REPORT OF THE FIRST MEETING OF THE OIE AD HOC GROUP ON STRAY ANIMAL CONTROL. Paris, May 2006

Transcription

1 1 REPORT OF THE FIRST MEETING OF THE OIE AD HOC GROUP ON STRAY ANIMAL CONTROL Paris, May 2006 Original: English May 2006 The OIE ad hoc Group on Stray Animal Control (hereinafter referred to as the ad hoc Group) met at the OIE Headquarters from 10 to 12 May The members of the ad hoc Group and other participants are listed at Appendix I. The Agenda adopted is given at Appendix II. On behalf of the Director General, the Deputy Director General of the OIE, Dr David Wilson, welcomed all members and thanked them for their interest in this important topic. He indicated how the work done in animal welfare had been addressed by the OIE through its permanent Animal Welfare Working Group (AWWG) and discussed the overall AW work programme and the expectations of Member Countries. Dr. Wilson noted that animal welfare issues created by stray animal control is a very complex issue and underlined the importance of this ad hoc Group as one of the priorities of the AWWG work programme. The Chair of this ad hoc Group, Dr Abdul Rahman, started by addressing the terms of reference approved by the 4 th meeting of the AWWG which took into account the need for the ad hoc Group to address animal welfare issues related to the dog control activities. An extract of the fourth meeting of the AWWG is presented in Appendix III. The terms of reference of this ad hoc Group (Appendix IV) were based on the discussion paper prepared by Drs. Aidaros, Wilkins and Rahman (See Appendix V). The experts were of the opinion that the title of the guidelines should read as dog population control instead of stray animal control. The ad hoc Group recommended the priority should be given to the completion on the work on dog population control and subsequently the ad hoc Group should consider other companion animals. It was also suggested that the terms urban and rural are not relevant to the document because the problems and solutions are not significantly different between them. A dog control programme has as its aim the reduction of the stray dog population with the ultimate aim of all dogs being responsibly owned. To achieve this, the activity has to encompass both the stray as well the owned dog population since the current information indicates that the majority of the stray population arises from the owned dog population. Hence, problems and welfare issues discussed pertain only to stray dogs but dog control strategies must include both stray and owned dogs. The ad hoc Group and the guidelines to be produced will follow the Guiding principles for animal welfare (Appendix of the Terrestrial Animal Health Code). The ad hoc Group worked through the discussion paper prepared by Drs Aidaros, Wilkins and Rahman and the guidelines for Dog Population Management prepared jointly by WHO and WSPA (WHO/ZOON/90.166). The ad hoc Group drafted guidelines addressing the problems caused by stray animals with special reference to stray/feral dogs to include dog population control strategies. The ad hoc Group addressed the issues identified in the terms of reference and developed a preliminary outline of the guidelines on dog population control. The proposed definitions are at Appendix VI and the draft

2 2 guidelines at Appendix VII. Reports on dog population control activities in some countries are attached at Appendix VIII. However, the members opinion was that further work should be done on developing the strategies and activities which should be sent to the OIE Working Group on Animal Welfare for comment. The ad hoc Group did not believe that this report was suitable, at this stage, for discussion by Member Countries. The ad hoc Group will continue to meet electronically, followed by a second meeting to finalise the draft guidelines. The ad hoc Group also discussed the draft questionnaire prepared by Dr. Paolo Della Villa from the OIE Collaborating Center for Veterinary Training, Epidemiology, Food Safety and Animal Welfare (Teramo) and it decided that it be reviewed by all members and included as an appendix to the report of this meeting. The questionnaire is attached at Appendix IX. The ad hoc Group identified work required to complete the first meeting report. The document is attached in Appendix X. The ad hoc Group developed its future work programme. The document is attached at Appendix XI.

3 3

4 4 Appendix I MEETING OF THE OIE AD HOC GROUP ON STRAY ANIMAL CONTROL Paris, May 2006 List of Participants MEMBERS OF THE OIE AD HOC GROUP Dr Sira Abdul Rahman (Chair) Retd. Dean Bangalore Veterinary College No 123, 7 th B Main Road 4th Block(West) Jayanagar, Bangalore INDIA Tel/Fax: (91-80) shireen@blr.vsnl.net.in Dr Alexander Wandeler (Absent) Center of Expertise of Rabies CFIA/ACIA Ottawa Laboratory Fallowfield 3851 Fallowfield Road CANADA Tel: (613) Fax: (613) wandelera@inspection.gc.ca Dr Elly Hiby Companion Animals Director WSPA World Society for the Protection of Animals 14th Floor, 89 Albert Embankment London SE1 7TP UNITED KINGDOM Tel: 44 (0) Fax: 44 (0) EllyHiby@wspa.org.uk Dr Rita de Cassia Garcia Rua Valdir Niemeyer 78 Sumarezhino Sao Paulo CEP BRAZIL Tel: (55-11) Fax.: (55-11) diretoria@institutoninarosa.org.br Dr Nick de Souza Box Post Code Mombasa KENYA Tel: Fax: NickdeSouza@auroraafrica.com Dr Mohd Zairi Serlan Department of Veterinary Services, Jalan Bukit Tengah, Bukit Mertajam, Penang, MALAYSIA Tel: Fax.: zairi@penang.gov.my OIE HEADQUARTERS Dr Bernard Vallat Director General OIE 12, rue de Prony Paris FRANCE Tel: 33 - (0) Fax: 33 - (0) oie@oie.int Dr David Wilson Deputy Director General OIE FRANCE Tel.: 33 (0) Fax: 33 (0) d.wilson@oie.int Dr Julio Pinto Deputy Head International Trade Department OIE FRANCE Tel.: 33 (0) Fax: 33 (0) j.pinto@oie.int Dr Tomoko Ishibashi Chargée de mission International Trade Department OIE International Trade Department FRANCE Tel.: 33 (0) Fax: 33 (0) t.ishibashi@oie.int

5 5

6 6 Appendix II MEETING OF THE OIE AD HOC GROUP ON STRAY ANIMAL CONTROL PARIS, May 2006 Adopted Agenda 1. Introduction - Discussion on OIE Working Group on Animal Welfare - other background information from members 2. Identification of welfare issues related to stray animal control programmes 3. Development of specific guiding principles and standards 4. Work programme 5. Conclusions

7 7

8 8 Appendix III Original: English September 2005 EXTRACT FROM THE REPORT OF THE FOURTH MEETING OF THE OIE WORKING GROUP ON ANIMAL WELFARE Teramo (Italy), 7-9 September 2005 The OIE Working Group on Animal Welfare held its fourth meeting at the OIE Collaborating Centre for Animal Welfare at Teramo on 7-9 September The members of the Working Group and other participants are listed in Appendix A. The Agenda adopted is given in Appendix B. Dr D. Bayvel chaired the meeting. On behalf of Dr B. Vallat, Director General of the OIE, Dr A. Petrini welcomed the members of the Working Group and thanked them for agreeing to continue their work on this important mandate of the OIE. Ms Barbara Alessandrini of the Collaborating Centre welcomed all participants. Dr Petrini advised that three industry experts (from the International Dairy Federation [IDF], the International Meat Secretariat [IMS] and the International Federation of Agricultural Producers [IFAP]) had been invited to participate in the meeting on the second day. 1. Proposed aquatic animal welfare standards Prof. Tore Håstein updated the Working Group on the initial work of the two ad hoc Groups on Aquatic Animal Welfare, meetings of which he had chaired in June The ad hoc Groups had used the relevant chapters in the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code (hereafter referred to as the Terrestrial Code) to produce proposed chapters on the transport of fish by land and sea, the killing of fish and the slaughter of fish for human consumption. Prof. Håstein advised that the guiding principles on animal welfare had been revised to better address aquatic animal issues. The proposed chapters covered wild-caught and farmed fish. The Working Group congratulated Prof. Håstein and the experts on their work to date and supported the additional work proposed by Prof. Håstein on the development of standards for other aquatic species. The Working Group noted that information on the experts work had been included in the report of the August 2005 meeting of the OIE Aquatic Animal Health Standards Commission (hereafter referred to as the Aquatic Animals Commission), and supported the proposed chapters being distributed to Member Countries by the Aquatic Animals Commission for discussion in 2006, with the expectation that they would be proposed for adoption in It was agreed that the Aquatic Animal Welfare Guiding Principles would be revised to better align them with the most recent terrestrial animal version. 2. Revision of adopted standards The Working Group examined comments received on and changes proposed to the four terrestrial animal welfare standards which had been adopted at the 2005 General Session. Dr Petrini explained that comments had been received from Member Countries and international organisations, most of them just prior to the 73 rd General Session. Those comments able to be addressed by the Secretariat had been incorporated into the working document while technical comments had been referred to the members of the relevant ad hoc Group.

9 9 Appendix III (contd) The Working Group made some modifications to the four standards (see Appendices C-F), taking into account the views of the members of the ad hoc Groups who had responded. Noting that the modified standards will need to be considered by the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission (hereafter referred to as the Terrestrial Code Commission) at its meeting in September 2005, the Working Group was of the strong view that the Terrestrial Code Commission should put them to the OIE International Committee for adoption at the 2006 General Session. Several issues required particular attention: the handling of foetuses this issue was deferred to experts and remained under study; the use of CO 2 /air mixtures due to reports of aversive reactions; this issue was deferred to experts and Article was placed under study. The commitment to outcome-focused, rather than prescriptive, guidelines (as detailed in the adopted guiding principles) was discussed. The Working Group was advised of the OIE intention to establish an ad hoc group to provide specific guidance and model examples in this important area. 3. Educational resources in the area of Animal Welfare The Working Group was of the view that, in order to begin providing information on educational resources in animal welfare, the OIE should develop a list of institutions offering animal welfare programmes or courses. The role of Collaborating Centres should also be described. It suggested that the information be linked to the OIE web site. Members offered to provide relevant information. 4. Urban animal control (companion animal welfare) The Working Group discussed the document prepared by Drs Wilkins, Aidaros and Rahman (Appendix G). The Working Group recognised that the paper had aimed at covering the broad issues, and that there was a need to prioritise. It decided to ask the OIE (through the Terrestrial Code Commission) to set up an ad hoc group to define the issues and set priorities. The Working Group also decided to concentrate exclusively on dogs and not on any other stray or feral animals (e.g. cats). As the Working Group recognised that the issue was very broad, it expressed interest in the need to emphasise the animal welfare issues which arise from urban control programmes (particularly for rabies) and to propose actions which would improve welfare but still complement the programmes. 5. Laboratory animal welfare A discussion paper on laboratory animal welfare was presented by Dr Bayvel (Appendix H), in which the key international organisations were identified. The OIE s work with VICH was noted. The Working Group discussed ways to proceed and agreed that a meeting with other key international organisations may help to minimise duplication, and identify a clear role from the OIE. A one-day workshop in association with a relevant conference (e.g. AALAS, ICLAS) was a possibility. It was agreed that Prof. Fraser will represent OIE at the November 2005 ICLAS International consortium meeting in St. Louis). The Working Group also decided to ask the OIE (through the Terrestrial Code Commission) to set up an ad hoc group to define the issues of laboratory animal usage in areas closest to the OIE s mandate, which would include the production and testing of vaccines and diagnostics. 6. Welfare Quality (Science and Society improving animal welfare) The Working Group noted the work underway on this extensive and significant EU project and that the OIE was an active participant. The November Conference in Brussels will be attended by Prof. Fraser, Dr Gavinelli and Central Bureau staff.

10 10 Appendix III (contd) 7. WSPA Universal Declaration Dr Wilkins updated the Working Group on the World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA) Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare. He indicated that WSPA was of the view that such a declaration would provide a useful basis for government animal welfare policy, especially in developing countries. Dr Wilkins recalled that, at its 2004 meeting, the Working Group had discussed whether an OIE Resolution on the issue could be drafted, but this had not been possible. He advised that WSPA was in the final stages of organising a meeting of six interested countries to act as a steering committee to carry the issue forward. 8. Evaluation of the Working Group Performance The members were reminded of the questionnaire for evaluation of the performance of the Working Group which had been circulated for their input and agreed to complete and return within one month. 9. OIE Collaborating Centres The Working Group noted the interest among institutions in Europe, the USA and Australia/New Zealand in becoming recognised as OIE Collaborating Centres on animal welfare. The Working Group decided to examine the current mandate for OIE Collaborating Centres with a view to ensuring that animal welfare is appropriately addressed. The Working Group agreed that centres which meet the qualification criteria should be encouraged to apply to the OIE for consideration. 10. Communications and consultation The Working Group noted the presentations on animal welfare made by members of the Working Group and by OIE Central Bureau staff at various conferences and seminars. Members indicated that they would send to the Secretariat copies of presentations made, for circulation to other members. It was recognised that, to ensure the best communication, Working Group members should consult with the OIE Director General prior to accepting any invitations to represent the OIE. 11. Membership of the Working Group In welcoming the experts from industry, the Chair recalled that the Working Group had proposed that experts from industry be included in its membership to ensure a balanced membership to enable the Working Group to fulfil its role as a steering committee. The industry experts indicated that their organisations were of the view that expertise from the private sector was essential to the OIE s work on animal welfare. To assist communications, each organisation would notify a single contact point for animal welfare. The Working Group believed that the OIE ad hoc group system provided the ideal mechanism for utilising specific independent technical expertise and for ensuring the scientific basis of OIE standards. The OIE was requested to seek the advice of Working Group members on the membership of ad hoc groups as early in the process as possible. The experts from industry were encouraged to submit names of experts for consideration by the OIE for future ad hoc groups. The Working Group noted the revised Commission meetings calendar and discussed with the industry experts the most effective pathways for technical input into OIE standards development. To improve the effectiveness of document development between meetings, the OIE was requested to develop a system for collaboration via the OIE Web page. 12. International relationships Dr Thiermann advised the Working Group of the continuing OIE collaboration with the International Air Transport Association (IATA), Animal Transport Association (AATA), World Association of Zoos and Aquaria (WAZA) and other organisations, in an effort to harmonise animal transport standards. The Working Group noted the desirability of the OIE and FAO coordinating their animal welfare work.

11 11 Appendix III (contd) Work plan review The Working Group reviewed its 2005 work programme (see Appendix J). It was agreed that the Chair/Central Bureau would prepare a first draft of the 2006 Work Plan, for working group member comment, by mid November. 14. Next meeting The Working Group agreed that its next meeting should be held before the main meeting of the Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission in September 2006, to enable it to review the work of the various animal welfare ad hoc groups meeting prior to consideration by the Terrestrial Code Commission. It decided to plan for a meeting in June 2006 but the final agreed date would be guided by a Central Bureau review of the implications of the new extended two-year consultation cycle. It was agreed that agenda material and background papers should be provided prior to the meeting and that, for some members, provision of hard copy may be necessary. 15. Other business Dr Wilkins raised for discussion whether an overriding ethical policy on animal welfare should be included in the guiding principles e.g. that animals should not, as a matter of principle, travel long distances for slaughter. The Working Group discussed the merit of this proposal and noted that the OIE Strategic Plan indicated that the OIE intends to address such policy issues, and that such a proposal should be brought to the attention of the Administrative Commission. Both Dr Gavinelli and Dr Wilkins raised the issue of uptake and promulgation of adopted guidelines and agreed to develop an issues and options discussion paper in conjunction with other working group members. It was also agreed to document committee terms of reference and to prepare a draft strategic plan to link with the OIE strategic plan. The Chair thanked all Working Group members and Central Bureau staff for their active and positive contributions, and thanked the OIE Collaborating Centre for hosting the meeting.

12 12 Appendix IV TERMS OF REFERENCE OIE AD-HOC GROUP ON STRAY ANIMAL CONTROL Identification of problems caused by stray animals (zoonoses, environmental pollution, nuisance, behaviour, traffic accidents) Assessment of existing substantial stray animal control programmes Identification of animal welfare issues created by stray animal control programmes Propose practical solutions to the animal welfare problems created by stray animal control programmes, providing guidelines.

13 13

14 14 Appendix V DOG WELFARE URBAN ANIMAL CONTROL Introduction The OIE General Assembly in May 2005 accepted the proposals of the Permanent Animal Welfare Group for priorities for 2005/2006. Amongst those priorities was the subject of Urban Animal Control and establishing international standards for the benefit of member countries of the OIE who are faced with the problems caused by stray/feral dogs. Profs Abdul Rahman and Hassan Aidaros, and Dr. David Wilkins were invited to put forward proposals for progressing this issue. Background Stray and feral stray dogs pose serious human health, socio-economic, political and animal welfare problems in many countries of the world. Many of these are developing countries and others fall in the least developed category. For example: Over 80 countries (almost all developing countries) have endemic canine rabies. Some 4 million people annually receive post exposure treatment and in excess of 30,000 deaths from rabies are reported every year. At the same time many millions of animals contract and die of rabies each year and many of the control schemes introduced by authorities are ineffective and cause major animal welfare problems. Whilst acknowledging the need to prioritise human health, the OIE also recognises the importance of doing so without causing unnecessary or avoidable animal suffering Proposal As a first step it is proposed that an ad hoc group of experts be established in order to fully evaluate the problem. It would identify existing control programmes and where any relevant data can be found. If it is agreed that OIE can play a significant role in identifying and proposing practical solutions to the animal welfare problems created by control programmes then guidelines/standards should be drafted. In drafting such standards consideration should be given to the following factors: Definition of issue: - Identification of target population via definition of urban or rural. Urban areas of high human population density and rural areas of low human population density. - Definition of various types of urban or rural animal (pet, community, stray, feral, etc). - Identification of problems caused by urban animals (zoonoses, environmental pollution, nuisance behaviour, traffic accidents) to ensure the key issues are addressed. - Identification of problems caused by rural animals. - Assessment of existing substantial stray/feral control programmes. Sources of stray urban animals: - Irresponsible animal ownership o o Allowing owned animals to roam unsupervised Abandonment of unwanted animals - Uncontrolled breeding within o o Owned population and subsequent abandonment of offspring. Stray population.

15 15 Appendix V (contd) o Commercial breeders producing an excess of animals, poor conditions leading to the production of unsuitable pet animals - Carrying capacity of environment o o o Identification of essential resources and which resource is the most limiting factor (often food) Reduction of carrying capacity (e.g. via improved solid waste management) Reduction of carrying capacity should be done concurrently with reduction in animal population via other methods Urban Animal control strategy: Addressing the sources of stray urban animals o o o o Legislation. Including registration and identification of owned animals, vaccination requirements, legal requirements for breeding facilities and pet shops, prevention of abandonment and unsupervised roaming and protection against animal cruelty. Enforcement. Collaboration between authorities and veterinary community. Animal control department/officers. Education. Responsible animal ownership and public awareness of urban animal control programmes. Neutering/sterilisation of owned animals. Provision of neutering services and incentives for animal owners. Current stray population o Estimating the existing numbers and distribution of strays. o o o Reuniting lost animals with owners. Registration and identification and minimum holding time. Re-homing. Fostering services or re-homing centres. Minimum standards for re-homing centres including healthy environment, quarantine, veterinary treatment, limitation on holding capacity, humane euthanasia, sterilisation and financial issues. Catch-Neuter-Release. Sensitivity of local community, animal catching, humane euthanasia, vaccinations, sterilisation techniques, marking, release and long-term impact on population. Limitations of this method. Control of Zoonoses o Mass vaccination campaigns or humane eradication: Of stray animals, with or without concurrent sterilisation Of owned animals, publicising the event and incentives for owners o Legislation, enforcement and education for animal owners on the importance of vaccinating and controlling parasites (including regular boosters/treatment)

16 16 Appendix V (contd) Establishing an Ad Hoc expert group It is important that experts are selected who have international experience of this problem and of the practical problems that have to be overcome for any control measures to be effective. Several international animal welfare NGOs, such as the World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA), already possess a wealth of knowledge and experience in this area and should be invited to send an expert to this ad hoc group. It is also important that the World Health Organisation be invited to be involved in this process. It is relevant to point out here that there already exists a document jointly produce by WHO and WSPA entitled Guidelines for Dog Population Management which could be a valuable reference for the ad hoc group s work.

17 17

18 18 Appendix VI Article 1 Definitions a. Stray Dog: dog not under direct control or not restricted Type of stray dogs free roaming owned dog (single person or persons) currently not under direct control or restriction free roaming dog with no owner feral dog: domestic dog reverted to the wild (natural) state and no longer directly dependant upon humans for successful reproduction. b. Owned Dog: dog with a single person or community that is responsible for this animal or that answers for or assumes the responsibilities to take care of it and to prevent the risks that this animal can represent to the others. c. Animal Birth Control (ABC): neutering/sterilisation of owned and/or stray dogs to reduce reproduction within the population. d. Catch, neuter and release (CNR): catching of stray dogs followed by their neutering/sterilisation and their release at the original point of capture. e. Selective Killing: to kill healthy dogs that are not under direct control, that were pre-selected by the competent authorities (veterinarians). f. Non-Selective Killing: to kill any animal that is not under direct control (e.g. healthy or sick, suffering or not) using humane methods that minimise stress and pain of animals that have been selected on an objective basis, not restricted to incurable disease or suffering. g. Selective Catching: to catch sick, suffering or aggressive dogs not under direct control; or if the animal is putting the community or person or others animals at risk; or if the dog doesn t have a owner and the community doesn t accept him. h. Euthanasia: the act of inducing death in a humane manner. i. Competent Authority: means the Veterinary Services, or other Authority of a Member Country, having the responsibility and competence and for ensuring or supervising the implementation of animal health measures or other standards in the Terrestrial Code. j. Persons: This can include more than one individual, either members of a family, household, neighbourhood or community

19 19 Appendix VI (contd) k. Stakeholder: any person or institution with an interest in the outcome (s) and has some type of leadership role in the community. l. Health Promotion: an activity directed towards enabling people to take action and participate in the decisions to develop, to establish or to implement activities to animal control, together with the public health and other organizations. m. Humane: to be humane in an animal control program is to perform any activity with technical knowledge (of animal welfare, animal behavior and ethological handling). n. Dog Population Control Programme: activities developed to stabilize the dog population. o. Responsible Pet Ownership: The condition under which the owner of an animal accepts and commits him/herself to assume a series of duties focused on the satisfaction of the psychological, environmental and physical needs of his/her pet; as well as to the prevention of risks (potential of aggression, disease transmission or injuries to people) that his/her pet may cause to the community or the environment.

20 20 Appendix VII GUIDELINES FOR DOG POPULATION CONTROL Article 1 Definitions of Issues 1.1 Identification of problems caused by stray dog zoonoses (e.g. rabies, echinococcosis, leishmaniosis) environmental pollution (e.g. noise, faeces) nuisance behaviour (noise, chasing vehicles) traffic accidents injury to people and animals; invasion of environmental preserve areas; 1.2 Assessment of existing control activities Existing methods of dog population control Non selective killing (e.g. shooting, poisoning, electrocution, drowning) Selective killing (this can be done humanely or inhumanely) non selective catching and killing selective catching and killing Catch, neuter and release (CNR) Animal Birth Control (ABC) Education and legislation for responsible ownership Registration and identification (licensing) Catching and shelter/re-homing (adoption/reuniting) Control of animal movement Environmental management Control of dog trade None of the methods described above (1.2.1) will work in isolation and animal welfare will differ both between and within the above methods.

21 21 Appendix VII (contd) 1.3 Sources of stray dogs: Irresponsible animal ownership Allowing owned animals to roam unsupervised Abandonment of unwanted animals Uncontrolled breeding within Owned population and subsequent abandonment of offspring. Stray population Commercial breeders producing an excess of animals under poor conditions leading to the production of unsuitable pet animals 1.4 Factors contributing to the maintenance of a stray dog population Animal Reproductive physiology of dogs (high fecundity) Environmental Carrying capacity of environment (e.g. available food and shelter) Human beings human response to and tolerance of dogs insensibility and lack of respect for animals; lack of public awareness and education

22 22 Appendix VII (contd) Article 2 Identification of Animal Welfare Issues 2.1 animal welfare issues of stray dogs (reflecting the five freedoms) Lack of protection from adverse environmental factors leading to physical and thermal discomfort Insufficient feed resources leading to starvation and malnutrition Exposure to adverse conditions and lack of veterinary care leading to pain, injury and disease Aggressive encounters with other animals and humans leading to fear and distress lack or deficient or inadequate zoonoses control programs 2.2 Dog control activities that can create welfare issues Poorly managed and executed dog control activities as described below can cause unnecessary suffering within all areas of the five freedoms. Most of the welfare issues are due to lack of selection, training and motivation of personnel and inappropriate infrastructure. Inhumane methods of killing in the field (e.g. shooting and poisoning) Improper dog handling and care Inhumane methods of catching due to poor techniques and lack of proper equipment Unsuitable transport such as poorly designed vehicles and improper use Improper loading and unloading Poor holding facilities (shelter/re-homing centre/pound) such as improper design of shelter and poor management. Lack of euthanasia in the case of incurable animal suffering Inhumane killing of captured dogs (e.g. electrocution/gassing/drowning etc.) Poor surgical techniques, pre-operative and post-operative care resulting in unnecessary suffering or death Inappropriate Adoption/re-homing/reuniting to irresponsible owner or inappropriate home, leading to poor welfare or abandonment Release into inappropriate environment

23 23 Appendix VII (contd) Article 3 Development of Guidelines on Dog Population Control 3.1 Factors to be considered in dog control activities Proposed practical solutions to the animal welfare problems created by dog control activities should be considered under the following headings: Selection of competent personnel with the correct attitude to animals periodic training of personnel periodic evaluation of the work (evaluation of the workers, the structure, the process, the results and the decision maker) Protection and resourcing of personnel (vaccination, protective gear and counselling) Infrastructure and equipment Legislation and policy guidelines Resources 3.2 Dog population control strategy Guiding Principles Dog population control is a complex issue and requires a holistic, ethical and rational approach involving numerous stakeholders. The aim of these guidelines is to ensure dog population control activities are done in a humane manner and do not cause unnecessary animal suffering. Dog population control is required to address the welfare issues associated with stray dogs and problems caused by stray dogs, in particular the zoonotic implications. Dog population control programmes may support wider zoonotic control and can contribute to improved community health. Dog population control programmes aim to reduce the stray dog population with the ultimate aim of all dogs being responsibly owned. Hence, problems and welfare issues discussed pertain only to stray dogs but dog control strategies must be targeted at both stray and owned dogs. National legislation and local by-laws should support dog population control programmes. Continuous public education is fundamental to give support and guarantee the success of the dog population control programmes

24 24 Appendix VII (contd) Planning and management Responsibilities and competences The welfare of animals in dog population control activities is the joint responsibility of all stakeholders. Overall responsibility for planning and implementation rests with the competent authorities. Planning at the national level and delegation to relevant authorities/organisations at the local level Initial assessment by the competent authority Evaluation of current status of dog population. Evaluation of the current control activities and existing infrastructure to identify baseline capacity. Consultation with all stakeholders (including the community and all the possible partners) to assess their needs and expectations and to share the responsibilities.

25 25 Appendix VII (contd) Article 4 Objectives and Strategies 4.1 The competent authority should set achievable targets for each strategy Objectives Create a balance between dog population and number of responsible owners Strategies 1. Setting up of a holistic policing and enforcement agency for controlling dogs within the jurisdiction of the competent authority. 2. Monitor the population of stray and owned dogs, at national or local level. 3. Establish programme for dog population control at national or local level. 4. Implement selective catching of stray dogs, holding for period, reuniting with owner, re-homing or adoption, failing these euthanasia. 5. Implement neutering /sterilisation of owned animals (ABC/CNR programmes) 6. Establish animal reproduction control through ABC and CNR programmes using Surgical and chemo-sterilization techniques. 7. Institute registration / identification system with integral financial cost to owning a non-sterilised animal to encourage sterilisation 8. Implement Licensing System, Dog Register (national or local). 9. Ensure responsible dog ownership in the community Reduce the abandonment of unwanted owned dogs onto streets 10. Implement public education and awareness campaign 1. Institute legislation against abandonment 2. Institute enforcement of statutes (policing by authorised officers) 3. Institute registration / identification system 4. Provide education in responsible animal ownership 5. Provide mechanism and coordination for the adoption and re-homing of neutered dogs. 6. Formation of Dog Protection Associations, etc. to help owners in responsible pet ownership. 7. Control male and female dogs during mating season. 8. Establishment of Veterinary Clinic and Appointment of personnel (Veterinary Officers, Veterinary Assistants, Enforcement Officers, and volunteers). 9. To provide proper healthcare, including pre and post operative at neutering facilities. 10. Provide sufficient and appropriate transport and dog catching equipments for the dog catching units.

26 26 Objectives Reduce the incidence of zoonotic diseases and other risks to humans and environment Strategies 1. Formal and informal education programmes informing the public on pertinent zoonotic implications and responsible pet ownership. 2. compulsory vaccination for all owned dogs ( a prerequisite of licensing / registration) 3. Surveillance and reporting of significant zoonotic diseases 4. legislation on vaccination / deworming requirement (can be tied in with registration / identification). Legislation of dog bite cases, enforcement, disease response mechanism, public health clinics, disease notification system, rabies investigation (quarantine, sampling and monitoring) 5. Ensure provision of sufficient vaccination / deworming services, may require government support mass vaccination campaigns 6. CNR programmes with vaccination / deworming of stray dogs if environment is suitable Reduce the number of owned animals roaming unsupervised 7. Restriction of movements of animals. 1. License or register owned dogs and implement permanent identification systems for owned dogs. Veterinary inspection, health record, licensing or registration of owned dogs. 2. Control of dog movement across state, national or international borders. Movement permit, veterinary health inspection and certification, control of dog trade, breeding rules, incentives, enforcement. legislation on dog confinement policing and enforcement of statutes Education and legislation on RPO with enforcement via animal control/welfare officers Orientation about prevention of the main zoonoses in the community; Reduce the carrying capacity 1. Remove the source of feed for the stray dogs. Fences in slaughter area and rubbish dump, clean daily market place and restaurants, rules in dog exercise area, cleanliness campaign. 2. Improve solid waste management by the local authority to reduce the environment carrying capacity for stray dogs Supply of rubbish bins with lid, improved management of solid waste, rubbish collection system, fence in solid waste disposal area, rubbish disposal rules / good practice. 3. Remove the dog habitat such as the shelters or hiding places Public awareness and education, neighbourhood cleanliness campaign. 4. Discourage the public from feeding the stray dogs Cleanliness Campaign, legislation against feeding of stray dogs, enforcement, solid waste management, Catch-Neuter-Release and rehoming programme.

27 27 Objectives Increase responsible animal ownership Strategies good solid waste management effective solid waste management, including animal-proof bins and efficient removal / disposal of waste Environment Education Education and legislation on RPO with enforcement via animal control/welfare officers Ensure sufficient veterinary services is made accessible to owners for RPO Registration and Identification Monitoring and Evaluation 1. Monitor and evaluate all aspects of the programme by the competent authorities. Cost-benefit analysis, socio-political impact study, feedback and questionnaire from community, recording of results, interpretation and documentation of results, dissemination of information. 2. Evaluate against targets and initial assessment of dog control programme periodically Improve public awareness on dog population control Re-set targets, cost benefit analysis, re-assess programme. 1. Organize dialogue and consultation with the local community / resident association / NGO on the importance of dog population control Local community groups / resident association, Animal Protection Associations, Kennel Associations, other NGOs, public awareness and campaign 2. Provide continuous public education and awareness campaign. Public education (adults and children), dog bulletin / newsletter, webpage on dog ownership and care. 3. Provide information on educational resources and training programme or courses in animal welfare and proper animal handling. Improve know-how and technical expertise in dog population control and the relevant fields Webpage on dog ownership and care, training and courses in animal welfare, dog bulletin / newsletter. 1. Provide training for dog catchers Training of dog catchers, train the trainers and trainees, training centre. 2. Provide training and refresher courses on proper techniques in dog humane killing. Training or refresher course on euthanasia, budget procurement, training centre, selection of trainers and trainees. 3. Provide technical training on surgical neutering and reproduction control Training or refresher course on reproductive surgery, budget procurement, training centre, selection of trainers and trainees. 4. Provide training in pre-operative and post-operative care in clinics Training of animal care personnel, budget procurement, training centre, selection of trainers and trainees.

28 28 Appendix VII (contd) Article 5 Activities involved in dog population control 5.1 Activities involved in dog population control (see Appendix VIII and IX) 1. Dog population surveys/census/estimates stray dogs (street surveys using direct counts and / or mark-recapture) owned dogs (questionnaire surveys) 2. Sensitisation of and consultation with the local community 3. Identification and registration (including licensing) 4. Infrastructure required for conducting activities efficiently. 5. Personnel and management: Selection of personnel, initial training requirements and future support 6. Veterinary and para-veterinary expertise 7. Enforcement (animal welfare officers): Responsibilities and powers of officers, training 8. Catching training of dog catchers: Selection and support, extension of role to animal control officers dog catching equipment: Diagrams of equipment (poles / nets with description of suitable use, safety gear for catchers) 9. Neutering training and techniques: principles of surgical neutering, current constraints and future possibilities of chemical equipment (minimum surgical equipment) pre-operative and post-operative care: principles of care 10. Catch; Neuter and Release Catch; Neuter and Release programme should only be considered as an addition to the standard dog population control programme; its inclusion should be based on local suitability of culture and the environment. 11. Re-homing/adoption (holding facilities, policy) 12. Euthanasia and selective humane killing (decision, selection, techniques, training) 13. Reduction of carrying capacity (e.g. solid waste management): Designs for animal proof bins and concurrent education of public regarding waste disposal. 14. Zoonotic control

29 Dog control programmes should support wider zoonotic control programmes such as: a. Mass vaccination campaigns (e.g. rabies) and de-worming: of stray dogs, with or without concurrent sterilisation of owned dogs, publicising the event and incentives for owners b. Education for owners on the importance of responsible ownership which includes vaccination (including regular boosters), control of parasites (regular treatment), control of dog movements, prevention of biting and reproduction control. c. Dog population control to reduce population density and increase population immunity d. Legislation and enforcement (including documentation)

30 30 Appendix VII (contd) Article 6 Monitoring and Evaluation Monitoring and evaluation of all aspects of the programme need to be done regularly by the competent authorities, with special reference to the following: animal welfare cost benefit analysis feedback from the community interpretation, documentation and recording of results periodical evaluation against the targets and ultimately the initial assessment (population survey, vaccination titres)

31 31 Conclusions

32 32 Appendix VIII Assessment of dog control activities: Malaysian Experience Control of Stray Dogs in Penang, Malaysia The Seberang Perai Municipal Council (SPMC) is the largest local authority in Malaysia covering an area of 738 sq. km. It has three districts with urban and semi-urban areas and the human population stood at 736,305 people in Stray dogs caused public nuisance and cleanliness problems, while sporadic dog bite cases were not usually reported to the veterinary authority. Stray dog population in the municipality was estimated at around 12,000 heads as majority of population were Muslims and license was required to keep dogs. Since 2002, SPMC adopted a catch and euthanize policy on stray dogs in its municipality. Every six months, SPMC would tender out the stray dog control job to a private dog catching company. Among the conditions are that the animals are caught and transported with care, humanely euthanized witnessed and supervised by two veterinary officers and buried with proper disinfection. The company would be paid RM 80 (USD 20) for every dog killed. However, due to limited budget, only 300 dogs are allowed to be killed every month. The success rate is low as only about 1,800 dogs would be killed in six months. It only comprise of about 20% of the total stray dog population. The contractor would rush the job to catch 300 dogs and hence killing is not evenly done every month. These lead to insignificant reduction of the stray dog population in the municipality. Observations also showed that there were rooms for improvement in the handling and catching, as well as the humane killing of the dogs. To give a more significant impact, bigger budget should be allocated to the stay dog control activities, to include public awareness and training in handling and catching of dogs, and catching to be carried out regularly for the whole year. Control of Stray Dogs in Selangor The same policy in controlling stray dog population was adopted by the Department of Veterinary Services and Kelang Municipal Council in the State of Selangor in Catch and euthanized contract jobs were awarded on a yearly basis, and RM 50 (USD 13) was paid for every tail presented to the authority. The contract was terminated due to false claims by the contractor and dogs were mishandled during catching, killing and disposal.

33 33 Analysis of data provided by HIS, Jaipur, relevant to the ABC programme for female street dogs. Report to WSPA by Lex Hiby, Conservation Research Ltd Counts of street dogs in the Pink City area of Jaipur show only a moderate decline over the period of the ABC programme (especially for adult females) combined with a rapid and sustained increase in the percentage of sterilised females. This suggests that the ABC programme is failing to access the entire female breeding population and that pockets of pup production are sustaining the street dog density. The following figure shows the change in female, male and pup densities since 1997 (when sterilisations of females at the full capacity of c per year started): total males females pups 0 Feb-97 Aug-97 Feb-98 Aug-98 Feb-99 Aug-99 Feb-00 Aug-00 Feb-01 Aug-01 Feb-02 Aug-02 Feb-03 Aug-03 Feb-04 Aug-04 Feb-05 Aug-05 Feb-06 The next figure shows the change in the percentage of sterilised females on the street over the same period: 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% Feb-97 Aug-97 Feb-98 Aug-98 Feb-99 Aug-99 Feb-00 Aug-00 Feb-01 Aug-01 Feb-02 Aug-02 Feb-03 Aug-03 Feb-04 Aug-04 Feb-05 Aug-05 Feb-06 % spayed % pups The figures show that percentage sterilised reached 70% by 2002 and has remained at about that level. Total dog density decreased by nearly a third from 1997 to 2002 but has changed little since then. Furthermore that decrease was due in part to an early reduction in the density of pups. The counts suggest some decline in male density since 2002 but that the density of females has changed very little over the entire period of the ABC programme. The rapid rise in percentage sterilised suggests that the accessible population component was treated efficiently by the ABC programme leading to reduced pup production on the street and reduced pup density on the street. At the same time the lack of further increase in percentage sterilised or decrease in density of adult females suggests that dogs beyond pup-age (greater than 6 months?) are appearing on the street from some other source. However, before we can accept that hypothesis we need to consider the possibility that the reduction in street dog density, though moderate, has led to increased production of dogs on the street (via a reduction of densitydependant juvenile mortality) and that that affect is preventing further reduction in street dog density. To check that possibility a simplified simulation of the Jaipur female street dog population was prepared. To run the simulation we need estimates of adult female annual survival, age at (potential) first breeding, frequency of breeding and litter size. On the assumption that the street population is self-contained, with no input of dogs from other sources, the juvenile annual survival is then available as that value that avoids the population either increasing without limit or dying out. Juvenile survival is made to depend on street dog density so that at

34 34 densities above carrying capacity (CC) it is reduced and street density declines and at densities below CC it is increased and street density grows. Adult female annual survival was estimated from HIS recapture data, allowing for the affect of sick or injured dogs having an increased probability of recapture: The screen dump shows that the maximum likelihood point estimate for adult female survival is 0.66 with 95% confidence interval from 0.59 to Nuisance parameter estimates (probability of being sick/injured in a given month and probabilities of recapture for dogs sick/injured and not sick/injured are also given). When not restricted to adult females the point estimate for annual survival was reduced to Month by month variation in the percentage of female dogs collected for spaying shows that the breeding cycle in Jaipur is annual (Chawla & Reece, 2002). By varying the degree of synchrony in the breeding cycle between different dogs and the percentage of dogs that breed in a given year it is possible to mimic closely the observed variation in the percentage pregnant from month to month:

35 35 The plot suggests that 52% of adult females breed each year (the graphical estimation method does not provide confidence limits; a ML estimate will be derived later). We assume that the average number of female pups per litter is 3 and that females are ready to have their first litter when they are 1 year old. These estimates then give a balancing female juvenile survival of per year. Those parameter values define the population dynamics of the Jaipur street dog population. In order to mimic the Pink City indices of percentage sterilised and street dog density we can then vary the carrying capacity (thus the female population size at the start of the ABS programme) and the degree of juvenile survival densitydependence. For example, reducing the CC, given the number of sterilisations, will increase the growth rate of the percentage of sterilised dogs on the street. It will also lead to a more rapid decline in population density. Increasing the density-dependence of juvenile survival will then act to reduce the continued growth in percentage sterilised and decline in population density. However, even when a non-linear density-dependence was used, to give a rapid increase in juvenile survival corresponding to a moderate decline in population density, it was impossible to mimic the observed indices:

36 36 The plot shows the closest approach to the observed indices (shown by the thin jagged lines) it was possible to obtain. Increase in predicted percentage sterilised (heavy blue line) follows the increase in the observed percentage but then continues to increase as the observed percentage levels off. The decline in predicted female street density (heavy red line) exceeds that of the observed index even though the observed index is for total dogs the observed index for female dogs shows much less decline. The green line shows the extreme dependence of juvenile survival on population size that was required to get even this close to the observed indices. To mimic the observed indices more closely it was necessary to introduce dumped 1-year old females in to the simulation: