Poisoning Dingoes Has Domino Effect on Australia’s Biodiversity

Australia has a long history of poisoning its dingoes (Canis lupus dingo), which have an unfair reputation of preying on sheep and other livestock.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Australia has a long history of poisoning its dingoes (Canis lupus dingo), which have an unfair reputation of preying on sheep and other livestock. But according to a new study, killing the country's native canines may have had unintended consequences, dramatically impacting the biodiversity in regions where dingo populations have been reduced or removed.

The study, conducted by researchers from the University of New South Wales (UNSW) and other institutions, looked at 14 forested sites in that southeastern Australian province. Half of the sites experienced dingo poisoning during the prior five years. The rest had minimal dingo control efforts. The sites were divided into seven pairs, each with one poisoning site. The researchers then studied the local flora and fauna by directly observing them, identifying footprints and capturing small mammals in baited traps.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The results were striking: In each of the areas where dingoes had been poisoned, the researchers found increased numbers of large plant-eating mammals, such as kangaroos and wallabies. These places also harbored higher numbers of red foxes (Vulpes vulpes), one of the worst invasive species in Australia. All of those species normally make ready prey for dingoes and they appear to have thrived in the latter's absence.

But that wasn't all. Both the herbivores and the foxes needed more food as their populations increased. The researchers found that grazing by the kangaroos and wallabies reduced the amount of vegetative ground cover available to a variety of small mammals and rodents such as possums and bandicoots. This decline then appears to have exposed the smaller animals to predation by the foxes, causing their populations to drop.

"Predation by foxes is one of the most important threats to small native mammals," the study's lead author, UNSW fellow Mike Letnic, said in a press release. "Dingoes should not be poisoned if we want to halt the loss of mammal biodiversity in Australia." He called the poisoning of dingoes "counterproductive for biodiversity conservation," although he acknowledged that either maintaining or restoring dingo populations would be controversial. "We need to develop strategies to maintain the balance of nature by keeping dingoes in the bush, while minimizing their impacts on livestock," he said.

The study was published March 11 in Proceedings of the Royal Society B.

Dingo photo by Pavel Sigarteu. Red fox photographed in NWS by Harley Kingston. Both used under Creative Commons license

Previously in Extinction Countdown:

John R. Platt is the editor of The Revelator. An award-winning environmental journalist, his work has appeared in Scientific American, Audubon, Motherboard, and numerous other magazines and publications. His "Extinction Countdown" column has run continuously since 2004 and has covered news and science related to more than 1,000 endangered species. John lives on the outskirts of Portland, Ore., where he finds himself surrounded by animals and cartoonists.

More by John R. Platt

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe