Developing a comprehensive stray dog control strategy in compliance with OIE standards

Alexandra Hammond-Seaman

RSPCA International

Bucharest, 17-19 June 2014

Developing a comprehensive programme

If you don’t know where you are going, how will you know when you get there?

What impacts is the intervention striving to achieve?

Monitoring and evaluation- “Success depends on knowing what works”

Developing a comprehensive programme

Are we making a difference?

What problem are we trying to solve?

Has the intervention brought desirable results?

Setting clear objectives

The cycle begins with an intervention concept; the desire

to reduce stray dog population.

Before an intervention is launched it is necessary to

measure the baseline of indicators selected to reflect

the impact.

Setting clear objectives (an example)

Interventions are a combined set of activities with specific changes or impacts in mind

Catch, neuter and release of roaming dogs in a Balkan city

Impacts are the changes we hope to contribute towards through our interventions

Reduce dog density

Improve the welfare of roaming dogs

Indicators are measurable signs of impacts (also known as metrics); they are the

things we would see or hear if our desired impact was occurring

Number of dogs seen on a set of routes along public roads

The % of roaming dogs with emaciated body condition

Methods of measurement are the methods we use to measure our indicators

Observation of the number and body condition score of all roaming dogs observed on a

6 monthly ‘street’ survey

Effort is the time and resources put into implementing the intervention

The number of dogs caught, neutered and released and the financial costs per dog plus

capital costs of intervention infrastructure

Identifying the source of the problem and monitoring the stray dog population

Possible impacts:

- Improve dog welfare

- Reduce dog population density/population

turnover

- Reduce risks to public health

- Improve public perception of dogs

- Improve shelter performance

- Reduce negative impact on wildlife

- Reduce negative impact of dogs on livestock

Identifying the source of the problem and monitoring the stray dog population

Impacting on dog population size or density – reducing population turnover is common desired impact of DPM often targeted towards roaming or stray dogs. Reduced turnover confers welfare benefits-and benefits for disease control.

Where are the dogs coming from? - the make-up of the roaming dog population

- the source(s) of the roaming dogs

Owned roaming Abandoned Lost ‘community dog’ ‘stray’ born on street

Dog population management Targeting the source

Initial assessment

Management strategies should aim to target the source of

the ‘problem’ and not only treat the ‘symptoms’ - What is the current size of the population and what are the

characteristics of the specific dog population.

- Where are the dogs coming from? Where are these sources?

- What are the problems perceived and what is currently done to

control these problems?

- Who is responsible for this control?

- Who are the relevant stakeholders?

- What is the prevailing public opinion/attitudes to this issues?

What people think/what people do?

Setting clear objectives

The desire needs to be turned into an intervention plan with:

-clear impacts and associated indicators

-budgeted and timed activities

The critical stage between intervention concept and planning is initial

assessment and analysis.

The process explores and understands the root of causes of the

problems in order to inform intervention planning.

Dog population management One size does not fit all

ICAM, 2007

Identifying the source of the problem and monitoring the stray dog population

Recommended indicators for measuring reduction in population density: -Dog density along streets – the average number of roaming dogs along the streets will remain a valid indicator of the impact of the intervention. -Measuring the number of dogs per km pf street is relatively easy as compared to establishing an accurate estimate of total population size.

Identifying the source of the problem and monitoring the stray dog population

Recommended indicators for measuring a reduction in population turnover: -Percentage of lactating females – an important component of dog population turnover is the birth rate of puppies, however reliably measuring the number of puppies in roaming population can be challenging. The % of lactating females in the roaming dog population is more reliable statistics, hence lactating females are an indicator of fecundity in the RDP and a proxy for the number of puppies born. - A female is defined as lactating if her mammary glands are visibly swollen.

Identifying the source of the problem and monitoring the stray dog population

Methods of measurements:

-Street surveys are an efficient method of collecting data relating to a

range of indicators. They are particularly suitable for M&E because they

can be repeated several times over the course of an intervention.

-Questionnaires

-Secondary sources on information- official or government derived

information

-Clinic records

Identifying the source of the problem and monitoring the stray dog population

Estimating the total dog population size is commonly required before

planning an intervention, but not for M&E of intervention impact, after

which density alone is sufficient.

The simplest is to multiply the average dogs per km of street with the

total street length for the area in question.

- Intensive survey paired with a questionnaire .

- To establish a total dog population a detectability estimate is needed

which requires more intensive survey effort, using questionnaires for

owners to establish the number of owned dogs that are allowed to

roam with mark-resight.

Surevying roaming dog populations: guidelines on methdoology

http://www.icam-coalition.org/resources.html

OIE stray dog control guiding principles-2010

Critical importance of promotion

of responsible dog ownership

Recognizes that dog ecology is

closely linked to human

behaviour

Promotes humane stray control

practices

Need to change human

behaviour to be successful in

stray dog population

management programs

Art. 2 Dog population control programme

objectives

Improve dog health and welfare

Reduce the numbers of stray dogs to an acceptable level

Reduce the risk of zoonosis and parasitic infections

Protect the environment

Prevent illegal trade and trafficking

Developing a comprehensive DPM programme

Developing a comprehensive DPM programme

Veterinary Competent Authority (public health issue, enforcement of legislation)

Other Government Agencies (public health agency, environment protection, public safety)

Local Authorities (legislation enforcement & control, subsidised neutering schemes)

Private vets (key role in disease surveillance plans, diseases notification, animal abuse or mistreatment, responsible ownership promotion)

NGOs (public awarenesss and understanding, responsible ownership promotion & educatiion, competency & skillls in shelter management)

Dog owners (responsible ownership -> animals needs, identification & registration, birth control)

Article 3: Responsibilities and competences

Developing a comprehensive DPM programme

National strategy should be developed in

consultation with the stakeholders to include

legislation, education, communication,

and implementation action plans need to be

developed at a local level to define specific

provisions for stray dog control which reflect the

local situations, needs and available resources.

DESIGNING THE INTERVENTION

Sustainability

Aims, objective and

activities

Defining policy and

setting standards

Art. 4 Considerations in planning a programme

Identify the sources of stray dogs

Estimating the existing number, distribution and

ecology

Set up specific legislation

Resources (are not unlimited………..!!)

Developing a comprehensive DPM programme

Developing a comprehensive DPM programme

Art.5 Control measures

Education and legislation for responsible ownership Dog I & R Birth control Removal, handling and management of free-roaming dogs (housing

standards,” community dogs”, adoption policy) Environmental controls Dog movement control (national, international) Regulation of commercial dog dealers Reduction in dog bite incidence (education,responsible ownership) Euthanasia

COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAMME

Education

Legislation

Basic veterinary care

Registration, identification

Sterilisation

Holding facilities/

rehoming centres

Euthanasia

Art.6 Monitoring and evaluation of programmes

To improve performance

To demonstrate that the programme is achieving its aims

To compare different strategies

Indicators (dog population size and related subpopulations, dog welfare ,prevalence of zoonotic diseases, people attitudes and behaviour)

Sources of information (surveys, questionnaires, focus groups, expert opinions, direct observation)

Developing a comprehensive DPM programme

MONITORING AND EVALUATION

To improve performance,

highlight problems

To be accountable to

stakeholders, and

demonstrate success

Remaining challenges

✓Public attitudes / perception – societal dimension

✓ Political will – right motivation for DPM vs. quick fixes

✓Improve communication and coordination between the stakeholders.

✓Improve enforcement of the existing laws

✓Set clear competencies for DPM

✓Develop infrastructure and resources

✓Education and training at all levels

Dog population management Policy and research needs

- Defining key outcome indicators to precede DPM intervention and to

measure impact. - Baseline data collection to measure effectiveness, economic sustainability

and determine what works while safeguarding the principles of good welfare. - Monitoring, evaluation and review to feed back into policy

making/refinement. - Developing specific indicators to address the multiple facets of this issue.

www.icam-coalition.org

Thank you!