Not ok.

Certainly not. I can only respectfully request that our political representatives act in our collective long-term interest, rather than being distracted by any political or personal benefits associated with short term appeasement of industries that are NOT obliged to work for us.

Sure do, and we hope to share some of this once our current cat work finishes, but that’s sadly still a small proportion of the State.

Interesting.
Dingoes prey varies with local availability, experience and social group size.
Also, what appears to be a solitary animal is often part of a dispersed social group.

Agreed. Plenty of people, including me, were very interested in major macropod taxonomic changes.

Osphranter rufus, formerly Macropus, continues to be killed in large numbers because people perceive it to be a pest.

Def not exactly the same, no two wildlife issues are, but ‘impacts’ matter most.

This is especially because impacts and management do not occur statewide.

It would be ideal if we could invest more in monitoring dingoes but as I noted (and despite some success in other research areas) we have not been able to secure grants for this, into the future.

2/2.

I don’t dictate NSW Government interests (possibly good for all of us).

Professionally I am interested in dingo densities, what drives them, how they relate to those of other species, and how we can manage impacts with minimal harm.

Statewide abundance is not necessary to manage impacts.

1/2

I like this idea and expect (the data from) many samples I’ve provided, and that our team continues to collect, will be shared once the wildlife geneticists and other ecologists using them have completed their work.

It’s also pretty hard to list an abundant animal as threatened, which dingoes are in many parts of Australia. (obv. they are at low densities in some areas, eg western Vic).
I have a little experience too, & think a primary, practical focus on impacts would be more helpful than a rebadge

And yet not enough to do everything. 🤔

I think it’s possible you have some sampling bias re the ‘most working in this space tend to agree’ idea.

I am skeptical that a name change will significantly affect on ground management, (esp. compared to rigorous quantitative study of impacts and population monitoring.)

‘Names can matter…’

We’d certainly be happy to generate an estimate if someone would pay for it!

I’m unsurprised by your self-confidence and my scepticism.

I guess we’ll have see if there is any meaningful change in #dingo management in the areas where they are most common.

Re your last point, I did write that names can be important and you give a good example.

Perhaps it’s a welcome distraction from the much more important issue of quantifying and managing impacts (+ve and -ve).

We’re all guilty of it occasionally, investing energy in a side issue rather than tackling the tough stuff! Ie How to improve real-world management in a broadly acceptable way?

Generally accepted that dingoes came to Australia with people rather than under their own steam. Not everyone agrees, of course!

1) Congratulations!
2) You can absolutely do Honours
3) Choose something you find interesting, where you will have a result to discuss.

I think they were saying that there is too much focus on limiting inputs to Govt services rather than focusing on the output that is required and delivered.