What If Gone

Species → Red kangaroo

Red kangaroo

Osphranter rufus

No single global census exists: Australian government aerial and…
Extinction risk Least Concern
Desert environmentPredator-prey cycleKey preyScientific controversy
Red kangaroo (Osphranter rufus)
Photo: PotMart186, Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0)

What if it disappeared?

Impact Moderate
One generation

On either side of South Australia's dingo-proof fence, red kangaroos show markedly different density and demographic structure: roughly ten times denser on the dingo-free side, with more females and juveniles, versus a sparser, male-skewed population where the dingo is present.

Documented
Detail

Mitchell, D.R., Cairns, S.C., Körtner, G., Bradshaw, C.J.A., Saltré, F. et Weisbecker, V. (2023). Differential developmental rates and demographics in Red Kangaroo (Osphranter rufus) populations separated by the dingo barrier fence. Journal of Mammalogy, 104(5), 929–940.

The study compares two populations separated by the fence for over a century. North of it (dingo common): lower density, a narrower age structure with near-absence of individuals under three years old, and faster juvenile growth — a profile consistent with active predation pressure. South of it (dingo rare): density an order of magnitude higher, with 67.8% females versus 39.2% on the dingo side, and a broader age structure including more juveniles.

Over several decades

Long-term historical counts show that inside the fence (dingo rare), red kangaroo numbers fluctuate strongly with rainfall, while outside it (dingo common) they stay comparatively more stable — a pattern the authors read as evidence of predator regulation rather than food availability alone.

Documented
Detail

Pople, A.R., Grigg, G.C., Cairns, S.C., Beard, L.A. et Alexander, P. (2000). Trends in the numbers of red kangaroos and emus on either side of the South Australian dingo fence: evidence for predator regulation? Wildlife Research, 27(3), 269–276.

The authors compare long-term historical count series on either side of the fence: the lower variability on the dingo side suggests a stabilizing predator effect, which adds to — without replacing — the single-generation density gap observed in the previous point.

22 years of surveys

An analysis spanning 22 years of aerial survey data in Western Australia finds no significant difference in kangaroo density within 100 km on either side of the dingo-proof fence, and instead attributes density differences to land use, prior rainfall, and the intensity of dingo baiting — not simply presence or absence of the dingo.

Insufficient
Detail

Dawson, S.J., Kreplins, T.L., Prendergast, K.S., Adams, P.J. et Fleming, P.A. (2023). Land use and dingo baiting are correlated with the density of kangaroos in rangeland systems. Integrative Zoology, 18(4), 599–614.

One dry season

In a semi-arid reserve, grazing by dense populations of red kangaroos (alongside rabbits) measurably reduced grass biomass, increased soil density, and decreased water infiltration rate — an effect tied simply to herbivore density, independent of the dingo question.

Documented
Detail

Braden, J., Mills, C.H., Cornwell, W.K., Waudby, H.P. et Letnic, M. (2021). Impacts of grazing by kangaroos and rabbits on vegetation and soils in a semi-arid conservation reserve. Journal of Arid Environments, 190, 104526.

The study documents this effect over a single dry season in a semi-arid reserve, without being able to isolate the kangaroo's share of the effect from the rabbits', since both herbivores were present simultaneously at the site — a reminder that kangaroo overabundance, here, has measurable soil effects independent of any dingo debate.

Documentation

Last verified: August 14, 2026

Related species