Culling badgers to control the transmission of bovine tuberculosis (TB) between this wildlife reservoir and cattle has been widely debated. Industry‐led culling began in Somerset and Gloucestershire between August and November 2013 to reduce local badger populations. Industry‐led culling is not designed to be a randomized and controlled trial of the impact of culling on cattle incidence. Nevertheless, it is important to monitor the effects of the culling and, taking the study limitations into account, perform a cautious evaluation of the impacts. A standardized method for selecting areas matched to culling areas in factors found to affect cattle TB risk has been developed to evaluate the impact of badger culling on cattle TB incidence. The association between cattle TB incidence and badger culling in the first 2 years has been assessed. Descriptive analyses without controlling for confounding showed no association between culling and TB incidence for Somerset, or for either of the buffer areas for the first 2 years since culling began. A weak association was observed in Gloucestershire for Year 1 only. Multivariable analysis adjusting for confounding factors showed that reductions in TB incidence were associated with culling in the first 2 years in both the Somerset and Gloucestershire intervention areas when compared to areas with no culling (incidence rate ratio (IRR): 0.79, 95% CI: 0.72–0.87, p < .001 and IRR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.34–0.51, p < .001, respectively). An increase in incidence was associated with culling in the 2‐km buffer surrounding the Somerset intervention area (IRR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.09–1.75, p = .008), but not in Gloucestershire (IRR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.77–1.07, p = .243). As only 2 intervention areas with 2 years of data are available for analysis, and the biological cause–effect relationship behind the statistical associations is difficult to determine, it would be unwise to use these findings to develop generalizable inferences about the effectiveness of the policy at present.

The objective was to measure the association between badger culling and bovine tuberculosis (TB) incidents in cattle herds in three areas of England between 2013–2017 (Gloucestershire and Somerset) and 2015–2017 (Dorset). Farming industry-selected licensed culling areas were matched to comparison areas. A TB incident was detection of new Mycobacterium bovis infection (post-mortem confirmed) in at least one animal in a herd. Intervention and comparison area incidence rates were compared in central zones where culling was conducted and surrounding buffer zones, through multivariable Poisson regression analyses. Central zone incidence rates in Gloucestershire (Incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.34 (95% CI 0.29 to 0.39, p < 0.001) and Somerset (IRR 0.63 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.69, p < 0.001) were lower and no different in Dorset (IRR 1.10, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.27, p = 0.168) than comparison central zone rates. The buffer zone incidence rate was lower for Gloucestershire (IRR 0.64, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.70, p < 0.001), no different for Somerset (IRR 0.97, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.16, p = 0.767) and lower for Dorset (IRR 0.45, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.54, p < 0.001) than comparison buffer zone rates. Industry-led culling was associated with reductions in cattle TB incidence rates after four years but there were variations in effects between areas.

The incidence of bovine tuberculosis (TB, caused by Mycobacterium bovis) in cattle has been associated with TB in badgers (Meles meles) in parts of England. The aim was to identify badger-associated M. bovis reservoirs in the Edge Area, between the High-and Low-Risk Areas for cattle TB. Data from badger TB surveys were sparse. Therefore, a definition for a local M. bovis reservoir potentially shared by cattle and badgers was developed using cattle TB surveillance data. The performance of the definition was estimated through Latent Class Analysis using badger TB survey data. Spatial units (25 km 2 ) in the Edge Area were classified as having a reservoir if they had (i) at least one TB incident in at least three of the previous 7 years, (ii) at least one TB incident in a cattle herd confirmed by post-mortem tests as due to M. bovis infection and not attributable to cattle movements in the previous 2 years and (iii) more confirmed TB incidents than un-confirmed in the previous 2 years. Approximately 20% of the Edge Area was classified as having a local M. bovis reservoir using the cattle-based definition. Assuming 15% TB prevalence in Edge Area badgers, sensitivity for the local M. bovis reservoir definition varied from 25.7% [95% credible interval (CrI): 10.7%-85.1%] to 64.8% (95% CrI: 48.1%-88.0%). Specificity was 91.9% (CrI: 83.6%-97.4%). Over 90% of the local reservoir was in stable endemic TB areas identified through previous work and its spatial distribution was largely consistent with local veterinary knowledge. Uncertainty in the reservoir spatial distribution was explored through its recalculation in spatial units shifted in different directions. We recommend that the definition is re-evaluated as further data on badger infection with M. bovis become available.

The incidence of bovine tuberculosis (TB, caused by Mycobacterium bovis) in cattle has been associated with TB in badgers ( Meles meles) in parts of England. The aim was to identify badger associated M. bovis reservoirs in the Edge Area, between the High and Low Risk Areas for cattle TB. Data from badger TB surveys were sparse. Therefore, a definition for a local M. bovis reservoir potentially shared by cattle and badgers was developed using cattle TB surveillance data. The performance of the definition was estimated through Latent Class Analysis using badger TB survey data. Spatial units (25 km ) in the Edge Area were classified as having a reservoir if they had i) at least one OTF-W (Officially Tuberculosis Free – Withdrawn) incident in a cattle herd not attributed to cattle movement in the previous two years, ii) more OTF-W incidents than Officially Tuberculosis Free – Suspended (OTF-S) incidents in the previous two years and iii) at least one TB incident (OTF-S or OTF-W) in at least three of the previous seven years. Approximately twenty percent of the Edge Area was classified as having a local M. bovis reservoir using the cattle-based definition. Assuming 15% TB prevalence in Edge Area badgers, sensitivity for the local M. bovis reservoir definition varied from 25.7% (95% Credible Interval (CrI) 10.7 to 85.1 %) to 64.8 % (95% CrI 48.1 to 88.0 %). Specificity was 91.9% (CrI 83.6 to 97.4 %). Over ninety percent of the local reservoir was in stable endemic TB areas identified through previous work and its spatial distribution was largely consistent with local veterinary knowledge. Uncertainty in the reservoir spatial distribution was explored through its recalculation in spatial units shifted in different directions. We recommend that the definition is re-evaluated as further data on badger infection with M. bovis becomes available.