Where knowledge and science meet ethics and compassion

Companion Animals Position Paper

Companion Animals Position Paper
08-18-2006
A truly civilized society is one in which all companion animals (“pets”) are wanted and treated with understanding, love, respect and compassion. Companion animals are more than mere property, objects, commodities, or things, but instead are individuals with needs and interests of their own. The animal protection movement affirms that humans are the guardians – not the owners – of companion animals and that they are not our property. According to the American Pet Products Manufacturers Association (citation July 11, 2005),there are more pets (377.6 million) than people (295 million) in the U.S. Currently, 64.2 million U.S. households (62 percent) includes a pet (e.g. 77.7 million cats, 65 million dogs, 17.3 million birds, 8.8 million reptiles, 16.8 million small animals, 7 million saltwater fish and 185 million freshwater fish). As the number of animals kept for human companionship increases (up from 56 percent in 1988), our society continues to struggle with many of the difficult issues that accompany a large population of surplus animals. While some have attempted to estimate the number of animals euthanized in our nation’s shelters, there is no confirmed data. The Humane Society of the United States estimates that 50 per cent of the six to eight million cats and dogs who enter U.S. shelters each year are put to death. (July 11, 2005). The Asilomar Accords were established in 2004 to (in part) establish a “uniform method for collecting and reporting shelter data, in order to promote transparency and better assess the euthanasia rate of healthy and treatable animals.” (July 11, 2005) The animal protection movement calls upon all levels of government to recognize the well-being of companion animals as a public policy issue of singular importance because of their unique role in providing love, companionship and connection to the natural world. Further, we call upon government to partner with the animal protection movement in a long-term strategy to successfully address the following issues. Currently, the moral and financial costs of dealing with unwanted companion animals rest solely on municipal animal care and control agencies and the private animal care sector (local SPCAs, humane societies, shelters, rescue groups and sanctuaries). While monetary costs can be calculated, the emotional costs to shelter workers and group volunteers are immeasurable. For far too long, unsuccessful policies or severely inadequate resources have forced many of these organizations to kill healthy and treatable animals. Increasingly, the animal protection movement is challenging this cruel irony and developing innovative, nonlethal alternatives. The animal protection movement invites the government to work with us in a partnership to help end companion animal overpopulation by achieving the following legislative objectives at the federal, state and local level, as appropriate, including Establish, expand and improve government-funded spay/neuter programs to make them easily available and affordable for all sectors of society Provide financial and expert assistance to municipal and private animal shelters to help them achieve a 100 percent spay/neuter rate for all animals adopted through them Promote mutually beneficial programs that encourage landlords and property managers to reduce or eliminate restrictions on companion animals living on site, while establishing for tenants standards of responsible animal guardianship Initiate public awareness campaigns on responsible, effective methods to manage and reduce the number of stray and feral cats Pass uniform legislation to require that breeders who sell directly to the public through retail outlets (“pet stores”), newspaper ads, the Internet, etc., be licensed, inspected and regulated; and that all dogs and cats sold be spayed or neutered Institute a tax or licensing fee for each animal sold by breeders and retailers, to be used to assist shelters in rescue, adoption and care of all unwanted animals The majority of animals killed in animal shelters are cats and most of those are feral. Federal, state and local governments must recognize that, due to decades of sporadic, ineffective, usually lethal control programs or to complete inaction, burgeoning populations of stray and feral cats have become a public health and animal control issue. An essential part of developing programs to reduce stray and feral cat populations is to educate policymakers, animal advocates and the general public about the differing natures and behavior patterns of stray and feral cats. The animal protection movement calls on all levels of government to support, through policies and financial resources, effective nonlethal population reduction programs to assess the safety, size and locations of stray and feral cat populations, to make spay/neuter facilities widely available and affordable and to encourage implementation of community-wide Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) programs (provided they pose no significant danger to wildlife), which are all produced in conjunction with appropriate and effective public education campaigns. Integral to any successful TNR program is responsible colony management (e.g., multiple caretakers, daily monitoring for food and water, sick or injured cats trapped for veterinary care, kittens removed and adopted and socialized cats adopted). Related to the issue of stray and feral cats are “free-roaming cats.” Although these cats are not usually long-term members of feral and stray populations, they contribute to the problems associated with stray and feral cat colonies, especially if they are not spayed or neutered. Moreover, free-roaming cats are often “cats in transition”, i.e., they have homes and guardians who allow them to roam freely. If their cats do not return home, many of these people simply obtain another cat. Generally speaking, cats should be kept indoors for their own well-being and because of their adverse impact on indigenous wildlife species. The animal protection movement envisions a time when U.S. public policy recognizes as fundamental to the interests of a healthy population of wanted companion animals an end to the commercial breeding and sale of companion animals in “puppy mills,” “kitten mills,” “rabbit mills” and “pocket pet mills” and of native and non-native wildlife (exotics) in “bird mills” and “reptile mills.” Compounding the impact of commercial breeders on the surplus animal problem is the introduction of commercial cloning of cats and dogs, which threatens to add even more animals to the population. A study published by the American Pet Products Manufacturers Association (APPMA) (See The Humane Society of the United States “U.S. Pet Ownership Statistics” (July 11, 2005) found that only 18 percent of owned dogs and 16 percent of owned cats were adopted from shelters. It also noted that 72 percent of owned dogs and 84 percent of owned cats are spayed or neutered. At least 80 percent of the dogs and cats in American homes are obtained from sources other than shelters (e.g., commercial or backyard breeders, retail stores). Although some retail stores have adopted policies that prohibit the sale of cats and dogs, they continue to sell other species. The animal protection movement acknowledges these stores and strongly encourages them to expand their policies to include all animals. According to the APPMA study, public spending on pets and pet supplies doubled from $17 billion in 1994 to a projected $34.3 billion for 2004. (July 11, 2005) The animal protection movement and the APPMA must work together to educate the public about responsible companion animal practices. Our combined resources must be fully utilized to end the surplus population and irresponsible treatment of companion animals. The animal protection movement calls on all levels of government to recognize the consequences of a largely unregulated industry of commercial breeders of animals for human companionship and work with us to achieve the following at the federal or state level, as appropriate, including Significantly strengthen and enforce the regulatory standards applicable to commercial breeders, dealers, retailers (“pet stores” and newspaper ads), brokers, swap meets and Internet sellers of companion animals. These standards must include veterinary care and appropriate biological needs (temperature, sanitary conditions, enclosures, food, water, etc.). Create a uniform licensing and regulation program for breeders who sell directly to the public through all methods of sale, including newspaper ads or via the Internet Enact and enforce strict penalties for violations of facility and animal care standards Prohibit the transfer and sale of animals who are weaned prematurely. Weaning should take place naturally, with the mother allowed to initiate and complete the gradual weaning process. Puppies and kittens should be at least eight weeks old before being placed in new homes. The animal protection movement questions the need for the commercial cloning of companion animals when millions of unwanted dogs and cats are euthanized annually. Cloning does not replicate an animal’s uniqueness. It only satisfies human vanity. Existing problems caused by the present surplus population of companion animals will be exacerbated if commercial cloning becomes economically feasible to a larger group of consumers. Companion animals generally include domesticated dogs, cats, horses, rabbits, rodents, guinea pigs, hamsters and other “pocket pets” as well as undomesticated species such as birds and reptiles. Increasingly, however, native and non-native wildlife species (exotics) are wild caught, bred, or imported into the U.S. and sold as “pets”. These captive wild animals include non-native wild caught animals who are imported into the U.S. and sold as pets, as well as native and non-native exotic species that are captivebred in the U.S. specifically for the pet trade. Addressing the needs of nondomesticated exotics presents a special challenge to society. Indeed, considerable debate remains about which, if any, may even be considered appropriate for human companionship. We hold that undomesticated birds (including all parrot species), reptiles, hedgehogs, monkeys, exotic cats and other species are unsuitable as companion animals. The pet industry’s promotion of these animals as “pets” has led to a burgeoning market that has doomed millions of them to captive living conditions that cannot possibly address their behavioral and psychological needs. Wild animals belong in the wild—not in our homes, basements or backyards. The animal protection movement calls upon government to address seriously the impact of non-domesticated exotics with respect to their welfare and the impact on human health and the environment by achieving at the federal, state or local level, as appropriate, the following legislative objectives. Significantly strengthen and enforce the regulations and prohibitions governing the importation, breeding and keeping of non-domesticated exotics for human companionship Enact and enforce strict penalties for violations of facility and animal care standards by commercial importers, breeders, brokers and individuals. Stronger penalties should include fines, jail time and/or confiscation of animals. The ultimate objective must be an end to the breeding and possession of non-domesticated exotics as pets. Enact and enforce licensing of all endangered or CITES listed animals Prohibit the keeping of non-domesticated exotics whose spatial, social and behavioral needs cannot be met in captivity; and strictly regulate the keeping of animals whose care requirements are extremely difficult for the average caretaker to maintain Discourage the practice of keeping non-domesticated exotics in classrooms, human care facilities and other establishments for the purposes of entertainment, exhibit or education where the animals’ welfare is not the exclusive priority Formulate non-lethal solutions for the placement of (1) non-domesticated exotic animals who become displaced as a result of regulatory legislation, (2) surplus animals from zoos, exhibits and performing venues, (3) wild animals seized from private individuals and, (4) as a last resort, allow for the humane euthanasia if appropriate placement can not be found Address the need for shelter and sanctuary facilities to accommodate nondomesticated exotics who become displaced. The financial burden to the animal care community for confiscated animals must be whenever possible the responsibility of those who previously “owned” the animal(s), which should be a provision enforced by law. The animal protection movement envisions a time when cruelty, neglect and abuse of companion animals will not be tolerated. Currently, the only states (see “Animal Cruelty Laws: Where Does Your State Stand” by The Humane Society of the United States July 12, 2005) that lack felony-level animal cruelty laws are Alaska, Arkansas, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, North Dakota, South Dakota and Utah. The minimum provisions in a felony anti-cruelty statute must include5: Applicable to all animals Applicable to first-time offenders Large fines and lengthy prison time as penalties No exemptions Require convicted abusers to receive counseling at their own expense Prohibit abusers from possessing animals or living where animals are present Strong commitment to enforcement of the law The animal protection movement calls upon government to recognize animal cruelty, neglect and abuse as social problems and achieve the following legislative objectives at the federal, state and local levels, as appropriate: Enact effective felony-level animal cruelty laws in all states Enact strict penalties for harming animals who work in service to their human caretakers, including dogs and horses used by police and other government agencies Repeal laws in Minnesota, Oklahoma and Utah that require shelters to surrender animals to research facilities (“pound seizure”) and introduce prohibitions in states that currently allow the practice of pound seizure to occur Prohibit cosmetic mutilations such as tail docking, ear cropping and declawing, as well as alterations such as beak splitting, debarking and devoicing, which have no documented health benefits and which prohibit animals from exercising normal behavior characteristics Enact standardized and mandatory training and continuing education for all animal control officers to increase the level of professionalism and help to prevent unnecessary harm and killing of animals Ensure criminal administrative processes properly document violations to increase tracking and later prosecution Conduct a study on enforcement problems regarding anti-cruelty laws. Develop a plan to work with prosecutors to help with investigations and prosecutions The FBI officially recognizes the validity of a “Cycle of Violence,” the proven link between violence to animals and violence to humans. “Animal violence does not occur in a vacuum … it is not only highly predictive in identifying children at risk for committing future acts of violence but also in identifying children being abused and cases of spousal abuse,” says Supervisory Special Agent Alan C. Brantley of the National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime. (Remarks of Alan C. Brantley before a Congressional Briefing on May 13, 1998 at the U.S. House of Representatives. See also “Deadly Serious” by Randall Lockwood, Ph.D. and Ann Church, HSUS News (Fall 1996)) A significant number of serial killers have been found to have a childhood history of animal torture and killing. The American Psychiatric Association recognizes animal cruelty as a diagnostic criterion of a conduct disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual IV TR. Perpetrators of domestic violence may abuse spouses, children and companion animals. Presently, courts in 27 states order those convicted of cruelty to animals to undergo counseling or anger management. In addition to working more closely with government welfare agencies and women’s shelters to ensure that companion animals are not left behind when other victims escape from abusive homes, the animal protection movement also trains health care and law enforcement professionals to identify and treat offenders. The animal protection movement calls upon government to recognize the link between animal cruelty and human violence and achieve the following legislative objectives at the federal or state level, as appropriate. Introduce provisions in states that currently do not require animal cruelty offenders to undergo counseling Require agencies that discover animal abuse or child abuse to report their findings to a corresponding child’s services or animal control agency (“cross reporting”) Require the FBI to categorize “animal cruelty” in its crime-reporting database separately to ensure accurate tracking and analysis Strengthen penalties for animal abuse that occurs in conjunction with domestic violence Enact and enforce laws that extend the penalties for wanton death or torture to animals beyond the “property” status and that award pain and suffering damages to those who have lost animal companions through deliberate acts of violence Animal racing and animal fighting raise serious animal welfare issues of cruelty, neglect and abuse and frequently result in early and often cruel death for the animals forced to participate. Species caught up in these practices include horses and greyhounds and farmed animals such as chickens and pigs. Although some states prohibit certain types of animal fighting, these laws are generally and arbitrarily limited to dogs and chickens. Legislation that strictly prohibits animal baiting and fighting must extend to all animals. The animal protection movement calls upon government to seriously examine the cruelty, neglect and abuse inherent in animal racing and animal fighting and to achieve the following legislative objectives at the federal or state levels, as appropriate, including Ban all forms of animal fighting Ban all forms of racing that involve animals other than horses Enact strict regulatory controls on the horse racing industry to eliminate egregious mistreatment and to reduce the surplus population of horses An “animal hoarder” is defined as a person who: Acquires more than the typical number of companion animals Is unable to meet even minimal standards of nutrition, sanitation, shelter and veterinary care, with this neglect often resulting in starvation, illness and death and Refuses to acknowledge her/his inability to provide minimum care and the impact of that inability on the animals, the human occupants of the dwelling and the dwelling itself Animal hoarding is a severe, chronic mental illness that requires intervention, ongoing treatment and monitoring by social service agencies and mental health professionals. The animal protection movement calls upon government to acknowledge the significant social and financial impacts of animal hoarding and to achieve the following legislative objectives at the federal or state level, as appropriate, including Increase mental health and social service resources to identify and intervene in animal hoarding cases Mandate mental health counseling for convicted animal hoarders Significantly increase penalties for convicted animal hoarders as part of a comprehensive program of punitive, treatment and educational responses to this problem Strengthen laws to discourage repeat offenses

Your Name
Your Email
Receiver's Name
Receiver's Email
Subject
Extra Comments