Search Results

The Australian dingo is an enigma—vilified by some, and little understood by most. Alternatively viewed as a native and invasive species, its ecological status as a sheep killer is often the focus, instead of its long and complex relationship with Indigenous Australians. This chapter explores the dingo’s dynamic and complex relationship with Aboriginal peoples over the past four to five thousand years, with a particular emphasis on hunting. It brings together archaeological and ethnographic evidence in an effort to bring clarity to this aspect of the dingo-human relationship. We question the use of ethnography and early colonial written records to infer pre-contact human-dingo relationships, particularly the recent suggestion that dingoes, acting as hunting companions, may have changed the gendered division of labor in Aboriginal societies, arguing that this is instead an over-simplification of a dynamic and variable relationship that warrants closer scrutiny.

This chapter examines the distinctive situation in Australia, where Homo sapiens and dingoes coexisted for several thousand years. These two species were the only large placental mammals on a continent dominated by marsupial mammals and large reptiles. The dingo group represents a unique branch of canid domestication; they live independently, either wild or semi-wild, but also associate with humans, including hunting and even sleeping with them. Dingoes demonstrate that it is possible for an animal previously domesticated to live and reproduce successfully without humans. The relationship between dingoes and the Aboriginals provides a model for investigating the process of domestication in canids, strongly suggesting that domestication is a multistep and potentially reversible process. It also reveals how a canid can exist in a situation where it may or may not choose to live with humans, functioning well in either case.

This chapter examines intra-specific interaction among dogs. It begins with a definition of ‘feral dog’. The term refers in general to dogs that differ from their domestic counterparts because they have not been exposed to close human contact early in their life (lack of socialization) but in the typical case they have a gene pool that is typical for domesticated dogs. Accordingly, one should refer to them as free-ranging not owned dogs. The discussions then turn to the behaviour and ethology of dingoes and free-ranging not owned dogs, along with comparisons of free-ranging not owned dogs with wolves.