Content uploaded by Bradley Philip Smith
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Bradley Philip Smith on Aug 02, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
A Review of the Relationship between Indigenous Australians, Dingoes (Canis dingo) and Domestic Dogs (Canis familiaris)
Abstract
Canids form a large part of Indigenous Australian life and mythology, an association first developed with the dingo, and later with the domestic dog. The relationship between canids and Indigenous Australians is intricate, but unique in that these peoples never domesticated the wild dingo. Neither were dingoes and dogs seen as a source of food nor in many cases considered practical hunting assistants, yet they were highly prized. Apart from featuring heavily in Indigenous Australian spirituality (The Dreaming), advantages of camp dingoes and dogs include them being protectors or guardians, "bed warmers," and companions. However, these benefits were weighed against the many associated social and economic costs incurred such as disruption to camp life and religious ceremony, burden on camp food supply and storage, and potential source of disease. This review explores the relationship between Indigenous Australians, dingoes and dogs, and attempts to explain why dingoes, and later dogs, were kept, yet not domesticated. By bringing together the many disparate observations made by early anthropologists, insight into traditional human-canid relationships may be gleaned.
... We reach this conclusion based on available insights into the complex relationship between Aboriginal people and the wild-living canid of Australia, the dingo (Canis dingo). Australia is host to the only mobile foraging communities whose ubiquitous practice of taking the pups of freeranging canids from their dens and raising them as companion animals is relatively well attested in the historical record (Meggitt, 1965;Smith and Litchfield, 2009;Balme and O'Connor, 2016;Brumm, 2021;Koungoulos, 2021). In this paper we critically investigate the human-initiated hypothesis of wolf domestication, and expand on this theory based on a detailed consideration of human-dingo relations. ...
... Numerous observers recorded that some dingo pups were kept alive specifically with the intention of raising them in human society (Meggitt, 1965). These so-called "camp dingoes" had varied roles in Indigenous communities (Meggitt, 1965;Gould, 1969Gould, , 1970Jones, 1970;Hamilton, 1972;White, 1972;Kolig, 1973;Macintosh, 1974;Hayden, 1975;Macintosh, 1975;Barker and Macintosh, 1979;Gould, 1980;Gollan, 1982Gollan, , 1984Breckwoldt, 1988;Rose, 1992;Corbett, 1995;Meehan et al., 1999;Smith and Litchfield, 2009;Cahir and Clark, 2013;Smith, 2015b;Balme and O'Connor, 2016;Koungoulos, 2017;Shipman, 2020;Koungoulos and Fillios, 2020a,b;Brumm, 2021;Koungoulos, 2021Koungoulos, , 2022Shipman, 2021;Brumm and Koungoulos, 2022). Some early writers commented on the practical value these animals had as hunting aides (e.g., Dawson, 1881;Giles, 1889:20), although there is continuing debate on this subject (Balme and O'Connor, 2016;Koungoulos and Fillios, 2020a;Koungoulos and Fillios, 2020b). ...
... Most authorities agree that Aboriginal people did not intentionally control the breeding of camp dingoes (Smith and Litchfield, 2009;Shipman, 2020; but see below). Instead, the available accounts consistently state that they acquired dingo pups by conducting raids on wild dens (Dawson, 1830:176;Nind, 1831). ...
The historically known relationship of interspecies companionship between Aboriginal foraging communities in Australia and free-ranging dingoes provides a model for understanding the human-canid relations that gave rise to the first domesticated dogs. Here, we propose that a broadly similar relationship might have developed early in time between wild-living wolves and mobile groups of foragers in Late Pleistocene Eurasia, with hunter-gatherers routinely raiding wild wolf dens for pre-weaned pups, which were socialized to humans and kept in camp as tamed companions (“pets”). We outline a model in which captive wolf pups that reverted to the wild to breed when they were sexually mature established their territories in the vicinity of foraging communities — in a “liminal” ecological zone between humans and truly wild-living wolves. Many (or most) of the wolf pups humans took from the wilderness to rear in camp may have derived from these liminal dens where the breeding pairs had been under indirect human selection for tameness over many generations. This highlights the importance of the large seasonal hunting/aggregation camps associated with mammoth kill-sites in Gravettian/Epigravettian central Europe. Large numbers of foragers gathered regularly at these locations during the wild wolf birthing season. We infer that if a pattern of this kind occurred over long periods of time then there might have been a pronounced effect on genetic variation in free-ranging wolves that denned and whelped in the liminal zones in the vicinity of these human seasonal aggregation sites. The argument is not that wolves were domesticated in central Europe. Rather, it is this pattern of hunter-gatherers who caught and reared wild wolf pups gathering seasonally in large numbers that might have been the catalyst for the early changes leading to the first domesticated dogs — whether in western Eurasia or further afield.
... After the dingo arrived in Australia, not only did it successfully integrate into the daily lives of many Aboriginal communities, but it also changed the way these communities operate. In many communities, it became an occasional hunting partner, social companion, and source of warmth and was used to source and kill food (Smith & Litchfield, 2009). This is not to say that the dingo was not, at times, a pest or undesired; it is to say that its arrival was momentous. ...
... Colonial interventions such as cluster housing had changed the proximity and relational components of canine and human lives, while the resulting degradation of condition for both was then blamed on the community as part of media prejudice and racial profiling (Jervis et al., 2018). As Smith and Litchfield (2009) have noted, systemic colonial factors cause issues with camp dogs in communities. This includes the inaccessibility of veterinary care, which would redress not only dog illness but also the high reproductivity of domestic dogs, who breed far more frequently than dingoes. ...
... For example, there are multiple instances of the expression of closeness and care, and sadness after separation or death (Constable et al., 2010). Dogs are seen to be part of the family, and they are linked to age and status, with Elders owning more dogs both for safety and the deep spiritual connections dogs bring (Smallacombe, 2020;Smith & Litchfield, 2009). Dogs who become more vulnerable by the death of their owners are treated by surviving members of the community with greater care. ...
... However, the observed roles of these so-called "camp dingoes" varied from group to group, and for many Indigenous people their value as companions ("pets") seems to have been foremost [15]. European colonisation resulted in profound and widespread disruptions to the customary lifeways of Aboriginal societies, including the breakdown of the traditional relationship between Indigenous people and dingoes [15]. Furthermore, introduced domestic canines were also rapidly adopted into At the time of the establishment of the British penal colony at Port Jackson (Sydney, Australia) in 1788-the first European settlement in Australia-dingoes were commonly seen together with local Aboriginal people; for example, residing in their camps, sharing their domiciles, travelling on foot and in watercraft with them, or otherwise in their company (e.g., [8][9][10][11]). ...
... In some communities, these animals were employed as hunting assistants for capturing prey [14]. However, the observed roles of these so-called "camp dingoes" varied from group to group, and for many Indigenous people their value as companions ("pets") seems to have been foremost [15]. European colonisation resulted in profound and widespread disruptions to the customary lifeways of Aboriginal societies, including the breakdown of the traditional relationship between Indigenous people and dingoes [15]. ...
... However, the observed roles of these so-called "camp dingoes" varied from group to group, and for many Indigenous people their value as companions ("pets") seems to have been foremost [15]. European colonisation resulted in profound and widespread disruptions to the customary lifeways of Aboriginal societies, including the breakdown of the traditional relationship between Indigenous people and dingoes [15]. Furthermore, introduced domestic canines were also rapidly adopted into Aboriginal communities, where they were widely valued both as hunting dogs and companion animals [14,16]. ...
Historical sources and Indigenous oral traditions indicate that Australian Aboriginal people commonly reared and kept the wild-caught pups of dingoes (C. dingo) as tamed companion animals. A review of the available evidence suggests Indigenous communities employed an intense socialisation process that forged close personal bonds between humans and their tame dingoes from an early age. This was complemented by oral traditions which passed down awareness of the dangers to children posed by wild or unfamiliar dingoes, and which communicated the importance of treating dingoes with respect. Together, these practices resulted in what can be interpreted as substantially altered behaviours in tamed dingoes, which, despite their naturally high prey drive, were not considered a serious threat to children and were thus able to be maintained as companion animals in the long term. This relationship is of importance for understanding the original domestication of the dog, as it demonstrates a means by which careful and deliberate socialisation by foragers could both manage risks to children’s safety posed by keeping wild canids in the domestic realm and retain them well into reproductive maturity—both issues which have been highlighted as obstacles to the domestication of dogs from wolves.
... Meehan, considering the use of dogs amongst the Ambarra of Australia, for example, concludes that most camp dogs were 'absolutely hopeless at hunting' (Meehan, Jones, and Vincent 1999: 102). This is an observation mirrored in other studies (Balme and O'Connor 2016;Smith and Litchfield 2009), though some argue that dogs may have been useful in hunting in some contexts (Koungoulos and Fillios 2020). It has been argued that the efficient hunting of large animals such as kangaroos would only have been possible in Australia through the introduction of highly bred and trained European dogs (Meehan, Jones, and Vincent 1999). ...
... Their use as a type of technology was limited. Dingoes mostly served a function as hunting aids for women hunting small game, and as 'blankets' , and did not hunt large game or carry loads (Balme and O'Connor 2016;Smith and Litchfield 2009). In contrast, it is their role as companions and as a source of emotional support that is the most evident (Meehan, Jones, and Vincent 1999). ...
... Instead, it seems most likely that the tamest of the wolves may have begged or scrounged for food, or lived independently, interacting with humans out of curiosity and companionship. Packs of Arctic wolves are tolerant of human proximity and interaction, for example (Smith and Litchfield 2009). As with dingoes, orphan wolf pups may have been the playthings of children, with some adult dogs then remaining attached to human groups. ...
In Hidden Depths, Professor Penny Spikins explores how our emotional connections have shaped human ancestry. Focusing on three key transitions in human origins, Professor Spikins explains how the emotional capacities of our early ancestors evolved in response to ecological changes, much like similar changes in other social mammals. For each transition, dedicated chapters examine evolutionary pressures, responses in changes in human emotional capacities and the archaeological evidence for human social behaviours. Starting from our earliest origins, in Part One, Professor Spikins explores how after two million years ago, movement of human ancestors into a new ecological niche drove new types of collaboration, including care for vulnerable members of the group. Emotional adaptations lead to cognitive changes, as new connections based on compassion, generosity, trust and inclusion also changed our relationship to material things. Part Two explores a later key transition in human emotional capacities occurring after 300,000 years ago. At this time changes in social tolerance allowed ancestors of our own species to further reach out beyond their local group and care about distant allies, making human communities resilient to environmental changes. An increasingly close relationship to animals, and even to cherished possessions, appeared at this time, and can be explained through new human vulnerabilities and ways of seeking comfort and belonging. Lastly, Part Three focuses on the contrasts in emotional dispositions arising between ourselves and our close cousins, the Neanderthals. Neanderthals are revealed as equally caring yet emotionally different humans, who might, if things had been different, have been in our place today. This new narrative breaks away from traditional views of human evolution as exceptional or as a linear progression towards a more perfect form. Instead, our evolutionary history is situated within similar processes occurring in other mammals, and explained as one in which emotions, rather than ‘intellect’, were key to our evolutionary journey. Moreover, changes in emotional capacities and dispositions are seen as part of differing pathways each bringing strengths, weaknesses and compromises. These hidden depths provide an explanation for many of the emotional sensitivities and vulnerabilities which continue to influence our world today.
... However, there still remain several species of wild, undomesticated dogs such as wolves, dingoes as well as singing dogs. For example, hunter-gathers cultures in Eurasia led to the domestication of wolves in the preagricultural period (Clutton-Brock, 1992;Smith & Litchfield, 2009;Thalmann & Perri, 2019) . However, similar hunter-gatherer activities that involve dogs in Australia has not resulted in domestication of dingoes to become canis familiaris (Smith & Litchfield, 2009). ...
... For example, hunter-gathers cultures in Eurasia led to the domestication of wolves in the preagricultural period (Clutton-Brock, 1992;Smith & Litchfield, 2009;Thalmann & Perri, 2019) . However, similar hunter-gatherer activities that involve dogs in Australia has not resulted in domestication of dingoes to become canis familiaris (Smith & Litchfield, 2009). ...
Interactions between humans and carnivores have been range from positive to negative, occasionally leading to human-wildlife conflict in many parts of the world. While dogs have roles to support humans, wild dogs such as wolf, dingoes, and singing dogs have both potential positive and negative roles for humans. We gathered knowledge among tribes in Pegunungan Tengah of Papua, Indonesia on their interactions with the New Guinea Singing Dog (NGSD) using an ethno-conservation approach. We conducted in-depth interviews using both emit and etic approaches with informants from the Amungme, Damal, Moni and Dani (Lani) tribes, who live in the habitat of the dog. Data were analyzed using phenomenological, content analysis, and analytical induction processes. The four tribes have traditional knowledge about the dog and its habitat, thus forming behavioral patterns, belief systems and cultural values toward NGSD. The ethno-conservation of these tribes is reflected in their culture as results from their ability to identify the dog’s sensitivity to the change of environment including human disturbances, water quality and food availability. The tribes also limit themselves to share information about NGSD to outsiders and respect the dogs as their ancestors. Residents of the four Indigenous tribes of Pegunungan Tengah believe that NGSD is the reincarnation and avatar of the dwelling spirits of their ancestors. We discuss the implications of these findings for the conservation of this non-protected species by the Indonesian government, but endemic to Papua.
... Disagreement over dingo taxonomy and nomenclature (names proposed and in use include: Canis familiaris, C. familiaris dingo, C. lupus familiaris, C. lupus dingo, and C. dingo) reflects debate over differences and similarities between dingoes and dogs (Cairns, 2021;Crowther et al., 2014;Jackson et al., 2017;Jackson et al., 2019;Jackson et al., 2021;Shipman, 2021;Smith et al., 2019)-as defined above-and whether dingo-dog hybridization represents a conservation issue Cairns et al., 2019;Cairns et al., 2021;Claridge et al., 2014;Crowther et al., 2021;Jones, 2009;Stephens et al., 2015;van Eeden, Dickman, et al., 2018). Further debate focuses on the dingo's status as a native species Hytten, 2011) and its varying cultural values to Australian people (Archer-Lean et al., 2015;Probyn-Rapsey, 2015;Smith & Litchfield, 2009;. ...
... Uncertainties on the extent to which dingoes are valued by the broader Australian society Smith & Litchfield, 2009;Hytten, 2011;Archer-Lean et al., 2015;Probyn-Rapsey, 2015; Ecological impacts ...
Expert elicitation can be valuable for informing decision-makers on conservation and wildlife management issues. To date, studies eliciting expert opinions have primarily focused on identifying and building consensus on key issues. Nonetheless , there are drawbacks of a strict focus on consensus, and it is important to understand and emphasize dissent, too. This study adopts a dissensus-based Del-phi to understand conflict among dingo experts. Twenty-eight experts participated in three rounds of investigation. We highlight disagreement on most of the issues explored. In particular, we find that disagreement is underpinned by what we call "conflict over values" and "conflict over evidence." We also note the broader role played by distrust in influencing such conflicts. Understanding and recognizing the different elements shaping disagreement is critical for informing and improving decision-making and can also enable critique of dominant paradigms in current practices. We encourage greater reflexivity and open deliberation on these aspects and hope our study will inform similar investigations in other contexts.
... Dingoes are of cultural, social, and spiritual significance to a great many Australians; most significantly Indigenous Australians who hold kinship ties and traditional knowledge about dingoes, other native animals, and the Australian landscape (Rose, 2000;Smith and Litchfield, 2009). However, decisions regarding the management of dingoes are shaped by narrow vested interests that wield significant power. ...
The seven transition pathways are discussed in relation to how they
can collectively foster coexistence with dingoes in extensive rangelands grazing
systems. International examples of interventions are used to illustrate the types of
successful actions associated with each pathway that could inform action in
Australia. The findings have implications for coexistence with large carnivores in
rangeland ecosystems globally.
... Available accounts suggest that Aboriginal men, women, and children were besotted with wild-caught dingo (C. dingo) pups, intensely nurturing the young canids and forming deep emotional bonds [109][110][111] that may have continued even after the mature animals returned to the wild to breed [112]. This close human-canine relationship seems to have flourished in even the harshest parts of the arid interior where food resources were exceptionally scarce, and despite the widely held view that these humanassociated canids conferred no obvious economic benefits, or certainly were not consistently useful as hunting 'dogs' ( [113]; but cf. ...
The Sulawesi warty pig (S. celebensis) is a wild and still-extant suid that is endemic to the Indonesian island of Sulawesi. It has long been theorised that S. celebensis was domesticated and/or deliberately introduced to other islands in Indonesia prior to the advent of the Neolithic farming transition in the region. Thus far, however, there has been no empirical support for this idea, nor have scientists critiqued the argument that S. celebensis was a pre-Neolithic domesticate in detail. Here, it is proposed that early foragers could have formed a relationship with S. celebensis that was similar in essence to the close association between Late Pleistocene foragers in Eurasia and the wild wolf ancestors of domestic dogs. That is, a longstanding practice of hunter-gatherers intensively socialising wild-caught S. celebensis piglets for adoption into human society as companion animals (‘pets’) may have altered the predator–prey dynamic, brought aspects of wild pig behaviour and reproduction under indirect human selection and control, and caused changes that differentiated human-associated pigs from their solely wild-living counterparts.
... In Australian Indigenous communities, it is necessary to develop an understanding of not only the STHs of concern to humans, but also other hosts such as dogs, that may act as zoonotic reservoirs for STHs that can mature to adulthood in humans, as well as environmental factors which may contribute to transmission. The importance of the relationship between people and canines is clear in the great significance and diverse roles that dogs hold in these communities; as companions, hunting partners, spiritual guardians and members of the intricate kinship system [2][3][4]. ...
Soil-transmitted helminths (STH) infect 1.5 billion people and countless animals worldwide. In Australian Indigenous communities, STH infections have largely remained endemic despite control efforts, suggesting reservoirs of infection may exist. Dogs fulfil various important cultural, social and occupational roles in Australian Indigenous communities and are populous in these settings. Dogs may also harbour zoonotic STHs capable of producing morbidity and mortality in dogs and humans. This review provides an overview of human and zoonotic STH infections, identifies the Australian Indigenous locations affected and the parasite species and hosts involved. The meta-analysis provides estimates of individual study and pooled true prevalence of STH infections in Australian Indigenous communities and identifies knowledge gaps for further research on zoonotic or anthroponotic potential. A systematic literature search identified 45 eligible studies documenting the presence of Strongyloides stercoralis , Trichuris trichiura , Ancylostoma caninum , Ancylostoma duodenale , Ancylostoma ceylanicum , undifferentiated hookworm, and Ascaris lumbricoides . Of these studies, 26 were also eligible for inclusion in meta-analysis to establish true prevalence in the light of imperfect diagnostic test sensitivity and specificity by Rogan-Gladen and Bayesian methods. These studies revealed pooled true prevalence estimates of 18.9% (95% CI 15.8–22.1) for human and canine S . stercoralis infections and 77.3% (95% CI 63.7–91.0) for canine A . caninum infections indicating continued endemicity, but considerably more heterogenous pooled estimates for canine A . ceylanicum infections, and A . duodenale , undifferentiated hookworm and T . trichiura in humans. This review suggests that the prevalence of STHs in Australian Indigenous communities has likely been underestimated, principally based on imperfect diagnostic tests. Potential misclassification of hookworm species in humans and dogs due to outdated methodology, also obscures this picture. High-quality contemporary studies are required to establish current true prevalence of parasite species in all relevant hosts to guide future policy development and control decisions under a culturally sound One Health framework.
... They depended on them for their livelihoods, and they perceived them as members of their families. Smith and Litchfield (2009) found evidence of concern being extended by Aborigines to dingoes, which may have derived from spiritual beliefs but also could have emanated from perceived family connections and/or services that they provided. The Nuer and most other East African pastoralists (Evans-Pritchard, 1969) perceive of their cattle as both members of their family coalitions and as necessary to their survival; accordingly, they have developed very high ethical concerns for them. ...
As hunter-gatherers, it is unlikely that humans evolved psychological tendencies to extend high levels of concern for predator or prey species. Our coalitional psychology, which evolved to regulate human interactions with other humans, might be the basis for the extension of ethical concerns to non-humans. This research identified three variables (kinship, reciprocity, and conscious deliberation) that affect our altruistic tendencies toward humans and tested them to see if they also affected our concern toward non-humans. Using a sample of 119 respondents from participants at animal auctions, the researchers compared levels of concern to: perceived the animals as family; received benefits from the animals; and/or consciously contemplated appropriate levels of concern. The data supported the hypotheses that concerns rise when animals are re-categorized as kin and/or when individuals have previously considered appropriate levels of concern, but it did not support the hypothesized connection between concern and reciprocity.
This paper outlines the problems associated with keeping dingoes as pets, and describes the lobbying efforts undertaken by the Australian Dingo Conservation Association (ADCA) to address the noxious status of the dingo and recent legislative changes that allow dingoes to be kept as pets in New South Wales. It also describes the efforts that have been made to conserve the dingo and to highlight the threat of hybridisation that is swamping the gene pool of dingo populations across Australia. There are four problems associated with the management of dingoes in the wild and in captivity under the new legislation. This paper outlines the problems and offers some solutions for the future of the dingo, and describes some of the very valuable work which has been done by dingo conservation groups. It is vitally important that any remnant wild populations are maintained and captive breeding programs are continued to deliver a positive outcome for the future of the dingo.