Para-aminopropiophenone (PAPP) in canid pest ejectors (CPEs) kills wild dogs and European red foxes quickly and humanely

  • Benjamin L. AllenEmail author
Research Article


Lethal control remains an important approach to mitigating the impacts of predators on livestock and threatened fauna. This occurs in Australia, where wild dogs (Canis familiaris) and European red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) are commonly subjected to broad-scale poisoning programs. Ongoing refinement of lethal tools has led to the recent development of manufactured poison baits containing para-aminopropiophenone (PAPP). Canid pest ejectors (CPEs) have also been recently registered for use and are a target-specific poison delivery device; yet, there has been no confirmation that PAPP delivered via ejectors will provide similar efficacy to PAPP delivered via manufactured baits. We tested the efficacy of PAPP in ejectors on wild dogs (1000-mg dose) and foxes (400-mg dose). Time-to-death, physical signs of poisoning and other related factors were assessed. Ten of 11 (91%) wild dogs used in controlled trials died within 3 h after PAPP administration; the mean time to unconsciousness was 65 min and the mean time to death was 84 min. Three of four (75%) foxes also died within 3 h after PAPP administration; their mean time to unconsciousness was 78 min, and their mean time to death was 121 min. Carcasses of eight deceased wild dogs and one fox were found during field trials, with distances between the nearest triggered ejector and the deceased animal ranging from 30 to 200 m. The presence of de-oxygenated blood in all necropsied carcasses and photographic evidence of triggered ejectors unequivocally demonstrated that using powdered PAPP in ejectors produces rapid anoxia and death in both wild dogs and foxes. Although anxiety and accompanying behaviours were observed in wild dogs (but not foxes), the use of PAPP offers a humane, additional option for the control of wild canids.


Canis dingo Humaneness Livestock protection Human-wildlife conflict Poison Wild dog 



Greg Conners and the Muturoo Pastoral Company provided access to the study site for each trial. Dave Berman, Deane Smith, Geoff Castle and Jason Wishart assisted with the fieldwork. Linton Staples and Jason Wishart provided advice on final stages of the manuscript. Animal Control Technologies Australia (ACTA) and Australian Wool Innovation (AWI) provided financial support to undertake the trials. Use of product trade names is given for descriptive purposes only and is not intended to endorse or dis-endorse any product, person or organisation.

Compliance with ethical standards

Approval to undertake the project was granted by the University of Southern Queensland’s Animal Ethics Committee (AEC permit number: 16REA102). A ‘Permit to allow research use and supply of an unregistered agvet chemical product’ was also obtained from the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA permit number: PER83898). The project was conducted in accordance with these approvals. Permission to work on private land was granted by the landholder prior to commencing work.


  1. Allen BL (2010) Skin and bone: observations of dingo scavenging during a chronic food shortage. Aust Mammal 32:1–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen BL (2011) A comment on the distribution of historical and contemporary livestock grazing across Australia: implications for using dingoes for biodiversity conservation. Ecol Manag Restor 12:26–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen BL (2012) Do desert dingoes drink daily? Visitation rates at remote waterpoints in the Strzelecki Desert. Aust Mammal 34:251–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Allen BL, Engeman RM, Leung LK-P (2014) The short-term effects of a routine poisoning campaign on the movement behaviour and detectability of a social top-predator. Environ Sci Pollut Res 21:2178–2190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Allen BL, Fleming PJS (2012) Reintroducing the dingo: the risk of dingo predation to threatened vertebrates of western New South Wales. Wildl Res 39:35–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Allen BL, Hampton JO (2017) Wild dogs, beef cattle and animal welfare: animal welfare considerations associated with wild dog control in extensive beef cattle production systems. University of Southern Queensland, ToowoombaGoogle Scholar
  7. Allen BL, Leung K-P (2014) The (non)effects of lethal population control on the diet of Australian dingoes. PLoS One 9:e108251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Anon (2014) National wild dog action plan: promoting and supporting community-driven action for landscape-scale wild dog management. WoolProducers Australia, Barton, Australian Capital TerritoryGoogle Scholar
  9. APVMA (2008) Review findings for sodium monofluoroacetate: the reconsideration of registrations of products containing sodium monofluoroacetate and approvals of their associated labels, environmental assessment. Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  10. APVMA (2015) Public release summary on the evaluation of the new active 4-aminopropiophenone (also known as para-aminopropiophenone (PAPP)) in the products Foxecute fox bait & PAPP wild dog bait: APVMA Product Numbers 65095 and 65094. Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, Kingston, ACTGoogle Scholar
  11. Behrendorff L, Leung LK-P, McKinnon A, Hanger J, Belonje G, Tapply J, Jones D, Allen BL (2016) Insects for breakfast and whales for dinner: the diet and body condition of dingoes on Fraser Island (K‘gari). Sci Rep 6:23469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bergstrom BJ, Arias LC, Davidson AD, Ferguson AW, Randa LA, Sheffield SR (2014) License to kill: reforming federal wildlife control to restore biodiversity and ecosystem function. Conserv Lett 7:131–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bird P (1994) Improved electric fences and baiting techniques: a behavioural approach to integrated dingo control. Animal and Plant Control Commission, Department of Primary Industries South Australia, AdelaideGoogle Scholar
  14. Bird P, Lock B, Cook J (1997) The Muloorina cell: a long-term trial to assess electric dingo fence designs. South Australian Dog Fence Board, AdelaideGoogle Scholar
  15. du Plessis J, Avenant N, Botha A, Mkhize N, Muller L, Mzileni N, O’Riain J, Parker D, Potgieter G, Richardson P, Rode S, Viljoen N, Tafani M (2018) Past and current management of predation on livestock. In: Kerley GIH, Wilson SL, Balfour D (eds) Livestock predation and its management in South Africa: a scientific assessment. Centre for African Conservation Ecology, Nelson Mandela University, Port Elizabeth, pp 125–177Google Scholar
  16. Eason CT, Miller A, MacMorran DB, Murphy EC (2014) Toxicology and ecotoxicology of Para-aminopropiophenone (PAPP) – a new predator control tool for stoats and feral cats in New Zealand. N Z J Ecol 38:177–188Google Scholar
  17. East IJ, Foreman I (2011) The structure, dynamics and movement patterns of the Australian sheep industry. Aust Vet J 89:477–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fisher P, O'Connor CE, Morriss G (2008) Oral toxicity of p-aminopropiophenone to brushtail possums (Trichosurus vulpecula), dama wallabies (Macropus eugenii), and mallards (Anas platyrhynchos). J Wildl Dis 44:655–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fleming PJS, Allen BL, Allen LR, Ballard G, Bengsen AJ, Gentle MN, McLeod LJ, Meek PD, Saunders GR (2014) Management of wild canids in Australia: free-ranging dogs and red foxes. In: Glen AS, Dickman CR (eds) Carnivores of Australia: past, present and future. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, pp 105–149Google Scholar
  20. GAP (2009) 'Global Animal Partnership 5-Step™ animal welfare rating standards for beef cattle. Global Animal Partnership, AustinGoogle Scholar
  21. Gentle M, Speed J, Allen BL, Harris S, Haapakoski H, Bell K (2017) The longevity of Para-aminopropiophenone (PAPP) wild dog baits and the implications for effective and safe baiting campaigns. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24:12338–12346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Henretig FM, Gribetz B, Kearney T, Lacouture P, Loveiov FH (1988) Interpretation of color change in blood with varying degree of methemoglobinemia. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 26:293–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hooke AL, Allen L, Leung KP (2006) Clinical signs and duration of cyanide toxicosis delivered by the M-44 ejector in wild dogs. Wildl Res 33:181–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jackson SM, Groves CP (2015) Taxonomy of Australian mammals. CSIRO Publishing, MelbourneCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kutsche F, Lay B (2003) In: Terry A (ed) Field guide to the plants of outback South Australia. Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation, Government of South Australia, AdelaideGoogle Scholar
  26. Mallick S, Pauza M, Eason C, Mooney N, Gaffney R, Harris S (2016) Assessment of non-target risks from sodium fluoroacetate (1080), Para-aminopropiophenone (PAPP) and sodium cyanide (NaCN) for fox-incursion response in Tasmania. Wildl Res 43:140–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Marks CA, Gigliotti F, Busana F, Johnston M, Lindeman M (2004) Fox control using a Para-aminopropiophenone formulation with the M-44 ejector. Anim Welf 13:401–407Google Scholar
  28. McLaughlin DW (2011) Land, food, and biodiversity. Conserv Biol 25:1117–1120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Meek PD, Brown SC (2016) It’s a dog eat dog world: observations of dingo (Canis familiaris) cannibalism. Aust Mammal 39:92–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Meek PD, Brown SC, Wishart J, Milne H, Aylett P, Humphrys S, Ballard G, Fleming PJS (2019) Efficacy of lethal-trap devices to improve the welfare of trapped wild dogs. Wildl Res xx:xx–xxGoogle Scholar
  31. MLA (2017) Australia's beef industry: fast facts. Meat and Livestock Australia, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  32. Newsome AE, Catling PC, Cooke BD, Smyth R (2001) Two ecological universes separated by the dingo barrier fence in semi-arid Australia: interactions between landscapes, herbivory and carnivory, with and without dingoes. Rangel J 23:71–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Petherick JC (2005) Animal welfare issues associated with extensive livestock production: the northern Australian beef cattle industry. Appl Anim Behav Sci 92:211–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Read J, Gigliotti F, Darby S, Lapidge S (2014) Dying to be clean: pen trials of novel cat and fox control devices. Int J Pest Manag 60:166–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Smith B, Appleby R (2018) Promoting human-dingo co-existence in Australia: moving toward more innovative methods of protecting livestock rather than killing dingoes (Canis dingo). Wildl Res 45:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thornton PK (2010) Livestock production: recent trends, future prospects. Philos Trans R Soc B 365:2853–2867CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tscharntke T, Clough Y, Wanger TC, Jackson L, Motzke I, Perfecto I, Vandermeer J, Whitbread A (2012) Global food security, biodiversity conservation and the future of agricultural intensification. Biol Conserv 151:53–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Twigg LE, Parker RW (2010) Is sodium fluoroacetate (1080) a humane poison? The influence of mode of action, physiological effects, and target specificity. Anim Welf 19:249–263Google Scholar
  39. van Bommel L, Johnson CN (2014) Protecting livestock while conserving ecosystem function: non-lethal management of wild predators. In: Glen AS, Dickman CR (eds) Carnivores of Australia: past, present and future. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, pp 323–353Google Scholar
  40. Van Dyck S, Strahan R (eds) (2008) The mammals of Australia. Reed New Holland, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  41. van Eeden LM, Dickman CR, Ritchie EG, Newsome TM (2017) Shifting public values and what they mean for increasing democracy in wildlife management decisions. Biodivers Conserv 26:2759–2763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Woinarski JCZ, Burbidge AA, Harrison PL (2015) Ongoing unraveling of a continental fauna: decline and extinction of Australian mammals since European settlement. Proc Natl Acad Sci 112:4531–4540CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Life Sciences and the EnvironmentUniversity of Southern QueenslandToowoombaAustralia

Personalised recommendations