TE_K__Guidelines_for_Standards_of_Care_in_Animal_Shelters,_Association_of_Shelter_Veterinarians_2010.pdf

The Association of Shelter Veterinarians • 2010

Guidelines for Standards of Care in

Animal Shelters

Authors:

Sandra Newbury, Mary K. Blinn, Philip A. Bushby, Cynthia Barker Cox, Julie D. Dinnage, Brenda Griffin, Kate F. Hurley, Natalie Isaza, Wes Jones, Lila Miller, Jeanette O’Quin, Gary J. Patronek, Martha Smith-Blackmore, Miranda Spindel

Association of Shelter Veterinarians TM

Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters

Association of Shelter Veterinarians TM

Sandra Newbury, DVM, Chair, Editor Koret Shelter Medicine Program, Center for Companion Animal Health, University of California Davis, Davis, California.

Adjunct Assistant Professor of Shelter Animal Medicine, Department of Pathobiological Sciences, University of Wisconsin-School of Veterinary Medicine, Madison, Wisconsin.

Mary K. Blinn, DVM Shelter Veterinarian, Charlotte/Mecklenburg Animal Care and Control, Charlotte, North Carolina.

Philip A. Bushby, DVM, MS, DACVS Marcia Lane Endowed Professor of Humane Ethics and Animal Welfare, College of Veterinary Medicine, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, Mississippi.

Cynthia Barker Cox, DVM Head Shelter Veterinarian, Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Boston, Massachusetts.

Julie D. Dinnage, DVM Executive Director, Association of Shelter Veterinarians, Scottsdale, Arizona.

Brenda Griffin, DVM, MS, DACVIM Adjunct Associate Professor of Shelter Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.

Kate F. Hurley, DVM, MPVM Koret Shelter Medicine Program, Center for Companion Animal Health, University of California Davis, Davis, California.

Natalie Isaza, DVM Clinical Assistant Professor, Merial Shelter Medicine Clerkship, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.

Wes Jones, DVM Shelter Veterinarian, Napa Humane, Napa, California.

Lila Miller, DVM, Editor Vice-President, Veterinary Advisor, ASPCA, New York.

Adjunct Assistant Professor, Cornell University College of Veterinary Medicine, Ithaca, New York.

University of Pennsylvania School of Veterinary Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Jeanette O’Quin, DVM Public Health Veterinarian, Ohio Department of Health, Zoonotic Disease Program, Columbus, Ohio.

Gary J. Patronek, VMD, PhD, Editor Vice President for Animal Welfare and New Program Development, Animal Rescue League of Boston, Boston, Massachusetts.

Clinical Assistant Professor, Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at Tufts, North Grafton, Massachusetts.

Martha Smith-Blackmore, DVM, Editor Director of Veterinary Medical Services, Animal Rescue League of Boston, Boston, Massachusetts.

Fellow, Tufts Center for Animals and Public Policy.

Clinical Assistant Professor, Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at Tufts, North Grafton, Massachusetts.

Miranda Spindel, DVM, MS Director of Veterinary Outreach, ASPCA, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Authors

The Association of Shelter Veterinarians • 2010

Guidelines for Standards of Care in

Animal Shelters

Authors 3

Introduction 7

Background 8

1. Challenges to Ensuring Welfare 8

2. The Need for Standards 9

3. The Five Freedoms and Companion Animals 10

How to Use This Document 11

Management and Record Keeping 12

1. Establishment of Policies and Protocols 12

2. Management Structure 12

3. Training 12

4. Animal Identification and Record Keeping 12

Facility Design and Environment 13

1. Primary Enclosure 13

2. Surfaces and Drainage 15

3. Heating Ventilation, and Air Quality 15

4. Light 16

5. Sound Control 17

6. Drop Boxes 17

Population Management 18

1. Capacity for Care 18

2. Protocols for Maintaining Adequate Capacity for Care 19

3. Monitoring Statistical Data 19

Sanitation 20

1. Cleaning and Disinfection 20

a) Sanitation Procedures 20

b) Fomite Control 22

2. Other Cleaning 23

3. Rodent/Pest Control 23

Medical Health and Physical Well-being 24

1. Veterinary Relationship and Recordkeeping 24

2. Considerations on Intake 25

Table of contents

3. Vaccinations 25

4. Emergency Medical Care 26

5. Pain Management 26

6. Parasite Control 27

7. Monitoring and Daily Rounds 27

8. Nutrition 28

9. Population Well-being 29

10. Response to Disease or Illness 29

a) Isolation 29

b) Diagnosis 30

c) Outbreak Response 30

11. Medical Treatment of Shelter Animals 30

Behavioral Health and Mental Well-being 32

1. Considerations on Intake 32

a) Behavioral History 32

b) Minimizing Stress 32

2. Behavior Evaluation 32

3. In-shelter Care 34

a) Environment 34

Enclosures 34

Separation 34

b) Daily Routine 34

c) Enrichment and Socialization 34

Interactions with People 34

Behavioral Considerations for Long-term Shelter Stays 35

Other Types of Enrichment 36

d) Behavioral Modification 36

Group Housing 37

1. Risks and Benefits of Group Housing 37

2. Facilities 37

3. Selection 37

4. When Group Housing is Inappropriate 38

Table of contents

Animal Handling 39

1. Restraint 39

2. Location and Timing 39

3. Equipment 39

4. Feral Cats 39

Euthanasia 40

1. Euthanasia Technique 40

a) Carbon monoxide 40

b) Verification of Death 41

2. Environment and Equipment 41

3. Record Keeping and Controlled Substances 42

4. Staff Training 42

Spaying and neutering 43

1. Veterinary Medical Guidelines 43

2. Surgery and Anesthesia 43

3. Identifying Neutered Animals 44

Animal Transport 45

1. Responsibilities of Participating Individuals and Organizations 45

a) General 45

b) Responsibilities at Point of Origin 45

c) Responsibilities During Transport 46

Primary Enclosure and Occupancy 46

Vehicles 46

Transporter Responsibilities 47

d) Responsibilities at Destination 47

Public Health 48

1. Zoonoses 48

2. Animal-Related Injuries 49

3. Emerging Diseases and Anti-microbial Resistance 50

Conclusions 51

References 52

Glossary of Terms 63

The Association of Shelter Veterinarians (ASV) is an international organization whose mission is to improve the health and well-being of animals in shelters through the advancement of shelter medicine. This document is the result of work that the ASV began in 2008 to address the lack of guidelines or standards of care for animals in shelters.

The first step in the process was to convene a taskforce to define the scope of this project. An exhaustive review of the scientific literature was undertaken to uncover as much data as possible pertaining to housing, care, health, and well-being of dogs and cats in population settings. Members of the taskforce then undertook writing this document over a period of 2 years. In some cases, answers were not available in the literature; in those instances, recommendations have been based on the collective expert opinion of the authors.

Every attempt was made to balance animal welfare science with practical and realistic recommendations specific for shelters. The guiding principle was always animals’ needs, which remain the same regardless of the mission of an organization or the challenges involved in meeting those needs.

As with any specialty, shelter medicine continues to evolve; studies and clinical experience continue to provide new information that animal caregivers must consider in order to provide truly humane care.

Principles of animal care that were believed to be appropriate just a few years ago may no longer be considered to be effective or humane. Shelters should bear this in mind and be willing to adapt as they review their programs.

The Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters is intended to be a living document that will be periodically reviewed and revised. This document does not attempt to provide specific operational instructions, as these must be tailored to each individual setting. References are provided that can be used to obtain more detailed information. It is the authors’ greatest hope that this document will serve shelter animals and those who care for them by providing scientific and humane guidelines for their care.

Introduction

Introduction

Historically, the provision of care for stray, unwanted, and owner-relinquished animals in the United States dates back to the founding of the first large-scale animal shelters in New York, Boston, and Philadelphia in the late 1800’s. Most shelters were originally intended for handling large numbers of dogs for brief periods of time as part of animal control programs. That mission drove shelter design and operation for nearly 100 years. Animal sheltering has evolved considerably since those early days.

Sheltering organizations can now be found for almost any companion or domestic animal species (e.g., rabbits, birds, rodents, horses, livestock), and for many exotic species as well. The entities delivering services vary from large, well-established agencies with significant resources, to grass-roots groups, loosely-networked individuals, or individuals acting alone. The spectrum of programs is equally diverse, including: traditional open-admission shelters; care-for-life sanctuaries and hospices;

home-based rescue and foster-care networks;

virtual internet-based animal transport programs;

behavioral rehabilitation centers; limited or planned admission shelters; no-kill or adoption guarantee shelters; high volume adoption agencies; and many permutations of these various approaches. In this document the term “shelter” is meant to apply to all of the entities mentioned above.

In contrast to many other settings such as zoos or laboratories (AZA 2009, 2010; ILAR 1996), the care of animals in shelters remains unstandardized and unregulated at the national level. Although as of 2010, at least 18 states require animal shelters to be registered or licensed (CO, GA, IL, IA, KS, MA, ME, MI, MN, MO, NE, NH, NJ, NC, PA, RI, VT, WI), and six require establishment of an advisory board (CO, KS, LA, ME, MO, TX) (ASPCA 2006a, 2006b; MDAR 2009); these regulations are inconsistent and often inadequately monitored at the state or local levels.

1. Challenges to Ensuring Welfare The heterogeneous, fragmented nature of shelter systems, coupled with the lack of a consistent regulatory structure, has made it difficult to ensure adequate care for shelter animals. This difficulty is compounded by a multitude of challenges.

There is a growing body of literature documenting a long list of stressors for animals entering shelters, such as: leaving a familiar environment; confinement;

adapting to new sounds, smells, and unfamiliar animals; and being handled by unfamiliar people.

As occurs in zoo, farm, and laboratory settings, shelter animals can be challenged by boredom, frustration, isolation, social deprivation and other stresses arising out of confinement (Griffin 2006;

Stephen 2005). Length of stay has been clearly identified as a risk factor for animal illness in shelters (Dinnage, 2009; Edinboro 2004).

Many facilities, which were historically designed for short-term handling of animals (e.g., for stray holding period), are poorly suited to meet the physical and behavioral needs of animals (Beerda 1997, 1999a, 1999b, 2000; Griffin 2006; Hennessy 1997; Holt 2010; Hubrecht 1992; Kessler 1997, 1999b; McCobb 2005; Ottway 2003;

Tuber 1996). Various factors have contributed to increased length of stay. At many shelters there is a greater potential for animals to be confined to inadequate institutional or quasi-institutional settings from months in many cases, to the remainder of their lives in others, compounding concerns about their welfare. The same issues recognized for many years by the zoological community (Maple 2003) are now confronting shelters.

Over the past 15 years, there has been an explosive growth of grass-roots sheltering efforts.

This expansion of the number of persons working on behalf of homeless companion animals has undoubtedly saved many animal lives, and overall is a very positive development. Concern arises, however, when animal care is provided by

Background individuals with good intentions but with little to no appropriate training in population husbandry, animal behavior, animal health, and/or veterinary medicine. Lack of awareness of information about sheltering or lack of connections to the larger shelter community may be additional barriers to ensuring adequate care.

There have been a growing number of incidents where shelter conditions have caused severe animal suffering and unnecessary death (ALDF website;

Dudding 2009; HSUS 2007; Mckinnon 2009;

Peat 2009; WBZN 2009). A growing number of allegations of cruelty have been filed against shelters or sanctuaries for failure to provide adequate and humane care (LA Times 2010). Lack of acceptable standards of care and failure to recognize or respond to animal suffering has contributed to these cases.

Many of these issues are not unique to the sheltering community. Over a quarter century ago, scandals revolving around substandard animal care, neglect and mismanagement rocked the laboratory animal world (Blum 1994) and the zoo community (Maple 2003). For laboratories, this led to significant federal regulation of animal care; for zoos, this triggered considerable internal dialogue and enhanced self-regulation (Wielbnowski 2003). Debates about farm animal welfare continue with less apparent progress. Consequently, the failure to self-regulate husbandry in some concentrated animal feeding operations (“factory farms”) has begun to drive the public to seek legislative solutions (e.g., ballot initiatives to ban gestation and veal crates).

2. The Need for Standards Despite the lessons learned from the high-profile examples referenced above, and the availability of substantial resources to guide shelter operations (ASPCA 2009; HSUS 2010; Miller 2004b, 2009; NACA 2009c; Peterson 2008; UC Davis website), it is regrettable that serious deficiencies in companion-animal care in shelters continue to occur. There is convincing evidence that societal expectations for the care and welfare of animals have increased. This ethic is reflected in the professional literature as well as in extensive guidelines and/or codes of ethics issued by trade organizations, regulatory bodies, advisory boards and policy-making agencies for animals in almost every conceivable setting except animal shelters [e.g., zoological parks (AZA 2009, 2010; Kohn 1994), research laboratories (CACC 1993; ILAR 1996; SCAW 2001), breeding kennels (AKC 2006, 2008), catteries (CFA 2009; CVMA 2009), exotic wildlife sanctuaries (ASA 2009; Brent 2007;

GFAS 2009), animal agriculture (FASS 1999;

Mench 2008; Veissier 2008), pet industry retailers (PIJAC 2009), boarding kennels (CVMA 2007;

New Zealand 1993; PCSA 2009), domestic wildlife rehabilitation (Miller 2000), animal rescue (ARA), equine rescue and retirement facilities (AAEP

2004; GFAS 2009)].

It might be assumed that anti-cruelty statutes would protect shelter animals, but these statutes are often not sufficient to ensure that animals in either public or private shelter and rescue settings receive proper care. One reason for this is that many retain 19th-century wording, which is difficult to interpret in modern settings, i.e.:

It can be difficult to apply this outdated anti-cruelty language to address modern concerns

Background

“Whoever overdrives, overloads, drives when overloaded, overworks, tortures, torments, deprives of necessary sustenance, cruelly beats, mutilates or kills an animal, or causes or procures an animal to be overdriven, overloaded, driven when overloaded, overworked, tortured, tormented, deprived of necessary sustenance, cruelly beaten, mutilated or killed;… and whoever, having the charge or custody of an animal, either as owner or otherwise, inflicts unnecessary cruelty upon it, or unnecessarily fails to provide it with proper food, drink, shelter, sanitary environment, or protection from the weather, and whoever, as owner, possessor, or person having the charge or custody of an animal, cruelly drives or works it when unfit for labor, or willfully abandons it, or carries it or causes it to be carried in or upon a vehicle, or otherwise, in an unnecessarily cruel or inhumane manner or in a way and manner which might endanger the animal carried thereon, or knowingly and willfully authorizes or permits it to be subjected to unnecessary torture suffering or cruelty of any kind commits the crime of cruelty to animals”.

about physical and psychological suffering from confinement as well as suffering from illness or death. Furthermore, there can be a large gap between adequate care and deficiencies serious enough to prosecute under existing cruelty statutes.

This leaves the possibility that substantial numbers of animals will live in substandard conditions within organizations expected to protect animal welfare.

In some cases, the organizations that are at fault for providing inappropriate or negligent care are governed by the same entity that investigates animal cruelty, creating a conflict of interest.

Because the legal definition of animal cruelty varies from state to state it is beyond the scope of these guidelines to specifically and directly address animal cruelty. However, it is clear that when failure by an individual to provide certain minimum standards of care constitutes animal cruelty, the same standards must apply to shelters. Good intentions or lack of resources should not serve as an excuse for municipalities or private organizations to permit or perpetuate animal cruelty.

3. The Five Freedoms and Companion Animals The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) has brief care guidelines for companion animals including some recommendations for humane societies (AVMA 2008). They have also stated, through the AVMA Animal Welfare Principles, that animals should be treated with respect and dignity throughout their lives (AVMA 2006).

A broader, independent set of standards developed from within the shelter veterinary community is needed to identify best and unacceptable practices as well as minimum standards of care for shelter animals – whether in a large organization, a small home-based effort, or something in between. In order to be flexible enough to guide any type of sheltering situation, standards need to clearly describe some general principles without being overly prescriptive.

The welfare principles enumerated as the Five Freedoms (Table 1) (Farm Animal Welfare Council 2009) provide a model that is applicable across species and situations, including animal shelters. The Five Freedoms were created in 1965 in the United Kingdom as a result of a report by the Brambell Commission (which later became the Farm Animal Welfare Council) to address welfare concerns in agriculture settings. There is ample evidence that the Five Freedoms are broadly accepted as guidelines for welfare for all animals. For example, a survey of large animal faculty at veterinary schools indicated strong support for these principles in the United States (Heleski 2005), and it has been recommended that they are equally useful as a framework for zoo animal welfare (Wielebnowski 2003). The Five Freedoms also form the basis for minimum standards for dogs, cats, and animals in boarding facilities promulgated by the New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture (New Zealand 1998, 2007) and recently, for standards from the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association for cats (CVMA 2009).

This approach has also been embraced by the laboratory animal community (Bayne 1998; CACC 1993; ILAR 1996; SCAW 2001). As performance standards, rather than engineering standards, the Five Freedoms define outcomes and imply criteria for assessment, but do not prescribe the methods by which to achieve those outcomes. The Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters has been written using the Five Freedoms for Animal Welfare as the basis for all sections in this document.

Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters

Table 1. Five Freedoms For Animal Welfare (Farm Animal Welfare Council 2009).

1. Freedom from Hunger and Thirst by ready access to fresh water and a diet to maintain full health and vigor

2. Freedom from Discomfort by providing an appropriate environment including shelter and a comfortable resting area

3. Freedom from Pain, Injury or Disease by prevention or rapid diagnosis and treatment

4. Freedom to Express Normal Behavior by providing sufficient space, proper facilities and company of the animal’s own kind

5. Freedom from Fear and Distress by ensuring conditions and treatment which avoid mental suffering

There are 12 sections in the document. Each section should be read in its entirety so that recommendations are not taken out of context and misunderstood.

Shelters should not focus solely on the limited number of unacceptable practices or call outs that have been separately highlighted. These represent summary points that draw attention to some issues of great concern, but do not provide sufficient basis for thorough evaluation of a program.

No sheltering organization, regardless of its circumstances, i.e., budget, size, etc., should engage in any practice that is deemed unacceptable. Unacceptable practices must be corrected without delay. For example, failure to identify and provide analgesia for painful conditions is unacceptable and corrective steps must be taken immediately. Whenever a practice is identified as “must”, it is believed that without adherence to this recommendation, the delivery of a minimum level of acceptable or humane care is not possible. Use of the word “should” implies a strong recommendation.

It is recognized that implementation of “ideal” recommendations may not be possible in all circumstances but would certainly enhance care for animals. A glossary of terms is provided at the end of this document to aid in understanding.

The terms “long-term” and “short-term” are used in several sections of this document (e.g., Facilities, Behavior, Medical Health and Physical Well-being).

It is difficult to define when a shelter stay shifts from being short-term to long-term, and the impact of length of stay may affect individual animals differently. Therefore, recommendations found throughout this document that refer to long-term stays do not have a specific timeframe associated with them. Ideally, recommendations to ensure physical and behavioral health and well-being for long-term care should be implemented as soon as possible, regardless of length of stay expectations, but especially whenever a stay is anticipated to exceed 1 or 2 weeks.

How to use this document

How to use this document

Implementation of the recommendations in this document requires adequate resources, planning, training, and monitoring; these operational principles form the foundation upon which many other elements described in this document must rest.

To build this foundation, organizations must have a clearly defined mission; policies and protocols that reflect current information; adequate staff training and supervision; and proper management of animal care. Because animal health is interwoven into virtually every facet of sheltering or rescue programs, veterinarians should be integrally involved with development and implementation of an organizational plan, and must have supervision of medical and surgical care of animals.

Organizational functioning, employee health and well-being, and animal wellness are inextricably linked (Reeve et al 2004; Rogelberg et al 2007).

1. Establishment of Policies and Protocols A clearly defined mission forms the basis for development of organizational policies, including those relating to animal care, intake, treatment, adoption, and euthanasia. Policies must address the resources and legal/contractual obligations of the organization. Protocols must be developed and documented in sufficient detail to achieve and maintain the standards described in this document, and updated as needed to ensure that they reflect current information and pertinent legislation (Hurley 2008a). All staff (and volunteers as needed) must have access to up-to-date protocols. Expert input on all policies and protocols related to maintenance of physical and behavioral animal health should be provided by a veterinarian. Ideally, this veterinarian would have training or experience in shelter medicine as well as knowledge about the particular population.

2. Management Structure A clearly defined structure that outlines accountability, responsibility, and authority for management within the organization is essential and must be communicated to all staff and volunteers. Lines of authority, responsibility, and supervision should ideally be put in writing, reviewed periodically and updated when roles change. Authority and responsibility must be given only to those who have the appropriate knowledge and training. Many decisions involve issues of resource allocation as well as population health and individual animal welfare; in these cases broad consideration must be given to all factors, and decisions may well be made by a group of qualified individuals.

However, in cases where animal welfare could be compromised, a veterinarian’s decision should not be overridden. Supervision and accountability for all staff and volunteers are essential to ensure that policies and protocols guide daily activities.

3. Training Adequate training is required to ensure humane animal care, as well as staff and public safety (ILAR 1996). This includes allocating time and resources for employees and volunteers to complete training prior to undertaking responsibility for tasks. The skills, knowledge and training to accomplish each task must be successfully demonstrated before proficiency is assumed. Continuing education should be provided in order to maintain and improve skills.

Documentation of training should be maintained.

4. Animal Identification and Record Keeping A unique identifier (e.g., name and /or number) and record must be established for each animal upon intake. Identification should be physically affixed to the animal (e.g., collar or tag) for the duration of the animal’s stay unless this poses a safety risk for animals and/or staff. Basic elements of a record should include: the identifier, results of microchip scan, microchip number if present, source of animal, dates of entry and departure, outcome, species, age, gender, physical description (breed and colors), and available medical and behavioral information. (See section on Population Management and section on Medical Health and Well-being for more information on medical records and population data collection.)

Management and record keeping

Lines of authority, responsibility, and supervision should ideally be put in writing, reviewed periodically and updated when roles change.

Adequate training is required to ensure humane animal care, as well as staff and public safety.

A unique identifier (name and/or number) and record must be established for each animal upon intake.

Management and record keeping

Shelters must provide an environment that is conducive to maintaining animal health. Facilities must be appropriate for the species, the number of animals receiving care and the expected length of stay in order to ensure physical and psychological well-being of the animals. The design should provide for proper separation of animals by health status, age, gender, species, temperament, and predator–prey status (see section on Medical Health and Physical Well-being and section on Behavioral Health and Mental Well-being for more information), and include sufficient space for the shelter operations described in this document (intake, examination, holding, adoption, isolation, treatment, food storage, laundry, and when necessary, euthanasia).

Entrances and exits, hallways, and rooms should be arranged so that movement through the facility (“foot traffic”) and cleaning, as described in the Sanitation section, should proceed from the areas housing the most susceptible to disease and/or healthiest animals to those who are most likely to be a source of contagious disease. One set of guidelines recommends that at least 10% of the facility housing capacity should be made available for isolation of animals diagnosed with or suspected of having infectious diseases (New Zealand 1993).

Organizations that provide services to privately owned animals (e.g., spay/neuter or veterinary clinics) should separate those animals from shelter animals.

1. Primary Enclosure A primary enclosure is defined as an area of confinement such as a cage, run, kennel, stall, or pen, where an animal eats, sleeps, and in most sheltering situations spends the majority of its time.

The primary enclosure must be structurally sound and maintained in safe, working condition to properly confine animals, prevent injury, keep other animals out, and enable the animals to remain dry and clean. There must not be any sharp edges, gaps or other defects that could cause an injury or trap a limb or other body part. Secure latches or other closing devices must be present. Wire-mesh bottoms or slatted floors in cages are not acceptable for primary enclosures for cats and dogs. Enclosures that permit care and cleaning without removal of the animals (e.g., double-sided or compartmentalized enclosures) are very important to prevent disease transmission and should be provided for recently admitted or ill animals and those who are younger than 20 weeks of age.

The primary enclosure should be readily cleaned and disinfected. Even in home-based shelters, where the home itself or a room within the home may be the primary enclosure, sanitation is important. Until disease concerns have abated, newly arrived animals should be housed in areas of the home, or enclosures within the home, that can be properly and easily sanitized.

Tethering is an unacceptable method of confinement for any animal and has no place in humane sheltering (HSUS 2009a). Constant tethering of dogs in lieu of a primary enclosure is not a humane practice, and the Animal Welfare Act prohibited its use in 1997 for all regulated entities (APHIS 1997a).

Primary enclosures must provide sufficient space to allow each animal, regardless of species, to make normal postural adjustments, e.g., to turn freely and to easily stand, sit, stretch, move their head, without touching the top of the enclosure, lie in a comfortable position with limbs extended, move about and assume a comfortable posture for feeding, drinking, urinating and defecating (AAEP 2004; CFA 2009; Hansen 2000; King County 2009; Kulpa-Eddy 2005; New Zealand 1993).

In addition, cats and dogs should be able to hold their tails erect when in a normal standing position.

Primary enclosures should allow animals to see out but should also provide at least some opportunity to avoid visual contact with other animals (Carlstead 1993; Overall 1997; Wells 1998).

A range of minimum dimensions have been suggested for primary enclosures for dogs and cats (CFA 2009; Griffin 2006; New Zealand 1993). Most of these recommendations exceed

Facility Design and Environment

Facility Design and Environment

Poor cat housing is one of the greatest shortcomings observed in shelters and has a substantially negative impact on both health and well-being.

Tethering is an unacceptable method of confinement for any animal and has no place in humane sheltering.

what is typically found in many shelters. Because of the wide range of body sizes for dogs, specific recommendations for minimum kennel sizes are not included in this document. However, the size of each primary enclosure must be sufficient to meet the physical and behavioral parameters described above. Less than 2 feet of triangulated distance between litterbox, resting place and feeding area has been shown to adversely affect food intake for cats (Figure 1) (Bourgeois 2004). Cats housed in cages with 11 square feet of floor space were found to be significantly less stressed than those with only

5.3 square feet of space (Kessler 1999b). The Cat Fanciers’ Association recommends a minimum of 30 cubic feet per cat (CFA 2009). Shelters should strive to exceed these dimensions, particularly as length of stay increases. (See section on Group Housing for dimensions recommended for group housing.)

In addition to size considerations, proper layout of the primary enclosure is essential to maintain animal health and welfare. Food and water bowls or receptacles must be provided. The location of food, water, and litter containers relative to each other, resting areas, doors, etc., can have a significant impact on the well-being of animals (CACC 1993).

Separation between food, urination and defecation, and resting areas should be maximized. A primary enclosure must allow animals to sit, sleep and eat away from areas of their enclosures where they defecate and urinate. This can be accomplished through the use of double-sided or compartmentalized enclosures; single enclosures for cats of sufficient size as described in the figure above; or walking dogs with sufficient frequency on a daily basis that they do not need to urinate or defecate within their enclosures, provided this can be accomplished without undue risk to health and safety.

Attention should be paid to the habits of individual animals. Confinement, even in compartmentalized housing, will inhibit some dogs, from urinating or defecating. Many cats will avoid defecation and urination if litterbox location or substrate is aversive (CACC 1993; Neilson 2004). Cats must have a litterbox large enough to comfortably accommodate their entire body.

For cats, vertical as well as horizontal dimensions are extremely important because cats show a preference for spending more time on raised surfaces and high structures than on the floor. Some dogs also prefer to rest on elevated surfaces. Elevated resting places should be provided whenever possible, as long as this would not restrict animal movement within the enclosure. A soft resting place should be made available for all animals to provide comfort and prevent pressure sores from developing (Crouse 1995; New Zealand 1998).

Cages or crates intended for short-term, temporary confinement or travel (e.g., airline crates, transport carriers, cages or crates designed to restrict mobility during a defined period for recovery or treatment including small stainless steel cages less than 2 ft × 2 ft), are unacceptable as primary enclosures and are cruel if used as such (CFA 2009; Miller 2000). Crates or cages must not be stacked upon each other in a manner that increases animal stress and discomfort, compromises ventilation, or allows waste material to fall from the cage above into the cage below.

Poor cat housing is one of the greatest shortcomings observed in shelters and has a substantially negative impact on both health and well-being. Existing housing can be modified to improve feline welfare (e.g., cutting portholes in stainless steel cages

Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters

Figure 1. Minimal spacing recommended between litterbox, resting place, and food.

Litter 2 feet fee t2 feet

Resting

Food

Enclosures that permit care and cleaning without removal of the animals are very important to prevent disease transmission, and should be provided for recently admitted and ill animals, and those who are younger than 20 weeks of age.

to increase available space and create multi-compartment housing units) (UC Davis 2009). Cats must have places to hide (e.g., paper bag or box large enough to provide concealment) and should have high points to perch upon (Carlstead 1993;

Crouse 1995; De Monte 1997; Griffin 2002, 2006, 2009a; Hubrecht 2002; Rochlitz 1999, 2002; Wells 2000). One study found that the ability to hide led to decreased stress hormones in cats (Carlstead 1993). Ideally, cats should not be restricted to floor level cages, since these are more stressful compared to elevated cages.

As the length of stay increases (e.g., beyond 1–2 weeks), it becomes progressively more important to provide space that is both mentally and physically stimulating; alternatives to traditional housing must be provided. For animals housed long term, the physical environment must include opportunities for hiding, playing, resting, feeding, and eliminating. For cats, the environment should also allow for scratching, climbing and perching. Protected indoor-outdoor access is ideal for most species, especially when animals are held long term. Outdoor spaces must be suitably enclosed to protect from adverse weather, vandalism, and prevent escape or predation.

2. Surfaces and Drainage Non-porous surfaces that can be easily disinfected and are durable enough to withstand repeated cleaning should be used in all animal areas and must be used in those areas housing puppies and kittens, or animals who are infectious or who are newly admitted with an unknown health history.

These principles are equally important in home-based programs. A sealed, impermeable surface, such as sealed concrete or epoxy is ideal for flooring (New Zealand 1993). Carpeting should not be used in animal housing areas because it cannot be effectively cleaned and disinfected. In a home-based setting or light use situation, linoleum or tiled floors may be acceptable, but seams and grout lines require higher maintenance and attention to sanitation than a sealed surface. Points where walls meet floors should also be sealed. Peeling, scratched or chipped floors that cannot be properly sanitized should be repaired or replaced.

Special accommodation (e.g., soft bedding or slip-proof mats) is required for animals with arthritis, muscle weakness, or other mobility impairments as these animals may have difficulty rising if surfaces are too slippery. Floors should be gently sloped to enable wastes and water to run off into drains. Waste water should not run off into common areas or adjacent kennels. Adequate drainage must be provided (New Zealand1993). When drains are located in common areas special care must be taken to sanitize and disinfect those areas prior to allowing animal access.

Drain covers should be designed to prevent toes from being caught in drains.

3. Heating, Ventilation, and Air Quality Temperature and humidity recommendations vary with the species of animal being housed, but it is essential that each primary enclosure allows an animal to comfortably maintain normal body temperature (AVMA 2008a; New Zealand 1993).

Temperature and humidity levels should be evaluated at the level of the animal’s body within its enclosure.

For dogs and cats, the AVMA recommends the ambient temperature should be kept above 60°F (15.5°C), and below 80°F (26.6°C), and the relative humidity should range from 30 to 70% (AVMA 2008a). Because of breed, body condition, medical condition, haircoat, facial conformation, and age differences, animals must be monitored individually to ensure their comfort and to ensure they can adequately maintain their body temperature. If animals appear too cold (i.e., shivering or huddling together for warmth) or too hot (i.e., excessive panting), necessary measures must be taken to ensure animal comfort and safety (i.e., adjustments to the thermostat, additional bedding, fans, movement to another area of the shelter, health evaluation, etc.) Proper bedding materials, when kept clean and dry, can help animals maintain appropriate body temperature.

Facility Design and Environment

Cages or crates intended for short-term, temporary confinement or travel are unacceptable as primary enclosures and are cruel if used as such.

Fresh air is essential for maintenance of good health and well-being as well as limiting the spread of infectious diseases (CFA 2009). Proper ventilation removes heat, dampness, odor, airborne microbes, and pollutant gasses such as ammonia and carbon monoxide, while allowing for the introduction of fresh, oxygenated air. Ventilation must be maintained at a high enough rate to provide clean air in all areas of the shelter including within primary enclosures. All ventilation systems must be adequately maintained and air quality should be monitored at the level of the animal.

Between 10 and 20 room air exchanges per hour with fresh air is the standard recommendation for adequate ventilation of animal facilities (European Council 1986; Johnson 2004; ILAR 1996).

Ventilation requirements vary depending on population density and pollutants in the air. A facility may require a higher ventilation rate when it is at full capacity compared to when it is relatively empty, as animals themselves are a major source of heat, humidity and ammonia. Other pollutants also increase with the number of animals housed.

Ventilation rates may need to be adjusted seasonally and should not be thermostat-controlled. Systems that circulate air only when the temperature or humidity require adjustment do not provide adequate ventilation throughout the year. Ventilation must be accomplished without compromising maintenance of appropriate temperatures.

Because canine respiratory pathogens can be easily transmitted through the air, isolation areas for dogs should have separate air circulation from the rest of the facility (Appel 1972). Separate air exchange for feline isolation areas are a lesser priority as cats do not readily aerosolize their pathogens (Gaskell 1982; Wardley 1977). To prevent droplet transmission of respiratory viruses, however, cat cages facing each other should be spaced more than 4 feet apart (Gaskell 1977; Povey 1970;

Wardley 1977). Although adequate ventilation to provide good air quality is essential, investment in enclosures and other aspects of facility design that reduce fomite transmission (e.g., double-sided enclosures that allow animals to remain inside their enclosures during cleaning) is also critical to animal health. Even excellent ventilation will not overcome the harmful effects of inadequate housing.

Good air quality requires good sanitation and cleaning to reduce sources of airborne particles and gaseous contaminants such as ammonia, carbon monoxide, and hydrogen sulfide (FASS Guide 1999). Published guidelines for maximum ammonia exposures reflect hazards to human health or adverse affects on animal production and should not be used as an indicator of proper sanitation.

Although some of the regulations for concentrated animal feeding operations cite minimum ammonia levels at or below 10 parts per million (ppm), acceptable levels in a shelter should be less than 2 ppm (G. Patronek 2010, unpublished data). In properly run shelters, ammonia should be below this level even before morning cleaning. Dust control is important because microbes may be transmitted by airborne dust (FASS 1999). Airborne dust can contain a variety of bioactive aerosols, particularly endotoxins, which have pro-inflammatory effects and a negative impact on lung function (Donham 2002; Rylander 2006, 2007).

4. Light Facilities should be designed to offer as much natural light as possible. When artificial light is used, it should closely approximate natural light in both duration and intensity (CFA 2009; Griffin 2006;

New Zealand 1993; Patronek 2001). Enclosures should be positioned so individual animals can avoid being exposed to excessive amounts of light or darkness. For example, cats on the lower level of a cage stack would spend most of their day in shadows unless light fixtures are mounted such that light shines into the lower level cages (CFA 2009). Cages should be spaced far enough apart to allow ambient light to reflect off the ceiling and floor. Adequate amounts of darkness are as important as light. Light and darkness should be provided so that they support the natural (circadian) rhythms of wakefulness and sleep.

Adequate lighting is also necessary for effective observation of animals (AAEP 2004).

5. Sound Control An appropriate acoustic environment is essential for good animal health and welfare. Noise should be minimized in animal areas. Dog and cat hearing is more sensitive than human hearing so it can be assumed that noise levels that are uncomfortable to humans are even more uncomfortable for animals.

Many common features of animal shelters contribute to elevated noise levels, including: forced air ventilation, barking dogs, non-porous building materials, use of power hoses, metal kennel gates, and metal food bowls. Excessive noise contributes to adverse behavioral and physiological responses (Spreng 2000).

Excessive noise from barking dogs is a particular welfare concern because of both its magnitude and duration (Sales 1997). Cats, in particular, are adversely affected by the sound of barking dogs (McCobb 2005). Sound levels in a shelter can exceed 100 db, largely due to barking (Coppola 2006). Sound is measured on a logarithmic scale, so a 90 db sound is 10 times louder than an 80 db sound. Any sound in the 90–120 db range can be felt as well as heard and may lead to irreversible hearing loss in humans. For comparison, a jackhammer produces noise in the 110 db range, and a subway train 95 db. Levels of 50–70 db or higher are considered likely to be detrimental to the hearing of rodents and rabbits (CCAC 1993).

(See section on Public Health for information on occupational safety.)

Because sound can have a detrimental effect, interventions to reduce sound in shelters are important for animal health and well-being. Architectural strategies to minimize the impact of noise (e.g., arrangement of caging, materials selection for cages, doors, and latches) should be implemented in facility design or be added to an existing facility.

Appropriate architectural strategies combined with behavior modification or enrichment strategies to reduce barking can dramatically reduce noise levels (Griffin 2009a; Johnson 2004). Staff must also be instructed to avoid creating excessive noise during routine activities (e.g., slamming cage or kennel doors, tossing metal bowls). Noise-producing equipment should be located as far away from the animals as possible (Hubrecht 2002). Sound-absorbent materials must be durable enough to permit repeated cleaning and should either be out of the animal’s reach or resistant to destruction (Hubrecht 2002). Shelters should be designed so that cats are not exposed to the noise of barking dogs (McCobb 2005). In a study of shelter dogs, visual contact with other dogs improved welfare and did not increase barking (Wells 1998); therefore preventing visual contact should not be used as a general strategy to reduce barking.

Music has been used to reduce animal stress in a variety of different settings (Line 1990; Wells 2002).

While anecdotal reports support this finding, little data exist to recommend its use for shelters. Music or other sounds as a form of enrichment need to be considered carefully, particularly if animals have no way to move away or control their exposure. Many animals, including dogs, are able to hear frequencies above what humans can hear. Therefore, if music is introduced, radios or other sound systems should not be placed directly on cages and the volume should not exceed conversational levels. In one study, heavy metal music was shown to increase barking and arousal, whereas classical music had a calming effect (Wells 2002).

6. Drop Boxes Although shelters often face challenges posed by limited operating hours for public access, the use of unattended “drop boxes” where live animals are placed by the public in receptacles for later intake may result in animal suffering or death and should be avoided. Alternatives should be provided (e.g., drop-off arrangements with police department or veterinary emergency clinics). Information about these alternatives should be made available to the public.

Facility Design and Environment

The use of unattended “drop boxes” where live animals are placed by the public in receptacles for later intake may result in animal suffering or death and should be avoided.

Population management describes an active process of planning, on-going daily evaluation, and response to changing conditions as an organization cares for multiple animals. Effective population management requires a plan for intentionally managing each animal’s shelter stay that takes into consideration the organization’s ability to provide care that meets the recommendations outlined in this document. The capacity to provide humane care depends on the number and condition of animals admitted and their duration of stay; the size and condition of the facility; staffing levels and training;

and other factors as well as the number of available enclosures. There are many ways to maintain a population within an organization’s capacity for care whether in a shelter or home-based rescue organization. Active population management is one of the foundations of shelter animal health and well-being (Hurley 2004a), and must be based on an appreciation that capacity to provide humane care has limits for every organization, just as it does in private homes. When a population is not managed within an organization’s capacity for care, other standards of care become difficult or impossible to maintain.

1. Capacity for Care Every sheltering organization has a maximum capacity for care, and the population in their care must not exceed that level. Factors that determine capacity for care include: the number of appropriate housing units; staffing for programs or services;

staff training; average length of stay; and the total number of reclaims, adoptions, transfers, release, or other outcomes. Many factors can alter the capacity for care. For example, loss of animal care staff, or malfunctioning enclosures, can temporarily decrease the capacity for care until such time as new persons are hired and appropriately trained, or enclosures are repaired or replaced. Operating beyond an organization’s capacity for care is an unacceptable practice.

Maximum housing capacity must be based on the number of animals who can be adequately housed within available primary enclosures. (See section on Facilities and section on Group Housing for information on adequate housing.) Ideally, shelters should maintain their populations below maximum housing capacity to allow for daily intake as well as more flexibility when choosing appropriate enclosures for each animal. Maximum housing capacity must not be exceeded.