Identifying signs of wild dogs:
It is important that land managers and their staff are familiar with the signs of wild dogs. The presence of wild dogs and any build up in numbers should be identified as early as possible, rather than waiting until stock losses become dramatically evident. In this way appropriate preventative action can be taken.
Tracking:
Animal prints are commonly noted when driving along access tracks and roads. To identify prints reliably, it is important to stop periodically for a closer examination.
If wild dog prints have been confirmed it is also often possible, depending on the degree of disturbance, to estimate at least a minimum number of wild dogs present. These estimates become unreliable where clear sets or sequences of prints are not found, as often occurs close to watering points.
Checking for prints is best done early in the day, before prints are blurred by wind or human or animal activity. Prints are also easiest to discern when the sun is lower in the sky, when shadows within a print tend to highlight its features.
Wild dogs travelling along a road will often favour the actual wheel tracks which are often softer and smoother to travel on than other ground. Sets of dog prints can continue unbroken for considerable distances, but generally the animals veer off periodically to investigate objects and may return to the road further along. It is important to be aware of these types of movements because they can cause errors when estimating numbers.
Wild dogs frequently follow the well-worn pads of other animals such as sheep and cattle, as these pads also offer soft and easy travelling. Major animal pads which intersect roads should be checked for wild dog prints.
Prints:
Most people are familiar with the general appearance of the foot prints of domestic dogs. There are no reliable and consistent features to distinguish the prints of dingoes from other similar sized wild or domestic dogs. Therefore observing the prints of the average domestic dog provides useful training and practice in recognising the prints of wild dogs.
The size of prints can vary widely, depending on the sex, age and weight of the animal, the hardness of the ground, and the speed at which the animal is travelling. Nevertheless, for an individual dog, the prints of the fore-feet are always larger than the prints of the hind-feet (respective lengths of approximately 70 mm and 61 mm for a male dingo, excluding claw marks). When prints are obscured it is important not to count the two different-sized prints of a single dog as belonging to two different individuals.
All clear dog prints show four toes with claw marks and a large hind or heel mark that is triangular in shape. The rear edge of the heel pad of the hind-foot usually has a rounded shape, whereas the corresponding part of the fore-foot is usually straight (see Figure 1).
Verifying whether a print is of a hindor fore-foot can also help avoid an erroneous double count outlined above.
Fox foot prints have the same basic appearance and can sometimes be confused with those of smaller dogs. Fox prints are smaller than the average sized dog (approximately 50 mm in length for fore-feet and 44 mm for hind-feet of a male fox, excluding claw marks).
Fox prints are also more elongated and proportionately narrower than those of dogs. This is because there is a marked gap between the pads of the two middle toes and the heel pad of foxes (see Figure 2).
In clear prints made by foxes, a line drawn between the front edges of the outer toes would not normally cut the rear part of the middle toes, whereas it will for dogs. Claw marks of foxes are sharper and finer than those of dogs.
The foot prints of cats tend to be smaller again, and more rounded, with no claw marks. The fore- and hind-feet are similar in size and shape, and the four toe pads form a more even semi-circular arch about the heel pad than those of dogs and foxes.
The hand prints of kangaroos can sometimes be mistaken for those of dogs, particularly when badly weathered or partly obscured. However, unlike dogs, they have five fingers and claws. As for other situations where there may be uncertainty in identification of prints, it is important to attempt to find areas nearby where the prints are clearer.
Pattern of prints:
An important factor to remember when interpreting prints is that the pattern of placement of the fore- and hind-feet can vary, depending on the gait and speed at which the animal is travelling. A dog that is walking or trotting produces a staggered set of prints of two lines, representing the fall of feet on opposite sides of the body (see Figure 3). Depending largely on speed of travel, the print of the hind-foot can also fall precisely over that already made by the fore-foot.
This means that the print of the hind-foot can often be the predominant print noticed. At faster speeds the stride increases, the prints tend to be less staggered and claw marks become more prominent.
Scats and urine:
The behaviour and signs related to excretion of faeces (scats) and urine by domestic dogs and cats are similar to those in the wild. Cats commonly bury their excreta. The excreta of each species has a distinctive and acrid odour. Scats are typically sausage-shaped and sometimes tapered at the ends, but the form can vary with diet.
Dog scats are generally bigger than those of foxes and cats, tend to contain less insect material and larger bone fragments than fox scats, and are not as regularly tapered. Scats of working or tourists’ dogs might be mistaken for those of wild dogs, though they seldom contain substantial quantities of hair common in scats of wild dogs.
Scats may persist for many months, particularly in dry conditions, losing odour over time. Scats tend to whiten with age, particularly when they have a high bone content. Aggregations of dog scats are often found on or near prominent objects, particularly at features such as creek crossings. These aggregations generally represent a scent marking site.
Multiple scats of varying age can indicate that one or more dogs have been visiting the area for some time and that they may be resident in that area. Urine is less easily detected, though the smell of fresh fox urine is pungent and usually readily identified. In the case of dogs, it is more common to detect urine marks by means of other cues, such as scratches made on the ground.
Information Sourced From:
