estimate of dog population in ccmc 4-2013

7/28/2019 Estimate of Dog Population in Ccmc 4-2013

1/49

1

EEsstt iimm aa tt ee dd DD oo gg PP oo pp uu llaa tt iioo nn ww iitt hh iinn tt hh ee BBoo uu nn dd aa rr iiee ss oo ff tt hh ee CCuu rr cchh oo rr ee mm -- CCaa ccoo rr aa MMuu nn iicciipp aa ll CCoo uu nn cciill AArr ee aa

&& iinn aa SSee llee cctt ee dd SSee cctt iioo nn oo ff Q uu ee ee mm TTaa lluu kk aa

b b y y Grace D. Kare ,, MMBB AA ((UU SS AA))

AAdd aa rr ss hh aa IInn ss t t iit t uu t t ee oo f f MMaa nn aa gg ee mm ee nn t t -- MMaa rr gg aa oo ,, GG oo aa

& & Tracy Potts

RR ee ss ee aa rr cc hh ee rr && DDaa t t aa AAnn aa llyyss tt

APRIL 2013


2/49

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTIONa. Background 1

b. Purpose of Study 2

c. Definitions 2d. Estimating the Stray Dog Population in Goa 3e. Available Research 5f. Geographic and Demographic Information 7g. Relationship Between Human and Dog Populations 10h. Garbage Problems and the Effects of Tourism 13

II. ANALYSIS

A. Dog to Human Ratio1. Dog to Human Ratios Around the World 17

2. Dog to Human Population in Goa 18B. Mark-Resight Survey

1. Methodology 212. Observations 263. Analysis 284. Calculations 28

C. Analysis of GAWTs ABC Programme Records 1. ABC Analysis 322. Calculation of Mortality Rate 333. Estimation of the Dog Population 35

III. SUMMARY

Conclusion 41

Bibliography 44

Annex I 46

Appendix I:Indicators of Socio-Economic Development 2011 i

Appendix II:

Maps of Curchorem-Cacora Municipal Council ivAppendix III:

Charts of 11 Individual Areas within CCMC Covered in the Survey x

Appendix IV:Sample Photographs Taken of Each Observation xxi

Facts About Curchorem xxii


3/49

1

I. INTRODUCTION

a. Background

In 1998, the Bombay High Court, Goa Bench, banned the shooting of stray dogs in the

State of Goa. Directions were issued by the High Court to the Goa Government to set up

proper facilities for the care of animals and to follow humane methods for keeping under

control the stray dog population in the state. Later the Court also directed the municipalities

to conduct a dog census within their jurisdiction and to set up animal shelters and begin

sterilization programmes for strays with the assistance of animal welfare NGOs in their areas.

Since November 2007, the animal welfare organisation Goa Animal Welfare Trust

(GAWT) has been conducting a small animal birth control programmein conjunction with

grants from the Animal Welfare Board of India-Chennai (AWBI-Chennai) to reduce thenumber of stray dogs in the jurisdiction of the Curchorem-Cacora Municipal Council area

(referred to in this document as CCMC).

According to Dr. Kathy Anzuino BVM&S, CertWEL, MRCVS:

Both human and animal welfare are given as reasons for controlling street dog numbers. Spread of zoonoses (diseases that can spread from animals to people) is a

particular problem where high densities of dogs and humans live in close associationand, in India, rabies is a major concern. 99% of human cases of this fatal disease aretransmitted in the saliva of infected dog bites.

The AWBI-Chennai has required local authorities to monitor the progress of the ABC

programme, as outlined in the Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001. 1 A monitoring

committee must be constituted by the local body, and monthly meetings held to review the

progress made by the Animal Birth Control programme in the area.

In addition, a census must be conducted periodically to ascertainthe success of the

programme, to evaluate the number of dogs sterilised and vaccinated, and the number of dogs

yet to be included in the programme. To meet these requirements, Adarsha Institute of

Management has been engaged to conduct a dog census in the CCMC area. Adarsha Institute

of Management is a post-graduate educational institution located in Margao, Goa that

provides students with specialised business training in the areas of finance, marketing and

human resources.

1 The Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001 are covered by sub-section (1) of Section 38 of the Preventionof Cruelty to Animals Act (1950, under the notification of the Government of India, Ministry of Environmentand forest.


4/49

2

b. Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the study is to determine the number of dogs found within the

municipality of the CCMC. The final number includes stray and roaming dogs, private dogs,

and pups found within the designated area.Since this is the first time a survey of this kind has been conducted in Goa, the results

of this census were described according to the indicators of the number of dogs in the area, as

well as by estimation based on observation.

According to Dr. John F. Reese, Help in Suffering (HIS) in Jaipur, and board member

of several committees constituted by the Animal Welfare Board of India:

There are two main ways of measuring and reporting on roaming dog populations: Collecting an indicator of the roaming population (sometimes referred to as an index of abundance). This is simply a count that, under certain assumptions, is expected to increase or decrease as the number of roaming dogs in the area increases or decreases. It will not tell you how many roaming dogs there are in

your area but a repeat count 12 months later can be compared to the original count to indicate if the population has changed.Calculating a population estimate . This may be for an entire city or for part of a city such as a specific municipality. Counts made in selected regions are combined to estimate the total number of dogs roaming on public property at any one time .

The resulting estimates of total number of dogs within the CCMC municipality was used

to extrapolate the probable number of dogs in the entire working area of GAWT within the

Quepem Taluka.

c. Definitions

In India there are numerous levels of interaction with dogs, from the extreme of fear

and avoidance to the other extreme of buying exclusive foreign dog breeds at exorbitant prices as status symbols. The World Health Organization (WHO) has recognised these

varying relationships across the world and created the following categories for differing

levels of interaction between human beings and dogs.

1. Restricted (supervised) dogs - fully dependant and fully restricted by man.

Usually tied up and kept within private premises.


5/49

3

2. Family dogs - fully dependent and semi-restricted. Usually seen as a pet but the

animal is able to roam around the neighborhood.

3. Neighbourhood dogs semi-dependent and semi-restricted. These dogs are

usually adopted by some of the residents of a building complex, or are tolerated

outside a shop or restaurant, for example.

4. Unrestricted dogs (unsupervised) dogs may reside within a designated area

without any supervision or restriction, although dependent on garbage or handouts

for food.

5. Feral dogs independent and unrestricted. These animals do not interact with

humans and are dependent on their own resources for food and shelter. 2

For the purposes of this study, dogs within categories 1 and 2 were considered private

dogs, and dogs in categories 3, 4, 5 were considered as stray/roaming dogs. Any dog with a

collar was categorised as a private dog.

Jurisdiction (area) of Curchorem-Cacora Municipal Council : The area

designated as under the jurisdiction of the CCMC is 22.55 sq. km.

Population of Curchorem-Cacora Municipal Council area : The 2001 Indian

Population Census is used as the base figure for this study, 21,407 with an annual growth rateof 1.48%, and a density of inhabitants per sq. km. of 949.3. It is categorised as an urban

setting.

d. Estimating the Stray Dog Population in Goa

During the past few years, several figures have been used in the mediaby animal

welfare organizations and citizens' groups to estimate the existing number of stray dogs in

Goa. Unfortunately, a formal, scientific and statistically relevant study has not beenconducted. Among the figures quoted, one is based on the Goa Animal Husbandry and

Veterinary Services' report of 1997 when it was estimated that around 92,311 "other animals"

were found in Goa, not including the usual farm animals such as buffaloes, goats, chickens,

2WHO (1988) Report of a WHO consultation on dog ecology studies related to rabiescontrol(unpublished doc WHO/Rabies/88.25)


6/49


7/49

5

Unfortunately, the researchers were unable to find data on the number of pet dogs

living in the State of Goa. Although there are adequate laws and regulations in existence

regarding the licensing of pets, Goa does not enforce these laws. As a result, not only are

pets unlicensed, there is no enforcement of annual vaccination of pets against rabies.

According to a research conducted by Research and Consultancy Enterprise (RACE)

of Institute of Management Technology (IMT), Ghaziabad there are about 2.2 million dogs in

the Indian household with the population increasing by 26% every year.

For our study, we have used the actual figures provided by GAWT of private dog

treatments conducted at their Animal Care Centre in Curchorem. For the period January to

October 2012, 753 cases were treated, eliminating any duplicates for same patient. The

average of this works out to 75.3 private patients per month.

e. Available Research

Very limited research has been done to determine the dog to human ratio around the

world. Many of the studies use surveys to interview pet owners. A few have estimated the

total dog population, including owned dogs and strays. One of the most extensive reports

noting dog to human ratios is found in the World Health Organization's (WHO), "Field


8/49

6

Application of Oral Rabies Vaccines for Dogs: Report of a WHO consultation", 4which

outlines findings for several countries with noticeable dog populations. Another much

quoted report from the WHO, "Guidelines for Dog Population Management" i, provided

additional data.

An Internet search also provided access to several articles prepared by E-collagewhich reported dog to human ratios for India as a whole and the cities of Bangalore and

Pune. There are also numerous scientific studies conducted on various animal welfare issues

in India and all over the world. A very detailed and noteworthy study was conducted in

Nepal and Okayama Prefecture, Japan and published in October 2003. 5

The statistical information for our study are from Goa Government sources and also

found available on the Internet. In addition, the GAWT Animal Care Centre records for the

CCMC area for the past five years were used for the statistical work needed to estimate the

number of dogs in the area.

Statistics for several countries and India were analysed to determine the dog to human

ratios for Goa. A thorough review of the available population figures for Goa was conducted

to calculate human population trends, including populations in rural and urban areas. Using

the results of actual sightings of dogs within the CCMC area and the available human

population figures from the 2001 census (plus estimated growth), a dog to human ratio was

calculated for use in this study.

In addition, analysis of Goa Animal Welfare Trusts Animal Birth Control records for

the years 2007 to 2012 were analysed. A yearly survival rate was estimated for the total

number of sterilised dogs during the period, and an estimate of the stray dog population was

calculated for the end of 2012. Also, reviewing the records of GAWTs private dog

treatments during the period 2007 to 2012 provided an indication of the number of private

dogs in the Quepem area.

Based on a visual survey conducted in 11 areas of the municipality, plus the estimates

provided by GAWT on the actual data of sterilised strays and privately owned dogs treated,

5Survey of the stray dog population and the health education program on the prevention ofdog bitesand dog- acquired infections: a comparative study in Nepal and OkayamaPrefecture, Japan byMasahiko Kato, Hideki Yamamoto, Yoshihide Inukai, Shohei Kira, Okayama University MedicalSchool, published in Acta Medica Okayama, Volume 57, Issue 5 2003 Article 8, October 2003.


9/49

7

this report has estimated the total population of dogs (strays and private) for the CCMC area

as of December 2012.

Based on the above three estimates, a probable range was developed to determine the

total number of dogs (stray and owned) found in the CCMC area as of December 2012. An

indication of the possible number of dogs in the Quepem Taluka areas covered by GAWTwas also estimated.

f. Geographic and Demographic Information

The information below shows a summary of the geographical area of the State of Goa

and the forest area within the state. It is interesting to note that out of 3,702 sq. km., only

2,278 sq. km. are considered human habitable areas.

GOA GEOGRAPHICAL FACTS

Geographical Area (sq. km.) : 3702.00 Forest Area (sq. km. ) : 1424.46 Government Forest (sq. km.) : 1224.46 Private Forest (sq. km.) : 200.00 approx.

The Table below shows the population breakdown for Goa, listing the 11 Talukas in

the state, as well as the population breakdown in urban and rural areas. By percentage, theTalukas with the least population in Goa are Pernem, Bicholim, Satari in the North, and

Quepem and Canacona in the South. By far, the most urbanized Taluka is Marmugao,

followed by Bardez and Tiswadi.

2001 Goa Population Breakdown

Taluka

Area in

Population

% of total

sq. km. Population Population

Rural % Urban %

Tiswadi 213.57 160,091 12% 55,019 34% 105,072 66%Bardez 263.98 227,695 17% 54,210 24% 133,445 76%Pernem 251.69 71,999 5% 62,386 87% 9,613 13%Bicholim 238.80 90,734 7% 53,647 59% 37,087 41%Satari 489.46 58,613 4% 50,696 86% 7,917 14%Ponda 292.78 149,441 11% 100,826 67% 48,615 33%Sanguem 836.82 64,080 5% 53,074 83% 11,006 17%Canacona 352.04 43,997 3% 32,096 73% 11,901 27%Quepem 318.25 74,034 5% 40,054 54% 33,980 46%


10/49

8

Salcete 292.94 262,035 19% 110,456 42% 151,579 58%Marmugao 109.13 144,949 11% 24,587 17% 120,362 83%TOTAL 3659.46 1,347,668 637,051 670,577

47% 50%

The Table below shows the population breakdown for South Goa, including the percentage of the population that resides in rural and urban areas. Based on the figures, one

can conclude:

The population for South Goa in 2001 was estimated to be 589,095.

44% of the population in South Goa lived in rural areas. 83% of the people in

Sanguem Taluka live in rural areas, and 54%.

83% of the population of Marmugao lives in urban areas.

56% of the population live in urbanized areas and 44% live in rural areas. 2001 South Goa Population Breakdown by Taluka

Area in % of total

square State Population

Taluka km. Population Population Rural % Urban %Sanguem 836.82 64,080 5% 53,074 83% 11,006 17%Canacona 352.04 43,997 3% 32,096 73% 11,901 27%Quepem 318.25 74,034 5% 40,054 54% 33,980 46%Salcete 292.94 262,035 19% 110,456 42% 151,579 58%Marmugao 109.13 144,949 11% 24,587 17% 120,362 83%

TOTAL 1909.18 589,095 260,267 44% 328828 56%

The Quepem Taluka has a population of 74,034,

and 54% of the population is rural.

In the Quepem Taluka, the populations of the

municipalities of Curchorem-Cacora and Quepem of

33,980 account for the total number of residents that live in

urban areas in the Taluka.

Salcete Taluka has a population nearly twice as

large as the next highest populated taluka of Marmugao.

The Table on the following page compares the amount of

geographical area available in Goa that is non-Government


11/49

9

forest with the population figures for the state. Although Goa has a geographical area of

3,702 sq. km., only 2,478 sq. km. are considered non-Government forest. There are also

private forest areas of approximately 200 sq. km. Within this small amount of available non-

Government forest land resides a human population of 1,347,688 (based on 2001 Census). As

a result, the average human population density in non-Government forest areas in the stateequals 544 people per square kilometres

AVAILABLE NON-FOREST AREA IN GOAGOATotal geographical area (sq. km) 3,702Total Govt. forest areas (sq. km.) 1,225

Total amount of Human Residing space(sq. km.) (non-Govt. Forest) 2,478

Total Human population for the state 1,347,688

Avg. Human population density inavailable Residing Space (non- Govt.forest) per sq. km. = 544/sq. km.

6

6Website:Goa Government Forestry Department


12/49

10

g. Relationship between Human Populations and Dog Populations

One of the most common methods for estimating the dog population is to evaluate the

growth and migration of the human population and associate it with the growth of the dog

population in the specific area. Thereafter, a broad dog to human ratio can be calculated

based on the estimates of human and dog populations.

The main assumption (which has been mentioned in various publications) is that dogs

are often directly or indirectly dependent on the human population. Annex I at the end of

this report contains excerpts from a World Health Organization report regarding dog

populations variables that are affected by human populations.

Dr. John F. Reese writes in "The State of the Animals III, 2005" 7, wrote about the

dependence between dogs and humans:

"It is against this background of a wide range of man-dog relationships that dogsin the developing world must be seen and understood. Knowledge about and understanding of the complexity of the relationships between dogs and local

people is essential to any attempts to regulate the human-dog relationshipofficially and to control any problems caused by dogs."

Dr. Reese also mentions that human activities contribute to dogs' accessibility to

food, shelter, and even companionship:

"It is generally believed that dogs exist in very few places where they have noreferral household or community (WHO 1990). The exception to this is around

food markets, slaughterhouses, temples, and roadside restaurants, where sufficient food is available without theactive involvement of humans in feeding the dogs."

A review of the human population in Goa over the past twenty years indicates some

interesting trends that may have a significant bearing on dog population growth in the state.

Appendix I contains data found in "Goa Economy in Figures - 2011", prepared by the Goa

Directorate of Planning, Statistics and Evaluation.

From the time Goa attained statehood (1987-88) to the population census of 2001, the

human population in the state grew from 10.08 lakhs to 13.48 lakhs, or about 13.5% over 13years. According to the 2001 Population Census, the population growth rate for Goa

between 1990 and 2000 was 15.21%. As indicated in the Tables below, for the period from

2001 to 2011 it was around 8.5%, to a population of 14.6 lakhs.

7The State of the Animals III, Reece et. al., edited by Deborah J. Salem and Andrew N. Rowan, HumaneSocietyPress, 2005.


13/49

11

A more interesting trend is found when reviewing Goa's rural and urban population

trends.

Source: Rural Development Statistics: Section 1: Population Trends. Govt. of India 2011 Census

The table above shows that Goas Rural/Urban breakdown is the opposite of the rest

of the country. In 2011, 68.84% of Indias population lived in a rural setting. By

comparison, only 37.83% of Goas population was categorised as rural. Records indicate that


14/49

12

The rural population in Goa for the period 1987-88 to 2001 declined slightly. When Goa

attained statehood in 1987-88, the rural population was 6.85 lakhs. By 2001, the rural

population had declined to 6.77 lakhs. In other words, the rural population decreased by 1.2%

at the time the general population in Goa was growing by 15.21% 8. On the other hand, the

urban population during the same period grew tremendously, from 3.23 lakhs in 1987-88 to6.71 lakhs in 2001, or 208%.

8Source: G O I, Census of India 2011, Provisional Population Totals, Paper-2 of 2011, Registrar General, India.


15/49

13

h. Garbage Problems and the Effects of Tourism

One of the main drawbacks of such an increase in the human population living in an

urban environment is the improper disposal of garbage. Large human populations in


16/49

14

small,urban areas, means high human population densities without proper infrastructure, due

to rapid growth. Today, the lack of proper garbage collection and the location of garbage

disposal sites are among the most debated and highly explosive topics in Goa.

In addition to garbage, other human activities strongly influence the growth of dog

populations. For example, urban living brings restaurants, bars, function halls, catering businesses and corner fast food carts, etc. In addition, urban areas create the need for densely

populated apartment complexes, schools, hospitals, and entertainment arenas. All these sites

represent excellent sources of food for street dogs.

In addition, Goa's tourism industry has grown tremendously and with this growth has

come numerous hotels, resorts, etc. Since Goa attained statehood in 1987-88 to 2005-6, the

number of hotels/lodging houses increased from 275 to 2,233 as shown in the table on the

following page. Also, domestic tourists increased from 7.34 lakhs in 1987-88 to an estimated

20.11 lakhs in 2006-07. Foreign tourists visiting Goa increased from .93 lakhs in 1987-88 to

an estimated 3.46 lakhs in 2006-07. The high number of food and drink establishments

catering to all these visitors creates numerous opportunities for food and shelter in the dog

population.

According to Tourism Minister, Mr. Dilip Parulekar figures in July 2012 indicated that for

the financial year 2011-2012, Goa received a record 4,51,998 international tourists, In 2010-

11 Goa recorded 4.41 lakh international tourists visiting the state, while in 2009-10 the

number of foreign tourists visiting Goa stood at 3.76 lakh. In addition, the State Tourism

Departments records indicate that t he number of domestic tourists arriving in the state has

been on the rise since the last few years. A total of 22.25 lakh domestic tourists arrived in the

state in the year 2011, as against 22.01 lakh domestic tourists for the year 2010, and 21.27

lakhs in 2009, and 20.20 lakhs in 2008. As a result, the population of Goa during the peak

months nearly doubles, creating huge stress on the states infrastructure. 9

9 Source: Published newspaper articles and interviews with Goa Tourism Department personnel.


17/49

15


18/49

16

* Source: Municipal Solid Waste Stats on Municipalities, PDF document published on theinternet, 2007-8.

The Table below shows the level of garbage produced in 2008 for each Taluka in

Goa. Due to the increased urbanisation and the limited improvement in the processing of

garbage, the figures below can be assumed to have risen substantially as of 2012.

In conclusion, the poor management of garbage, the huge increase in the number of entertainment/food establishments, the migration of the human population from the rural to

the urban environment, plus the friendly attitude of foreign tourists towards animals has in

general, made for increased food and shelter resources for stray dogs.


19/49

17

II. ANALYSIS

A. Dog to Human Ratio

1. Dog to Human Ratios around the World

The Table on the following page summarises the findings from various sources on

the estimated dog to human ratios around the world. The dog to human ratio compares the

total number of dogs (both stray and owned) compared to the human population of a certain

location. It indicates for every one dog how many human beings there are in a particular

location. Ratios for western countries usually range from 1:6 to 1:10. In 2001, the WHO

estimated that there was a 1:20 dog to human ratio in India. Other countries, for example in

Indonesia, have an estimated dog to human ratio of 1:16. Studies have found that the dog to

human ratio in Bangalore was estimated at 1:12 and in Pune at 1:22. 10

Unfortunately, in Goa there is no research available on this topic. To our

knowledge, neither the Government of Goa nor any other government department or NGO

has to date made a periodic, systematic census of the total dog population in the state.

10 Dog Population Management & Canine Rabies Control: Indias Official Dog Control Program, anInternational Context, p. 5, published by E-Collage, Pune 2002.


20/49


21/49

19

As a result, by 2007 the human population of CCMC was approximately 22,700.

Therefore, using a 1:17.4 ratio and a human population of 22,700, the estimated number of

dogs in the CCMC area in 2007 was approximately 1,230, without consideration of themortality rate for the year.

Using the figures for South Goa only, the dog to human ratio can be

calculated with a bit more accuracy and more relevance to the CCMC area. The human

population in 2001 for South Goa was 5, 86,591, and at an annual growth rate of .87 can be

estimated to be 6,23,261 in 2007. The Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services figure for

the number of dogs in South Goa in 2007 was 40,541, resulting in a dog to human ratio of

1:15.4. If the population of Curchorem in 2007 was 22,700, then there were around 1,475

dogs in the CCMC area without consideration of the mortality rate for the year.

The Table on the following page summarises the above discussed ratios.

GAWT started the ABC programme in the CCMC area in 2007. Thereafter, the

growth rate for the stray dog population in the CCMC area would be expected to decline over

the years as dogs were caught and sterilised, preventing the birth of unwanted pups. In

another section, the results of the ABC programme will be examined in more detail.

District/Taluka/City Total / RuralUrban Population 2001 %

Male Female Total

District :South Goa Total 297501 289090 586591

Rural 127839 130116 257955 44%

Urban 169662 158974 328636 56%

3. Quepem Taluka Total 37472 36454 73926

Rural 20284 19760 40044 54%

Urban 17188 16694 33882 46%

Curchorem-Cacora CT Urban 10961 10437 21398

Quepem CT Urban 6227 6257 12484


22/49

20

Human to Dog Ratio 2001 & 2007

Year 2001 Year 2007

Area Human Dog Ratio Human Dog Ratio

Goa 13,47,668 100,000 1:13.5 14.14 LK 81,636 1:17.4

SouthGoa

5,86,951 N/A N/A 6,23,261 40,451 1:15.4

Source: Goa Stats hand Book 2008/9 Data from Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services


23/49

21

B. MARK-RESIGHT SURVEY

The Animal Birth Control (ABC) programme in Curchorem-Cacora is run by Goa

Animal Welfare Trust and was implemented in November 2007. Each dog picked up for

sterilisation is spayed or neutered by a veterinarian, and while under anaesthesia the right ear

is ear-notched for easy identification later. The dog remains at the centre for post - operative

care for around 5 to 7 days. Before being released back to the areas where it was picked up,

each dog is given an anti-rabies injection. During the period November 2007 to December

2012, a total of 1,027 stray dogs were sterilised by GAWT in the CCMC area.

Within the Quepem Taluka, GAWT has Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) with

the municipalities of Curchorem-Cacora and Quepem, and also responds to complaints about

roaming dogs near these areas. The area of coverage for GAWT in the Quepem Taluka isapproximately 50 sq. km., although the Taluka is much larger. During the period November

2007 to December 2012, a total of 2,289 stray dogs were sterilised within this 50 sq. km. area

of the Quepem Taluka.

1. Methodology

A Mark-Resight survey census was conducted to estimate the number of dogs found

within the CCMC jurisdiction. As described by Dr. John F. Reece and others 11 , the Mark-

Resight survey method is used where the ABC programme has been implemented for a

number of years to monitor the number of roaming dogs in certain areas, provided that the

numbers, dates and locations of the dogs released following the intervention are reliably

recorded.

The dog observations within the designated areas of Curchorem-Cacora were

recorded using the methodology suggested in the WSPA article, WSPA Companion &

Working Animals Unit: Surveying Roaming Dog Populations: Guidelines on Methodology

which discusses the methodology for a Mark-Resight survey. 12

11 A mark-resight survey method to estimate theroaming dog population in three cities inRajasthan, India by Lex R Hiby1*, John F Reece2, Rachel Wright3, Rajan Jaisinghani4, Baldev Singh4 andElly F Hiby512 WSPA article: Surveying Roaming Dog Populations: Guidelines on Methodology,Companion & Working Animals Unit, World Society for the Protection of Animals, London-UK,June 2008.


24/49

22

Since this is the first time a census of this type has been conducted in Goa, there were

no previous sources of information for the researchers. In addition, it proved extremely

difficult to find accurate and up-to-date maps for the area. The researchers relied on the

verification of map areas by the CCMC staff, as well as maps for the area found on internet

sources and Google Earth. The Google Earth photograph on the following page depicts theCurchorem-Cacora Municipal Council Area with detailed roads. Also included is a map of

the municipal area provided to the researchers by the CCMC. Appendix II contains Google

Earth images of each of the areas covered in the Mark-Resight survey.

The dog census figures were collected between 26 November 2012 and 3 rd January 2013. A

total of 11 sections of the CCMC area were selected for study.

A strict protocol was used by the researchers, which included:

1. Dogs on both sides of the streets were counted.

2. The observers looked for dogs under parked cars, in compounds and in

building areas.

3. Observations were made of all dogs observed, including private, stray, and all

ages.

4. Dogs wearing a collar were categorised as privately owned

5. The observations were completed within the same early morning timeframe

for each of the areas observed (approximately a 2 hour timeframe)

6. There was no interaction with any of the dogs, i.e. feeding or petting to reduce

the risk of large numbers of dogs following the observers and thus introducing

bias into the count.

7. A variety of routes were selected to ensure variations on both population

density and traffic volume.8. An individual photograph was taken of each dog as a record of the

observation ( See Appendix IV for sample of photographs taken)


25/49

23

Curchorem-Cacora Municipal Council Area

Source : Google Earth 2013


26/49

24

Source:CCMC


27/49

25

The information collected includes:

Top level Survey Information:

1. The date of the survey.

2. The start/end locations of each surveyed area.

3. The time started.

4. The time finished.

5. The temperature during the observation time.

6. Traffic flow (heavy/medium/light).

7. Density of population ( high, medium, low).

8. Landmarks within each of the surveyed areas.

Information was also recorded pertaining to each observed dog and this was categorised as

follows:

1. Male or female.

2. With a V c ut (indicating sterilis ation) or without a V cut indicating un -

sterilised.

3. With a V cut but gender unknown.

4. Old or young. Old was categorised as being approximately 5 years or

more. Young was categorised as being older than 6 months but younger

than 5 years.

5. Lactating female.

6. Puppies under 6 months old.7. Dogs that were unable to be categorised as any of the above were recorded

as dog only.

8. Dogs wearing collars were considered as privately owned and marked as

such but included in the categories stated above.


28/49

26

2. Observations

1. The largest number of dogs observed were young males without a V-cut (yet to be

sterilised). One reason for this could be the emphasis on catching females in

order to quickly reduce the number of puppies born each mating season, quickly

increasing the number of strays in the area.2. The next largest number of dogs observed was young females that had been

sterilised and had a V-cut. Young females are the most likely to have large litters,

and thereby stressing the sterilisation of these animals decreases the number of

strays in the area.

3. 91 out of 308 dogs observed (nearly 30%) were sterilised females.

4. A total of 39 out of 308 dogs (12%) were unsterilised females.

5. 73 out of 308 dogs (24%) were unsterilised males.

6. 12 out of 308 dogs (3.4 %), or 12 out of 132 females (9%) were lactating females

with pups.

7. The highest number of dogs were observed in the centre of Curchorem, within

approximately a 1+1/2 kilometre radius. This area includes the bus station,

railroad station, and central market. This area also has numerous restaurants, tea

shops, and food-generating buildings, schools, and public areas.

8. The least number of dogs were observed in residential areas, and nearing the open

paddy field areas.

9. The table below summarises the observations made between 26 November 2012

and 3 rd January 2013 in each of the areas under study. A total of 11 areas were

selected and 308 dogs were observed and categorised as shown:


29/49

27

64

60

3029

28

26

21

19

12

9

6

2

1

1

0

0

0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

MALE NON V CUT/YOUNGFEMALE/V CUT/YOUNG

FEMALE/V CUT/OLDFEMALE/NON V CUT/YOUNG

MALE/V CUT/ YOUNGMALE /V CUT/OLD

PUP UNDER 6 MONTHSMALE/NON V CUT/OLD

LACTATING FEMALEFEMALE/NON V CUT/OLD

DOGFEMALE/V CUT UNKNOWN/ OLD

MALE/ V CUT UNKNOWN/YOUNGFEMALE V CUT UNKNOWN/YOUNG

MALE/ V CUT UNKNOWN/OLDV CUT/ GENDER UNKNOWN/OLD

V CUT/ GENDER UNKNOWN/ YOUNG

NUMBER OF DOGS COUNTED

CATEGORIES OF DOGS

CUMULATIVE SUMMARY OF DOGS COUNTED


30/49

28

3. Analysis

The Chart on the following page lists all the recorded observations for each of the 11

researched areas. Appendix III contains the detailed information recorded on each day of

observation.

a. Calculations

Using the observations collected by the researchers, a rough estimate can be made of

the total number of dogs in the CCMC area. Since this is the first time such a study has been

made about the number of dogs in the area, these findings cannot be compared with previous

estimates. As a result, the following results are only approximations, to be viewed as a

starting point until future studies can be made of the dog population in the area.

The Chart on the following page summarises the number of dogs observed in each of the 11 areas. For comparison purposes, the distance covered in each observation area has

been adjusted to reflect the number of dogs that would be found within one square kilometre.

The total adjusted number of dogs observed per sq. kms. is then 461. Utilising these

adjusted figures, the mean for the sample is 42 dogs per sq. km., and the standard deviation is

29.1.

Using the formula discussed in the WSPA article (mentioned in earlier section), t he

population estimate can be calculated from the above count. The population estimate is

calculated by dividing the total number of dogs counted in the sample blocks by the

sampling fraction:

945

55.2211

461

blocksof number total blocks sampleof number

counted dogsof number total

The numbers of blocks in the formula were substituted by the number of areas

selected in sq. km. versus the total sq. km. for the CCMC area of 22.55. Based on this

formula, the number of dogs roaming in the CCMC area between 9:30 a.m. and 11:30

a.m. is approximately 950.


31/49

29Summary of Information Collected for 11 Observed Areas of Curchorem-Cacora Municipal Council Area

SURVEY DATETTL DOGSSURVEYED

LOCATION/LANDMARK K SQ % VCUT % NVC % UKN%U6MTH

M/VC/OLD M/VC/Y F/VC/OLDF/VC/Y M/NVC/OM/NVC/YF/NVC/OLDF/NVC/Y M/VC?/OLD M/VC?/Y F/VC?/OLD F/VC?/Y VC/GU/OLD VC/GU/Y LACT FEMPUPS U-

6MTHDOG

COLLAR/PRIVATE

26/11/12 57

CURCHOREMCENTRE FROM CARPARK OPP MILKUNION

0.50 64% 25% 11% 8 4 12 13 6 3 2 3 0 1 2 1 0 0 1 0 1 2P 1C

28/11/12 31CURCHOREMCENTRE FROMPONTEMOL RD

0.50 87% 13% 0% 4 5 5 13 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1P

1/12/12 41

FROM SUNNIMASJID TEMPLEAND AROUNDCARRIAMADI TOBACK OF ELECTRICITYSUBSTATIONPONTEMOL ROAD

0.75 51% 46% 2% 4 7 2 8 0 8 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 1 8P

1/12/12 40

KAKODA ROAD ATSHRI MAHADEVTEMPLE ALONG RDOPPOSITE TEMPLETO BACK OF GAWTCARE CENTRE

0.75 40% 53% 4% 3% 4 2 3 7 0 8 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 02 P2 C

3/12/12 40

NEXT TO SHELTERBANSAI AREA TOKAKODA RD -TOMAHADEV TEMPLEFROM BANSAI SIDE

1.00 32% 62% 3% 3% 0 5 0 6 2 15 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 13 P

3/12/12 15

BEHINDCURCHOREMRAILWAY STATIONTO ST SEBASTIANCHAPEL

0.50 20% 80% 0% 0% 1 0 1 1 2 4 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 P

31/12/12 32

KAKUMODDI EASTRD OPP GASSTATION TOKAKUMODDI WEST

1.50 16% 69% 9% 6% 1 1 0 3 5 15 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 26 P

3/1/13 23

PONTEMOL RD BACKOF SUBSTATION TODESSAI AUTOSPONTEMOL RD

0.50 61% 30% 0% 9% 3 2 3 6 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0

3/1/13 15

RD OPPOSITEGUARDIAN ANGELCHURCH RD VIANEW EDUCATIONALINSTITUTE TOBACKSIDE BANK OFINDIA

0.75 40% 47% 0% 13% 0 1 3 2 0 3 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 6 P

3/1/13 8

BEYONDCARIAMODDI(PONTEMOL RD) TO

CACORA RD TO ENDOF PONTEMOL RD

0.50 50% 25% 0% 25% 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 P

3/1/13 6

CURCHOREMCACORA RDENTRANCE FROMPONTEMOL RD TOEND OF PONTEMOLRD EAST

0.50 0% 83% 17% 0% 2 2 1 1 1 P

26 28 30 60 19 64 9 29 0 1 2 1 0 0 12 21 664 P3 C

308

144 47%

133 43%

VCUT UKN 10 3%

21 7%

64 0.21PRIVATE

V CUT GENDER UNKWNMALE V C UT FEMALE V CUT MALE NON V C UT FEMALE NON V CUT MALE V CU T ? FEMALE V CUT?

PUPS UNDER 6MONTH

NO V CUT

VCUT

NON V CUT(INC LAC FEM)

SUMMARY


32/49

30

The standard deviation calculated for the 11 areas observed was 29.1, reflecting

the small size of the sample and the large variance in the number of dogs recorded in

each area. The range in each of the areas varies greatly from 114 dogs per sq. km. in the

centre of Curchorem to a low of 12 dogs per sq. km. in the quieter residential areas in the

outskirts of the CCMC area.

Using the formulas in the WSPA article, the 95% confidence interval 13for the 950

estimate can be calculated as follows:

The lower limit of the 95% confidence interval is calculated by subtracting the

standard deviation of the estimate multiplied by the t-statistic from the estimated

number:

885

8.64950

)228.21.29(950

)(

x

statistict deviation standard dogsof number estimated

The upper limit of the 95% confidence interval is calculated by adding the

standard deviation of the estimate multiplied by the t-statistic to the estimated

number:

1015

8.64950

)228.21.29(950

)(

x

statistict deviation standard dogsof number estimated

Based on the above calculations, it can be concluded that between 9:30 am. and 11:30

a.m. there is an estimated 950 roaming dogs in the CCMC area. The 95% confidence

interval on this estimate is from 885 to 1,015 (it means that you can be 95% certain that the

true number of roaming dogs lies between these numbers).

13 It must be noted that the size of the sample is small in statistical terms, and therefore these results are onlyindicators until a larger study is conducted.


33/49

31

CALCULATIONS OF DOGS PER SQ. KM. IN OBSERVED AREASAND AVERAGE AND STANDARD DEVIATION

SURVEY DATETTL DOGSSURVEYED

LOCATION/LANDMARK K SQ EST. DOGS PER

SQ. KM.

26/11/12 57 CURCHOREM CENTRE FROM CAR PARK OPP MILK UNION 0.5 114

28/11/12 31 CURCHOREM CENTRE FROM PONTEMOL RD 0.5 62

1/12/12 41 FROM SUNNI MASJID TEMPLE AND AROUND CARRIAMADI TO BACK OF ELECTRICITY SUBSTATION PONTEMOL ROAD0.75 51

1/12/12 40 KAKODA ROAD AT SHRI MAHADEV TEMPLE ALONG RD OPPOSITE TEMPLE TO BACK OF GAWT CARE CENTRE 0.75 50

3/12/12 40 NEXT TO SHELTER BANSAI AREA TO KAKODA RD -TO MAHADEV TEMPLE FROM BANSAI SIDE 1 40

3/12/12 15 BEHIND CURCHOREM RAILWAY STATION TO ST SEBASTIAN CHAPEL 0.5 30

31/12/12 32 KAKUMODDI EAST RD OPP GAS STATION TO KAKUMODDI WEST ROAD 1.5 21

3/1/13 23 PONTEMOL RD BACK OF SUBSTATION TO DESSAI AUTOS PONTEMOL RD 0.5 46

3/1/13 15 RD OPPOSITE GUARDIAN ANGEL CHURCH RD VIA NEW EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE TO BACKSIDE BANK OF INDIA0.75 19

3/1/13 8 BEYOND CARIAMODDI (PONTEMOL RD) TO CACORA RD TO END OF PONTEMOL RD 0.5 16

3/1/13 6 CURCHOREM CACORA RD ENTRANCE FROM PONTEMOL RD TO END OF PONTEMOL RD EAST 0.5 12

TOTAL 308 461

AVERAGE 28 42

STD DEV 16.0 29.1


34/49

32

C. Analysis of GAWTs ABC Programme Records

Goa Animal Welfare Trust has Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) with the

Curchorem-Cacora Municipality, Sanguem Municipality, Quepem Municipality and the

Cuncolim Municipality. Any grant received to sterilise a pre-determined number of street

dogs from the Central Government via the Animal Welfare Board of India must be divided

among all four municipalities. As a result, the number of stray dogs operated through the

ABC programme varies from year to year depending on the grant sanctioned to GAWT.

Detailed records suggest that the Animal Birth Control programme in Curchorem has

been effective to some extent. However, much work remains in order to accomplish a target

of at least 80% of the animals being sterilised in the area.Since GAWT has MOUs with the municipalities of Quepem and Curchorem-Cacora,

most of the ABC work in the Quepem Taluka is conducted in these areas. Together, CCMC

and the Quepem municipality account for an area of around 40 sq. km. In addition, GAWT

also responds to dog complaints in surrounding areas. It is estimated therefore, that the

working area for GAWT in the Quepem Taluka is in total around 50 sq. km.

Meticulous records are kept by GAWT about each dog collected, including the date

and location where the animal is picked up, sex, age, colour, and other identifying markings,

date of surgery, date of vaccination, and date of release. These records are inspected

periodically by a representative from the Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services

(AH&VS). Also, the organs removed during surgery from each stray animal are kept in

formaldehyde and counted for verification purposes on a periodic basis by a representative of

AH&VS.

1. ABC Analysis

The ABC records for 2007 to 2012 were reviewed and the utmost care was taken toidentify only those stray dogs collected from the Quepem Taluka working area and CCMC

area. The areas outside of this Taluka, including Sanguem, Cuncolim, beaches, etc. were

deleted for this analysis. Between 2007 and 2012, a total of 2,289 stray dogs were sterilised

and vaccinated against rabies in GAW Ts working area in the Quepem Taluka.


35/49

33

YEAR

TOTALRECORDS

QUEPEMTALUKA

NON PROJECT AREASBUT WITHIN QUEPEM

TALUKA

CURCHOREM

PROJECT AREASDATA TO & FROM

2007 100 26 74 SEPT - DEC

2008 519 210 309 JAN - DEC

2009 717 499 218 JAN - DEC

2010 391 228 163 JAN - DEC

2011 272 161 111 JAN - DEC

2012 290 138 152 JAN - DEC

TOTAL 2289 1262 1027

2. Calculation of Mortality Rate

To calculate how many roaming dogs there are in Curchorem as of the end of 2012,

the mortality rate for dogs in Goa must be considered. Unfortunately, there are no figures or

estimates available regarding this subject.

A search of the internet yielded very little substantiated information about the

longevity of roaming dogs in India. Some estimates are available for pets, however very little

research has been done on the subjectof roaming or street dogs.

According to the website Dog Breed Info Center, A well-looked after pet Pariah

may live to the age of 12 16 years. There is no research to determine the life expectancy of

free-roaming dogs but it is probably considerably less, perhaps 4 6 years. 14

The published article, Fecundity and longevity of roaming dogs in Jaipur, India 15

discusses several previous studies as well as introducing the findings of the research

14 Pariah Dog: Indian Pariah Dog, Dog Breed Info Center Website (C) 1998- 2013 15Fecundity and longevity of roaming dogs in Jaipur, India, by John F. Reece, Sunil K. Chawla,Elly F. Hiby, and Lex R. Hiby, published by British Medical Council Vet Res. 2008; 4: 6.

TOTAL QUEPEM TALUKA RECORDS & PROJECT AREAS


36/49

34

conducted in Jaipur in 2007on this subject. The table below summarises the findings

discussed in this paper.

AUTHOR

% SURVIVALPER YEAR (RANGE)

ROAMING DOG

LONGEVITY SPECIFIC GROUP

Reece, Chawla & Hiby 70% (62%-78%) 4 years Adult spayed females

In Jaipur, India

Kitala P, McDermott J,

Kyule M, Gathuma J,

Perry B, Wandeler A.

60% -- Machakos Dist, Kenya

Pal, S. K. 91% 2.6 years West Bengal

Beck, A.M. 77% (70%-87%) -- Baltimore, MD USA

RANGE (60% - 91%) 2.6 4 yearsMEDIAN 75.5% 3.3 years

According to the researchers, survival rates for street dogs can range from 60% to

91%, depending on various conditions. The median for this range is 75.5%. Since there are

no estimates available for the longevity of roaming dogs in Goa, or for the yearly survival

rate of dogs in the state, for the following analysis the median figure of 75.5% has been

adopted to estimate the number of dogs in Quepem Taluka and the CCMC area.


37/49

35

3. Estimation of the Dog Population

Based on the actual figures of the ABC programme provided by GAWT for its ABC

programme, and using a survival rate of 75.5%, the number of surviving ABC roaming dogs

(strays) in the Quepem Taluka area at the end of 2012 is estimated to be around 1,220:

Several assumptions must be made in order to calculate the total number of stray

(roaming) dogs in the Quepem Taluka area.

The observations recorded under the Mark-Resight survey method (and discussed in a

previous section) indicate that approximately 50% (47% + 3%) of the dogs observed

had been sterilised and had a v-cut ear.

43% of the dogs observed did not have a V-cut ear, indicating that they had not been

sterilised by GAWT yet, and included lactating females with pups.

308

144 47%

133 43%

VCUT UKN 10 3%

21 7%

64 0.21PRIVATE

PUPS UNDER 6MONTH

VCUT

NON V CUT(INC LAC FEM)

SUMMARY

QUEPEM TALUKA: 75.5% SURVIVAL RATE OF ABC DOGS IN QUEPEM TALUKA (50 SQ. KM)

2007 100

2008 76 519

2009 57 392 717

2010 43 296 541 391

2011 32 223 409 295 272

2012 25 169 309 223 205 290 = 1220 ROAMING DOGS (strays)


38/49

36

Private dogs accounted for 21% in the Mark-Resight survey. However, based on

actual data collected from GAWT, 904 private dogs are estimated to have been

treated from around the Quepem Taluka in 2012.

Instead of using the 21% recorded in the Mark-Resight survey in Curchorem, the

figure of 904 private dogs will be used for the Quepem Taluka estimate.

Using these observations to determine the total number of dogs roaming in the

Quepem Taluka area covered by GAWT (50 km.), it is estimated that there were a total of

3,344 dogs (private and stray) as of December 2012, with a dog density of 66.9 per sq.

km.

IF: 1,220 = REPRESENT 50% OF V-CUT OBSERVED DOGS (SUMMARY DATA - MARK-RESIGHT SECTION) THEN 2,440 Total StraysCALCULATION:

1,049 = 43% STRAY NON V-CUT DOGS IN QUEPEM1,220 = 50% STRAY V CUT (STERILISED)

171 = 7% PUPS (NON V-CUT) 904 = PRIVATE DOGS BASED ON DATA PROVIDED BY GAWT

EQUALS: 3,344 = TOTAL DOGS (STRAY & PRIVATE) IN QUEPEM TALUKA 66.9 = DOGS PER SQ. KM

Using the same assumptions discussed above to estimate the total number of dogs inthe CCMC area, below are the estimates of the number of surviving ABC dogs for

Curchorem:

CCMC AREA: 75.5% SURVIVAL RATE OF ABC DOGS STERILISED BYGAWT

2007 74

2008 56 3092009 42 233 218

2010 32 176 165 163

2011 24 133 124 123 1112012 18 100 94 93 84 152 541 = ABC SURVIVING

STRAY DOGS


39/49

37

Then applying the findings of the Mark-Resight survey method, as discussed above, it

can be estimated that the total number of dogs (both roaming/stray and private) in the CCMC

area equals 1,082, with a dog density of 58.1 per sq. km.

IF: 541 = REPRESENT 50% OF V-CUT OBSERVED DOGS (SUMMARY DATA - MARK-RESIGHT SECTION) THEN 1,082 Total Strays

CALCULATION: 465 = 43% STRAY NON V-CUT DOGS IN CCMC 541 = 50% STRAY V CUT (STERILISED)

76 = 7% PUPS (NON V-CUT) 227 = PRIVATE DOGS BASED ON 21% OBSERVED

(SUMMARY DATA - MARK-RESIGHT SECTION)

EQUALS: 1,309 = TOTAL DOGS (STRAY & PRIVATE) IN THE CCMC AREA 58.1 = DOGS PER SQ. K

Please note that for the above estimate, the number of private dogs was calculated

using the 21% observed in the Mark-Resight survey. The actual figure provided by GAWT

of 904 private cases was inclusive of all dogs in the Quepem Taluka area. It was not possible

to isolate the number of private dogs living only within the CCMC area.

The above findings are illustrated on the following graphs. The efficacy of the

Animal Birth Control (ABC) programme in both Quepem and Curchorem can easily be seen

on the Pie Charts illustrating Total Surviving Dogs since 2007.


40/49

38

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 22892007 100 12202008 76 519 2009 57 392 7172010 43 296 541 3912011 32 223 409 295 2722012 25 169 309 223 205 290 TTL 1220

1 220 TO TAL NUM BE R O F ST RAY DOG S IN QUEPE M

BREAKDOWN 171 7% STRAY PUPS AND UNKNOWN1 049 43% ST RAY NON V-CUT DOG S IN QUE PE M1220 50% STRAY V CUT

904 PRIVATE DOGS BASED ON DATA PROVIDED BY

GAWT

3 344 TO TAL DO GS (S TRAY & PR IV) IN QUEP EM

TOTAL OPERATED IN QUEPEM TALUKA UNDER ABC PROGRAMME 2007-2012

TOTAL SURVIVING DOGS

NUMBER OF DOGS BASED ON 75.5% SURVIVAL RATE

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

No.of Dogs based on75.5% survival rate

Year

ANIMAL BIRTH CONTROL SURVIVAL RATE FOR QUEPEM GOA 2007-2012

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2289

1220

TOTAL SURVIVING ABC DOGS BASED ON 75.5%SURVIVAL RATE FROM 2007-2012

TOTAL DOGSOPERATED INQUEPEM UNDERABC PROGRAMME

2007-2012

TOTALSURVIVINGABC DOGS

171 (7% StrayPups & Unknown)

1049 (43% StrayNon V-Cut Dogs

in Quepem)

1220 (50% StrayV-Cut)

904(Private Dogs

Based on DataProvided by

GAWT

BREAKDOWN OF STRAY & PRIVATE DOGS IN QUEPEM BASEDON 75.5% SURVIVAL RATE

1

2

3

4

Total Dogs Stray & Private In Quepem 3344


41/49

39

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 10272007 74 5412008 56 309

2009 42 233 218

2010 32 176 165 163

2011 24 133 124 123 111

2012 18 100 94 93 84 152 TTL 541

1082 TOTAL NUMBER OF STRAY DOGS IN CCMC AREA

BREAKDOWN 76 7% STRAY PUPS AND UNKNOWN4 65 43 % ST RAY NO N V-C UT DO GS IN CCM C A REA541 50% STRAY V CUT 2 27 P RIVATE DO GS BA SED ON 21% OBS ERVED

(SUMMARY DATA: MARK-RESIGHT SECTION)

1309 TOTAL DOGS (STRAY & PRIV) IN CCMC AREA

TOTAL OPERATED IN CCMC AREA UNDER ABC PROGRAMME 2007-2012

TOTAL SURVIVING ABC DOGS

NUMBER OF DOGS BASED ON 75.5% SURVIVAL RATE

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

No.of Dogs based on75.5% survival rate

Year

ANIMAL BIRTH CONTROL SURVIVAL RATE FOR CURCHOREM-CACORA MUNICIPALCOUNCIL AREA (CCMC) GOA 2007-2012

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

1027

541

TOTAL SURVIVING ABC DOGS BASED ON 75.5% SURVIVALRATE FROM 2007-2012

1

2

TOTAL DOGSOPERATED IN

CCMC AREA UNDERABC PROGRAMME2007-2012

TOTALSURVIVINGABC DOGS

76 (7% StrayPups & Unknown)

465(43% Stray NonV-Cut Dogs inCCMC Area)

541 (50% StrayV-Cut)

227 (PrivateDogs Based on

21% Observed)Summary Data

Mark-ResightSection

BREAKDOWN OF STRAY & PRIVATE DOGS IN CCMC AREABASED ON 75.5% SURVIVAL RATE

1

2

3

4

Total Dogs Stray & Private In CCMC Area 1309


42/49

40

III. SUMMARY

In the previous sections of this report, several methods were proposed to estimate the

number of dogs in the Curchorem-Cacora Municipal Council area of jurisdiction. Thefollowing table summarises the findings for each section.

SUMMARYNumber of Dogs in the Area

CURCHOREM-CACORA

METHODOLOGYQUEPEMTALUKA MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

I.DOG TO HUMAN RATIOGOA RATIO 1,230S. GOA RATIO 1,475

II.MARK-RESIGHT SURVEYESTIMATE 950RANGE 855 TO 1,015

III.ABC ACTUAL FIGURESSURVIVING ABC DOGS 1,220 541TOTAL NO. OF STRAYS 2,440 1,082

TOTAL NO. OF DOGS 3,344 1,309

In Section II (A) the dog to human ratio for Goa was estimated using available

comparable information from previous studies around the world. The estimate prepared by

Goas Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services department along with official census

population figures for the state were then used to calculate a conceivable ratio of dogs to

humans for Goa and for South Goa.

In Section II (B) the researchers conducted a Mark-Resight survey in the CCMC area

between November 2012 and January 2013, recording numerous observations and following

the procedures recommended by WSPA (World Society for the Protection of Animals).


43/49

41

In Section II (C) the actual figures for the Animal Birth Control (ABC) programme

implemented by Goa Animal Welfare Trust (GAWT) for parts of Quepem Taluka and in the

CCMC area were analysed. These figures were used to calculate an initial estimate of the

number of dogs in the area.

In addition, a possible range was calculated for the number of roaming/stray dogs

within a 50 sq. km. area of the Quepem Taluka and for the CCMC area of 855 to 1,015.

Furthermore , using the actual records of private dogs treated at GAWTs Animal Care

Centre, an estimate was made of the number of private dogs in the 50 sq. km. area of the

Quepem Taluka.

Conclusion Section II (A)s calculation of the dog to human ratio for Goa is only a preliminary

estimate. The figures published in the 2008 Statistical Hand Book of Goa from the

AH&VS do not provide any information about the methodology used to determine this

figure. In addition, no other research or study has been conducted to verify the number of

dogs in the state. As a result, the estimated ratio of 1:17.4 for Goa and 1:15.4 for South Goa

can only be viewed as starting points for discussion.

Section II (B) (Mark-Resight survey results) and Section II (C) (Analysis of GAWTs

ABC figures) are both stronger indicators of what is the possible number of dogs in the

CCMC area. These figures are based on observations and historical data of work done in the

field.

In the case of the Mark-Resight survey, although this is the first such study made in

this geographical area, the researchers recorded meticulous data of their observations in the

field. In addition, to ensure accuracy, the maps for the area were researched, evaluated, and

verified. And finally the calculations used to determine the number of roaming dogs in the

area follow the guidelines of experienced nationwide researchers in the area of census taking.Using the Mark-Resight survey results, an estimate of around 950 roaming dogs

appears to be a very reasonable figure for the CCMC. The population of the CCMC area is

around 22,700 currently, and the population density is around 1,000. However, looking at

the recorded observations at each of the 11 areas under review, it is clear that the central


44/49

42

locations of the CCMC area are the most densely populated. It is here that most of the dogs

were observed.

This is the area of town where most of the food, shelter and water sources are located

- restaurants, hotels, schools, temples, church, and administrative and commercial buildings,

as well as numerous residential apartment buildings. As the researchers moved out into theresidential and outlying areas of the CCMC region, where there are fewer opportunities for

food, the number of dogs observed drastically dropped. As a result, although there are 22.55

sq. km. in the CCMC area, only a small section of the municipal area can sustain large

numbers of dogs. A large part of the CCMC area is made up of paddy fields, open areas, and

industrial (mining storage piles) areas, which cannot sustain roaming dogs due to lack of

food, water and shelter.

In Section II (C) the actual recorded figures for GAWTs ABC programme

demonstrates some degree of success for the programme, as well as the need for additional

implementation of the ABC programme in larger numbers per year. The records indicate that

about 50% of the roaming/stray dogs in the CCMC area that were sterilised and vaccinated

against rabies over the past 5 years have survived until date. For the population to stabilise,

the AWBI recommends that around 80% of the population must be spayed or neutered.

Based on the observed number of dogs, only about 50 % have been sterilised, highlighting

the need to increase the number of sterilizations per year in order to reach the goal of 80%.

The records kept by the NGO were detailed. The researchers were able to segregate

the work done in the 50 sq. km. area only within the Quepem Taluka as well as within the

CCMCs jurisdict ion. Based on these actual figures, the estimated number of roaming/stray

dogs in the CCMC area is around 1,082, or say 1,100. This figure is comparable to the

estimate found by the Mark-Resight survey of 950 roaming dogs.

In conclusion, based on the above discussions and calculations, it is estimated

that the number of roaming/stray dogs in the Curchorem-Cacora Municipal Council

area of jurisdiction is between 950 and 1,100 dogs.Within the area of operation of GAWT in the Quepem Taluka, it is estimated that there are (say) 2,500 roaming/stray

dogs within the 50 sq. km. area.

In addition, using the actual figures recorded by GAWT of private dog

treatments in 2012, it is estimated that there is a combined total of 3,400 stray and

private dogs in the 50 sq. km. area of the Quepem Taluka. The estimated figure of


45/49

43

private dogs for Curchorem- Cacora could not be isolated from GAWTs actual records,

as a result the total number of dogs (stray and private) for the CCMC area can roughly

be estimated at around 1,300 using the observations from the Mark-Resight survey

results.

This report is the first of its kind in the state of Goa. It is a starting point to determine

the number of dogs in any sector of the state. The report is limited due to the lack of

previous research and the small size of the sample area. However, every effort has been used

to analyse the field observations and historical data from GAWT in the most reliable and

scientific manner.

It is suggested that a state-wide survey be conducted at the earliest opportunity, and

that the areas covered by this report be re-examined after one year, so that the data can be

compared and more accurate estimates can be calculated in the future.


46/49

44

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. 2011 Census for Goa, Provisional Population Totals, Chapter 1: Introduction Conceptsand definitions, Jurisdictional changes in the State/UT, Rural-Urban Frame and generalinterpretation of Urbanization in the State/UT, Gov. of India, April 2011.

2. Animal Birth Control (ABC) Programme Records for the years 2007 to 2012, GoaAnimal Welfare Trust, Bansai, Curchorem-Cacora.

3. The Success of the ABC-AR Programme in India, Dr. S. Chinny Krishna, June 2009.

4. Guidelines for Dog Population Management, 1990, WHO and World Society for theProtection of Animals, Bogel K and Hoyt J.A.

5. The Ecology of Stray Dogs: A study of free ranging urban animals, Beck, AM, York Press, Baltimore, USA, 1973

6. Estimation of the dog and cat population in the State of Sao Paulo, Maria Cecilia PortoAlveset. al, Instituto de Saude, Secretaria de Estado da Suade de Sao Paulo, Brazil, 2005.

7. Goas Urbanisation and the impact of s ea level rise, Dr. Nandkumar M. Kamat, Lecturer,Goa University, Goa, India 2008.

8. Statistical Hand Book of Goa 2008-09, Government of Goa, Publication Division,Directorate of Planning, Statistics and Evaluation, Panaji-Goa.

9. Statistical Hand Book of Goa 2006-07, Government of Goa, Publication Division,Directorate of Planning, Statistics and Evaluation, Panaji-Goa.

10. Studies on Dog Population in Makurdi, Nigeria (1): Demography and Survey of PetOwners Beliefs and Attitudes, Omudu, E.A. et. al, Department of Biological SciencesBenue State University, Makurdi, Nigeria, Journal of Research in Forestry, Wildlife andEnvironment, Volume 2, No. 1, March 2010.

11. Indicators of Socio-Economic Development, 2009, Directorate of Planning, Statistics andEvaluation, Government of Goa, Panaji-Goa.

12. Indicators of Socio-Economic Development, 2011, Directorate of Planning, Statistics and

Evaluation, Government of Goa, Panaji-Goa.

13. Surveying Roaming Dog Populations: Guidelines on Methodology, WSPA Companion &Working Animals Unit, London, UK, 2008

14. Rural Development Statistics, Section 1, Government of India 2011, Registrar General,Delhi, India.


47/49

45

15. The Booming Pet Industry in India, The Views Paper (website), by Shruti R., March 8,2010.

16. Vaccination Coverage and epidemiological parameters of the owned-dog population inThungsong District, Thailand, Wandee Kongkaewet. al, Preventive Veterinary Medicine65 (2004) 105-115.

17. OIE questionnaire on dog population control in 81 countries: different nationalapproaches to the free -roaming dog problem and their association with degrees of economic development, by P. DallaVillaet. al, Instituto Zooprofilattico SperimentaledellAbruzzo e del Molise G. Caporale Teramo, 2008.

18. Annual Administrative Report (2008-09), by Rajesh Desai, Goa Forestry Department,2008.

19. Dog Population Modeling, Bruno B. Chomel, DVM, PhD., School of VeterinaryMedicine, University of California, Presented at FAO Meeting, Banna, Italy, March 15-

19, 2011

20. Re-evaluating the Burden of Rabies in Africa and Asia, Bulletin of the World HealthOrganization, May 2005, (83)5

21. Free-Roaming Dogs in Developing Countries: The Benefits of Capture, Neuter, andReturn Programs, Jannifer Jackman and Andrew Rowan, The State of Animals IV,Chapter 3, 2007

22. A Survey of Communal Land Dogs in Zimbabwe with Reference to Improving RabiesVaccination Coverage, James R. A. Butler, Department of Biological Sciences,

University of Zimbabwe, 2006.

23. Fecundity and longevity of roaming dogs in Jaipur, India, John F Reece, et.al, BMCVeterinary Research 2008.

24. Alphabetical List of Towns and their Populations Goa, List of towns: Census of India2001

25. Street Dog Population Control, Kathy Anzuino, BVM&S, CertWEL, MRCVS, BritishVeterinary Association, BVA Overseas Group, 2006.

26. Stray dog population demographics in Jodhpur, India following a populationcontrol/rabies vaccination program, Sarah C. Totton et. al, Preventive VeterinaryMedicine, July 2010.


48/49

46

ANNEX I

EXCERPT:

Some major components of the environment that are determinants of dog habitat(and thus their density and distribution) are:

Climate. Harsh climates and particularly cold, winter weather, but also

extreme heat, tend to make survival more difficult, resulting in lower free-

roaming dog densities (Daniels; 1980).

Shelter. The urban environment contains numerous areas where dogs can

find cover and protection against adverse weather conditions, people and-other animals, while resting, sleeping or whelping. The availability of shelter in

urban areas appears to be determined in large part by the economic status

and density of the human population. As mentioned under Section 2.3.2, dog

densities are generally higher in densely populated areas where incomes are

low. Sites offering complete cover include vacant buildings and garages, as

well as those under construction, and passages and common areas of

occupied structures (Fox et. al., 1975). There are also numerous 'topographic

,features that offer some protection against the elements including disused

densely vegetated areas, woodlots, dumps, building 'structures, porches and

other overhanging structures. Parked cars and trucks are also routinely used

(Beck, '1973, 1974, 198Oa; Daniels, 1980). The rural environment contains

many similar structures as well as larger woodlands and fields and natural

caves and dens; Scott-and Causey, I973). It should be remembered that the

general social acceptance of dogs permits them to use areas which are not

available to wild animals or pest species (Beck, 1973, 1980a).Water. While availability of water in most areas is not a limiting factor, water

in arid habitats may be so limited that dogs are forced to either move

elsewhere or numbers are limited.


49/49

47

Food. Availability of food for free-roaming dogs is probably one of the most

important factors influencing density. In urban as well as in rural areas

garbage from individual homes, at market places, or at centralized dumps is a

major source of food for dogs.Cultural practices and customs . Human affection for, or tolerance of, both

owned and un-owned dogs, religious beliefs, use and disposal of natural and

man-made resources, and living conditions, to mention only a few factors,

directly or indirectly influence the quality and quantity of shelter, food, and

water required to support dog populations.

Source: Guides for Dog Rabies Control, World Health Organization, VPH/83.43 Rev. 1, p. 71 .

estimate of dog population in ccmc 4-2013

Documents