The dingo debate is heating up. How we manage these animals will determine their future

What should we do about dingoes?

How we manage dingoes is a source of heated debate. Dingoes play an integral ecological role as a top predator, and have immense cultural significance to First Nations communities. However, many farmers view dingoes as a threat to their livestock, livelihoods and mental health.

The New South Wales government is grappling with this tension, as a parliamentary inquiry considers how to manage dingo populations in the state’s national parks.

In NSW, dingoes are not protected under state law but are legally managed under the category of “wild dogs”, a term that includes dingoes.

The inquiry is currently examining the genetic status, ecological role and cultural significance of dingoes. The inquiry received nearly 400 public submissions.

The dingo debate

The NSW government relies on several core values to guide how it manages the state’s national parks. These include protecting biodiversity, keeping ecosystems intact and upholding the values of local First Nations communities. These principles must be balanced with the need for research and sustainable tourism.

When it comes to dingoes, the crucial question is whether dingo control within national parks conflicts with these considerations.

There is a mounting push to strengthen protection for dingoes across the country, and particularly in national parks. The ecological argument emphasises their role as a top predator that keeps numbers of kangaroos, foxes and other invasive species under control. From a cultural perspective, archaeological evidence chronicles the long-standing relationships between dingoes and Indigenous Australians. Today, dingoes remain a culturally significant native animal among First Nations communities.

However, the argument for controlling dingoes revolves around the damage they can inflict on livestock and rural communities. In areas where dingo habitat overlaps with farms, particularly those with sheep and goats, dingoes have been known to attack, maim, and kill livestock. This can cost farmers thousands of dollars in lost income. Harder to quantify is the psychological toll of losing animals and worrying about future dingo attacks.

Noticing the nuance

The debate about dingoes is often framed as a battle between farmers on the one hand, and conservationists and dingoes on the other. But this is misleading.

The conventional way of managing dingoes involves indiscriminate killing. This is typically done through large scale baiting programs targeting areas where dingoes are known to kill livestock.

However, there is little evidence to suggest this approach actually protects livestock. In one study, for example, baiting across four cattle stations reduced the relative abundance of dingoes but did not reduce how many calves were lost.

And while baiting can curb dingo numbers, these effects can be short lived. Reducing dingo numbers doesn’t necessarily protect livestock from unexpected attacks.

Read more: Dingoes found in New South Wales, but we’re killing them as ‘wild dogs’

Where to from here

The dingo inquiry could pave the way for a more nuanced approach to dingo management that limits livestock deaths while valuing the ecological role and cultural value of dingoes.

Several non-lethal control methods – including exclusion fencing, guardian animals and targeted responses to individual problem animals – could be effective in managing dingo numbers on lands that neighbour national parks.

But introducing these methods on a large scale comes with major hurdles, such as the high costs of fencing and training guardian animals. Major policy changes are required to recognise dingoes as a native species, protect them within national parks and fund the research needed to understand how people and dingoes can co-exist.

By introducing non-lethal control strategies in or near to national parks, NSW would align with other jurisdictions across the globe that are successfully managing the tension between apex predators and livestock. It would also make NSW a leader in Australian dingo management.

With public hearings concluded, the NSW dingo inquiry is now considering what an alternative approach could look like. The question is no longer whether dingoes should be controlled, but how we can better live alongside them.

Niraj Meisuria is a committee member of the Australasian Wildlife Management Society. He is also a member of the Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales and the Ecological Society of Australia.

Thomas Newsome receives funding from the Australian Research Council. He is president of the Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales and a member (and past president) of the Australasian Wildlife Management Society. He is also a member of the Australian Mammal Society and the Ecological Society of Australia.

Rhys Cairncross does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.