Dog and Cat population management within the One Welfare framework: A retrospective look Bogotá 2004 to 2021

Gestión poblacional canina y felina en el marco One Welfare: Una mirada retrospectiva Bogotá 2004 a 2021

Objective: To analyze the population management of dogs and cats in Bogotá between 2004 and 2020 in the "One Welfare" framework. Materials and Methods: Retrospective descriptive study that includes analysis of public and private interventions related to sterilizations, adoptions and sacrifice of companion animals, discriminating by location, species, gender and actor (public or private), the available information was organized using Excel®, with descriptive analysis and results expressed in frequencies, proportions and rates. Results: Between 2004 and 2020, 680,000 cats and dogs were sterilized by the public sector and 157,000 by the private sector, 21,450 were adopted through the district adoption program, 95,000 animals were euthanized, of which 8% were cats, until after 2005 the cats were included in the population estimates and after 2014 information was collected from individuals (sterilization) who contributed 25% of the total number of interventions. Conclusions: The population growth of animals demands health, police and environmental attention, and its ethical management must be maintained, although complemented with actions on various sources where the animals originate; The One Welfare approach is forward-looking, recognizes interconnections between animal, human and environmental welfare and facilitates interdisciplinary collaboration to improve their welfare, as well as complementing and dialoguing with One Health. This study contributes, therefore, organizes and compares the available management statistics, being an input for decision makers and the interested community.

1. Rodriguez EG. Stepping up dog population management to achieve rabies elimination [Internet]. WOAH - World Organisation for Animal Health. 2022. https://www.woah.org/en/stepping-up-dog-population-management-to-achieve-rabies-elimination/
2. Tenzin KW, Michael PW. Human and animal rabies prevention and control cost in Bhutan, 2001–2008: The cost–benefit of dog rabies elimination. Vaccine. 2012; 31(1):260-270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.05.023
3. Butler RJ, du Toit DJ, Binham J. Free-ranging domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) as predator and prey in rural Zimbabwe: threats of competition and disease to large wild carnivores. Biol Conserv. 2004; 115(3):369-378. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(03)00152-6
4. Pinillos RG, Appleby MC, Manteca X, Scott-Park F, Velarde A. One Welfare - a platform for improving human and animal welfare. Vet Rec. 2016; 179(16):412–413. https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.i5470
5. Fitzpatrick MC, Shah HA, Pandey A, Bilinski AM, Kakkar M, Clark AD, Townsend JP, Abbas SS, Galvani AP. One Health approach to cost-effective rabies control in India. PNAS. 2016; 113(51):14574–11581. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1604975113
6. Acero Aguilar M. Esa relación tan especial con los perros y con los gatos: la familia multiespecie y sus metáforas. Tabula Rasa. 2019; (32):157-179. https://doi.org/10.25058/20112742.n32.08
7. Henao S. Eutanasia en animales de compañía Dilemas, encuentros y desencuentros. Rev Colomb Bioét. 2017; 11(3):74-108. https://dx.doi.org/10.18270/rcb.v11i3.2163
8. Andrade Muñoz EB, Moncada Rangel JA. Estrategias para fortalecer el capital social y su importancia en la solución del conflicto ser humano-fauna urbana en la ciudad de Ibarra, Ecuador, dA. Derecho Animal. 2022; 13(1):34-49. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/da.596
9. Anuario epidemiológico. Boletín Epidemiológico Distrital Semanas 17 a 32. Volumen 12, números 5 al 8. Secretaría Distrital de Salud: Bogotá Colombia; 2005. http://www.saludcapital.gov.co/sitios/VigilanciaSaludPublica/Biblioteca%20de%20Anuarios/Anuario%20Ambiente%202005.pdf
10. Masache JL, Brito MC, Sagbay CF, Webster PG, Garnica FP, Mínguez C. Ovariectomía en Perras: Comparación entre el Abordaje Medial o Lateral. Rev Investig Vet. Perú. 2016; 27(2):309-315. http://dx.doi.org/10.15381/v27i2.rivep.11663
11. Castillo-Neyra R, Levy MZ, Náquira C. Effect of free-roaming dogs culling on the control of canine rabies. Rev Peru Med Exp Salud Publica. 2016; 33(4):772–779. http://dx.doi.org/10.17843/rpmesp.2016.334.2564.
12. Humane dog population management 2019 update [Internet]. ICAM. 2019. Disponible en: https://www.icam-coalition.org/download/humane-dog-population-management-guidance/
13. García R de CM, Calderón N, Ferreira F. Consolidation of international guidelines for the management of canine populations in urban areas and proposal of performance indicators. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2012; 32(2):140–144. https://scielosp.org/article/rpsp/2012.v32n2/140-144/
14. Mota-Rojas D, Calderón-Maldonado N, Lezama-García K, Sepiurka L, Garcia R de CM. Abandonment of dogs in Latin America: Strategies and ideas. Vet World. 2021; 14(9):2371-2379. http://dx.doi.org/10.14202/vetworld.2021.2371-2379
15. Barrios Gómez CL, Cirac Sanz R, Lisperguer Araya MF, Calvo Soler P, Bustos-López C. Desarrollo de una escala de tenencia responsable de perros. Revista de Psicología. 2022; 21(1):201–211. https://doi.org/10.24215/2422572Xe106
16. Fatjó J. Él nunca lo haría. Estudio sobre abandono y adopción de animales de compañía. Fundación Affinity; 2021. https://www.fundacion-affinity.org/observatorio/el-nunca-lo-haria-informe-sobre-abandono-y-adopcion-de-animales-de-compania-2021
17. Sánchez R.A, Stamatiu S.L. Citología endometrial en la gata (Felis catus) durante el diestro. Rev Investig Vet Perú. 2017; 28(4):869-875. http://dx.doi.org/10.15381/rivep.v28i4.13881
18. Baquero OS, da Silva Filho AP, Monsalve S, Gebara RR, Garcia RCM, Sussai S. Can sterilization help to prevent roaming in owned dogs and cats?. Res Vet Sci. 2020; 129:180-184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rvsc.2020.01.021
19. Hall CM, Bryant KA, Haskard K, Major T, Bruce S, Calver MC. Factors determining the home ranges of pet cats: A meta-analysis. Biol Conserv. 2016; 203:313-320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.09.029
20. Gunter LM, Gilchrist RJ, Blade EM, Barber RT, Feuerbacher EN, Platzer JM, et al. Investigating the impact of brief outings on the welfare of dogs living in US shelters. Animals. 2021; 11(2):548. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani11020548
21. Fawcett A. Is a One Welfare approach the key to addressing unintended harms and maximising benefits associated with animal shelters? J Appl Anim Ethics Res. 2019; 1(2):177–208. https://brill.com/view/journals/jaae/1/2/article-p177_2.xml
22. Ortega-Pacheco. A. La sobrepoblación canina: un problema con repercusiones potenciales para la salud humana. Rev Biomed. 2001; 12(4):290–291. https://doi.org/10.32776/revbiomed.v12i4.288
23. Palmer C, Corr S, Sandøe P. Inconvenient desires: Should we routinely neuter companion animals? Anthrozoos. 2012; 25(sup1):s153–172. http://dx.doi.org/10.2752/175303712x13353430377255
24. Bhattacharjee D, Sau S, Bhadra A. Free-ranging dogs understand human intentions and adjust their behavioral responses accordingly. Front Ecol Evol. 2018; 6:232. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2018.00232
25. Fossati P. Spay/neuter laws as a debated approach to stabilizing the populations of dogs and cats: An overview of the European legal framework and remarks. J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2022; 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10888705.2022.2081807
26. Rendón HD, Quintana ME, Door MI, Vicuña AF, León CD, Falcón PN. Parámetros demográficos en la población de canes y gatos domésticos en asentamientos humanos del distrito de Ventanilla, Callao-Perú. Rev investig vet Perú. 2018; 29(1):217-225. http://dx.doi.org/10.15381/rivep.v29i1.14191
27. Hernández-Gallo N, Hernández-Flórez LJ, Cortés-Vecino JA. Cryptosporidiosis and “One Health”. Rev Salud Pública (Bogotá). 2018; 20(1):138–143. http://dx.doi.org/10.15446/rsap.V20n1.69959