Tourists’ perceptions of the free-roaming dog population in Samoa
Loading...
Supplementary material
Other Title
Authors
Beckman, Magnus
Hill, Kate E.
Farnworth, Mark
Bowell, Charlotte F.
Bridges, Janis
Acke, Else
Hill, Kate E.
Farnworth, Mark
Bowell, Charlotte F.
Bridges, Janis
Acke, Else
Author ORCID Profiles (clickable)
Degree
Grantor
Date
2014-09-29
Supervisors
Type
Journal Article
Ngā Upoko Tukutuku (Māori subject headings)
Keyword
Samoa
animal welfare
developing countries
dogs (Canis familiaris)
free-roaming
population management
tourism
tourists
Western Samoa
animal welfare
developing countries
dogs (Canis familiaris)
free-roaming
population management
tourism
tourists
Western Samoa
ANZSRC Field of Research Code (2020)
Citation
Beckman, M., Hill, K.E., Farnworth, M.J., Bolwell, C., Bridges, J., and Acke, E. (2014). Tourists’ perceptions of the free-roaming dog population in Samoa. Animals, 4, pp.599-611.
Abstract
SIMPLE SUMMARY: For travelers, the way in which people in other nations interact with animals may be different to that in their home nation. This research explores how the treatment of dogs impacted upon the holiday experiences of tourists visiting a developing island nation. In general, and where tourists encountered dogs, their treatment was perceived as less positive than in their home country and had a negative impact upon the holiday experience. Although it is important to recognize that the local population will have a different worldview, tourists felt that the dog population required more effective management and were most supportive of techniques that were non-lethal and humane.
ABSTRACT: A study was undertaken to establish how visiting tourists to Samoa perceived free-roaming dogs (Canis familiaris) and their management, additionally some factors that influence their perceptions were assessed. Questionnaires were administered to 281 tourists across Samoa over 5 weeks. Free-roaming dogs were seen by 98.2% (n = 269/274) of respondents, with 64.9% (n = 137/211) reporting that their presence had a negative effect on overall holiday experience. Respondents staying in the Apia (capital city) area were more likely to consider dogs a problem (p < 0.0001), and there was a significant association between whether the respondent owned a dog and if they thought dogs were a nuisance in Samoa (p < 0.003). Forty-four percent (20/89) of non-dog owners agreed that dogs were a nuisance compared to 22% (80/182) of dog owners. The majority felt that dogs required better control and management in Samoa (81%, n = 222) and that there were too many “stray” dogs (67.9%, n = 188). More respondents were negatively affected by the dogs’ presence (64.9%, 137/211), and felt that the dogs made their holiday worse, than respondents that felt the dogs’ presence improved their holiday experience (35.1%, 74/211). Most respondents stated that the dogs had a low impact (one to three; 68%, 187/275) on their stay in Samoa, whilst 24% (65/275) and 8% (23/275) stated they had a medium or high impact, respectively, on their stay. Respondents showed strong support for humane population management. Free-roaming dogs present a complex problem for Samoa and for its tourism industry in particular. The findings of this study further support the need for more discussion and action about the provision of veterinary services and population management for dogs in Samoa. It also provides information complementing an earlier study of the attitudes of local Samoans.
Publisher
MDPI AG (Basel, Switzerland)
Permanent link
Link to ePress publication
DOI
doi:10.3390/ani4040599
Copyright holder
MDPI AG (Basel, Switzerland)
Copyright notice
CC0 1.0 Universal