An Analysis of Differences in Treatment Methods and Processing Periods Based on the General Characteristics of Rescued Dogs in Shelters

This study investigated differences in treatment methods and processing periods based on the general characteristics of rescue dogs admitted to an animal shelter, providing baseline data for shelter management and policy improvement.The study included 231 rescue dogs admitted to Animal Shelter A in Jeollabuk-do between 2019 and 2024, and data were analysed using SPSS 27.0.The results showed that the overall treatment methods comprised other (unadopted and under protection, etc.) at 41.1%, adoption at 34.6%, return to owner at 16.9%, natural death at 6.9%, and euthanasia at 0.4%.Rescue dog sex showed no statistically significant differences in either treatment method (p=.159) or processing period (p=.159).Conversely, statistically significant differences were observed in both treatment methods and processing periods across age (treatment methods p<.001, processing periods p<.001), weight (treatment methods p=.002, processing periods p=.048), and breed (treatment methods p<.001, processing periods p<.001).Younger dogs (under 1 year), small dogs weighing less than 5 kg, and purebred dogs had higher adoption rates.In contrast, mixed-breed dogs had a significantly lower returnto-owner rate than purebred dogs, with a higher proportion ending in natural death and other protective measures.Furthermore, purebred dogs tended to be protected for less than two weeks, whereas 49.4% of mixed-breed dogs experienced long-term stays exceeding five weeks.Based on these findings, to promote the adoption of rescue dogs, it is necessary to standardize budget support for foster care systems and introduce socialization programs to reduce the long-term stays of mixed-breed dogs.Ultimately, to curb the influx prioritized, expanding local government subsidies for preventive neutering of outdoor dogs and vulnerable populations exposed to the risks of straying and indiscriminate breeding, while ensuring the effectiveness of an incentive-driven animal registration system.