, Volume 48, Issue 3, pp 240–250 | Cite as

Evidence supporting that human-subsidized free-ranging dogs are the main cause of animal losses in small-scale farms in Chile

  • Diego Montecino-LatorreEmail author
  • William San Martín
Research Article


We surveyed professionals from the Chilean Ministry of Agriculture working with small-scale farmers to characterize the attacks of free-ranging dogs across Chile. Nationwide, in a single year, free-ranging dogs attacked 25% of the ca. 8500 farms included in the survey, killing or injuring about 10 000 small ruminants. These dogs were ranked as the main cause of animal losses for small-scale farmers, representing a threat to the livelihoods of this vulnerable group. Further, free-ranging dogs attacking small ruminants were considered as human-subsidized, since they would be recruited by irresponsible ownership and abandonment from urban centers. This is the first national assessment reporting that human-subsidized dogs are a main threat to livestock rearing. Policies to control populations of these animals should target their anthropogenic origin as well as cultural shifts in dog ownership and animal welfare. While these policies may be effective mid- to long-term approaches, short-term actions may also be needed.


Attacks Chile Dogs Farms Livestock Predation 



We are thankful to all PRODESAL and PDTI professionals that work on a daily basis to make Chile a better country. We appreciate the support of Dr. Javier Fernández and Dr. Juan Jiménez from the Ministerio de Agricultura de Chile. We thank Dr. Héctor Pavez for providing us his experience, which improved the survey, and the help of Dr. Joseph Gaydos and Dr. Emily Pascoe. We also wish to thank Joe Roy-Mayhew, and Jay McNair for their feedback and edits on earlier drafts of this article. Finally, we thank two anonymous reviewers whose comments improved this manuscript.

Supplementary material

13280_2018_1066_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (370 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 370 kb)


  1. Acosta-Jamett, G., W.S.K. Chalmers, A.A. Cunningham, S. Cleaveland, I.G. Handel, and B.M.D. Bronsvoort. 2011. Urban domestic dog populations as a source of canine distemper virus for wild carnivores in the Coquimbo Region of Chile. Veterinary Microbiology 152: 247–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Acosta-Jamett, G., S. Cleaveland, B.M. Dec Bronsvoort, A.A. Cunningham, H. Bradshaw, and P.S. Craig. 2010a. Echinococcus granulosus infection in domestic dogs in urban and rural areas of the Coquimbo region, north-central Chile. Veterinary Parasitology 169: 117–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Acosta-Jamett, G., S. Cleaveland, A.A. Cunningham, and B.M.D. Bronsvoort. 2010b. Demography of domestic dogs in rural and urban areas of the Coquimbo Region of Chile and implications for disease transmission. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 94: 272–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Acosta-Jamett, G., P. Corti, A. Aleuy, A. Espinoza, and P. Quevedo. 2014. Study of perception of farming-predator conflicts Arica y Parinacota, Coquimbo, Araucanía and Aysén Districts, 26–27. Valdivia: Univ. Austral Chile.Google Scholar
  5. Acosta-Jamett, G., et al. 2015. Increased dog population and potential for bat-borne rabies spillover in Chile in response to “Dog management, abundance and potential for bat-borne rabies spillover in Chile” by Astorga et al. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 120: 246–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Acosta-Jamett, G., J.R. Gutiérrez, D.A. Kelt, P.L. Meserve, and M.A. Previtali. 2016. El Niño Southern Oscillation drives conflict between wild carnivores and livestock farmers in a semiarid area in Chile. Journal of Arid Environments 126: 76–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Amaku, M., R.A. Dias, and F. Ferreira. 2010. Dynamics and control of stray dog populations. Mathematical Population Studies 17: 69–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Armstrong, W., and G. Ulloa. 2016. Epidemiogical features of canine bites during the year 2011 in Temuco City, Chile. Sustainability, Agri, Food Environmental Research 4: 41–49. (In Spanish. Summary in English).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beck, A.M. 1973. The ecology of stray dogs: A study of free-ranging Urban animals. Baltimore: York Press.Google Scholar
  10. Boitani, L., F. Francisci, P. Ciucci, and G. Andreoli. 2016. The ecology and behavior of feral dogs: A case study from central Italy. In The domestic dog: Its evolution, behaviour, and interactions with people, ed. J. Serpell, 342–368. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bonacic, C., T. Ibarra, M.F. Amar, D. Sanhueza, N. Guarda, N. Gálvez, and T. Murphy. 2007. Assessment of the conflict between wild carnivores and livestock. 612-461-LE07. Laboratorio de Vida Silvestre Fauna Australis Facultad de Agronomía e Ingeniería Forestal Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. Santiago (In Spanish).Google Scholar
  12. Boza, S., M. Cortés, and F. Guzmán. 2015. Characterization of small-scale agriculture producers benefited by the Programa of Local Development in the Metropolitan District, Chile. IDESIA 33: 135–142 (In Spanish. Summary in English).Google Scholar
  13. Cattan, P., G. Acosta-Jamett, G. Cundill, P. Correa, G. Cortes, and G. Rojo. 2010. Assessment of the interaction between puma (Puma concolor) and livestock in Choapa Province, Coquimbo District. 612-370-LE09. Centro de Estudios de Vida Silvestre Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias y Pecuarias Universidad de Chile. Santiago (In Spanish).Google Scholar
  14. Corti, P., H.U. Wittmer, and M. Festa-Bianchet. 2010. Dynamics of a small population of endangered huemul deer (Hippocamelus bisulcus) in Chilean Patagonia. Journal of Mammalogy 91: 690–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Doherty, T.S., C.R. Dickman, A.S. Glen, T.M. Newsome, D.G. Nimmo, E.G. Ritchie, A.T. Vanak, and A.J. Wirsing. 2017. The global impacts of domestic dogs on threatened vertebrates. Biological Conservation 210: 56–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Doherty, T.S., A.S. Glen, D.G. Nimmo, E.G. Ritchie, and C.R. Dickman. 2016. Invasive predators and global biodiversity loss. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences of the United States of America 113: 11261–11265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Donoso, G., O. Melo, and E. Negrete. 2010. Participation determinants and impact assessment of the Institute of Agricultural Development (INDAP) credit program. Ciencia e Investigación Agraria 37: 87–99.Google Scholar
  18. Favi, M.C., and J.C. Durán. 1991. Rabies epidemiology in Chile (1929–1988) and perspectives in wild mammals. Avances en Ciencias Veterinarias. (In Spanish).Google Scholar
  19. Flores, J. 2017. Pack of wild dogs costs millions in lost after attacking sheep in Porvenir. Radio Biobío. Retrieved 20 March 2017 from (In Spanish).
  20. Gompper, M.E. 2014. Introduction: Outlining the ecological influences of a subsidized, domesticated predator. In Free-ranging Dogs and Wildlife Conservation, ed. M.E. Gompper, 1–7. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Home, C., R. Pal, R.K. Sharma, K.R. Suryawanshi, Y.V. Bhatnagar, and A.T. Vanak. 2017. Commensal in conflict: Livestock depredation patterns by free-ranging domestic dogs in the upper Spiti landscape. Ambio. Scholar
  22. Hughes, J., and D.W. Macdonald. 2013. A review of the interactions between free-roaming domestic dogs and wildlife. Biological Conservation 157: 341–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Instituto de Desarrollo Agropecuario. 2017. State of the Institution 2016 (In Spanish).Google Scholar
  24. Instituto de Desarrollo Agropecuario. 2018. The improvement process of the indigenous territorial development program. Jofré Godoy, M.; Huenchumil (In Spanish).Google Scholar
  25. Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas. 2015. Survey of sheep flocks. Estadísticas Pecuarias/Ganadería Ovina (In Spanish).Google Scholar
  26. Krippendorff, K. 2013. Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  27. Lord, K., M. Feinstein, B. Smith, and R. Coppinger. 2013. Variation in reproductive traits of members of the genus Canis with special attention to the domestic dog (Canis familiaris). Behavioral Processes 92: 131–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Macpherson, C.N.L. 2013. Dogs, zoonoses and public health. Boston: CAB International.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ministerio de Agricultura. 1990. Replaces the act of the Instituto de Desarrollo Agropecuario. Biblioteca del Congreso Nacional de Chile. February 3 (In Spanish).Google Scholar
  30. Ministerio de Agricultura. 1993. Amendment to the Act of the Instituto de Desarrollo Agropecuario. Biblioteca del Congreso Nacional de Chile. Mayo 5 (In Spanish).Google Scholar
  31. Ministerio de Agricultura. 2015. Modification of hunting law enforcement, approved by Decree No 5, 1998. Biblioteca del Congreso Nacional de Chile. January 31 (In Spanish).Google Scholar
  32. Ministerio de Salud. 2017. Law number 21020 about responsible pet and company animals’ ownership. Biblioteca del Congreso Nacional de Chile. August 2 (In Spanish).Google Scholar
  33. Mohai, P., D. Pellow, and J.T. Roberts. 2009. Environmental justice. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 34: 405–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pisano, E. 1966. Biogeographic zones. Economical geography of Chile. Santiago: Corporación de Fomento de la Producción. (In Spanish).Google Scholar
  35. Ritchie, E.G., C.R. Dickman, M. Letnic, A.T. Vanak, and M. Gommper. 2014. Dogs as predators and trophic regulators. In Free-ranging Dogs and Wildlife Conservation, ed. M. E. Gompper: 55–68. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Rivas, F. 2015. Campaign against the hunting of wild dogs goes viral. Radio Biobío. Retrieved 15 February 2018 from (In Spanish).
  37. Rubio, A.V., R. Alvarado, and C. Bonacic. 2013. Introduced European rabbit as main prey of the native carnivore culpeo fox (Lycalopex culpaeus) in disturbed ecosystems of central Chile. Studies on Neotropical Fauna and Environment 48: 89–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ryan, G.W., and H.R. Bernard. 2000. Data management and analysis methods. In Handbook of qualitative research, ed. N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln, 769–802. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
  39. Schüttler, E., L. Saavedra-Aracena, and J.E. Jiménez. 2018. Domestic carnivore interactions with wildlife in the Cape Horn Biosphere Reserve, Chile: husbandry and perceptions of impact from a community perspective. PeerJ 6: e4124. Scholar
  40. Scott, M.D., and K. Causey. 1973. Ecology of feral dogs in Alabama. The Journal of Wildlife Management 37: 253–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sepúlveda, M.A., R.S. Singer, E. Silva-Rodríguez, P. Stowhas, and K. Pelican. 2014. Domestic dogs in rural communities around protected areas: Conservation problem or conflict solution? PLoS ONE 9: e86152. Scholar
  42. Sepúlveda, M., K. Pelican, P. Cross, A. Eguren, and R. Singer. 2015. Fine-scale movements of rural free-ranging dogs in conservation areas in the temperate rainforest of the coastal range of southern Chile. Mammalian Biology 80: 290–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Silva-Rodríguez, E.A., and K.E. Sieving. 2011. Influence of care of domestic carnivores on their predation on vertebrates. Conservation Biology 25: 808–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Suryawanshi, K.R., Y.V. Bhatnagar, S. Redpath, and C. Mishra. 2013. People, predators and perceptions: patterns of livestock depredation by snow leopards and wolves. The Journal of Applied Ecology 50: 550–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tuemmers, C., C. Lueders, C. Rojas, M. Serri, C. Castillo, and R. Espinoza. 2013. Detection of Brucella canis by immunochromatography method in stray dogs captured in Temuco ity, Chile, 2011. Revista Chilena de Infectología 30: 395–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Villatoro, F.J., M.A. Sepúlveda, P. Stowhas, and E.A. Silva-Rodríguez. 2016. Urban dogs in rural areas: Human-mediated movement defines dog populations in southern Chile. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 135: 59–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Walker, G. 2012. Environmental justice: Concepts, evidence and politics. Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wandeler, A.I., H.C. Matter, A. Kappeler, and A. Budde. 1993. The ecology of dogs and canine rabies: A selective review. Revue Scientifique et Technique 12: 51–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Waters, A. 2017. Helping prevent sheep attacks. The Veterinary Record 180: 314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yoak, A.J., J.F. Reece, S.D. Gehrtc, and I.M. Hamilton. 2016. Optimizing free-roaming dog control programs using agent-based models. Ecological Modelling 341: 53–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zúñiga, A.H., and A. Muñoz-Pedreros. 2014. Feeding habits of Puma concolor (Carnivora, Felidae) in fragmented forests in the south of Chile. Mastozoologia Neotropical 21: 157–161. (In Spanish. Summary in English).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.One Health Institute, School of Veterinary MedicineUniversity of California DavisDavisUSA
  2. 2.Program in Science, Technology, and Society, and History SectionMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations