Previous studies identify owner-related issues, such as cost and housing, as common reasons for relinquishment of companion animals to animal shelters. It is likely that the burden of surrendering for owner-related reasons falls on those who are socially vulnerable (e.g., low income, unemployed); however, very few studies have assessed social determinants as a predictor of animal relinquishment. The present study used the Canadian Index of Multiple Deprivation (CIMD), which uses four factors of social vulnerability (Ethnocultural Composition, Economic Dependency, Residential Instability, and Situational Vulnerability) to predict risk of surrender for various reasons, of various species and breeds, and of various health statuses across British Columbia, Canada (n = 29,236). We found that CIMD factors predicted increased risk of surrender across many shelter variables. For further understanding of differences between areas in the province, the present study also analyzed the relationship between CIMD factors and animal surrender variables in two areas of interest: Metro Vancouver (n = 3,445) and Kamloops (n = 2,665), and plotted these relationships on a geospatial scale. We found that there were some similarities across areas, such as Situational Vulnerability predicting increased odds of surrendering pit bull-labeled dogs vs. all other dog breeds. There were also differences in predictors of animal surrender variables, suggesting that provision of animal services, such as veterinary care, for vulnerable groups may be specific to location. For example, whereas Ethnocultural Composition predicted increased risk of owner surrender for multiple owner-related reasons in Metro Vancouver, these same reasons for surrender were predicted by Residential Instability in Kamloops, indicating demographic differences that affect animal shelter service use. The results of this research validate the use of geospatial analysis to understand relationships between human vulnerability and animal welfare, but also highlight the need for further interventions in marginalized populations to increase retention of animals.

There is increasing awareness among animal shelter professionals regarding the role of shelters in perpetuating inequities in pet ownership, although the relationship between owner vulnerabilities and animal shelter services is largely understudied. Currently, there is no literature comparing the sociodemographic conditions of communities where surrendered animals originate and communities where they are adopted. The present study compared the “flow” of surrendered animals between originating communities (incoming) and communities where they were adopted (outgoing; n = 21,270). To analyze community-level vulnerability, we used the Canadian Index of Multiple Deprivation (CIMD), which has four dimensions of social vulnerability. We found that three of the four CIMD dimensions were significantly different between surrendering and adopting communities (Ethnocultural Composition, Situational Vulnerability (SV), Economic Dependency, but not Residential Instability). For further investigation, we also grouped our analysis by intake groups (small animal n = 2,682; puppy n = 973; dog n = 3,446; kitten n = 6,436; cat n= 7,733) and found multiple relationships for which the incoming and outgoing CIMD quintiles were different. For example, for both puppies and kittens, the median outgoing SV quintile ranks were statistically significantly lower (less vulnerable) than incoming quintile ranks, with the effect size being moderate (puppy r = 0.31, kitten r = 0.30; p ≤ 0.0025), supporting the concern of the flow of certain animals from more vulnerable to less vulnerable communities. The results of this research provide a basis for understanding potential inequities in the use of shelter services to surrender or adopt an animal. Furthermore, these methods allow animal shelters to assess community needs and create interventions to reduce intake and increase adoption of animals. Finally, these data provide further support that animal sheltering is best considered from a One Welfare perspective.

Recent natural disasters and weather extremes are a stark reminder that we live in a climate crisis. Climate scientists and policymakers have asked each discipline to anticipate and create mitigation and adaptation plans in preparation for a worsening future. Companion animals both impact and are impacted by the changing climate through their intrinsically linked relationships to human society. In this theoretical paper, we argue that companion animal scientists are well-suited to address climate change issues. We identify several anticipated climate change outcomes, such as an increase in extreme weather events, human migration, disasters, and an increase in human inequity, and connect these outcomes to identified or hypothesized impacts on companion animals and the human-animal bond. We suggest opportunities to reduce climate change impacts on companion animals that include alterations to owner caretaking behaviours and breeding practices, and education of owners and governments on zoonosis and disaster preparedness. Furthermore, building climate resilience through decreasing inequity in companion animal fields is paramount; and we propose that a starting place can be in animal sheltering and other support services. We also summarize how companion animals and owners’ caretaking behaviours are impacting climate change through the use of finite natural resources as well as pollution and carbon emissions. We propose that replacement, reduction, and refinement, that guide laboratory animal research, can also be useful to mitigate the effects of companion animals on the environment. We suggest criteria for successful mitigation and adaptation plans to include equitability, sustainability, respect for animals, and measurability. Finally, we end on a call to all companion animal professionals to actively consider their role in mitigating the impact of companion animals on the climate and preparing for the fallout of climate change in their communities.

Dairy farm systems have intensified to meet growing demands for animal products, but public opposition to this intensification has also grown due, in part, to concerns about animal welfare. One approach to addressing challenges in agricultural systems has been through the addition of new technologies, including genetic modification. Previous studies have reported some public resistance towards the use of these technologies in agriculture, but this research has assessed public attitudes toward individual practices and technologies and few studies have examined a range of practices on dairy farms. In the present study, we presented participants with four scenarios describing dairy practices (cow-calf separation, the fate of excess dairy calves, pasture access and disbudding). Citizens from Canada and the United States (n = 650) indicated their support (on a 7-point scale) toward five approaches (maintaining standard farm practice, using a naturalistic approach, using a technological approach, or switching to plant-based or yeast-based milk production) aimed at addressing the welfare issues associated with the four dairy practices. Respondents also provided a text-based rationale for their responses and answered a series of demographic questions including age, gender, and diet. Participant diet affected attitudes toward milk alternatives, with vegetarians and vegans showing more support for the plant-based and yeast-based milk production. Regardless of diet, most participants opposed genetic modification technologies and supported more naturalistic practices. Qualitative responses provided insight into participants’ values and concerns, and illustrated a variety of perceived benefits and concerns related to the options presented. Common themes included animal welfare, ethics of animal use, and opposition toward technology. We conclude that Canadian and US citizens consider multiple aspects of farm systems when contemplating animal welfare concerns, and tend to favor naturalistic approaches over technological solutions, especially when the latter are based on genetic modification.

People often express concern for the welfare of farm animals, but research on this topic has relied upon self-report. Facial expressions provide a quantifiable measure of emotional response that may be less susceptible to social desirability bias and other issues associated with self-report. Viewing other humans in pain elicits facial expressions indicative of empathy. Here we provide the first evidence that this measure can also be used to assess human empathetic responses towards farm animals, showing that facial expressions respond reliably when participants view videos of farm animals undergoing painful procedures. Participants (n = 30) were asked to watch publicly sourced video clips of cows and pigs undergoing common management procedures (e.g. disbudding, castration, tail docking) and control videos (e.g. being lightly restrained, standing). Participants provided their subjective rating of the intensity of 5 negative emotions (pain, sadness, anger, fear, disgust) on an 11-point Likert scale. Videos of the participants (watching the animals) were scored for intensity of unpleasantness of the participants’ facial expression (also on an 11-point Likert scale) by a trained observer who was blind to treatment. Participants showed more intense facial expressions while viewing painful procedures versus control procedures (mean ± SE Likert; 2.4 ± 0.08 versus 0.6 ± 0.17). Participants who reported more intense negative responses also showed stronger facial expressions (slope ± SE = 0.4 ± 0.04). Both the self-reported and facial measures varied with species and procedure witnessed. These results indicate that facial expressions can be used to assess human-animal empathy.

As animals experience distress in animal shelters, leaders call for increased efforts to divert intake of companion animals away from shelters. One novel intake diversion strategy is supported self-rehoming, where owners find new homes for their animals without surrendering to a physical shelter. This study aimed to identify predictors of successful diversion of animals through the AdoptaPet.com ‘Rehome’ online platform. Data for dogs (n = 100,342) and cats (n = 48,484) were analysed through logistic regression to assess the association of animal- and owner-related factors and outcome. Overall, 87.1% of dogs and 85.7% of cats were successfully diverted from animal shelters, out of which, 37.8% of dogs and 35.3% of cats were kept by their original owner. Multiple animal-related factors predicted increased odds of diversion (e.g. younger, smaller). Dog and cat owners who set a longer rehoming deadline (i.e. > 8 weeks) were over twice as likely to keep or adopt out their animal. Dog owners who surrendered for owner-related reasons had increased odds of diversion in comparison to animal behaviour issues. We conclude that online-supported, self-rehoming platforms provide pet owners with an alternative to relinquishment that may reduce the intake of animals to shelters; however, owners with animals that are not preferred by adopters may have to decide whether to keep their animal or relinquish their animal to a shelter or rescue. These results provide guidance for animal shelter professionals on the likelihood of successful diversion programmes given certain animal and owner characteristics.