none

Over the past decades, stray dogs have become serious problems to the environment and society in Taiwan. Dogs wandering on the streets are potential threats to the safety of the public, and their droppings make the sanitation appalling. Stray dogs have strong reproductive capacity, and the population is still rising. However, shall we keep them in captivity and give them euthanasia ? And, are there other solutions ? Opinions differ on many issues. Based on what administrations had done with stray dogs in Taiwan and especially the case in Kaohsiung city , the thesis attempts to provide answers to disputed issues on stray dogs and some possible administrative measures.

O ProMAC surgiu dentro da USP como resposta à demanda da comunidade, de abordar alguns problemas ambientais, inclusive a presença de cães errantes no campus. O presente trabalho teve como objetivo atender este programa no tocante à avaliação da dinâmica e da saúde da população de cães mantidos soltos na CUASO e dos cães recolhidos ao ATA. Utilizando a técnica de captura e recaptura fotográfica, a população de cães foi estimada em nove oportunidades ao longo de dois anos. No segundo ano, os cães dóceis foram individualmente identificados e, em quatro oportunidades, tiveram amostras biológicas coletadas (sangue, fezes e ectoparasitos). Os cães alojados no ATA foram identificados e as amostras coletadas em um único esforço contínuo ao longo de três meses. A estimativa da população errante variou entre 14 e 55 cães, com tendencia de queda não significativa ao longo do tempo. A população foi, em sua maioria composta de indivíduos machos (58,4%), adultos (77,8%) e dóceis (55,7%). A população errante apresentou alterações nos parâmetros hematológicos ao longo do ano, compatíveis com infecção subclínica, possivelmente causada por Hepatozoon canis, que teve aumento significativo de sua prevalência. Todos os cães foram negativos para Leishmania sp., Ricketsia sp., Erlichia sp. Não houve diferença significativa tanto para a SAM (Leptospira sp.,entre 14 e 50% - CUASO e 52,4% - ATA) quanto para a eliminação de ovos de Ancylostoma sp. nas fezes (entre 21 e 55% - CUASO e 27% - ATA) entre os cães da CUASO e do ATA, sendo o risco de infecção na comunidade universitária considerado baixo. A análise ambiental permitiu estabelecer que a fonte principal de alimento dos cães é a mesma dos humanos, fornecida próximo aos pontos de venda de alimentos, o que se torna preocupante ao sabermos que mais da metade destes cães são positivos para Toxoplasma sp. (entre 54 e 60%), sendo indicadores do risco ao ser humano. Os cães da população aversiva apresentam sinais reprodutivos (8,7% das fêmeas ao ano), mas os filhotes não foram encontrados possivelmente devido à baixa sobrevivência. Os adultos, tanto da população dócil como da população aversiva possuiam boa condição corporal, baixa mortalidade, sendo que os dóceis deixaram o campus mais frequentemente devido à adoção. O conjunto dos dados indicaram que o status sanitário dos cães alojados no abrigo foi semelhante àquela dos cães soltos, sendo que o bem-estar destes últimos foi maior, devido à condição precária em que o ATA era mantido, com a capacidade de alojamento de cães acima do limite máximo do abrigo. Como os cães da CUASO se distribuiam modulados pelo fornecimento de alimento e abrigo pelos usuários do campus, o manejo adequado destes cães deveria incluir o envolvimento da comunidade, além de sua responsabilização. A reprodução dos cães aversivos precisa ser eliminada, buscando métodos alternativos, devido à dificuldade de captura destes cães. O uso da área de mata destinada a pesquisa por estes cães representa um risco sanitário à comunidade universitária. / The ProMAC emerged within the University of São Paulo in response to a community demand, to address environmental problems, including the presence of stray dogs in its campus. This study aimed to address this program regarding the dynamics and health of the population of stray dogs in the campus and the dogs kept in the campus shelter. Using the technique of photographic mark and recapture, the dog population was estimated in nine occasions in a two years period. In the second year the docile dogs were individually identified and, on four occasions, had biological samples collected (blood, feces and ectoparasites). Dogs housed in the shelter were identified and biological samples were collected in a single effort over three months. The population estimates varied between 14 and 55 dogs, with a non-significant decrease trend over time. The population was mostly composed of males (58.4%), adults (77.8%) and docile individuals (55.7%). The stray population showed changes in hematological parameters throughout the year, consistent with subclinical infection, possibly caused by Hepatozoon canis, which had a significant increase in its prevalence. All dogs were negative for Leishmania sp., Rickettsia sp., Ehrlichia sp. There was no significant difference between either the MAT (Leptospira sp, between 14 and 50% -. campus and 52.4% - shelter) or the elimination of Ancylostoma sp. eggs in feces (between 21 and 55% - campus and 27% - shelter), between dogs from campus and shelter, and the risk of infection in the university community was considered low. Environmental analysis established that the stray dogs main food source are the human food given to them close to food selling points, which is a concern given that more than half of these dogs are positive for Toxoplasma sp. (from 54 to 60%) and would be risk indicators to humans. The aversive stray dogspopulation showed reproductive signs (8.7% of females per year), but the puppies were not found possibly due to low survival rate. Adults, both from docile and the aversive population, had good body condition, low mortality and the docile dogs left the campus more often due to adoption. The data indicated that the health of dogs housed in the shelter were similar to the stray population, and the welfare of the latter is higher due to the precarious condition that the shelter was maintained and the number of dogs kept being over the maximum capacity. As stray dogs were distributed and maintained by the food and shelter supplied by the campus users, the proper management of these dogs would include community involvement and responsibility. The reproduction of aversive dogs must be eliminated, seeking alternative methods, because of the difficulty of catching these dogs. Use of research forest area by these dogs poses a risk to the university community.

O ProMAC surgiu dentro da USP como resposta à demanda da comunidade, de abordar alguns problemas ambientais, inclusive a presença de cães errantes no campus. O presente trabalho teve como objetivo atender este programa no tocante à avaliação da dinâmica e da saúde da população de cães mantidos soltos na CUASO e dos cães recolhidos ao ATA. Utilizando a técnica de captura e recaptura fotográfica, a população de cães foi estimada em nove oportunidades ao longo de dois anos. No segundo ano, os cães dóceis foram individualmente identificados e, em quatro oportunidades, tiveram amostras biológicas coletadas (sangue, fezes e ectoparasitos). Os cães alojados no ATA foram identificados e as amostras coletadas em um único esforço contínuo ao longo de três meses. A estimativa da população errante variou entre 14 e 55 cães, com tendencia de queda não significativa ao longo do tempo. A população foi, em sua maioria composta de indivíduos machos (58,4%), adultos (77,8%) e dóceis (55,7%). A população errante apresentou alterações nos parâmetros hematológicos ao longo do ano, compatíveis com infecção subclínica, possivelmente causada por Hepatozoon canis, que teve aumento significativo de sua prevalência. Todos os cães foram negativos para Leishmania sp., Ricketsia sp., Erlichia sp. Não houve diferença significativa tanto para a SAM (Leptospira sp.,entre 14 e 50% - CUASO e 52,4% - ATA) quanto para a eliminação de ovos de Ancylostoma sp. nas fezes (entre 21 e 55% - CUASO e 27% - ATA) entre os cães da CUASO e do ATA, sendo o risco de infecção na comunidade universitária considerado baixo. A análise ambiental permitiu estabelecer que a fonte principal de alimento dos cães é a mesma dos humanos, fornecida próximo aos pontos de venda de alimentos, o que se torna preocupante ao sabermos que mais da metade destes cães são positivos para Toxoplasma sp. (entre 54 e 60%), sendo indicadores do risco ao ser humano. Os cães da população aversiva apresentam sinais reprodutivos (8,7% das fêmeas ao ano), mas os filhotes não foram encontrados possivelmente devido à baixa sobrevivência. Os adultos, tanto da população dócil como da população aversiva possuiam boa condição corporal, baixa mortalidade, sendo que os dóceis deixaram o campus mais frequentemente devido à adoção. O conjunto dos dados indicaram que o status sanitário dos cães alojados no abrigo foi semelhante àquela dos cães soltos, sendo que o bem-estar destes últimos foi maior, devido à condição precária em que o ATA era mantido, com a capacidade de alojamento de cães acima do limite máximo do abrigo. Como os cães da CUASO se distribuiam modulados pelo fornecimento de alimento e abrigo pelos usuários do campus, o manejo adequado destes cães deveria incluir o envolvimento da comunidade, além de sua responsabilização. A reprodução dos cães aversivos precisa ser eliminada, buscando métodos alternativos, devido à dificuldade de captura destes cães. O uso da área de mata destinada a pesquisa por estes cães representa um risco sanitário à comunidade universitária. / The ProMAC emerged within the University of São Paulo in response to a community demand, to address environmental problems, including the presence of stray dogs in its campus. This study aimed to address this program regarding the dynamics and health of the population of stray dogs in the campus and the dogs kept in the campus shelter. Using the technique of photographic mark and recapture, the dog population was estimated in nine occasions in a two years period. In the second year the docile dogs were individually identified and, on four occasions, had biological samples collected (blood, feces and ectoparasites). Dogs housed in the shelter were identified and biological samples were collected in a single effort over three months. The population estimates varied between 14 and 55 dogs, with a non-significant decrease trend over time. The population was mostly composed of males (58.4%), adults (77.8%) and docile individuals (55.7%). The stray population showed changes in hematological parameters throughout the year, consistent with subclinical infection, possibly caused by Hepatozoon canis, which had a significant increase in its prevalence. All dogs were negative for Leishmania sp., Rickettsia sp., Ehrlichia sp. There was no significant difference between either the MAT (Leptospira sp, between 14 and 50% -. campus and 52.4% - shelter) or the elimination of Ancylostoma sp. eggs in feces (between 21 and 55% - campus and 27% - shelter), between dogs from campus and shelter, and the risk of infection in the university community was considered low. Environmental analysis established that the stray dogs main food source are the human food given to them close to food selling points, which is a concern given that more than half of these dogs are positive for Toxoplasma sp. (from 54 to 60%) and would be risk indicators to humans. The aversive stray dogspopulation showed reproductive signs (8.7% of females per year), but the puppies were not found possibly due to low survival rate. Adults, both from docile and the aversive population, had good body condition, low mortality and the docile dogs left the campus more often due to adoption. The data indicated that the health of dogs housed in the shelter were similar to the stray population, and the welfare of the latter is higher due to the precarious condition that the shelter was maintained and the number of dogs kept being over the maximum capacity. As stray dogs were distributed and maintained by the food and shelter supplied by the campus users, the proper management of these dogs would include community involvement and responsibility. The reproduction of aversive dogs must be eliminated, seeking alternative methods, because of the difficulty of catching these dogs. Use of research forest area by these dogs poses a risk to the university community.

Dogs are one of the most widespread carnivore and the third most invasive mammal, after cats and rodents. Stray dogs affect wildlife negatively by predation, disturbance, disease spreading, competition and hybridization with other wild canids. Even in urban environments stray dogs cause problems such as disturbance, pollution, traffic accidents, bites and risk of disease spreading. Serbia is one of many countries in the Balkan region that has a problem with overpopulation of stray dogs. The aim of this study is to investigate the population dynamics of stray dogs in Bor, Serbia and discuss different dog population management strategies. A total of 361 stray dogs were registered, 111 male dogs, 85 female dogs and 165 dogs with undetermined sex. 55 dogs (15.23%) were estimated to be older than 7 years old, 262 dogs (72.57%) were estimated to be between 3-7 years old, 30 dogs (8.31%) were estimated to be between 6-24 months old and 14 dogs (3.87) were estimated to be between 0-6 months old. No dogs showed any signs of rabies or CDV (canine distemper virus) and 241 stray dogs (66.75%) seemed healthy. 120 stray dogs (33.25%) did however have some kind of impaired health. To achieve a stop in the population increase,70% sterilisation rate is required and to teach responsible dog ownership. The stray dogs showed different reactions towards people, 164 dogs (45.42%) were neutral and 100 dogs (27.70%) showed no fear or aggression towards humans and gladly interacted. Since the dogs are highly accessible, they would be acceptable for a TNR (trap-neuter-release) program and male dogs need to be prioritised considering their dispersal patterns. / Hundar är en av de mest spridda karnivorerna och det tredje mest invasiva däggdjuret, efter katter och gnagare. Gatuhundar påverkar vilda djur negativt genom predation, störning, spridning av sjukdomar, konkurrens och hybridisering med andra vilda hunddjur. Även i urbana miljöer har gatuhundar en negativ påverkan, genom störning, förorening, trafikolyckor, bett och sjukdomsrisk. Serbien är ett av många länder i Balkanregionen som har för stora populationer av gatuhundar. I detta arbete undersöks populationsdynamiken hos gatuhundar i Bor, Serbien och diskuterar olika metoder för att hantera gatuhundpopulationen. Totalt inventerades 361 gatuhundar, 111 hanar, 85 honor och 165 med obestämt kön. 55 hundar (15.23%) uppskattades vara äldre än 7 år, 262 hundar (72.57%) uppskattades vara mellan 3-7 år, 30 hundar (8.31%) uppskattades vara mellan 6-24 månader gamla och 14 hundar (3.87) uppskattades vara mellan 0-6 månader gamla. Inga hundar visade tecken på rabies eller CDV (canine distemper virus) och 241 gatuhundar (66.75%) föreföll friska. Däremot visade 120 hundar (33.25%) någon typ av nedsatt hälsa. För att uppnå ett stopp i populationsökningen krävs minst 70% steriliseringstakt samt att man lär ut ansvarsfullt hundägande. Gatuhundarna visade olika reaktioner mot människor, 164 hundar (45.42%) var neutrala och 100 hundar (27.70%) visade ingen rädsla eller aggression för människor och interagerade gärna. Eftersom gatuhundarna är lättillgängliga, skulle de kunna ingå i populationshanteringar som TNR (trap-neuter-release) och hanhundar bör prioriteras med tanke på deras spridningsmönster.

Unsocialized stray dogs live unrestrained in urban areas, having limited to no direct contact with humans. Aggressive behaviour towards humans leads to their apprehension to shelters, where they tend to stay permanently. This study aimed to determine if unsocialized stray dogs could be rehabilitated and develop the social skills needed for adoption. Six unsocialized stray dogs (Group Stray) and 12 socialized dogs (C1: Control Group 1, n=6; C2: Control Group 2, n=6) housed in a shelter were selected. Stray and C2 dogs went through two training phases: social rehabilitation towards humans and leash training. Sociability towards humans and behaviour on a leash were tested in all groups following Valsecchi et al. (2011). Sociability Tests (ST) and Leash Tests (LT) were conducted before any intervention (ST1), after sociability training (ST2, LT1) and after leash training (ST3, LT2). Training sessions and tests were video recorded and posteriorly analysed by four observers. Results showed that for Stray, but not for C1 and C2, there was a significant increase in sociability from ST1 to ST3. Moreover, for Stray Group there was a significant decrease in the frequency of fear-related behaviours between ST1 and ST3. For leash behaviour, no significant changes were found from LT1 to LT2 for neither group. However, there was considerable individual variation, as not all strays overcame their extreme fear towards humans. These findings suggest that dog­–human interactions can be improved through training for dogs who do not show extreme fear and/or aggression towards humans.

A população de cães errantes tem sido um problema na sociedade moderna e levanta discussão sobre o bem estar dos animais, a responsabilidade ambiental e assuntos relacionados saúde pública, como agressão, zoonoses e acidentes de trânsito. São Paulo é uma cidade com mais de dez milhões de habitantes e uma população de cães domiciliados em torno de 2,5 milhões de animais. Não há pesquisas a respeito da distribuição da população de cães errantes e isso dificulta o planejamento de ações de intervenção neste campo. O problema foi abordado do ponto de vista da probabilidade de abandono e capacidade de suporte ambiental. Foi criado um escore composto por treze variáveis de risco de abandono. Os dados foram agrupados por distrito administrativo e estes classificados em três categorias (tercis). Foi definida uma amostra de conveniência de seis áreas a serem visitadas, duas em cada categoria, que fossem pequenas e isoladas, passiveis de percorrer a pé. O número de animais foi estimado pelo método de pseudo-captura, utilizando fotos e anotações para identificar os animais. Simultaneamente, foi aplicado um questionário em uma amostra aleatória sistemática dos domicílios de cada área. Das seis áreas visitadas, em duas foi observada presença de cães errantes e em apenas uma delas, uma população fixa. Dos fatores associados a presença de cães errantes, destacam-se os relacionados a proximidade homem-cão e ao ambiente. Intervenções nestes fatores e incentivo à guarda responsável podem ser soluções desejáveis para redução gradativa da população de cães errantes / The stray dog\'s population of has been a problem in modern society and raises discussion on different issues like animal welfare, environmental responsibility and public health matters such as dogs bites, zoonosis and traffic accidents. Sao Paulo is a city with over ten million inhabitants and a population of owned dogs around 2.5 million animals. There are no surveys on the distribution of the population of stray dogs and this hampers any plan of intervention. The problem was accessed from the standpoint of relinquishment probability and environmental carrying capacity. A score was created with thirteen variables, of known risk factors of relinquishment. The data was grouped by district and classified in to three categories (terciles). a convenience sample of six areas was defined, two in each category, which were small and isolated, liable to go through on foot. The number of animals was estimated by the pseudo capture method, using photos and notes to identify the animals. Simultaneously, a questionnaire was administered in a systematic random sample of households in each area. Of the six areas visited, in only two it the presence of stray dogs was observed and only one showing a fixed stray population. Of the factors associated to the presence of stray dogs, one can distinguish: degree of human-dog proximity and those related to environment. Intervention on these factors and encouraging responsible ownership could be a solution to gradually reduce the population of stray dogs.

A população de cães errantes tem sido um problema na sociedade moderna e levanta discussão sobre o bem estar dos animais, a responsabilidade ambiental e assuntos relacionados saúde pública, como agressão, zoonoses e acidentes de trânsito. São Paulo é uma cidade com mais de dez milhões de habitantes e uma população de cães domiciliados em torno de 2,5 milhões de animais. Não há pesquisas a respeito da distribuição da população de cães errantes e isso dificulta o planejamento de ações de intervenção neste campo. O problema foi abordado do ponto de vista da probabilidade de abandono e capacidade de suporte ambiental. Foi criado um escore composto por treze variáveis de risco de abandono. Os dados foram agrupados por distrito administrativo e estes classificados em três categorias (tercis). Foi definida uma amostra de conveniência de seis áreas a serem visitadas, duas em cada categoria, que fossem pequenas e isoladas, passiveis de percorrer a pé. O número de animais foi estimado pelo método de pseudo-captura, utilizando fotos e anotações para identificar os animais. Simultaneamente, foi aplicado um questionário em uma amostra aleatória sistemática dos domicílios de cada área. Das seis áreas visitadas, em duas foi observada presença de cães errantes e em apenas uma delas, uma população fixa. Dos fatores associados a presença de cães errantes, destacam-se os relacionados a proximidade homem-cão e ao ambiente. Intervenções nestes fatores e incentivo à guarda responsável podem ser soluções desejáveis para redução gradativa da população de cães errantes / The stray dog\'s population of has been a problem in modern society and raises discussion on different issues like animal welfare, environmental responsibility and public health matters such as dogs bites, zoonosis and traffic accidents. Sao Paulo is a city with over ten million inhabitants and a population of owned dogs around 2.5 million animals. There are no surveys on the distribution of the population of stray dogs and this hampers any plan of intervention. The problem was accessed from the standpoint of relinquishment probability and environmental carrying capacity. A score was created with thirteen variables, of known risk factors of relinquishment. The data was grouped by district and classified in to three categories (terciles). a convenience sample of six areas was defined, two in each category, which were small and isolated, liable to go through on foot. The number of animals was estimated by the pseudo capture method, using photos and notes to identify the animals. Simultaneously, a questionnaire was administered in a systematic random sample of households in each area. Of the six areas visited, in only two it the presence of stray dogs was observed and only one showing a fixed stray population. Of the factors associated to the presence of stray dogs, one can distinguish: degree of human-dog proximity and those related to environment. Intervention on these factors and encouraging responsible ownership could be a solution to gradually reduce the population of stray dogs.

The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals of Texas in Dallas, Texas offers an array of services and programs to residents in southern Dallas and other areas. However, interest in the state of access to veterinary care has been questioned for southern Dallas residents. In an area that faces certain compounding stressors, such as food deserts and transportation difficulties, a lack of access to veterinary care for pet owners is considered an additional possible stressor. Pet owners in southern Dallas, along with the SPCA of Texas, contemplate how to best provide medical care for local pets. In this body of work, I describe community access to veterinary services in southern Dallas. I provide a resident-centered explanation based on in-depth interviews with locals that discuss the current state of access to veterinary services while simultaneously analyzing the links between access to veterinary care, the area of southern Dallas itself, and ongoing issues with roaming and stray dogs.

2017年，零撲殺政策在未考量國內現況下貿然實施，造成收容所過度擁擠、收容品質驟降。為舒緩收容壓力及兼顧動物權益，中央政府積極提倡多元認養政策作為地方施政重點。然而認養行為涉及民眾觀念、意願及資源，難以在短期內提升成效，加上家戶飼養能量似瀕臨飽和，未來發展成疑。 A市以「工作犬計畫」為推動流浪犬認養之策略，且短期內認養率升幅最高，率先達成零撲殺目標，故本文以此為個案，藉「由下而上」政策執行分析途徑，透過文獻分析、深度訪談、參與觀察、問卷調查及焦點團體訪談等研究方法，了解工作犬計畫之內容及執行過程、工作犬佔個人認養率之比例與後續飼養品質等情形，並剖析影響前述成效之關鍵，以供其他縣市參考。最後總結上述發現，對相關政策行動者提出建議，並就整體流浪犬政策議題提出未來研究思考方向。 / 英文文獻 Ajzen, I. (1985). From Intention to Action: The Theory of Planned Behavior. In J. Kuhl, & J. Beckmann (Ed.), Action Control From Cognition to Behavior (pp. 11-39), New York: Springer Verlag. Barrett, S., & C. Fudge (1981). Examining the Policy-Action Relationship. Fudge & Barrett, Policy and Action: Essays on the Implementatino of Public Policy (pp.3-32). London: Methuen. DeLeon, P. (1999). The Missing Link Revisited: Contemporary Implementation Research. Policy Studies Review, Vol.16, 311-338. Downey, H. & S. Ellis (2008). Tails of animal attraction: incorporating the feline into the family. J. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 61, 434–441. Friedmann, E., S.A. Thomas, P.K. Stein, & R.E. Kleiger (2003). Relation between pet ownership and heart rate variability in patients with healed myocardial infarcts. American Journal of Cardiology. Vol. 91,718 –721. Gerston, L. (2010) . Public Policy Making: Process and Principles (3rd Ed).M.E.:Sharpe. Guba, E. G. & Lincoln Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Hirschman, E. C. (1994). Consumers and their animal companions. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20, 616–632. Parslow R.A., A.F Jorm. H. Christensen, & B. Rodgers (2003). Pet Ownership and Health in Older Adults: Findings from a Survey of 2,551 Community-Based Australians Aged 60–64. The Gerontology : Oxford Jornals. Vol. 51,40–47. Hupe, P., (2014). What Happens on the Ground: Persistent Issues in Implementation Research. Public Policy and Administration, Vol. 29(2), 164-182. Majone, G., & A. Wildavsky (1984). Implementation as evaluation in Jeffrey L.Pressman and Aaron Wildavsky. Implementation. (3rd ed.) Berkeley: University of California Press. Marston, L. C., P. C. Bennett, & G. J. Coleman (2005). Adopting shelter dogs: Owner experiences of the first month post-adoption. Anthrozoos, 18, 358-378. Mazmanian, D., & P. Sabatier. (1983). Implementation and Public Policy. Glendale, IL: Scott, Foresman. McLaughlin, M. W., (1976). Implementation as Matual Adaptation: Change in Classroom Organization. Teacher College Record,Vol. 77(3) : 339-351. Mjern, B., & C. Hull. (1982). Implementation Research as Empirical Constitutionalism. European Journal of Political Research, Vol. 10(2), 105-115. Raupp, C. (1999). Treasuring, trashing, or terrorizing: Adult outcomes of childhood socialization about companion animals. Society & Animals, Vol. 7(2), 141–149. Smith, T.B., (1973). The Policy Implementation Process. Policy Sciences, Vol. 4(2), 203. Soto, F. R., F. Ferreira, S. R. Pinheiro, F. Nogari, M. R. Risseto, O. de Souza, & Amaku M. (2005). Adoption of shelter dogs in a Brazilian community: assessing the caretaker profile. The Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, Vol. 8(2), 105-116. Van Meter, D. S., & C. E. Van Horn (1975). The policy implementation process: A conceptual framework. Administration and Society, Vol. 6(5), 445-488. Virués-Ortega, J., & G. Buela-Casal(2006). Psychophysiological Effects of HumanAnimal Interaction: Theoretical issues and long-term interaction effects. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. Vol. 194(1), 52–57. Weng, H.Y., P.H. Kass, L.A. Hart, & B.B. Chomel (2006). Animal protection measures in Taiwan: Taiwanese attitudes toward the animal protection law and animal shelters. The Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, Vol. 9(4), 315-326. Zasloff, R.L., & A.H. Kidd (1994). Loneliness and pet ownership among single women. Psychological Reports, Vol. 75, 747-752. 中文文獻 王順美、任孟淵、趙雅慧（2017）。動物保護教育架構之內涵。臺灣動物之聲，64。臺北：關懷生命協會（官方網站電子期刊）。 王佩雯（2010）。臺北市民眾飼養與棄養寵物行為之探討。國立臺北大學自然資源與環境管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 王華懋（譯）（2013）。我要牠們活下去─日本熊本市動物愛護中心零撲殺10年奮鬥紀實（初版）（片野ゆか原著）。臺北：本事文化股份有限公司。 王鎮宏（2007）。寵物犬在休閒生活之角色－探討飼主飼養之動機、行為與阻礙，亞洲大學休閒與遊憩管理學系碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。 甘雅嵐（2005）。花蓮地區大學生對同伴動物認知與態度之研究。國立花蓮師範學院生態與環境教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，花蓮縣。 丘昌泰、李允傑（2007）。政策執行與評估（第二版）。臺北：空中大學出版社。 朱家德、黃英蘭（2006）。出國考察報告：英國動物收容所管理運作及動物保護措施及作法，臺北：行政院研究發展考核委員會。 余瑋翎（2016）。收容所進狗數與認養率之相關性研究。國立臺灣大學獸醫學研究所碩士論文，已出版，臺北市。 李奧森（譯）（2016）。為什麼狗是寵物？豬是食物？（二版）（Hal Herzog原著）。新北：遠足文化事業股份有限公司。 李盈瑩（2010）。寵物飼養意願研究─消費者社會化、消費者資源與動機之應用。中興大學行銷學研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。 李鴻昌（2007）。“寵物≠寵物”:家庭休閒與寵物的新共生關係。國立臺灣體育學院休閒運動管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。 邱思云（2011）。兒童與同度動物的連結關係。國立臺北教育大學幼兒與家庭教育學系碩士班，未出版，臺北市。 余惠文（2010）。我國動物保護之研究─以流浪動物領養問題為例。銘傳大學公共事務研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 林水波、李長晏（2005）。跨域治理。臺北：五南圖書。 林怡君（2015）。動物莊園─英國動物福利市場。窩抱報，2，20-22。 林慧敏（2010）。處理流浪犬政策之研究─以桃園縣公私協力的觀點。開南大學公共事務管理學系碩士論文，未出版，桃園市。 周怡伶（譯）（2016）。貓狗的逆襲─荊棘滿途的公民之路（初版）（Davic Grimm原著）。新北市：新樂園出版。 周海濤、李永賢、張蘅（譯）（2009）。個案研究─設計與方法（初版）（Robert K.Yin原著）。臺北：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。 吳宗憲（2010）。臺南市動物保護政策態度調查研究。臺南市政府委託專案研究，未出版。 吳宗憲、黃建皓（2011）。論道德政策所引起的民主治理危機─以臺南市民流浪動物政策態度為例。建國百年的公共管理思潮：趨勢與挑戰，臺南。 吳宗憲（2012）。道德政策理論之應用：臺灣寵物業管理政策之個案研究。行政暨政策學報，54，121-164。 吳定（2002）。公共政策。臺北市：華視文化事業。 吳英明（1996）。公私協力關係之研究：兼論公私部門聯合開發與都市發展。高雄：復文書局出版社。 林水波、張世賢（2006）。公共政策：理論、方法與臺灣經驗。臺北市：五南圖書出版公司。 林新沛、吳明峰（2010）。寵物認養網站會員認養寵物意向之研究。戶外遊憩研究，23(3)，39-60。 高美芝（2007）。從休閒效益角度看伴侶動物對銀髮族的影響，世新大學觀光學研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 許丹薰（2004）。流浪犬領養者行為意向研究。國立中山大學公共事務管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。 許志明（2007）。國內外動物收容所組織管理及教育現況與國內收容所改善策略。臺北市立教育大學環境教育與資源研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 許桂森（2004）。荷蘭動物保護現況簡介。農政與農情，141，96-71。 黃宗潔（2017）。牠鄉何處？城市‧動物與文學。臺北市：新學林。 張清良（2004）。地方政府執行九年一貫課程政策之研究。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文，未出版，臺北市。 張穎綺（譯）（2014）。狗：狗與人之間的社會學（初版）（John Homans原著）。新北：立緒文化事業有限公司。 游威倫（2008）。臺北市流浪犬管理政策分析─公私協力互動模式觀點。中華行政學報，5，245-262。 詹勝利（1996）。臺灣地區家戶寵物飼養之初步調查。國立臺灣大學公共衛生研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 費昌勇（2002）。動物倫理與公共政策。臺北：臺灣商務出版社。 費昌勇（2003）。92年度公立動物收容所評鑑計畫結案報告。臺北：行政院農業委員會動植物防疫局。 費昌勇、楊書瑋（2011）。動物權與動物對待。應用倫理評論，51，75-103。 林明德（2012）。臺南市流浪犬政策之回應性評估。國立中正大學政治學系暨研究所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義縣。 蔡岳庭（2009）。臺灣民眾寵物飼養行為之研究：計畫行為理論之應用。世新大學社會心理學研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 鄭華娟（2011）。氣質卡小狗學堂。臺北：圓神出版社。 陳光陽（1998）。畜主選擇寵物犬條件對往後主從關係之影響研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告（編號NSC 88-2412-H-002-008），未出版。 陳美如（2011）。非營利組織與地方政府合作關係之研究─以臺北市街貓絕育回置方案為例。國立臺北大學公共行政暨政策學系碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 陳皓雯、張國慶（1999）。大臺中地區民眾的寵物飼養習慣。寶貝寵物雜誌，2，128-132。 陳穎芃（2010）。影響民眾到公立動物收容所認養犬隻之因素探討。國立中山大學公共事務管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。 鍾芳樺（2005）。德國動物收容所現狀及相關法律問題。載於葛克昌、王曉彤（編），公立動物收容所委託民間經營管理之可行性評估與先期規劃作業。臺北：行政院農業委員會動植物防疫檢疫局。 藍當傑（2010）。臺灣公立收容所動物福利概況（2008-2009）。國立臺灣大學獸醫學系，未出版碩士論文，臺北市。 鄭和萍（1999）。健康狀態之生活品質相關與養有寵物間的關聯性。國立臺灣大學流行病學研究所，未出版碩士論文，臺北市。 劉清華（2000）。社區老人擁有寵物對其健康狀況及生活品質影響之相關性探討。國立臺北護理學院護理研究所，未出版碩士論文，臺北市。 劉威良（2014）。借鏡德國：一個臺灣人的日耳曼觀察筆記。臺北：貓頭鷹出版社。 劉珈延（2004）。動物保護法立法前後公私協力關係之研究─以棄犬問題處理為個案分析。國立東華大學公共行政研究所碩士論文，未出版，花蓮縣。 簡妤儒（2002）。寵物商品化與價值變遷：分析1950年代後犬市場的形成與變遷。國立臺灣大學社會學研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 戴至欣（2007）。臺北市流浪犬處理政策之研究─政策工具的分析。銘傳大學公共事務學系碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。 網路資料 大學報（2015）。【社論】杜絕流浪狗　政府應禁止寵物買賣，2016年8月12日，取自：大學報http://www.unews.nccu.edu.tw/unews/%E3%80%90%E7%A4%BE%E8%AB%96%E3%80%91%E6%9D%9C%E7%B5%95%E6%B5%81%E6%B5%AA%E7%8B%97%E3%80%80%E6%94%BF%E5%BA%9C%E6%87%89%E7%A6%81%E6%AD%A2%E5%AF%B5%E7%89%A9%E8%B2%B7%E8%B3%A3/。 臺灣動物社會研究會（2009）。臺灣「奇蹟」─悲傷326！公布全臺326縣市鄉鎮流浪犬貓捕捉、收容現況調查控訴政府集體、大規模虐待流浪犬貓，2016年8月14日，取自：臺灣動物社會研究會官方網站http://www.east.org.tw/that_content.php?id=285。 臺灣防止動物虐待協會（2016）。零撲殺倒數3個月　全台公立收容所大調查，2016年12月2日，取自：官方網站http://www.spca.org.tw/press-releasel653063864625778275782049825976199772049126376-20840214882084431435259102348125152228233551926597.html。 行政院農業委員會（2016）。105年度施政計畫，2016年6月5日，取自：行政院農業委員會全球資訊網http://www.coa.gov.tw/view.php?catid=2504460。 李依融（2015）。德國沒浪浪、毛孩搭巴士！飼主帶愛犬上課　棄養罰90萬，2016年8月12日，取自：東森新聞雲http://www.ettoday.net/news/20151027/586536.htm。 李娉婷（2014）。千萬元絕育補助　擲對地方了嗎？，2016年7月17日，取自：臺灣動物新聞網http://www.tanews.org.tw/info/5946#sthash.Ff831fTV.dpuf。 李娉婷（2015）。北市籌設動物養老院　遇到難題，2016年9月4日，取自：臺灣動物新聞網http://www.tanews.org.tw/info/7828。 李娉婷（2016a）。流浪狗分三種？政策需”因狗制宜”，2016年7月17日，取自：臺灣動物新聞網http://www.tanews.org.tw/info/10070。 李娉婷（2016b）。零撲殺配套 TNVR確實可行嗎？，2016年7月17日，取自：臺灣動物新聞網http://www.tanews.org.tw/info/10406。 李娉婷（2016c）。動保政策矯枉過正　害死獸醫師？，2016年7月24日，取自：臺灣動物新聞網http://www.tanews.org.tw/info/10471。 李娉婷（2016d）。收容所大調查　澎湖、屏東糟透了！，2016年12月2日，取自：臺灣動物新聞網http://www.tanews.org.tw/info/11663。 何宜（2014a）。動保法修法有疑慮？農委會怎麼說？，2016年6月12日，取自：臺灣動物新聞網http://www.tanews.org.tw/info/4746。 何宜（2014b）。借鏡德國　動物保護入憲法，2016年8月11日，取自：臺灣動物新聞網http://www.tanews.org.tw/info/5575。 林佩怡（2014）。獸醫從缺　收容所成動物墳場，2016年10月20日，取自：中時電子報，http://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/20141020000379-260102。 吳宗憲（2016）。【動物當代思潮】吳宗憲：殞落了一位年輕獸醫師之後，2016年7月24日，取自：天下雜誌獨立評論http://opinion.cw.com.tw/blog/profile/383/article/4306。 社團法人臺灣之心愛護動物協會（2016）。流浪犬問題之分析及對策，2016年7月17日，取自：社團法人臺灣之心愛護動物協會網站http://www.hotac.org.tw/board_read.asp?board_id=395&action=page。 社團法人臺灣動物社會研究會（2011）。改善動物福利及增進流浪犬社會功能系列計畫二-2「收容所動物福利與實務」系列工作坊（二）：「動物收容所設計與管理」，2016年7月29日，取自社團法人臺灣動物社會研究會http://www.east.org.tw/that_content.php?id=369。 社團法人臺灣動物社會研究會（2011）。改善動物福利及增進流浪犬社會功能系列計畫二-3「收容所動物福利與實務」系列工作坊（三）：「專業動物收容所設計與建築」，2016年7月29日，取自社團法人臺灣動物社會研究會http://www.east.org.tw/that_content.php?id=383。 高雄市關懷流浪動物協會（2016）。賣相不好．打入冷宮．高雄市收容所毫無制度一團亂，2016年8月6日，取自：高雄市關懷流浪動物協會官方網站http://www.kcsaa.org.tw/Joomla_159/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7704:20160802&catid=603:20168&Itemid=1129。 徐珍翔（2016）。戶口名簿紀載貓狗數量？曹啟鴻：可一起普查，2016年12月3日，取自：ETtoday東森新聞雲http://www.ettoday.net/news/20160616/717644.htm?feature=profile_007&tab_id=322。 黃天如（2016）。流浪動物零撲殺》「臺灣人領養挑三揀四」怎麼為毛小孩找到新家？，2016年12月2日，取自：風傳媒http://www.storm.mg/article/169853。 黃文博（2009）。流浪狗結紮放養　兩派吵翻天，2016年6月9日，取自：動物新聞資料庫http://www.meetpets.org.tw/book/export/html/111。 黃意淨（2016）。死了47隻狗之後─談民雄收容所事件，2016年7月26日，取自：臺灣動物新聞網http://www.tanews.org.tw/info/10339。 郭璇（2015）。動保觀念，討論流浪動物問題之前的第一道學問：流浪狗有三種，2016年7月17日，取自：流浪者的流浪狗之歌網站https://TN(V)Rvolunteerbeyondborder.wordpress.com/2015/06/07/%E3%80%90%E5%8B%95%E4%BF%9D%E8%A7%80%E5%BF%B5%E3%80%82%E8%A8%8E%E8%AB%96%E6%B5%81%E6%B5%AA%E5%8B%95%E7%89%A9%E5%95%8F%E9%A1%8C%E4%B9%8B%E5%89%8D%E7%9A%84%E7%AC%AC%E4%B8%80%E9%81%93%E5%AD%B8%E5%95%8F/#more-169。 葉力森（2000）。良好的公立動物收容所，取自：臺灣動物社會研究會http://www.east.org.tw/that_content.php?id=147。 報導者（2016a）。零撲殺政策，流浪動物的新天堂樂園？，2016年12月1日，取自：報導者https://www.twreporter.org/a/animal-protection/。 報導者（2016b）。不願面對的真相──公立收容所獸醫師的困境，2016年12月3日，取自：報導者：https://www.twreporter.org/a/protect-animal-veterinarian。 報導者（2016c）。零撲殺政策——流浪動物的新天堂樂園？（上），2016年12月3日，取自：https://www.twreporter.org/a/protect-animal-no-killing-ch1。 報導者（2016d）。零撲殺政策——流浪動物的新天堂樂園？（下），2016年12月3日，取自：https://www.twreporter.org/a/protect-animal-no-killing-ch2。 蔡丹喬（2012）。德國的動物領養制度，2016年8月11日，取自：旅居德國個人部落格http://blog.xuite.net/uliou/twblog/130588534-%E5%BE%B7%E5%9C%8B%E7%9A%84%E5%8B%95%E7%89%A9%E9%A0%98%E9%A4%8A%E5%88%B6%E5%BA%A6。 蔡丹喬（2005）。為什麼德國沒有流浪狗（德國動保聯盟會），2016年8月11日，取自：http://cn.hkfreezone.com/thread-349906-1-1.html。 窩團隊（2015）。窩專題：我就不愛牠們不行嗎？。窩抱報，2，30-59。 德國之聲（2016）。德國街頭為什麼很少看到流浪狗？，2016年8月11日，取自：天下雜誌file:///C:/Users/Shalian/Desktop/%E5%BE%B7%E5%9C%8B%E8%A1%97%E9%A0%AD%E7%82%BA%E4%BB%80%E9%BA%BC%E5%BE%88%E5%B0%91%E7%9C%8B%E5%88%B0%E6%B5%81%E6%B5%AA%E7%8B%97%EF%BC%9F%EF%BD%9C%E5%9C%8B%E9%9A%9B%EF%BD%9C2016-06-01%EF%BD%9C%E5%BE%B7%E5%9C%8B%E4%B9%8B%E8%81%B2%EF%BD%9C%E5%A4%A9%E4%B8%8B%E9%9B%9C%E8%AA%8C.html。 劉盈如（2016）。幾個數字告訴你寵物登記的真相：總量管制、犬貓入籍已勢在必行，2016年7月25日，取自關鍵評論網http://www.thenewslens.com/article/42490。 賴亦德（2014）。當TNR和捕捉移除的效果遇上棄養。2018年1月21日，取自：http://pansci.asia/archives/60533。 賴亦德（2017a）。談2017年TNVR入法（1）：說明前七點怎麼就有這麼多的疏漏害我囉唆這麼久。2018年1月21日，取自：http://yitelai.blogspot.tw/2017/09/2017tnvr1.html。 賴亦德（2017b）。談2017年TNVR入法（2）：談2017年TNVR入法（2）：要學保加利亞動保法就學徹底一點可以嘛？。2018年1月21日，取自：http://yitelai.blogspot.tw/2017/09/2017tnvr2.html。 賴亦德（2017c）。談2017年TNVR入法（3）：最後三點終於出現比較合理的修法建議了。2018年1月21日，取自：http://yitelai.blogspot.tw/2017/09/2017tnvr3.html。 賴亦德（2017d）。談2017年TNVR入法（4）：法條新瓶裝舊酒，三年前的問題現在也還在。2018年1月21日，取自：http://yitelai.blogspot.tw/2017/09/2017tnvr.html。 賴亦德（2017e）。談2017年TNVR入法（5）：我不反TNVR但反對這樣的入法，更討厭不誠實的倡議。2018年1月21日，取自：http://yitelai.blogspot.tw/2017/09/2017tnvrtnvr.html。 鄧仲華（2003a）。流浪動物收容及政策檢討─認領養問題。2016年7月29日，取自關懷生命協會官方網站http://www.lca.org.tw/book/670。 鄧仲華（2003b）。流浪動物收容及政策檢討─收容所管理問題，2016年7月29日，取自關懷生命協會官方網站http://www.lca.org.tw/book/672。 關懷生命協會（1997）。犬殤專題之一：步履「犬殤」。2016年8月6日，取自關懷生命協會官方網站http://www.lca.org.tw/column/node/934。 關懷生命協會（2000）。步履犬殤─八十七年臺灣公立收所現況調查報告及具體改善建議。2016年8月6日，取自關懷生命協會官方網站http://www.lca.org.tw/column/node/937。 關懷生命協會（2001）。公立流浪犬收容所體檢報告。2016年8月6日，取自關懷生命協會官方網站http://www.lca.org.tw/column/node/942。 關懷生命協會（2015）。動保網站評比：《為牠找個家─臺灣各縣市動物收容業務網站分析報告》，2016年8月5日，取自關懷生命協會官方網站http://www.lca.org.tw/news/node/5781。 關懷生命協會（2016）。公民觀察收容所　開拓動保心思路。2016年8月6日，取自關懷生命協會官方網站http://www.lca.org.tw/avot/6000。 盧思岑（2016）。誰會是下一位自殺的前線獸醫師？，2016年7月25日，取自：https://www.twreporter.org/a/opinion-veterinarian-suicide。 陳佳利、紀岳君（2012）。【我們的島】街頭的救贖，2016年6月5日，取自：公視新聞議題中心http://pnn.pts.org.tw/main/2012/01/16/%E3%80%90%E6%88%91%E5%80%91%E7%9A%84%E5%B3%B6%E3%80%91%E8%A1%97%E9%A0%AD%E7%9A%84%E6%95%91%E8%B4%96/。 國際伴侶動物管理聯盟（2007）。人道犬隻族群管理指南，2016年7月17日，取自：http://www.icam-coalition.org/downloads/ICAM_Co_Humane_Dog_Population_Management_Guidance_Chinese.pdf。 蕭士塔（2015）。TN(V)R促成零撲殺？動保處不認可，2016年6月2日，取自：臺灣動物新聞網http://www.tanews.org.tw/info/9152。 A市政府動物防疫保護處：http://www.tainan.gov.tw/ahipo/default.asp。 政府資料 監察院（2011）。流浪狗調查報告。100年2月17日院台財字第10022300770號調查報告，未出版。 農委會（2014）。104至107年度加強動物保護行政效能計畫。未出版。 期刊雜誌 林洧楨（2016）。模範城市─動保最成功在臺南，連童子賢都按讚《賴清德數字管理學　流浪犬三年少一半》。商業周刊，1496，50-52。