Many people may have watched the recent documentary from the ABC TV on the subject of the problems with the management of the dingoes on Fraser Island, Queensland. Although far from here, the management of wildlife anywhere in Australia should be a matter of concern to all. Because the members of Fraser Island dingoes are all pure bred, without any contact with other canine varieties, they should be treated as an irreplaceable part of Australia’s World Heritage: and as such should be properly protected by law. It is probable that the cost of looking after the dingoes will need strong support from both State and Commonwealth Governments.
There seem to be some misconceptions and some illogical procedures in connection with the welfare of the public and of this unique group of dingoes on Fraser Island. To put the situation there briefly but not too simplistically, I see it in these terms:-
The Dingoes are wild carnivorous animals, and to stay fit and healthy they need a good diet, which in nature means that they have to eat a lot of meat as regularly as possible. This they would have done in times past because of the presence of enough edible animals in their habitat. The presence of residents and tourists has now caused a shortage of their natural food, by interfering with the habitat of all the island’s animals generally, causing the reduction of the natural food supply of the dingoes.
Hungry dingoes will therefore take every opportunity to eat whatever they can find. If desperate, the presence of a small unsupervised or unprotected human child is enough to arouse a hungry dingo to attack the child as this has happened in the past. The dingo responsible for such an attack cannot be expected to understand why it is killed in retaliation. Without considering all the requirements of the dingoes, the threats and actions to prevent tourists from feeding dingoes are illogical.
If the dingoes cannot receive food from any other source, they will be hungry and even more savage, and will probably die a slow and painful death by starvation as have so many in the past, without ever attacking anyone. But open feeding by tourists is bound to bring dingoes close to people, with the risks to small children increased and this must be avoided.
I suggest that the dingoes’ diet must be improved so that tourists can see them getting about fit and healthy. The presence now of dingoes that are painfully undernourished, with the lean bodies and prominent ribs and poor appearance I have seen personally, does little to bring pleasure to tourists who would not treat their own cattle, horses or domestic companion animals so disgracefully. It seems that the thing to do would be to exclude all residents and tourists by fences from extensive areas of land on the island, reserved only for the dingoes. The food available to the dingoes there may improve naturally, but could be augmented by aerial drops of suitable food carefully controlled and distributed. An ongoing scientific study of the dietary needs of the dingoes should be maintained to guide this. Some restoration of natural species of animals eaten by dingoes could help.
Certainly the reservation’s fences should allow glimpses of the dingoes for tourists, by providing feeding areas adjacent to some of the fences close to, but not accessible from, roads or recreation areas. Certainly tourists and residents need to be prevented from feeding the dingoes, especially with inappropriate foods, in much the same way as people are not allowed to feed bears in Canada. If dingoes will be kept on the island, and so they should, their needs must be adequately supplied. Most Zoological Gardens elsewhere in Australia provide diet and appropriate environments and space for a wide selection of many different animals, to bring pleasure and education to many people. Surely the humane requirements of animals should be the first priority for consideration in their management.
I am also writing to the appropriate ministers of the Queensland Government to convey my opinions to them.
Robert G Backhouse,
Armidale
