This article was downloaded by: [Dr Kenneth Shapiro]On: 08 June 2015, At: 07:49Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Journal of Applied AnimalWelfare SciencePublication details, including instructions for authorsand subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/haaw20

Population Dynamics,Overpopulation, and theWelfare of Companion Animals:New Insights on Old and NewDataStephen Zawistowski , Julie Morris , M.D. Salman &Rebecca Ruch-GalliePublished online: 04 Jun 2010.

To cite this article: Stephen Zawistowski , Julie Morris , M.D. Salman & Rebecca Ruch-Gallie (1998) Population Dynamics, Overpopulation, and the Welfare of CompanionAnimals: New Insights on Old and New Data, Journal of Applied Animal WelfareScience, 1:3, 193-206, DOI: 10.1207/s15327604jaws0103_1

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327604jaws0103_1

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or

indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dr

Ken

neth

Sha

piro

] at

07:

49 0

8 Ju

ne 2

015

JOURNAL OF APPLIED ANIMAL WELFARE SCIENCE, 1(3), 193-206 Copyright O 1998, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Population Dynamics, Overpopulation, and the Welfare of Companion Animals:

New Insights on Old and New Data

Stephen Zawistowski and Julie Morris The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

M. D. Salman and Rebecca Ruch-Gallie College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences

Colorado State University

Americans profess a great love for their companion animals, and, indeed, their expenditures on food and other products for their dogs and cats would seem to confirm this. However, each year, many millions of dogs and cats are brought to animal shelters, where the majority are euthanized. Our inability to provide reasonably valid statistics related to this concern makes it difficult to offer a credible presentation on the need for a concerted effort to deal with the issue, design initiatives to ameliorate the problem, or evaluate progress and performance of these efforts. In this article we review some of the past efforts to document the scale of the "pet overpopulation" problem. We reexamine long-term shelter statistics from a single shelter system and present new data that reflect a recent cooperative effort to understand the origins and disposition of dogs and cats received by animal shelters.

The early history of animal welfare in the United States reflects the limited role seen for companion animals. The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), founded by Henry Bergh in 1866, focused much of its early work on protecting horses (Steele, 1942; Zawistowski, 1998). As other humane societies were formed in Buffalo (1 867) and Boston (1 868), the protection of horses was also central to their early work. This is not surprising, because horses in the latter half of the 19th century were an important economic asset and a common sight for both city and rural dwellers.

Requests for reprints should be sent to Stephen Zawistowski, The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 424 East 92nd Street, New York, NY 10128.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dr

Ken

neth

Sha

piro

] at

07:

49 0

8 Ju

ne 2

015

1 94 ZAWISTOWSKI, MORRIS, SALMAN, RUCH-GALLIE

Keeping dogs or cats as household companions was not a common practice, although cats were common and generally tolerated for their role in controlling rodent populations. Dogs were sometimes kept for hunting, herding, or guarding. In New York City, for example, ragmen and others who used small carts often were unable to afford the upkeep of a horse and used dogs to pull their carts. These dogs often were allowed to roam free at night to find their own food (Buffet, n.d.). The municipal dog pounds of the time concentrated on removing stray dogs from the streets as a source of disease or menace. In some cases, a bounty was paid to people who rounded up strays (Arkow, 1991). Corruption was common; unscrupulous characters would steal owned dogs and take them to the pound to claim the bounty (owned dogs were easier and safer to capture than were streetwise strays). Owners coming to claim their "found" dogs at the pound would be forced to pay a redemption fee. Unclaimed dogs would either be clubbed or drowned (Buffet, n.d.; Steele, 1942).

A growing interest in the humane treatment of animals, which was advocated by humane societies, in time extended to companion animals and the oversight of dog pounds, starting with the Women's Branch of the Pennsylvania SPCA (Steele, 1942; Turner, 1980). By 1894, New York City convinced the ASPCA to take over the management of the city's animal shelters; it also made the capture of stray cats part of its mandate. In today's pressurized and emotional environment surrounding the euthanasia of companion animals at animal shelters, it is ironic to read in the ASPCA's 1895 annual report that it felt itself successful in its management of New York City's animal shelters because the ASPCA euthanized more animals than had previous authorities. This was because the ASPCA did away with the bounty system, with the result that nearly all of the animals captured were real strays and therefore euthanized. During this early period of animal control, primary attention was paid to ensuring that dog pounds were run as humanely as possible, providing proper treatment of animals and performing euthanasia in a painless fashion.

Whereas methods of euthanasia were of great concern to humane groups during that period, it does not appear that the issue of how many dogs and cats were being euthanized surfaced as aconcern until the 1940s (Moulton, Wright, & Rindy, 1991). Several developments might explain why "pet overpopulation" began to be seen as a problem at that time. The post-World War I1 era resulted in a major U.S. population shift. Rural populations shrank as people moved to the cities, where a growing industrial sector offered employment. At the same time, rising incomes spurred the growth of suburban areas. New housing developments offered the ideal opportunity for many families to acquire a pet for the first time (Arkow, 1991). At the same time, developments in veterinary medicine, pet foods, and other products helped ensure that dogs and cats lived longer, healthier lives, thereby increasing their fecundity (Moulton, Wright, & Rindy, 1991).

To address the problems brought about by rapid pet population growth, particu- larly unwanted pets, a patchwork of programs was devised. In some cases animal shelters operated by governments grew to meet the need. In other cases, humane

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dr

Ken

neth

Sha

piro

] at

07:

49 0

8 Ju

ne 2

015

POPULATION AND THE WELFARE OF COMPANION ANIMALS 1 95

societies stepped in to fill the gap, some with government subsidies. Unfortunately, with chronic underfunding a problem, most efforts were directed toward any available "cure," with or without evidence as to efficacy. Because animal sheltering was organized in such a haphazard fashion, there was no single agency or depart- ment available to collect statistics. The early history of animal control is largely one of ad hoc responses, with limited attention paid to the development of systematic programs or efforts during those years. As a result, there are few long-term individual shelter statistics or cross-sectional statistics for the nation as a whole.

The lack of fundamental statistical information on the nature of animals entering and exiting shelters makes it difficult to plan programs and to evaluate their effectiveness (Nasser & Fluke, 1991). The relative lack of importance seen for statistical data as a tool to plan and evaluate programs addressing pet overpopulation is demonstrated in Anchel(1990). In a 250-page summary of a 1987 conference on the overpopulation of dogs and cats, there are little or no data presented either to define the issue or to address variables associated with the concern. Much of the book is dedicated to placing blame or arguing for favorite programs believed to have an impact on the overpopulation of dogs and cats.

Rowan (1991, 1992) discussed the variation and difficulties surrounding the analysis and interpretation of available statistical information related to the numbers of animals entering and exiting shelters in the United States. A number of regional studies have provided glimpses at particular communities or states (California Sheltering Agencies Survey, 1991; Iowa Federation of Humane Societies Animal Shelter Survey, 1992; Progressive Animal Welfare Society, Report on Washington State Animal Shelter Statistics, 1994). Data released from these studies show wide variations in the exiting methods of animals (e.g., adoption rates of dogs ranged from 20% to 57%). However, certain characteristics appear consistent. For exam- ple, a greater proportion of cats were euthanized than dogs in all studies.

Arkow (1993) examined many of these same studies and attempted to derive an estimate of the percentage of companion animals that enter shelters and are euthanized in those communities. He concluded that 5.6% to 8.2% of a state's dog and cat population would be sheltered during a year, and that, on average, an estimated 3.77% of that population would be euthanized. However, the Arkow analysis is complicated, because the studies he analyzed were conducted in different years and did not follow a consistent methodology.

The American Humane Association (AHA) collected national shelter reporting statistics for 1985,1986,1987,1988, and 1990 (Nasser, Talboy, & Moulton, 1992). The AHA mailed a comprehensive shelter program survey to a subsample of a mailing list for animal shelters. In 1990, the number of responding shelters was 140, although the AHA estimated that there are between 3,000 and 5,000 shelters in the United States. From their data, the AHA researchers extrapolated estimated ranges of the numbers of animals received in animal shelters and their dispositions. Their estimates for the numbers of dogs and cats received by animal shelters ranged

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dr

Ken

neth

Sha

piro

] at

07:

49 0

8 Ju

ne 2

015

from 16.3 million to 27.1 million per year, and for euthanized animals ranged from 11.1 million to 18.6 million per year. Rowan (1992) pointed out, however, that if the reports used to generate the estimates were received mainly from larger shelters, they likely would overestimate the ranges, because other research has indicated that larger shelters handle and euthanize a larger number of animals. Rowan concluded that the rhetoric frequently used to support the belief that pet overpopulation is getting worse is unfounded. On the other hand, he pointed out that the financial costs-perhaps as high as a billion dollars annually-and the emotional costs of euthanizing large numbers of healthy, unwanted animals in America's animal shelters are a heavy burden for society to bear (Rowan, 1992).

Clearly, because of the paucity of the empirical literature in this area, and the many problems with the methods employed to collect the available data, it is difficult to make substantive claims regarding the intake and disposition of animals in U.S. shelters. Longitudinal data for individual shelters, as well as cross-sectional "snapshots" of the national picture, are required to help develop and evaluate programs and approaches to pet population issues.

FIRST STUDY: DEVELOPING A NATIONAL PROFILE

Method

The National Council on Pet Population Study and Policy (NCPPSP) was formed in 1993 to gather and analyze reliable data that further characterize the number, origin, and disposition of companion animals (dogs and cats) in the United States; to promote responsible stewardship of the companion animals; and, based on data gathered, to recommend programs to reduce the number of surplus or unwanted pets in the nation. It is a coalition that represents a wide range of groups concerned with pet population issues (American Animal Hospital Association, AHA, ASPCA, American Veterinary Medical Association, Association of Teachers of Veterinary Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Cat Fanciers Association, Humane Society of the United States, Massachusetts SPCA, National ~ n i n i a l Control Association, and the Society of Animal Welfare Administrators). In the fall of 1994, the NCPPSP compiled a list of agencies sheltering animals in the United States. Each member of the groups making up its board of directors was asked to assume the responsibility for several states and identify any association, group, or agency that housed or sheltered more than 100 animals in a given year. Together, these lists initially showed a total of 4,700 shelters. No effort was made to exclude shelters that did not routinely perform euthanasia.

Researchers constructed a survey card for collecting data. The shelter name, address, contact person, and phone numbers were requested, as well as information about the animals. Data were requested for the number of dogs and cats entering,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dr

Ken

neth

Sha

piro

] at

07:

49 0

8 Ju

ne 2

015

POPULATION AND THE WELFARE OF COMPANION ANIMALS 1 97

classified by those through animal control, owner relinquishment, or other methods, and for the number of dogs and cats exiting through adoption, owner reclamation, euthanization, or other methods. Data were requested for cats and kittens combined and for dogs and puppies combined. The data request card was printed and sent to the initial list of shelters in February 1995. The survey cards also were circulated by the National Animal Control Association and personal solicitations from the involved organizations.

By April 1995, the first completed cards were returned. The original sheIter list was corrected where needed to reflect address changes, additions, and deletions. In June 1995, a reminder card was sent to shelters on the original list that had not yet responded. Data from the reminder cards were entered as received. The data were compiled for the total number of shelters reporting by state, the number of dogs and cats received, and the disposition of dogs and cats. The survey was repeated in 1996 to solicit data from 1995 with minor changes in the procedures. A total of 1,100 shelters responded to the survey for 1994, and 1,04 1 for 1995.

Results

Table 1 presents a profile of the shelter types thatresponded to the reporting surveys. Twenty-three percent of the sheIters on the list reported data for 1994, and 22% for 1995. Government animal control facilities and private nonprofit shelters with animal control housing contracts accounted for the majority of reporting shelters, 75% in 1994 and 71% in 1995.

Table 2 presents the means by which the dogs and cats entered the shelters. The numbers were reported for both 1994 and 1995 and are very consistent in all categories. A separate category of "unknown source" was added in 1995, based on comments received during the 1994 survey, and likely accounts for some of the small differences observed. Nearly half of the animals recorded were brought to the shelter through an animal control function. This is not surprising given the high percentage of animal control facilities that responded to the surveys. Dogs entered

TABLE 1 Types of Responding Shelters

Shelter Type I994 (%) 1995 (96)

Local government agency 53.1 46.2 Private, nonprofit 21.9 24.8 Private, nonprofit with housing contract 16.0 18.1 Other 9.0 4.1 Unknown NA 6.8 Total number 1100 1041

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dr

Ken

neth

Sha

piro

] at

07:

49 0

8 Ju

ne 2

015

TABLE 2 Source of Dogs and Cats Entering Shelters Reporting to 1994 and 1995 Surveys

Animl Animal Control (%) Owner Relinquish (%) Other Source (%) Unknown Source (%) Total Number

1994 1995 1994 1995 1 994 1995 1994 1995 1994 1995

Dogs 51.0 44.7 27.7 27.4 21.3 10.0 N A 17.8 2,112,009 2,059,651 Cats 39.7 35.4 36.1 35.0 25.2 13.3 N A 16.3 1,668,996 1,532,585 EitherH 59.9 50.9 18.2 20.9 24.9 6.7 N A 21.5 547,919 469,516 Overall 47.4 41.9 29.3 29.5 23.3 10.1 N A 17.7 4,329.914 4.061.589

aSome shelters did not separate statistics for dogs and cats.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dr

Ken

neth

Sha

piro

] at

07:

49 0

8 Ju

ne 2

015

POPULATION AND THE WELFARE OF COMPANION ANIMALS 199

by this method more often than cats. This is also consistent with shelter profiles, because animal control functions may not be mandated to be active capturing cats. Animals relinquished by owners accounted for about 29% of the total each year, and all other methods of entry accounted for the remaining dogs and cats.

The methods by which animals exited the shelters are presented in Table 3. For each year of the study, just over 63% of all animals entering the shelters that reported were euthanized, with cats being euthanized more frequently than dogs. Lost dogs were reclaimed by their owners far more often than cats, and dogs and cats were adopted at about the same rates.

A selective and intensive study of 50 randomly selected counties from through- out the country currently is underway to provide a better sense of the representative nature of the shelters that responded to the shelter reporting studies. The new analysis addresses the question raised by Rowan (1992) regarding larger shelters handling a higher proportion of animals and those shelters' greater likelihood of responding to surveys. The euthanasia figure of just over 63% is probably influ- enced by the number of animal control facilities that responded. A hypothesis to be tested is whether animal control facilities are more likely to respond to surveys because they are more likely to compile data for administrative reports when compared to nonprofit shelters that do not bear this public responsibility.

The NCPPSP expects to continue an annual shelter reporting survey. The organization will encourage shelters to assist in developing a national pet overpopu- lation profile by sharing data obtained from the shelters' statistical records. When we determine who responds to the survey, and why, we can estimate how many animals enter animal shelters in the United States each year and how many are euthanized. Many shelters may already have the information needed to evaluate their own historical approach to the problem in their communities. These shelters need to be encouraged to share their statistics. At the same time, a concerted national effort to coordinate the collection and publication of statistics from across the country is important.

SECOND STUDY: LONG-TERM STATISTICS FOR A SINGLE SHELTER SYSTEM

When the ASPCA was formed in 1866, its primary energies were focused on the protection of horses, who were essential to New York City's commerce at the time. Henry Bergh was approached several times to take an active role in the management of the city's animal shelters to deal with the well-known cruelties that occurred there. In Manhattan, dogs were killed by placing them in iron cages and drowning them in the East River. In Brooklyn, dogs were clubbed to death each morning. Although Bergh recognized those problems and did speak out against them, he would assent to running the shelters only if the city would commit to full funding for their operations. It was not until 1894, four years after Bergh's death, that the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dr

Ken

neth

Sha

piro

] at

07:

49 0

8 Ju

ne 2

015

TABLE 3 Disposition of Dogs and Cats Entering Shelters Reporting to 1994 and 1995 Surveys

--

Adopted(%) Reclaimed by Owner (%) Euthanized (%) Other (%) Unknown (%) Total Number

Type I994 1995 1994 1995 1994 1995 1994 1995 I994 1995 1994 I995

Dogs 25.4 25.6 15.6 16.1 56.0 55.0 3.0 2.3 NA 0.9 2,031,909 1,863,727 Cats 22.6 23.4 2.1 2.2 71.9 71.2 3.5 2.4 NA 0.6 1,576,087 1,424,830 Either" 20.4 13.6 9.1 8.3 67.8 74.4 2.7 3.3 NA 0.2 523,836 424,017 Overall 23.6 23.4 9.6 9.9 63.6 63.5 3.2 2.4 NA 0.7 4,131,831 3,712,375

'Some shelters did not separate statistics for dogs and cats.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dr

Ken

neth

Sha

piro

] at

07:

49 0

8 Ju

ne 2

015

POPULATION AND THE WELFARE OF COMPANION ANIMALS 201

city came to an agreement with the ASPCA to manage animal control. Until that time, the ASPCA annual reports included substantial descriptive and statistical analysis of the cruelty investigations handled by the ASPCA. It was apparently a natural step to include animal shelter statistics in the annual report. Starting with that first report, the statistics included separate information on dogs and cats and on the number of animals adopted.

The ASPCA performed the animal control function until 1994. During that time, shelters operated by the ASPCA accounted for the vast majority of unwanted animals in the city. Other smaller shelters of the time accepted limited numbers of animals and did not routinely perform euthanasia. An examination of available ASPCA annual reports is revealing (ASPCA, 1895,1896,1904,1914,1928,1934, 1946, 1954, 1965, 1974, 1984, 1994). Table 4 lists the number of dogs and cats received and the percentage adopted and euthanized at intervals during that period. The euthanasia figure represents all animals euthanized, including those who were killed at their owners' requests, and euthanasia of ill, injured, and dangerous animals. It is interesting to note that cats consistently outnumbered dogs in intake and euthanasia. The numbers of dogs and cats handled by the ASPCA increased just before World War I and stayed high during the Depression Era and World War 11. During World War 11, however, the numbers began to drop. The decrease, when seen within the context of the city's increasing population, is dramatic.

Figure 1 presents the animals euthanized per 10,000 humans in the U.S. population. The sudden decline in the euthanasia rate may have its roots in an action taken by the ASPCA. Whereas the number of animals placed by the ASPCA with the public probably represented a small proportion of the total city animal popula- tion, beginning in 1972 all animals placed in its adoption program were subject to the Association's mandatory spay-neuter policy. It is likely that this policy repre-

Euthanasia per 10,000 Human Population 600

FIGURE 1 ASPCA Animal Control Services. Euthanasia of dogs and cats as a function of the human population of New York City.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dr

Ken

neth

Sha

piro

] at

07:

49 0

8 Ju

ne 2

015

TABLE 4 ASPCA Animal Control Services Statistical Summary 1894-1994

Number Received % Adopted % Euthunized

Yeur Dogs Cuts Totul Dogs Cats Cotnbit~ed Dogs Cats Combined

1895 21,741 24,140 45,881 1.8 0.33 1 .O 95.7 95.3 95.5 1896 27,587 43,263 70,850 2.4 0.38 1.2 86.6 99.6 94.5 1904 30,505 55,667 86,172 N A N A N A 93.7 97.8 96.3 1914 59,355 177,234 236,589 N A N A N A 88.0 99.6 94.9 1928 85,744 217,774 303,s 18 3.2 0.25 1.1 82.3 99.4 94.6 1934 65,207 219,506 284,713 6.1 0.40 1.7 93.5 99.5 98.1 1946 60,537 155,312 215,849 2.9 0.20 0.97 9 1 99.6 97.2 1954 66,043 101,669 167,712 13.6 2.30 6.8 73.7 96.3 87.4 1965 70,185 75,858 146,053 21.0 7.6 14.0 65.1 90.0 78.3 1974 8 1,627 54,408 136,035 8.8 6.1 7.8 82.7 91 .O 86.0 1984 41,867 33,110 74,977 19.4 19.3 19.3 75.0 79.0 76.7 1994 23,077 27,366 50,443 18.2 17.1 17.6 74.0 78.8 76.7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dr

Ken

neth

Sha

piro

] at

07:

49 0

8 Ju

ne 2

015

sented an important change in overall public attitude toward pet overpopulation and greater education and awareness of spaying and neutering to deal with pet overpopulation. Similar long-term analyses of data for individual communities could provide substantial information about pet population dynamics within par- ticular regions. It is important to consider a variety of factors as probable causes for the decrease, including altered pet ownership patterns reflected in the changing ethnic mix comprising the city's population, as well as efforts related to more responsible companion animal care.

Schultz and Zawistowski (1992) further characterized the intake and disposition of animals for a sample of days during June, September, and December of 1991, and March of 1992. This resulted in a sample of 2,474 animals received, which included 1,163 dogs, 1,175 cats, 12 rabbits, and 124 other types of animals. Nearly half the dogs (47%) and 38.9% of the cats were picked up as strays by animal control or found as strays by members of the public and turned in to the shelter, which is consistent with the percentages reported in Table 2. More than half of all dogs and cats received suffered from at least one medical condition, with dogs most often suffering from skin conditions and cats from respiratory infections. Dogs were twice as likely as cats to be brought in by owners to be euthanized (17.8% vs. 8.1%). These data are consistent with other evidence published by the NCPPSP ("Top Ten Reasons," 1997). Interviews with people who relinquished dogs and cats at animal shelters show that illness and injury, along with owner-requested euthanasia, were among the most common reasons given for bringing an animal to the shelter.

Similar longitudinal analyses of shelter statistics from other communities could provide an important perspective on the dynamics of dog and cat euthanasia at animal shelters. It would be valuable to know whether the large decrease docu- mented in New York City is unique or if it represents a broader trend. Additional socioeconomic and demographic analyses might uncover other correlates to this decline.

GENERAL DISCUSSION

This article reports two methods of typifying aspects of pet overpopulation through analysis of shelter statistics on dog and cat euthanasia. The first study was a national survey of shelters in the United States. That effort highlighted the great difficulty associated with an attempt to determine a reasonably accurate count of the numbers of dogs and cats entering shelters and their subsequent dispositions. It is clear that because animal sheltering programs differ in their origins, philosophies, funding sources, and functions, it is difficult to get a complete and consistent list of such facilities. Two surveys of a reasonably complete list found that there is no standard format for keeping statistical information. In addition, some facilities may not even keep statistical information. With about a quarter of the shelters on the list reporting to the surveys, some general statements can be made: Animal control functions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dr

Ken

neth

Sha

piro

] at

07:

49 0

8 Ju

ne 2

015

204 ZAWISTOWSKI, MORRIS, SALMAN, RUCH-GALLIE

accounted for a large percentage of shelter intake; differences between dog and cat return to owner rates result in a greater proportional euthanasia rate for cats compared to dogs; and a long-term outreach effort to shelters will be needed to get more complete information from shelters.

The second longitudinal study demonstrated that, for at least one major Ameri- can city, the numbers of dogs and cats euthanized has decreased dramatically and consistently in the past 50 years. Documentation of similar declines in other cities would contradict popular media reports that pet overpopulation is soaring. As Rowan (1992) pointed out, however, even if dog and cat euthanasia in shelters is below previous estimates, and is likely in decline, the remaining economic and emotional costs to society are very high. Continued efforts to alert the sheltering community to the importance of statistical reports for program management through the NCPPSP national shelter statistical report will need to be combined with analyses of data regarding individual pet owner acquisition and disposition of dogs and cats.

Data reported by the NCPPSP (Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 1997) on the most common reasons cited by people for relinquishing animals to shelters show that no single reason accounts for the vast majority of cases. Additional analyses planned by the NCPPSP would further describe and characterize the reasons for dog and cat relinquishment at animal shelters, along with the socioeconomic variables of the people turning in the dogs and cats.

Other studies, such as those reported by Luke (1996) and Patronek, Glickrnan, Beck, McCabe, and Ecker (1996a, 1996b), will give the added depth of under- standing required to develop intervention programs. Both Luke and the two studies by Patronek et al. used random digit dialing as part of their efforts to survey pet owners. Luke reported data from several studies reflecting elements of cat owner- ship that impact on failed caregiver-cat relationships. He concluded, among other things, that promoting veterinary care, including early sterilization and identifica- tion, will be important in enhancing the welfare of cats. The Patronek et al. studies provided detailed data regarding risk factors associated with shelter relinquishment of dogs and cats. The data implicated a wide variety of variables, which include owner financial and emotional investment, behavior problems, owner expectations, and other factors. To determine their generality, these valuable data will need to be confirmed in studies that reflect a variety of geographic regions. The data do, however, highlight a number of the variables that should be addressed in the development of intervention programs for the region they studied. They provide a model for further work in individual communities. Given the number of factors in these studies already associated with dogs and cats entering animal shelters, it is to be expected that a wide variety of intervention programs will be required; further progress in reducing the numbers of animals entering shelters, who are subsequently euthanized, will be incremental. As more studies are completed in this field, animal protection professionals will need to maintain open minds regarding past practices and the development of new programs.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dr

Ken

neth

Sha

piro

] at

07:

49 0

8 Ju

ne 2

015

POPULATION AND THE WELFARE OF COMPANION ANIMALS 205

Although a continued emphasis on spaying and neutering of companion animals will remain an important part of efforts to control pet overpopulation, additional efforts will be needed to address questions related to owner expectation, the availability and cost of veterinary care, and appropriate and human solutions to the behavioral problems of companion animals. The development of standard statistical formats for animal shelters and pet demographics will be critical to the success of intervention programs. Empirical data as well as subsequent evaluations, under- taken with appropriate statistical rigor, must inform the implementation and main- tenance of these intervention programs.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Portions of the work reported here were supported by the National Council on Pet Population Study and Policy, and Colorado State University.

REFERENCES

American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. (1895,1896,1904,1914,1928,1934,1946, 1954, 1965, 1974, 1984,1994). Annual report. New York: Author.

Anchel, M. (Ed.). (1990). Overpopulation of cats and dogs: Causes, effects andprevention. New York: Fordham University Press.

Arkow, P. (1991). Animal control laws and enforcement. Journal of the American Veterinary Medicine Association, 198, 1164-1 172.

Arkow, P. (1993). New statistics challenge previously held beliefs about euthanasia. The Latham Letter. 14(1), 10-11.

Buffet, E. (n.d.). [Manuscript notes on Bergh's War on vested cruelty]. Unpublished raw data. Luke, C. (1996). Animal shelter issues. Journal of the American Veterinary Medicine Association, 208,

524-527. Moulton, C., Wright, P., & Rindy, K. (1991). The role of animal shelters in controlling pet overpopu-

lation. J o u m l of the American Veterinary Medicine Association, 198, 1172-1 175. Nasser, R., & Fluke, J. (1991). Pet population dynamics and community planning for animal welfare

and animal control. Journal of the American Veterinary Medicine Association, 198, 1160-1 163. Nasser, R., Talboy, J., & Moulton, C. (1992). Animal shelter reporting study: 1990. Englewood, CO:

American Humane Association. Patronek, G. J., Glickman, L. T., Beck, A. M., McCabe, G. P., & Ecker, C. (1996a). Risk factors for

relinquishment of cats to an animal shelter. Journal of the American Veterinary Medicine Associa- tion, 209, 582-588.

Patronek, G. J., Glickman, L. T., Beck, A. M., McCabe, G. P., & Ecker, C. (1996b). Risk factors for relinquishment of dogs to an animal shelter. Journal of the American Veterinary Medicine Associa- tion, 209, 572-581.

Rowan, A. (1991). What we need to learn fromepidemiologic surveys pertaining to pet overpopulation. Journal of the American Veterinary Medicine Association, 198, 1233-1236.

Rowan, A. (1992). Shelters and pet overpopulation: A statistical black hole. Anrhrozoos, 5, 140-143. Schultz, J., & Zawistowski, S. (1992, July). Now you count them, now you don't: Delving deeper into

shelter stars. Paper presented at the International Animals and Us conference, Montreal, Canada.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dr

Ken

neth

Sha

piro

] at

07:

49 0

8 Ju

ne 2

015

206 ZAWISTOWSKI, MORRIS, SALMAN, RUCH-GALLIE

Steele, Z. (1942). Angel in a top hat. New York: Harper and Brothers. Top ten reasons for relinquishment identified. (1997). Journal of the American Veterinary Medicine

Association, 210, 1256. Turner, J. (1980). Reckoning with the beast. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Zawistowski, S. (1998). The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. In M. Bekoff

& C. Meaney (Eds.), Encyclopedia of animal rights and animal welfare. Westport, CT: Greenwood.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Dr

Ken

neth

Sha

piro

] at

07:

49 0

8 Ju

ne 2

015