Discover Top Posts Tagged with #dingo research

Progressive Dingo Management Strategies

Over the next year I will be involved in a project managed by Griffith University, in collaborations with residents from two peri-urban communities with an interest in animal management and environmental conservation. ‘Peri-urban’ areas are zones that have undergone rapid urbanisation of a once remote rural environment. These particular locations are extraordinary in their concentration of dingoes (and feral domestic dogs) and the incessant conflict between community members (predominantly farmers), but also newly arrived “urban refugees” (to use the term often quoted in the workshop).

The academics managing this project are not necessarily specialists in dingoes and invasive species, but experts in community empowerment and communication. Their expertise has been channelled to empower communities to challenge Government led and enforced management of invasive species, which all community members shared a dissatisfaction with, regardless of position regarding dingoes (and feral domestic dogs and other invasive species). While the population of dingoes is exceptionally high in these areas, they are exhibiting classic chaos behaviour in response to the traditional, exclusively lethal means to control dingoes (+ feral domestic dogs). These culls are typically controlled and enforced exclusively by local and state departments of government by means of 1080 poison baiting. All affected people – particularly farmers – have expressed concern that the impact of predatory species has continued to increase, despite a lack of monitoring and quantitive data measuring the effectiveness of current practises. Even farmers that carry out baiting are open to alternative measures of control, and the vast majority share concern for the welfare of animals that are killed by It is this projects goal to gather residents to create stratagems that reflect the diversification of values and welfare concerns of all community members. It creates and opportunity to open a forum of discussion between new and ‘old-school’ community members, reflecting their unique experiences, education and ethics. Farmers also have an opportunity to address the lack of results of these culls actually decreasing stock losses, and to voice their concerns over the rapid social change within their community. “Communities are often best-placed to take action because they have a unique and detailed understanding of the issues, challenges and opportunities in their community. A self-empowered community-led planning process can be an effective way for communities to come together to establish responses to threats to their lifestyles.”

All parties will benefit from the guidance of the research fellows. Their specialisation in self empowered community management ensures that and the objective of valuable action, is not limited to discussion, and the power of working within a community to add merit to suggested changes in practices. The objective of this workshop is to submit an application to the revision of the Wild Dog Management Strategy (2011 – 2016) which is up for review, due to the expiry date of the most recent plan by the Queensland Dog Offensive Group. This papers’ draft is available to the public, and open to suggestions that I can put forward to the researchers, regardless of whether you are local or not. It’s a good 17 pages long, so I’ll try to make a post to link it Here if anyone would like to have a read (Just give me a little time to figure out how haha). These are the key points explored in the submission, with my own notes highlighted in italics

1. A need to distinguish between dingos and non-dingoes throughout the strategy. (according to the taxonomy “Canis Dingo” & phenotype and status as its own species)

2. A need for greater community awareness, education and capacity building around wild dogs and dingoes and their management in peri-urban areas.

4. A need to quantify actual impacts of feral dogs and dingoes in peri-urban areas to inform best management practices, as well as the need for better understanding of dingo behaviour and ecological role based on the latest science (Reference material must be peer reviewed and critically analysed).

5. A need to consider the range of views of peri-urban residents that include, but are not limited to: the importance of dingo conservation, the appropriateness of current control methods (especially 1080 baiting) (with regard to welfare concerns and human accountability for domestic animal husbandry), the need to understand current impacts of wild dogs, and issues of personal responsibility and pet management.

6. A need to consider personal responsibility and preventive measures and improve residents’ compliance with relevant regulations (e.g. microchipping, desexing) (How to address undocumented and irresponsible behaviour with other methods that don’t simply rely on punishment, and provide motives for target audience?). A need for greater transparency and sharing of information (Accuracy of information available on Gov, academic and media resources, esp. regarding species distinction) between Government and local communities, especially in relation to wild dog impacts, sighting (With conclusive, first hand evidence of animals responsible for stock attacks – as in visual documentation of the attack, not just the aftermath. Attack could be by a range of invasive species – domestic dogs, pigs, foxes, cats, or dingoes), and management (community oriented and autonomous) outcomes in peri-urban areas.

“We note that although the desired outcomes of the current Strategy specifically include the conservation of dingoes (Desired Outcome 5), the vision does not mention conservation and is only focused on control. At the same time by only using the word impacts it implies that all impacts are negative, but dingoes can have positive ecological impacts (Johnson & VanDerWal, 2009; Letnic, Ritchie, & Dickman, 2012; Smith, 2015). We suggest that conservation of dingoes should be included within the vision in order to ensure conservation of dingoes is considered as equally important as control of wild dogs, and that it should be made explicit that the negative impacts should be minimised. We also note that community responsibility and involvement in this issue is vital (Martin, Low Choy, LeGal, & Lingard, 2016), and has been shown to be a key factor in successful wild dog management (Paroo Shire Council, 2011). This is reflected in Desired Outcome 2 in the current strategy. However, the group’s experience is that there was a reliance on and expectation of local government to take responsibility for this issue. To emphasise the importance of the community, the vision should include some reference to community responsibility”. - Submission to QDOG regarding Wild Dog Management Strategy

#canis dingo #dingo management #dingo conservation #dingo legislation #dingo welfare #dingoes are not dogs #or wolves #dingo research #community action #australian dingo #australia #biodiversity #ecology #land management #wildlife management #conservation

the-tabulariumreblogged your photoset:hey dogfang, I’ve got some more unusual dingoes...I’d have to grab the book and check, but I think Dr Brad Purcell was surprised to find that brindle dingoes are less... ahha!! I know the one :D I’ve got it here, but I’m still yet to get through it all... i may have gone on a book binge and overwhelmed myself a bit. I’m slowly getting there but haha. His book was my favourite of the ones I’ve bought though, by far. You’re right, there’s been taxonomic evidence of many coat differences dingoes before hybridisation was statistically viable enough to have any significant influence on the animals collected for the research into creating the official taxonomy. I’ll put a link here, there’s some photos of pelts and taxidermies they’ve collected, too. If you click on the “Diagnosis” subtitle, it’s in there. The text says:

“ Dingoes are dog-like and possess a fairly broad head, tapered muzzle, erect ears and a bushy tail (Kerr, 1792; Fig. 6). Relative to similar-sized domestic dogs, dingoes have longer and more slender muzzles. The 19th century dingoes we examined, like wolves but unlike many dogs, do not possess dewclaws on the hind legs (Ciucci et al., 2003). Dingoes can have five basic pelage colours: yellow, brown, ginger/red, black and white (Cairns, Wilton & Ballard, 2011). These colours occur in various combinations and 19th century skin specimens included animals that are entirely white (Fig. 6), entirely yellow/brown (Fig. 6), entirely black, yellow with white patches (Fig. 6), particularly at the tip of the tail and ankles (Fig. 6), and yellow with black fur along the dorsal parts of the body (sable, Fig. 6). The original specimen of C. dingo (Fig. 1) illustrated in Mazell & Phillip (1789) was uniformly brown on its dorsal surface, with the face, underparts and feet being white (Kerr, 1792). Other pre-1800 paintings included colours such as dark brown, reddish brown, and sandy with sabling (Supporting Information Figure S1).

The specimen of C. macdonnellensis (Matschie, 1915) ZMB 22418 at the Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin, and the specimen of C. familiaris australasiae (Desmarest, 1820) at the Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, were both predominantly yellow with some dark fur along the dorsum (sabling).

Historical records describing dingo colours are scant, and mostly not detailed (Elledge et al., 2006). The earliest report of a dingo from 1697 is of a ‘yellow-dog’ near Jurien, Western Australia (Abbott, 2008). Collins (1798) reported dingoes in the Sydney region as ‘two colours, the one red with some white about it, and the other quite black’. Explorer Mitchell (1839) reported a ‘small black native dog’ in northern central New South Wales in 1832. Historical descriptions of dingoes from Western Australia during the period 1826–1890, compiled by Abbott (2008), include red, yellow, black, black and white, white, tan and tawny animals.

Diagnosing the dingoDiagnosing what constitutes a dingo remains difficult due to the overlap in morphological characters with domestic dogs, localized adaptations in dingoes and morphological variation through time (Radford et al., 2012). Identification of diagnostic morphological characters is also difficult, especially when there is more variation within the domestic dogs in shape and size than in the whole Canidae (Drake & Klingenberg, 2010). Our morphological analyses showed that there is considerable overlap between domestic dogs and dingoes for most morphological characters. This was particularly the case for some Australian breeds, such as the Australian cattle dog, which are thought to have dingo ancestry (Arnstein, Cohen & Meyer, 1964). A similar degree of overlap in shape exists between North American wolves and closely related husky dogs (Clutton-Brock, Kitchener & Lynch, 1994).Consistent with previous studies, a broad cranium, widening of the palate and shortening of the rostrum were characteristics separating domestic dogs from dingoes (Newsome et al., 1980; Newsome & Corbett, 1982). Previous studies have regarded widening of the palate and shortening of the rostrum as indicators of domestication in dogs (Clutton-Brock, 2012). The 19th century skin specimens we examined possessed erect ears and a bushy tail. These characteristics were considered to be typical traits of dingoes in the original description given by Kerr (1792) and also in subsequent studies (Corbett, 1995; Elledge et al., 2008). Pre-20th century dingoes lacked dewclaws on the hind legs (Clutton-Brock, Corbet & Hills, 1976; Ciucci et al., 2003).The range of coat colours that can occur in dingoes is a controversial subject, with some authors only accepting black, and black and tan dingoes (Macintosh, 1975; Newsome & Corbett, 1985; Jones, 2009), while others only accepting yellow or light brown (ginger) and rejecting animals with dark dorsal fur (sable) (Elledge et al., 2008). The small sample of 19th century dingo skins and 18th century illustrations of dingoes we examined shows that there was considerable variability in the colour of dingoes, and that their coloration was not restricted to just yellow and white animals, but also included various combinations of yellow, white, brown and black. The range and combinations of coat colours in these skins and illustrations were consistent with historical accounts from the 19th century and observations of dingoes made by Newsome & Corbett (1985). Markings such as white spots restricted to feet, chest spot, neck flash, underbelly and tail tip, as used by the Australian National Kennel Council in the dingo breed standard (http://www.ankc.org.au/Breed_Details.aspx?bid=103), are not recorded in most early accounts, and are not present in all pre-1900 CE skins or illustrations.The presence of individuals with sable pelage (dark dorsal coloration and lighter lateral coloration: Fig. 6b,d) in the sample of 19th century skins suggests that this coloration is not necessarily indicative of hybridization as has been suggested by previous authors (Corbett, 1995; Elledge et al., 2008). The sample of skins and illustrations we examined did not include animals with brindle coloration. Brindle, dingo-like dogs appear in the historical record from the 1890s, and could plausibly be the result of hybridization, particularly as it is a colour pattern found in greyhounds, which were brought into Australia in 1788 and are not found in most older dog breeds (Cairns et al., 2011). However, the small sample size of specimens we examined does not allow inferences to be made as to whether brindle individuals are dingo-dog hybrids or dingoes.” Oh man... that’s a bit of a wall of text, sorry! I’m absolutely not an expert on genetic purity though, it’s such a complex issue, when it can be bred in/out of DNA tests, and pups of the same litter will come up with such drastically different percentile of dingo vs dog alleles.. I’ve had a few discussions with the lecturer for Wild Dog Ecology class who is involved with the same research project as Guy Ballard (the scientist that is sharing these photos/ findings that I’ve been following), and he seemed to have the attitude of “Arrrghhh So Wibbley Wobbley Timey Wimey!”.. I’ve had similar responses from other researchers I’ve spoken with, but it’s one of those issues which is a bit controversial and I haven’t really had the chance to find someone who specialises in genetic research of dingoes, specifically. Dr Brad’s is one of my absolute favourite scientists, but I’m a bit wary of generalisations when it comes to something as much of a grey area (but still very interesting one) as coat colour, as opposed to diet, social behaviour, bone structure, etc. I know that common sense plays a part in seeing different parts in the whole animal (individually and as a species), but there are people who literally have a heap of dingo pups brought to them, and they pick out the ginger ones with white paws and tips, call them “dingoes” and consider them wildlife, while picking out the others who are sabel, brindle, black/tan, or solid ginger, and call them “dogs” and give them away as pets. These are animals from the same litter, too. It’s just insane.. There are also hunters who will kill a sabel dingo and claim it wasn’t a dingo at all, it must have been a kelpie or shepherd cross. There are dingo sanctuaries who will refuse a brindle animal because it must be a dog, must be part staffy. There are government sites which describe anything other than ginger with white tips, white, or black and tan, as wild dog hybrids that need to be killed. I’m ranting a bit by this point, but not at you (cus you’re awesome and i love your reply), just because there’s so much social and scientific consequences from fascination or damnation of dingoes based on their coat colour.

#dingo phenotype #dingo research #canis dingo #i don't understand genetics aaargh i'm sorry

These dingoes have features that indicate possibly hybridisation, but they are all successfully living wild, follow dingo-like breeding patterns, have a distinct territory and hunt native animals (like the brindle male with the bandicoot). When I say they all show some signs of dog history, it is only slight, unlike hybrids which are in captivity as companions. The top dark sable male looks like he may be a dingo-dog for how square his muzzle is, his paws are a bit splayed, and he has quite a stocky build and lower tuck. The black dingo with the white tip is the female of this breeding pair, who live on their own and breed once per year - so they are following dingo behavioural phenotypes, even though her eyes are a bit softer and rounder than a dingo, and her ears are in a higher position.. she actually looks a tiny bit border collie-ish? The longer haired brindle is another cool tiger striped dingo, but not a very clear photo. They’ve got a huge bandicoot for dinner, and as much as the photo is terrible to judge, they seem to have a more doglike body shape, shorter legs and are much heavier set than a typical dingo (which weighs 16kg).

It’s often repeated that hybridisation is the biggest threat to dingoes as a species, but this has been addressed in the most recent paper detailing the Taxonomic status of Australian Dingoes, and confirming their place as a native canid species of Australia - entirely seperate from breeds and subspecies of dogs or wolves.

“There are three reasons why the frequency of dingo–domestic dog hybrids might be overstated; (1) Current DNA testing methods (i.e., Stephens et al. 2015 or Wilton 2001) were designed without knowledge of the geographical, phenotypic, and genetic variation within dingoes (Cairns & Wilton 2016, Cairns et al. 2017). Thus, when comparing dingoes in southeast Australia to those in the northwest, they might appear different, and so could be falsely labelled as having dog ancestry. (2) Most studies of the genetic integrity of dingo populations have been done with the goal of establishing the distribution of dingo–domestic dog admixture, rather than of populations devoid of any dog ancestry. That is, samples used for genetic studies (e.g., Stephens et al. 2015) are biased towards animals collected (killed) from areas with high human activity and artificially abundant food resources. As a result, samples do not always reflect dingoes that do not encounter dogs. (3) There are some behavioural barriers that hinder hybridisation in canids (Hinton et al. 2018). It is difficult for a feral domestic dog to integrate and compete with a large dingo population that has a stable pack structure (Corbett 2001b). As is the case for wolf hybridisation with other Canis species (Vilà & Wayne 1999), behavioural and physiological differences make mating difficult, and hybrid offspring can exhibit lower fitness in the wild.

For these reasons, Vilà and Wayne (1999) argued that hybridisation is not a major management concern, and that natural selection will help ensure that the behavioural sequences necessary for survival and reproduction are maintained and passed onto subsequent generations (Jones 1990). Research on dingo-domestic dog hybridisation raises the question of how the biological population of dingoes is delimited. The proposed definition of a dingo by Smith and Savolainen (2015) excludes all dingoes that have dog ancestry (as well as free-living domestic dogs with modern domestic ancestry, such as a pet dog that has escaped a farm, a hunting dog abandoned in the bush, or a village dog).

However, given that most wild dingo–dog hybrids have a higher proportion of dingo ancestry than domestic dog ancestry (Stephens et al. 2015), and in the wild hybrids express a ‘dingo identity’ in morphology (Parr et al. 2016), ecology (Glen 2010), and seasonality (Cursino et al. 2017), not all hybrids should be completely excluded from modern definitions of the dingo. Instead, considering vonHoldt et al.’s (2017) suggestion of a 10-20% threshold of genomic admixture (e.g., between coyotes and wolves), we concur that an adjustment might be needed to the existing definition of dingoes to include those with at least 75% dingo genetic identity (Glen 2010; Purcell 2010; Parr et al. 2016).”

#canis dingo #dingo #australian dingo #dingo phenotype #dingo research #wild dingo hybrids #dingo hybrid discussion #australian dingo cross #dingo morphology

dogfang reblogged this from forthedingoes and added:gorgeous, never seen one like this! are there other pelt variations that you know of? hiya :) Here are some more beautiful and non-typical coat variations, I’m having a look through folders of images I’ve stashed away to post now that I’m feeling more in the swing of things again. I’ll add some more as I find them, and tag you if you like? There are also some characteristics that are found in particular areas due to genetic mutation and closed breeding animals (largely due to baiting) which have resulted in some animals having curled tails, or stumpy tails. The effect of age is fascinating in itself. Dingoes are typically dark when born, then their coats fade, and can change with seasons influencing undercoats. And the weather! haha I have never seen such fluffy dingoes than the ones in the New England area (it’s feckin COLD beyond the telling of it).

#canis dingo #dingo variation #australian dingo #dingo research

A PhD student who led research into dingoes in the Northern Territory says it’s better ecologically to let the animals take “one or two cows here and there” than to bait them on farms.

Sydney-based University of NSW student Viyanna Leo, 32, said she has visited the Territory at least nine times over the past two years as part of her study on the effects of dingoes as ecosystem regulators in tropical systems

“I worked out in remote areas ... I spent five months in the bush on one occasion ... where I was looking at the ecological affects of dingoes as an apex predator,” Ms Leo said.

“I researched properties that eliminated dingoes with bait and compared them with properties where they didn’t bait the dingoes with poison.”

Ms Leo said her main findings, which are yet to be published, revealed that the ecological effects of dingoes were the same in arid zones as they were in tropical environments.

“When you have dingoes, kangaroos are kept at a lower level,” she said.

“Where dingoes were controlled, kangaroos were abundant, and this affects the grass because they graze a lot.

“Where dingoes weren’t controlled, they controlled the kangaroos and kept the numbers down and the eco system was more balanced.

“Dingoes also control cats.

“So everything needs a predator.”

Ms Leo said farmers invested “a lot of money in poison to control dingoes”.

“Then they invest all this other money into controlling kangaroos because all their pastures are damaged,” she said.

“Those who don’t control dingoes and allow one or two cows here and there to be taken, will have much lesser costs than those trying to constantly control dingoes.” Ms Leo said she was yet to analyse all of her data but that aspects of her research had surprised her including how important dingoes were to the ecosystem.

Originally published as ‘Let them eat cows’

#canis dingo #australian dingo #dingo research #predator friendly farming

Wild babies exploring quoll traps and triggering motion sensor cameras in the New England forest, researched by Guy Ballard and the team from UNE (my uni).

#canis dingo #dingo pups #wild dingo #dingo research #australian dingo