Rolling dice reveals level of illegal badger killing

Jan 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: Next-door leopards: First GPS-collar study reveals how leopards live with people

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

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Scientists urge Britain to cancel badger cull

Oct 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.

Britain grants first licence for badger cull

Sep 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.

Recommended for you

Laser scanning accurately 'weighs' trees

Nov 21, 2014

A terrestrial laser scanning technique that allows the structure of vegetation to be 3D-mapped to the millimetre is more accurate in determining the biomass of trees and carbon stocks in forests than current ...

Cameras detect 'extinct' wallabies near Broome

Nov 21, 2014

Yawuru Country Managers have found a spectacled hare wallaby (Lagorchestes conspicillatus) population, a species which for the last decade was feared to be locally extinct at Roebuck Plains, adjacent to Broome.

User comments : 1

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.