When people look at Dog Desk Animal Action’s Global Crisis Map, one question occasionally arises, why is Australia classified as stable when animal welfare concerns still exist within the country?
The answer lies in what the map is designed to measure.
The Global Crisis Map is not a ranking of overall animal welfare standards. It is specifically focused on the welfare of free-roaming and street dogs and seeks to identify countries where those dogs face significant risks from culling, large-scale euthanasia programmes, mass collection campaigns, inadequate confinement or other policies that result in high mortality.
Using those criteria, Australia does not currently meet the threshold for either the Crisis Zone or the Watchlist.
Australia does not have a widespread street dog population comparable to those found in many parts of Asia, Eastern Europe, the Middle East or North Africa. It is not experiencing large scale municipal collection campaigns aimed at removing free roaming dogs from public spaces. Nor is there evidence of a national policy framework that is leading to the routine euthanasia of large numbers of street dogs as a method of population control.
This does not mean Australia is free from animal welfare challenges. Debates surrounding greyhound racing continue. Concerns about commercial breeding operations remain. Animal welfare organisations also work hard to improve outcomes for dogs in some remote communities where access to veterinary services and sterilisation programmes can be limited.
These are important issues and deserve attention. However, they are not the same as the street dog crises currently affecting countries where dogs are being rounded up, confined in inadequate facilities, euthanised on a large scale or subjected to aggressive population control policies.
One of the principles underpinning the Global Crisis Map is consistency. If every country with animal welfare problems were placed on the Watchlist, the distinction between a welfare concern and a welfare crisis would quickly become meaningless. The map therefore focuses on a specific set of indicators linked to the treatment and management of free-roaming dog populations.
When Australia is assessed against those indicators, it compares favourably with many countries around the world. Animal welfare legislation is well established, veterinary care is widely available, responsible ownership is common and there is no evidence of a nationwide crisis affecting free-roaming dogs.
For that reason, Australia appears in the Stable category.
Stable does not mean perfect. No country is perfect. It simply means that Australia is not currently experiencing the types of street dog welfare emergencies that define the Crisis Zone or Watchlist categories.
As the Global Crisis Map continues to develop, countries will be assessed according to the same criteria. The aim is not to judge nations as good or bad, but to identify where free-roaming dogs are facing the greatest risks and where conditions appear comparatively secure.
At present, Australia remains one of the countries that falls into the latter category.