Predation of wildlife by free-ranging domestic dogs in Polish hunting grounds and potential competition with the grey wolf

Wierzbowska, Izabela A.; Hędrzak, Magdalena; Popczyk, Bartłomiej; Okarma, Henryk; Crooks, Kevin R.

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2016.06.016

Cited by 82 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 44 publications

(73 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(). While dogs can be effective deterrents of livestock depredation (Marker, Dickman, & Macdonald, ), they also hunt wild prey, compete with wild predators (Wierzbowska, Hędrzak, Popczyk, Okarma, & Crooks, ), and can be a reservoir for diseases such as canine distemper virus (CDV) and rabies, which have caused massive die‐offs of a variety of carnivores within this ecosystem (Lembo et al., ; Roelke‐Parker et al., ). Rabies has been confirmed in 12 carnivore species in the Serengeti National Park in Tanzania (Lembo et al., ) and was implicated in the local extinction of wild dogs (Cleaveland et al., ), while two CDV epidemics caused large‐scale mortality in lions throughout this ecosystem (Munson et al., ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of human–carnivore conflict hotspots to prioritize mitigation efforts

Broekhuis

Cushman

Elliot

2017

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human–carnivore conflict is a primary driver of carnivore declines worldwide and resolving these conflicts is a conservation priority. However, resources to mitigate conflicts are limited and should be focused on areas of highest priority. We conducted 820 semistructured interviews with community members living within Kenya's Maasai Mara ecosystem. A multiscale analysis was used to determine the influence of husbandry and environmental factors on livestock depredation inside livestock enclosures (bomas). Areas with a high proportion of closed habitat and protected areas had the highest risk of depredation. Depredation was most likely to occur at weak bomas and at households where there were fewer dogs. We used the results to identify potential conflict hotspots by mapping the probability of livestock depredation across the landscape. 21.4% of the landscape was classified as high risk, and within these areas, 53.4% of the households that were interviewed had weak bomas. Synthesis and applications. With limited resources available to mitigate human–carnivore conflicts, it is imperative that areas are identified where livestock is most at risk of depredation. Focusing mitigation measures on high‐risk areas may reduce conflict and lead to a decrease in retaliatory killings of predators.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of human–carnivore conflict hotspots to prioritize mitigation efforts

Broekhuis

Cushman

Elliot

2017

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The typical behavior of wolves toward dogs is aggressiveness (Fritts and Paul 1989, Kojola et al 2004, Lescureux and Linnell 2014, Peltola and Heikkilä 2015, Wierzbowska et al 2016, but in cases where the wolf is in a state of social isolation, it could alter its behavior completely and display playful or submissive behavior (Bibikov 1985). Additional support for this hypothesis provides the fact that the putative wolf is a young individual (probably recently dispersing), repeatedly limping with its front left leg in different recordings (Supplementary Appendix 2), which indicates a long-lasting trauma.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…roe deer Capreolus capreolus Linnaeus, 1758) in order to fulfill their energy requirements. The recruitment of the putative wolf could only enhance their hunting success, as hybrids have been shown to prey on wild boar (Sus scrofa Linnaeus, 1758) and roe deer, similarly to wolves and feral dogs ( Wierzbowska et al 2016, Bassi et al 2017.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Living a dog’s life: a putative gray wolf in a feral dog group

Popova

Zlatanova

2019

Mammalia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The gray wolf and the domestic dog are closely related species that can interbreed and produce fertile offspring. In settings where unrestrained dogs are present in the wild, hybridization can happen naturally. However, the behavior of the resulting hybrids and their ecological impact is largely understudied. In September–November 2018, a putative gray wolf was repeatedly camera-trapped in a group of 10 presumably feral dogs in a remote mountainous area (the Osogovo Mountain) along the border between Bulgaria and North Macedonia. The most feasible explanation for this individual’s atypical behavior is that it is of hybrid origin (assumption based on phenotype). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first documented observation of such a kind. A discussion of its recruitment and position in the group is presented, setting the basis for further investigation of the complex interaction between wolves, dogs and hybrids in the wild.

show abstract

“…Domestic dogs can also be responsible for the killing of livestock [45][46][47][48][49]; in particular, small-and medium-bodied livestock such as sheep, goats, and donkeys [45][46][47][48][49]. The loss of livestock contributes to substantial economic losses [45].…”

Section: The Impact Of Free-roaming Dogs On Wild and Domestic Animalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The financial consequences can be particularly problematic in areas of low-income communities [45]. Additionally, the loss of livestock can increase human-wildlife conflict, as predation by dogs is often mistaken for that of other species, such as wolves [45,46,49] or snow leopards [45]. This can hinder local support for conservation programs.…”

Section: The Impact Of Free-roaming Dogs On Wild and Domestic Animalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effectiveness of Dog Population Management: A Systematic Review

Smith

Hartmann²,

Munteanu³

et al. 2019

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple Summary: Domestic dogs are abundant worldwide-as owned pets, unowned strays, and feral animals. High numbers of free-roaming dogs can be a concern because of the risks they pose to public health, animal welfare, and wildlife. Using a systematic review process, we investigated what the research published to date can tell us about the effectiveness of different dog population management methods. We found that management methods for dog populations have been researched in multiple countries worldwide, using a wide range of indicators to assess method effectiveness. We outline the results and suggest improvements to help guide future dog population management policy. Abstract:The worldwide population of domestic dogs is estimated at approximately 700 million, with around 75% classified as "free-roaming". Where free-roaming dogs exist in high densities, there are significant implications for public health, animal welfare, and wildlife. Approaches to manage dog populations include culling, fertility control, and sheltering. Understanding the effectiveness of each of these interventions is important in guiding future dog population management. We present the results of a systematic review of published studies investigating dog population management, to assess: (1) where and when studies were carried out;(2) what population management methods were used; and (3) what was the effect of the method. We evaluated the reporting quality of the published studies for strength of evidence assessment. The systematic review resulted in a corpus of 39 papers from 15 countries, reporting a wide disparity of approaches and measures of effect. We synthesised the management methods and reported effects. Fertility control was most investigated and had the greatest reported effect on dog population size. Reporting quality was low for power calculations (11%), sample size calculations (11%), and the use of control populations (17%). We provide recommendations for future studies to use common metrics and improve reporting quality, study design, and modelling approaches in order to allow better assessment of the true impact of dog population management. Author Contributions: Conceptualisation, L.M.S., L.M.C., and R.J.Q.; methodology, L.M.S., L.M.C., and R.J.Q.; formal analysis, L.M.S.; investigation, L.M.S.; data curation, L.M.S.; writing-original draft preparation, L.M.S.; writing-review and editing, L.M.S., L.M.C., S.H., A.M.M., P.D.V., and R.J.Q.; visualisation, L.M.S.; supervision, L.M.C. and R.J.Q.; and funding acquisition, L.M.C. Funding: This research was funded by VIER PFOTEN International.Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank Steven Sait, Helen Gray, and Mary Friel for their useful comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript. We would also like to thank the three anonymous reviewers for providing valuable feedback on the manuscript. Conflicts of Interest:The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders were involved in the reviewing of the manuscript.

show abstract

Predation of wildlife by free-ranging domestic dogs in Polish hunting grounds and potential competition with the grey wolf

Cited by 82 publications

References 44 publications

Identification of human–carnivore conflict hotspots to prioritize mitigation efforts

Identification of human–carnivore conflict hotspots to prioritize mitigation efforts

Living a dog’s life: a putative gray wolf in a feral dog group

The Effectiveness of Dog Population Management: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About