Dingo Management Research Articles

Activity of dingoes (Canis familiaris) and their use of anthropogenic resources in the Strzelecki Desert, South Australia

Context Managing human–wildlife conflict where anthropogenic resources are provided is difficult. Providing food, water and shelter can result in over-abundant dingo populations, especially in Australian desert mine sites where managing dingoes, wildlife and humans around waste-management facilities and camps is problematic. Aims To measure and characterise the spatial activities of a population of arid-zone dingoes in relation to resources provided by a Cooper Basin (Strzelecki Desert, South Australia mining operation). The results were used to facilitate effective dingo management. Methods Free-roaming dingoes were captured, their morphometrics and ectoparasite presence recorded, and they were fitted with Iridium (GPS) radio collars. These were used to collect high-fidelity data about individual dingo activity and movements in relation to mine-site infrastructure and the Cooper Basin ecosystem. Key results A high density of dingoes (181 trapped in 2 km2 per 4 years) was associated with the mining operation. Home range/activity area sizes and usage of the anthropogenic landscape showed the following three categories of dingo: desert, peripatetic and tip dingoes. Dingoes reliant on food provisioning at the waste-management facility (WMF) displayed activity areas with a strong focus on the WMF (tip dingoes). Temporal activity patterns of another group of dingoes (peripatetic dingoes) were associated with regular waste-dumping times and normal nocturnal activity away from the WMF. Of the 27 dingoes collared, 30% (i.e. desert dingoes) were not dependent on the WMF, spending more time and a greater area of use in the desert dune system than in the mine-site area. Conclusions On the basis of the capture of 181 dingoes over 4 years and home-range analysis, it is likely that anthropogenic resource provisioning has caused an overabundance of dingoes in the Cooper Basin mine site. However, some of the dingo population remains reliant on native wildlife and resources in the surrounding desert. Managing food waste and excluding dingoes from food, water and shelter will result in a change in the prevalence of dingoes in the mine site, and subsequent reduction in the risk of disease transmission, native wildlife impacts, human conflicts and social pressures on dingoes, influencing them to revert to domestic-dog behaviours. Implications Waste-management facilities where food is dumped provide resources that lead to a change in wild-dingo behaviour, on the basis of their acceptance of human-provided resources, and high abundance. Managing access to anthropogenic resources will reduce the population as well as unwanted or aggressive encounters with humans. Dingoes reliant on food scraps will be encouraged to adjust their activity areas to desert habitat, thereby providing natural hunting opportunities and reduced contact rates with conspecifics, thus potentially reducing pathogen transmission.

Genomic signatures of bottleneck and founder effects in dingoes.

Dingoes arrived in Australia during the mid-Holocene and are the top-order terrestrial predator on the continent. Although dingoes subsequently spread across the continent, the initial founding population(s) could have been small. We investigated this hypothesis by sequencing the whole genomes of three dingoes and also obtaining the genome data from nine additional dingoes and 56 canines, including wolves, village dogs and breed dogs, and examined the signatures of bottlenecks and founder effects. We found that the nucleotide diversity of dingoes was low, 36% less than highly inbred breed dogs and 3.3 times lower than wolves. The number of runs of homozygosity (RoH) segments in dingoes was 1.6-4.7 times higher than in other canines. While examining deleterious mutational load, we observed that dingoes carried elevated ratios of nonsynonymous-to-synonymous diversities, significantly higher numbers of homozygous deleterious Single Nucleotide Variants (SNVs), and increased numbers of loss of function SNVs, compared to breed dogs, village dogs, and wolves. Our findings can be explained by bottlenecks and founder effects during the establishment of dingoes in mainland Australia. These findings highlight the need for conservation-based management of dingoes and the need for wildlife managers to be cognisant of these findings when considering the use of lethal control measures across the landscape.

Genome-wide variant analyses reveal new patterns of admixture and population structure in Australian dingoes.

Admixture between species is a cause for concern in wildlife management. Canids are particularly vulnerable to interspecific hybridisation, and genetic admixture has shaped their evolutionary history. Microsatellite DNA testing, relying on a small number of genetic markers and geographically restricted reference populations, has identified extensive domestic dog admixture in Australian dingoes and driven conservation management policy. But there exists a concern that geographic variation in dingo genotypes could confound ancestry analyses that use a small number of genetic markers. Here, we apply genome-wide single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping to a set of 402 wild and captive dingoes collected from across Australia and then carry out comparisons to domestic dogs. We then perform ancestry modelling and biogeographic analyses to characterise population structure in dingoes and investigate the extent of admixture between dingoes and dogs in different regions of the continent. We show that there are at least five distinct dingo populations across Australia. We observed limited evidence of dog admixture in wild dingoes. Our work challenges previous reports regarding the occurrence and extent of dog admixture in dingoes, as our ancestry analyses show that previous assessments severely overestimate the degree of domestic dog admixture in dingo populations, particularly in south-eastern Australia. These findings strongly support the use of genome-wide SNP genotyping as a refined method for wildlife managers and policymakers to assess and inform dingo management policy and legislation moving forwards.

Characterisation of volatile organic compounds in dingo scat and a comparison with those of the domestic dog

Olfaction is a widespread mode of communication in mammals. The volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in biological samples such as scat and urine give them either a repellent property to warn prey or an attractant property to communicate reproductive, social, and territorial status to conspecifics. The aim of this study was to determine whether there are VOC differences in the scat of a dingo compared to that of a domestic German Shepherd Dog (GSD). We standardised the diet for 10 days and then collected scat from 14 dingoes and 11 GSDs. Using headspace solid phase microextraction (HS-SPME) with gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS), we characterised VOCs present in the dingo scat and compared the composition with those of GSDs. We identified 58 significant VOCs out of a total of 154 VOCs identified in both dingoes and GSDs. Of these, 12 were significantly higher in the scat of dingoes and 46 elevated in the GSD. Of the 12 elevated in the dingo, three were unique and present in high concentration (>10 ng/g), four were elevated and present in high concentration and five were present at low concentrations (<10 ng/g). We suggest that the detected differences show potential to be incorporated into dingo management strategies.

Unlocking Lethal Dingo Management in Australia

Adoption by livestock producers of preventive non-lethal innovations forms a critical pathway towards human and large carnivore coexistence. However, it is impeded by factors such as socio-cultural contexts, governing institutions, and ‘perverse’ economic incentives that result in a ‘lock-in’ of lethal control of carnivores in grazing systems. In Australian rangelands, the dingo is the dominant predator in conflict with ‘graziers’ and is subjected to lethal control measures despite evidence indicating that its presence in agricultural landscapes can provide multiple benefits. Here we explore the barriers to the uptake of preventive innovations in livestock grazing through 21 in-depth interviews conducted with Australian graziers, researchers, and conservation and government representatives. Drawing on Donella Meadow’s leverage points for system change framework, we focus, primarily, on barriers in the ‘political sphere’ because they appear to form the greatest impediment to the adoption of non-lethal tools and practices. These barriers are then discussed in relation to characteristics of lock-in traps (self-reinforcement, persistence, path dependencies, and undesirability) to assess how they constrain the promotion of human–dingo coexistence.

Pathways to coexistence with dingoes across Australian farming landscapes

IntroductionAgriculture and biodiversity conservation are both vitally important human activities that overlap geographically and are often in conflict. Animal agriculture has been implicated in species loss and the degradation of ecosystems due to land clearing, overgrazing, and conflicts with large carnivores such as dingoes (Canis dingo). This paper explores the potential for transformation in Australian commercial livestock production from human-dingo conflict towards social-ecological coexistence.MethodA qualitative model that depicts transformative change was developed from field observations and twenty-one in-depth interviews with livestock producers, conservation researchers, grazing industry representatives and policy makers across Australia. The model articulates the current state of dingo management and the drivers of system change.ResultsSeven pathways are described to catalyse transformation from routine lethal management of dingoes towards a future vision that embeds mutually beneficial coexistence. Central to transformation is the adoption by livestock producers of preventive non-lethal innovations supported by a new farming movement, Predator Smart Farming, that balances livestock grazing and wildlife conservation values to unlock the resilience of landscapes, animals (domesticated and wild) and livelihoods. Other key pathways include targeted research, capacity building, outreach and knowledge sharing networks; institutional (policy, legislation, and economic incentives) and cultural change; public awareness raising and advocacy to reduce lethal control; and greater involvement of Indigenous Australians in decisions relating to wildlife management.DiscussionThe seven transition pathways are discussed in relation to how they can collectively foster coexistence with dingoes in extensive rangelands grazing systems. International examples of interventions are used to illustrate the types of successful actions associated with each pathway that could inform action in Australia. The findings have implications for coexistence with large carnivores in rangeland ecosystems globally.

The Role of Socialisation in the Taming and Management of Wild Dingoes by Australian Aboriginal People.

Simple SummaryThe dingo (Canis dingo) is a wild-living canid endemic to mainland Australia; the descendent of an early lineage of dog introduced thousands of years ago to the continent, where it was isolated from further introductions of domestic canines until European colonisation began in 1788. Dingoes are notoriously difficult to maintain in captivity and owing to their predatory nature it is also known that they can pose a serious risk to children. Yet, written records and oral histories indicate that Aboriginal people in mainland Australia routinely practiced the rearing and keeping of dingoes in a tame state within their home communities and domestic spaces. This paper reviews historical and archaeological evidence for the management of wild and captive dingoes by Indigenous communities, revealing a substantial divide between the nature and outcomes of these interactions between historical/pre-contact Aboriginal societies and those in contemporary Australia. It is concluded that this special human-wild canid relationship has implications for the understanding of the domestication of dogs from wolves during the Late Pleistocene.Historical sources and Indigenous oral traditions indicate that Australian Aboriginal people commonly reared and kept the wild-caught pups of dingoes (C. dingo) as tamed companion animals. A review of the available evidence suggests Indigenous communities employed an intense socialisation process that forged close personal bonds between humans and their tame dingoes from an early age. This was complemented by oral traditions which passed down awareness of the dangers to children posed by wild or unfamiliar dingoes, and which communicated the importance of treating dingoes with respect. Together, these practices resulted in what can be interpreted as substantially altered behaviours in tamed dingoes, which, despite their naturally high prey drive, were not considered a serious threat to children and were thus able to be maintained as companion animals in the long term. This relationship is of importance for understanding the original domestication of the dog, as it demonstrates a means by which careful and deliberate socialisation by foragers could both manage risks to children’s safety posed by keeping wild canids in the domestic realm and retain them well into reproductive maturity—both issues which have been highlighted as obstacles to the domestication of dogs from wolves.

Does management of a top carnivore influence the response of mesopredators and prey to rainfall in arid ecosystems? Evidence for a Baseline Density theory

The removal of apex carnivores from ecosystems can impact the abundance and diversity of species in lower trophic levels. In arid ecosystems, where “bottom up” forces of primary productivity and resource availability strongly affect trophic interactions, the role of “top down” effects is still much debated. This study explored the potential role of an apex predator, the dingo, as a “top down” trophic regulator in Australian arid ecosystems under different levels of primary productivity and dingo management regimes. Consistent with the theory of top down regulation, strong relationships were found between dingo management, dingo activity and fox activity. Dingoes appeared to suppress fox activity where dingoes were uncontrolled or only opportunistically controlled. At sites where dingoes were absent or in low numbers, fox activity was higher, and this inverse relationship persisted regardless of rainfall. The activity of rabbits and small mammals was lower where dingoes were absent and fox activity was high, while the activity of macropods was higher in the absence of dingoes. Feral cat activity did not differ significantly between sites under different dingo management or between years. These results suggest that management of dingoes is a key determinant of fox activity and the activity of some prey under varying levels of productivity. Evidence from this research showed that while the strength of trophic regulation by dingoes may fluctuate, top down effects occurred both prior to and post significant rainfall events. Following this, top down regulation of fox populations during dry periods at sites where dingoes are retained may enable higher and more stable “baseline” densities of small vertebrates, from which a larger and more rapid rate of increase of these prey during the “boom” periods can occur. Understanding the relative strength and interactions of top down and bottom up forces in regulating populations, and under what ecological states the importance of each changes, is important for the long-term conservation of biodiversity in arid regions.

The myth of wild dogs in Australia: are there any out there?

Hybridisation between wild and domestic canids is a global conservation and management issue. In Australia, dingoes are a distinct lineage of wild-living canid with a controversial domestication status. They are mainland Australia’s apex terrestrial predator. There is ongoing concern that the identity of dingoes has been threatened from breeding with domestic dogs, and that feral dogs have established populations in rural Australia. We collate the results of microsatellite DNA testing from 5039 wild canids to explore patterns of domestic dog ancestry in dingoes and observations of feral domestic dogs across the continent. Only 31 feral dogs were detected, challenging the perception that feral dogs are widespread in Australia. First generation dingo × dog hybrids were similarly rare, with only 27 individuals identified. Spatial patterns of genetic ancestry across Australia identified that dingo populations in northern, western and central Australia were largely free from domestic dog introgression. Our findings challenge the perception that dingoes are virtually extinct in the wild and that feral dogs are common. A shift in terminology from wild dog to dingo would better reflect the identity of these wild canids and allow more nuanced debate about the balance between conservation and management of dingoes in Australia.

Applying a social-ecological system framework to diagnose drivers of dingo management practices

Social-ecological system (SES) frameworks offer a way of diagnosing the economic, environmental, and social issues driving human-canid conflict, and can assist in the development and testing of management interventions. SES-based approaches to carnivore management in the context of conflicts with humans are limited and highlight a growing need to develop new initiatives involving a broad spectrum of interested parties. To help identify management opportunities provided by using a SES applied to human-canid conflict, we apply the principles of Elinor Ostrom’s multi-tiered framework and develop a SES relating to dingo management in the Australian rangelands. This SES posits variables influencing management practices for dingoes and identifies key management opportunities. We use the framework to categorise first-tier sub-components of the SES, propose second-tier variables specific to the SES (referring to past history or experiences of relevant actors and government resource policies), and identify pathways or interactions for testing (e.g., the influence of scientific evidence on policy, development of educational packages, uptake of new knowledge, and impact of socio-economic status). The proposed SES demonstrates the potential for such approaches to help resolve human-dingo conflict, highlights variables that may influence dingo management practices, and presents opportunities for testing these variables empirically.

A Theory of Change for promoting coexistence between dingoes and livestock production

AbstractAchieving conservation goals, such as coexistence between wildlife and humans, requires an evidence‐based understanding of the factors that shape conservation contexts. For addressing conflict between humans and wildlife, this means understanding the barriers and opportunities to changing human behaviors toward wildlife. Here, we develop a Theory of Change (ToC) to promote coexistence between livestock producers and dingoes in Australia. The ToC is based on behavior change principles and interdisciplinary research identifying four key stakeholder groups who may influence dingo management. It employs four overlapping strategies to address these barriers: (a) a media campaign to promote public awareness of dingo management practices, which may result in pressure upon governments to restrict lethal control; (b) promoting more inclusive decision‐making processes, specifically including Aboriginal Australians; (c) monitoring and evaluation of the effects of dingo management on livestock and ecosystems to identify opportunities for nonlethal dingo management; (d) campaign to encourage adoption of nonlethal management methods by livestock producers based on an understanding of sociopsychological factors that shape behaviors. The framework is a tool for conservation advocates and policymakers to implement and monitor change that facilitates both wildlife conservation and thriving rural communities.

There is no Dingo dilemma: legislation facilitates culling, containment and conservation of Dingoes in New South Wales

The perceived dilemma about Dingoes overly simplifies a complex “wicked problem”. Similarly, it is simplistic to suggest that to “cull, contain or conserve” Dingoes are mutually exclusive options or are the only options for managing Dingoes at a state-wide level. The legal instruments enacted and implemented in New South Wales (NSW) attempt to accommodate conflicting values, impacts and drivers. Since the first Dingo symposium in 1999, there has been a series of legislative changes pertaining to Dingo management. That legislation, and associated regulation and policy, addresses the management of Dingoes and other free-roaming dogs such that the dilemma is perceived rather than actual. The main new legal operand in New South Wales is the Biosecurity Act 2015, but other States have similar legislation. Here we outline the application of this Act and others to the management of Dingoes in NSW and conclude that they can be variously culled, contained and conserved, within and across large landscapes, depending on context and managers’ objectives.

Elucidating dingo’s ecological roles: contributions from the Pelorus Island feral goat biocontrol project

Understanding the ecological roles of apex predators remains an important field of study. The influence of apex predators on ecosystems can be either profound or negligible in different situations, and uncertainty still exists about the ecological roles of most top-predators, including Australian dingoes. This uncertainly is maintained by a dearth of experimental evidence investigating their roles. Such evidence is indispensable if dingo management is to be evidence-based. In this report, we discuss a recent experiment where dingoes were released on to an island as vertebrate biocontrol tools intended to eradicate feral goats and restore native vegetation being threatened by the goats. The experiment was successful, and the dingoes reduced the goat population to one or perhaps two male goats within ~2 years. This predator introduction experiment elucidated dingo’s effects on small livestock, their per capita predation rates, and their invasiveness or their ability to adapt and change their environment. The experiment confirmed that dingoes have the capacity to decimate populations of small livestock species and trigger a trophic cascade by reducing herbivory on vegetation. We encourage further manipulative experiments to explore the ubiquity of these results in different contexts.

Wicked “wild dogs”: Australian public awareness of and attitudes towards dingoes and dingo management

Public opposition has shaped management of wild animals in Australia, but public interest in dingo control has been minimal. We hypothesised that this is due to lack of awareness of dingo management practices, in part because using the term “wild dogs” to describe management renders “dingoes” invisible, framing the issue as one of control of introduced pests rather than control of an iconic Australian animal. We distributed an online questionnaire survey to the Australian public (N = 811) to measure how the public perceived dingoes and their management, how these views compared with other animals managed as pests in Australia, and whether the term “wild dogs” has shaped views and knowledge of dingo management. Most respondents (84.6%) considered dingoes to be native to Australia and there was low approval of lethal control methods, except when justification was provided (e.g., to protect livestock or endangered native species). Only 19.1% were aware that “wild dog” management included dingoes, and attitudes towards “wild dogs” were more negative than those towards dingoes. If public awareness about dingo management increases, pressure from the public may result and shape future management actions, including restricting the use of lethal control practices like poison baiting on public lands. As such, public attitudes should be incorporated into decision-making, and appropriate communication strategies need to be employed to prevent backlash.

Minimizing animal welfare harms associated with predation management in agro-ecosystems.

The impacts of wild predators on livestock are a common source of human-wildlife conflict globally, and predators are subject to population control for this reason in many situations. Animal welfare is one of many important considerations affecting decisions about predation management. Recent studies discussing animal welfare in this context have presented arguments emphasizing the importance of avoiding intentional harm to predators, but they have not usually considered harms imposed by predators on livestock and other animals. Efforts to mitigate predation impacts (including 'no control' approaches) cause a variety of harms to predators, livestock and other wildlife. Successfully minimizing the overall frequency and magnitude of harms requires consideration of the direct, indirect, intentional and unintentional harms imposed on all animals inhabiting agricultural landscapes. We review the harms resulting from the management of dingoes and other wild dogs in the extensive beef cattle grazing systems of Australia to illustrate how these negative impacts can be minimized across both wild and domestic species present on a farm or in a free-ranging livestock grazing context. Similar to many other predator-livestock conflicts, wild dogs impose intermittent harms on beef cattle (especially calves) including fatal predation, non-fatal attack (mauling and biting), pathogen transmission, and fear- or stress-related effects. Wild dog control tools and strategies impose harms on dingoes and other wildlife including stress, pain and death as a consequence of both lethal and non-lethal control approaches. To balance these various sources of harm, we argue that the tactical use of lethal predator control approaches can result in harming the least number of individual animals, given certain conditions. This conclusion conflicts with both traditional (e.g. continuous or ongoing lethal control) and contemporary (e.g. predator-friendly or no-control) predation management approaches. The general and transferable issues, approaches and principles we describe have broad applicability to many other human-wildlife conflicts around the world.

A snapshot of changes in graziers’ management and attitudes towards dingoes over 60 years

Livestock producers and governments have managed predators to protect livestock for millennia. But in recent decades attitudes towards predators and their management have shifted from solely killing towards coexistence and even conservation. In Australia, a continent-wide survey of graziers conducted in the 1950s provides an opportunity to consider how attitudes and practices surrounding dingo management have changed over the last 60 years. We created a survey that repeated questions and themes from the 1950s study and sent this to 75 of the properties where the original survey had been completed. We received 23 complete or semicomplete responses. Ground-baiting and shooting continue to form a major focus of management on the focal properties, while fewer respondents used trapping and fencing in the current survey than in the 1950s. Ten properties had adopted either or both of two lethal methods (aerial baiting and hiring professional doggers) since the 1950s survey. Unlike the 1950s survey, three respondents used non-lethal methods only (animal husbandry or livestock guardian animals) and indicated that they support maintaining dingoes in the landscape. This change, albeit small, may suggest that attitudes towards dingoes by graziers have diversified from solely lethal control. We discuss these trends and consider the future of dingo management in Australia. In accordance with changing attitudes among some producers, we suggest that governments must now consider the diversity of approaches to managing livestock in the presence of dingoes and offer more training and support for those methods that are proven effective.

Pets and pests: a review of the contrasting economics and fortunes of dingoes and domestic dogs in Australia, and a proposed new funding scheme for non-lethal dingo management

Carnivore conservation and management is complex and expensive, and significant ongoing management costs may inhibit the development of new tools and any subsequent transition away from lethal control. We review and compare the economic costs and benefits of dingoes and domestic dogs in Australia and suggest that public affinity for domestic dogs may be co-opted into yielding more positive management outcomes for dingoes. Whereas Australians spend over AU$10 billion annually on purchasing and maintaining 4.2 million domestic dogs, landowners and government spend at least AU$30 million attempting to limit the density and distribution of dingoes, feral dogs, and their hybrids. These contrasting investments highlight the dual response of society towards domestic and wild members of the Canis genus. We suggest that a modest conservation levy on the sale of pet dogs or dog food, or both, could secure long-term funding to support efficacious non-lethal management of dingo impacts. A modest levy could generate AU$30 million annually, funding the development of non-lethal dingo-management tools without compromising existing management practices while new tools are investigated. Ultimately, a transition away from controlling dingoes through culling or exclusion fencing, to managing the negative impacts of dingoes could result in both more successful and sustainable management outcomes of dingoes and support the ecological, cultural and economic benefits they confer as Australia’s apex predator.

Attitudes towards dingoes (Canis dingo) and their management: a case study from a mining operation in the Great Sandy Desert, Western Australia

This study provides insight into the attitudes and perceptions of people who live alongside dingoes in a remote Australian mining town. A mixed-methods, self-administered questionnaire was circulated, targeting employees across 11 departments (n=160). Overall, employees saw dingoes favourably (60.5%), and believed that humans and dingoes should be able to coexist (75.8%). Dingoes were not considered to be causing unacceptable damage or to be overabundant, despite being seen almost daily at both the village and work sites. A total of 31.4% of employees had felt threatened or scared because of a dingo on more than one occasion, and 16.5% had experienced a dingo being aggressive towards them at least once. Yet, only 21.0% of employees considered dingoes dangerous to people, and few worried about their safety at the village or work site (9.5% and 11.4% respectively), or the safety of others in general (21.6%). There was a dichotomy of views regarding the dingo’s presence: employees were supportive of dingoes living in close proximity at the mine, as long as they were not directly being problematic (i.e. representing a personal threat, or causing property damage). Half of the employees surveyed (50.4%) felt that management decisions relating to dingoes were personally important to them, highlighting the need to ensure that employees are consulted, and that dingo management strategies are well communicated. These findings have implications for improving the success rates of management approaches to human–carnivore conflict at mine sites and other situations where predators are perceived to threaten human safety.

‘The dingo menace’: an historic survey on graziers’ management of an Australian carnivore

Studies of environmental history provide an important lens through which to analyse our contemporary thinking and practices. Here we consider historic management of the conflict caused by dingo predation on livestock. We present unpublished findings of a comprehensive national survey of graziers’ attitudes, knowledge and interactions with dingoes that was conducted by Professor N.W.G. Macintosh in the 1950s. By analysing the 137 responses from this survey, we sought to determine the factors that shaped graziers’ attitudes and management decisions. The four most popular management methods employed to protect livestock from dingoes were trapping (80%), ground-baiting (68%), fencing (44%), and shooting (34%). Whether a respondent had sheep or not was the strongest determinant of which management methods were used, with sheep graziers less likely to use ground-baiting and shooting and more likely to use trapping and fencing. While some patterns among responses were evident, the study reveals the complex nature of graziers’ experiences with dingoes and suggests that, given the lack of scientific evidence available to them at the time of Macintosh’s survey, their decisions, observations, and attitudes were influenced by contextual factors. We use this analysis to consider how history has shaped contemporary dingo management. While the economic, social and environmental context has changed since Macintosh’s survey over 60 years ago, some historical attitudes and practices surrounding dingoes have endured and attacks on livestock by dingoes continue to be regarded as a major threat to graziers.

Contemporary dingo management on K’gari (Fraser Island, Great Sandy National Park) under the Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service

ABSTRACTK’gari (Fraser Island) is the world’s largest sand island, lying off the east coast of mainland Australia, approximately 300 km north of Brisbane, Queensland. The island is the ancestral home of the Butchulla people, who call it K’gari, meaning paradise, and they continue to be active participants in the management and protection of the island. K’gari (Fraser Island) also has a shared history of logging and sand mining, and was partly designated as a National Park in 1971 with further additions in the following years. In July 2013, the Queensland Government, through the Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service (QPWS), released the Fraser Island Dingo Conservation and Risk Management Strategy (FIDCRMS), which included a range of management approaches to promote the best outcomes for human safety and dingo welfare on K’gari (Fraser Island). The strategy presents four programmes: Risk Intervention, Communication and Education, Research and Evaluation and Review. Compliance is recognised as an integral part of the strategy. Here, we describe and distil two of these programmes (Risk Intervention and Communication and Education) from a practical, on-ground perspective.