Pets in the city

Here at transportblog we’re big fans of initiatives that increase housing and transport choice in Auckland. This is why we support investment in Auckland’s “missing modes”, such as public transport, walking, and cycling, as well as simple policy changes, such as removing minimum parking requirements and apartment sizes, which will enable more intensive and diverse housing developments.

While any single transport investment or policy change is likely to have a small impact, when considered together their impacts can be cumulative and synergistic.

Indeed, improved housing and transport choice would leave us materially better off, due to lower housing and transport costs. We could expect greater social mobility, with Auckland less spatially stratified by age and income than it is now. Improvements in material well-being and social mobility would leave us as a society happier and healthier. On a day-to-day basis we’d also sit on our arses less. Auckland’s high rates of obesity, and associated complications such as diabetes, would decline. The ecological footprint of the city would shrink with its waistline, as people used less energy and land to sustain their life-styles.

We would likely see more families living in the city centre, and also the flip-side of the same coin: More young adults living in the suburbs. Imagine blocks of terraced houses located above shops adjacent to a train/bus station, from where young adults can easily access both the socio-economic opportunities of the city, as well as supporting their aged parents. Such urban villages could emerge across Auckland if our transport investment and land use policies were focused on enabling such choices. (Note to NIMBYs: Restrictions on housing intensification are effectively forcing your children to live further away from you).

I would also expect to see more pets in the city. Like our precious Princess Kura below, with her favourite plastic pot (if you look closely you can see the teeth marks around the top of the pot).

Personally, petting time makes an important contribution to my quality of life. And it would appear that I’m not alone (source):

Social support is critical for psychological and physical well-being, reflecting the centrality of belongingness in our lives. Human interactions often provide people with considerable social support, but can pets also fulfill one’s social needs? Although there is correlational evidence that pets may help individuals facing significant life stressors, little is known about the well-being benefits of pets for everyday people. Study 1 found in a community sample that pet owners fared better on several well-being (e.g., greater self-esteem, more exercise) and individual-difference (e.g., greater conscientiousness, less fearful attachment) measures. Study 2 assessed a different community sample and found that owners enjoyed better well-being when their pets fulfilled social needs better, and the support that pets provided complemented rather than competed with human sources. Finally, Study 3 brought pet owners into the laboratory and experimentally demonstrated the ability of pets to stave off negativity caused by social rejection. In summary, pets can serve as important sources of social support, providing many positive psychological and physical benefits for their owners. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved)

In the rest of this post I want to explore some of the ways in which we can accommodate pets in the city without necessarily increasing pet numbers. In some respects I am focused on increasing productivity, i.e. getting more petting output for the same pet input.

First let’s consider barriers to petting time. One barrier is, I think, particularly important: Uncertainty over future location. Traditional pet ownership implies a reasonably long-term commitment. This commitment is a problem not just for young people who are mobile, but also old people who are not confident they’ll be able to support the pet for the duration of its life.

This uncertainty is likely to have two effects, both of which are negative. First, many people will not get a pet, hence their petting time will be suppressed optimal levels. Second, the people who do get a pet may subsequently find themselves in a position where they can no longer look after the pet, at which point the pet is effectively given up.

Thankfully, awareness is growing of the benefits of petting time, as well as the barriers to pet ownership, is growing. And as usual, people are finding some awesomely creative ways to solve the problems.

The first solution is “pet-friendly cafes”, where you can see lots of other people’s pretty pooches. Overseas this has been taken even further, with the development of “pet cafes”. These places supply their own little fur babies.

Many pet cafes partner with animal rescue organisations so as to increase public awareness of the opportunities for animal fostering and adoption.

One really effective way to increase petting time, while avoiding the pitfalls of pet ownership, is to sign-up to fostering. This is an excellent option for people who travel a lot, are unsure of their finances, or are unsure if pet ownership will integrate with their lifestyle. In these conditions, fostering can be an excellent way to test the waters. The RSPCA in New Zealand notes:

Foster parents are a vital part of our work. Every animal that you foster is given a second chance at life – and the more animals you foster, the more lives you help save. Many of the animals that come into the SPCA Auckland Animal Village need a little extra TLC before finding their new forever home. Foster Parents provide a temporary home for these animals as they recover from surgery or illness, or simply put on a little more weight before being desexed. While each animal is different, the average length of stay is 3 – 5 weeks for cats, and 6 weeks for dogs. Once they are ready, the animals come back to the Animal Village and are put up for adoption.

Fostering is a wonderful experience that gives you the opportunity to meet and help many wonderful animals. Animal rescue organisations typically contribute to the costs of fostering, e.g. equipment, food, and vet bills – so beyond your time and love costs are minimal. There are a range of foster options, with some animals requiring fostering until such time as they are adopted (anywhere from a week to months) with others needing fostering for a specified length of time, e.g. until they recover from illness, holiday relief for other carers, or pets in crisis.

A common argument advanced against fostering is that “it would be too hard on the animal to give it up”. While emotions are a relevant consideration, I think it’s really important to understand that there are simply more rescue pets than there are available foster homes (or potential adoptive families). So the harsh reality is that the dogs who are not placed in foster care will often be put to sleep; this is especially true of animals with behavioural issues. So the majority of foster dogs are 1) very much in need of fostering and 2) relatively well adjusted in temperament and demeanour, having been screened and assessed for unsociable traits.

And one of the large advantages of fostering is that you can trial a range of different animals and, if you bond with a particular one, then there you usually have the option to adopt it. Like this little one; Punky the Yorkshire terrier.

Which brings us nicely to the issue of adoption.

Animal adoption is a more serious commitment, insofar as you commit to caring for an animal for the duration of its life. However, in many cases animal rescue organisations have a surplus of older animals, whose original owners have passed away or had their living arrangements change. So if you are uncertain of your ability to commit to the full lifespan of an animal, or having the skills/time/energy to nurture and train them when they are young, then I would encourage you to consider adopting an older pet. Adopting older animals has a number of advantages. First, less certainty is required about your future. Second, they tend to be cheaper to adopt, and you have a clearer idea of their personality and temperament. Contrary to perception, older animals often come pre-trained, and they are still trainable.

So just to re-cap some of the key points in this post:

1. As Auckland grows our transport investments and housing policy changes should support greater choice.
2. We can expect these changes to result in greater spatial diversity, and greater demand for “pets in the city”.
3. There are ways to accommodate increased demand for petting time, without increasing the number of pets.
4. Options include visiting pet-cafes (i.e. pet sharing), fostering, and adoption.

Which brings me to my final plea: If anyone of you out there is considering getting an animal, then please consider adopting an animal from a rescue organisation. There are many, many beautiful animals out there who would love to be part of your family. You will also genuinely be supporting animal welfare, rather than inadvertently funding pet over-breeding and the profits of backyard breeders.

Share this