Badger Trust loses High Court cull battle The Trust argued Government proposals for two pilot culls were "very, very controversial" at both animal welfare and scientific levels and should be stopped. But today Mr Justice Ouseley, sitting in London, ruled the legal challenge had failed on all grounds and refused to quash a Government decision last December to allow the culls by farmers and landowners to go ahead. At a hearing last month, the Trust accused the livestock industry of using badgers as a scapegoat and underestimating the risk of cattle-to-cattle transmission of bovine tuberculosis (bTB). Ruling the culling policy lawful, the judge said: "The scientific evidence supported the simple view that these measures would help prevent or reduce the spread of the disease." The Trust represents around 60 voluntary badger groups and says the (bTB) problem should be dealt with through vaccination. It points to the situation in Wales, where, after legal action, the Welsh government decided in March this year to use other methods following a review of the latest scientific evidence on culling. The Government argues bTB has now spread to cover large areas of the west and south-west of England, as well as Wales, and badger vaccination is "not a sufficient response to the problem." It says in 2010/11, nearly 25,000 cattle were slaughtered in England alone at a cost to the taxpayer of £91 million, and the disease is having a devastating impact on livestock farmers. The court heard Caroline Spelman, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), plans to introduce the initial culls later this year. David Wolfe QC, appearing for the Trust, said that if the courts did not intervene, the culls would take place in two areas - one in West Gloucestershire and the other in West Somerset. Each area was some 350 square kilometres, approximately the size of the Isle of Wight, and it was estimated 3,800 badgers could eventually be killed in each of the four years of culling, Mr Wolfe said. The scheme could eventually lead to culling in up to 10 areas per year. Mark Jones, veterinarian and executive director of Humane Society International/UK (HSI/UK), said: "Today's High Court judgment is a devastating blow for badgers and for the protection of our wildlife." Mr Jones said "the badgers' last hope" may now be the society's complaint at the Council of Europe's Bern Convention. He said HSI/UK was "determined to do everything we can to prevent this bloody and pointless slaughter." Mr Jones said: "Right from the start, the cull has been robustly challenged by scientists and conservationists alike, and yet the Government has ignored the evidence in favour of appeasing farmers and landowners with a license to kill. As signatories to Bern, the UK has an obligation to keep the badger population out of danger, an obligation that is undeniably abused by the plan to shoot and kill the vast majority of these magical animals in local areas. England's badgers are relying on Bern to succeed where the High Court has failed. The RSPCA also supported the Badger Trust's legal challenge and said it was "bitterly disappointed" that it was not successful. David Bowles, RSPCA director of communications, said: "We are bitterly disappointed that the UK Government in England is ploughing on with plans to kill badgers but the fight is not over yet. We believe culling is not a long-term, sustainable solution and will be of little help in reducing the disease - perhaps even making things worse in some areas. It will wipe out huge numbers of this much-loved species, virtually eliminating badgers from these areas, including many animals which are healthy. It is not as if there aren't alternatives to a cull. Vaccination could be a more effective and sustainable way of dealing with the disease, and one which does not involve killing most of the badger population in very large areas of the countryside. A Defra spokesman said: "We are pleased with the judgment. No one wants to cull badgers but last year bovine TB led to the slaughter of over 26,000 cattle and to help eradicate the disease it needs to be tackled in badgers. We will continue to work with the farming industry so badger control in two pilot areas can start as soon as is practical. Later, the Trust announced that it was considering an appeal against today's ruling. It said in a statement: "The Badger Trust will now study the judgment closely and consider the next steps in its campaign to protect the badger from a pointless cull." The Trust condemned culling as "thoroughly unnecessary killing." It added the likely method of free shooting "is cut-price expediency risking a cruel and brutal outcome for a protected species and increased outbreaks for farmers within and around the culling zone." Legislation had "not kept pace with the developments in the understanding of how TB works" or vaccination possibilities. Given "the massive costs and marginal benefits," the Trust said it would call for detailed disclosure of the costings if the pilot culls went ahead so that Parliament could decide whether the policy could actually be justified.