cfhs catreport english 1

7/30/2019 Cfhs Catreport English 1

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cfhs-catreport-english-1 1/69

Cats in Canada

A Comprehensive Report on the Cat Overpopulation Crisis



S onsors

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................4

2. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS ..............................................................5

3 CFHS RESEARCH APPROACH ..........................................................................8

4. RESULTS ..........................................................................................................10

4.1 Cat Demographics .....................................................................11

4.2 Perceptions o Cat Overpopulation..............................................15

4.3 E ectiveness o Current Solutions ..............................................17

4.4 Sheltering Cats ...........................................................................20

Shelter Capacity ...................................................................20

Animal Intake ......................................................................20

Live Release .........................................................................244.5 Euthanasia ................................................................................29

4.6 Cats at Large .............................................................................32

4.7 Veterinarian Support ..................................................................35

5. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................37

6. APPENDIX I – CASE STUDIES ............................................................................38

7. APPENDIX II – PROVINCIAL TABLES ..................................................................49

8. REFERENCES ....................................................................................................69

CONTENTS

Acknowle ements

The CFHS would like to acknowledge the work of Tamara Nahal, Deb Gleason,John Wall, David Dern and Kim Elmslie and the additional contributions of

taskforce members Barbara Cartwright, Stephanie Walsh, Kristin Williams and CraigNaherniak, without whom this report could not have been completed.

Design by Lola Design and French version by Communications Pierre René de Cotret.



1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARYt is o ten overlooked in the thread o human civilization,

but the past and uture o people and cats are thoroughlyntertwined. Since nomadic humans frst developed

agriculture, cats have been part o our community –perhaps settling in more like riendly neighbours rather thanbeing domesticated’ as it is generally understood (Baldwin,

1975; Vigne et al, 2004; Driscol et al, 2007; Seprell, 2000).That relationship o mutual bene t – with cats thriving underhuman protection while ridding arms o rodent pests – hascontinued and evolved over the millennia. Today ully 37%o households in Canada include one or more cats.

Sadly, all is not well in this relationship. Each year inCanada it is estimated that hundreds o thousandso companion animals enter shelters and the vastmajority o these are cats (CFHS, 2012). Some are petsurrendered by their owners who can no longer care orhem while others are ound roaming as strays or dumped

by careless guardians. Cats are less likely to be reunitedwith their owners than dogs and once in shelter care itypically takes longer to adopt out cats than it does dogs.

Some are never adopted. Cats in shelters may be euthanizedwhen they become ill (a development that can be hastenedby stress). Sometimes shelters cannot adequately supporthe unending stream o new arrivals.

To better understand the scope and scale o catoverpopulation in Canada, the Canadian Federationo Humane Societies (CFHS) undertook a multi-takeholder research initiative to address the negative

consequences o cat overpopulation includinghomelessness, overburdened shelters and rescues, andeuthanasia or space and illness. The research providbaseline data and possible solutions or practitionerstruggling within the system. This report represents the dataand opinions collected rom more than 478 stakeholdersincluding shelters, municipalities, veterinarians, rescuorganizations, trap-neuter-return groups and spay/neuterorganizations. These are the organizations that deal with theoutcomes o cat overpopulation every day.

The research ound that there are an estimated 10.2 millowned cats in Canada and the owned cat population growing at a rate aster than the number o householdsacross the country. Shelters are at or near capacityto care or the cats that arrive at their doors. Thexacerbated by the act that twice as many cats as dogs arebeing brought in or care. Extrapolating the data provided,it is projected that more than 600,000 homeless cats inCanadian shelters did not fnd new homes in 2011.Un ortunately, more than 1/3 o the cats surrendered toshelters were surrendered due to issues o housing includingrental agreements, landlord conficts and moving, ollowedby the animal taking up too much time or responsibility.

The research identi ed adoption as being both the mostavailable as well as the most success ul current solution tocat overpopulation. Although adoption is key or cats,survey showed that only 44% o cats brought intoshelters are adopted out. And even though our shelteare ull, Canadians are more likely to acquire a cat rom ariend, relative, a give-away, rom their own pet’s o springor take in a stray than they are to adopt rom a humanesociety, SPCA or a rescue group.

Sterilization was also identi ed as a success ul solution to catoverpopulation – in act 70% o respondents agreed thataccessible spay/neuter surgeries (including subsidized

and high volume) was the most important solution tothis crisis. O the animals that are surrendered to shelters(both by owners and by the public) less than hal o onepercent were spayed or neutered. I this is a refection onational spay neutering patterns then there are millions ounaltered animals across the country, many o which are reeto roam. Stakeholders are sterilizing cats that they adoptedout but not at a rate o 100%, o ten due to the age o theanimal and other medical reasons.



Who is the Canadian Federationo Humane Societies?

The Canadian Federation o Humane Societie(CFHS) is a national organization representinhumane societies and SPCAs in Canada. Founded in1957, the CFHS works toward positive, progressivchange to end animal cruelty, improve animaprotection and promote the humane treatment o allanimals. As the convener and representative o thelargest animal wel are community in Canada, theCFHS advances the wel are o companion animalsarm animals, wildli e and animals in research witha strong national voice promoting the interests andconcerns o animal wel are to government, policymakers, industry and the public.

Stakeholders agreed that municipal bylaws and en orcementre the least likely to help with the cat overpopulation issue,espite the act that legislation is a commonly proposed

olution in response to the problem. When asked to citeolutions, stakeholders indicated that lack o resources ton orce municipal bylaws as a key reason or ailing.

While it is di cult to estimate the Canadian Homeless-At-Largend Feral cat population (see de nitions page 9) it is thoughthat these cats are signi cant contributors to overpopulationecause o their lower spay/neuter rates and their unwanteditters (Slater, 2007, 2002, Centonze & Levy, 2002). There ore,etermining a population estimate method and solutions is anssential step in solving this crisis.

Euthanasia is the starkest outcome o cat overpopulation.Stakeholders across the spectrum are working to reduce theeed or euthanasia by decreasing the incidence o unwantedets and increasing the number o viable homes. The number cats euthanized in 2011 was signi cantly larger than theumber o dogs. The most common reason or the euthanasia cats and kittens is illness or a change in status which re ers

o animals that become ill while being sheltered.

ncluded at the end o the report are several case studieshat showcase some programs and projects that relate to theecommendations o the report. These case studies provideeal-word examples o innovative work that is having a positivempact on cat overpopulation.

At this point, i large-scale, targeted action is not taken,he cat overpopulation problem will worsen. There iso one stakeholder or group responsible or the problem or

nding the solution – it is truly a community problem thatequires a community e ort to resolve. To signi cantlyeduce cat overpopulation in Canada the CFHS urgeshelters, municipalities, rescues, TNR groups, veterinarians,ll communities and any individual who values cats to takehe steps necessary to reduce the cat overpopulation problemtarting with:

• Accessible spay/neuter surgeries• Increased adoption strategies• Humane education• Adequately funded enforcement• Responsible pet ownership



2.SUMMARY Of RECOMMENdATIONS

Cat DemographicsMaintain a set of comprehensive national statistics measured every two years to determine long-termsolution e cacy and trending data. This data mustinclude accurate estimates o the number o allstakeholders involved and project the correct numberneeded to adequately measure the current state o thecat population and the e ectiveness o the solutions.As well, a common language across the animal wel arecommunity should be agreed upon in order tostandardize and compare data.Develop a national marketing campaign, integrated at the local level, to connect the potential 5 millionadoptive homes with cats in shelters.Implement a spay/neuter public education campaignbased on behavioural science with the goal osterilization compliance in owned animals.Design a Homeless-at-Large and Feral cat populationestimate tool using credible evidence-based approaches.

Perceptions o Cat OverpopulationInitiate a strategic communications process with municipalities to better understand the issues within thisstakeholder group.Quantify the consequences of unfunded homeless cat mandate at the municipal level.

E ectiveness o Current Solutions• Support and fund the top identi ed effective current solutions: adoption, humane education, trap/neuter/ return and subsidized spay/neuter.

• Invest in research and pilot programs to improve leastutilized or understood solutions, as well as high volumespay/neuter, cat licensing and trap/neuter/return.

• Identify the key mitigation strategies in an effective catbylaw and adopt and adequately en orce such laws.

• Increase the incidence return-to-owner rates throughmandatory identi cation and education campaigns.

Sheltering Cats• Shelters must capture simple, accurate data including

intake numbers, live release rates and euthanasiastatistics in order to de ne the issues in their jurisdictionand engage with local stakeholders. As well, the datashould be incorporated into provincial and nationalstatistics.

• Shelters should review their policies and standards toimprove the shelter environment or cats. Resources suchas the Guidelines or Standards o Care in AnimalShelters (Newbury et al, 2010) and associated Capacity toCare model are recommended.

• Mandatory sterilization of all new cats such as those adopted rom shelters, SPCAs, humane societies, rescuesas well as cats purchased rom pet stores.

• Implement an effective accessible spay/neuter regimethat allows or subsidies, high volume programs,pediatric sterilizations and bans the selling or adopting oanimals that are not spayed or neutered in order toreduce the ertility rate o unowned and stray cats, as thisis the highest source o relinquished animals ororganizations.

• Organizations should review their procedures to

determine whether prepubertal spaying and neuteringcould be appropriate or their organizations.• Establish clear return-to-owner policies in conjunction

with local shelters. For example, establish a centralin ormation location that all groups can access with thegoal o increasing return-to-owner rates.

• Increase the number of adoptions by increasing awareness o the concept o responsible pet ownershipincreasing the value o cats and implementing greaterhumane education.

1 Responsible pet ownership as de ned in Slater (2007) includes the provision o suitable ood and shelter, health care and social interaction, and the permanent

identi cation o the animal (a tattoo or microchip), the provision o a sa e environment and a li e-long commitment to the animal’s care. The community shouldview abandonment not only as a ailure o individual responsibility but also as an antisocial and immoral act.

What ollows is a summary o recommendations rom the major topic areas.



2.SUMMARY Of RECOMMENdATIONS

1Responsible pet ownership as de ned in Slater (2007) includes the provision o suitable ood and shelter, health care and social interaction, and, Ibelieve, the permanent identi cation o the animal (a tattoo or microchip), the provision o a sa e environment and a li e-long commitment to the

animal’s care. The community should view abandonment not only as a ailure o individual responsibility but also as an antisocial and immoral act.© City o Calgary

Adoption of only sterilized cats in pet stores throughpartnerships with local rescues, shelters, SPCAs, and

humane societies until such time when there is nolonger a population o Homeless – Sheltered cats.

EuthanasiaImplement best practices in order to reduce euthanasia o cats by developing minimum standards or acilitiesthat reduce length o stay while increasing communitycapacity to adopt and spay/neuter the animals in thecommunity (Newbury et al, 2010).

Cats at LargeConduct projects in known cat populations with an active management protocol.Ensure adequate training for individuals involved in the process o trapping and returning.Trap-and-removal of stray cats with identi cation, such as tattoos or licenses, to shelters, SPCAs, or humanesocieties or reuni cation with previous home. I nonecan be ound, rehome.Trap-and-removal of adoptable homeless and feral cats that can be socialized or who are already well-socialized.Trap-neuter-return (TNR) for feral cats with consistent monitoring to remove new strays and spay or neuternew eral cat arrivals.Ensure that feeding stray cats is not illegal. If it is illegal,work to remove this clause rom bylaws.

Veterinarian Support• Develop provincial mechanisms allowing for the greater

collaboration between the veterinarian and wider animalwel are community in accessible spay/neuter campaigns.

• Support and fund subsidized or no-cost spay/neuterinitiatives.



3. CfHS RESEARCH AppROACH

ASKFORCE MEMBERS

ichelle Anderson-Cameron (Guelph Humane Society)ynne Cadigan (SPCA New oundland & Labrador)arbara Cartwright (CFHS), Project Managerck Kinch (Kitchener/Waterloo Humane Society)any Koback (Saskatoon SPCA)

ill MacDonald (Winnipeg Humane Society)aren McGeean (Fredericton SPCA)elly Mullaly (PEI Humane Society)raig Neherniak (British Columbia SPCA)

enys Pelletier (SPA de Québec)eo Urton (British Columbia SPCA)ances Wach (Saskatchewan SPCA)ephanie Walsh (Edmonton Humane Society)ristin Williams (Nova Scotia SPCA)

The objective o the CFHS cat overpopulation research is torovide a benchmark or Canadian stakeholders striving toddress the issue that aces both cats and the communitieshat care or them. To complete this research the CFHSmplemented a three-pronged approach:

1. Establish a national task orce2. Conduct a national market study3. Carry out a national multi-stakeholder survey

CFHS Task orceThe CFHS Task orce is comprised o animal sheltering leadersepresenting all ten provinces with the goal o determininghe scope and scale o cat overpopulation across Canada.

t is important to note that while the three territories wereot represented on the Task orce (the data demonstratedhat cat overpopulation is not considered a crisis in thoseegions), they were included in the stakeholder survey. The

Task orce was consulted on strategy and technique includinghe best tools to capture data, categories o measurementnd survey questions, as well as identi ying key industrytakeholders and providing eedback on the results andecommendations.

National Market SurveyA national market survey o Canadians was conducted todetermine the prevalence o cat ownership. The survey,based on an online polling o Canadians randomly recruitedby telephone using the Nanos RDD Crowdsource, includeresponses rom 1,000 individuals conducted between July25th and 30th, 2012. The results o this approach areaccurate plus or minus 3.1%, 19 times out o 20.

Stakeholder SurveyThe CFHS undertook the rst national multi-stakeholdersurvey on cats in Canada. Based on guidance rom the CFHSTask orce, target stakeholder groups were identi ed usingthe criteria o those currently working with the direct resulto the cat overpopulation. There ore, groups such as petstores, groomers and pet-sitters, who may come in contactwith cats on a daily basis, were not included.

The target stakeholders were identifed as:• H m n S t s n S t s f r th Pr v nt n

o Cruelty to Animals (SPCAs): organizations ocusseon the wel are o animals includingthe sheltering and re-homing o animals as well as, insome cases, having the added responsibility and authority

to investigate and en orce animal cruelty legislation.• M n p t s: animal control o ten alls under theresponsibility o the local municipality. Municipalitiesmay choose to capture and house roaming animals, orthey may choose to contract services out to a local group(in-part or in-whole).

• R s s: this group typically takes in stray, abandoned,injured, or surrendered animals needing care andattention and humane assistance, usually without ananimal sheltering acility. Rescues o ten rely on networkso volunteers to oster and care or rescued animals.

• Sp n N t r Gr ps: these groups ocus osterilizing animals through low/no-cost programs withservices o ered through licensed veterinarians.

• Tr p-N t r-R t rn (TNR) Gr ps: typicallycommunity-based, TNR groups manage populationso eral/ ree-roaming cats by trapping, sterilizing,vaccinating and then returning the cats to their habitat.TNR groups can also provide longer term care or thesecolonies.

• V t r n r ns: the Doctors o Veterinary Medicine (DVMdeal with prevention, diagnosis and treatment odisease and injury in animals. Veterinarians are licensedby provincial bodies.



Table 1: PaRTiciPaTioN by PRoViNce aNd STakeHoldeR GRouP

HumaneSociety

SPCA TNR Municipality Veterinarian Rescue Spay/NeuterGroup

Other Total

NL 0 6 1 14 5 0 1 0 27

PEI 1 1 0 0 9 0 1 1 13

NS 2 8 2 1 26 3 1 1 44

NB 0 7 3 1 11 1 0 1 24

QC 4 3 2 3 60 5 1 2 80

ON 13 1 1 13 32 9 4 2 75

MB 3 1 2 17 11 3 1 1 39

SK 3 4 0 0 32 2 0 0 41

AB 6 2 0 5 46 4 0 0 63

BC 0 37 4 4 12 11 0 0 68

NT, YK, NU 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 4

TOTAL 32 70 15 61 245 38 9 8 478

Percentage 7% 15% 3% 13% 51% 8% 2% 2% 100%

Task orce members compiled lists o stakeholders inheir provinces, while CFHS sta developed lists or allhree territories. Stakeholder lists were augmented andxpanded with the assistance o the Federation o Canadian

Municipalities (FCM), Muniscope, the Canadian VeterinaryMedical Association (CVMA), provincial veterinary medicalssociations, municipal associations, online research andhrough the use o social media and digital communicationsools including Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and Hum@ne

News (CFHS digital newsletter).

The Task orce then compiled a list o investigative questionshat provided the baseline data to answer the ollowingver-arching questions:

• Is there a cat overpopulation problem in Canada?• If so, what is the extent of the problem?• What are the current responses, solutions and

success rates?

Nanos Research was retained to create a statisticallyrobust online survey to collect the data. The survey conducted between May 25 – July 15th, 2012. A secure,anonymous survey link was sent to 1076 stakeholders andcompleted by 233 (22% response rate) and an open link wasdistributed through the CVMA newsletter to veterinariansand was completed by 245 respondents. The response rateor this group cannot be calculated as the potential surveyaudience is not de nitively known.

In all provinces except New oundland and Labradoveterinarians comprised the highest response rate orthe survey at 245 (51%). SPCAs had the second-highestresponse rate at 70 (15%) and municipalities made up thethird-highest response rate at 61 (13%) (Table 1).



R E S

U L T S

4. RESULTS

During the research phase, the CFHS received input roma total o 478 stakeholders as well as a random sampleo 1,000 Canadians in a market survey. This sectioncombines results rom both research methods to providea comprehensive overview o cat overpopulation inCanada including:

• Cat Demographics• Perceptions of Cat Overpopulation• Current Solutions• Sheltering Cats• Euthanasia• Cats at Large• Veterinarian Support

A note on reading the tables: Many tables include an N value. This re ers to thenumber o organizations and/or individuals thatresponded to that speci c question. In some tablesthere are multiple N values. As well, in some cases theN value is very small. Typically an N value below 30not reported on, however, as this is the rst research oits kind CFHS wanted to provide as much in ormationas possible to set a baseline or uture studies.

A note on “Mean”: In many tables the total mean may not add up to 100due to weighting and rounding.

A note on abbreviations:The survey included stakeholders rom HumanSocieties, SPCAs, municipalities, rescues, TNR groupspay/neuter groups and Veterinarians. For brevity, the

term All Stakeholders re ers to every respondent, theterm Shelters, Rescues and TNR re ers to HumanSocieties, SPCAs, municipalities, rescues, TNR grouand spay/neuter groups.



Cat populations in Canada aredynamic and consist of several segmentsbased on three broader categories: owned,homeless and feral. These categories can befurther broken down as:

Owne –In oor:cats that belong to a home, are kept insideor not allowed to roam outside.

Owne –Out oor:cats that belong to a home, roam outdoors,out of the control of the homeowner.

Homeless–At-Lar e: loosely owned cats (fed by one or manypeople), lost or abandoned and strays.

Homeless–Sheltere :previously owned or at-large cat surrenderedor brought into a facility for care.

feral–Mana e :unowned cats living in a colony anddirectly fed by a resident, receiving medicalassistance when required and with somedegree of human socialization.

feral–In e en ent:unowned cats with no human socializationfor the period of the cat’s life and who sur-vives independently of human involvement.

Critical to understanding cat overpopulation is trackinga reliable number o the cats in Canada. The mostreliable estimates can be generated rom the Owned–Indoor, Owned-Outdoor and Homeless–Shelteredpopulations. While adequate numbers or the

Homeless-at-Large and Feral populations are critical orunderstanding the ull crisis, there are two limiting actorsto compiling adequate data in this area: an inadequateresponse rom those working with eral-managed cats;estimating such populations requires credible evidencebased approach, possibly a conservation biology approachinvolving population dynamics and modeling.

Owned Cat Population Model

Using the data rom the Nanos market survey, an ownedcat population model was devised (Table 2) with theollowing criteria and methods:

1. current household counts taken romStatistics Canada 2

2. prevalence o cat ownership through anonline survey.

3. compared against the previous cat populationreported in the Canadian Veterinary Journalcompleted by Ipsos Canada in 2008 (Perrin,2009) (Table 3).

4. using the comparison model, Cat GrowthRate Projections were calculated or 2008 to2012 (Table 4).

4.1 Cat Demographics

2“Dwelling Counts, or Canada, Provinces and Territories, 2011 and 2006 Censuses,” Statistics Canada, 11 Apr. 2012, 20 Aug. 2012<http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/dp-pd/hlt-fst/pd-pl/Table-Tableau.cfm?LANG=Eng&T=108&S=6&O=D>.



4.1CatDemographics

sh birds cats dogs

10

7.5

5

2.5

0

2.2 1.9

5.8

1.3

Table 2: Owned Cat Population Model Estimate

Variable Description Nanos 2012

A Number o Households in Canada (Statscan) 14,569,633

B Percentage o households with a cat (Nanos) 37.7%

C Number o households with a cat (Nanos) [A x B] 5,492,752

D Average number o cats per household (Nanos Genpop Market Study) 1.85

E Number o owned cats with households [C x D] 101,61,591

Table 3: Comparison o 2008 and 2012 Population Estimates

Variable Description Ipsos 2008 Nanos 2012

A Number o Households Canada (Statscan) 13,576,855 14,569,633

B Percentage o households with a cat (Nanos) 35.5% 37.7%

C Number o households with a cat (Nanos) [A x B] 4,819,784 5,492,752

D Average number o cats per household (Nanos) 1.76 1.85

E Number o owned cats with households [C x D] 8,482,819 10,161,591

T 4: own c t Gr wth R t Pr j t ns 2008 t 2012

Year Base est m t c mp n Gr wth

2008 8,482,819 8,788,200

2009 9,104,576

2010 9,432,340

2011 9,771,905

2012 10,161,591 10,123,693

Annualized growth 3.6%

At the time o the research there were an estimated 10.2 million cats in Canada. Cats are more popular dogs as companion animals and their ownership rate is increasing at a rate o 3.6% annually while dog ownership isdecreasing. 37.7% o households owned a cat compared to 29.1% who owned a dog. This is similar to data collectedin the 2010 National Urban Animal Report by Petlynx, which ound that 35% o households in Canada have a cat and32% have a dog.

Demographics o Ownership

On average, cat owning households had 1.9 cats comparedwith 1.3 dogs per household (Figure 1) which has increasedsince the Ipsos Reid poll in 2008 (Perrin, 2009).

Figure 1: Response to the question:“How many o each o the ollowing types o animalsdoes your household currently have as pets?”



25%

16%

16%

15%

11%

8%

5%3%

Humane Society/S

shelter N=174Adopt a Stray N=Friends/Relatives Giveaway/Free NPet Store N=77Breeder N=58Pet's Offspring N=Vet Clinic N=23

4.1CatDemographics

Table 5: Homeless - Sheltered Cat Population Model

Stakeholder Survey Question Total

Total Intake o Cats 150,350

Adopted Out 65,249

Reclaimed by Owner 7,140

Euthanized 59,939

Net new number o cats without a home in 2011 18,022

When asked how many o their cats, i any, hadbeen spayed or neutered, respondents in cat owninghouseholds provided an average response o 80%,revealing that 20% o owned cats are not spayed orneutered. This suggests that there could be more than2,032,318 unaltered owned cats in Canada contributingto the overpopulation crisis.

Cat owners report that they are more likely to adopttheir cat rom a humane society, SPCA or shelter (25%)than to purchase rom a pet store or breeder (19%).However, when combined, Canadians are most likely toacquire their cat as strays, rom riends and relatives, asgiveaways or their own pet’s o spring (36%) (Figure 2).The act that respondents report 80% o owned cats assterilized, but the majority is also sourcing their cats romlargely unwanted litters may indicate that preventativesterilization is not happening – in other words theysterilize in reaction to their cat having a litter.

When asked “In addition to any pets that you have now,would you consider adopting a cat as a pet?” 34% ofCanadians said they would consider it. This indicatesthat there may be up to 5 million Canadian householdsthat would at least consider cat adoption.

Homeless–Sheltered Cat Population Model

The Homeless-Sheltered cat population is the number o cats and kittens brought into animal shelters throughoutCanada that are not adopted out into new homes. According to the research, a total o 150,350 cats were surrenderedto 164 participating shelters (Table 5). O this total, 18,022 cats remained in shelters waiting or homes and 59,939were euthanized (overwhelmingly due to illness). When added together it reveals an overpopulation o at least 77,961cats. It is here that the concept o “overpopulation” - more cats than viable homes – is directly identi able andmeasurable. The Homeless-Sheltered population represents those cats not absorbed back into homes and there orelanguishing in shelters or acing euthanasia.

However, this number must be treated with caution as it is extremely conservative, representing only a small portiono possible shelters in Canada. It is more likely that, based on extrapolation, that more than 600,000 cats were le t inCanadian shelters in 2011 (Table 6). This number refects the average number o Homeless-Sheltered cats reported inthe survey extrapolated to an estimated number o municipal shelters, humane societies and SPCAs.

NOTE: this estimate does not include rescues sheltering cats in Canada and assumes that each municipalshelter or pound takes in cats.

Figure 2: Response to the question “How many o thecats in your household were from the following sources?”



4.1CatDemographics Table 6: Extrapolated number o homeless-sheltered cats

Variable Description Total

A Number o respondents with cat intake data 164

B Number o cats euthanized 59,939

C Number o cats waiting or adoption 18,022

D Total number o homeless-sheltered cats (B+C) 77,961E Average annual number o homeless-sheltered cats per responding shelter (D/A) 475

F Estimated number o municipal animal services 3 1,135

G Estimated number o Humane Societies and SPCAs 210

H Total estimated number o shelters (F+G) 1,345

I Projected number o Homeless-Sheltered cats [ExH] 638,875

C at D emographiCs - C onClusion

At the time o this research there were an estimated 10.2 million owned cats in Canada, which equates to aboutone owned cat or every three Canadian residents. 37.7% o all Canadian households owned a cat with anaverage number o 1.9 cats per household. Based on market research 80% o owned cats have been sterilized,leaving 20% unaltered. However, while Canadians enjoy cat ownership, conservatively more than 150,000 catswere surrendered to shelters in 2011. More alarmingly, when the stakeholder data on Homeless-Sheltered catsthat did not nd a new home is extrapolated to include all potential shelters it is more likely that 638,875 cats inCanada languished - either waiting in shelters or acing euthanasia. This is where the cat overpopulation problemand the crisis acing those looking a ter the problem becomes very real.

r eCommenDations

• Maintain a set of comprehensive national statistics measured every two years to determine long-term solution e cacy and trending data. This data must includeaccurate estimates o the number o all stakeholders involved and project the correctnumber needed to adequately measure the current state o the cat population and thee ectiveness o the solutions. As well, a common language across the animal wel arecommunity should be agreed upon in order to standardize and compare data.

• Develop a national marketing campaign, integrated at the local level, to connect the potential 5 million adoptive homes with cats in shelters.

• Implement a spay/neuter public education campaign based on behavioural science with the goal o sterilization compliance in owned animals.• Design a Homeless-at-Large and Feral cat population estimate tool using credible

evidence-based approaches.

3 Estimated number o municipal animal services sheltering cats in Canada is extrapolated rom Ontario statistics ound to be most reliable. Thereare 444 Ontario municipalities (Ministry o Municipal A airs and Housing -http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page1591.aspx). According to Ontario Ministryo Agriculture, Food, and Rural A airs, there are 170 municipal pounds o which 31 contract to humane societies or SPCAs leaving 139 (31%) omunicipalities with acilities or contracting elsewhere. Estimated number o municipalities is 3660 calculated rom the total o Census Subdivisionsin Canada (2011), less unorganized territories, chartered communities, community governments, crown colonies, improvement districts, islandmunicipalities, Reserves and sel -governing First Nation communities/government districts, resort villages, county subdivisions, summer villages, andregional district electoral areas. Extrapolating 31% o the 3660 municipalities equals the estimated number o pounds in Canada.



British Columbia (N=56)

Alberta (N=17)

Saskatechewan (N=9)

Manitoba (N=28)

Ontario (N=43)

Quebec (N=20)

New Brunswick (N=13)

Nova Scotia (N=18)

Prince Edward Island (N=47)

Newfoundland &Labrador (N=22)

Aggregate 2012

100

53

86

85

100

100

75

64

82

94 6

88 12

29

7

10

25

36

14

18

7

5

4

YES NO UNSURE


Alberta (N=46)

Saskatechewan (N=32)

Manitoba (N=11)

Ontario (N=32)

Quebec (N=60)


Nova Scotia (N=26)


Newfoundland &Labrador (N=5)

Aggregate 2012

75

100

78

65 23

64 18 18

92

100

100

75

72 15 1

12

42 50

13

15

YES NO U

uns rpr s ng , r sp n ng st h rs wh w r w th ts n s s gr th t c n s f ngcat overpopulation. When asked directly “In your opinion, is there a cat overpopulation problem in yourmunicipality?” 78% responded “yes”.

The perception o the problem varies by province. 100% o responding Shelters, Rescue and TNR groups in NovaScotia, New Brunswick, and Saskatchewan believe there is a cat overpopulation problem. Manitoba’s responses arethe most divided, with 53% o respondents believing there is a problem while 29% believe there is not (Figure 3).

Whereas 100% o responding veterinarians in Manitoba, PEI and New oundland and Labrador believe there is acat overpopulation problem and the greatest divide in responses is in British Columbia when 42% believe there is aproblem and 50% do not (8% are unsure) ( gure 3A).

4.2 Perceptions o Cat Overpopulation

Figure 3: Shelters, Rescues, TNR response to: “In your opinion,is there a cat overpopulation problem in your municipality?” byprovince

Figure 3A: Veterinarian response to: “In your opinionthere a cat overpopulation problem in your municipalityby province

When divided into stakeholder groups, the spay/neuter groups, rescues and humane societies unanimously believethere is a cat overpopulation with a response rate o 100% (Figure 4). SPCAs are only slightly more cautious: out o70 responses, 87% believe that there is a problem, 11% believe that there is no problem. O all the organizations,municipalities are the most-divided on the issue: 49% agree that there is a cat overpopulation, 38% disagree, and13% are unsure which may point to urther targeted research into this stakeholder group to determine awareness andimpact o the issues in municipalities.



Veterinarians (N=245)

Other (N=8)

Spay/Neuter group (N=9)

Rescue (N=38)

Municipality (N=61)

TNR (N=15)

SPCA (N=70)

75

88

100

100

49 38 13

93

87

15

12

7

11 2

10

YES NO UNSURE

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

51%

20%

40%

61%

6%

15%

3%

4%

Shelters, Rescues, TNR (N=191)


Severe Moderate Mild Unsure

4.2PerceptionsofCatOveropoulation

Figure 4: Breakdown of response to: “In your opinion, is there a cat overpopulation problem in your municipality?” by stakeholder

While generally stakeholders agree there is a catoverpopulation problem in Canada, there isn’tconsensus on the severity o the problem. Wherestakeholders di er is on the extent o the problem.Fi ty-one percent o Shelters, Rescues, TNR believethat the problem is severe, compared to only 20% oveterinarians. While veterinarians are more likely toview the crisis as moderate at 61% compared to 40%o Shelters, Rescues, TNR (Figure 5).

p erCeptions of C at o verpopulation - C onClusion

The large majority o participating stakeholders in the survey responded yes when asked i there was a cat overpopulationproblem in their community. Interestingly, although the groups or the most part agree, their perception o the severitydi ers. Over hal o the Shelters, Rescues and TNR believe the problem is severe while Veterinarians are more likely tosee the problem as moderate. Municipalities are divided on the issue altogether with just under 50% identi ying it as

a problem at all.

r eCommenDations

• Initiate a strategic communications process with municipalities to better understand the issues within this stakeholder group.

• Quantify the consequences of unfunded homeless cat mandate at the municipal level.

Figure 5: “Would you say that the cat overpopulation in yourmunicipality is severe, moderate or mild?”



Adoption

TNR

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

Veterinarians Shelter, Rescues, TNR

Animal control

Euthanasia

High volumespay/neuter

HumaneEducation

Licensing

Other

Subsidizedspay/neuter

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100

Euthanasia(N=183)

64 24 25 70

21 11 145

5 3 29 120

14 8231 69

7912 7

12 7 9766

10522539

61 10 41

80

72

Unsuccessful, somewhat unsuccessful

Successful, somewhat successful

Neither

Unsure, not ap

Humane education(N=196)

TNR (N=178)

Subsidized spay/ neuter (N=182)

Cat license program(N=171)

Cat animal control(N=184)

Cat adoption(N=216)

High volume catspay/neuter (N=157)

4.3 E ectiveness o Current SolutionsCat overpopulation is not a new issue and organizationstasked with managing the results o this crisis have beenworking to nd permanent success ul solutions. Whileresponses vary depending on stakeholder resources andmission, common current approaches include:

• Adoption• Animal control

• Euthanasia• Humane Education• High volume spay/neuter• Licensing• Subsidized spay/neuter• Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR)

The responses ound in Figure 6, developed rom thestakeholders’ comments in the cat overpopulation survey,encompass the most o ten cited means o respondingto or managing a cat population problem. This is not anexhaustive list. Overall, adoption was the most commonresponse stakeholders identi ed as being an availablesolution in their community. The second most availablesolutions cited by veterinarians were animal controland euthanasia while Shelters, Rescues and TNR groupsidenti ed humane education and then euthanasia.

Figure 6: “What practices, i any, does your community have in placethat addresses cat overpopulation?” Number of responses for eachdi erent practice.

Respondents were then asked to identi y, in their opiniowhich o the practices were success ul. By collapsing categories, it becomes evident that ‘adoption’ is perceivby all stakeholders to be the most success ul, along wi‘humane education’ but at a signi cantly lower rat

Shelters, Rescues and TNR groups were likely to rate ‘Tas a success ul option (Figure 7) while veterinarians wmore likely to rate it as unsure or not applicable (FigureVeterinarians were slightly more likely to rate ‘subsidspay/neuter’ as a more success ul tactic than ShelteRescues and TNR groups which contradicts a perceptthat veterinarians may be unwilling to support subsidizprograms and points to a need or greater collaboratiowith the veterinarian community in accessible spay/neucampaigns. Finally, ‘high volume spay/neuter’ was raas the least success ul method o all tactics, howevwhen employed, stakeholders perceived it as e ective.

Figure 7: Shelters, Rescues, TNR response to the question: “Wyou say that the ollowing methods used by your communhave been success ul, somewhat success ul, neither success ul nunsuccess ul, somewhat unsuccess ul, or unsuccess ul at addressicat overpopulation?” collapsed into 4 categories.



0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Euthanasia (N=213) 50 31 43 89

28 17 137

15 7 37 138

20 7124 90

5211 1

24 12 10472

124331044

63 15 57

39

131

83

Humane education(N=205)

TNR (N=195)

Subsidized spay/ neuter (N=212)

Cat license program(N=211)

Cat animal control(N=218)

Cat adoption (N=221)

High volume catspay/neuter (N=197)

Unsuccessful, somewhat unsuccessful

Successful, somewhat successful

Neither

Unsure, not applicable

Humane Society (N=32)

Rescue Groups (N=38)

SPCA (N=70)

TNR (N=15)

Municipalities (N=61)

Spay/Neuter groups (N=9)

Other (N=8) 8%

0%

0%

8%

74%

26%

50%

Organizations that answered "Yes"

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Shelter, Rescue,TNR: Cat license

program (N=171)2239 5

61 10 7241

124331 044

63 15 57

105

83

Unsuccessful,somewhat unsuccessfulSuccessful, somewhat successful

Unsure,not applicable

Neither

Vet: Cat animal

control (N=218)

Shelter, Rescue,TNR:Cat animalcontrol (N=184)

Vet: Cat licenseprogram(N=211)

4 . 3 E f f e c t i v e n e s s o f C u r r e n t S o l u t i o n s

A commonly proposed solution or cat overpopulatiis legislative in nature, including cat animal control licensing programs. In general, municipalities are mlikely to be responsible or animal control but halall humane societies (50%) and one quarter o SPCA(26%) are also responsible or animal control (Fig9). However, all stakeholders agree that ‘municibylaws’ and ‘en orcement’ are the least likely to success ul (Figures 7 and 8).

Figure 9: Response to the question “Is your organization responsible for animal control?”

Figure 10 : “Would you say that the ollowing methods used by your community have been success ul, somewhatsuccessful, neither successful nor unsuccessful, somewhat unsuccessful, or unsuccessful at addressing cat overpopulation?”pertaining to animal control collapsed into our categories.

Figure 8: Veterinarian response to the same question as Figure 7.

The most requently-cited elements o animal contrin municipal bylaws were ‘no roaming’ bylaws (26‘return to owner’ bylaws (25%), and ‘household limon pets’ bylaws (25%). The ourth-most cited elemewas mandatory licensing and registration (16%) athe remaining three options, permanent ID, mandato

sterilization, and breeder licensing received low resporates o roughly 3%.

Overall, respondents did not cite animal control as e ective method o controlling cat populations, howevethe majority indicated that they were unsure or that thquestion was not applicable, which points to eithertrend toward underutilized legislation or possibly that inot used e ectively (Figure 10).



4 . 3 E f f e c t i v e n e s s o f C u r r e n t S o l u t i o n s e ffeCtiveness of C urrent s olutions - C onClusion

Stakeholders agreed that adoption was the most available solution to cat overpopulation in their community,ollowed by euthanasia according to veterinarians, and animal control and humane education according toShelters, Rescues and TNR groups. When it came to identi ying which practice was the most success ul adoptionwas the rst choice by all stakeholders. All stakeholders ound that municipal bylaws and en orcement are the

least likely to be success ul.

r eCommenDations

• Support and fund the top identi ed effective current solutions: adoption, humane

education, trap/neuter/return and subsidized spay/neuter.• Invest in research and pilot programs to improve lesser utilized or understood solutions, as well as high volume spay/neuter, cat licensing and trap/neuter/return.

• Identify the key mitigation strategies in an effective cat bylaw and adopt and adequately en orce such laws.

• Increase the return-to-owner rates through mandatory identi cation and education campaigns.



4.4ShelteringCats

Table 8: Cats and dogs received or intake in 2011

Animal N Average Total

Cats 164 917 150,350

Dogs 131 537 70,302

Table 9: Total cats and dogs received in 2011 by organization type

Organization Cats Dogs % kittens % puppies

Humane Society63,532 23,191 38% 20%

N 32 30 28 24

Society or the Prevention oCruelty to Animals (SPCAs)

60,214 31,787 40% 21%

N 68 67 64 62

TNR group 1,958 N/A 47% N/A

N 7 8

Municipality 17,830 14,279 43% 21%

N 19 19 18 17

Rescues5,461 730 45% 19%

N 30 12 35 12

Spay/neuter groups549 N/A N/A N/A

N 4 4

Other, please speci y...806 315 52% 5%

N 4 3 4 3

Total150,350 70,302 42% 20%

N 164 131 161 118

Table 9A: Total cats and dogs received in 2011 by veterinarians

Organization Cats Dogs % kittens % puppies

Veterinarians1,743 185 2% 1%

N 98 100 91 94

Number ReceivedOverall, organizations were twice as likely to receive cats at intake as dogs. In 2011, participating organizations tookin 150,350 cats and 70,302 dogs, with an average o 917 cats and 537 dogs per responding organization (Table 8).

O those who responded, humane societies and SPCAs received the highest number o cats; a total o 63,532 catswere received by humane societies and 60,214 were received by SPCAs, while municipalities received 17,830 andrescue groups received 5,461 (Table 9). Almost hal o all responding veterinarians take in cats or dogs in need (49%).O the veterinarians who take in animals, on average, they took almost 10 times as many cats as dogs (Table 9A).



4.4ShelteringCats

Table 10: Animals surrendered by owner and not by owner

Surrendered by ownerSurrendered by owner,

% juvenileSurrendered strays/ by

non-ownerSurrendered strays/ bynon-owner, % juvenile

Cats Dogs Kittens Puppies Cats Dogs Kittens Puppies

N 145 113 96 62 150 121 88 59

Mean 226 148 4% 3% 585 302 7% 5%

Total 32,755 16,731 87,770 36,548

Table 11: Juvenile animal surrenders by owner and not by owner

Surrendered, % juvenile o adultsSurrendered by owner, % juve-nile o adults

Surrendered strays/ not byowner, % juvenile o adults

Kittens Puppies Kittens Puppies Kittens Puppies

N 161 118 148 157 152 122

Mean 42% 20% 26% 40% 39% 18%

Source o SurrenderThere are two categories o surrendered animals on intake: those surrendered by an owner and those who arestray or surrendered by a member o the public claiming no prior ownership o the animal. Overall, cats and dogssurrendered to shelters are more than twice as likely to be stray or public surrendered as owner surrendered - onaverage, 58% o surrendered cats are strays, while 52% o dogs surrendered are strays. In contrast, 22% osurrendered cats and 24% o dogs are surrendered by their owners (Table 10).

Juvenile SurrenderIn general, a greater proportion o juvenile animals surrendered are elines (Table 11). O the surrendered, 42% o catsare kittens and 20% o dogs are puppies. The majority o kittens surrendered are strays or public surrendered (39%)compared to puppies at 18%. In contrast, more puppies (40%) are surrendered by their owners than kittens (26%).Moreover, since a larger proportion o the kittens surrendered are unowned, they are likely homeless or the o spring

o eral cats.

These numbers imply that owner relinquishment o cats is not as high as was previously thought. Instead, it is possiblethat owners instead choose to let their animal loose or dump it at a eral cat colony, give it to a riend, or give it awaythrough an advertisement. Second, these results suggest that the juvenile population is unowned. This is only possiblei there is a high ertility rate among unowned and stray cats and dogs, which suggests that proactive methods areneeded to reduce the ertility rate o unowned and stray cats and dogs, as this is the highest source o new animalsor organizations.



4.4ShelteringCats

Housing (N=53)

Animal behaviour(N=14)

Financial reasons(N=17)

Too much time/ responsibility (N=43)

Owner health(N=18)

Other (N=10)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40

Table 12: Proportion o animals received without any orms o ID

RECEIVED ReceiVed WiTHouT id % ReceiVed WiTHouT id

Cats Dogs Cats Dogs Cats Dogs

N 164 131 93 59

Mean 917 537 575 247 63% 46%

Table 13: Owner and non-owner surrendered animals that were spayed or neutered

Cats S/N onsurrender

Average% o totalcat intake

Dogs S/Nonsurrender

Average% o totaldog intake

Owner surrendered (N=78) 3,284 42 2,125 27

Stray/public surrendered(N=76)

3,546 47 2,295 30

SUM 6,830 0.4% 4,420 0.6%

Figure 11: What is the rst ranked reason why cats & dogs/catswere owner-surrendered to your organization in 2011?Reason or Surrender

O the 155 Shelters, Rescues and TNR groups whoresponded to the question (Figure 11) regarding thereason cats and dogs are surrendered 34% report thatit’s due to issues with housing which includes rentalagreements, landlord conficts and moving homes.This was ollowed closely by a concern o owners thattheir animals took too much time or responsibility

(28%). Only 9% o people cited animal behaviour asthe reason they were surrendering.

Status on Surrender - IdentifcationComparatively, 63% o cats and 46% o dogs arrive at an organization without any orm o identi cation (ID) includingmicrochips, tattoos or collars (Table 12). It is possible that because cats are less likely to have ID they are less likely tobe returned to their owner. In contrast, dogs are more likely to arrive at an organization with ID and there is a greaterstatistical chance they will be re-united with their amily.

Status on Surrender - SterilizationMost cats and dogs arrive at shelters and rescues unaltered. However, less than hal o the respondents that receiveanimals record the animal’s sterilization status at intake. There ore, it is important to examine these results with cautionas they may not be representative. O those that did respond, slightly ewer dogs arrive at these organizations spayedor neutered in comparison to cats but both are negligible numbers at less than ½ o one percent o the overall intakenumber (Table 13). Among the respondents, on average, 42 cats surrendered by owners out o a total o 226 cats werespayed or neutered. This means that on average, 18.5% o owner surrendered cats are spayed or neutered. Amongrespondents, on average, 42 dogs surrendered by owners out o a total average o 148 dogs were spayed or neutered.On average, 28% o dogs surrendered by owners were sterilized.



4.4ShelteringCats

Table 14: Proportion o animals reclaimed compared to animals received in 2011

AnimalTotal received

in 2011Averageintake

Reclaimed % reclaimedAverage

reclaimed

Cats 150,350 917 7,139 <1% 5

Dogs 70,302 537 20,856 30% 161

Table 15: The number o animals adopted out in 2011

Number o Adoptions Number o Adoptions, % youth

Cats Dogs Kittens Puppies

N 162 123 152 111

Mean 403 220 46% 28%

Sum 65,249 27,058

LIVE RELEASERespondents were asked to report, where possible, on the live release rates or cats and dogs in their care. Live releasere ers to animals that leave shelter acilities alive through 4:

1. Return-to-owner2. Trans er to another non-pro t agency3. Adoption

Return-to-ownerThe ideal resolution or stray and public surrendered animals is that the owner and animal are reunited. Un ortunatelyor cats this is not a common outcome. In act, dogs are much more likely to be reclaimed by their owner than cats.In 2011, nearly 30% o dogs were reported as reunited with their owners in Canada, whereas less than 1% o catswere (Table 14). Contrast these numbers with the act that twice as many cats are surrendered to shelters than dogs.On average, that means o the 537 dogs received in by Shelters, Rescues and TNR groups 161 are reclaimed (30%). Incomparison, o 917 cats received on average, only 5 are reclaimed (<1%). This shows a signi cant gap in pet ownerpractices and also complements prior data regarding pet identi cation (Table 14) - dogs are slightly more likely to haveID and to be reclaimed by their owners than cats.

4 ASPCA – http://www.aspcapro.org/live-release-rate.php

Trans er to another non-proft agencyThe trans er o animals is another solution to increase live release rates. On average the responding shelters trans er29 cats and 32 dogs to another agency. O these animals, less than 20% were juvenile animals, 17% were kittens and15% were puppies. Trans er rates are likely low because other agencies are at capacity.

AdoptionAll stakeholders agree that adoption is the most prevalent and success ul intervention. In 2011 44% o the cats receivedand 41% o the dogs were adopted out or a total o 65,249 cats and 27,058 dogs - o which 46% were kittens and28% were puppies (Table 15). Municipalities are the least likely to adopt to the public, with 30% adopting out animals.All stakeholders reported that they trans er animals between acilities with SPCAs most active with trans er programs.



cats (N=64)35%

kittens (N=62)34%

dogs (N=32)

17%

puppies(N=26)14%


TNR (N=15)

Municipality (N=52)

Rescue (N=38)

Spay/neuter (N=9)

SPCAs (N=70)

Other (N=7)

0 25% 50% 75%

4.4ShelteringCats

Table 16: Number o animals spayed/neutered while at Shelters,Rescues, TNR groups, in 2011, i any

Number spayed or neutered % juvenile spayed or neutered

Cats Dogs Kittens Puppies

N 105 56 111 58

Mean 378 241 28% 14%

The majority o veterinarians do not o er petsor adoption. O those that do, 35% o er cats oradoption, 34% o er kittens, 17% o er dogs, and14% o er puppies (Figure 12).

Figure 12: Percentage o animals o ered oradoption by responding veterinarians

Status Prior to Release: SterilizationThe majority o Shelter, Rescues and TNR groups spayand neuter cats in their care. O the 233 respondents,176 groups spay and neuter cats (76%) while 45 do not(19%). 100% o TNR groups, 97% o rescues, 97% ohumane societies and 93% o SPCAs are spaying andneutering animals be ore they are released rom shelterscompared to only 27% o municipalities (Figure 13). Itis worth noting that the majority o the 52 respondingmunicipalities, 73%, do not sterilize cats in their care.

Figure 13: Organizations that answered“yes”to the question “Does your organizationhave cats spayed or neutered?”

Among Shelters, Rescues and TNR groups that sterilize their cats or dogs, on average, they spay or neuter 378 catsand 241 dogs annually (Table 16). In total that represents 39,723 cat sterilizations. The average cost o cat sterilizationsurgery in Canada is approximately $200 5 which accounts or an expenditure o $7,944,600 annually in cat surgeriesby these non-pro t organizations and through veterinarian donations. Once again, this is a very conservative numberand i extrapolated by the possible number o shelters in Canada (1345 – see Table 6) the number increases to 508,410cat sterilization surgeries accounting or just over $101 million absorbed by this community. O these animals, 28% ospayed cats are kittens and 14% o spayed dogs are puppies.

5 personal communication, Warren Skippon, Manager, National Issues & Animal Wel are, CVMA: $200 is the average o an average spay surgery($250) and average neuter procedure ($150) in Canada as per the Canadian Veterinarian Medical Association Member Business ManagementProgram economic survey.



lack of kennel/ foster homes(N=10)

too young/ too old(N=94)

medically notrecommended

(N=14)lack of available

veterinary services(N=3)2%

lack of funds(N=38)

other(N=24)

5%

51%21%

8%

13%

4.4ShelteringCats

Table 17: Proportion o animals spayed or neutered while in carecompared to the number o animals received in 2011

Received Number spayed orneutered % Spayed

Cats Dogs Cats Dogs Cats Dogs

N 164 131 105 56

Mean 917 537 378 241 41% 45%

The number o cats and dogs spayed and neutered as a proportion o the number received is somewhat similar (Table17). On average, 41% o cats received were spayed or neutered be ore they were adopted and 45% o dogs receivedwere spayed or neutered be ore they were adopted.

Although many organizations spay and neuter the companion animals they are adopting out, it is important tounderstand why others do not. To assess this, survey respondents were asked to choose the top three reasons outo the ollowing six responses:

• Lack of kennel/foster home space• Lack of available veterinary services• Too young/too old to be spayed/neutered• Lack of funds for surgery• Medically not recommended• Other

Overall, the number one reason that a cat was adopted out without being spayed or neutered is that it was ‘too

young or too old’ (51%). ‘Lack o unds’ or surgery was also a concern, comprising 21% o rst-ranked responses.The top-reported second-ranked response was that it was ‘medically not recommended’ (8%) and the top-reportedthird-ranked response was a ‘lack o kennel/ oster home space’ (5%) (Figure 14).

Figure 14: Top reasons why cats are released without being spayed or neutered



4.4ShelteringCats

YES NO

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Alberta (N=13)

Saskatechewan (N=8)

Manitoba (N=13)

Ontario (N=30)

Quebec (N=13)

New Brunswick (N=9)

Nova Scotia (N=16)


Nefoundland & Labrador (N=7)

Aggregate (N=161)

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Alberta (N=46)

Saskatechewan (N=31)

Manitoba (N=11)

Ontario (N=30)

Quebec (N=56)


Nova Scotia (N=26)


Nefoundland & Labrador (N=5)

Aggregate (N=237)

YES NO

microchip54%

other7%

tattoo39%

Access to Subsidized Spay/NeuterSterilization o companion animals is o ten cited as a key solution to a surplus o animals ending up homeless in sheltersor at large. However, the rising cost o veterinary services is also cited as a barrier to owners accessing the surgery,leaving animal breeding uncontrolled (Kass, 2007). Although subsidized spay/neuter initiatives are widely supported byrespondents, the majority o those who responded to the question, “Is there a subsidized spay/neuter option in yourcommunity?” did not indicate that these services were widely available - 42% answering ‘no.’

Among stakeholders, TNR groups and spay/neuter groups are the most likely to respond by indicating that there is asubsidized spay/neuter option in their community. This is likely because without such an option, these programs wouldnot exist as they rely on low-cost or subsidized spay/neuter options. 60% o TNR groups, 56% o spay/neuter groups,49% o SPCAs, 42% o veterinarians, 41% o rescues, 37% o humane societies, 20% o other groups, and 14%o municipalities indicate that there is some type o subsidized spay/neuter option in their community. It is importantto note that this does not measure the type o service available. Not all sterilization programs are equal in scope andcapacity with some being very limited. While in some provinces there are dedicated accessible spay/neuter clinics, inmany provinces there is not, which means organizations depend on limited resources rom select veterinarians.

Figure 15: Shelter, Rescue and TNR response to question:“Is there a subsidized spay/neuter option in yourcommunity?” By province

Figure 15A: Veterinarians response to question“Is there a subsidized spay/neuter option in yourcommunity?” By province

Status Prior to Release: Identifcation57% o cats adopted out by all respondents in 2011 wereassigned a permanent ID. Veterinarians were less likely toassign a permanent ID to cats they adopted out to thepublic at only 29%. Among the types o permanent ID,microchip was the most popular (54%) and tattoo wasthe second most popular (39%) (Figure 16).

Figure 16: Permanent ID methods used

to identi y cats be ore adoption, i any.



s heltering C ats - C onClusion

Shelters in Canada are at or near capacity to care or cats that arrive at their doors. This is exacerbated by theact that twice as many cats as dogs are being brought in or care. Humane Societies and SPCAs see the highestnumbers o cats each year. These cats are more than twice as likely to be stray or public surrendered as ownersurrendered and o those surrendered almost hal are kittens. More than a third were surrendered due to issues ohousing, ollowed by the animal taking up too much time or responsibility. O those surrendered 63% o cats donot have ID which is much higher than dogs making the reuniting o animal with their owner much more di cult.

In Canada less than 1% o cats are reunited with their owner while 30% o dogs are reunited.

Adoption is key or cats and the survey showed that 44% o cats brought into shelters are adopted back out.This is where cats have a slight lead over dogs as their adoption rate is only 41%. O the stakeholders surveyed76% o them spay and neuter cats be ore adoption. The number one reason that a cat is not spayed or neuteredbe ore adoption is that it was too young or too old. When it comes to ID 57% o cats that are adopted out areassigned permanent ID.

r eCommenDations

• Shelters must capture simple, accurate data including intake numbers, live release ratesand euthanasia statistics in order to de ne the issues in their jurisdiction and engagewith local stakeholders. As well, the data should be incorporated into provincial andnational statistics.

• Shelters should review their policies and standards to improve the shelter environmentor cats. Resources such as the Guidelines or Standards o Care in Animal Shelters(Newbury et al, 2010) and the attached “Capacity to Care” model are recommended.

• Mandatory sterilization of all new cats such as those adopted from shelters, SPCAs,

humane societies, rescues as well as cats purchased rom pet stores.• Implement an effective accessible spay/neuter regime that allows for subsidies, highvolume programs, pediatric sterilizations and that bans the selling or adopting o animalsthat are not spayed or neutered in order to reduce the ertility rate o unowned andstray cats, as this is the highest source o relinquished animals or organizations.

• Organizations should review their procedures to determine whether prepubertalspaying and neutering could be appropriate or their organizations.

• Establish clear return-to-owner policies in conjunction with local shelters. For example,establish a central in ormation location that all groups can access with the goal oincreasing return-to-owner rates.

• Increase the number of adoptions byincreasing awarenessof theconceptof responsiblepet ownership 6, increasing the value o cats and implementing greater humane

education.• Adoption of only sterilized cats in pet stores through partnerships with local rescues,shelters, SPCAs, and humane societies until such time when there is no longer apopulation o Homeless – Sheltered cats.

6Responsible pet ownership as de ned in Slater (2007) includes the provision o suitable ood and shelter, health care and social interaction, thepermanent identi cation o the animal (a tattoo or microchip), the provision o a sa e environment and a l i e-long commitment to the animal’s

care. The community should view abandonment not only as a ailure o individual responsibility but also as an antisocial and immoral act.

4.4ShelteringCats



YES NO

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100


SPCA (N=66)

TNR (N=15)

Municipality (N=61)

Rescue (N=38)

Spay/Neuter Group (N=9)

Other (N=8)


75 21

86

13 87

22 78

25 75

44 56

46 49

34 63

Table 18: Number o animals and % o juvenile euthanized in 2011

Received Number euthanizedNumber euthanized,

% receivedNumber euthanized,

% juvenile

Cats Dogs Cats Dogs Cats Dogs Kittens Puppies

N 164 131 117 104 103 88

Mean 917 537 512 97 40% 14% 20% 4%

Sum 150,350 70,302 59,939 10,082

4.5 EuthanasiaEuthanasia is the starkest outcome o cat overpopulation.Stakeholders across the spectrum are working to reducethe need or euthanasia by decreasing the incidence ounwanted pets, increasing protocols to prevent disease

and illness and increasing the number o viable homes.O 225 Shelter, Rescue and TNR respondents, 125 (54%)stated that their organizations euthanized cats and 94(40%) stated that their organization did not. By typeo organization, 87% o SPCAs and 78% o humanesocieties responded that they euthanize cats, while 88%o TNR groups, 78% o spay/neuter groups, 75% oother groups, 63% o rescues, and 49% o municipalitiesresponded that they do not (Figure 17).

Figure 17: Response to question: “Does yourorganization or clinic euthanize cats?” By organizati

The number o cats euthanized in 2011 was signi cantly higher than the number o dogs. Accounting or respondingorganizations, 59,939 cats were euthanized compared to 10,082 dogs. O these, 20% o the cats were kittens and4% o the dogs were puppies. O the total number o cats received, 40% were euthanized compared to 14% odogs. These numbers should be viewed with caution as they are very conservative representing only a raction oorganizations that are sheltering cats (Table 18).

To better understand why animals were euthanized,respondents were asked to choose the most commonreason out o the ollowing 5 responses or cats, kittens,dogs, and puppies:

• Lack of space• Affordability of medical treatment• Animal behaviour• Illness/change in status• Unsure/Not applicable

The most common reason or euthanasia o cats ankittens in the Shelters, Rescues and TNR group willness/change in status (Table 19). Change in status re eto a healthy animal that becomes ill when in shelcare. Animal behaviour was the second most commreason. 91%indicate that dogs are euthanized or animabehavior and then illness/change in status ollowiclosely. Where it varies is in puppies – puppies are mlikely to be euthanized or illness/change in status.



4 . 5 E u t h a n a s i a

Table 19: Reasons or euthanasia at shelters, rescues and TNR

Reason or Euthanasia Cats Kittens Dogs Puppies

Illness/ change in status88%

N=10782%

N=9479%

N=8675%

N=72

Animal behaviour67%

N=82

47%

N=57

91%

N=99

19%

N=18

Lack o space29%

N=3524%

N=289%

N=105%

N=5

A ordability o medical treatment22%N=2

17%N=19

16%N=17

13%N=12

Table 20: Number o cats and dogs euthanized or non-medical reasonsand the proportion o which were juveniles in 2011

Cats Euthanized Dogs Euthanized

Cats % kittens Dogs Puppies

N 74 78 73 77

Mean 19 1% 14 <1%

Sum 1,381 990

Table 21: Reasons or euthanasia at veterinarians

Reason or Euthanasia Cats Kittens Dogs Puppies

Unsure8%

N=2312%

N=125%

N=513%

N=13

Animal behaviour74%

N=777%

N=778%

N=8215%

N=15

Lack o space22%

N=2328%

N=2829%

N=3017%

N=17

A ordability o medical treatment47%

N=4925%

N=2550%

N=5219%

N=19

The 232 veterinarians who shared their views were somewhat more likely to say that their clinic did not euthanize catsand dogs or non-medical reasons (56%) than to say that they did (44%). Between 74 and 78 were able to provide thenumber o cats and dogs, and the proportion o which were juvenile, that were euthanized (Table 20).

Cats are slightly more likely to be euthanized or non-medical reasons than dogs: on average, 19 cats were euthanizedor non-medical reasons versus 14 dogs in 2011. O this, 14% o cats were kittens and 0.6% o dogs were puppies.‘Animal behaviour’ is the most likely reason or euthanizing on non-medical grounds, accounting or 74% o allmentions related to cats and 78% o all mentions related to dogs. ‘A ordability o medical treatment’ and then ‘lacko space’ was also cited with ‘lack o space’ being almost equal among cats, kittens, dogs and puppies (Table 21).



4 . 5 E u t h a n a s i a e uthanasia - C onClusion

54% o the organizations that responded to the survey said they euthanized cats while 40% said they did not.The number o cats euthanized is signi cantly higher than dogs and o cats euthanized approximately 20% othem are kittens. The most common reason or euthanasia o cats in Shelters, Rescues and TNR groups wasillness/change in status ollowed by animal behaviour. Cats are three times more likely than dogs and kittens ve

times more likely than puppies to be euthanized or space. The veterinarians participating in the survey said thatcats are slightly more likely to be euthanized or non-medical reasons than dogs. 88% o cats being euthanizedor illness/change in status highlights a possible solution involving the capacity o a shelter particularly regardingthe length o stay.

r eCommenDations

• Implement best practices in order to reduce euthanasia of cats by developing minimum standards or acilities that reduce length o staywhile increasing community capacity to adopt and spay/neuter the animalsin the community (Newbury et al, 2010).




TNR (N=15)

Municipality (N=49)

Rescue (N=34)

Spay/neuter (N=9)

SPCA (N=67)

Other (N=7)

0 25 50 75 100

Organizations that care for a feral cat colony

A “colony” is de ned as a group

o three or more sexually mature animalsliving and eeding in close proximity to oneanother. A managed colony is controlledby volunteer caretakers, who provide ood,water and shelter (Slater, 2007). Feral catcolonies can orm anywhere there is a oodsource, such as in alleyways, vacant lots,abandoned buildings, warehouses, parksand backyards. (Hildreth, Vantassel, &Hygnstrom, 2010)

4.6 Cats at Large

The ollowing results are in response to questions regardingeral cat management and are based on very limiteddata rom only 41 stakeholders which is not statisticallyvalid and there ore not representative o the eral catpopulation or the sector. However, the CFHS recognizesthe importance o this population o cats and the toolsand techniques or managing colonies including trap,neuter, vaccinate, return and where possible adoptionand has included it with a comparison to US data thatprovides an introduction to the issues and concerns.

Figure 18: “Does your organization care for a feral cat colony?” By organization

Only 20% o stakeholders report caring or a eral cat colony. When broken down by organization, TNR groups (93%),spay/neuter groups (67%) and rescues (50%) are the most likely to care or a eral cat colony (Figure 18). 4% ohumane societies, and 1% o SPCAs care or eral cats. No municipalities reported caring or a eral cat colony.

Respondents report supporting 429 eral cat colonies across the country, with an average o 118 cats and kittensper colony (Table 22). An average o 106 cats and kittens were spayed or neutered (89%) and 19% were kittens. Anaverage o 25 cats and kittens (21% o the population) were removed rom the colony in 2011, o which 46% werekittens.



4.6CatsatLarge Table 22: Feral cat colony demographics

# colonies# cats and

kittens% kittens

# cats and kittensspayed/

neutered

% kittensspayed/

neutered

# cats and kittensremoved rom a

colony

% kittenremoved rom

colony

N 39 30 35 35 36 37 37

Mean 11 118 19% 106 19% 25 46%

Sum 429 3,540 3,710 925

Table 23: Projected annual contribution o owned versus eral cats touSa t v rp p t n 7

Owned Cats Feral Cats

Percentage emale 50% 50%

Sterilization rate 85% 2%

Litters per year 1.5 1.5

Kittens per litter 4.0 4.0

Kittens per cat per year 0.45 2.9

US cat population 73 million 50 million

Kittens born annually 33 million 147 million

Estimating the population o Canadian eral cats with statistical con dence requires the implementation o an evidence-based approach, possibly even a conservation biology approach that considers population dynamics and modeling.Un ortunately, this approach was not easible given the restraints o the current project. However, the ollowingAmerican in ormation can help put the Canadian eral population into context.

In 2004 estimates o the number o eral and homeless cats in the United States was 50 million (Levy & Craw ord2004). In a urther 2004 study, it was ound that ree-roaming cats living in a managed colony had a mean o 1.4litters per year; with most pregnancies occurring in March, April, and May; where 75% o the observed kittens died ordisappeared during their rst 6 months o age (Nutter, Levine, & Stoskop , 2004).

Feral cats tend to contribute more to cat overpopulation because they are not sterilized at the same rates as ownedcats, and there ore produce unwanted litters. An estimate o the number o kittens born annually to owned and eralcats shows that eral cats produce signi cantly more kittens per year than owned cats (Table 23).

7 Levy & Craw ord: 1355



4.6CatsatLarge

In general, there is greater support or eral cat population control when there is a perceived threat to humans. Forexample, a study o Texas A&M University employees ound that support or eral cat population control was strongerwhere eral cat colonies existed near human structures, suggesting that the predominant concerns about eral catswere their impact on humans. Most respondents pre erred TTVAR (Trap, Test, Vaccinate, Alter and Release) as a methodo controlling the population o eral campus cats, but respondents were more likely to pre er no control in rural areas,such as wildli e re uges and national orests. (Ash & Adams, 2003)

In a similar survey conducted in Ohio, o the 703 respondents, almost 42.1% were unaware o TNR programs (Lord,2008). O the 184 respondents who reported eeding ree-roaming cats, 142 (77.2%) reported never taking them toa clinic or veterinary care. Just as revealing, 34 o the 42 (81%) who reported taking a cat to the veterinarian werecat owners. Lastly, the survey ound that cat owners were more likely to support TNR programs, support the use otax dollars or low-cost spay and neuter clinics, and oppose laws prohibiting cats rom roaming reely. The surveyalso revealed a di erence in opinion o urban, suburban, and rural respondents and their belie s about whether ree-roaming cats were a problem: when asked whether ree-roaming cats were a problem in their neighbourhoods, urbandwellers had the highest positive response rate (41.7% responded strongly agree or agree), while suburban dwellershad the lowest positive response rate (22.8% responded strongly agree or agree) and rural-dwellers had a middlingpositive response rate (28.7% strongly agree or agree).

In general, adoption o eral cats is restricted to kittens under the age o ve to six months as cats older than this canonly be rehomed as barn cats (Kortis et al, 2003). Alley Cat Allies, a well-known TNR advocacy organization, does not

encourage attempts to adopt eral cats and urges owners to look past their desire to nurture the cats and leave themoutdoors. Although some eral cats were adopted out to homes in Julie Levy et al’s Evaluation o the E ect o a Long-Term Trap-Neuter-Return and Adoption Program on a Free-Roaming Cat Population, this is not the usual case.

C ats at l arge - C onClusion

While it is di cult to estimate the Canadian eral cat population it is estimated that eral cats produce more kittensthan owned cats. Feral cats are, there ore, thought to be signi cant contributors to cat overpopulation because otheir lower spay/neuter rates and their unwanted litters. It is essential in addressing the negative consequences o catoverpopulation that eral cats and their success ul management be closely considered.

r eCommenDations

• Conduct projects in known cat populations with an active management protocol.• Ensure adequate training for individuals involved in the process of trapping and

returning.• Trap-and-removal of stray cats with identi cation, such as tattoos or licenses, to

shelters, SPCAs, or humane societies or reuni cation with previous home. I none canbe ound, rehome.• Trap-and-removal of adoptable homeless and feral cats that can be socialized or who are

already well-socialized.• Trap-neuter-return (TNR) for feral cats with consistent monitoring to remove new strays

and spay or neuter new eral cat arrivals.• Ensure that feeding stray cats is not illegal. If it is illegal, work to remove this clause

rom bylaws.



Cat rescues (N=94)

Dog rescues (N=95)

Cat shelters (N=106)

Dog shelters (N=98)

TNR (N=51)

Other (N=46)

5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

foster network

(N=28)

spay/neutersurgeries(N=143)

medicaltreatment/

testing(N=132)

vaccinations(N=215)

other(N=26)

5%

29%

6%

27%

adoption(N=39)

25%

8%

4.7 Veterinarian SupportVeterinarians, humane societies, SPCAs, rescues, TNR and spay/neuter groups have a critical relationship in maintainingthe health and wel are o homeless cats. To better refect the availability o resources or homeless cats–and dogs as acomparative measure–the survey asked veterinarians to identi y which type o services were o ered to allied groups.

While responding veterinarians support all stakeholders, the highest-reported group to receive services rom veterinarians

is cat shelters, with 22% o the respondents indicating that they provide services to them. The second, third, and ourthhighest reported are dog shelters (20%), dog rescues (19%), and cat rescues (19%). 10% provide service to TNRgroups and 9% provide services to other groups (Figure 19).

Figure 19: Veterinarians that responded yes tothe question: “Does your clinic provide veterinaryservice to any of the following groups?”

Overall, veterinarians were more likely to o er spay/neuter surgeries to groups than any other service (Figure 20).Veterinarians, on average, o er a discount o 30% to 41% or treatment (Table 24). The highest discount is o ered orspay/neuter surgeries at 42%; an average discount o 39% is o ered or vaccinations and an average discount o 30%is o ered or medical treatment/testing.

Figure 20: Response to questions 124-129, “What services do you provide to these groups?



4.7VeterinarianSupport

1%

YES NO UNSURE

84%

15%

Table 24: How much o a discount, i any, does your clinic provide?

Responses Responses

N Percent N Discount

Spay Neuter surgeries 132 34% 114 42%

Vaccinations 100 26% 100 39%

Medical treatment/testing 108 28% 108 30%Foster network 18 5% N/A N/A

Adoption 29 8% N/A N/A

Total 387 100% 322

The majority o cats and dogs that are o ered or adoption by a veterinary clinic are spayed or neutered. Out o 67respondents, 84% spay or neuter the cat or dog be ore releasing it to their new owner, while 15% o cats or dogs arenot spayed or neutered 1% are unsure (Figure 21). Since they personally adopt out these pets and they have the meansto per orm these surgeries, it is likely that the veterinarians see the bene t o sterilizing the pets be ore rehoming them.This also indicates that among individuals who are personally involved in the adoption process, spaying and neutering

is very important.Figure 21: “Are adopted cats and dogs spayed/neutered byyour clinic before they go home with adopters?” (N=67)

v eterinarian s upport - C onClusion

When asked about which allied group they support the most, veterinarians indicated they supported cat shelters the

most. They indicated that o all the services they could o er, spay/neuter surgeries were the most common and onaverage they provided a discount o 42% to allied groups. Veterinarians indicated that over 80% o the dogs and catsthey adopt are spayed/neutered be ore going home.

r eCommenDations

• Develop provincial mechanisms allowing for greater collaboration between theveterinarian and the wider animal wel are community in accessible spay/neuter campaigns.

• Support and fund subsidized or no-cost spay/neuter initiatives.



5. CONCLUSION

Cats are popular in Canada – one in three Canadians

owns a cat and more than a third o householdsinclude an average o 1.9 cats. Un ortunately, theirlevel o care is not matched by their popularity. Catsare less likely than dogs to receive veterinary care, tohave permanent identi cation, to be reunited withtheir owner, or to be adopted to a new amily i lost orabandoned (Perrin, 2009). Furthermore, cats are twiceas likely to be surrendered to shelters and more likely tobe euthanized due to long stays and illness.

As the nal question in the CFHS multi-stakeholdersurvey, respondents were asked “In your opinion,what would be the best way to deal with the catoverpopulation problem in Canada?” It was anopen ended question with no parameters, there orerepresenting advice rom the stakeholders who dealwith the results o cat overpopulation on a daily basis.Very ew respondents made only one recommendation,the majority recognized a multi aceted approach wasnecessary to address the complex issue. However, the

one overwhelmingly clear recommendation was to

ensure that spay/neuter surgeries are a ordable andaccessible to everyone. 70% o stakeholders cited itas the key to addressing the negative consequences ocat overpopulation. The term accessible spay/neuteris a higher order category that in this case includedrecommendations or subsidized spay/neuter orthose who cannot a ord the surgery, a ordable spay/ neuter or everyone regardless o means, high volumespay/neuter and mandatory spay/neuter re erring toboth a requirement that all cats be sterilized and thata ordable spay/neuter be mandated.The next most common recommendation was humaneeducation/public education with 34% stakeholdersciting it as a good way to deal with cat overpopulation.

For any o these solutions to be success ul, humansmust be aware o the value o cats, the responsibilitieso pet ownership and the importance o humanetreatment or all, including cats that have no home.This requires communication and education byanimal wel are organizations, humane societies,SPCAs, rescues, shelters and TNR groups which,working together, can change the landscape o catoverpopulation in Canada. Finally, legislation was citedby 25% o respondents as a key tool and TNR was citedby 19% o respondents. The common goal o all those who care aboutcats should be to reduce su ering. The negativeconsequences o cat overpopulation are borne byeveryone – it is a community problem. All stakeholders,including the public at large, must assess andact upon what they can accomplish to endoverpopulation. This report represents a step orwardtoward a more complete understanding o cat

population in Canada and its challenges and laysout a set o plausible solutions. Future research canre ne and improve the methods used here, and theimplementation o the report’s recommendations willidenti y promising practices and show how e orts canbe urther improved. The Canadian Federation oHumane Societies and its members are committedto continuing this process and working toward auture in which all cats that can be are homed andenjoy humane treatment.



Education and Public Awareness - Tuxedo Stan CampaignHali ax, Nova Scotia

ORgANIzATION : Spay Day CONTACT: Dr. Hugh Chisholm

MISSION: The Tuxedo Stan campaign is currently part o the Spay Day special initiative to address the catoverpopulation in Hali ax Regional Municipality (HRM) by assisting students and low-income amilies to spay/neutertheir owned cats.

dESCRIpTION: There have been many attempts to deal with cat homelessness in Hali ax including aailed bylaw in 2007. Frustrated with the lack success Spay Day decided to create a unique educationcampaign by running a eline (Tuxedo Stan) or the position o Mayor in the 2012 municipal election.

The goal o the program is to increase awareness about spaying and neutering o cats, to educate the public aboutthe importance o Trap, Neuter, Return (TNR) and or the creation o sanctuary/shelter or unadoptable cats.

AUdIENCE: Media, general public and key municipal decision makers.

fUNdINg: Initial start-up costs were provided by private donors (primarily materials such as signage, buttons,brochures etc). The campaign is volunteer-run with no salaries or associated administrative costs. Increasingpopularity o the campaign has brought many local in-kind donations. In act, it has been so popular that the sale o“Tuxedo Stan” merchandise now generates a pro t o which 100% is put back into the Spay Day program.

SUCCESS : The program now has an international scope with key partner “Hank”, a eline running or Senatein the U.S. Shortly a ter Hank posted a piece about Stan on Facebook Anderson Cooper endorsed the campaignin a segment on CNN. Overnight media coverage went rom local to national to international. People rom Italy,Germany, Russia, China and New Caledonia (in the South Paci c) shared support or Stan. On social media Stan has8,000+ ollowers, a website and a Twitter eed. To hold politicians accountable to their election campaign promises,Tuxedo Stan created a pledge that commits the signatory to addressing cat overpopulation a ter the election is over.More than 30 politicians, including two mayoralrontrunners, signed it! This campaign has anadditional advantage o engaging and bringingout people who normally wouldn’t vote, althoughtechnically a eline cannot be voted in as Mayor inHali ax, unlike in Talkeetna, Alaska where Stubbshas served as eline mayor or teen years.

RESOURCES: The key resource required or thiscampaign is time. For the individual involved itbecame a ull time job in order to be responsiveto media and to keep the campaign content reshand updated.

REpLICATION: Utilize volunteers, especiallythose who are media savvy to keep things reshand current. The key to this campaign is the useo humour and communicating an importantmessage while staying avoiding the negative.



Cat Licensing Program – Animal and Bylaw Service,Calgary, Alberta

ORgANIzATION: City o Calgary, Animal and Bylaw ServicesCONTACT: Gr g St nr ths, (a t ng d r t r) r b br (R t r )

dESCRIpTION: The cat licensing program started in 2007 as an initiative to increase the value o cats to the samelevel as dogs in Calgary. Licensing is mandatory and those in noncompliance with the law may be ned $250. Theee or licensing a kitten or altered animal over 6 months is $15 or $30 or unaltered animals over 6 months (notethe ees or dogs are $36 and $58 respectively). The return to owner impound ee is $40. The city also works withMEOW Foundation and AARCS to place eral cats into the communityunder supervision o a volunteer. The cats are micochipped with thechip registered to the rescue to acilitate returning the cat i it comesinto the shelter. Feral cats are also placed into barn cat programswhen appropriate.

AUdIENCE : All pet owners.

SUCCESS: Since it started the program has seen a 55% compliancerate and a return to owner rate o 50-56% (in 2010 the nationalaverage return to owner rate was 3.8%). The live release re-adoptionrate is at 80%. The program has an online lost cat app in which youcan report missing cats, search or your cat or view animals available

or adoption. For more statistics visit http://calgary.ca/animalservices.fUNdINg: The program generates $800,000 annuallyrom cat licensing compared to 4.4 million or dogs.The city is required to hold cats or 4 days i they have no ID and 10days i they have ID. A ter that, the animal becomes City propertyand can be adopted. Adoption ee is $150 (spay/neuter, vaccinations,microchip, vet check and 6 month license). All required dental workor surgeries are completed prior to adoption and included in the cost.

pARTNERS: Meow Foundation, Alberta Animal Rescue Crew, AnimalRescue Foundation, Calgary Humane Society, Kennel Club, Cat Fanciers, veterinarians, training community—onlycerti ed trainers. Shortly the program will be open to retailers that don’t sell pets.

RESOURCES: Two years o marketing and education to the public were needed elevate the issues cats aced in thecommunity and how the program would help more cats.

REpLICATION: This is a six step process – identi y the issues and engage the public, engage stakeholders, build aprogram that will work (i.e. people worried about using collars, so use microchips/tattoos instead), good educationprogram, en orcement to support compliance where education has not been success ul, measure and report backbene ts. One key piece missing that applies to all licensing, not just cats, is creating value o the license otherwiseit is just another tax. License revenues need to be re invested back into animals in the community and shared withpartnering not or pro t partners. The license is the ticket home that also unds many great initiates or animals ( reelow income spay and neuter programs, education, sta to support responsible pet owners etc.)



Cat Licensing Program - Animal Care CentreLondon, ON

ORgANIzATION: Animal Care Centre CONTACT : Kent Lattanzio

MISSION: The Animal Care Centre is contracted by City o London to provide bylaw services or the municipalityincluding sheltering stray cats and dogs and licensing o cats and dogs.

dESCRIpTION: In the City o London it is mandatory to license all cats and dogs. Licensing is used to educateowners about responsible pet ownership, to en orce by-laws, and to reduce cat homelessness by increasing thereturn to owner rate o stray cats. Each license has a traceable number back to the owner. To acilitate ease o use,licenses can be renewed through the mail, online or in person.

AUdIENCE: Cat owners (also administers all dog licenses or the city).

fUNdINg: Funding generated rom the licensing program (both cats and dogs) goes to the City o London to o setthe animal control budget and to und animal wel are initiatives.

COST: Licensing or a sterilized cat is $20 compared to $35 or an intact cat.

SUCCESS ANd LEARNINg: The City o London has the highest number o licensed animals compared to othermunicipalities in Ontario. One di erence between this program and the city o Calgary is that Calgary has a signi cantne or not paying or your license. I you don’t pay the nes in Calgary an arrest warrant may be issued. Calgary has

legislation that backs their en orcement initiatives. In Ontario, the only punitive action or unpaid nes is submittingthe name to a collection agency; there ore there is a limited mechanism or en orcement. STATISTICS: O the 13 000 licensed cats, 27 000 licensed dogs they lose about 20%to attrition each year. There is a constant need to educate and en orce to maintainlicenses database.

RESOURCES: A mandatory cat licensing by-law requires administrative support(inputting o data, reminder notices, etc) and compliance and en orcement support(animal control o cer). Depending on the size o the city this could require severalpersonnel.

REpLICATION: Keep the program in-house in order to accurately maintain records.Many people aren’t educated about licensing a cat and will resist or nancial reasons. A licensing program mustbe combined with an education program. It is imperative those interested in replicating the program have a well-trained, uni ormed animal control o cer speaking with the public.


http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cfhs-catreport-english-1 42/69© Angie Chauvin Photography

Table 1: Voucher allocations 7

Voucher Type Eligibility Maximum No. ofVouchers

Value of EachVoucher

Expiration of Voucher

Owned Cat Windsor ResidentOver 18Household Incomebelow threshold

2 per household $75 (includes HST) 2 months a ter date oissue

Feral Cat Windsor Resident

Over 18

4 per household $75 (includes HST) 2 months a ter date o

issue

Subsidized Spay/NeuterWindsor, ON

ORgANIzATION: City o Windsor CONTACT: Sandra Bradt

dESCRIpTION: 1000 spay/neuter vouchers were issued to 500 eral cat care providers and 500 low-income amilies:Windsor residents, 18 and over, who ell below certain income criteria or provided care to eral cats were eligibleto apply. The vouchers were redeemable at seven animal hospitals and the Windsor Essex County Humane Society.Vouchers were allocated on a rst come, rst served basis subject to availability and eligibility (see chart below). Thegoals o the program are to increase spay/neuter rates or cats, collect more standardized data and demographic dataon who spays and neuters their animals.

AUdIENCE: low-income amilies/individuals or those who cared or eral cats in the municipality o Windsor(261,473 2006 census).

fUNdINg: Windsor City Council allocated $75,000 undingin the 2012 budget to provide 1000 spay/neuter vouchers toquali ying individuals. The vouchers were valued at $75 each(HST included). The average cost to spay/neuter a cat in Ontarioas recommended by the Ontario Veterinary Medical Associationis $495/$370 respectively.

SUCCESS: The eral cat vouchers were claimed within 24hours and the cat owner vouchers within a week. The WindsorHumane Society opened a high-volume spay/neuter program($75/surgery) and the bulk o the vouchers were redeemedthere. The anticipation is that all o the owned-cat voucherswill be used but not all o the eral cat vouchers will be used.Exact statistics will be available at the end o 2012. O the 1000vouchers issued, to date 663 were redeemed o which 336were owned-cat vouchers and 327 were eral cat vouchers.

7 “Spay/Neuter Voucher Program or Cats,” The City o Windsor, 3 Jul. 2012 <http:// www.citywindsor.ca/cityhall/licensingandregistration/Animals/Pages/Spay-Neuter-Voucher-Program-for-Cats.aspx>.



© Angie Chauvin Pho

REpLICATION: This program is not highly labour-intensive, however, it does have dedicated sta(not ull-time). The program was publicizedusing earned media and social media outlets. Itis believed that eral cat vouchers went so quicklybecause those involved in this work have a goodcommunication network. Key partners in theprogram were the Windsor Humane Society andrescue organizations who spread the word about

the program, local veterinarians who acceptedthe vouchers, City Council and individuals in thecommunity.

LEARNINgS: There are regulations under theCollege o Veterinarians o Ontario that prohibitbusiness being directed or steered to one serviceprovider or another. The CVO recommended thatthe all veterinarians be involved in the program.Communication with provincial veterinary college/ regulatory body is highly recommended. TheWindsor program issued vouchers in June, with anexpiry date o 60 days rom issue. In the uture, alonger expiration period would be recommended.



Subsidized Spay/Neuter ProgramRegina, Saskatchewan

ORgANIzATION: Regina Humane Society (RHS) CONTACT: Lisa Koch

dESCRIpTION: In April 2011 Regina Humane Society launched its Mobile Spay and Neuter clinic and Spay NeuterProgram providing subsidized pet spay and neuter surgeries to nancially disadvantaged households and communityanimal rescue organizations through a partnership with the City o Regina. The objectives o the Program include: decrease sterilization costs with particular emphasis on animals living inlow-income households and RHS adoptable animals; increase sterilization numbers with particular emphasis on low-income households; decrease animal numbers at the RHS by reducing incoming animals and increasing adoptions. Toquali y or the Low Income Spay/Neuter Program, participants must be a resident o the City o Regina, be 18 years oage or older, be the owner or keeper o the pet being spayed or neutered and be able to o er proo o being eligibleor social assistance or o alling into speci ed amily income or charitable animal rescue categories. The sterilizationsurgery and related medical/identi cation procedures are either ully subsidized (no cost) or partially subsidized(low cost $60) under two income quali ying levels to the program. Each animal sterilized under the program is alsotattooed, micro-chipped and leaves with a license, not only ensuring ewer unwanted litters but also that moreanimals can be quickly and sa ely returned to their owners.

AUdIENCE: nancially disadvantaged households and community animal rescue organizations

fUNdINg: In 2010, the Regina Humane Society approached the City o Regina to support a Spay/Neuter Programthat would take the service to the problem. Targeted subsidized spay/neuter services had proven to reduce shelterintake making spay/neuter incredibly cost e ective. The City o Regina agreed to direct $147,300 to the RHS (thesame unding provided under the ormer City Spay and Neuter Program) to provide sterilization procedures or dogsand cats owned by quali ying low income households or cared or by registered charity animal rescue organizations.

SUCCESS: Community support has been strong and awareness continues to grow. The clinic’s presence at RHSeducation and outreach e orts continue to cultivate trust between the RHS and targeted communities with thehighest incidence o animal wel are issues. Animal Protection o cers report a signi cant improvement in the way theyare received in the communities as a result o programming e orts. The clinic has also promoted the importance ospaying and neutering as part o responsible pet care at community events. The Society’s 522-SPAY line rings daily andapplications or spay/neuter surgeries food into the shelter with more surgeries booked well into the coming months.

RESOURCES: RHS Director o Veterinary Care, supported by the RHS veterinary team comprised o a .6 timeassistant veterinarian and 4 veterinary technicians, operates under the regulations and practice standards o care setby the Saskatchewan Veterinary Medical Association. In addition to the surgical procedures provided, the RHS assistslow income animal owners with application completion, income veri cation and scheduling a sterilization procedureor their animal(s); assists with transportation/delivery o animals or sterilization, provides animal owners within ormation about sterilizing the Animal and pre-surgery and post-surgery care; arranges to have animals transportedand treated at the 24 Hr. Animal Care Centre at the expense o the RHS or any a ter hour surgical complications. TheRHS Veterinary team is also responsible or all aspects regarding the management and day to day operations o thehospital within the Regina Humane Society in caring or all animals admitted into the animal shelter. The RHS meetswith representatives rom the Regina Association o Veterinarians (RAV) to discuss areas o potential confict andexplore areas o mutual opportunity. All adopters rom the RHS are strongly encouraged to continue their new pet’sveterinary care with their choice o city veterinarian through RAV brochures provided with each adoption. Working



with the RAV, the Society has also established a re erral program to supportthis initiative.

RESULTS: In the RHS original proposal to the City, 2008 statistics cited that arecord 5,115 homeless dogs and cats entered the RHS (Shelter and Impound),and 2,166 animals, many which were healthy and adoptable, were euthanized.In the rst year o operating the Low Income Spay Neuter Program, the numbero homeless dogs and cats entering the shelter decreased by 14 per cent to4,402. Over the same period, the number o animals euthanized decreasedby 18 per cent while the number o dogs and cats adopted increased 12 percent and the momentum is continuing. At the culmination o the rst ull yearo the program RHS live release rates had risen rom 60% in April 2011 to73% in April 2012. To date in 2012, the Society is continuing to experience itshighest live release rates. These are just the numbers. What is immeasurable isthe incredible di erence this service has made to hundreds o pet owners whowere given the opportunity to be a part o the solution to end the practiceo pet euthanasia as a means to control pet overpopulation in the Reginacommunity.

LEARNINgS: At the RHS’s current, a mobile clinic was selected becausethe in rastructure to support a clinic did not exist, it would support outreache orts o the Spay and Neuter clinic in areas with the highest incidence oanimal wel are issues and could be used to support o -site adoption eventsand other programming. Although the clinic has been utilized in outreachprogramming, spay and neuter e orts o the clinic remain on-site as the highresponse and participation in the program has made it unnecessary to travel

to the targeted areas. The RHS is in the process o developing a new animalcommunity centre acility with on-site clinic or the City o Regina. The RHSresearched and designed targeted Spay Neuter Program promotional materialsand budgeted to support a promotional campaign. None o the budgetedamounts were utilized and no advertising has been completed as word omouth, communication with local rescues, social services and RHS eld o cershas resulted in overwhelming response and continuous participation in theprogram. Spay and Neuter numbers have been limited by capacity. Fundingis not available to sta spay/neuter surgeries seven days a week. The clinic iscurrently not utilized on weekends. The RHS is seeking unding opportunities tosta the clinic on weekends through participation with external veterinarians/ vet techs as locum. Director o Veterinary Care must maintain shelter animal

health in addition to role in per orming spay and neuter surgeries. Since RHSis municipal impound acility, this role detracts rom surgery time particularlyin peak months

REpLICATION: Partnership. Partnership. Partnership. The Society continuesto meet with Regina Association o Veterinarians to discuss opportunitiesto collaborate and support li elong veterinary care. Partnering with the Cityo Regina, Regina pet retailers (all are RHS satellite adoption acilities) andRegina animal rescues to address animal wel are issues as a community hascontributed to the success o the program.



Regent Park Feral and Low Income Spay/Neuter ProgramToronto, Ontario

ORgANIzATION: Toronto Feral Cat Coalition CONTACT: Dr. Johanna Booth

dESCRIpTION: The Toronto Feral Cat Coalition is a coalition o 9 Toronto area TNR stakeholders. The program targetsall ree-roaming cats in low income amilies in the Regent Park area o Toronto which is notorious or kitten littersand dumped cats, as well as an area with a higher than average rateo intact ree roaming cats. This program uses a community awarenesscampaign to in orm residents o TNR project and trapping dates. Theyuse volunteers to trap and transport cats to clinics and or the most part

volunteers Veterinarians and Vet Techs to per orm the surgeries.TARgET AUdIENCE: Low income amilies and those who manageeral cat colonies.

fUNdINg ANd COSTS: The program is unded through a grant romPetSmart Charities. In order to make the unds stretch as ar as possiblethe program is sta ed almost exclusively by volunteers. Currently theonly paid position is a veterinary tech, all o the other veterinary servicesare provides by volunteers.

pROgRAM SUCCESS: There are an estimated 500 ree roaming cats in Regent Park and 250 have already beenspayed/neutered. The program now has the unding to spay/neuter the remaining 250 cats. Dramatic decreases havealready been seen in the number i kittens born in eral colonies and there has been a very appreciative and positiveresponse rom the resident o Regent Park.

RESOURCES: The program has a network ovolunteers and assistance rom other coalitionorganizations. Key positions include 2 volunteerveterinarians that attend all clinics as well as variouscoordinators or community outreach, bookings/ record keeping, and email correspondence. ThePetSmart unds are used or veterinary supplies/ materials.

RECOMMENdATIONS fOR REpLICATION:Form a coalition o invested stakeholders and createa dynamic volunteer program. Apply or large grantopportunities such as the PetSmart grant. Create anawareness campaign using volunteers to canvassdoor-to-door to break down barriers and encourageprogram participation.



Capacity or CareVancouver, British Columbia

ORgANIzATION: BC SPCA Vancouver Branch CONTACT NAME: Kim Monteith

dESCRIpTION: Capacity or care (C4C) is a management model that helps shelters humanely care or all o theanimals in their acility. It creates the conditions necessary to provide the Five Freedoms, as outlined in the Associationo Shelter Veterinarians’ Guidelines or Standards o Care in Animal Shelters (available at: www.sheltervet.org/ standards). It not only improves the wel are o individual animals, but generally results in lower incidence o illness,dramatically higher adoption rates, and lower lengths o stay. In practice, C4C requires daily population management,assessing and managing the needs o each animal, ensuring animal fow-through is occurring as planned, andknowing the shelter’s capacity number well, so you don’t go over it. Providing the 5 Freedoms becomes impossible

when a shelter is over capacity.

AUdIENCE: shelter sta , volunteers, owners surrendering, nders ostrays

CApACITY fOR CARE MOdEL: Under the C4C model, a shelter’scapacity relates to a variety o critical actors other than physical space;it determines how many animals can be provided adequate care andrequires discipline to stay within this ceiling. C4C is based on incomingand current populations, individual animal needs, human resources(sta ng, volunteers), training, physical capacity and design, and otheractors. Dr. Kate Hurley rom the UC Davis Koret Shelter MedicineProgram provided various calculations in order to acilitate BC SPCA’scapacity-setting exercise as they piloted the model at their VancouverCommunity Animal Centre. BCSPCA calculated their “adoption-drivencapacity” to determine the average number o daily adoptions at thisshelter. Based on the average daily adoptions, they determined howmany cats and kittens they could: humanely care or, have available oradoption, and have on their way to adoption. As recommended by Dr.Hurley, they set their physical capacity at 80% o this gure in order toallow or fuctuations in intake above this gure.

In our Vancouver Community Animal Centre, like any many othershelters, the general approach had been to take in many cats & kittens,expand rooms so there we several communals along with individualhousing. Physical space never seemed to be the issue; however theisolation was always ull. When a cat sneezed s/he was removed to

isolation to prevent other cats rom getting sick. Trying to decrease the number o cats in isolation to make roomor new entrants meant sta were constantly trying to nd oster homes or the sick cats. When the room lledup and there were no homes they were orced to make some hard decisions. Preventing the cats rom getting sickbecame one o the biggest goals. There never seemed to be a good way to prevent cats rom getting sick until theyimplemented Capacity or Care. Facility managers rst implemented substantial changes to previous managementprotocols or sick animals by implementing new intake and cleaning procedures and eliminating the “One sneeze”policy (i a cat in adoptions sneezed once it was moved to URI isolation), Post Upper Respiratory Disease Adoption(PURDA) rooms and separate housing area or surrenders and strays (unless highly stressed). They also implemented

disciplined protocols to ensure they: never over-crowded cat rooms; decreased the number o di erent rooms cats



were kept in (pockets); housed stray cats in the adoption room; asked relinquishers/ nders o stray cats to hold themi possible until capacity became available. fUNdINg/COST: No additional unding was necessary to initiate the program as all operational changes wereaddressed within existing budgets and, in act, cost savings were realized as a result o less overtime needed anda reduced reliance on medication and veterinary visits. Modi ying cat cages to provide additional space will incuradditional one-time costs when implemented in a uture phase. SUCCESS: The incidence o upper respiratory disease did not increase when sneezing cats were allowed to remain(singly housed) within the general adoption area. The number o cats in the isolation ward went rom 12- 16(maximum allowable) at any given time to an estimated 10-15 or the entire year. Adoptions increased; length ostay decreased. There was an increased opportunity to trans er cats & kittens into our shelter rom other BC SPCABranches. Human wel are also increased. For example, Animal Care Attendant hours ( or cat care) changed rom6am-2pm to 8am-4pm due to a reduction in time necessary to prepare or adoption viewing. Importantly, withthe change in scheduling, sta had more time to spend with volunteers and members o the public during peakhours to acilitate adoptions. Prior to piloting this program, the isolation room was almost always at or slightly overcapacity and health techs were responsible or cleaning cages. When the numbers decreased, health techs wereable to spend more time working with individual animals and assisting adopters and oster amilies. Anecdotally,improvements were also seen immediately in the adoption o stray cats who were normally kept out o public viewand sta morale increased.

RESOURCES: The main resource needed to complete the implementation o C4C was the commitment by sta andthe Manager to stay within capacity. Sta and volunteers also require the knowledge and understanding o whatC4C is so they can explain it to the public. Time must be given to daily population management; it can’t be le t andthen someone says “I didn’t have time.” You need to make time and prioritize your population management. Oneway to help manage population is to keep good records o your inventory and fow through – so tware or trackinganimal management is key.

KEY pARTNERS: There were no ormal partners in this project. BC SPCA participated in two workshops deliveredby Dr. Kate Hurley and used resources o ered through the UC Davis Koret Shelter Medicine Program. Internalorganization support or implementation and monitoring o progress rom Senior Managers was important orsuccess in this pilot.

LEARNINgS: The ability o a manager to provide ongoing management o the system, including knowing theshelter capacity and staying within it, is essential. Sometimes sta were too excited and admitted too many cats whenthey saw an increase in adoptions. The key is to retrain sta and volunteers to understand the di erence betweenphysical capacity and fow-through capacity. It was also challenging to overcome the prevailing misperception thatthe shelter was not being as help ul to homeless cats when not every cage was occupied at all times. However, wheneveryone sees the improvements in the health and wel are o the cats in care and the resultant increase in adoptionsand decreased length o stay, they elt more con dent that the new model was helping more animals. At rst itwas also di cult to tell relinquishers that they were at capacity and some were upset; however once the shelterhad implemented the program and was at its new capacity, it has never been a problem and in act, they are o tenlooking or cats & kittens to trans er in or calling osters to bring cats back due to the greatly increased fow-through.Currently the shelter is modi ying the cat cages to make them larger so cats will have a greater living space; this isone area that will urther improve our capacity or care. REpLICATION: Contributors to success include the manager’s understanding and desire to improve care o catsand kittens in shelter, constant management o program, sta and Board support and willingness to try somethingnew. It is important to clearly communicate all changes to sta and volunteers in regular updates and brie ngs. BCSPCA highly recommends the C4C program to other shelters and would encourage those interested to view Dr.Kate Hurley’s presentation prior to making any changes, and to consult the Association o Shelter Veterinarians’Guidelines or Standards o Care in Animal Shelters (available at: www.sheltervet.org/standards).



British Columbia Respondents N

Humane Societies 0

SPCAs 37

TNR 4

Municipalities 4

Veterinarians 12

Rescue 11

Spay/Neuter Group 0

Other 0

TOTAL 68British Columbia Intake Data - Cats N TOTAL

Total Intakes (Q39) 52 21,589

% o Kittens 53 44%

# o total owner surrendered 9 7,529

# o total stray/public surrendered 50 10,764

Reclaimed by owner (Q81) 52 1,092

Adopted (Q73) 50 12,256

Euthanized (Q102) 44 4,684

Net new number o cats without a home(Intake–Reclaimed–Adopted–Euthanized=cats without homes) 3,557

British Columbia Shelter Capacity N TOTAL

% o Capacity in 2011 17 81%

% o Capacity in 2012 (6 months into the year) 18 68%

British Columbia Intake Data - Dogs N TOTAL

Total Intake of Dogs (Q41) 43 12,938

% puppies 42 20%






Net new number o dogs without a home(Intake–Reclaimed–Adopted–Euthanized=dogs without homes) 40 1,868

British Columbia Spay/Neuter Data N TOTAL

# o total o owner surrendered Cats that were spayed/neutered 9 127

# o total Public/Stray Surrendered Cats that were spayed/neutered 9 79

# o total owner surrendered Dogs that were spayed/neutered 3 3

# o total stray/public surrendered Dogs that were spayed/neutered 3 0

# o stakeholders that spay/neuter 56 100%

Total number s/n while in care (Q90) Cats 13 1,885

Total number s/n while in care (Q90) Dogs 5 168

b R i T i S H c o l u M b i a

7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLESn each case, respondents were categorized by province however, there was not su cient data in each province to do a ull

analysis. There ore, what ollows is a select data set or each province should readers’ wishes to look at speci c provinces.The N value represents the number o respondents in each case and provides the context when responses may not berepresentative o the province.



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLES(bRiTiSH coluMbia)

Top Three First Ranked Reasons or Surrendering Cats 1. Too Much Time or Responsibility 62%2. Housing including moving or landlord strata issues 16%3. Financial Reasons 12%

EuthanasiaO the stakeholders that responded, 82% euthanize cats and dogs. The top reason or euthanasia or cats (50%)and kittens (51%) was illness/change in status. This was ollowed closely by animal behaviour at 44% or cats and44% or kittens.

Feral Cat Management20% o respondents are managing a eral cat colony with 95 colonies sited as under management averaging 226cats per colony and 1370 were spayed or neutered.



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLESAlberta Respondents N

Humane Societies 6

SPCAs 2

TNR 0

Municipalities 5

Veterinarians 46

Rescue 4

Spay/Neuter Group 0

Other 0

TOTAL 63

Alberta Intake Data - Cats N TOTAL


% o Kittens 14 39%




Adopted (Q73) 14 9,714



Alberta Shelter Capacity N TOTAL



Alberta Intake Data - Dogs N TOTAL


% puppies 11 17%




Adopted out (Q73) 11 4,939


Net new number o dogs without a home(Intake–Reclaimed–Adopted–Euthanized=dogs without homes) 4,159

Alberta Spay/Neuter Data N TOTAL# o total o owner surrendered Cats that were spayed & neutered 6 326

# o total Public/Stray Surrendered Cats 4 3

# o total owner surrendered Dogs 5 257

# o total stray/public surrendered Dogs 3 25



Total number s/n while in care (Q90) Dogs 6 3,158

A L B E R T A



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLES(ALBERTA)

Top Three First Ranked Reasons or Surrendering Cats 1. Housing (including moving or landlord issues) – 47%2. Animal behaviour – 20%3. Too much time or responsibility/Owner health – 13%

EuthanasiaO the stakeholders that responded, 69% euthanize cats and dogs. The top reason or euthanizing cats and kit-tens is illness/change o status with 37% o cats and 44% o kittens being euthanized or this reason.

Feral Cat ManagementNo respondents in the province reported that they were managing a eral cat colony.



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLESSaskatchewan Respondents N

Humane Societies 3

SPCAs 4

TNR 0Municipalities 0

Veterinarians 32

Rescue 2

Spay/Neuter Group 0

Other 0

TOTAL 41

Saskatchewan Intake Data - Cats N TOTAL


% o Kittens 6 45%

# o total owner surrendered 8 1,570# o total stray/public surrendered 8 4,480

Reclaimed by owner (Q81) 8 322

Adopted (Q73) 8 2,442


Net new number o cats without a home(Intake–Reclaimed–Adopted–Euthanized=cats without homes)

287

Saskatchewan Shelter Capacity N TOTAL



Saskatchewan Intake Data - Dogs N TOTALTotal Intake of Dogs (Q41) 6 4,076

% puppies 4 28%






Net new number o dogs without a home(Intake–Reclaimed–Adopted–Euthanized=dogs without homes) 141

Saskatchewan Spay/Neuter Data N TOTAL

# o total o owner surrendered Cats 17 17







S A S K A T C H E W A N



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLES(SASKATCHEWAN)

Top Three First Ranked Reasons or Surrendering Cats 1. Housing (including moving or landlord issues) – 67%2. Too much time responsibility and Owner health – 17%3. N/A

EuthanasiaO the stakeholders that responded, 56% euthanize cats and dogs. The top reason or euthanizing cats andkittens is due to illness/change in status. The averages are 50% or cats and 57% or kittens.

Feral Cat Management22% o respondents are managing a eral cat colony with 9 colonies cited as under management averaging 7 cats

per colony and 27 were spayed or neutered.



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLES

Manitoba Respondents N

Humane Societies 3

SPCAs 1

TNR 2

Municipalities 17

Veterinarians 11

Rescue 3

Spay/Neuter Group 1

Other 1

TOTAL 39

Manitoba Intake Data - Cats N TOTAL


% o Kittens 10 34%




Adopted (Q73) 8 5,425



Manitoba Shelter Capacity N TOTAL



Manitoba Intake Data - Dogs N TOTAL


% puppies 7 29%





Euthanized (Q102) 7 538


Manitoba Spay/Neuter Data N TOTAL








M A N I T O B A



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLES(MANITOBA)

Top Three First Ranked Reasons or Surrendering Cats 1. Housing (including moving or landlord issues) – 40%2. Animal behaviour and Other - 20%3. Financial reason and Owner health – 10%

EuthanasiaO the stakeholders that responded, 39% euthanize cats and dogs. The top reason or euthanizing cats (50%)and kittens (46%) was illness/change in status.

Feral Cat ManagementO the responding organizations 12% are managing a eral cat colony with 24 colonies cited as under

management averaging 173 cats per colony and 335 reported as spayed and neutered in 2011.



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLESOntario Respondents N

Humane Societies 13

SPCAs 1


Veterinarians 32

Rescue 9

Spay/Neuter Group 4

Other 2

TOTAL 75

Ontario Intake Data - Cats N TOTAL


% o Kittens 32 39%



Adopted (Q73) 29 13,147



Ontario Shelter Capacity N TOTAL



Ontario Intake Data - Dogs N TOTAL


% puppies 21 9%







Ontario Spay/Neuter Data N TOTAL

# o total o owner surrendered Cats 21 1,640# o total Public/Stray Surrendered Cats 23 2,066


# o total stray/public surrendered Dogs 14 1,270




O N T A R I O



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLES(ONTARIO)

Top Three First Ranked Reasons or Surrendering Cats 1. Housing (including moving or landlord issues) – 31%2. Owner health - 27%3. Animal behaviour - 23%

EuthanasiaO the stakeholders that responded, 54% euthanize cats and dogs. The top reason or euthanizing cats (39%)and kittens (47%) was illness/change in status.

Feral Cat Management

O the respondents 38% are managing a eral cat colony with 168 colonies cited as under managementaveraging 108 cats per colony and 909 that were spayed or neutered in 2011.



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLESQuebec Respondents N

Humane Societies 4

SPCAs 3


Veterinarians 60

Rescue 5

Spay/Neuter Group 1

Other 2

TOTAL 80

Quebec Intake Data - Cats N TOTAL


% o Kittens 11 39%



Adopted (Q73) 15 7,888



Quebec Shelter Capacity N TOTAL



Quebec Intake Data - Dogs N TOTAL


% puppies 6 26%






Net new number o dogs without a home(Intake–Reclaimed–Adopted–Euthanized=dogs without homes) 4,627

Quebec Spay/Neuter Data N TOTAL








Q u e b e c



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLES(Quebec)

Top Three First Ranked Reasons or Surrendering Cats 1. Housing (including moving or landlord issues) – 54%2. Too much time or responsibility – 31%3. Animal behaviour and Owner health – 8%

EuthanasiaO the stakeholders that responded, 53% euthanize cats and dogs. The top reason or euthanizing cats wasillness/change in status (29%) ollowed closely by animal behaviour (27%). The top reason or euthanizingkittens was illness/change in status (33%).

Feral Cat ManagementO the respondents 19% are managing a eral cat colony with 6 colonies cited as under management averaging15 cats per colony o which 42 were spayed or neutered in 2011.



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLESNew Brunswick Respondents N

Humane Societies 0

SPCAs 7


Veterinarians 11

Rescue 1

Spay/Neuter Group 0

Other 1

TOTAL 24

New Brunswick Intake Data - Cats N TOTAL


% o Kittens 8 37%



Adopted (Q73) 11 3,954



New Brunswick Shelter Capacity N TOTAL



New Brunswick Intake Data - Dogs N TOTAL


% puppies 6 19%

# o total owner surrendered 7 663






New Brunswick Spay/Neuter Data N TOTAL

# o total o owner surrendered Cats 7 81# o total Public/Stray Surrendered Cats 7 85






N e W

b R u N S W i c k



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLES(NeW bRuNSWick)

Top Three First Ranked Reasons or Surrendering Cats 1. Housing (including moving or landlord issues) – 57%2. Too much time responsibility - 33%3. Other – 11%

EuthanasiaO the stakeholders that responded, 33% euthanize cats and dogs. The top reason given or euthanizing catswas animal behaviour 36% and the top reason or kittens was illness/change in status 60%.

Feral Cat ManagementO the respondents 25% are managing a eral cat colony with 106 colonies cited as under management averaging

60 cats per colony o which 715 were spayed or neutered in 2011.



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLESNova Scotia Respondents N

Humane Societies 2

SPCAs 8


Veterinarians 26

Rescue 3

Spay/Neuter Group 1

Other 1

TOTAL 44

Nova Scotia Intake Data - Cats N TOTAL


% o Kittens 14 45%

# o total owner surrendered 8 839# o total stray/public surrendered 10 3,372


Adopted (Q73) 14 3,455


Net new number o cats without a home(Intake–Reclaimed–Adopted–Euthanized=cats without homes) 765

Nova Scotia Shelter Capacity N TOTAL



Nova Scotia Intake Data - Dogs N TOTAL


% puppies 11 20%


# o total stray/public surrendered 10 493


Adopted out (Q73) 11 861



Nova Scotia Spay/Neuter Data N TOTAL







N O V A S C O T I A



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLES(NOVA SCOTIA)

Top Three First Ranked Reasons or Surrendering Cats 1. Housing (including moving or landlord issues)2. Financial reasons, Owner health, Other – 23%3. Too much time responsibility - 8%

EuthanasiaO the stakeholders that responded, 33% euthanize cats and dogs. The top reason given or euthanizing cats andkittens was illness/change in status with 63% o cats and 67% o kittens euthanized or this reason.

Feral Cat ManagementO the respondents 22% are managing a eral cat colony with 8 colonies cited as under management averaging 64

cats per colony o which 100 were spayed or neutered in 2011.



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLESPrince Edward Island Respondents N

Humane Societies 1

SPCAs 1


Veterinarians 9

Rescue 0

Spay/Neuter Group 1

Other 1

TOTAL 13

Prince Edward Island Intake Data - Cats N TOTAL


% o Kittens 2 60%

# o total owner surrendered 2 636# o total stray/public surrendered 2 953


Adopted (Q73) 2 688


Net new number o cats without a home(Intake–Reclaimed–Adopted–Euthanized=cats without homes) 370

Prince Edward Island Shelter Capacity N TOTAL



Prince Edward Island Intake Data - Dogs N TOTAL

Total Intake of Dogs (Q41) 2 841

% puppies 2 19%


# o total stray/public surrendered 2 451




Net new number o dogs without a home(Intake–Reclaimed–Adopted–Euthanized=dogs without homes) -74

Prince Edward Island Spay/Neuter Data N TOTAL







P R I N C E E D W

A R D I S L A N D



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLES(PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND)

Top Three First Ranked Reasons or Surrendering Cats 1. Housing (including moving or landlord issues) and Owner Health – 50%2. N/A3. N/A

EuthanasiaO the stakeholders that responded, 33% euthanize cats and dogs. All cats (100%) were euthanized due toa ordability o medical treatment, and all kittens (100%) were euthanized due to illness/change o status.

Feral Cat ManagementNo respondents in the province reported that they were managing a eral cat colony.



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLESNew oundland & Labrador Respondents N

Humane Societies 0

SPCAs 6


Veterinarians 5

Rescue 0

Spay/Neuter Group 1

Other 0

TOTAL 27

New oundland & Labrador Intake Data - Cats N TOTAL


% o Kittens 11 47%



Adopted (Q73) 11 6,280


Net new number o cats without a home(Intake–Reclaimed–Adopted–Euthanized=cats without homes) -3 393

New oundland & Labrador Shelter Capacity N TOTAL



New oundland & Labrador Intake Data - Dogs N TOTAL


% puppies 8 38%







New oundland & Labrador Spay/Neuter Data N TOTAL






Total number s/n while in care (Q90) Cats 9 863


N e W F o u N d l a N d & l a b R a d o R



7. AppENdIX II-pROVINCIAL TAbLES(NeWFouNdlaNd & labRadoR)

Top Three First Ranked Reasons or Surrendering Cats 1. Housing (moving or landlord issues) - 55%2. Financial reasons - 27%3. Too much time or responsibility and Owner health – 9%

EuthanasiaO the stakeholders that responded, 48% euthanize cats and dogs. The top reason or euthanizing cats wasor illness/change in status (30%) ollowed by animal behaviour and lack o space (25%). The top reason oreuthanizing kittens was lack o space (30%).

Feral Cat Management

O the respondents 11% are managing a eral cat colony with 11 colonies cited as under management averaging21 cats per colony o which 200 were spayed or neutered in 2011.



8. REfERENCES Asilomar Accords (2004). Retrieved June 28, 2012 rom http://www.asilomaraccords.org/2004-accords5.pd .

Ash, S. & Adams, C.E.(2003). Public Pre erences or Free-Ranging Domestic Cat Management Options. Wildli eSociety Bulletin 31: 335-337.

Baldwin, J. (1975). Notes and Speculations on the Domestication o the Cat in Egypt.” Anthropos 70.3-4:428-448.

Centonze, L.A. & Levy, J. (2002). Characteristics o ree-roaming cats and their caretakers.JAVMA, Vol 220, No. 11, June 1.

Driscoll, C., Menotti-Raymond, M., Roca, A. , Hupe, K., Johnson, W., Ge en,…..Macdonald, D. (2007). The NearEastern Origin o Cat Domestication. Science 317.5837: 519-523.

Nutter, F., Levine, J., & Stoskop , M. (2004), Reproductive Capacity o Free-Roaming Domestic Cats and KittenSurvival Rate. Journal o the American Veterinary Medical Association 225.9: 1399.

Kass, P. (2005). Cat Overpopulation in the United States. The Welfare of Cats. Ed. Irene Rochlitz. Dordrecht,

the Netherlands: Springer.Kortis, B., Weiss, M., Frazier, A. and Burns, L. (2004). The Neighbourhoods Cats TNR Handbook: A Guide to

Trap-Neuter-Return or the Feral Cat Caretaker. Neighbourhood Cats, New York.

Levy, J. & Craw ord, C. (2004). Humane Strategies or Controlling Feral Cat Populations. Journal o the AmericanVeterinary Medical Association 225.9: 1355.

Looney, A., Bohling, M., Bushby, P., Howe, L., Gri n, B., Levy, J.,………Scarlett, J. (2008). The Association oShelter Veterinarians Veterinary Medical Care Guidelines or Spay-neuter Programs. Journal of the AmericanVeterinary Medical Association 233.1: 74-86.

Lord, L. (2008). Attitudes Toward and Perceptions o Free-Roaming Cats Among Individuals Living in Ohio. Journalo the American Veterinary Medical Association 232.8: 1163.

McDonagh, A., (2010). 2010 National Urban Animal Report, Retrieved May 31, 2012 rom http://internal.petlynx.net/con uence/download/attachments/3479162/2010+National+Urban+Animal+Report.pdf?version=1&m odi cationDate=1318435727000.

Newbury, S., Blinn, M.K., Bushby, P. A., Cox, C.B., Dinnage, J., Gri n, B.,……Spindel, M. (2010). Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters . Retrieved May, 12, 2012 rom http://www.aspcapro.org/shelter-medicine-resources-and-related-links.php

Perrin, T. (2009). The Business o Urban Animals Survey: the acts and statistics on companion animals in Canada.Canadian Veterinary Journal 50.1: 48-52.

Serpell, J.A (2000). Domestication and history o the cat. In Dennis C. Turner and Patrick Bateson (Eds), TheDomestic Cat; the biology of its behaviour, (pp 179 – 191). Cambridge University Press.

Slater, M. (2007). Wel are o Feral Cats. The Welfare of Cats. Ed. Irene Rochlitz. Dordrecht, the Netherlands:Springer.

cfhs catreport english 1

Documents