AgriSearch publishes major review of evidence behind bTB wildlife options

AgriSearch has published a major review of the evidence behind DAERA’s bovine tuberculosis (bTB) wildlife intervention options, looking at what the evidence says each approach could achieve, what it could cost and how DAERA has compared the options.

The farmer-funded research organisation has reviewed the scientific evidence on non-selective culling, Test and Vaccinate or Remove (TVR) and vaccination-only, alongside an independent review of DAERA’s economic appraisal undertaken by The Andersons Centre.

AgriSearch Chairman Norman McMordie said:

“Bovine TB has blighted Northern Ireland’s cattle sector and farming families for far too long. We need to make much greater progress towards controlling and ultimately eradicating this disease.

“The purpose of this work was not to start with a preferred answer. It was to look carefully at the available evidence, understand where it is strong, where uncertainty remains and what that means for decisions in Northern Ireland.

“Wildlife intervention cannot be considered in isolation from cattle measures, but equally the wildlife reservoir has to be addressed if we are serious about eradication. The challenge is to select interventions appropriate to the circumstances, implement them effectively and measure whether they are working.”

The assessment highlights four key issues:

• Evidence of results in cattle. The three approaches differ in the type and strength of evidence supporting them. Results demonstrated in cattle through field studies need to be distinguished from outcomes predicted by computer models.
• How the options are compared. DAERA’s non-monetary and risk assessments involve subjective judgements in the scores assigned, while economic, non-monetary and risk assessments are given equal weight in the overall ranking. AgriSearch asks DAERA to justify both the scores and the equal weighting, because changing either could alter the ranking of the interventions.
• The cost to farmers. Andersons concludes that DAERA is likely to have underestimated the costs borne by farmers during herd breakdowns, and therefore the economic value of preventing herd breakdowns. DAERA’s estimate relies partly on older source data, some dating back to 2010/11. AgriSearch considers the much more recent Andersons study for LMC, UFU and DCNI should be used as the benchmark unless DAERA can provide robust evidence for an alternative.
• Badger numbers. Reliable, up-to-date local population information is needed to plan interventions, assess how much of the badger population they reach and estimate delivery costs.

Andersons found DAERA’s broad approach to costing logical, but identified important uncertainties in the assumptions used and limitations in the supporting information published with the consultation.

Norman McMordie added:

“There will always be uncertainty in a disease as complex as bTB, but that should not become a reason for inaction. We need an evidence-based programme that can act on what we know now, measure the results and adapt as better evidence becomes available.”

AgriSearch is making the material available ahead of the consultation deadline of 5pm on Friday 9 October 2026, so that farmers who wish to respond can use the evidence to inform their own response.

A short, illustrated Evidence Briefing provides an accessible overview of the findings. It is available alongside the full AgriSearch consultation response and The Andersons Centre Economic Review