Explores cultural principles shaping coexistence with predators in Indigenous Australian communities, suggesting ethical conservation practices.
Human–predator coexistence presents urgent conservation challenges that demand approaches extending beyond mere conflict mitigation. Indigenous knowledge systems, though historically marginalised by Western science, offer vital insights into ethical, sustainable relationships with nature. This study examines how the Noongar people of southwestern Australia relate to culturally significant predators— Waalitj (wedge‐tailed eagle) and Twert (dingo)—under the hypothesis that their biocultural knowledge and relational values can inform understandings of coexistence. Guided by an Elder‐led approach, this cross‐cultural collaboration involved five conservation scientists and eight Noongar Elders and community members from different language groups. Data were gathered through repeated visits and semi‐structured interviews, with findings developed through iterative, collaborative interpretation rooted in Noongar conceptual frameworks. Findings show that predators are seen not as threats, but as kin, spiritual guides, a higher power, and vital to ecosystem health and cultural balance. To the Elders, the real predatory forces were introduced species and colonisers. The Elders shared a worldview grounded in the principles of reciprocity, respect, avoidance, taking only what you need, humility and collective decision‐making. Elders also emphasised non‐lethal conflict management and called for ‘two‐way’ approaches that integrate traditional knowledge with mainstream science and conservation practice. This research challenges dominant narratives of predator control by offering a conservation paradigm rooted in belonging rather than dominance. It underscores the importance of First Nations governance (lore), cultural continuity and ethical relationships with Country and family. Future work in predator conservation must create space for First Nations voices, practices and relational values to guide decision‐making and build enduring cross‐cultural partnerships. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Almuna et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: