Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Cautionary considerations for positive dingo management: a response to the Johnson and Ritchie critique of Fleming et al. (2012)

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Johnson and Ritchie (2012) have provided a criticism of our opinion piece (Fleming et al. 2012). There is some common ground, but we remain unconvinced by their view that our reasoning was unsound or beside the point. In this response, we discuss where Johnson and Ritchie have provided unconvincing evidence to refute our seven considerations, and reiterate and demonstrate why these considerations remain important. The mesopredator release or suppression hypothesis in Australian ecosystems must be objectively evaluated before positive management of dingoes and other free-ranging dogs is recommended or implemented. Adaptive comanagement of free-ranging dogs can be used for both biodiversity conservation and the mitigation of livestock predation but caution must be exercised when considering using free-ranging dogs as a conservation tool.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)15-22
JournalAustralian Mammalogy
Volume35
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Keywords

  • Animal Behaviour

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Cautionary considerations for positive dingo management: a response to the Johnson and Ritchie critique of Fleming et al. (2012)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this