Dynamic interactions among badgers: implications for sociality and disease transmission.

1. Direct interactions between individuals play an important part in the sociality of group-living animals, their mating system and disease transmission. Here, we devise a methodology to quantify relative rates of proximity interaction from radio-tracking data and highlight potential asymmetries within the contact network of a moderate-density badger population in the north-east of England. 2. We analysed radio-tracking data from four contiguous social groups, collected over a 3-year period. Dynamic interaction analysis of badger dyads was used to assess the movement of individuals in relation to the movement of others, both within and between social groups. Dyads were assessed with regard to season, sex, age and sett use pattern of the badgers involved. 3. Intragroup separation distances were significantly shorter than intergroup separation distances, and interactions between groups were rare. Within groups, individuals interacted with each other more often than expected, and interaction patterns varied significantly with season and sett use pattern. Non-mover dyads (using the main sett for day-resting on > 50% of occasions) interacted more frequently than mover dyads (using an outlier sett for day-resting on > 50% of occasions) or mover-non-mover dyads. Interactions between group members occurred most frequently in winter. 4. Of close intragroup interactions (< 50 m separation distance), 88.6% were associated with a main sett and only 4.4% with outlier setts. Non-mover dyads and non-mover-mover dyads interacted significantly more often at the main sett than mover-only dyads. These results highlight the importance of the main sett to badger sociality and support the suggestion that badger social groups are comprised of different subgroups, in our case based on differential sett use patterns. 5. Asymmetries in contact structure within a population will affect the way in which diseases are transmitted through a social network. Assessment of these networks is essential for understanding the persistence and spread of disease within populations which do not mix freely or which exhibit heterogeneities in their spatial or social behaviour.

The current and future management of wild mammals hunted with dogs in England and Wales.

There is increasing concern about the use of lethal methods to control wild mammal populations, especially those methods that may have significant impacts on animal welfare. The continued use of dogs to hunt wild mammals in England and Wales, principally foxes (Vulpes vulpes), red deer (Cervus elaphus), brown hares (Lepus europaeus) and mink (Mustela vison), has become a focus for political debate and has been the subject of a recent UK government inquiry. This paper reports the results of a questionnaire study to quantify the use, effectiveness and acceptability of the different methods currently used to manage these four species, and future changes in management following a possible ban on hunting with dogs. There was no straightforward relationship between culling pressure and perceived pest status of the different species from the questionnaire data. For foxes and brown hares, the proportion of land managers (practitioners) carrying out lethal control was higher than that considering these species to be pests. However, the reverse was the case for mink. The most frequently used and effective control methods, which were most acceptable to practitioners and public alike, were various forms of shooting. The general public perceived hunting with dogs as one of the least acceptable means of control for all four species. Practitioners thought that hunting with dogs for red deer and the use of terriers against foxes were among the least acceptable forms of control, but considered hunting with dogs in other situations and for other species to be relatively acceptable. Most practitioners said a ban on hunting with dogs would make no difference to their management of the four species. A ban on hunting with dogs would have minimal impact on populations of foxes, red deer and mink, but it may be of conservation benefit to hares.