Original Scientific Article
Free-roaming dogs control activities in one Italian province (2000-2013): Is the implemented approach effective?
Shanis Barnard
*
,
Matteo Chincarini
,
Lucio Di Tommaso
,
Fabrizio Di Giulio
,
Stefano Messori
,
Nicola Ferri
Received: 07 February 2015
Received in revised form: 26 March 2015
Accepted: 31 March 2015
Available Online First: 15 April 2015
Published on: 15 October 2015
Correspondence: Shanis Barnard, shanis.barnard@gmail.com
Abstract
In Italy, standards for the management of free-roaming dogs (FRDs) are defined by regional norms, generating a high variability of approaches around the country. Despite efforts carried out by the competent authorities, FRDs are still a reality impacting upon animal health and welfare and public costs. A similar scenario can be found in many other Mediterranean and Balkan counties. Here we present 14 years of data (2000–2013) retrieved from the admission dog registry of a public shelter (PS) responsible for the collection of stray dogs from one Italian province. The aim of this retrospective study was to describe the local FRD population, identifying its source and to evaluate the effectiveness of the actions implemented by the local authorities. In the investigated period, 7,475 dogs were admitted to the PS. Despite the intense sterilisation plan (mean 381.7 sterilisations per year), the overall number of dogs entering PS did not decrease consistently across the years. Results highlighted a lack of responsibility of owners by failing to sterilise and identify their dogs and allowing intact animals to roam free, therefore producing uncontrolled and unwanted litters. The current dog population management strategy, based on both sheltering and capture-neuter-release programmes, is insufficient to tackle the straying phenomenon. Educational and sterilisation programmes should be an integral part of a successfully implemented FRD control plan. Our results provide further insight on free-roaming dog population dynamics and control systems, and may have important implications for many other local contexts across Europe trying to overcome the straying phenomenon.
Keywords: dog, free-roaming, prevention, public health, shelter, welfare
References
2. Kato M, Yamamoto H, Inukai Y, Kira S, Survey of the stray dog population and the health education program on the prevention of dog bites and dog-acquired infections:A comparative study in Nepal and Okayama prefecture, JapanActa Medica Okayama 2003; 57: 5261-266. PMid:14679405
3. Vučinić M, Đorđević V, Radisavljević K, Atanasijević N, Nedeljković-Trailović J, Feeding behavior of stray dogs in a municipal shelterActa veterinaria 2011; 61: 199-105.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/AVB1101099V.
4. Dalla Villa P, Matthews L. B, Alessandrini B, Messori S, Migliorati G, Drivers for animal welfare policies in EuropeRevue Scientifique Et Technique-Office International Des Epizooties 2014; 33: 139-46.
6. Voslářvá E, Passantino A, Stray dog and cat laws and enforcement in Czech Republic and in ItalyAnnali dell’ Istituto superiore di sanita 2012; 48: 197-104.
7. Hogasen H. R, Er C, Di Nardo A, Dalla Villa P, Free-roaming dog populations:a cost-benefit model for different management options, applied to Abruzzo, ItalyPreventive veterinary medicine 2013; 112: 3-4401-413. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2013.07.010. PMid:23973012
8. OIE. 1st OIE regional workshop on stray dog population management for Balkan countries. Bucharest, RO, 17-19 June 2014;
9. OIE. Terrestrial Animal Health Code 2014; 23rd ed. Paris:
10. Italian law. Legge n.281 of 4 Agosto 1991In materia di animali d’affezione e prevenzione al randagismo. Gazzetta Ufficiale, n. 203, 30 agosto 1991; 1991:
12. Fraser Clarence M, The Merck veterinary manual. No. Ed. 6Merck & Co 1986;
13. FAO. Dog population management. Report of the FAO/WSPA/IZSAM expert meeting - Banna, Italy - 14-19 March 2011 2014; Rome, Italy: Animal Production and Health Report. No. 6;
14. Jackman J, Rowan A. N, Salem D.J, Rowan A.N, Free-roaming dogs in developing countries:The benefits of capture, neuter, and return programsAnimal studies repository. The state of the animals 2007 2007; Washington, DC: Humane Society Press; 55-78.
15. Brickner I, The impact of domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) on wildlife welfare and conservation:a literature review2002;
18. Santoro V, Smaldone G, Lozito P, Smaldone M, Introna F, A forensic approach to fatal dog attacks. A case study and review of the literatureForensic Science International 2011; 206: 1-3E37-E42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.07.026. PMid:20719439
19. Vučinić M, Dordevic M, Brana R.-D, Ljiljana J, Mirilovic M, Bites to humans caused by stray and owned dogs in BelgradeActa Veterinaria-Beograd 2008; 58: 5-6563-571.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/AVB0806563V.
20. Fedele V, Gnaccarini M, Laurenti P, Marino M, Meia B, Monitoraggio delle morsicature nel pinerolese negli anni 1998 - 2008Argomenti 2008; 4: 53-59.
21. Overall K. L, Love M, Dog bites to humans - demography, epidemiology, injury, and riskJournal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 2001; 218: 121923-1934. http://dx.doi.org/10.2460/javma.2001.218.1923. PMid:11417736
22. Sinclair C. L, Zhou C, Descriptive epidemiology of animal bites in Indiana, 1990-92 a rationale for interventionPublic Health Reports 1995; 110: 164-67. PMid:7838946 PMCid:PMC1382076
23. Fournier A. K, Geller E. S, Behavior analysis of companion-animal overpopulation:A conceptualization of the problem and suggestions for interventionBehav. Soc 2005; 13: 51-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.5210/bsi.v13i1.35.
24. Fielding W. J, Dog breeding in New Providence, The Bahamas, and its potential impact on the roaming dog population I:planned and accidentalJournal of applied animal welfare science:JAAWS 2010; 13: 3250-260.
25. Slater M. R, Di Nardo A, Pediconi O, Dalla Villa P, Candeloro L, Alessandrini B, Del Papa S, Free-roaming dogs and cats in central Italy:Public perceptions of the problemPreventive veterinary medicine 2008; 84: 127-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2007.10.002. PMid:18055046
26. Slater M. R, Di Nardo A, Pediconi O, Villa P. D, Candeloro L, Alessandrini B, Del Papa S, Cat and dog ownership and management patterns in central ItalyPreventive veterinary medicine 2008; 85: 3-4267-294. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2008.02.001. PMid:18374434
27. Levy J. K, Crawford C, Appel L. D, Clifford E. L, Comparison of intratesticular injection of zinc gluconate versus surgical castration to sterilize male dogsAmerican journal of veterinary research 2008; 69: 1140-143. http://dx.doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.69.1.140. PMid:18167099
28. McKenzie B, Evaluating the benefits and risks of neutering dogs and catsCAB Reviews:Perspectives in agriculture, veterinary science, nutrition and natural resources 2010; 5: 045 http://dx.doi.org/10.1079/PAVSNNR20105045.
29. Clark C. C. A, Gruffydd-Jones T, Murray J. K, Number of cats and dogs in UK welfare organisationsVeterinary Record 2012; 170: 19493- http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.100524. PMid:22589036
30. Di Nardo A, Candeloro L, Budke C. M, Slater M. R, Modeling the effect of sterilization rate on owned dog population size in central ItalyPreventive veterinary medicine 2007; 82: 3-4308-313. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2007.06.007. PMid:17692414
31. Voith V. L, The impact of companion animal problems on society and the role of veterinariansVet Clin N Am-Small 2009; 39: 2327-
32. Italian law. Accordo del 6 Febbraio 2003 tra il Ministro della salute, le regioni e le province autonome di Trento e di Bolzano in materia di benessere degli animali da compagnia e pet-therapyGazzetta Ufficiale 2003; n. 51, 03/03/2003
33. Dalla Villa P, Messori S, Possenti L, Barnard S, Cianella M, Di Francesco C, Pet population management and public health:a web service based tool for the improvement of dog traceabilityPreventive veterinary medicine 2013; 109: 3-4349-353. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2012.10.016. PMid:23182028
34. Caminiti A, Sala M, Panetta V, Battisti S, Meoli R, Rombola P, Spallucci V, Eleni C, Scaramozzino P, Completeness of the dog registry and estimation of the dog population size in a densely populated area of RomePreventive veterinary medicine 2014; 113: 1146-151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2013.10.003. PMid:24188820
35. Magnani D, Barnard S, Messori S, Di Bonaventura I, Giovannini A, Dalla Villa P, Ferri N, Investigation on responsible ownership in two different urban context 2015; March3-5Proceedings 2nd International conference on dog population management: Istanbul, Turkey; 63-
Acknowlegment
A special thanks to Dr. Fabrizio De Massis for his precious suggestions that helped improving this work and to Dr. Mary Friel for language revision.
Copyright
© 2015 Barnard S. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium provided the original work is properly cited.
Conflict of Interest Statement
The authors declared that they have no potential conflict of interest with respect to the authorship and/or publication of this article.
Citation Information
Macedonian Veterinary Review. Volume 38, Issue 2, Pages 149-158, p-ISSN 1409-7621, e-ISSN 1857-7415, DOI: 10.14432/j.macvetrev.2015.04.041, 2015
10.14432/j.macvetrev.2015.04.041
