Rolling dice reveals level of illegal badger killing

January 17, 2013

A little-used method for estimating how many people are involved in sensitive or illegal activities can provide critical information to environmental policy makers involved in the proposed badger culling scheme in England, according to new research.

"Innovative techniques for estimating in a human-wildlife-management conflict", a paper written by a research team from Bangor University, the University of Kent and Kingston University, has revealed - for the first time - the estimated rate of illegal badger killing.

Using a method known as the randomised response technique (RRT), the research, published today in PLOS ONE, has shown over 10% of in Wales have illegally killed badgers in the 12 months preceding the study.

Previous research does not sufficiently consider whether illegal badger killing contributes to the spread of bTB to livestock.

The team suggest that it would be interesting to model how such a rate of illegal badger killing could be contributing, or not, to the spread of (bTB) particularly as badger movements are effected when are disrupted.

Dr Paul Cross, from Bangor University's School of Environment, Natural Resources & Geography explains: 'The proportion of farmers estimated to have killed badgers should be considered by policymakers and in the wider debate'.

'Intensive is one approach being considered by policy makers, in an attempt to control the spread of in cattle. However, studies investigating the effects of badger culling on TB outbreaks in cattle have not factored in the prevalence of illegal badger killing, and its potential to spread disease'.

Dr Freya St John, from the University of Kent's Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology (DICE), said: 'Attempting to resolve the issues regarding as carriers of bovine TB requires cross-disciplinary scientific research, a departure from deep-rooted positions, and the political will to implement evidence-based management. We believe that this study makes an important contribution to that debate'.

RRT requires respondents to roll two dice before answering sensitive questions such as 'have you killed a badger in the last 12 months'. The result of the dice roll is never revealed to researchers, it is the respondents' secret. Crucially there are instructions associated with the dice roll, for example, if the sum of the dice equals five through to ten, answer truthfully; if they sum 2 – 4 answer 'yes'; and if they sum 11 or 12 answer 'no'. The role of 'forced' answers adds noise to the data so that a 'yes' answer doesn't necessarily mean that a respondent committed an illegal act.

Explore further: Benefits of badger culling not long lasting for reducing cattle TB, says study

More information: To view the full research paper, visit: dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0053681

Related Stories

Britain grants first licence for badger cull

September 18, 2012

Up to 3,000 badgers could be killed in England after a government agency on Friday issued the first licence for a pilot cull in a bid to prevent the spread of tuberculosis in cattle.

Scientists urge Britain to cancel badger cull

October 14, 2012

British wildlife experts on Sunday condemned a plan to cull thousands of badgers in the UK in a bid to fight bovine tuberculosis, saying that killing the animals could worsen the problem it aims to solve.

Recommended for you

Research advances on transplant ward pathogen

August 28, 2015

The fungus Cryptococcus causes meningitis, a brain disease that kills about 1 million people each year—mainly those with impaired immune systems due to AIDS, cancer treatment or an organ transplant. It's difficult to treat ...

Genomes uncover life's early history

August 24, 2015

A University of Manchester scientist is part of a team which has carried out one of the biggest ever analyses of genomes on life of all forms.

Rare nautilus sighted for the first time in three decades

August 25, 2015

In early August, biologist Peter Ward returned from the South Pacific with news that he encountered an old friend, one he hadn't seen in over three decades. The University of Washington professor had seen what he considers ...

1 comment

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

antialias_physorg
not rated yet Jan 17, 2013
RRT seems a bit weird until you think about it: You give the respondent the illusion that he can give a morally questionable, but truthful, answer without it being connected back to him.

Which is true - but you also can deduct the noise from the resulting scores and get a minimum estimate of the morally questionable answers with high certainty.

Clever bastards.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.