Three years after accepting Neuter-Release approach as Sofia's official policy to reduce dog population increase, in a special media briefing on 19 May 2009, the Ekoravnovesie municipal animal control director Miroslav Naidenov announced that April/May 2009 survey counted 8538 stray dogs in the capital and indicated a population decrease of 23 per cent in comparison to the 2007 survey.

Naidenov alleged a presence of "other Ekoravnovesie's activities - monitoring the animals released and their re-vaccination."

According to Naidenov, releasing out of sterilized animals were recommended by the World Health Organization as "the only effective and sustainable method to reduce dog population."

In other contexts, Naidenov just mentioned probable number of Sofia owned dog population and suggested "between 150 and 200 thousand."

Ekoravnovesie's chief also said that the municipal program provides final culling strays in 2011.

First, we hardly can assume how the municipal authorities implement legal provisions for monitoring and re-vaccinating unwanted dogs while practically all strays roaming the City's downtown, Krasno Selo, Ivan Vazov, Lozenetc, Geo Milev, Mladost etc. had no ID tags.

In fact, in June 2003 Dr. Agostino Macri and Prof. Adriano Mantovani (WHO/FAO Collaborating Center of Research and Training in Veterinary Public Health), sent a letter to Maria Harbova, then chair of Sofia Municipal Council's Committee for Environmental Protection and argued: "As a rule, the main source of dtray canine population is the unwanted offspring of pets... This... may be discouraged by offering pet owners free (or low-cost) spaying and neutering... This type of programme is capable of permanently reducing the total population... "

While Sofia stayed populated with over 100000 entire dogs, their reproductive capacity will appear as extremely problematic.

If we assume that in 2011 six to seven thousand stray dogs remain in Sofia, theyr proper and humane kenneling seems completely impossible. On the other hand, mass removal may lead to increased animal movement and redistribution into newly vacant territories. Dr. Macri and Prof. Mantovani identified in above mentioned letter the access to resources available on the street as another crucial factor for the presence of stray population. Moreover, that includes direct feeding, which is traditionally offered by people. Obviously, a permanent solution should look quite differently.

Dog population dynamics in Sofia also can be regarded as a result of engrossing non-government sector. Inadequate behavior of a whole range of formal representatives of the civil society continued to cause indignation. While Boiko Borisov's team spends millions with no certain success, so-called NGOs for animal protection are not worried by the major population problem nor interested in the best practice to solve it.

Recently, it was found that a suspicious Bulgarian version of European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals provided by Intimate With Nature Society have been accepted by government as official. That contains a deliberate translation of key texts of Article 12 - Reduction of numbers. The original text in English read: "Parties undertake to consider... providing for dogs and cats to be permanently identified... reducing the unplanned breeding of dogs and cats by promoting the neutering of these animals..." But according to the official translation "Parties realize that... providing every dog or cat by permanent identification is a good thing... reducing the unplanned breeding of dogs and cats by neutering of these animals is a good thing..." Thus, Bulgarian authorities provided themselves with a meaningless and burlesque version of this Convention.