Table 3.

Available information on impacts of surgical sterilization programs on dog population characteristics.

Location and assessment dates	Coverage achieved	Reported impacts	Reference
Not peer reviewed
Bali, Indonesia, 1998–2005	51%	None	(6)
Bangkok, Thailand, 2002–2005	Less than 30%	None	(99)
Sri Lanka, 2005	70–90%	None	(6)
Rosebud Reservation, USA, 2003–2010	Not measured	(Unmeasured) reduction in population size, 50% reduction in bite incidents, 75% reduction in complaints of cruelty to dogs, and increased demand for veterinary services	(51)
Kathmandu, Nepal, 2006–2012	47% of females	Overall population size reduction from 2006–2010 but no further impact to 2012, within zones mixed results found	(98)
Peer reviewed
Gelephu and Phuentsholing towns, South Bhutan, 2012	56–58%	Majority of free-roaming dogs had healthy body and skin conditions	(100)
Dhaka, Bangladesh, 2012–2013	19.2–79.3% across 29 of 92 city wards	Neutered dogs tended to be healthier than intact dogs	(36)
Bangalore, India, 2000–2001	10.4%	None	(94)
Colombo, Sri Lanka, 2007–2010	Not measured	% Lactating females reduced from 8 to 1.1%. Slight increase in population size (possibly a rebound effect from ceasing of culling). Dog bites dropped by 33%, public perceptions of free-roaming dogs improved	(35, 40)
Pink city area, Jaipur, India, 1994–2002	65% of females	28% reduction in population size	(33)
Pink city area, Jaipur, India, 2003–2011	70–80% of females	Around 50% reduction in dog bites, associated with reduction in breeding females	(101)
Jodhpur, India, 2005–2007	61.8–86.5% across 6 areas	Dog population declines of 51%*, 40%, 39%*, 28%*, 3% (*significant)	(34)
Jodhpur, India, 2006	Not measured	Sterilized dogs had higher body condition scores, but worse skin conditions	(65)