Shooting:
Wild dogs are seldom seen during the day and in controlled areas they are especially wary of people. Shooting is therefore only an opportunistic method of wild dog control.
Shooting should only be attempted if an appropriate firearm is used, the shooter has the appropriate experience, and the distance and circumstances are such that the target animal can be killed with a single round.
The shot must be aimed to achieve a humane kill by destroying the brain or heart of the animal. The minimum calibre for shooting wild dogs at distances greater than 30 m is .222. At shorter ranges, a .17 Remington, .22 Hornet, or 12 gauge shotgun with a minimum of BB shot can be used. Wild dogs found alive in traps can be destroyed with a brain shot from a .22 rimfire.
Remember that when shooting free-ranging wild dogs, you need to make certain that a clean kill can be achieved. Aside from considerations of animal welfare from merely wounding an animal, a missed shot is liable to make the animal extremely wary.
Exclusion fencing:
Exclusion fencing provides a non-lethal means of protecting livestock from predators. Where conditions are suitable, and fences are properly maintained, wild dogs can be excluded by either wire netting or high-voltage electric fences.
Fencing is very costly and only useful when wild dogs can be effectively removed from the properties needing protection. In Western Australia’s rangeland areas, large scale exclusion fencing against wild dogs is normally not practical.
Not only is there an uneven assortment of problem and non-problem areas, but also much of the terrain involved (such as watercourses and breakaways) would make the construction and particularly the maintenance of exclusion fences very difficult and expensive.
Netting fences have been used in the Eastern States for many decades and generally act as a barrier along the extensive and distinct boundaries between sheep grazing areas and cattle country or crown land. In most cases, those areas that became protected by a barrier fence had essentially removed wild dogs prior to fence construction.
In some instances, the barrier fence began as an amalgamation of portions of fence from individually fenced properties. Several Western Australian properties on the Nullarbor have boundary fences of dog-proof netting. These fences are effective but they are very expensive to construct and maintain.
Electric fences are generally cheaper than netting fences. Electric fences have been developed to keep out a variety of vertebrate pests, including wild dogs. Some make use of an existing fence and incorporate one or two electrified wires on outriggers; others are constructed as plain wire fences with six or seven alternating live and earth wires.
Reducing the wire spacing and increasing the number of wires increases the effectiveness of electric fences, but also increases their cost. Wild dogs sometimes cross even well maintained fences so occasional mopping-up efforts using standard control techniques must also be used. In most fenced areas, some form of buffer zone control is used to relieve potential pressure on the fences.
Biological Control:
It is unlikely that deliberate biological control of wild dogs would be successful. Dog diseases such as distemper and mange are already present in wild populations, so attempts to re-introduce them to some areas would have little or no impact.
New or genetically modified diseases offer little hope because domestic dogs would be equally susceptible, and public concern would almost certainly prevent their introduction. As well, the conservation status of dingoes would have to be considered in any attempt to introduce any new and naturally spreading lethal agent.
Bounties:
Bounties or bonuses have been paid on many species around the world for centuries. The payments are a reward for killing pest animals, usually on presentation of evidence such as scalps.
Though now phased out over much of Australia, the bounty system is still occasionally suggested as a means of improving the management or control of certain pest animals, including wild dogs. There are sound reasons why a general bounty system would not prove beneficial to the management of wild dogs in Western Australia or elsewhere.
Worldwide evidence against bounties:
The experience worldwide has been that bounty systems do not deliver effective control of pest populations. In Australia, evidence from discontinued fox and wild dog bounty schemes has been the same.
When the numbers of scalps taken for either species are plotted over long periods of time, the results invariably show a common outcome: numbers fluctuate over time, but there is no downward trend in pest numbers. This shows that the bounty system has not worked: if it had, there would be a progressive reduction in the number of bounties paid.
As well, general bounty schemes encourage fraud. Historically, the variety of fraud has varied greatly, from the careful counterfeiting of scalps, through to the more common trafficking of scalps from other jurisdictions or localities.
Information Sourced From:
