Activity May Not Reflect the Numbers: An Assessment of Capture Rate and Population Density of Dingoes (Canis familiaris) Within Landscape-Scale Cell-Fencing

Most human-carnivore conflicts arise from the impact of predation on livestock. In Australian rangelands, considerable resources are allocated to constructing exclusion fences and implementing control measures to manage dingo populations for sustainable livestock enterprise. Assessing the effectiveness of these measures is crucial for justifying the investment. We used a replicated experimental design to examine the effect of landscape-scale dingo-proof exclusion fences ('cell-fencing') on activity and population density of dingoes in the Southern Rangelands of Western Australia. We monitored dingo populations for 22-24 months across six study sites nested within a landscape of about 75,000 km2 and defined 'fence level' as the number of dingo-proof fences enclosing each study site. We used camera trap capture rate (number of independent capture events per 100 trap nights) as a metric for dingo activity (including the availability of resources as other potential covariates), estimated dingo density using spatially explicit mark-resight models, and tested the relationship between capture rate and estimated density of dingoes for each study site. Significant variation in both metrics was observed between sites and across time. Fence level and prey occurrence significantly influenced dingo activity. The annual mean dingo density estimate across study sites was below two dingoes per 100 km2 (i.e., 0.02 dingoes per km2; the maximum value believed to be compatible with small livestock) at only one study site in the first year, but it was higher across all sites during the second year of monitoring. Dingo activity correlated with estimated dingo density at only two sites, suggesting differences in dingo behaviour and detection across the six study sites. This study provides experimental evidence that camera trap capture rate is not a reliable method for assessing variations in the population size of dingoes. These results have implications for monitoring outcomes of dingo control programs across Australia.

Distinctive diets of eutherian predators in Australia

Introduction of the domestic cat and red fox has devastated Australian native fauna. We synthesized Australian diet analyses to identify traits of prey species in cat, fox and dingo diets, which prey were more frequent or distinctive to the diet of each predator, and quantified dietary overlap. Nearly half (45%) of all Australian terrestrial mammal, bird and reptile species occurred in the diets of one or more predators. Cat and dingo diets overlapped least (0.64 ± 0.27, n = 24 location/time points) and cat diet changed little over 55 years of study. Cats were more likely to have eaten birds, reptiles and small mammals than foxes or dingoes. Dingo diet remained constant over 53 years and constituted the largest mammal, bird and reptile prey species, including more macropods/potoroids, wombats, monotremes and bandicoots/bilbies than cats or foxes. Fox diet had greater overlap with both cats (0.79 ± 0.20, n = 37) and dingoes (0.73 ± 0.21, n = 42), fewer distinctive items (plant material, possums/gliders) and significant spatial and temporal heterogeneity over 69 years, suggesting the opportunity for prey switching (especially of mammal prey) to mitigate competition. Our study reinforced concerns about mesopredator impacts upon scarce/threatened species and the need to control foxes and cats for fauna conservation. However, extensive dietary overlap and opportunism, as well as low incidence of mesopredators in dingo diets, precluded resolution of the debate about possible dingo suppression of foxes and cats.