DINGO.
DINGO.
This animal, which exists in large numbers all over the peninsulas of India and Malacca, differs so much from the ordinary Dogs, that it has been proposed to separate it from them under a different generic name,Cuon. Its distinctive characters are, however, by no means sufficiently great to warrant this separation. It occurs, under slightly different varieties, in different parts of India, and receives various native names. By the Mahrattas it is calledKolsun(Canis dukhunensisof Colonel Sykes);Sona kúta, or Golden Dog, in Central India;Buansúin the Himalayas;Dholein Ceylon, and so on.
A capital notion of the appearance of this interesting Dog may be obtained from a case of stuffed specimens now in the India Museum at South Kensington. The Zoological Society has at differenttimes been able to exhibit in their Gardens more or less fine examples of the Indian Wild Dog. Dr. Murie gives the following account of a male and female specimen sent to the Gardens some time ago:—
“Theirtout ensembleconveyed to me the idea of a compound between Wolf, Jackal, and Fox, partly on account of their colour, partly from their size and general shape, and also partially from the contour of the head, ear-outline, and direction of the eyes. But, on the other hand, a critical inspection left the impression that they were more markedly of the Dog type. This pair of animals very nearly corresponded in size,” the most important dimensions being—length, from snout to tip of tail, forty-two inches; length of the tail, twelve inches; height at shoulder, about fifteen inches, and at the loins about sixteen inches.
“Their colour was entirely reddish or fulvous brown, and remarkably like the tint of a Fox. The tip of the nose and lower part of the face was somewhat darker; the tail also exhibited deepening of hue. Moreover, upon the outer side of the hind-leg, and similarly on the fore-limb, there was a tendency, though a very indistinct one, to whitish spotting.... Of those features marking race, the tail was moderately lengthened, dark, and full below, as in the Jackal or Wolf, and not with the great round brush of the Fox. The eye had a certain obliquity; but the pupil, as far as I could ascertain, was round. Ears large, erect, and hairy.”
“I am not cognisant of any observations as to their habits having been noted prior to their receipt by the Society. But I may mention that when in the Gardens they were exceedingly active, snapping, snarling, and in their general behaviour resembling a couple of Wolves rather than sedate Dogs. I am not aware that they were heard to bark; but occasionally they howled and whined.”
The Wild Dog has thus, in many respects, an appearance resembling that of a Fox or a Jackal, with which it also agrees in its filthy smell. It is, however, a true Dog, although less specialised than the domestic kinds, and therefore approaching the average structure of the wildCanidæ.
These Dogs hunt in packs, six, eight, ten, or as many as thirty, animals in a pack. They hunt either by night or day; and it is said that “when once a pack of them put up any animal, no matter whether Deer or Tiger, that animal’s doom is sealed; they never leave it. They will dog their prey for days, if need be, and run it down exhausted, and if it turns to fight, they go in fearlessly, and by their numbers win. All animals dread the Wild Dog; others they may elude by speed, artifice, or battle: but their instinct tells them that there is no escaping the Wild Dog, as it hunts in packs by scent as well as by sight, and is as brave as it is persevering.”
They make no noise when running, except sometimes a low whispering kind of note, which may either express their own gratification, or act as a signal to other Dogs. Great numbers of them are destroyed in their hunting expeditions, as the larger animals, such as the Elk and Boar, defend themselves with great fierceness, and sacrifice many of their pursuers before they fall a victim to the overwhelming numbers and unconquerable perseverance of the latter.
In some parts of India they are half-domesticated, and used in the noble sport of “Pig-sticking.” “They are remarkably savage, and frequently will approach none but theirdoonahs, or keepers, not allowing their own masters to come near them. Some of them are very fleet, but they are not to be depended upon in coursing; for they are apt suddenly to give up the chase when it is a severe one, and, indeed, they will too often prefer a Sheep or a Goat to a Hare. In Hog-hunting they are more valuable. It seems to suit their temper, and they appear to enjoy the snapping and the snarling incident to that species of sport.”[118]
This is another distinct breed of Wild Dog, quite as remarkable in its way as the Indian Wild Dog, and possessing far greater interest than the latter, from the fact that it is the only Mammal not belonging to the group of Marsupials, or pouched animals (Kangaroos, Wombats, &c.), found in the great island of Australia. In all probability, it is not a true native even there, but was most likely introduced before the discovery of the island by Europeans.
The Dingo “approaches in appearance to the largest kind of Shepherd’s Dog (see figure on page 147).The head is elongated, the forehead flat, and the ears short and erect, or with a slight direction forwards. The body is thickly covered with hair of two kinds—the one woolly and grey, the other silky and of a deep yellow or fawn colour. The limbs are muscular, and, were it not for the suspicious yet ferocious glare of the eye, he might pass for a handsome Dog. When he is running, the head is lifted more than usual in Dogs, and the tail is carried horizontally. He seldom barks.”[120]
There are some Dingoes in the Zoological Gardens, and one would never guess their savageness of disposition from their innocent faces. They are decidedly good-looking Dogs in appearance, but as regards temper they are anything but pleasant animals, although quite tamable if taken young: they are, indeed, often domesticated by the natives, but are never known to attain to those higher qualities which make the thoroughly civilised Dog so valuable.
“When Van Diemen’s Land began to be colonised by Europeans, the losses sustained by the settlers by the ravages of the Wild Dogs were almost incredible. The districts infested by these animals were principally those appropriated to Sheep, and there was scarcely a flock that did not suffer. It was in vain to double the number of shepherds, to watch by night and day, or to have fires at every quarter of the field; for these animals would accomplish their object by stratagem or force. One colony lost no fewer than 1,200 Sheep and Lambs in three months; another colony lost 700.
“The ravagers were either the native Wild Dogs of the island or those that had escaped from their owners. They seemed to have apportioned the country into different districts, each troop having its allotted range. At length the evil became so great, that a general meeting of the colonists was convened. The concluding sentences of the speech of Lieutenant Hill forcibly express the extent of the evil:—‘The country is free from bushrangers: we are no longer surrounded and threatened by the natives. We have only one enemy left in the field; but that enemy strikes at the root of our welfare, and through him the stream of our prosperity is tainted at its very source.’ The colonists were then few, but they cordially united in the endeavour to extirpate this formidable enemy; and, although the Wild Dog is still found in the interior of the island, he is comparatively seldom seen, and his ravages have nearly ceased.”[121]