Cull Court Case: Breaking News
Legal Challenge against badger culling licences given green light to proceed
Remember last June when we told you we had uncovered evidence that in May 2024 Natural England had granted supplementary cull licenses to kill badgers in order to keep farmers ‘happy’? (See here >). Well, you might have wondered whether we had given up. We hadn’t.
Together with our friends Wild Justice, we have continued to pursue this case with our solicitors Leigh Day, and on Thursday 15th May, we were in the High Court for a renewal hearing where the judge granted us permission to proceed with our Judicial Review against Natural England. Read our joint press release with Wild Justice and Leigh Day >
Judicial Reviews are not to be undertaken lightly – they cost significant sums of money, take many, many hours of staff time to prepare for, and the grounds for a successful JR are necessarily narrow, making success very far from certain even in what looks like a solid case. And – importantly – grounds for JRs do not include challenging the interpretation of science, yet science has been the focus of so much discussion to date.
Consequently, Badger Trust and Wild Justice thought very long and hard before deciding to opt for a JR, and we only did so because (in our view) the manner in which the licensing decision had been reached by Natural England was so improper that we could not let it go without being challenged.
We will be publishing a commentary on the documents which the Judge has now ordered be released into the public domain – we have had them for a year but haven’t been able to discuss, much less share them with you.
“The science says ‘no’, the chief scientist therefore said ‘no’, but DEFRA said ‘yes’,and thousands of badgers were unnecessarily and cruelly killed. Just to keep farmers ‘happy’.
Chris Packham, Co-Director of Wild Justice.
It’s important to note that supplementary cull licenses are very different from intensive cull licenses. Supplementary cull licenses must be applied for annually, and unlike for the intensive culls, DEFRA has not given Natural England written direction compelling it to grant them. So, Natural England did not have to grant them by law, by Government order, or even by convention. In fact, DEFRA refused to give Natural England written direction to grant the 2024 supplementary licenses.
When you do see the documents, you will be able to read for yourselves that the decision-making debate within Natural England and between DEFRA and Natural England was focused on organisational self-interest and industry-Government relationship management.
Breathtakingly, Natural England decided that it was preferable to kill thousands of badgers (despite their own evidence and advice) than getting an angry reception from farming trade lobby groups (they name the NFU) or from as a result of an angry reaction from the industry it becoming more tricky to deliver some of their nature restoration schemes.
“This is a landmark decision that casts doubt on Natural England’s ability to act in the interest of nature and wildlife”.
Nigel Palmer, CEO of Badger Trust
Putting it very crudely, Natural England seems to believe that if badgers aren’t allowed to be shot, then “the nature schemes get it”.
Let’s hope that isn’t how the farming industry trade lobby or any of their members behave towards our national advisor on and protector of wildlife. Badgers aren’t to be traded off against this or that scheme, but our argument is that the documents show it’s exactly what DEFRA and Natural England were/are willing to do, perhaps have always been willing to do, at the cost of tens of millions of pounds to the taxpayer every year. But without telling the public or Parliamentarians.
Now that’s a scandal.
Rosie Wood, Chair of Trustees, Badger Trust.
