BackgroundDogs are ubiquitous in human society and attempts to manage their populations are common to most countries. Managing dog populations is achieved through a range of interventions to suit the dog population dynamics and dog ownership characteristics of the location, with a number of potential impacts or goals in mind. Impact assessment provides the opportunity for interventions to identify areas of inefficiencies for improvement and build evidence of positive change.MethodsThis scoping review collates 26 studies that have assessed the impacts of dog population management interventions.ResultsIt reports the use of 29 indicators of change under 8 categories of impact and describes variation in the methods used to measure these indicators.ConclusionThe relatively few published examples of impact assessment in dog population management suggest this field is in its infancy; however this review highlights those notable exceptions. By describing those indicators and methods of measurement that have been reported thus far, and apparent barriers to efficient assessment, this review aims to support and direct future impact assessment.

The aim of the study was to analyse the demographic characteristics of lost and found dogs in Belgrade, Serbia. The demographic data concerning the 246 lost and 81 found dogs in the period of 5 consecutive years (January, 2009 to January 2014) was sampled and analysed from the data bases of four organizations for animal protection in Belgrade. The recovery rate of lost dogs and the chance to be reunited again with their owners was 33%. The highest recovery rate was estimated in the category of lost dogs with visible marks such as tags or collars (30%).The chi-square test disclosed that besides dogs with special visible marks, significantly more females, light colour coated, friendly/sociable and neutered dogs were reunited with their owners (P<0.0001).

The importance of nutrition for the welfare of dogs is highlighted in this review. Malnutrition can be the cause of many health disorders, including behavioural disorders. On the other hand, dietary interventions and modifications, and nutritional enrichment can be used for the treatment of certain health problems and improving welfare in dogs. The paper focuses on data collected from the literature on omissions in the diet of dogs for which owners, food producers, veterinarians and/or animal welfare societies are responsible. Manufacturers are responsible for the composition, quality and safety of commercially available dog food. They are also responsible for the clarity of the feeding guidelines that are provided on the labels. Owners are expected to know what type of food is most suitable for their dogs in terms of any particular allergies or intolerances they may have, as well the quality and quantity of food they should feed their dogs. It is especially important for owners to be aware of the risks of using raw food in dog nutrition. Due to the special social status that dogs have in their owners’ families, owners are increasingly interested in the quality and safe nutrition of their companions. This should be a challenge for veterinarians to master the necessary knowledge of pet nutrition, and to develop and provide advice and consulting services in this area within their practice. Owners’ interest in good quality and safe dog nutrition should also be a challenge for animal welfare societies to include information on nutrition in general dog ownership education.