New research shown to farmers during DEECA consultation sessions suggests the majority of ‘wild dogs’ are in fact pure dingos.
Scientists have assured farmers concerned with wild dogs that recent genetic research does not mean government policy will change on control measures.
Hold tight - we’re checking permissions before loading more content
Representatives from DEECA met with more than 400 landholders in five statewide consultation meetings on September 4 to 6.
Arthur Rylah Institute chief biodiversity officer and acting directorJames Todd hosted round-table discussions with livestock farmers at the government’s final consultation in Mansfield on Friday, September 6.
Dr Todd told farmers the results of Kylie Cairns’ 2023 study, which showed the majority of Australia’s wild dogs were dingos, was only one factor of the government’s intended policy update.
He also presented a DEECA survey for Victoria that supported Dr Cairns’ study.
“It’s an input, like your input here,” Dr Todd said.
“The science does not (necessarily) mean the policy changes.”
In answer to criticism that previous research into dog populations was being ignored, Dr Todd said current genetic testing methods were more valuable and that most of the genetic ‘markers’ being tested were showing similar results in determining the genetic background of both dogs and dingos.
“One marker is not enough; testing more genetic markers gives a more powerful analysis,” he said.
“The research is using the most modern methods and these methods are very powerful.
“Science is evolving.”
Dr Todd presented a ‘principal component analysis’ which showed four different groups of wild dogs, separated by the least variable data.
Three distinct groups of dingoes were found, representing the alpine, desert and mallee areas, while a fourth group represented domestic dogs.
The minimal cross-bred or back-crossed dogs came from interstate data as a comparison.
Previous studies in 2015 used 23 genetic markers and suggested the dingo was endangered.
The DEECA study used 4000 markers and Dr Cairns’ work published last year used more than 195,000.
Dr Cairns told Country News that older testing methods developed in 1999 had been maintained to accrue more valuable data over time, but DNA testing methods had since improved vastly.
“As my research and the new DEECA research has shown, you are misidentifying animals with the old methods,” Dr Cairns said.
“More markers makes the study more robust.”
Further data provided by DEECA at the consultation showed that eastern Victoria had an estimated 4900 dingos with a density of one dingo every eight square kilometres.
The north-west of the state — where the unprotection order on dingos is now lifted — has a dingo population of 170 (one per 50 square kilometres).
Several farmers at the meeting said they were now seeing more wild dogs than in the past with one landholder saying most of them ‘seemed to be’ regular dogs.
Dr Todd said cross-bred dogs were not persisting in the wild.
“They can interbreed because they are effectively the same species,” Dr Todd said.
“They might have progeny but those might not survive.”
Results of genetic testing of wild dogs in Victoria.
The above chart is the DEECA genetic survey of Victorian ‘wild dogs’.
In this analysis, the bottom axis is the most important and shows here a very large genetic distance between domestic dogs and three populations of dingoes.
The percentage value on that axis (19.4 per cent) is relatively high, which means the results are very robust. Kylie Cairns’ study reached 41.9 per cent.
The chart also shows cross-bred and back-crossed dogs from interstate data for comparison — none were found in Victoria.
The data come from 298 hair samples and more than 4000 genetic markers, in comparison to only 23 markers tested in a 2015 study.
In the genes
‘Wild dog’ is a coverall term used to identify both feral domestic dogs and dingos.
Dingos were introduced to Australia from Asia 3500 to 10,000 years ago as companions to humans.
The dingo is believed to have removed the mainland Thylacine as apex predator and established its evolved place in the ecosystem.
Dingos and domestic dogs are the same species, something defined by the ability to interbreed, although scientists have named them as different subspecies: Canis lupus familiaris and Canis lupus dingo.
Kylie Cairns’ 2023 study found 87.1 per cent of Victoria’s wild dogs had more than 99.9 per cent dingo DNA.
15°C