Badger cull thoroughness

Summary

Between 2013 and 2016 collected records show that the area of participant's land parcels in which no badgers were removed was half (actually 49.5%) of the accessible area across the badger cull zones. In Gloucestershire this percentage exceeded 75% in 2014 and was just less than 75% in 2016. This was found from information supplied by Natural England and is based on records submitted at badger collection points by those performing the culls.

The data

Data was requested from Natural England on 13th September 2017 under Freedom of Information Request RFI 4007. The request can be viewed by clicking here.

The above request refers to polygons. Natural England defined a polygon as follows on 21st October 2016 in response to a request for clarification.

When we are supplied with the information on a dispatched badger the location information we receive relates to the participant who's land the badger was dispatched on. Participant land is mapped as a block of land, which in GIS mapping is called a polygon. So for example if we receive information that a badger has been dispatched on the P456's land, then we allocate that dispatched badger to the polygon belonging to P456. We will not have the precise location via say a Grid Reference. All we know is that the dispatching took place somewhere in that polygon.

On 8th November 2017 Natural England sent the data shown in the following links.

1. RFI 4007 Response to Customer 081117.
2. RFI 4007 Response to Customer Q1 Daily Returns 2013-2016 081117.
3. RFI 4007 Response to Customer Q2&Q3 081117.

Illustration of the data received in RFI4007

The images below are thumbnails which may appear at a larger size if clicked.

Year	Area	Number of badgers collected but not included in the count of badgers trapped/shot
2013	-	Information not held
2014	-	Information not held
2015	Area 1 - Gloucestershire	1
2015	Area 2 - Somerset	1
2016	Area 2 - Somerset	4

Discussion of the above results

If only 65% of licensed areas are accessible and only half of accessible areas are having any badgers removed from them then badgers are being removed from only a third of licensed area. However removal of badgers from neighbouring land parcels may benefit these parcels from which no badgers were removed.

Comparison with RBCT

In terms of the number of badgers removed per square kilometre, cull rates in these culls are comparable to those in the RBCT. Please refer to the tables below for References. Clicking on the links will take you directly to the correct page in these references.

Badgers removed in the RBCT reactive culls

Year	Zone	Cull type	Number of badgers removed	Treatment area (km2)	Badgers removed per km2	References
1999	b	reactive	73	96.8	0.75	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2000	a	reactive	34	112.5	0.30	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2000	b	reactive	34	96.8	0.35	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2000	c	reactive	179	120.6	1.48	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2002	a	reactive	47	112.5	0.42	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2002	b	reactive	84	96.8	0.87	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2002	c	reactive	115	120.6	0.95	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2002	e	reactive	62	108.6	0.57	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2002	f	reactive	145	113.9	1.27	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2002	g	reactive	171	115.7	1.48	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2002	h	reactive	17	123.6	0.14	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	a	reactive	36	112.5	0.32	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	b	reactive	110	96.8	1.14	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	c	reactive	101	120.6	0.84	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	d	reactive	122	115.2	1.06	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	e	reactive	125	108.6	1.15	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	f	reactive	291	113.9	2.55	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	g	reactive	84	115.7	0.73	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	h	reactive	143	123.6	1.16	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	i	reactive	94	137.6	0.68	Table_2.6_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4

Badgers removed in the RBCT proactive culls

Year	Zone	Cull type	Number of badgers removed	Treatment area (km2)	Badgers removed per km2	References
1998	b	proactive	238	101.8	2.34	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
1999	a	proactive	55	103.8	0.53	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
1999	b	proactive	83	101.8	0.82	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
1999	c	proactive	244	121.2	2.01	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2000	b	proactive	74	101.8	0.73	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2000	c	proactive	111	121.2	0.92	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2000	e	proactive	747	118.8	6.29	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2000	f	proactive	452	110.8	4.08	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2000	g	proactive	426	114	3.74	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2000	h	proactive	162	116	1.40	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2002	a	proactive	146	103.8	1.41	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2002	b	proactive	49	101.8	0.48	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2002	c	proactive	126	121.2	1.04	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2002	d	proactive	292	104.1	2.80	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2002	e	proactive	96	118.8	0.81	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2002	f	proactive	249	110.8	2.25	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2002	g	proactive	204	114	1.79	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2002	h	proactive	231	116	1.99	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2002	i	proactive	218	131.4	1.66	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2002	j	proactive	442	110.5	4.00	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	a	proactive	52	103.8	0.50	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	b	proactive	170	101.8	1.67	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	c	proactive	132	121.2	1.09	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	d	proactive	369	104.1	3.54	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	e	proactive	258	118.8	2.17	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	f	proactive	103	110.8	0.93	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	g	proactive	144	114	1.26	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	h	proactive	71	116	0.61	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	i	proactive	176	131.4	1.34	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2003	j	proactive	185	110.5	1.67	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2004	a	proactive	58	103.8	0.56	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2004	b	proactive	111	101.8	1.09	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2004	c	proactive	187	121.2	1.54	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2004	d	proactive	211	104.1	2.03	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2004	e	proactive	214	118.8	1.80	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2004	f	proactive	220	110.8	1.99	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2004	g	proactive	103	114	0.90	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2004	h	proactive	75	116	0.65	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2004	i	proactive	93	131.4	0.71	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2004	j	proactive	109	110.5	0.99	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2005	a	proactive	48	103.8	0.46	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2005	b	proactive	58	101.8	0.57	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2005	c	proactive	163	121.2	1.34	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2005	d	proactive	182	104.1	1.75	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2005	e	proactive	148	118.8	1.25	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2005	f	proactive	155	110.8	1.40	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2005	g	proactive	117	114	1.03	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2005	h	proactive	53	116	0.46	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2005	i	proactive	173	131.4	1.32	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4
2005	j	proactive	109	110.5	0.99	Page_10_of_Ref_2,Table_2.4_of_Ref_4,Appendix_D_of_Ref_4

Badgers removed in the culls which started in 2013

Year	Zone	Number of badgers removed	Licensed area (km2)	Badgers removed per km2	References
2013	gloucestershire_1	921	311	2.96	Page_9_of_Ref_8,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2013	somerset_2	940	256	3.67	Page_9_of_Ref_8,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2014	gloucestershire_1	274	311	0.88	Page_1_of_Ref_3,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2014	somerset_2	341	256	1.33	Page_1_of_Ref_3,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2015	gloucestershire_1	432	311	1.39	Page_1_of_Ref_14,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2015	somerset_2	279	256	1.09	Page_1_of_Ref_14,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2015	dorset_3	756	223	3.39	Page_1_of_Ref_14,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2016	gloucestershire_1	252	311	0.81	Page_2_of_Ref_16,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2016	somerset_2	217	256	0.85	Page_2_of_Ref_16,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2016	dorset_3	502	223	2.25	Page_2_of_Ref_16,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2016	cornwall_4	711	393	1.81	Page_2_of_Ref_16,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2016	cornwall_5	851	272	3.13	Page_2_of_Ref_16,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2016	devon_6	2038	567	3.59	Page_2_of_Ref_16,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2016	devon_7	833	431	1.93	Page_2_of_Ref_16,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2016	dorset_8	3000	417	7.19	Page_2_of_Ref_16,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2016	gloucestershire_9	1858	651	2.85	Page_2_of_Ref_16,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2016	herefordshire_10	624	285	2.19	Page_2_of_Ref_16,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	gloucestershire_1	172	311	0.55	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	somerset_2	91	256	0.36	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	dorset_3	257	223	1.15	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	cornwall_4	213	393	0.54	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	cornwall_5	358	272	1.32	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	devon_6	727	567	1.28	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	devon_7	246	431	0.57	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	dorset_8	1166	430	2.71	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	gloucestershire_9	1012	651	1.55	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	herefordshire_10	394	285	1.38	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	cheshire_11	736	292	2.52	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	devon_12	1874	563	3.33	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	devon_13	1237	432	2.86	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	devon_14	708	249	2.84	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	devon_15	763	207	3.69	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	dorset_16	3450	1030	3.35	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	somerset_17	1123	280	4.01	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	somerset_18	489	198	2.47	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	wiltshire_19	2252	623	3.61	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	wiltshire_20	1040	546	1.90	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3
2017	wiltshire_21	1229	332	3.70	Page_2_of_Ref_17,RFI4007_Sheet_Q3

In the above tables treatment area in the RBCT means the same as licensed area in the 2013 culls. It is the overall area which encompasses both accessible and inaccessible area.

Conclusions

According to records of land parcels on which badgers have been removed, no badgers have been removed from approximately half of the accessible area and two thirds of licensed area in all zones each year. If cull thoroughness is key, and these records are reliable, this does not bode well for TB control.

However, in terms of the number of badgers removed per square kilometre, cull rates between 2013 and 2017 were comparable to those achieved in the RBCT.

A note

History has shown that badger removal requires considerable persistence and dedication regardless of the method being used. Cullers have only cage trapping and free shooting available to them for 6 weeks per year unless an extension is granted. This makes the task given to them challenging particularly if they have the added burden of running a farm, managing a business or going to work the next day.

References

1. Monitoring the efficacy of badger population reduction by controlled shooting during the first six weeks of the pilots. AHVLA. Report to Defra. 31st January 2014.
2. Association between Levels of TB in Cattle Herds and Badgers. C.A Donnelly and J Hone. 2010.
3. Summary of badger control monitoring during 2014. DEFRA. December 2014.
4. Final Report of the Independent Scientific Group on Cattle TB
5. Pilot Badger Culls in Somerset and Gloucestershire. Report by the Independent Expert Panel. Chair: Professor Ranald Munro. Presented to DEFRA Secretary of State Owen Paterson MP, March 2014.
6. The Government's policy on Bovine TB and badger control in England. DEFRA. December 2011.
7. Badger culls and contractors hired. An email sent to nfu.org.uk on 18th Jan 2015.
8. Badger Culling: Controlled Shooting Pilots. SN/SC/6837. E Ares. Last updated: 11 January 2015.
9. Bovine TB: Distribution of effort in badger cull pilots Year 2. Reply from DEFRA to a FoI. ATIC0507. 21 January 2015.
10. Estimating social group size of Eurasian badgers Meles meles by genotyping remotely plucked single hairs. LJ Thomas et al. Source: Wildlife Biology, 13(2):195-207. Published By: Nordic Board for Wildlife Research. 2007.
11. Setting the minimum and maximum numbers for Year 2 of the badger culls. Advice to Natural England. Supplied by DEFRA. August 2014.
12. Badger Cull Costs and Culled Badger Numbers. RFI 6456. DEFRA. 1st May 2014.
13. Distribution of badger removals across the cull zones. FoI response from Natural England. RFI 2911. May 2015.
14. Summary of badger control monitoring during 2014. DEFRA. December 2015.
15. Setting the minimum and maximum numbers in Dorset for Year 1 of the badger cull. DEFRA. Advice to Natural England. August 2015.
16. Summary of badger control monitoring during 2016. DEFRA. December 2016.
17. Summary of badger control monitoring during 2017. DEFRA. December 2017.