Fact-based scientifically-accurate educational information about Badgers
Home Shop Animals Pictures Help Seeing Groups Education News Search Books
Teaching Age 3-7 Age 8-11 Age 12-16 Age 17+ Poems Stories Politics Research Journals

Boundary faeces and matched advertisement in the European badger (Meles meles): a potential role in range exclusion

Badgerland online shop



Paul D. Stewart 1 , David W. Macdonald 1 , Chris Newman 1 Chris L. Cheeseman 2
1 Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, U.K.
2 Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Central Science Laboratory, Sand Hutton, York, Y04 1LW, U.K.


In lowland England, badgers Meles meles form social groups of up to 30 individuals. They share a main den (sett) and a core feeding range, but largely forage alone. Faeces are deposited in discrete hinterland and border 'latrines'. Border latrines are shared with neighbouring groups.

We demonstrate that there is a highly significant tendency for neighbouring groups to place a similar quantity of faeces at shared latrines. There are also significant tendencies to place more faeces in boundary latrines close to the sett, and for reduced separation of latrines close to the sett. We also demonstrate that badgers tend to defecate most frequently on the boundary closest to their current feeding site. These observations are consistent with the hypothesis that faeces at border latrines are used to promote range exclusion.

We propose that faecal volume represents a reliable signal of the encounter likelihood and/or foraging pressure of badgers along a particular border. According to the 'active territorial defence' hypothesis, this indicates a stand-off position in terms of each group's resource holding potential by signalling encounter likelihood across the boundary. By the 'passive range exclusion' hypothesis, this border is an isopleth (equal contour) of resource depletion between groups, and crossing over such a contour deep into a neighbouring range reduces foraging efficiency. By either hypothesis, the matched faecal volume and sett proximity effects suggest a simple mechanism that is capable of allowing reliable information to be passed by individuals between adjacent sectors of neighbouring territories to deter intrusion. This is a 'bottom–up' process of inter-dependent, parallel, individual responses, which is capable of generating the emergent complexity of co-ordinated group ranges without central control.


Meles meles • boundary • defecation • territory

Web site


Badger by Tim Roper Collins New Naturalist Library (114) - Badger
This reference work is packed with detail about the badger - great for studious readers - there is no better book in print.  Click here to buy:
Paperback edition or Hardback edition
Kindle edition
Scientific Journals Copyright
These are simplified abstracts of scientific papers about badgers. Copyright in the journal article remains with the third-party copyright owner. This may be the publisher of the journal, the organisation who commissioned the work or the researchers. For further details, contact the publisher of the journal or the corresponding author.
Badgerland do not provide electronic or paper copies of journals.
We do not condone or encourage copyright infringement.