The Foundation for Interdisciplinary Research and Education Promoting Animal Welfare (FIREPAW)

This executive summary was created for organizations and individuals who either assisted with this dissertation research or who could benefit from learning of the results of this research but who would prefer to get such results in an abbreviated format rather than reading the full dissertation. The dissertation research topic focuses on the effectiveness of various methods of reducing the cost of dog overpopulation. A mixed ecological-economic model of animal flow dynamics is utilized to study the impact of various treatments on dog overpopulation. Survey results for the New York State Capital Region are utilized to estimate model parameters, analyze the effectiveness of policy options, understand the perceptions and attitudes of dog owners, and to obtain a contingent valuation method estimate of the value to dog owners of their animal and the cost to society of dog overpopulation.

Possible policies analyzed here include increasing shelter space, increasing shelter marketing efforts, low cost spay/neuter programs, spay/neuter public education efforts, financial incentives to encourage adoption, and public education efforts to encourage responsible pet ownership. The effectiveness of policy options is analyzed using a variety of welfare objectives.

The diagram above shows the ecological-economic model that is used in this dissertation. The diagram shows all stocks (labeled "P" followed by a numeral for a population of animals) and all flows ("S" represents supply lines to the consumer pet market, "B" represents animal births, "D" represents deaths, "A" represents abandoned animals, and "T" represents other transfers). The advantage of using such a model is that results can be quantified, indirect effects and long-term impacts can be taken into consideration, and the impact of policy on various disparate animal welfare goals can be explicitly measured.

Survey data was collected from random mailings to residents of Albany and Rensselaer Counties as well as to registered dog owners for these same two counties. Some of this data is used to better estimate model parameters. Some of this data is also used to estimate the cost of unwanted dogs to society. However, the primary focus of the survey questions is to analyze the effect of proposed policy alternatives.

A total of 700 surveys were sent to registered dog owners in Rensselaer and Albany Counties while 300 surveys were sent to random residents of those counties. The total response rate for all surveys was 36%.

According to the results of the model, if the goal is to make the New York State Capital Region to a "no-kill" area, this could quite possibly be achieved long-term at a cost of a couple hundred thousand dollars a year (with the exact amount depending on exactly how the result would be achieved and how quickly the goal is to be achieved). The survey results indicated an average "willingness to pay" to reduce regional dog overpopulation of about $15, with 173,000 households in the two-county study region, the goal of becoming a "no-kill" region may be well within reach at a price that the public as a whole would find acceptable. It should be noted that to arrive at quantifiable cost efficiencies for a wide range of hypothetical and untested programs, some significant assumptions were made in this study. However, even assuming actual costs are several times higher than those found in the model, a no-kill goal is still a long-term achievable goal for the region.

One of the key insights gained from this analysis is the advantages/disadvantages of the specific treatments studied here. First, it should be noted that no single treatment can be described as "optimal" or even most cost-effective. This is because the relative efficiency of various treatments depends on the definition of welfare and the time frame being considered. However, this dissertation did bring out many advantages/disadvantages to the possible treatments considered.

Low-cost Spay/Neuter Programs: Despite arguments made by some veterinarians to the contrary, subsidized spay/neuter programs have the potential to be among the most cost-effective tools. Even if these programs only reach a small number of consumers, a small change in the spay/neuter rate can result in a large change in euthanasia and abandonment rates. Low-cost spay/neuter programs also improve in effectiveness over time. Even after thirty years, there can still be small improvements in euthanasia rates from a one-time permanent shift in the spay/neuter rate. However, this is also a disadvantage of a spay/neuter program since it can take close to a decade for even 50% of the program's eventual impact to be felt. Another disadvantage of a subsidized spay/neuter program is that it has a limited potential impact. Based on the number of people who reported being willing to spay/neuter their dog at a lower price, a subsidized spay/neuter program could not bring the region to a "no-kill" level on its own (though it could reduce euthanasia by more than 50%).

Spay/Neuter Public Education Efforts: The advantages and disadvantages of a spay/neuter public education effort are very similar to those for a low-cost spay/neuter program since both efforts focus on influencing the same variable. One difference between a public education program and subsidized spay/neuter program is that an intensive public education program may do enough alone to allow society to reach a no-kill goal. The cost of a subsidized spay/neuter program is in the same general range as the cost of a public education spay/neuter program. There is also some evidence that the two programs combined may be more effective than either one alone.

Public Education Campaign to Encourage Adoption/Improved Shelter Marketing: Depending on who one assumes the new adopters are, a program to encourage adoption can be very effective at reducing euthanasia and has an immediate and permanent benefit. One disadvantage of this type of program is that it has little or no effect on other dimensions of animal welfare outside of euthanasia (among other things it has no effect on the number of dogs dying as strays).

Financial Incentives for Adoption: By levying a tax on alternative sources of dogs, adoption rates can also be increased. A cost/benefit analysis indicates that financial incentives would probably would be more cost effective (in terms of the social cost of the tax) than a public education program. On the other hand, the most obvious disadvantage of such a tax is that it would face stiff political opposition, both from consumers and from breeders/pet stores. Enforcement also could be a problem.

Public Education to encourage "responsible pet ownership": An additional possible focus for an educational/advertising campaign is to encourage responsible pet ownership (i.e. encouraging people not to purchase an animal unless they are sure they can provide it lifelong care). This treatment has only a relatively moderate cost-effectiveness. Another disadvantage is that using some assumptions the reduced abandonment eventually leads to more dogs and the breeding of these dogs eventually leads to a population increase.

Increasing Shelter Space: Money to increase the amount of shelter space is a common plea of animal welfare organizations and shelters. More space seems intuitively to many to mean that less animals will have to be killed. However, this intuition is not generally correct. There is little direct impact on euthanasia rates from having more space to shelter the animals. There are however, two situations where shelter space can make a significant impact. The first is when increased space improves selection and therefore increases adoption rates (15.2% of surveyed dog owners who did not adopt their animal indicated that they did visit a shelter, but they could not find the type of dog they wanted). A second important scenario where increased shelter space can be very powerful is when the inflow of animals into a shelter is close to the average flow of animals out of a shelter. When shelter inflow is much higher than outflow, killing cannot be avoided. On the other hand, when inflow is much less than outflow, high shelter capacity is not necessary. But when inflow is very close to outflow, seasonal and random variation in these flows can cause animals to be killed that would not need to be killed if there was an adequate buffer of shelter space. Under these flow conditions, moderate increases in shelter space can make a large difference in euthanasia rates.

Many other important findings also resulted from this research. It was found that the cost-effectiveness of various treatments was very sensitive to both time-scale and the definition of animal welfare used. Therefore, people working to promote animal welfare need to make sure they have a consensus on what exactly their goals are before they decide on the appropriate policy mix.

One encouraging finding of this research is that society (at least for an area with dynamics similar to the Capital Region of New York) can reasonably achieve a "no kill" goal. The exact cost would depend on the assumptions, methods, and time frames used. However, under some assumptions and with a long time frame of 30 years or more, the goal might be achievable for between $100,000 to $200,000 a year, with most of that money going towards low-cost spay-neuter programs and spay-neuter education.

The survey results indicate that only a small percentage of the population has dogs that are allowed to reproduce. However, this small group still generates enough puppies to supply most of the pet-owning population with new animals, with 0.6 new dogs generated per existing dog by private owners. Because of the profound impact this group of dog owners has on population dynamics, the small size of this group can be deceptive. The results here also give some insight into the profile of this population. Generally, the owners of breeding animals tend to own mixed breed dogs at least as often as they own pure-bred dogs. Owners of reproducing animals were lower in income and tended to rate the costs and benefits of ownership as lower relative to expectations.

This study failed to confirm prior research which has found a connection between price of dog and abandonment, with lower priced dogs being more frequently abandoned. Lower priced dogs also did not result in lower unexpected benefits nor higher unexpected costs.

One reason people purchase dogs from breeders is to reduce uncertainty in traits and because they believe this will lead to "higher quality" dogs. The results of the survey do not show support for the conclusion that there is reduced uncertainty or higher quality from pure-bred dogs. Unexpected benefits were actually lower and unexpected costs were higher (though these differences were not statistically significant) for dogs from breeders.

It was found that both costs and benefits of dog ownership are systematically underestimated. It should also be noted that benefits were rarely lower than expectations, indicating that if abandonment occurs because of a mismatch between expectations and reality, it is more likely the unexpected costs that cause abandonment (with monetary costs more commonly being underestimated than non-monetary costs). Another interesting result here is that in general there were more unexpected benefits than unexpected costs. This would indicate that if the decision to purchase a dog in the first place implies that expected benefits were greater than expected costs, in reality, the net benefit from the purchase was typically even higher than expected.

The results of this research give some useful information for improving adoption rates regarding why people purchase dogs from other sources. The table below gives the reasons why dog owners purchased rather than adopting their animal.

The results indicate that if shelters could better reach people looking for pure-bred dogs or puppies, they could greatly increase the number of adoptions. This could be done either by informing potential adopters of the presence at shelters of both puppies and pure-bred breeds or by addressing the underlying reason that some consumers seek these animals (i.e. addressing concerns about quality of mixed breeds and "used" dogs and pointing out the advantages of obtaining a mature dog over a puppy). Other important ways to increase adoption include addressing issues of selection, general quality concerns, and marketing better to the impulse buyer or the buyer who does not immediately think of going to the shelter. The results of the survey also indicate that financial incentives to promote adoption can also be effective on approximately 20% of the population.

· For at least one region of the country, a goal of becoming "no-kill" can be achieved for a cost far lower than the regional willingness to pay. This region appears to be a fairly typical mid-sized urban area.

· The "optimal" policy or combination of policies depends on both the definition of welfare and the time frame being considered.

· Over the long-term both low-cost spay/neuter programs and spay/neuter education campaigns can be very powerful and cost-effective even if they only affect a small segment of the population.

· Increasing shelter space can have a positive impact in two situations: 1) if the inflow of animals is very close to the outflow and 2) if more space increases selection and therefore adoption rates. Otherwise, it is not cost-effective at reducing euthanasia

· Costs and benefits of companion animal ownership are consistently underestimated and shelter animals have at least as high unexpected benefits and as low unexpected costs as pure-bred animals.