Spatial Distribution and Population Dynamics of Free-roaming (stray and Semi-domiciled) Dogs in a Major Brazilian City

Overview

Journal Front Vet Sci

Specialty Veterinary Medicine

Date 2024 Aug 16

PMID 39149148

Authors

Carlos Eduardo de Santi

Wagner Antonio Chiba de Castro

Alessandra Cristiane Sibim

Renata Defante Lopes

Sandro Roberto Galvao

Giselli Maria Kurtz

Leandro Meneguelli Biondo

Louise Bach Kmetiuk

Alexander Welker Biondo

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: Although estimate models have been proposed to determine free-roaming (both stray and semi-domiciled) dog populations, to date, no study has focused on the three major border areas of Brazil. Therefore, the present study assessed the free-roaming dog population of Foz do Iguaçu, a major far-west Brazilian city located in a three-border area (Brazil, Argentina, and Paraguay), which is considered among the top five Brazilian tourist destinations.

Methods: Capture-release sampling was performed in three phases with a 6-month interval and 10-day duration of each phase, totaling 18 months, between 2018 and 2019.

Results: A total of 1,273 dogs were estimated in the first [95% confidence interval (CI), 468-2,078 dogs], 904 in the second (95%CI, 452-1,355 dogs), and 1,564 in the third (95%CI, 521-2,607 dogs) capture phases in this area, suggesting a population density of 18.4 dogs/km (6.1-30.6 dogs/km, 95% CI). Of all free-roaming dogs, 452/1,125 (40.2%) were stray with no confirmed ownership or household, whereas 672/1,125 (59.8%) had a known origin, among which 625/1,125 (55.6%) were semi-domiciled with ownership or a household, 36/1,125 (3.2%) were neighborhood dogs with maintainers, and 11/1,125 (1.0%) were owned by recycling material collectors and homeless individuals. The majority of the 1,125 dogs (862/1,125; 76.6%) had an ideal body condition score. The high outdoor access of owned dogs is likely caused by cultural behavior. However, because 533/1,125 (47.4%) of the free-roaming dogs presented with clinical abnormalities, irresponsible ownership may have negatively impacted dog health and welfare.

Discussion: This study was the first to establish the density of free-roaming dogs, the ratio of stray and semi-domiciled dogs, and their dynamics over time in Foz do Iguaçu. The findings may serve as a warning for the high level of dog outdoor access and irresponsible guardianship, which may negatively affect animal health and welfare, leading to diseases, accidents, trauma, and animal cruelty.

References

de Souza Leandro A, Lopes R, Martins C, Rivas A, da Silva I, Galvao S . The adoption of the One Health approach to improve surveillance of venomous animal injury, vector-borne and zoonotic diseases in Foz do Iguaçu, Brazil. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2021; 15(2):e0009109. PMC: 7891772. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009109. View

Arief R, Hampson K, Jatikusumah A, Widyastuti M, Sunandar , Basri C . Determinants of Vaccination Coverage and Consequences for Rabies Control in Bali, Indonesia. Front Vet Sci. 2017; 3:123. PMC: 5220097. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2016.00123. View

Beran G, FRITH M . Domestic animal rabies control: an overview. Rev Infect Dis. 1988; 10 Suppl 4:S672-7. DOI: 10.1093/clinids/10.supplement_4.s672. View

Nimer A, Meneses N, Watson Z, Shuster S, Benford R . Population survey and management strategies of free-roaming dogs (Canis familiaris) on Saipan, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2018; 21(2):170-184. DOI: 10.1080/10888705.2017.1406801. View

Totton S, Wandeler A, Zinsstag J, Bauch C, Ribble C, Rosatte R . Stray dog population demographics in Jodhpur, India following a population control/rabies vaccination program. Prev Vet Med. 2010; 97(1):51-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2010.07.009. View

Dias R, Guilloux A, Borba M, Guarnieri M, Prist R, Ferreira F . Size and spatial distribution of stray dog population in the University of São Paulo campus, Brazil. Prev Vet Med. 2013; 110(2):263-73. DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2012.12.002. View

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, Japan. Acta Med Okayama. 2003; 57(5):261-6. DOI: 10.18926/AMO/32829. View

Beran G . Ecology of dogs in the Central Philippines in relation to rabies control efforts. Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis. 1982; 5(1-3):265-70. DOI: 10.1016/0147-9571(82)90047-9. View

Conan A, Akerele O, Simpson G, Reininghaus B, van Rooyen J, Knobel D . Population Dynamics of Owned, Free-Roaming Dogs: Implications for Rabies Control. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2015; 9(11):e0004177. PMC: 4636342. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004177. View

10.

Morters M, Bharadwaj S, Whay H, Cleaveland S, Damriyasa I, Wood J . Participatory methods for the assessment of the ownership status of free-roaming dogs in Bali, Indonesia, for disease control and animal welfare. Prev Vet Med. 2014; 116(1-2):203-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2014.04.012. View

11.

Constantino C, da Silva E, Dos Santos D, Paploski I, Lopes M, Morikawa V . One Health Approach on Dog Bites: Demographic and Associated Socioeconomic Factors in Southern Brazil. Trop Med Infect Dis. 2023; 8(4). PMC: 10146334. DOI: 10.3390/tropicalmed8040189. View

12.

Mendes Oliveira F, Arcencio R, Arcoverde M, Fronteira I . Are the neglected tropical diseases under control in the tri-border region between Brazil, Argentina, and Paraguay?. J Infect Dev Ctries. 2022; 16(3):547-556. DOI: 10.3855/jidc.13613. View

13.

Tiwari H, Robertson I, ODea M, Vanak A . Demographic characteristics of free-roaming dogs (FRD) in rural and urban India following a photographic sight-resight survey. Sci Rep. 2019; 9(1):16562. PMC: 6851138. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-52992-y. View

14.

Hu C, Yu P, Kang C, Chen H, Yen S . Demography and welfare status of free-roaming dogs in Yangmingshan National Park, Taiwan. Prev Vet Med. 2019; 166:49-55. DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2019.03.009. View

15.

Hossain M, Ahmed K, Marma A, Hossain S, Ali M, Shamsuzzaman A . A survey of the dog population in rural Bangladesh. Prev Vet Med. 2013; 111(1-2):134-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2013.03.008. View

16.

Flockhart D, Rowan A, Boone J . Owned dog population size and ownership patterns in Costa Rica. Front Vet Sci. 2022; 9:946603. PMC: 9751483. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2022.946603. View

17.

Laflamme D, Kuhlman G, Lawler D . Evaluation of weight loss protocols for dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc. 1997; 33(3):253-9. DOI: 10.5326/15473317-33-3-253. View

18.

Cortez-Aguirre G, Jimenez-Coello M, Gutierrez-Blanco E, Ortega-Pacheco A . Stray Dog Population in a City of Southern Mexico and Its Impact on the Contamination of Public Areas. Vet Med Int. 2018; 2018:2381583. PMC: 6176319. DOI: 10.1155/2018/2381583. View

19.

Kitala P, McDermott J, Kyule M, Gathuma J, Perry B, Wandeler A . Dog ecology and demography information to support the planning of rabies control in Machakos District, Kenya. Acta Trop. 2001; 78(3):217-30. DOI: 10.1016/s0001-706x(01)00082-1. View

20.

Tenzin T, Ahmed R, Debnath N, Ahmed G, Yamage M . Free-roaming dog population estimation and status of the dog population management and rabies control program in Dhaka City, Bangladesh. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2015; 9(5):e0003784. PMC: 4433337. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0003784. View