BBC One – Panorama, Badgers: Dodging the Bullet?

BBC1 8:30pm-9:00pm (30 minutes) Monday 12th Nov

Last month, days before it was due to start, the government suddenly postponed its controversial badger cull. The plan was to shoot thousands of badgers to try to control the spread of tuberculosis in cattle. Animal rights activists were ready for the biggest clash in the countryside since fox hunting was banned, while scientists questioned the evidence justifying the cull. In the face of this opposition, Panorama asks, will the government have the stomach to enforce the badger cull next year?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes

URGENT – The Battle for badgers begins

Today the 20th of October, one of our teams in the Gloucestershire zone found two setts that had been pre-baited.

We have the photos and we will disclose the names of the farms tomorrow.

After making calls we found out that at 6.45pm on this Saturday night there are people working in Natural England, we can only assume that the licence and all the other logistics are in place and the cull is about to start, we have looked at a lot of setts today and there are only the two that have been pre-baited.

With this in mind we now have to ask you all to get your waterproofs packed and start working out your work schedules, booking any time off from the 29th of October almost guarantees that you will be coming during the cull (if it is taking place) as the cull has to be finished by the end of November.

Please remember that the biggest and hardest part for us is too work out accommodation, If you need help with this then you really do need to contact your local hunt sab group.

We will update you with any information that we have as soon as we get it, we will be updating this page tomorrow with any news about other setts being pre-baited and we will put up a comprehensive list of all the things you should bring with you.

We are watching the farmers

We are watching setts

We will protect the setts

http://badger-killers.co.uk/battle-for-badgers-begins/

Fury at minister Richard Benyon’s ‘astounding’ refusal to ban deadly bird poison

Millionaire landowner – and Wildlife minister – accused of putting wealthy friends before his parliamentary brief

The Wildlife minister, Richard Benyon, has been accused of being “the gamekeeper’s friend” by refusing to outlaw a poison used by some to kill protected birds of prey on shooting estates.

Mr Benyon, a millionaire landowner who is strongly associated with shooting interests and owns both a pheasant shoot in Berkshire and a Scottish grouse moor, has declined a request from senior MPs to make possession of the poison, carbofuran, a criminal offence – as is the case in Scotland.

The effect of his refusal is to make a substance which is particularly deadly to birds of prey, despite it being a banned chemical with no legitimate use whatsoever, still available to any gamekeepers who wish to get rid of raptors illegally when they are perceived to be predating on gamebirds.

His stance, which is only the latest controversy arising from Mr Benyon’s personal involvement with game shooting policy, met with fierce criticism yesterday. “The minister’s shocking refusal to outlaw the possession of a poison used only by rogue gamekeepers to illegally kill birds of prey would be inexplicable were it not for his own cosy links to the shooting lobby,” said the Green Party MP, Caroline Lucas.

“Instead of protecting the interests of his friends on the shooting estates and undermining the wellbeing of British wildlife, the minister should be following the ad vice of MPs and the Scottish precedent by making carbofuran possession a criminal offence.”

Dr Mark Avery, former conservation director of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and now a leading wildlife campaigner, said that Mr Benyon’s refusal to act on carbofuran was “astounding”.

“The minister responsible for protecting wildlife in England does not believe it is worth helping to stamp out the poisoning of birds of prey by making it a clear offence to possess a poison for which there is no legal use in this country,” said Mr Avery. “He is certainly the gamekeeper’s friend – even if he is not a friend to wildlife.”

Mr Benyon’s refusal is revealed in a report today on wildlife crime from the cross-party House of Commons Environment Audit Committee, which discloses that between 2002 and 2011 there were 633 confirmed bird of prey poisoning incidents in the UK, with species killed ranging from golden eagles and white-tailed eagles to peregrine falcons – and carbofuran was used in 316 cases, or 50 per cent.

The report links the persecution of raptors firmly to shooting interests. “Unfortunately, some gamekeepers persecute birds of prey,” the MPs say. “One study found only five successful hen harrier nests on the 3,700 square kilometres of driven grouse moor in the UK in 2008, an area which has the potential to support 500 pairs.”

They add that of the 152 people who have been convicted of offences against birds of prey under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, some 70 per cent were gamekeepers employed on shooting estates.

Focusing on carbofuran use, the MPs say: “It is extremely toxic to birds, and a single grain would kill a large bird of prey such as a golden eagle.” They add: “A gamekeeper who was convicted of poisoning birds of prey in Skibo, Scotland, in 2011, was found to possess 10 kilos of carbofuran, sufficient to kill every bird of prey in the UK.”

However, when members of the committee asked Mr Benyon to make possession of it illegal, he refused, saying that poisoning was an offence anyway, and that outlawing the chemical “may not be a proportionate course of action”. The MPs reject Mr Benyon’s arguments and call on the Government to outlaw possession of carbofuran and other similar substances in England and Wales – “to discharge its obligations under the EU Birds Directive, to demonstrate its commitment to addressing raptor persecution, and to send a clear signal that it regards poisoning birds of prey as wholly unacceptable”.

The MPs also call on the Government to consider introducing an offence of “vicarious liability” in relation to birds of prey persecution – which would mean that if a gamekeeper were convicted of illegally killing a raptor on a shooting estate, say, the landowner who employed him would also be liable for prosecution.

“Given the scale of ongoing persecution of birds of prey, the current law appears to carry insufficient weight,” the MPs say. The offence of vicarious liability was introduced in Scotland in 2011 and the MPs call on the Government to review its effects and to make the results of any such review public.

Martin Harper, conservation director of the RSPB, said last night: “Through their suggestion of tighter controls on the use of certain pesticides, like carbofuran, the committee has provided any easy way for the Government to protect birds of prey.”

Shooting minister: Benyon’s record

Since becoming Wildlife minister in 2010, Richard Benyon’s keen support for shooting interests has involved him in controversy.

He came in for ferocious criticism earlier this year for sanctioning a research project into the effect of buzzard predation on young pheasants, which would have involved buzzards’ nests being blasted by shotguns. The policy was dropped following intervention with Mr Benyon’s Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs by Downing Street – 24 hours after extensive coverage of the plan in ‘The Independent’, in which Mr Benyon was labelled “The Bird-Brained Minister” and David Cameron’s own links to game shooting were highlighted.

Mr Benyon now faces questions about an upland shooting estate in West Yorkshire which was being prosecuted by the Government’s wildlife watchdog, Natural England, for illegally damaging protected habitat, a blanket bog – until the case was suddenly and mysteriously dropped. Mr Benyon is the minister directly in charge of Natural England, but neither Defra nor Natural England itself is willing to offer any explanation of why the prosecution of the Walshaw Moor estate was abruptly dropped in March this year. Now the RSPB has attempted to open up the case by asking the European Commission to intervene.

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/fury-at-minister-richard-benyons-astounding-refusal-to-ban-deadly-bird-poison-8215803.html

Farmer guilty of pumping slurry into badger sett

A FARMER has been sentenced by Scarborough Magistrates Court after he pumped 5,000 gallons of slurry into a badger sett.

Malcolm Brian Foster, of Grange Farm, Bulmer, near Malton, was found guilty of recklessly damaging an active badger sett by magistrates on Thursday.

He was fined £500 with a £15 victim surcharge and £700 costs.

The one day trial at Scarborough Magistrates Court heard how Foster, a tenant cattle farmer on land which is part of the Castle Howard estate, pumped the liquid cattle slurry into an active badger sett at Northfield Farm, Bulmer, in March.

The court heard how Malton-based PC Jez Walmsley, the district’s Wildlife Crime Officer, visited the farm with badger expert Jean Thorpe after a tip-off from a member of the public.

The badger sett previously known by Mrs Thorpe, of Ryedale Badger Group, was completely filled with cattle slurry and had spilled out into the adjacent agricultural fields.

“Badgers give birth in February and in March and this large badger sett would have held badger cubs below ground,” said Mrs Thorpe. “Badgers in this sett will have died from drowning or suffocation as the slurry was pumped under pressure into this obvious active sett.”

A spokesman for North Yorkshire Police said: “This was a very callous and heartless act of cruelty to these protected animals who will have died a horrible death. The court’s punishment reflects the seriousness of this distressing act. Those who persecute badgers should remember that it remains illegal to kill badgers in North Yorkshire.”

The first licence for a cull of badgers to control Bovine TB has been granted for an area of West Gloucestershire.

It is a strictly controlled cull and is carried out by licensed marksmen and is being monitored by both DEFRA and Gloucestershire Police.

There have been no other licences issued for any other part of the UK and badgers in the rest of the UK remain protected under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992.

The police spokesman added: “The cull does not allow anyone, unless licensed, to kill badgers and any offences will be dealt with by the Wildlife Unit of North Yorkshire Police.”

http://www.maltonmercury.co.uk/news/local/man-fined-in-cruelty-case-1-4960441

 

STOP THE BADGER CULL VIDEO – then please sign the petition

 

Saboteurs aim to wreck first badger cull

Wildlife campaigners have been warned that they face prosecution if they attempt to disrupt marksmen conducting the country’s first badger cull.

By James Kirkup and Louise Gray

18 Sep 2012

Natural England issued the first licence for a pilot cull yesterday, the start of a controversial attempt to tackle tuberculosis in cattle by shooting thousands of badgers, which are blamed for spreading the disease.

Owen Paterson, the Environment Secretary, said he hoped that the four-year pilot in Gloucestershire would lead to a nationwide cull. Animal rights groups promised “direct action” to block the cull. Opponents, who include celebrities such as Brian May, the rock guitarist from Queen, say it is cruel and unlikely to address the TB problem.

Mr Paterson is a long-standing advocate of culling, arguing that, as well as sparing cattle, killing can also save badgers from suffering the effects of TB. The minister, appointed earlier this month, kept two badgers, Bessie and Baz, as pets when he was a child.

He said that in the absence of a viable TB vaccine, culling was the best way to contain the disease. “Until we get a vaccine — and we would all love to have a vaccine — we should use the measures used in other countries very effectively to bear down on the disease in wildlife and in cattle,” he said.

Ministers say culling could reduce the incidence of TB in cattle by 16 per cent, but some critics dispute that figure. Others argue that the benefit does not justify the cost.

The Hunt Saboteurs Association said protesters were confident that they could stop the cull in Gloucester.

“We have had feedback from a lot of our local groups that they are definitely planning to get involved,” said a spokesman. “They will be in the cull zones during the planned killing taking peaceful direct action at night. They will be in high-vis jackets making noise, doing every­thing they can to disrupt the shooters. I’d be surprised if this sort of thing does not end in arrest. Lots of people feel strongly about this and are willing to take that risk.”

The Coalition of Badger Action Groups has promised “direct action” to disrupt any cull. On its website, the organisation said: “We will be out in the fields before and during the cull, stopping and making citizen’s arrests on marksmen/women when we can, filming, rescuing injured badgers and neutralising bait points when we find them.”

Gloucestershire Constabulary has said that it will allow lawful protests against the culls, but warned protesters that they could face prosecution under several different laws

“If persons enter on to private land as trespassers with the intention of preventing any lawful activity taking place there, they may be guilty of aggravated trespass,” said a spokesman. “There are also potentially offences of harassment and intimidation of those conducting a lawful activity, a host of wildlife crimes ranging from disturbing badgers to damaging Sites of Special Scientific Interest, as well as a number of more common public order offences.”

The Gloucester pilot will take place on 300 farms over four years, with as many as 3,000 badgers likely to be killed.

The cost of the culling operation will be as much as £360,000, which will be met by farmers in the affected area.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/9549301/Saboteurs-aim-to-wreck-first-badger-cull.html

 

DEFRA backs down on buzzard ‘management’ trial!!

News just in, from Defra’s twitter account:

“We’ve listened to public concerns, so we are stopping current research and developing new proposals on #buzzards”

Fantastic news (well, at least until we find out what these ‘new proposals’ entail). A big, fat, massive WELL DONE to everyone who blogged, tweeted, emailed, petition-signed etc about this outrageous ‘study’. The people have been heard! It’s incredible to see how effective 9 days of campaigning can be!

We’ll post responses here as and when they are published:

RSPB response here

http://raptorpersecutionscotland.wordpress.com/2012/05/30/defra-backs-down-on-buzzard-management-trial/

Words fail me yet again!!!

Conservationists have condemned plans that would allow buzzard nests to be destroyed and the birds of prey taken into captivity to protect pheasant shoots.

The Environment Department (Defra) is to spend up to £375,000 researching ways to keep buzzards from targeting captive-reared pheasants.

Proposed methods include destroying nests to prevent birds breeding, catching and relocating buzzards to places such as falconry centres or providing alternative food sources for the predators.

The RSPB said the idea of taking wild buzzards into captivity or destroying their nests was “totally unacceptable”, and criticised Defra for spending hundreds of thousands of pounds on the project when money was tight for conservation measures.

In a document setting out plans for the research project, Defra said the 2011 National Gamekeepers Organisation survey found that three quarters of gamekeepers (76%) believed buzzards had a harmful effect on pheasant shoots.

Buzzards are thought to target pheasant release pens if they find there is a readily available source of food and the Government’s conservation agency Natural England has received a number of requests to license the killing of the bird of prey, which is a protected species.

In one case it was claimed that 25% to 30% of young pheasants were lost to buzzards, making the shoot unsustainable.

Buzzards have seen numbers increase by 146% between 1995 and 2009, although the increase appears to have levelled off between 2009 and 2010, according to the British Breeding Bird Survey.

But the RSPB said buzzards were eradicated from swathes of Britain by persecution and were only now recovering, as a result of legal protection and the warming of attitudes by many lowland land managers towards birds of prey.

Buzzards usually scavenge on animals which are already dead, but will sometimes take young pheasants released for sports shooting, the wildlife charity said.

Around 40 million pheasants, which are not native to the UK, are released for shooting each year and buzzards play only a small role in game bird losses compared to other factors such as collisions with cars, the RSPB said.

One study found just 1% to 2% of pheasants were taken on average by birds of prey.

The Government’s document says the impact of buzzards on pheasant shoots has not been investigated and the extent of the issue was unclear.

But it said there were a number of sites where buzzards could be contributing to losses, and that there was an urgent need for management measures to reduce the impact on pheasant shoots.

The RSPB’s conservation director Martin Harper said: “We are shocked by Defra’s plans to destroy buzzard nests and to take buzzards into captivity to protect a non-native game bird released in its millions.

“Destroying nests is completely unjustified and catching and removing buzzards is unlikely to reduce predation levels, as another buzzard will quickly take its place.

“Both techniques would be illegal under current wildlife laws, and I think most people will agree with us that reaching for primitive measures such as imprisoning buzzards or destroying their nests, when wildlife and economic interests collide, is totally unacceptable.”

Nigel Middleton, of the Hawk and Owl Conservation Trust, said destroying the nests of buzzards was tantamount to persecution.

“We believe that alternatives should always be sought to lethal control where the commercial interests of humans come into conflict with birds of prey.

And Mick Carroll, of the Northern England Raptor Forum, said: “Given that buzzards are still recovering from past persecution and there is no evidence they are a significant cause of loss, this is a scandalous waste of public money.”

The conservation groups called for the Government to abandon the project.

A Defra spokeswoman said: “The buzzard population in this country has been protected for over 30 years, and as the RSPB says, has resulted in a fantastic conservation story.

“At the same time we have cases of buzzards preying on young pheasants. We are looking at funding research to find ways of protecting these young birds while making sure the buzzard population continues to thrive.

“This research is about maintaining the balance between captive and wild birds.”

Shadow environment secretary Mary Creagh called for the Government to drop the project.

She said: “The restoration of the buzzard population has been a real success in recent years.

“It is astounding that Defra are wasting hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money disrupting this protected species.

“This out-of-touch Government’s priority is protecting the interests of large commercial shooting estates and non-native pheasants, rather than protecting our country’s native species.

“The Government should drop this plan now. This has all the hallmarks of another Defra shambles.”

David Taylor, shooting campaign manager for country sports group the Countryside Alliance, welcomed Defra’s decision to commission the study.

“It is however disappointing that the situation has got to the point where such a study is required.

“Since the early 1980s, successive governments have had the ability to issue licences for buzzard control, but have been reluctant to do so because of their fear of coming under pressure from groups who have a narrow interest in birds of prey, often to the detriment of other species in Britain.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/rspb-voices-shock-at-buzzard-plans-7784548.html

Welsh badger cull scrapped in favour of vaccination

Farmers and unions have described the decision not to cull as a betrayal

The Welsh government has dropped plans to cull badgers as part of an attempt to wipe out bovine TB in cattle.

Environment Minister John Griffiths said he had instead opted to vaccinate the animals after carefully considering the scientific evidence.

A review of the science involved in controlling bovine TB was commissioned after last year’s assembly elections.

The Farmers’ Union of Wales attacked a “cowardly betrayal”, while the RSPCA said it was “delighted and relieved”.

The previous government had planned a pilot cull of badgers in west Wales.

But Mr Griffiths revealed on Tuesday that he was scrapping the plan, saying a five-year vaccination programme will start in the intensive action area – the TB hotspot in north Pembrokeshire where the cull was due to take place.

His decision disappointed farming unions and Labour’s political opponents who strongly backed the cull.

Officials hope to start vaccinating within two to three months.

Badgers will be trapped in cages and marked so they are not vaccinated multiple times.

Other areas where vaccination might contribute to TB eradication will be considered.

Mr Griffiths said he remained committed to eradicating a “terrible disease” that had “devastating” consequences.

Deciding to cull would have to be justified on the basis that it was necessary to substantially reduce bovine TB in cattle, he told AMs in the Senedd chamber.

“At present I am not satisfied that a cull of badgers would be necessary to bring about a substantial reduction in cases of TB in cattle,” Mr Griffiths added.

It is understood ministers had advice that a cull might not survive a legal challenge under the Animal Health Act 1981.

The cull was drawn up under the previous Labour-Plaid Cymru coalition Welsh government. At last May’s election, Labour said it would take a science-led approach to the policy.

The previous government first announced a cull of badgers in April 2008, but it was halted in the courts after an appeal by conservationists. The plans were revived last March, before being put on hold by Labour when it commissioned a scientific review.

Opponents have accused the minister of delaying since a 13-page report by the review panel arrived on his desk in December.

‘Totally unacceptable’

Plaid’s former Rural Affairs Minister Elin Jones, who drew up the plans for a cull, said: “Farmers will now have to decide how best to protect their cattle and I for one would not blame them for anything they do.”

Deputy minister for agriculture Alun Davies said her comments were “totally unacceptable”.

Farmers in the action area have been subject to a raft of extra controls on their cattle since 2010, the Farmers’ Union of Wales (FUW) said.

FUW TB spokesman Brian Walters said: “Those who have now gone back on their words have not just betrayed farmers in north Pembrokeshire but the industry as a whole. They should hang their heads in shame.”

NFU Cymru deputy president Stephen James said the decision would leave diseased badgers “continuing to roam the countryside infecting more cattle with the disease for which there is yet no known cure”.

It is now time for the British government to wholeheartedly commit to a programme of vaccination”

Brian May

British Veterinary Association president Carl Padgett said it was a “political decision, rather than a scientific one”, that would “potentially set back our efforts to tackle this devastating disease by many years”.

Welsh Conservative rural affairs spokeswoman Antoinette Sandbach said the minister had “hamstrung the eradication programme by abandoning culling, despite voting in favour of that policy less than a year ago”.

Welsh Liberal Democrat spokesman William Powell said: “There will continue to be a dangerous vacuum in this policy area which could be filled by twilight operators and others who despair in the face of this devastating virus.”

Rock star Brian May, who has long campaigned against the cull plan, said he was thrilled at the news.

“It is now time for the British government to wholeheartedly commit to a programme of vaccination – the only route which can guarantee, long term, the elimination of bovine TB from our British countryside,” he said.

RSPCA Cymru external affairs manager Claire Lawson said badger vaccination had already been shown to “significantly reduce the prevalence and severity of disease in the badger population and could reduce the potential for transmission of TB from badgers to cattle”.

Campaign group Pembrokeshire Against the Cull said it was “delighted” by a “brave decision” to reject culling.

In a statement, it said: “We are sure that there will be much relief, especially from those worried about the potential impact on tourism from culling, and cross-community support for this approach within the intensive action area.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-17435827

 

Advisers warned government on badger cull

UK badger culling plans could kill tens of thousands of the animals, worsen the cattle tuberculosis problem, and put the country in breach of a European wildlife treaty, advisers have warned.

The government is to allow culling in England to curb cattle TB, with a similar move possible in Wales.

The Labour Party used Freedom of Information (FoI) laws to obtain advice given by Natural England.

It highlights aspects of ministers’ plans that are not backed by science.

Earlier this month, campaigners said they were seeking leave for a judicial review of the government’s position.

The Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) will allow two pilot culls this year in areas of about 150 sq km each, in west Gloucestershire and west Somerset.

If they are judged to be a success, a further 10 areas could be opened for culling each year, up to a maximum of about 40, under licences issued by Natural England.
Better, or worse?

Ministers should listen to the scientists and can this cull”

Mary Creagh MP Shadow environment secretary

Defra sees the move as part of a package of bovine TB control measures that will prove beneficial in highly affected areas, alongside restrictions on cattle movements and enhanced biosecurity on farms.

The disease costs the UK public purse about £100m per year.

The Randomised Badger Culling Trial (RBCT), the biggest scientific investigation of culling anywhere in the world, found that it can reduce incidence of TB in farm herds provided it is done in large areas with a large proportion of badgers being killed virtually simultaneously, and that it is sustained for at least four years.

Without this rigour, it found, culling can increase disease spread because it perturbs the badgers, making them roam further and infect new farms.

In the documents obtained by Labour, Natural England warns explicitly that the only badger-culling regime backed by science is that used in the RBCT.

“While it is reasonable to assume that replicating the RBCT approach would deliver similar benefits in a future cull, it is far from certain that these benefits could be delivered via the farmer and landowner-led approach that has been proposed.”

In the RBCT, culls were performed by trapping badgers and shooting them, and each area had to be covered within 10 days.

By contrast, the government will allow the much cheaper option of “free-shooting” by trained marksmen across a six-week period, which one former government ecologist has dubbed “a recipe for perturbation”.

The FoI documents show that Natural England warned “there is no evidence to support “any approach less onerous than the 10-day window.

Shadow environment secretary Mary Creagh MP said the documents confirmed that Defra had “ignored scientists’ advice” on the issue.

“The scientists confirm that the government’s cull could spread TB in cattle if farmers fail to oversee an effective cull,” she said.

“Ministers should listen to the scientists and cancel this cull which is bad for farmers, bad for taxpayers and bad for wildlife.”

A Defra spokesman told BBC News that the government “had taken on board” all responses to its consultation.

“Culling will only take place in the localised areas where it will make a difference, the number of licences to cull badgers will be limited, the licence will specify the maximum number of badgers that can be controlled, and the number of animals controlled will be monitored to guard against local disappearance,” he said.

However, the six-week window aspect of the plans was not changed in response to Natural England’s submissions, issued in January and July last year.
Prepared for take-up

How popular culling will prove with farmers is unclear. Much is likely to depend on experiences in the two pilot areas.
Cattle testing for TB Animal welfare groups propose further enhancements to cattle testing, rather than culling

If farmers embrace it enthusiastically, Natural England warns there could be a substantial impact on badger populations.

If 40 areas are eventually licensed and if each has an area of about 350km, it calculates that “the cumulative maximum [badger deaths] that might be reached under the policy is about 90,000 to 130,000 in total”.

It continues: “It is unlikely that the survival of the badger nationally would be jeopardised by culling but the local disappearance of the badger in some areas cannot be ruled out if culling is carried out at a large scale.”

Killing badgers is generally prohibited under the UK Protection of Badgers Act, with exceptions allowed for disease prevention.

The Badger Trust is already challenging the government on this aspect of its plans, arguing that reducing incidence by 12-16%, as Defra projects, does not constitute “prevention”.

Another animal charity, Humane Society International (HSI), is seeking judgement that the government is breaching the EU Bern Convention on protection of wildlife.

Among other things, the convention says that governments “shall prohibit… the use of all means capable of causing local disappearance of, or serious disturbance to, populations of a species…”

HSI’s case may be bolstered by the revelation that Natural England specifically warned the government: “If implemented on a large scale… it is our opinion that culling poses a significant risk of contravening Articles 8 and 9 of the Bern Convention”.

The government has included in its guidance on issuing licences: “Natural England should aim to ensure that culling will ‘not be detrimental to the survival of the population concerned’ within the meaning of Article 9 of the Bern Convention”.

Last year, wildlife groups began programmes of vaccination, and they believe this will in the end remove any need for culling.

The Welsh government is due to announce its decision on a proposed pilot cull in West Wales early this year.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17321086