is eliminate."

The RSPCA's head of wildlife science, Rob Atkinson, speculated that Sir David had come under pressure from the Government: "A cull would mean senseless slaughter, enormous suffering and would be scientifically bankrupt," he said. "The science shows a cull is not a long-term solution, unless we want to continually exterminate badgers from vast regions of the country.

"The Government's study – which took almost 10 years, cost the lives of more than 10,000 badgers and cost taxpayers £34m - showed killing badgers is actually likely to make matters much worse.