An Honest Conversation About Dingo Classification

[MG5150]

G'day Gents

I recently wrote an article about dingo classification and submitted it to the Mansfielf Courier. The editor is pretty happy about it and is looking at getting it published for me on their website as they are having trouble with dogs around Mansfield (here in Vic) and there is lots of debate around the classicication.

After a recent conversation with Dr Cairns who is the researcher in the much quoted study that claims 99% of dingos are pure, I was left baffled as to how policy and laws have been changed on dodgey evidence which is basically the result of changing around defintiions. (I also posted it here as Wapiti posted something about dingos on a recent post by another member)

Anyway, here it is...

An Honest Conversation About Dingo Classification

The debate around dingoes, wild dogs, and hybrids is far from settled. At the heart of the matter lies a question of classification: what counts as a true dingo? While the science behind dingo genetics is evolving, the public narrative around these animals has been dominated by sweeping generalisations, often driven more by ideology than biology. It's time we had an honest, evidence-based conversation.
Before we go any further, it’s important to clarify some key terms. Different states in Australia may use slightly different language, but for the sake of clarity, here are the definitions this article will use:

Dingo – A wild canid that meets the genetic profile considered to be a "pure" dingo.
Wild dog – A hybrid of a dingo and a domestic dog (e.g., a farm dog, hunting dog, or domestic pet gone feral) and their offspring.
Feral dog – A domestic dog that has been lost or abandoned and now lives in the wild.

Getting clear on terminology from the start ensures a more productive and accurate conversation.

Many So-Called "Pure" Dingoes Are Actually Backcrosses

Recent genetic studies, including the 2023 work led by Dr. Kylie Cairns, show that while many wild canids in Australia are genetically close to pure dingoes (>99% dingo DNA), not a single animal tested came back as 100% dingo. In fact, around 30% of the animals tested had measurable domestic dog ancestry, ranging from 55% to 93% dingo DNA.
These are not "pure" dingoes in the strictest sense. They are backcrosses — the offspring of hybrids bred back into the dingo population. Yet, in public conversation and even some scientific framing, these animals are often referred to as "dingoes," reinforcing the impression that hybridisation is either negligible or non-existent.



In the table above (taken from Dr Cairns' study) only 68.54% of the animals tested nationally came back as "pure dingo" with 27% of the animals being some degree of backcross, and 3.58% hybrids with domestic dominant DNA. While a higher percentage of dogs tested as "pure" than previously thought, the numbers are being inflated by the inclusion of backcrosses in the "pure" category. It’s also worth pointing out that not a single animal has come back as 100% pure either — meaning that every single animal in the study has some degree of hybridisation, even if it was from 200 years ago.

Proposing Better Classification Categories'

To move beyond the confusion and polarisation, we need clearer categories for classification. Here's a suggested framework:

Pure dingo: >99.9% dingo DNA
High-percentage backcross: 93%–99% dingo DNA
Low-percentage backcross: 75%–92% dingo DNA
Hybrid (F1 or F2): 50%–74% dingo DNA
Dog-dominant hybrid: <50% dingo DNA

Dr Cairns' study does show similar categories, however it includes the backcrosses under the "pure" category. The only way we get close to over 90% pure animals is if you include the hybrids and backcrosses. Dingo advocates are eager to include the backcrosses in order to boost numbers, and Dr Cairns does not appear to make a consistent effort to separate or clarify the categories in public discussion.

This level of granularity would improve the clarity of public discussion, policymaking, and conservation planning. Most importantly, it would stop the inappropriate use of the word "pure" when referring to animals that still carry significant domestic dog ancestry.

And while F1 hybrids are rare and didn’t come up in the sample group, they are appearing frequently enough for 30% of the other animals to show varying levels of backcrossing. That’s a significant minority — and one we shouldn’t ignore.

A Call for Honesty from Dingo Advocates

Many dingo conservationists are passionate and well-meaning, but some have adopted a rigid, all-or-nothing mindset — one that resists acknowledging hybridisation even when the data is clear. In some cases, animals with as little as 55% dingo DNA are being lumped into the same category as high-purity animals. (In fact, there were more animals coming up as 'recent backcrosses' in Dr Cairns' study than 'historical backcrosses'.)
This is not just misleading — it's intellectually dishonest.
If the goal is to protect and conserve dingoes, that work should be grounded in truth. That includes accepting that the population has been genetically influenced by domestic dogs and recognising that calling everything a "dingo" muddies the waters, undermines trust, and potentially weakens the conservation case.


A Sobering Reality: No 100% Pure Dingoes

One of the most striking takeaways from recent genetic studies is that not a single 100% pure dingo was identified. Even the most "pure" animals tested showed minor traces of domestic dog DNA.

This should give us pause. If every animal tested carries at least a tiny trace of domestic dog ancestry, then it's not just a question of protecting dingoes from future hybridisation — it's a race against time to preserve what genetic identity remains. Conservation strategies need to reflect this reality.
Many advocates point out that the study didn’t find a single F1 hybrid or feral dog... but it also didn’t find a single 100% pure dingo either. Supposedly, the alpine dingo still exists in the Victorian high country with an untouched bloodline — but one of these animals is yet to show up in testing. While we may hope a pure bloodline remains, the data doesn't yet prove it. That should be the final nail in the coffin for claims of total purity.

Conclusion: Let’s Base Policy on Data, Not Narrative

Words matter. Classifications matter. And framing matters.

We need to question the dominant narrative that "there is no such thing as a wild dog," and re-examine the data and the way it's being presented. The very study used to dismiss the existence of hybrids actually confirms their presence — and categorises them as "pure" through sleight-of-hand definitions.
This isn't about eradicating animals based on their DNA. It’s about allowing farmers and land managers to deal with problem animals, especially when livestock are attacked. Hybrid or pure, any wild canid responsible for killing livestock must be managed. The more hybrids are removed, the less likely the last remaining pure bloodlines will be diluted further.

Efforts should absolutely be made to conserve dingoes where protection is warranted — especially in isolated or genetically significant populations. But blanket protection policies that rely on inflated purity numbers do more harm than good.

Perhaps most concerning is that recent policy changes in Victoria — including the removal of wild dog bounties, increased legal protections, and reduced capacity for trapping — have been based on this study. With just 308 animals sampled, it’s a major oversight to make sweeping policy changes with such limited data.

Already, livestock attacks have surged in places like Mansfield, Gippsland, and the Yarra Valley.
It’s time for a reset. Let’s have an honest conversation, define our terms, and make decisions based on evidence — not ideology.

Reference: Cairns, K. M., Wilton, A. N., Ballard, J. W. O., & Savolainen, P. (2023). Genomic assessment of dog introgression into wild Australian dingoes. Molecular Ecology, 32(21), 5563–5576. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.16998

[MG5150]

here is the diagram from the first paragraph

[Oldbloke]

MG5150, very well put. A good example of clear thinking.
Congratulations on a job well done.
The Qn is,,,will anyone who matters (the decision makers) care?

[MG5150]

MG5150, very well put.
Congratulations on a job well done.
The Qn is,,,will anyone who matters (the decision makers) care?

The problem is the people making the decision are so time poor that they listen to 'experts' who tell them nonsense and then they make a decision based on the bulls**t they've been fed rather than the truth.

I take the time to write things like this in the hope that enough people wake up and we get change.

[Wapiti]

Thanks for an honest and very well supported article, MG.
It is indeed an honest description of where this supposed "Pure dingo" classification has become very political rather than factual.

I can completely understand how people without any "skin in the game" would want to protect the animals they call pure dingos. Now by that, I mean environmentalists based in a university in a large capital city, intent on immortality and to whom the only time they step foot into the scary wilds are for photo ops.
OK, so I'll get serious here, instead of the sarcasm.
In reality, the underlying reasons for this are unfortunately not only a true desire to protect the true purity of the original species from its evolution here 100's of years ago, but splattered with a huge dose of self-indulgence, self-entitlement and mostly, emotion.

Damn lies and statistics. Statistics can be made, skewed, or edited just like Mr. Cairns has spent much effort to push his agenda. Unfair? Maybe.

99.9% pure, even if back-crosses are factored in (which are absolutely impossible outside of a controlled, fenced in breeding programme), is unpure, period. The original "Dingo" is no more. And if there are a few examples still out there, their offspring certainly will not be.

And the fact remains, a blanket law coming from some city-educated conservationist with the best intentions or otherwise, who has never walked a paddock for hours and hours, walking down the terrible screams of the poor unfortunate stock he has spent 30 years and 10's of 1000's of dollars improving, building, breeding to it's best and most profitable potential , and putting a bullet into their brains to end their suffering.
After they have tripped on their own knotted intestines and fallen from either incredible pain or blood poisoning, or both.

And the lounge-lizards who just keep on pushing this wheelbarrow of "that's the law, beware of the law", over and over like some insane child desperate for attention.
Farming political representatives and organisations will always strive to counter and disprove the agendas of faux conservationists presenting skewed data to further choke the farming sector in their quest for relevance and personal agendas.

But it will be the farmer who again, has to suffer the stress of having to make the decision to defend his animals, to protect them from an animal who will keep on coming back to kill, not for food, but because it is in their nature. When he has a problem, he is going to solve it, irrespective of the deliberate misinformation of those to whom laws are made sitting in front of a computer screen.
He will solve it, because the fakes making the laws are nowhere to be seen, let alone see reality, outside of the dream world they hide in.

[Wapiti]

MG5150, very well put. A good example of clear thinking.
Congratulations on a job well done.
The Qn is,,,will anyone who matters (the decision makers) care?

What changed your position? Peer group pressure?

[GQshayne]

In a conversation a while back, a friend of mine stated that dingo's should be protected as they are a native animal. I pointed out to him that whilst they have been here for an estimated 3000 years or more, they were introduced by man. By the same measure, eventually feral cats could be considered the same. In terms of introduced species they were probably the first.

I am not saying I support this position 100%, but it is part of the equation in my view.

[Oldbloke]

In a conversation a while back, a friend of mine stated that dingo's should be protected as they are a native animal. I pointed out to him that whilst they have been here for an estimated 3000 years or more, they were introduced by man. By the same measure, eventually feral cats could be considered the same. In terms of introduced species they were probably the first.

I am not saying I support this position 100%, but it is part of the equation in my view.

They are not native IMO. If they are then foxes, pigs, goats, rabbits and deer are native.

But I believe they are native to PNG.

[Larry]

I have been around Asia a bit and observed the street dogs or Soi dog in Thailand . Strangely they all seem to take on that golden colour we see in wild dogs here and in dingoes.
It may be the reverse or another example of this discovery that behavioral traits also effect appearance traits. This is a very well known experiment where wild foxes were selected on tameness behaviors and the appearance changed towards black and white dogs with floppy ears.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsIibD-TLcM

[Die Judicii]

In a conversation a while back, a friend of mine stated that dingo's should be protected as they are a native animal. I pointed out to him that whilst they have been here for an estimated 3000 years or more, they were introduced by man. By the same measure, eventually feral cats could be considered the same. In terms of introduced species they were probably the first.

I am not saying I support this position 100%, but it is part of the equation in my view.

They are not native IMO. If they are then foxes, pigs, goats, rabbits and deer are native.

But I believe they are native to PNG.

If you wish to be pedantic,, you would be correct.
However, there is a small matter of a few thousand years (roughly) of them being introduced to Australian soil,,,,, as opposed to a few hundred
years of foxes, pigs, goats, rabbits and deer.
A pretty absurd stretch of the bow string.

If you were born in Australia,, you'd consider yourself to be "Australian" yet you've only been so for 60-70 years or thereabout.
I think the dingo is a tad closer to being the apex predator of Australia and be considered "native" than you give it credit for.

[womble]

They’re Asian and they came here on boats.
And they probably weren’t genetically pure when they arrived here because they were semi domesticated.
If they don’t belong here then where.
Closest living relative to the grey wolf.
I would not like to see them eradicated. We’ve done that enough worldwide with wolves.
If it has a taste for livestock then obviously it has to be destroyed or contained, but it’s still an ancient species and should be preserved.
I mean really ancient. It’s not descended from dogs or wolves.

So you have a species with no other natural habitat left in the world than ours.
So no. We don’t wipe it out.
They are a native species here today that play an important role in the ecosystem. Apex predators balance the natural order. They are important and essential.
If it was up to me I would release lions and tigers and bears here because I think they’re awesome.
I also like gorillas but I don’t think they would adapt well here. Though I would be willing to consider trialling an introduction in the Yarra valley.

But that’s another topic and a very good one. Though I digressed.
In summary. Habitat/region I am overruling with preservation of an ancient species. We came into its territory. The onus is on us to coexist, mitigate, manage, budget for it, just deal with it suck it up.

[MG5150]

If it was up to me I would release lions and tigers and bears here because I think they’re awesome.

I believe a group of rich aristocrats released lions in Victoria back in the 1800's because they wanted big game hunting. I'll try and dig up the article.

I don't think we should eradicate the dingo, but the protections they've been granted in Vic around farmland where their numbers are abundant is only going to contributre to problems. We need a common sense approach to management rather than activist propaganda informing government policy.

Additionally, the Thylacine is Australia's apex predator... unfortunately it was outcompeted by the dingo on the mainland once it was introduced, it's not native. In another 3000 years once deer have been here for the same period of time are we going to call them native?

[Oldbloke]

If man introduced them, they are not native. Time has nothing to do with it.

They are native if they evolved here, or came here under their own steam.

https://www.australiangeographic.com.au ... ve-canine/


https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/f ... new-guinea

[Die Judicii]

They’re Asian and they came here on boats.
And they probably weren’t genetically pure when they arrived here because they were semi domesticated.
If they don’t belong here then where.
Closest living relative to the grey wolf.
I would not like to see them eradicated. We’ve done that enough worldwide with wolves.
If it has a taste for livestock then obviously it has to be destroyed or contained, but it’s still an ancient species and should be preserved.
I mean really ancient. It’s not descended from dogs or wolves.

So you have a species with no other natural habitat left in the world than ours.
So no. We don’t wipe it out.
They are a native species here today that play an important role in the ecosystem. Apex predators balance the natural order. They are important and essential.
If it was up to me I would release lions and tigers and bears here because I think they’re awesome.
I also like gorillas but I don’t think they would adapt well here. Though I would be willing to consider trialling an introduction in the Yarra valley.

But that’s another topic and a very good one. Though I digressed.
In summary. Habitat/region I am overruling with preservation of an ancient species. We came into its territory. The onus is on us to coexist, mitigate, manage, budget for it, just deal with it suck it up.

Well said Mate,, re dingoes (not necessarily gorillas and lions) but refer back to where i posted recently concerning the dingoes on Fraser Island. It is the ideal place to further advance and conserve the species. The biggest problem by far is us,,,,,,, the humans.

[perentie]

They’re Asian and they came here on boats.
And they probably weren’t genetically pure when they arrived here because they were semi domesticated.
If they don’t belong here then where.
Closest living relative to the grey wolf.
I would not like to see them eradicated. We’ve done that enough worldwide with wolves.
If it has a taste for livestock then obviously it has to be destroyed or contained, but it’s still an ancient species and should be preserved.
I mean really ancient. It’s not descended from dogs or wolves.

So you have a species with no other natural habitat left in the world than ours.
So no. We don’t wipe it out.
They are a native species here today that play an important role in the ecosystem. Apex predators balance the natural order. They are important and essential.
If it was up to me I would release lions and tigers and bears here because I think they’re awesome.
I also like gorillas but I don’t think they would adapt well here. Though I would be willing to consider trialling an introduction in the Yarra valley.

Can the Dingoes on Fraser support themselves or are they getting handouts?
If they are not getting handouts but relying on what they kill perhaps the numbers are out growing the food supply and why there are more human attacks.

Keith

But that’s another topic and a very good one. Though I digressed.
In summary. Habitat/region I am overruling with preservation of an ancient species. We came into its territory. The onus is on us to coexist, mitigate, manage, budget for it, just deal with it suck it up.

Well said Mate,, re dingoes (not necessarily gorillas and lions) but refer back to where i posted recently concerning the dingoes on Fraser Island. It is the ideal place to further advance and conserve the species. The biggest problem by far is us,,,,,,, the humans.

[womble]

If it was up to me I would release lions and tigers and bears here because I think they’re awesome.

I believe a group of rich aristocrats released lions in Victoria back in the 1800's because they wanted big game hunting. I'll try and dig up the article.

I don't think we should eradicate the dingo, but the protections they've been granted in Vic around farmland where their numbers are abundant is only going to contributre to problems. We need a common sense approach to management rather than activist propaganda informing government policy.

Additionally, the Thylacine is Australia's apex predator... unfortunately it was outcompeted by the dingo on the mainland once it was introduced, it's not native. In another 3000 years once deer have been here for the same period of time are we going to call them native?

That would be an interesting snippet of lost history if big game was released here. They introduced moose to New Zealand and some people still claim to see them.

We did have country wide rather poorly managed lion safari’s here. I remember visiting one very young with my parents.
Just drive through in the family car. Could wind the windows down and get up close.
Lions often escaped from these parks. They were dodgy operations by modern standards and the owners,/handlers were rather careless yobbos.
It’s taken us a long time in this country to learn that lions are dangerous and given the opportunity they will eat you.
They’re really good at sneaking up on things and eating them.
Sometimes kangaroos get into our open range zoos here lion enclosures. It happens at Dubbo zoo more often than they’d mention. Their survival time is very short within a pride of lions.

[GQshayne]

Nor far from where I live, dingos are protected as they live in a national park. And also not far from where I live, but in the other direction, they are a pest and you get paid a bounty for killing them.

It's a funny old world.

[womble]

Visit our national parks. See all the pigs and goats roaming free. It’s so true.

Even in Victoria I’ve camped in a national park, woke up in the tent to hear something rummaging around the fireplace. And it’s a big healthy specimen of feral pig. Big black hairy one in Victoria.
Living the dream he was. Just foraging camp sites. Big fat happy disease ridden bastard.

And if I had of camped across the highway in the state forest he wouldn’t have been there in the morning. Because he’s not stupid.

[womble]

[MG5150]

Look at how smug this post in a dingo advocate group is...

"this is proven science so shut up about it"

See how they instantly shut down conversation.

[womble]

Maremma will kill your kelpie
Donkey will kill the dingo and your Kelpie and your Maremma

[Billo]

But do they have a bounties on Donkeys ..

[animalpest]

Nothing is "honest" about discussions on naming dingoes and whether they are native or not.

It all about personal bias and politics.
In fact, you could readily argue that almost all research published on dingoes in the past 10+ years has bias

[womble]

I shouldn’t discount Maremmas so readily. Or any of the livestock guardian breeds that people have been importing in more recent times.
They are a solution that works 100% of the time. There is no way a dingo is going anywhere near that herd.
They don’t behave like domestic pet dogs. They will make their presence known if they sense another dog at a distance. And that’s not just barking and growling and making a racket. The body language and posturing they display is very interesting. Not what domestic dogs typically do. Or even wild dogs.
Usually dogs will transmit for lack of a better word an invitation. Then they will assess up close.
These dogs are different. They make it very clear you are not welcome in this territory. And no dingo is going to test that.
These dogs are signaling that if they can smell you they are going to kill you no questions asked.

Occasionally in their homelands a starving and desperate pack of wolves will try to challenge them. And the outcome is 50 50.
If raised from puppies with your herding dog they can accept them.
But if you know wild dogs you understand how aggressive an animal they can be. And a Maremma can match that. So you need to know what you’re getting in to.
And they have to match the intelligence of wolves and dingoes to a significant degree. And they do. They won’t leave the herd or be enticed out, separated and picked off. Ideally you’d want a working pair or more.

They are used in vic high country and some other breeds to great effect. But sometimes people steal them.

I myself own neopolitan mastiffs. Not for livestock. But anyway big intimidating breed. Man stoppers.
I will take them for long walks on weekends and there’s a property not far from me that uses kangals.
And I give it a wide berth.

[GQshayne]

Look at how smug this post in a dingo advocate group is...

"this is proven science so shut up about it"

See how they instantly shut down conversation.

I have an old photo somewhere, of me with a dog I shot in about 1984. On a cattle property. I was there at the request of the owner with my dad, as the dogs were attacking his cattle. We saw a calf that was killed, actually spotted the dog killing it, so no argument about what killed it. Most of them were purebred in appearnace in those days, but the one I got was a crossbreed.

[Die Judicii]

I shouldn’t discount Maremmas so readily. Or any of the livestock guardian breeds that people have been importing in more recent times.
They are a solution that works 100% of the time. There is no way a dingo is going anywhere near that herd.
They don’t behave like domestic pet dogs. They will make their presence known if they sense another dog at a distance. And that’s not just barking and growling and making a racket. The body language and posturing they display is very interesting. Not what domestic dogs typically do. Or even wild dogs.
Usually dogs will transmit for lack of a better word an invitation. Then they will assess up close.
These dogs are different. They make it very clear you are not welcome in this territory. And no dingo is going to test that.
These dogs are signaling that if they can smell you they are going to kill you no questions asked.

Occasionally in their homelands a starving and desperate pack of wolves will try to challenge them. And the outcome is 50 50.
If raised from puppies with your herding dog they can accept them.
But if you know wild dogs you understand how aggressive an animal they can be. And a Maremma can match that. So you need to know what you’re getting in to.
And they have to match the intelligence of wolves and dingoes to a significant degree. And they do. They won’t leave the herd or be enticed out, separated and picked off. Ideally you’d want a working pair or more.

They are used in vic high country and some other breeds to great effect. But sometimes people steal them.

I myself own neopolitan mastiffs. Not for livestock. But anyway big intimidating breed. Man stoppers.
I will take them for long walks on weekends and there’s a property not far from me that uses kangals.
And I give it a wide berth.

Your info may be correct some of the time,, but certainly not all of the time.

The dingo/dog I shot last week and posted pics of,,, was off a property that runs goats.
They also have two donkeys that the owner says are useless as protection against dingos (which is why they bought them in the first place) and had suffered considerable losses to dingos prior to calling on my services,,, even though the donkeys were running with the goats.

And Maremmas,,,,,,,, They too can be useless.
Another property owner that I have shot for 80 klms further away,, bought 4 Maremmas,, and all 4 were killed by wild dogs within one month.

[MG5150]

Nothing is "honest" about discussions on naming dingoes and whether they are native or not.

It all about personal bias and politics.
In fact, you could readily argue that almost all research published on dingoes in the past 10+ years has bias

Yes, yes it is

[womble]

I shouldn’t discount Maremmas so readily. Or any of the livestock guardian breeds that people have been importing in more recent times.
They are a solution that works 100% of the time. There is no way a dingo is going anywhere near that herd.
They don’t behave like domestic pet dogs. They will make their presence known if they sense another dog at a distance. And that’s not just barking and growling and making a racket. The body language and posturing they display is very interesting. Not what domestic dogs typically do. Or even wild dogs.
Usually dogs will transmit for lack of a better word an invitation. Then they will assess up close.
These dogs are different. They make it very clear you are not welcome in this territory. And no dingo is going to test that.
These dogs are signaling that if they can smell you they are going to kill you no questions asked.

Occasionally in their homelands a starving and desperate pack of wolves will try to challenge them. And the outcome is 50 50.
If raised from puppies with your herding dog they can accept them.
But if you know wild dogs you understand how aggressive an animal they can be. And a Maremma can match that. So you need to know what you’re getting in to.
And they have to match the intelligence of wolves and dingoes to a significant degree. And they do. They won’t leave the herd or be enticed out, separated and picked off. Ideally you’d want a working pair or more.

They are used in vic high country and some other breeds to great effect. But sometimes people steal them.

I myself own neopolitan mastiffs. Not for livestock. But anyway big intimidating breed. Man stoppers.
I will take them for long walks on weekends and there’s a property not far from me that uses kangals.
And I give it a wide berth.

Your info may be correct some of the time,, but certainly not all of the time.

The dingo/dog I shot last week and posted pics of,,, was off a property that runs goats.
They also have two donkeys that the owner says are useless as protection against dingos (which is why they bought them in the first place) and had suffered considerable losses to dingos prior to calling on my services,,, even though the donkeys were running with the goats.

And Maremmas,,,,,,,, They too can be useless.
Another property owner that I have shot for 80 klms further away,, bought 4 Maremmas,, and all 4 were killed by wild dogs within one month.

Wow. That’s a serious wild dog problem.
I stand by what I’ve said, because of what I’ve seen in Victoria. But perhaps maremmas were the wrong choice of breed there.

[bigrich]

sheep grazier that i talked to down inverell nsw reckon's alpaca's were a good thing for protecting sheep . me personally , if dogs/dingoes are killing livestock it's a farmers right to shoot/trap them . from what i do know (which ain't much compared to some of you ) dingo's do knock over cats and foxes which is less predator's in the bush.

i've come across dingo's over the years but they've generally disappeared too quick for me to have a crack . i was butchering a goat on a property at Bundarra nsw ,when i heard something moving quick through waist high grass towards me , it's movements didn't "sound" like anything i heard before. i look up and twenty feet away there's a dog staring at me . as soon as our eyes met he was off into the scrub . i had a goat leg in one hand, a knife in the other. i think he thought i looked like trouble . rifle was 10 feet away leaning against a fence post i've had a few encounters like that.

another interesting topic on this forum from which i've gained a little more knowledge . thanks to the posters for sharing their experiences

[MG5150]

sheep grazier that i talked to down inverell nsw reckon's alpaca's were a good thing for protecting sheep . me personally , if dogs/dingoes are killing livestock it's a farmers right to shoot/trap them . from what i do know (which ain't much compared to some of you ) dingo's do knock over cats and foxes which is less predator's in the bush.

i've come across dingo's over the years but they've generally disappeared too quick for me to have a crack . i was butchering a goat on a property at Bundarra nsw ,when i heard something moving quick through waist high grass towards me , it's movements didn't "sound" like anything i heard before. i look up and twenty feet away there's a dog staring at me . as soon as our eyes met he was off into the scrub . i had a goat leg in one hand, a knife in the other. i think he thought i looked like trouble . rifle was 10 feet away leaning against a fence post i've had a few encounters like that.

another interesting topic on this forum from which i've gained a little more knowledge . thanks to the posters for sharing their experiences

You can still shoot them on private land in Vic (with the exclusion of around the Little Desert area) - but state forests are now a no-no. National Parks have always been protection zones.

The first one I shot was about 300m from our house on a track in state forest (when it was still legal). Two popped out infront of me when I was walking along a track, they were starting at me and I happened to have the 22LR and dropped one on the spot from about 30m.

I've been stalking deer and put up a few hiding in thick scrub and they normally skadaddle once you get too close. They're pretty weary of people and probably have a fear drive triggered by your bipedal silhouette.

That being said, the ones near our local water catchment which also has a running track have decensitives and often follow or chase joggers because they don't assosciate people wiht danger anyone - same as the ones on Frasier Island.

I think there are less than 20 recorded fatalities where dingos have been involved since settlement. Most are kids and invovle campsites or places where the dingos are fed. aybe 5-10 peopel go missing in the vic high country every year. I've got no doubt the dingos would eat a body they find, but it's unlikly they're responsible for the killing.