Dog days are just starting: the ecology invasion of free-ranging dogs (Canis familiaris) in a protected area of the Atlantic Forest

You Are Not Welcome! A Media Analysis of Risk Factors, Prevalence and Management of Free-Roaming Dogs in Iran

History has witnessed a long-term relationship between humans and animals. Historical documents and modern findings prove that humans' needs to use animals for companions or services are commonplace in many parts of the world, leading to the domestication of certain animals. Yet, modern societies have degraded many natural habitats for wildlife, confining them to small patches of landscapes or urban areas. Whether a domesticated/free-roaming animal or a wild species, their close contact with humans can create cumbersome situations for both species. This paper explores a link between online media content and on-the-ground efforts to manage free-roaming dogs as a rare case study. As indicated by news articles, the municipal costs of managing free-roaming dogs in Iranian cities have increased, and this can potentially derail the control of such dogs in the long run. This paper lays out pivotal factors for recent increasing human-animal encounters, which have led to many challenges (e.g., rabies) across cities in Iran. We show that some urban features (e.g., topography) can influence the presence and behaviours of free-roaming animals in the cities. The findings of this paper can be related to other developing countries where the plague of rabies is rising.

Are Tourists Facilitators of the Movement of Free-Ranging Dogs?

Dogs are the most abundant carnivores on earth and, as such, negatively impact wildlife. Free-ranging dogs roam in many protected areas, which in turn are often tourist destinations. Whether tourists influence their roaming is largely unexplored but highly relevant to wildlife conservation. To address this question, we obtained (i) 81 completed questionnaires from tourists on their experience with free-ranging dogs in the remote Cape Horn Biosphere Reserve, Chile, and (ii) photographs of three camera-traps placed next to trekking trails (n = 87 trap days). A third of the participants were followed by dogs for up to four days, and 39% saw free-ranging dogs on their hikes, but neither feeding dogs nor fear of them had any influence on whether tourists were followed by dogs. Camera-traps yielded 53 independent dog sequences, recorded 32 individuals plus 14 unidentified dogs, of which only one was leashed, with a frequency of one dog every 28^th person. In 17% of 53 sequences, dogs were photographed together with hikers carrying large backpacks for several-day trips. We conclude that tourists are facilitators for the movement of dogs and highlight the importance of the engagement of the tourism sector in wildlife conservation in and close to protected areas.