Diverse human dimensions affect the management of public and animal health impacts of free-roaming dogs in Australia: A One Health solution

Peter J.S. Fleming^1,2*Benjamin L. Allen³Guy Ballard^2,4Linda Behrendorff⁵Andrew W. Claridge^2,6,7Matthew N. Gentle⁸Lana Harriott⁸Donald W. Hine⁹David J. Jenkins¹⁰Brooke P.A. Kennedy²Lynette J. McLeod⁹Paul D. Meek^11,2Grace Proudfoot¹²Nicole Schembri¹³Deane Smith^2,4Jessica Sparkes¹⁴

• ¹Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Orange, Australia
• ²Ecosystem Management, University of New England School of Environmental and Rural Science, Armidale, Australia
• ³Nelson Mandela University, Port Elizabeth, South Africa
• ⁴Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Armidale, Australia
• ⁵Queensland Government Department of Environment and Science, Queensland Parks and Wildlife, K'gari, Australia
• ⁶Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Queanbeyan, Australia
• ⁷School of Science, University of New South Wales, Canberra, Australia
• ⁸Pest Animal Research Centre, Biosecurity Queensland, Department of Primary Industries, Toowoomba, Australia
• ⁹School of Psychology, Speech and Hearing, University of Canterbury Faculty of Science, Christchurch, New Zealand
• ¹⁰School of Animal, Environmental and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, Australia
• ¹¹New South Wales Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Coffs Harbour, Australia
• ¹²New South Wales Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Orange, Australia
• ¹³One Health Unit, Interim Australian Centre for Disease Control, Sydney, Australia
• ¹⁴Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Yanco, Australia

The socio-ecological roles and status of free-roaming dogs (Canis familiaris) in Australian urban, peri-urban and other environments are complex. We review and synthesise those complexities and identify knowledge deficits and impediments to adoption of best practice management of free-roaming dogs. Briefly, perceptions of the roles and impacts of free-roaming dogs in Australia are affected by their status as native, introduced and culturally significant animals, the situations in which they occur and the other species, including humans, with which they interact. Their negative, neutral and positive impacts often occur contemporaneously making free-roaming dogs a 'wicked' problem. We propose and evaluate a One Health-based solution using an environmental psychology perspective in a strategic adaptive management framework. This includes: a typology of free-roaming dogs that assists in the situational definition of animal and public health and welfare issues; identification of some human dimensions affecting management of free-roaming dogs; identification of discipline specialities that require inclusion in an effective One Health approach; audience segmentation, and; priorities for research and policy development to encourage adoption of best-practice management for each occurrence of free-roaming dog impacts.