Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

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.

Original publication




Journal article


Journal of Zoology

Publication Date





191 - 198