Predation of wildlife by free-ranging domestic dogs in Polish hunting grounds and potential competition with the grey wolf
Introduction
Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) are among the most popular companion animals and one of the world's most common carnivores (Gompper, 2014b). Globally, dog ownership is widespread, ranging from 37% of US households (AVMA, 2012), 27% of European households (FEDIAF, 2010), 39% of Australian households (AHA, 2014), and up to 86% of households in Chile (Sepulveda et al., 2014, Silva-Rodríguez and Sieving, 2012). The worldwide dog population is estimated to be between 700 and 900 million (Gompper, 2014b, Hughes and Macdonald, 2013). Given their close association with and subsidies from humans, dogs have access to most ecosystems globally (Gompper, 2014b, Hughes and Macdonald, 2013, Young et al., 2011).
A growing body of literature demonstrates that dogs can have significant detrimental effects on natural environments. For example, dogs act as predators of a variety of native fauna, primarily mammals but also birds, reptiles, amphibians, and invertebrates, and also prey on domestic livestock (Hughes and Macdonald, 2013, Ritchie et al., 2014, Vanak and Gompper, 2009, Young et al., 2011). Non-lethal interactions can also disturb wild animals, including disruption of physiology and normal behaviour such as foraging, vigilance, and bedding (Weston and Stankowich, 2014). Dogs carry pathogens transmissible to wildlife and humans, serving as reservoirs and vectors for disease such as rabies and canine distemper virus (Knobel et al., 2014, Macpherson et al., 2013). Intraguild interactions between domestic dogs and native carnivores can be particularly impactful. Dogs act as resource and interference competitors with sympatric carnivores, competing for prey and carrion and excluding, and sometimes killing, predators in their guild (Butler and du Toit, 2002, Vanak et al., 2014, Vanak and Gompper, 2009). Conversely, dogs also serve as prey for other carnivores, exacerbating human-carnivore conflict (Butler et al., 2014, Kojola and Kuittinen, 2002, Young et al., 2011). Additionally, dogs hybridize with native canids, including wolves (Canis lupus. Canis simensis), jackals (e.g., Canis aureus), and coyotes (Canis latrans), resulting in loss of genetic integrity (Leonard et al., 2014).
Recent publications (e.g., Hughes and Macdonald, 2013, Lescureux and Linnell, 2014, Ritchie et al., 2014) stress the paucity of scientific studies on the ecological impact of domestic dogs. Research on the impacts of domestic dogs at a national rather than local scale are notably scarce. Legislation in Poland specific to dogs and wildlife provides an unusual opportunity to conduct such an analysis. The 1995 Hunting Act in Poland stipulates that hunting can be exercised only by members of the Polish Hunting Association (PHA), with Poland divided into hunting grounds managed by hunting clubs within 49 Hunting Districts. Recent data estimate 116,000 hunters in the 2550 PHA hunting clubs (CSO, 2014). Although members of hunting clubs can hunt free of charge, they are obliged to deliver the harvested animals to hunting club headquarters as all game belong to the Polish government. Hunting Districts must prepare annual hunting reports that include data on hunting ground management, annual harvest, and estimated population sizes of game species. In addition, reports include information on free-ranging dogs, both owned and stray, including greyhounds, which are still illegally used for hunting.
Poland contains an estimated 6–8 million dogs (Fiszdon and Boruta, 2012, Tasker, 2007), including between 75,000 and 650,000 strays (Kołłątaj et al., 2011, Tasker, 2007). No study has evaluated the population status, management, and ecological impact of free-ranging dogs in Poland. Here, we exploit data derived from Polish Hunting Association reports to provide the first national evaluation of rural free-ranging (RFR) dogs, including their numbers and their prey recorded by hunting clubs between 2001 and 2011. We hypothesized that dog abundance would positively predict depredation of wildlife and livestock on hunting grounds. We also hypothesized that depredation events would be positively correlated with prey availability, as indexed both by estimated population sizes of wildlife as well as hunter harvest. In addition, we evaluated available data on the geographic distribution of free-ranging grey wolves in Poland between 2006 and 2011 to predict the degree of spatial overlap and hence potential intraguild interactions by dogs and wolves. This comprehensive analysis represents one of the first such studies of dogs and their impacts on a national scale and provides important guidance on alternative legislative and management measures to control their impacts.
Section snippets
Study area
The study was conducted in Poland, a 322,575 km2 country with an estimated 38.5 million people, including 23.3 million urban and 15.3 rural residents (CSO, 2014). Poland contains 4696 hunting grounds encompassing 252,546 km2. Each hunting ground is rented and managed by a hunting club for at least 10 years. Each hunting club contains at minimum 10 hunters. According to the Polish Hunting Act, each hunting club must employ at least one hunting guard who lives in close proximity to the hunting
Rural free-ranging dogs and greyhounds
RFR dogs were recorded in all 49 Hunting Districts, primarily in central and eastern Poland (Fig. 1a). Between 2001 and 2011, the estimated average annual number of RFR dogs (excluding greyhounds) recorded in hunting grounds in Poland was 138,286 (SD: 8859.2; min-max: 126,157 in 2007 – 154,858 in 2001), of which 29.4% (SD: 0.84; min-max: 28.3% in 2006 – 31.1% in 2010) were stray dogs (Table 1). The estimated annual average number of observed free-ranging greyhounds in hunting grounds was 2990
Discussion
Our results demonstrate that free-ranging dogs are widespread and abundant in Poland, frequently killing wildlife and livestock. On average, hunting club records estimate that over 138,000 RFR dogs, nearly 30% of which were unowned strays, occur annually across the 49 Polish Hunting Districts. In addition, estimates suggest that nearly 3000 free-ranging greyhounds and their mixed breeds occurred annually in hunting grounds, although greyhound hunting has been banned and they are legally
Conclusions
Our results indicate the potential scope and impact of free-ranging dogs in Poland. A large number of unconfined dogs have access to natural areas, causing direct mortality of a variety of wildlife species and livestock, and consequently they may compete with the legally-protected grey wolf. In addition, it is conceivable that the additional animals killed by dogs, in conjunction with those harvested by humans, may result in an unsustainable off-take of some game species. This might be
References (83)
- et al.
Free-ranging domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) as predators and prey in rural Zimbabwe: threats of competition and disease to large wild carnivores
Biol. Conserv.
(2004) - et al.
Who is who? Identification of livestock predators using forensic genetic approaches
Forensic Sci. Int. Genet.
(2013) - et al.
The damage-conservation interface illustrated by predation on domestic livestock in central Italy
Biol. Conserv.
(1996) - et al.
A review of the interactions between free-roaming domestic dogs and wildlife
Biol. Conserv.
(2013) - et al.
Selected parameters of the Fort Collins, Colorado, dog population, 1978–80
Appl. Anim. Ethol.
(1983) - et al.
Warring brothers: the complex interactions between wolves (Canis lupus) and dogs (Canis familiaris) in a conservation context
Biol. Conserv.
(2014) - et al.
The impact of free-roaming dogs on gazelle kid/female ratio in a fragmented area
Biol. Conserv.
(2004) - et al.
Sheep predation: Characteristics and risk factors
Small Rumin. Res.
(2012) - et al.
Diet and prey selection of wolves (Canis lupus) recolonising Western and Central Poland
Mamm. Biol.
(2011) - et al.
Domestic dogs shape the landscape-scale distribution of a threatened forest ungulate
Biol. Conserv.
(2012)
The current and future management of wild mammals hunted with dogs in England and Wales
J. Environ. Manag.
Pet Ownership in Australia 2013
Competition between domestic dogs and Ethiopian wolf (Canis simensis) in the Bale Mountains National Park, Ethiopia
Afr. J. Ecol.
2012 U.S. Pet Ownership and Demographics Sourcebook
Dogs Gone Wild: Feral Dog Damage in the United States
The Crime History of Greyhounds Coursing [in Polish]
Aristocratic Poachers in the Forest of Dean: Their Methods, their Quarry and their Companions
Domestic animal losses to coyotes and dogs in Iowa
J. Wildlife Manage.
Wolf and dog competition in Italy
Acta Zool. Fenn.
Drive counts as a method of estimating ungulate density in forests: mission impossible?
Acta Theriol.
Environmental factors shaping ungulate abundances in Poland
Acta Theriol.
Diet of free-ranging domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) in rural Zimbabwe: implications for wild scavengers on the periphery of wildlife reserves
Anim. Conserv.
Dog eat dog, cat eat dog: social-ecological dimensions of dog predation by wild carnivores
The significance and dynamics of stray dog populations with special reference to the U.K. and Japan
J. Small Anim. Pract.
Feral dog and white-tailed deer interactions in Alabama
J. Wildl. Manag.
Szacowanie liczebnosci kopytnych w srodowisku lesnym: przegl1d metod
For. Res. Pap.
An overview of the current status and protection of the brown hare (Lepus europaeus) in the UK
Statistical Information and Elaboration – Forestry
Polish greyhound
Interspecific and geographic variation in the diets of sympatric carnivores: dingoes/wild dogs and red foxes in south-eastern Australia
PLoS One
Noninvasive monitoring of wolves at the edge of their distribution and the cost of their conservation
Anim. Conserv.
Facts and figures 2010
The assessment of dog bites? Part one. Which dogs bite? [in Polish]
Use of line intercept track index and plot sampling for estimating wild boar, Sus scrofa (Suidae), densities in Poland
Folia Zool.
Impact of feral dogs in an urban Atlantic forest fragment in southeastern Brazil
Nat. Conserv.
Lines of Defenses; Coping with Predators in the Rocky Mountain Region
Free-Ranging Dogs and Wildlife Conservation
The dog-human-wildlife interface: assessing the scope of the problem
Introduction: outlining the ecological influences of a subsidized, domesticated predator
Feral dogs
Report of General Venerinary Inspectorate on Shelters for Dogs and Cats in Poland [in Polish]
Cited by (58)
Initial study on free-roaming dogs in Serbian hunting grounds
2022, Journal of Veterinary BehaviorPredation on livestock as an indicator of drastic prey decline? The indirect effects of an African swine fever epidemic on predator–prey relations in Poland
2021, Ecological IndicatorsCitation Excerpt :In Poland, wolves currently inhabit all larger forest complexes (Nowak and Mysłajek, 2016), but this species is characterized by high plasticity in relation to occupied environments and diet preference. Current wolf diet is poorly understood in Poland, but recent studies show that wild boar are probably a second order prey, after red and roe deer (Wierzbowska et al., 2016). Moreover, the availability of prey largely shapes wolf diet composition (Okarma, 1995; Sidorovich et al., 2017), and a significant increase in the number of wild boar has been observed during last 20 years (Popczyk, 2016).
Dog in sheep’s clothing: livestock depredation by free-ranging dogs may pose new challenges to wolf conservation
2023, European Journal of Wildlife ResearchApplication of UHPLC-MS/MS method to monitor the occurrence of sulfonamides and their transformation products in soil in Silesia, Poland
2023, Environmental Science and Pollution Research