Elimination Behavior of Shelter Dogs Housed in Double Compartment Kennels

Abstract

For animals in confinement housing the housing structure has tremendous potential to impact well being. Dogs in animal shelters are often housed in one of two types of confinement housing – single kennels and rooms or double compartment kennels and rooms most often separated by a guillotine door. This study examines the effect of housing on the location of elimination behavior in dogs housed in double compartment kennels were the majority of the dogs were walked daily. One side of the kennel contained the food, water and bed and the other side was empty and available except during cleaning time. Location of urination and defecation was observed daily for 579 dogs housed in indoor double compartment kennels for a total of 4440 days of observation. There were 1856 days (41.9%) when no elimination was noted in the kennel. Feces, urine or both were observed in the kennel on 2584 days (58.1%). When elimination occurred in the kennel the probability of fecal elimination on the opposite side of the bed/food/water was 72.5% (95% CI 69.05% to 75.69%). The probability of urination on the opposite side of the bed/food/water was 77.4% (95% CI 74.33% to 80.07%). This study demonstrates the strong preference of dogs to eliminate away from the area where they eat, drink and sleep. Double compartment housing not only allows this – it allows staff the ability to provide safe, efficient, humane daily care and confers the added benefits of reducing risks for disease transmission for the individual dog as well as the population.

Improving in‐kennel presentation of shelter dogs through response‐dependent and response‐independent treat delivery

“…One solution may be to prevent the dogs from entering the back portion by designing kennels without compartments, or closing the door to the back compartment (most kennels have a divider between compartments for ease of cleaning). However, this solution may present welfare concerns because dogs use both compartments for different purposes: the front for toileting and the back for eating and resting (Wagner, Newbury, Kass, & Hurley, ). Another solution may be to evaluate a compound stimulus of the visual presentation of a person together with an auditory cue that may be presented only once when a visitor enters the shelter.…”

Nocturnal activity as a useful indicator of adaptability of dogs in an animal shelter and after subsequent adoption

“…For comparisons between the UCCR of control group dogs and sheltered dogs after adoption, day 3 and day 12 after adoption (for both n = 7) were compared to the averaged data of two UCCR outcomes (12 days apart) for control dogs in homes without novelty experiences ( n = 21). No significant differences were found between UCCR at day 3 and 12 after adoption compared to those of control dogs (independent samples one-sided t -tests, day 3 vs averaged control dogs: estimated mean difference [ratio] = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.86—∞, t 33 = 0.73, p = 0.235; day 12 vs averaged control dogs: estimated mean difference [ratio] = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.87—∞, t 34 = 0.77, p = 0.224).…”

Bem-estar dos cães de abrigos municipais no estado do Paraná, Brasil, segundo o protocolo Shelter Quality

“…Seis abrigos mantinham 100% dos seus cães com pelagem limpa, e oito abrigos, acima de 80%. Wagner et al (2014) mostraram a probabilidade de 72 e 77% dos cães de abrigos defecarem e urinarem, respectivamente, no lado oposto à cama, mostrando a forte preferência dos cães em expressarem o comportamento de eliminação em espaços distintos da alimentação e da área de descanso. Recintos pequenos ou lotados não permitem esse comportamento, comprometendo o bem-estar dos animais e a limpeza do pelame.…”