S. and Hurley, K. (2012). Population Management. In: Shelter Medicine for Veterinarians and Staff (eds. L. Miller and S. Zawistowski), 93–114. Ames: Blackwell Publishing.
12 Newbury, S., Blinn, M.K., Bushby, P.A. et al. (2010). ASV Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters. https://www.sheltervet.org/assets/docs/shelter‐standards‐pdf (accessed 17 July 2019).
13 Newbury, S., Moriello, K.A., Kwochka, K.W. et al. (2011). Use of itraconazole and either lime sulphur or Malaseb Concentrate Rinse® to treat shelter cats naturally infected with microsporum canis: an open field trial. Veterinary Dermatology 22 (1): 75–79.
14 Patronek, G.P. and Bradley, J. (2016). No better than flipping a coin: reconsidering canine behavior evaluations in animal shelters. Journal of Veterinary Behavior 15: 66–77.
15 Spehar, D.D. and Wolf, P.J. (2019). Integrated return‐to‐field and targeted trap‐neuter‐vaccinate‐return programs result in reductions of feline intake and euthanasia at six municipal animal shelters. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 6: 1–13.
16 Swanson, D. (2015). What's your magic number? Analyzing shelter capacity can increase live releases. Animal Sheltering (May/June), pp. 20–24.
17 Wagner, D.C., Kass, P.H., and Hurley, K.F. (2018). Cage size, movement in and out of housing during daily care, and other environmental and population health risk factors for feline upper respiratory disease in nine North American animal shelters. PLoS One 13 (1): e0190140.
18 Weiss, E. and Gramman, S. (2009). A comparison of attachment levels of adopters of cats: fee‐based adoptions versus free adoptions. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 12 (4): 360–370.
19 Weiss, E., Gramann, S., Dolan, E.D. et al. (2014). Do policy based adoptions increase the care a pet receives? An exploration of a shift to conversation based adoptions at one shelter. Open Journal of Animal Sciences 04 (05): 313–322.
2 Wellness
Brenda Griffin
College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
2.1 Introduction: Wellness Defined
Simply stated, the primary goal of any animal shelter (no matter what resources, philosophy, or mission it possesses) must be for animals to be as physically and behaviorally healthy as possible during their stays. The protection of public health and safety must also be central goals. In this way, shelters also achieve the goal of public education, leading by example as they display good animal care practices.
Wellness is defined as the maintenance of good health. Both physical health and behavioral (or emotional) health comprise wellness. For example, a dog may be physically fit, free from infectious or other physical diseases, but suffering from severe anxiety. This animal cannot be assessed as truly healthy; his behavioral disorder must be addressed to ensure his well‐being. A wellness program to optimize animal health in the shelter must therefore address both physical and behavioral health. In addition to addressing the animals themselves, addressing the shelter environment is also critically important when developing a wellness program for an animal shelter. Even the best‐designed facilities cannot manage or prevent infectious disease and problem behaviors without thoughtful implementation of environmental wellness protocols. In small animal practice, environmental wellness is frequently not emphasized simply because many owners are accustomed to providing a reasonably healthy environment for their pets. In contrast, a structured program to address environmental wellness is essential in the context of an animal shelter regardless of the actual physical design of the facility. Proactive measures to maintain clean, sanitary environments that are not overcrowded, where animals are segregated (by species, health and behavior status), shielded from stressful stimuli, and provided with regular daily schedules of care by well‐trained, dedicated staff are essential.
2.2 The Critical Importance of Wellness Protocols for Shelters
Infectious diseases, stress, and problem behaviors are common in cats and dogs housed in animal shelters. Pets entering shelters are highly stressed and at significant risk of acquiring infections and developing disease. The stress of even short‐term confinement in a shelter can compromise both physical and behavioral health, negatively affect animal welfare and make cats and dogs less desirable to potential adopters. Though considerable progress has been made in recent years to increase the live release rate of animals in shelters, individual animals with compromised physical or behavioral health are still less likely to be adopted and more likely to be euthanized. Furthermore, when animals experience stress chronically, the attendant physiological and behavioral manifestations may persist even after adoption, compromising behavioral health and welfare in the long term.
The maintenance of good health or wellness of animals in shelters presents challenges for several reasons. Risk factors for the development of infectious disease include the frequent introduction of new animals often with unknown histories to the facility, high‐density housing, housing animals of different ages and susceptibility levels in close proximity, induction of stress, and lack of adequate vaccination or insufficient time to respond to vaccination. All these risk factors, and others, exist in the shelter setting; therefore, a certain risk of infectious disease is inherent. In addition, certain diseases become endemic in facilities where populations of animals are housed, especially if wellness and disease control protocols are inadequate, or if staff lack training or if facility design and sanitation are poor.
Confinement of companion animals in a shelter can result in the display of a wide variety of behavioral indicators of stress, fear, anxiety, and/or frustration, including activity depression, hyperactivity, stereotypic behavior (such as pacing or circling), and barrier aggression, among others. Programs that reduce stress and related negative emotional states also serve to minimize the morbidity of endemic infectious diseases because stress has a profound influence on disease transmission as well as behavior. Shelter environments must be enriched to minimize stress, fear, anxiety, and frustration.
It is neither acceptable nor humane to house animals under conditions likely to induce illness and poor welfare. In addition, if animal shelters are to compete with other sources of animals for adoption, they must be able to present healthy animals in a healthy environment. Though very few regulations and mechanisms for oversight of animal shelters exist, shelters have an ethical obligation (and are increasingly expected by the public) to provide humane care for the well‐being of every animal being handled. In order to meet this obligation, there is a critical need for a wellness program in every shelter.
2.2.1 Goals of a Shelter Wellness Program
The goals of a shelter wellness program are to minimize infectious disease and problem behaviors while optimizing the physical and behavioral health of the animals. Shelter wellness programs should not be based on control of a single disease or problem but should offer broad‐based preventive strategies (a holistic approach). When shelters meet these goals, both public relations and adoption rates may be positively impacted. Further, shelter wellness programs must address both the health of individual animals and the health of the population. Shelter medicine has been compared to herd health (Hurley 2004). Indeed, much like a herd‐health approach, population medicine in the shelter utilizes a systematic approach for optimizing animal health in the group. Unlike a herd‐health program for large animals, where production (i.e. meat, milk, eggs, etc.) is the ultimate goal, ensuring the welfare of cats and dogs is the ultimate goal in the animal shelter. In order to implement a comprehensive wellness program for the shelter, establishing goals for and methods of monitoring the population is critical to ensuring animal health and welfare. Medical decisions must be weighed in the context of the population as well as the individual, while also considering animal welfare and the availability of resources. Finally, assessment and follow‐up must be performed on a population as well as an individual level.