When free-ranging dogs threaten wildlife: Public attitudes toward management strategies in southern Chile

Villatoro, Federico; Naughton‐Treves, Lisa; Sepúlveda, Maximiliano A.; Stowhas, Paulina; Mardones, Fernando O.; Silva‐Rodríguez, Eduardo A.

doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.06.035

Cited by 61 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These negative impacts are mostly attributed to stray and feral dogs, which is also being described by other authors (Wierzbowska., 2016;Massei et al, 2017;dos Santos et al, 2018), although the respondents acknowledge that owned dogs mays be as destructive if they are not confined (Slater et al, 2008). These negative impacts of dogs are similar to those mentioned in other studies (Morters et al, 2014;Villatoro et al, 2018) including bites/attacks of humans or domestic and wild animals, transmission of diseases to human and wildlife, nuisance because of noise/barking, and environmental contamination with feces and urine.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 68%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Community Perceptions of Free-Roaming Dogs and Management Practices in Villages at the Periphery of a Protected Area in Bhutan

Dorji¹,

Tenzin²,

Rinzin³

et al. 2020

CMUJNS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Bhutan, free-roaming dogs pose health hazards to human, livestock, and wildlife. Understanding the perceptions and practices of local communities regarding free-roaming dogs is important to mitigate negative impacts. A community-based study was conducted in the buffer zone of Strict Nature Reserve, western Bhutan. The study was conducted in February-October 2018 using a household questionnaire survey, 'free-listing' of dog diseases, group discussions and key-informant interviews. A total of 140 households from Katsho and Esue geogs (sub-districts) were interviewed. People classify dogs under three categories: 'Gokhi'/pet dog, 'Changkhi'/stray dog, and 'Shakhi'/feral dog. A higher proportion of rural people owned pet dogs, which were considered important to guard crops and livestock from wildlife and protect households' properties. Owning a dog also contributed significantly to the non-material well-being of the respondents, especially in the rural villages. In contrast to the perceived positive impacts of the pet dogs, 81% of the respondents considered stray and feral dogs a problem in the community. The threats were attacks/bites by free-roaming dogs to humans, livestock and also wildlife. Rabies was the most frequently (69.7%) known dog diseases with the highest rank (1.46) in the list, followed by scabies (49.5%, rank 1.52). The majority (56%) of the respondents indicated that stray and feral dogs originate from abandoned pet dogs. This study calls for a multi-sectorial/One Health

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 68%

“…Breed was not a major factor in determining the management of pet dogs by people in Haa, which differs from other areas around the world (Villatoro et al, 2018). For instance, dog reproduction, health and housing, which often differ according to the breed (Blouin, 2013), were similar for cross-breeds, local Mastiff, and imported pure breeds.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community Perceptions of Free-Roaming Dogs and Management Practices in Villages at the Periphery of a Protected Area in Bhutan

Dorji¹,

Tenzin²,

Rinzin³

et al. 2020

CMUJNS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many invasive species generate conflicts of interest, and engagement is crucial for avoiding, reducing or resolving such conflicts (Crowley et al, 2017;Zengeya et al, 2017;Novoa et al, 2018;Crowley et al, this issue;Villatoro et al, this issue). Approaches used to deal with conflicts include building social learning and trust between parties and promoting effective communication (Novoa et al, 2016(Novoa et al, , 2018Crowley et al, this issue;Wald et al, this issue).…”

Section: Human Responses To Invasionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The human and social dimensions of invasion science and management

Shackleton

Larson

Novoa

et al. 2019

Journal of Environmental Management

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biological invasions are a leading cause of global environmental change given their effects on both humans and biodiversity. Humans introduce invasive alien species and may facilitate their establishment and spread, which can alter ecosystem services, livelihoods, and human well-being. People perceive the benefits and costs of these species through the lens of diverse value systems; these perspectives influence decisions about when and where to manage them. Despite the entanglement of humans with invasive alien species, most research on the topic has focused on their ecological aspects. Only relatively recently have the human and social dimensions of invasions started to receive sustained attention in light of their importance for understanding and governing biological invasions. This editorial draws on contributions to a special issue on the "Human and Social Dimensions of Invasion Science" and other literature to elucidate major trends and current contributions in this research area. We examine the relation between humans and biological invasions in terms of four crosscutting themes: (1) how people cause biological invasions; (2) how people conceptualise and perceive them; (3) how people are affected - both positively and negatively - by them; and (4) how people respond to them. We also highlight several ways in which research on the human and social dimensions of invasion science improves understanding, stakeholder engagement, and management.

show abstract

“…In particular, dogs have bred with the Australian native dog, the dingo, and the offspring are considered a hybrid animal, while many cats living in the wild are very large and aggressive in comparison with those who are companion animals. Dogs and cats in Australia can impact local wildlife (culturally understood in Australia as species that existed prior to European colonisation, but see [8]) through, for example, pathogen transmission [9,10], species behavioural changes [11,12], and, most commonly, predation and competition [1,13,14]. As a consequence of the numbers of free-roaming dogs and cats, their wide spatial distribution, and the potential consequences for biodiversity, these dogs and cats are considered key threats to wildlife in multiple locations [2,15], and unowned dogs and cats are considered pests by many governments (for example, in Queensland, under the Queensland Biosecurity Act).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the case of managing dog and cat populations' impacts on wildlife, public opinions are conditioned by the strong bond that exists between humans and dogs and cats [2,14], public concerns for the welfare of both domestic animals and wildlife [35] and structural and cultural factors that affect people's attitudes to (and uses of) different management strategies [30,36,37]. Animal welfare concerns, in particular, encompass multiple species and forms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beliefs and Attitudes of Residents in Queensland, Australia, about Managing Dog and Cat Impacts on Native Wildlife

Carter

Paterson²,

Morton³

et al. 2020

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many humans have created close relationships with wildlife and companion species. Notwithstanding that companion species were at some point themselves wild, some wild (i.e., feral) and domesticated (owned) dogs and cats now have significant impacts on wildlife. Many strategies exist to control the impact of dogs and cats on wildlife, but the successful implementation of management initiatives is tied to public opinions and the degree of acceptability of these measures. This paper reports the findings of a survey assessing the beliefs of residents in Queensland, Australia, about dog and cat impacts on wildlife, and their attitudes towards various strategies and options for controlling wild (i.e., feral) and domesticated (owned) dogs and cats. The responses of 590 participants were analysed. Our respondents collectively grouped strategies into those that directly cause wild dog and cat deaths and those that allow wild dogs and cats to live a ‘natural’ life, which is a variation on past research where respondents grouped strategies into lethal and non-lethal methods. Community acceptability of strategies that directly cause wild dog and cat deaths (each assessed using five-category Likert scores) was lower amongst females and respondents aged 34 years or less. Gender expectations in most places and cultures still predominately suggest that women are more ‘caring’, supportive of animal welfare, and perhaps cognizant that wild dogs and cats are also sentient creatures and appreciate the problematic tension between controlling wild and companion species. Age-related differences may reflect the changing social values of communities at different points in time. There was high support for regulations that enforce responsible pet ownership but not for the importance of pet-free suburbs, which the majority of respondents considered unimportant. These important variations in beliefs and attitudes require careful management within each community for the success of any program to control wild dogs or cats.

show abstract

When free-ranging dogs threaten wildlife: Public attitudes toward management strategies in southern Chile

Cited by 61 publications

References 54 publications

Community Perceptions of Free-Roaming Dogs and Management Practices in Villages at the Periphery of a Protected Area in Bhutan

Community Perceptions of Free-Roaming Dogs and Management Practices in Villages at the Periphery of a Protected Area in Bhutan

The human and social dimensions of invasion science and management

Beliefs and Attitudes of Residents in Queensland, Australia, about Managing Dog and Cat Impacts on Native Wildlife

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About