The Court of Appeal has rejected the Badger Trust's appeal concerning the legality of the government's badger cull.
The trust's appeal was based on the refusal of the Secretary of State to maintain an Independent Expert Panel (IEP) to oversee the monitoring and analysis of the results from the second year of the pilot culls in West Somerset and West Gloucestershire.
The Trust had understood that the Secretary of State had promised that an IEP would oversee the monitoring and analysis of the results of the culls while she was still considering a wider roll out.
However, although the IEP had concluded that the first year of the pilot culls had been an abject failure and therefore the Secretary of State rightly decided not to roll out culling more widely, she abandoned the use of an IEP for the second year of the pilot.
Humane Society International said whilst it was regrettable that the High Court today dismissed the Badger Trust's challenge that the badger cull was unlawful, the ruling has no bearing whatsoever on the illegitimacy of the cull itself.
Wendy Higgins, Communications Director for Humane Society International/UK, said: "Today's High Court ruling is regrettable but it doesn't in any way change the fact that culling badgers in an effort to control cattle TB has been thoroughly and robustly discredited and rejected by the overwhelming majoriity of scientists and wildlife disease experts. This challenge was about one aspect of the cull only, that the government totally abandoned independent oversight to monitor the humaneness or otherwise of the killing. The judges' decision about that one issue doesn't alter the fact that the badger cull is an abuse of animal welfare and without scientific foundation."
The Trust challenged this decision on the basis that the Secretary of State's promise amounted to an enforceable legitimate expectation and accordingly any decision to roll out more widely after the second year of the pilots would be unlawful.
The Court of Appeal rejected this argument, noting that the Government's policy could be "said to be characterised by a tone of optimism as to the likely success of the pilot scheme in the first year."
This optimism proved to be totally unfounded given the failure of the first year of the culls to achieve sufficient standards of effectiveness, humaneness and safety, despite the then Secretary of State's premature announcement to the contrary. While the Trust respects the decision of the Court of Appeal as a matter of law, as a matter of policy, it calls upon the Secretary of State to confirm she will not roll out culls more widely given the failure of the pilot culls.
Jeff Hayden, Financial Director and the Trust's lead on the Judicial Review challenge said: "The current Secretary of State rightly has not jumped, as her predecessor did, to a premature conclusion regarding the result of the second year of the culls. However, if the leaked figures regarding effectiveness are correct, then contrary to the suggestions of the National Farmers' Union, she cannot yet again move the goalposts, particularly when she has refused to have an independent referee.
"If the second year of the pilots has not met the standards determined by the Secretary of State, she must acknowledge that the pilots are a failure and culling cannot be rolled out more widely.
"Instead, DEFRA should commit to rigorous cattle control measures as employed in Wales where a reduction of 48% in bovine TB (bTB) has been achieved during the last five years. The small threat from badgers should be dealt with by vaccination rather than inhumane and ineffective slaughter."
