The aim of this study was to develop a welfare assessment tool based on objective, reliable and relevant measures to be applied to individual dogs as they underwent a Catch-Neuter-Return (CNR) programme. A modified Delphi method and Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) approach was used to develop the composite canine welfare assessment protocol, comprising both animal-based and resource-based measures. This draft welfare assessment protocol was then trialed and refined in existing CNR programmes to identify key control points where individual dog welfare may be moderately or significantly compromised in the CNR process. The results show that animal-based welfare indicators, e.g., pain behaviours, which provide a more direct indication of an animal’s welfare state, require training and skill to recognise, whilst resource-based indicators are simple to measure but act only as indirect measures of welfare. We concluded that whilst CNR projects can potentially improve the health and welfare of free-roaming dogs in the long-term, the risk of short-term welfare harms during the CNR process is high. Thus, it is essential for staff involved in dog population management programmes to assess the welfare state of dogs in CNR and take remedial action to safeguard individual dog welfare.

Free-roaming dogs (Canis familiaris) may be viewed positively or negatively within their communities. Negative aspects of the presence of free-roaming dogs include noise, fouling, disease transmission, dog-bite injuries, road traffic accidents and potential hybridisation with endangered wildlife species. Due to these concerns, control of free-roaming dog populations may be required. Surgical sterilisation of free-roaming dogs through the implementation of ‘trap-neuter-return’ (TNR), initiatives is often recommended as a welfare-friendly method of dog population control. Welfare assessments in TNR are often absent. Where they do exist they may rely upon proxy assessment, or be limited to relatively few measures of health status. As a result, there is a paucity of literature regarding the welfare impacts of surgical control of canine populations despite this practice often being promoted for animal welfare reasons. We outline the primary welfare issues associated with surgical population control of free-roaming dogs, suggest steps that may be taken to mitigate these problems and discuss barriers to improving dog welfare in TNR. Many opportunities for welfare problems exist within the spectrum of surgical TNR initiatives. We recommend that further research is needed to set appropriate standards for surgical approaches to free-roaming dog population management.

The assessment of animal welfare is reliant upon the application of animal- and resource-based indicators. Animal-based indicators (physical, physiological and behavioural) are considered to be more representative of an animal's welfare state but are more difficult for an assessor to interpret. In order to build a robust composite framework for the assessment of welfare of dogs (Canis familiaris) within Catch-Neuter-Return (CNR) programmes, including both resource- and animal-based indicators, it is necessary to first evaluate whether appropriate capture and handling techniques plus behavioural, animal-based indicators can be reliably assessed by staff working in CNR programmes. Results of a video-based survey of experienced dog management staff and CNR practitioners are reported and indicate that staff experienced in canine CNR are reliably able to agree on acceptable and unacceptable handling and capture techniques. However, there is only fair agreement between observers in positively recognising pain. Thus, dog welfare in CNR may be at risk unless staff are effectively trained at recognising behavioural indicators of poor welfare including pain behaviours. This paper suggests that non-invasive, visual indicators of pain, such as facial tension and body posture, may be a reliable and effective approach to recognising post-operative pain in street dogs.