Human and livestock diseases can be difficult to control where infection persists in wildlife populations. For three decades, European badgers (Meles meles) have been culled by the British government in a series of attempts to limit the spread of Mycobacterium bovis, the causative agent of bovine tuberculosis (TB), to cattle. Despite these efforts, the incidence of TB in cattle has risen consistently, re-emerging as a primary concern for Britain's cattle industry. Recently, badger culling has attracted controversy because experimental studies have reached contrasting conclusions (albeit using different protocols), with culled areas showing either markedly reduced or increased incidence of TB in cattle. This has confused attempts to develop a science-based management policy. Here we use data from a large-scale, randomized field experiment to help resolve these apparent differences. We show that, as carried out in this experiment, culling reduces cattle TB incidence in the areas that are culled, but increases incidence in adjoining areas. These findings are biologically consistent with previous studies but will present challenges for policy development.

Pathogens that are transmitted between wildlife, livestock and humans present major challenges for the protection of human and animal health, the economic sustainability of agriculture, and the conservation of wildlife. Mycobacterium bovis, the aetiological agent of bovine tuberculosis (TB), is one such pathogen. The incidence of TB in cattle has increased substantially in parts of Great Britain in the past two decades, adversely affecting the livelihoods of cattle farmers and potentially increasing the risks of human exposure. The control of bovine TB in Great Britain is complicated by the involvement of wildlife, particularly badgers (Meles meles), which appear to sustain endemic infection and can transmit TB to cattle. Between 1975 and 1997 over 20,000 badgers were culled as part of British TB control policy, generating conflict between conservation and farming interest groups. Here we present results from a large-scale field trial that indicate that localized badger culling not only fails to control but also seems to increase TB incidence in cattle.

Summary1. The incidence of bovine tuberculosis (TB) in British cattle has risen markedly over the last two decades. Failure to control the disease in cattle has been linked to the persistence of a reservoir of infection in European badgers Meles meles , a nationally protected species. Although badger culling has formed a component of British TB control policy for many years, a recent large-scale randomized field experiment found that TB incidence in cattle was no lower in areas subject to localized badger culling than in nearby areas where no experimental culls occurred. Indeed, analyses indicated that cattle incidence was higher in culled areas. 2. One hypothesis advanced to explain this pattern is that localized culling disrupted badgers' territorial behaviour, potentially increasing the rate of contact between cattle and infected badgers. This study evaluated this hypothesis by investigating badger activity and spatial organization in 13 study areas subjected to different levels of culling. Badger home ranges were mapped by feeding colour-marked baits at badger dens and measuring the geographical area in which colour-marked faeces were retrieved. 3. Badger home ranges were consistently larger in culling areas. Moreover, in areas not subjected to culling, home range sizes increased with proximity to the culling area boundary. Patterns of overlap between home ranges were also influenced by culling. 4. Synthesis and applications. This study demonstrates that culling badgers profoundly alters their spatial organization as well as their population density. These changes have the potential to influence contact rates between cattle and badgers, both where culls occur and on adjoining land. These results may help to explain why localized badger culling appears to have failed to control cattle TB, and should be taken into account in determining what role, if any, badger culling should play in future control strategies.