On 26th May, the 89th Annual General Session of the OIE voted to approve the update to Chapter 7.7. This chapter originally joined the OIE standards in 2009 under the title ‘Stray dog population control’. This 2022 update included a significant title change to ‘Dog Population Management’ plus a general text overhaul. Most of the text and structural amendments were in pursuit of clarification, whilst major concepts have in general been sustained. However there have been some important changes and retention of key animal welfare language.
So what’s changed?
Chapter title change from ‘stray dog population control’ to ‘dog population management’, and the introduction of the acronym DPM. Emphasises a really important point – that DPM needs to take a systems approach that addresses the whole dog population, importantly addressing sources of future free-roaming dogs, rather than classic ‘stray control’ that takes a somewhat myopic view of only the current ‘stray symptom’ and not the cause.
Increased emphasis on responsible dog ownership; the relevance of owned dogs and owner behaviour was expressed in the original chapter, but the update sees this as a clear guiding principle.
There has been a tendency for national government to dismiss DPM as a local authority issue, leaving a gap in central legislation, funding and attention to the issue. So the update clarifies the role of the competent authority at the national level and explicitly recommends a national action plan to enable local implementation of DPM programmes whilst respecting that these programmes will need to be tailored to local dog population dynamics.
The contribution of DPM to rabies control is clearly an important issue, not least for the OIE who have stated their commitment to ZeroBy30, provide an international standard for rabies elimination (Terrestrial Animal Health Code Chapter 8.14) and a rabies vaccine bank for those countries with robust plan for rabies elimination. Importantly, that plan for rabies elimination must include a recognised dog population management element.
The process of population assessment, planning, monitoring and evaluation to ensure well designed and adapted DPM programmes come together in subsequent and expanded articles. Led by an article that talks about ‘evidence-based DPM programme development’ and the role of the competent authorities in supporting this approach.
There is one change that may initially surprise us in the NGO movement for dogs, and that is removal of the NGO paragraph from the ‘responsibilities and competencies’ article. This change was made because NGOs have now been encompassed within the definition of veterinary services which “means the governmental and non-governmental organisations that implement animal health and welfare measures and other standards and recommendations in the Terrestrial Code and the OIE Aquatic Animal Health Code in the territory” (from the glossary of the Terrestrial Code). As veterinary services get nearly top billing as paragraph 2 article 7.7.8, we are arguably reflected as important implementers in this field. NGOs are also mentioned as relevant stakeholders within Advisory groups supporting the development of DPM programmes and national action plans.
So what stays the same?
As this update can be considered more as an evolution and not revolution, lets also consider what has stayed the same in chapter 7.7.
The first rule of veterinary care is ‘first do no harm’, and one could argue that this is a primary role of the OIE - to guide veterinarians around the world in how to improve health and welfare without causing harm in the process. In keeping with this role, the introduction to the updated chapter includes the clear statement that “it is important to manage dog populations without compromising animal welfare, in accordance with Chapter 7.1” – a similar statement appeared in the original chapter.
Retention of the statement that “euthanasia of dogs, used alone, is not effective (for DPM)” with a related new statement in the introduction that “Recognising that mass culling of dogs is ineffective and may be counterproductive, reducing dog population size is not an effective means of reducing rabies prevalence”, echoing a similar statement by the World Health Organisation on page 79-80 of their ‘blue bible’ for rabies, the WHO TRS No. 1012.
The OIE position on euthanasia in this chapter has also remained the same, that when used it must be done humanely, but there is no direction on when euthanasia should or should not be used. The update to the euthanasia methods article has reduced the text length significantly - simply outlining what is recommended, leading with intravenous barbiturates, and then a retained and expanded a list of methods that are unacceptable on animal welfare grounds. The retention of this unacceptable list is important, as the use of cruel methods of killing is still done in some countries and this OIE position can be useful for those of us advocating against these inhumane practices.
The DPM measures – the how of population management - are also very similar to the ‘control measures’ in original chapter, with some clarifications and expansion of guidance. There is also one new measure - ‘Access to veterinary care’ - this new measure again emphasises the overlap with rabies control through access to dog rabies vaccination. But it also supports the concept that responsible ownership is central to dog population management, and that to fulfil their responsibilities these owners need access to veterinary services to keep their dogs healthy, happy and wanted.
The importance of changing and promoting responsible human behaviours when managing dog populations remains a guiding principle in the update, as it was in the original chapter.
That DPM is a multi-sectorial issue and benefits from the guidance of a multi-stakeholder advisory group was included in the original chapter and remains a clear recommendation within the update. Further, the updated chapter expressly states that DPM is “in line with the One Health approach”.
Where can I access the updated chapter?
Chapter 7.7 is part of the Terrestrial Animal Health Code and is accessed here. However, after adoption at the Annual General Session, updated chapters go through a process of final editing, formatting and translation into French and Spanish – so the updated versions aren’t available until July 2022. In the meantime, you can see the most recent draft text in Annex 9 of the February 2022 Code Commission report (page 46); expect there to be minor text changes between this last draft and the final version.
In conclusion
We hope the humane DPM field welcomes this OIE chapter 7.7 update and can see their good work reflected in these standards. Taking this as an opportunity to advocate for more support and celebrate where they are achieving benefits through internationally recognised approaches, leading to better outcomes for people and dogs.
Further explanation and a comparison to ICAM’s DPM guide can be found here.
