Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The impacts of free-ranging rural dogs on wildlife conservation, including predation and disease transmission, vary by context, highlighting the need to assess their specific effects. This study examines home range size and native habitat use of free-ranging owned rural dogs (FRORD) within protected areas and fragments of the Cerrado biome, Brazil. We monitored each of the 105 FRORDs once over a 2-mo period using GPS collars, between August 2022 and January 2024. Home range sizes were estimated using 95% autocorrelated kernel density estimates, with predictor variables analyzed through generalized linear mixed models. Most FRORD exhibited restricted home ranges (mean = 30.74 ha), with larger home ranges correlated with dogs accompanying owners in daily activities. Native habitat use was also analyzed through generalized linear mixed models, and FRORD primarily occupied farming areas, with only 4% of locations in native habitats. Both home range size and native habitat use were associated with household-level factors, suggesting that local context plays a more important role than individual characteristics. Dog movement patterns are strongly influenced by socio-environmental contexts. These findings facilitate targeted management strategies for specific local contexts, reducing biodiversity impacts and promoting animal welfare.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fujioka et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: