See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275342854

THE PREVALENCE OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS AND TYPES OF REWARDS,

PUNISHMENT AND COMMANDS USED IN DOMESTIC DOGS IN IRAN

Conference Paper · August 2012

CITATIONS

0

READS

916

3 authors:

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

The study of blackberry concentration effects in increasing spermatogenesis and sperm count in mature rats View project

Arsalan Kalami

Ferdowsi University Of Mashhad

19 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION   

SEE PROFILE

Mohammad Azizzadeh

Ferdowsi University Of Mashhad

59 PUBLICATIONS   230 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Javad Khoshnegah

Ferdowsi University Of Mashhad

38 PUBLICATIONS   107 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Arsalan Kalami on 23 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

(continued next page)

Schedule of Events2012 ACVB/AVSAB Scientific Program • Friday, August 3, 2011 • San Diego, CA

Time Speaker Title of Presentation

8:00–9:00 Registration/Check In—Coffee/Breakfast Breakfast Sponsored by Ceva

9:00–9:15 Melissa Bain and Karen Sueda

Welcome/Announcements/Recognition of Sponsors

9:15–9:30 Marie Hopfensperger Effects of oral transmucosal detomidine hydrochloride gel in dogs

9:30–9:45 Claude Beata A new anti stress product coming from the sea…

9:45–10:00 Ben Hart Canine Conspecific Coprophagia: When, Who and Why Dogs Eat Stools

10:00–10:15 Patrick Pageat The possible role of Oxytocin as indicator of stress in puppies during the first social isolation

10:15–10:30 Gary Landsberg S-Adenosylmethionine Improves Executive Function in the Aged Cat: Implications for Cognitive Dysfunction Syndrome

10:30–11:00 Coffee/Restroom Break/Exhibit Hall Break Sponsored by Elanco

11:00–11:15 Arsalan Kalami The prevalence of behavior problems, encouragements, punishments and obedience in domestic dogs of Iran.

11:15–11:30 Claude Beata Factor of severity of dog bites presented in emergency services

11:30–12:00 Theresa DePorter RK Anderson Resident Award Efficacy evaluation of D.A.P.® diffuser versus placebo diffuser for guide dogs completing the final stage of training program leading to graduation as a working guide dog with a visually impaired person.

12:00–12:30 Ariel Fagen AVSAB First Place Student Award Determining the Effectiveness of Secondary Positive Reinforcement Training in Elephants (Elephas maximus) in Nepal—A Feasibility Study

12:30–1:30 Lunch and Exhibit Hall Lunch Sponsored by Virbac

1:30–1:45 Sheila Segurson-D’Arpino

The Use and Perception of Canine Behavioral Assessments in Sheltering Organizations

1:45–2:00 Kristen Collins Bred to Fight

2:00–2:15 Pamela Reid Assessing Conspecific Aggression in Fighting Dogs

2:15–2:30 Petra A. Mertens Fractious or Feral – Assessing the Adoptability of Cats in an Animal Shelter Setting

2:30–2:45 Leslie Sinn Factors Contributing to the Selection and Non-selection of Cats by Potential Adopter: A Pilot Study

2:45–3:00 Alexandra Protopopova

The Effects of Social Training and Other Factors on Adoption Rates of Shelter Dogs

3:00–3:15 Petra A. Mertens Outcomes of an animal shelter program for dogs with symptoms of separation anxiety

3:15–3:30 Sarah Husseini AVSAB Second Place Student AwardEffects of Preadoption Counseling for Owners on Separation Anxiety in Shelter Dogs

3:30–4:00 Afternoon Tea and Exhibit Hall Break Sponsored by Elanco

4:00–4:15 Kathy Meyer PET: The use of a controversial procedure as part of the successful comprehensive treatment of serious interdog aggression between household dogs

4:15–4:30 Margaret M. Duxbury PET: Employing a veterinary technician to implement practice-based behavior modification

4:30–4:45 Noa Harell PET: A new perspective on teaching veterinary behaviorial medicine

4:45–5:00 Elizabeth S.M. Feltes PET: Using model dogs to mould behavior

5:00–5:05 Monique AVBT Update

5:05-5:15 Melissa Bain and Karen Sudea

Closing Remarks

2012 Symposium Sponsors

Platinum Sponsors

Breakfast Sponsor

Lunch Sponsor

Coffee and Tea Breaks Sponsor

Silver Sponsors

Meridian Animal Health

Veterinary Products Laboratories

Royal Canin

Kong/Karen Pryor Academy

Bronze Sponsors

Hill’s Pet Nutrition

Veterinary Information Network

Quincy Animal Health

Presentations Table of Contents

—continued—

Page Author Title of Presentation

2 Marie Hopfensperger Effects of oral transmucosal detomidine hydrochloride gel in dogs

3 Claude Beata A new anti stress product coming from the sea…

8 Ben Hart Canine Conspecific Coprophagia: When, Who and Why Dogs Eat Stools

9 Patrick Pageat The possible role of Oxytocin as indicator of stress in puppies during the first social isolation

10 Gary Landsberg S-Adenosylmethionine Improves Executive Function in the Aged Cat: Implications for Cognitive Dysfunction Syndrome

12 Arsalan Kalami The prevalence of behavior problems, encouragements, punishments and obedience in domestic dogs of Iran.

15 Claude Beata Factor of severity of dog bites presented in emergency services

21 Theresa DePorter RK Anderson Resident Award Efficacy evaluation of D.A.P.® diffuser versus placebo diffuser for guide dogs completing the final stage of training program leading to graduation as a working guide dog with a visually impaired person.

26 Ariel Fagen AVSAB First Place Student Award Determining the Effectiveness of Secondary Positive Reinforcement Training in Elephants (Elephas maximus) in Nepal—A Feasibility Study

27 Sheila Segurson-D’Arpino

The Use and Perception of Canine Behavioral Assessments in Sheltering Organizations

31 Kristen Collins Bred to Fight

37 Pamela Reid Assessing Conspecific Aggression in Fighting Dogs

40 Petra A. Mertens Fractious or Feral—Assessing the Adoptability of Cats in an Animal Shelter Setting

45 Leslie Sinn Factors Contributing to the Selection and Non-selection of Cats by Potential Adopter: A Pilot Study

47 Alexandra Protopopova

The Effects of Social Training and Other Factors on Adoption Rates of Shelter Dogs

48 Petra A. Mertens Outcomes of an animal shelter program for dogs with symptoms of separation anxiety

53 Sarah Husseini AVSAB Second Place Student AwardEffects of Preadoption Counseling for Owners on Separation Anxiety in Shelter Dogs

54 Kathy Meyer PET: The use of a controversial procedure as part of the successful comprehensive treatment of serious interdog aggression between household dogs

57 Margaret M. Duxbury PET: Employing a veterinary technician to implement practice-based behavior modification

58 Noa Harell PET: A new perspective on teaching veterinary behaviorial medicine

61 Elizabeth S.M. Feltes PET: Using model dogs to mould behavior

1

Paper Presentations

2

Use of Oral Transmucosal Detomidine Hydrochloride Gel to Faciliate Handling in DogsM.J. Hopfensperger, K.M. Messenger, M.G. Papich, B.L. Sherman*

College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA*Corresponding author: Barbara_Sherman@ncsu.edu

AbstractDetomidine hydrochloride is an alpha-2 agonist available in an oral transmucosal (OTM) formulation (Dormosedan gel®, Pfizer Animal Health) approved for sedation and restraint in horses. This study evaluated the behavioral and physiologic effects of OTM detomidine gel in dogs to assess its efficacy and safety for facilitation of handling canine patients.

Six institution-owned dogs received 0.35 mg/m2 detomidine gel via OTM administration. Assessments were performed pre-treatment and every 15 to 30 minutes for five hours post-treatment. Behavioral assessments included global sedation (GS), composite sedation (CS), global anxiolysis (GA), and ease of handling (EH) scores. Physiologic assessments included heart rate and rhythm, respiratory rate, mucous membrane color, indirect blood pressure, rectal temperature, oxygen saturation, and capillary refill time.

Following OTM detomidine gel administration, GS, CS, GA, and EH scores increased in all subjects. In four of six dogs, maximal GS scores occurred at 45 minutes post-treatment and duration of maximal GS scores was 30 minutes. EH scores were significantly higher during time points of maximal GS scores as compared to time points when maximal sedation was not achieved. Bradycardia was observed in five dogs, and second-degree atrioventricular block was observed in one dog. All dogs recovered uneventfully.

OTM detomidine gel was safely administered to dogs at a dose of 0.35 mg/m2 and resulted in measurable signs of sedation, anxiolysis, and improved ease of handling. While further evaluation is warranted for use in client-owned dogs, OTM detomidine gel offers a novel sedative and anxiolytic option to facilitate handling of canine patients.

Keywords alpha-2 agonist; anxiety; detomidine; dog; oral transmucosal; sedation

3

A New Anti Stress Product Coming From the Sea…

C.Beata*Cetace LLC. 353 A Bd Grignan 83000 Toulon France

Corresponding author : c.beata@cetace.com

AbstractProcalm is a peptide extract from white fishes with bio-active peptides. The product and its synthetic analogue are protected by a patent. In a Conditioned defense burying paradigm (CDB paradigm) in rats, Procalm has shown as much efficacy as the reference molecule, diazepam.

These are the results of a double-blind, placebo controlled trial of 34 dogs presented in different behavior practices for stress related (anxiety) disorders.The objective was to assess the effect of a fish extracted protein hydrolysate (ProCalm) on stress related disorders with both objective and subjective analysis.Successes were defined by the combination of the objective and the subjective results and the difference was statistically significant in favor of the fish compound against the placebo.

IntroductionStress disorders are very frequent in dogs and described by major authors of the field.1-4 Management of anxieties or stress-related disorders involves behavior modification techniques. According to different approaches, the use of psychotropic drugs can be also helpful to decrease behavioral and physical effects of anxiety and to increase adaptability and brain plasticity.4-7

Some obstacles can prevent the practitioner from using these drugs: the lack of knowledge given in veterinary schools and universities, and the reluctance of owners. Psychotropic drugs often have negative connotations; people may fear potential side effects and worry that it changes the personality of the dog. We have observed a dramatic increase in “natural” solutions such as pheromones or nutraceutical compounds.8 It is always interesting to underline that so called natural compounds do not fit exactly to the definition. Mimic pheromones are synthetic and nutraceuticals are extracted by physical processes.

Owners are happy when the practitioner recommends such compounds and practitioners also feel relieved because they are less worried by side effects. According

4

to evidence-based medicine rules, besides the safety of the product, the evidence of efficacy should be provided to the practitioners before using these products. Evidence has been produced for the use of milk derivate (alpha-S1 casein) nutraceutical.9

After having the first step completed (i.e., positive CBD test) the goal of this trial was to assess the efficacy of the fish extracted hydrolysate containing bioactive peptides.

Subjects, Materials and MethodsAn international, European, trial has been implemented with the help of different behaviorists, all graduated from the French Diploma awarded by the French National Veterinary Schools.

34 dogs have been recruited and randomly assigned to the placebo or to the product treatment. This was a double-blind study. Neither the owner, nor the practitioner knew what product was given to the dog.

The trial lasted two months with an inclusion visit at day 0 (D0). Two physical follow-ups were set at D28 and D56 and two phone calls follow-ups were set at D14 and D42.

Inclusion criteria included age of over three months and body weight of 25 to 45 kilograms. In addition, all dogs needed a diagnosis of anxiety disorder given by the practitioner. An EDED scale and a 4A scale were performed. The result had to be over 20 for the EDED scale and more than 5 in the anxiety part of the 4A scale.During each follow-up contact, the two scales were filled (4A scale and EDED scale) and a subjective evaluation score was asked to the owner.

To be a success, the score of the EDED scale had to be under 20 (or the 4A scale score had to decrease of 25%) AND the evaluation score had to be equal or more than 6 (on 10) at the end of the trial.

ResultsResults show a highly significant difference in successes between palcebo and produc tant the end of the trial.

PROCALM PLACEBOSUCCESSES 14 5FAILURES 3 12

p = 0,002 Highly significant difference

5

Final resultsThere was no difference in the 4A scale evolution or in the EDED scale evolution between the product and the placebo. Surprisingly, both the product and placebo improved the score, that is the anxiety has decreased but stayed above normal.

EDED Scale Evolution

4A Scale EvolutionAt any time of the survey, there was no significant statistical difference. The difference was made by owner’s appreciation. Given the fact that this was a double-blind placebo control in a parallel program trial owners were not able to identify their dog’s treatment group.

6

Visit Significance pT1 NS 0,93V2 NS 0,57T2 Trend 0,05V3 Highly significant 0,005

DiscussionThe results of this study are somewhat surprising. A double blinded randomized placebo control study should prevent any subjective or owner related effects (such as “a self-fulfilling prophecy” effect), we must think that our objective tools, the scales, are only able to measure negative issues but not positive outcomes.In the case of placebo, the evaluation score follows a classical course with first an improvement then a decrease in the evaluation when owners cannot keep with their optimism. In contrast, with ProCalm the enthusiasm is still ongoing after two months of treatment.

We have no doubt on the fact that the product induces positive changes given the fact that many owners report spontaneous and striking testimonies such as:” I never saw my dog as happy as he is now”. Happiness was not an item in the questionnaire so it was quite strange to receive such declarations.

Today, trials are made to confirm this positive effect and to check how the mood can be affected in a positive way.

7

AcknowledgementsThe author wishes to thank Copalis for funding this research, Drs. Hofmans (Belgium), Aimar (Italy), Diaz, Lachapele, Marlois, Marion, Massal (France) who included cases in these studies. Finally, the author wishes to thank the dogs and more to the owners who were able to observe their animal so precisely.

References1 Overall KL. Clinical Behavioral Medicine for Small Animals. St-Louis, Missouri: Mosby, 1997.

2 Horwitz D, Landsberg G. Behavior of dogs and cats: Questions and answers. Guelph, Ontario, Canada: Lifelearn, 1998.

3Pageat P. Pathologie du comportement du chien. 2 Edition ed. Maisons-Alfort: Editions du Point Vétérinaire, 1998.

4 Pageat P. Pathologie du comportement du chien. 1 Edition ed. Maisons-Alfort: Editions du Point Vétérinaire, 1995.

5 King JN, Simpson BS, Overall KL, et al. Treatment of separation anxiety in dogs with clomipramine: results from a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter clinical trial. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2000;67:255-275.

6 Rapoport JL, Ryland DH, Kriete M. Drug treatment of canine acral lick. An animal model of obsessive-compulsive disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1992;49:517-521.

7 Overall KL. Pharmacological treatment in behavioural medicine: the importance of neurochemistry, molecular biology and mechanistic hypotheses. Vet J 2001;162:9-23.

8 Pageat P, Gaultier E. Current research in canine and feline pheromones. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2003;33:187-211.

9 Beata, Beaumont G, DIaz C, et al. Effects of alpha-casozepine (Zylkene®) vs selegiline chlorhydrate (Selgian®, Anipryl®) on anxious disorders in dogs. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research 2007;2:175-183.

KeywordsStress, anxiety, dog, fish protein hydrolysate, biopeptides, positive mood

8

Canine Conspecific Coprophagia; Who, When and Why Dogs Eat Stools

B.L. Hart,* A. A. Tran and M.J. BainSchool of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis

*Corresponding author: blhart@ucdavis.edu

A common problem behavior in dogs is a tendency for some adult dogs to consume feces of other adult dogs or their own (conspecific coprophagia, heretofore referred to as stool eating). A visit to dog websites reveals at least 12 commercial food additives advertised to cure the syndrome. However, there are no data-based studies dealing with the syndrome’s prevalence or risk factors, and no evaluation of efficacy of various commercial products or behavior modification treatment approaches. Two Internet-based surveys, of about 1,500 returns each, were used to acquire data that met enrollment criteria, to address these issues.

Frequent stool-eaters comprised 16% of the dogs in the study. They were more likely to come from multi-dog households and tended to be greedy eaters. Intact males were less likely than neutered males or females to be stool eaters. Stool eaters were one-third as likely to eat their own stools compared to those of other dogs, and the behavior was overwhelmingly concentrated on fresh stools.

Among the various behavioral modification procedures attempted, the “cure rate” was 1-2%, and with the various commercial products, cures ranged from 0-2%.

Our conclusion is that eating of fresh stools is a reflection of an innate predisposition of ancestral canids living in nature that protects pack members from intestinal parasites present in feces that could occasionally be dropped in the den/rest area. The only way that wild canids can remove feces before infective larvae hatch is by consuming them –– no pooper scoopers available.

Keywordscanine coprophagia

9

The Possible Role of Oxytocin as Stress Indicator In Puppies

During the First Social IsolationP. Pageat, C. Bienboire Frosini, C. Chabaud,

C. Lecuelle Lafont, F. Noela, A. Cozzi*IRSEA - Research Institute Semiochemistry and Applied Ethology, Le Rieu Neuf,

84490 Saint Saturnin Les AptaBio2M, Domaine des Souches, 89130, Mezilles, France

* Corresponding author: a.cozzi@irsea.info

Social isolation is an inherently difficult state for dogs. The sequence of events which initially involves separation from the litter and then arrival in a human family can be a risk factor for adoption failures. Oxytocin is a neurohormone involved in the mechanisms of attachment and stress management. In an innovative way, this study aimed at evaluating the alterations of plasma oxytocin concentration during puppies’ first experience of social isolation and comparing these changes to other known physiological stress markers in dogs. Plasma concentration of oxytocin, adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) and cortisol was measured in 5 Beagle puppies aged 7 to 8 weeks, during a standardized test: namely, the first period of social and spatial isolation. Plasma concentration of oxytocin was measured by Enzyme Immunoassay (EIA). Plasma concentrations of cortisol and ACTH were analyzed by chemiluminescent immunoassays methods with an Immulite 2000, automated immunoassay analyzer. Data were collected at T0: before the separation and at T1: after 15 minutes of separation and social isolation. Concentration of oxytocin decreased significantly at T1 (Z=2,022; p=0.04; Wilcoxon matched pairs sample test) while that of ACTH increased significantly at T1 (Z=2,022; p=0.04; Wilcoxon matched pairs test). We found a statistical tendency for the increase of plasma concentration of cortisol at T1 (Z=1,752; p=0.08; Wilcoxon matched pairs test). This study offers a practical approach of the investigation of physiological indicators during the first period of separation from littermates, which is a significantly stressful event even for puppies as young as 7 to 8 weeks old. These preliminary results of the significant decrease of oxytocin plasma concentration after short term isolation, add interesting data to explain the role of this neurohormone during a separation process in dogs. Related to other physiological indicators, the oxytocin levels could be a parameter used to assess the dog’s stress. The measurement of oxytocin levels could help the veterinary behaviorist during preventive interventions to avoid behavioral problems in dogs or in the diagnosis process of problems related to separation.

10

S-Adenosylmethionine (Novifit®) Improves Executive Function In The Aged Cat:

Implications For Treatment Of Cognitive Dysfunction Syndrome

Gary Landsberg,1,2* Joseph A. Araujo,1,3 Melissa L. Brooks,4 Marjorie L. Faubert,4 Heidi Lobprise5

1CanCog Technologies, Ontario, Canada, 2North Toronto Animal Clinic, Ontario, Canada, Thornhill, ON, Canada, 3InterVivo Solutions, Canada, 4Vivocore, Ontario, Canada, 5Virbac Corporation, Texas, USA

*Corresonding author: gmlandvm@aol.com

IntroductionDogs and cats may develop age-related behavioral changes consistent with cognitive dysfunction syndrome (CDS), which is linked to neurodegenerative processes. Previous studies suggest executive function in aged dogs is improved by Novifit supplementation, which contains S-adenosylmethionine (SAMe) tysolate an endogenous metabolite involved in several biochemical pathways and reportedly deficient in human dementia. (Reme 2008, Mongillo 2009)

Materials and MethodsThe current study investigated if Novifit also improves executive function in aged cats.

Sixteen aged cats (>6 years) were divided into two treatment groups (Novifit and placebo) balanced for learning errors on an object discrimination task. Following a two-week wash-in, cats were tested on a reversal learning task in which they were required to respond to the previously incorrect object. Independent t-tests and repeated-measures analysis of variance with treatment condition as a between-subject variable and test phase (baseline and reversal) as a within-subject variable was used to analyze the data. Testers were blinded to treatment condition.

ResultsNo group difference was found on learning errors, indicating groups were equivalent at baseline. Significantly more errors were committed on the reversal task compared to the discrimination task and a trend for a treatment interaction was found, which was further explored by examining the top and bottom half of performers based on baseline errors. A significant reduction in reversal learning errors under treatment was found in the top performers, but no effects were found in the bottom performers.

11

DiscussionIn the current study, SAMe supplementation improved executive function in aged cats, which has previously been shown to decline with age. (Milgram 2011) However, improvement was evident only in top performing cats, suggesting that SAMe is most effective when used early in disease progression. In conjunction with data in aged dogs, the data support both the use of Novifit supplementation for treating age-related executive dysfunction and CDS early in disease progression.

Research study was funded by Virbac Animal Health, under contract with CanCog Technologies.

ReferencesMilgram NW, Landsberg GM, De Rivera C, Pan G, 2011 Age and cognitive function in the domestic cat. Proc. 17th Annual ESVCE Congress and 1st Annual ECAWBM Congress, Avignon

Rème CA, Dramard V, Kern L et al. 2008. Effect of S-adenosylmethionine tablets on the reduction of age-related mental decline in dogs: a double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Vet Ther 9: 69-82

Mongillo P, Araujo JA, Rivera C et al, 2010. The effects of Novifit on cognitive function in aged beagle dogs. (abstract) Journal Veterinary Behavior 5: 39

Keywordsaged cats, cognitive dysfunction syndrome, reversal task, SAME, S-adenosylmethionine

12

The Prevalence of Behavior Problems and Types of Rewards, Punishment and Commands

Used In Domestic Dogs In IranA. Kalami1*, M. Azizzadeh1 & J. Khoshnegah1

1Department of Clinical Science, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran. P.O. Box 9177948974-1793

* Corresponding author: arsalankalami@yahoo.com

AbstractBehavior problems directly affect the welfare of dogs. The existence of behavior problems is a main factor in the euthanasia and relinquishment of animals to shelters. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of behavioral problems, as well as identify rewards and punishments used by the owners for training and obedience in domestic dogs in Iran.

We examined dogs referred to Tehran pet hospital and Alborz pet hospital. Data was obtained from 134 questionnaires successfully completed by the owners. The pet owners were asked about presence or absence of 12 behavioral problems in their pets and also about rewards, punishments and commands they used to treat their dogs. We mentioned 12 common behavior problems, 5 commands, 6 types of rewards and 8 types of punishment. The majority of respondents (128, 95.5%) stated that their dogs exhibited at least one behavior problem. The most common behavioral problem was licking objects (78, 58.2%). The most common commands used by the owners for training were come on, sit down and stay. The most common rewards that the owners used were hugging, kissing and playing with the dogs. The main types of punishment included noise punishment, not allowing the dog to be in the owner›s room and physical punishment. The evaluation of the prevalence of behavior problems and obedience in domestic dogs, as well as rewards and punishments used may be helpful to advise owners and improve dog training in small animal practice.

IntroductionThe term “behavior problem” is used to describe any behavior shown by an animal that is unacceptable to the owner (Khoshnegah et al. 2011). Undesirable behaviors are common in the domestic dog population. It has been estimated that up to 90% of dogs may exhibit behaviors that their owners find unacceptable (Wells & Hepper 2000). Behavior problems directly affect the welfare of dogs. The existence of behavior problems is a main factor in the euthanasia and relinquished of animals to shelters (Mashhadi Rafiei et al. 2011). Historically, pet dogs were trained using

13

mainly negative reinforcement or punishment, but positive reinforcement using rewards has recently become more popular. The methods used may have different impacts on dog welfare (Hiby et al. 2004). The current study was designed to provide a prevalence of canine behavior problems and types of rewards, punishment and commands used in a population of domestic dogs in Iran. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study of this type carried out in Iran.

Materials and MethodsWe examined dogs referred to Tehran pet hospital and Alborz pet hospital in Tehran, capital of Iran. Information was obtained from 134 questionnaires successfully filled out by the owners through face to face interviews. The pet owners were asked about the presence or absence of 12 behavioral problems in their pets and also types of rewards, punishments and commands they use to treat their dogs. They also scored the response of their pets to the commands in a grading system of 1 through 5. We mentioned 12 common behavior problems: destructive chewing, excessive barking, house soiling urine, house soiling stool, jump up to owners, jump up to guests, imaginary fly chasing, uncontrolled urination with excitement, uncontrolled urination with fear, licking objects, excessive activity, shyness and other. Obedience status was scored by asking the response of dogs to 5 commands commonly used by the owners. The commands were sit down, stand up, stay, go and come on. Different types of rewards we asked about were hugging, kissing, feeding, taking to the park, playing with the dog and giving food treats. Punishments we asked about were physical punishment, noise punishment, water spraying, herbal feeding, leaving alone, not giving food, not taking to the park, not allowing the dog to be in owner›s room and other.

ResultsIn the present study, 71 dogs were males and 63 were females. 29 dogs were neutered and 105 were intact. The majority of respondents (128, 95.5%) stated that their dogs exhibited at least one behavior problem. The behavior problems reported by the owners were licking objects (78, 58.2%), house soiling urine (72, 53.73%), excessive activity (69, 51.49%), jump up to owners (61, 45.52%), jump up to guests (54, 40.29%), destructive chewing (53, 39.55%), excessive barking (52, 38.8%), house soiling stool (50, 37.31%), Uncontrolled urination with fear (41, 30.59%), uncontrolled urination with excitement (37, 27.61%), shyness (32, 23.88%), imaginary fly chasing (30, 22.38%), and other behavior problems (10, 7.46%). The common commands used by the owners for training were come on (99.3%), sit down (99.3%), stay (97.8%), go (97.8%) and stand up (96.3%). The common rewards that the owners used were hugging (81.3%), kissing (65.7%), feeding (39.6%), playing with the dog (39.6%), taking to the park (34.3%), and giving food treats (28.4%). The types of punishment that the owners used were noise punishment (84.3%), not allowing the dog to be in

14

the owner›s room (28.4%), physical punishment (26.9%), leaving alone (25.4%), water spraying (15.7%), not giving food (8.2%), not taking to the park (8.2%), other punishments (6.7%) and herbal feeding (5.2%).

DiscussionThe majority of respondents (128, 95.5%) stated that their dogs exhibited at least one behavior problem. This was higher than other studies performed in Iran before that showed 85.6% (Khoshnegah et al 2011) and 47.1% (Mashhadi Rafiei et al. 2011) of dogs had at least one behavior problem. In the present study the most common behavior problems were licking objects (58.2%), house soiling urine (53.73), excessive activity (51.49%) and jump up to owners 45.42%) and the most common rewards that the owners used were hugging (81.3%), kissing (65.7%), feeding (39.6%), and playing with the dog (39.6%). The most common forms of punishment that the owners used were noise punishment (84.3%), not allowing the dog to be in the owner›s room (28.4%), physical punishment (26.9%), and leaving alone (25.4%). These results are different from the other study (Hiby et al. 2004) that showed 66% reported using vocal punishment, 12% used physical punishment, 60% praise (social reward), 51% food reward and 11% playing. The difference of percentage in this study compared to the other studies may be caused by the influence of the living condition of the dogs, breed, age, gender and also may be due to the different culture for training dogs in Iran.

AcknowledgementsWe would like to thank Dr Payam Mohebi, the manager of Tehran pet hospital and Dr Pedram Peimanifard, the manager of Alborz pet hospital for supporting this project.

ReferencesHiby EF, Rooney NJ, Bradshaw JWS 2004.Dog training methods: their use, effectiveness and interaction with behavior and welfare. Animal Welfare 13: 63-69Khoshnegah J, Azizzadeh M, Mahmoodi Gharaie A, 2011. Risk factors for the development of behavior problems in a population of Iranian domestic dogs: Results of a pilot survey. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 131: 123–130Mashhadi Rafiei S, Sattari B, Naderi MM, Ale-Davoud SJ, Seif AA, Bokaei S 2011. Prevalence of Behavior Problems in Domestic Dogs in Tehran-Iran. Global Veterinaria 6(3):333-338Wells DL, Hepper PG 2000. Prevalence of behaviour problems reported by owners of dogs purchased from an animal rescue shelter. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 69: 55–65

KeywordsBehavior problems; dog; rewards; obedience; punishment; training

15

Factor Of Severity Of Dog Bites Presented In Emergency ServicesC.Beata*, G. Sarcey*, C. Richard**, B. Thelot**,*ZOOPSY 344 Boulevard de la Paix 64000 PAU France** InVS 12 rue du Val d’Osne, 94 St-Maurice - France

Corresponding author : cbeata@noos.fr

AbstractA one-year study conducted by the French Institute of Health Monitoring (InVS) and by the Association of Behaviorist Veterinarians (Zoopsy) was performed to better understand the criteria of severity for dogs’ bites. As far as we know, this is the first survey done collectively by human physicians and behaviorist veterinarians.

Data were collected from eight French hospitals involved in epidemiological network. Every person coming to an Emergency service belonging to one of these 8 hospitals because of a dog bite was invited to be included in the study. 485 people, between May 1, 2009 and May 31, 2010 agreed to fill in the forms and to answer to the double questionnaire (one asked by the physicians during the first visit, another one asked by the vet within 15 days calling by phone).On 485 hospital questionnaires, 381 veterinary questionnaires were completed (79%).Many interesting results appeared.

• Male dogs were responsible for ¾ of bites but these bites were not more severe• Circumstances of bites were different between adults and young people.

These data are consistent with the literature. However, the finding of more severe wounds in adults than in children is different from the literature.

The number of breeds involved in the bites did not allow definition of dangerous breeds, nor the frequency or severity of bites.

IntroductionFrance lives under a breed-specific law defining two categories: Attack dogs — this category gathers all dogs without a pedigree but which look like some specific breeds such as American Staffordshire Terrier, Boerbull or Tosa

Defense dogs — Rottweiler’s, with or without pedigree are the most important part of the population. American Staffordshire Terrier with pedigree also included.

16

Veterinary Behaviorists could only slightly influence the law by adding a compulsory risk assessment for any biting dog whatever its breed.

Factors of severity or occurrence of bites have been widely studied.1-20

As far as we are aware, no prospective study involving both human physicians and behaviorist veterinarians each evaluating the same event has been implemented.

Subjects, materials and methodsAn epidemiological interdisciplinary survey was conducted from May 1, 2009 to June 30, 2010 with the participation of epidemiologists, medical doctors and veterinarians specialized in dog behavior. It was implemented in emergency departments of eight voluntary hospitals, and supplemented by veterinary data collected by phone on the characteristics of the dog and the attack, as well as a follow-up questionnaire to report sequelae one month after the bite.

The questionnaire had been developed during many meetings between physicians, epidemiologists and behaviorist veterinarians. A particularly interesting point of this collaborative work was to measure how much non-vets could ignore about the different possible forms of aggressions and also how much they have preconceived ideas about breeds involved in the attacks. But as true scientists, we could see them changing their mind according to the results we got during the survey.

ResultsResults regarding circumstances triggering bites were divided according to the age of the victims.

The veterinary behaviorist evaluated each case, allowing the assessment of each type of aggression exhibited by the dog. Irritation and not hierarchical issues is usually implicated as the most common trigger for aggression, but with hierarchy accounting for 15% of the cases, this cannot be forgotten as a possible trigger.

The main goal of the study was to assess factors contributing to severity of bites.Physicians graded bites from 1 to 3 (mild, moderate, severe). First a univariate analysis has been made leading to some precisions.

According to the severity of bites no influence of the breed or of the group was discovered. No FCI (Federation Cynologique Internationale) group was more involved or assigned more severe bites.

17

Thus, the study of breeds involved in the bites did not reveal any significant discrepancies in relation to frequency or severity of bites and, therefore, could not support the definition of any of the breeds as “dangerous”.

After a multivariate analysis 3 points were emerging as factors of severity of bites.

- even if males were giving 3 on 4 bites, sex was not a factor of severity- weight did not reach significance and even dogs under 15 kg were not biting

less severely (that was the case in the univariate analysis)- bites at home and bites made by a know dog are more severe in this study.

This last result underlines how preventing bites in family context is a very important issue.

18

DiscussionMany interesting results appeared which included: There is a difference between epidemiology of bites and factors of severity (males responsible of 3/4 but not more severe bites) and breed specific laws do not address main factors of severity of bites.

These data are consistent with the literature but we also found more severe wounds in adults than in children and this is different from the literature. Precisely, in children, bites were more frequent in the head and neck, but lesions were more severe in adults. The bites were more numerous and more serious when the victim knew the biting dog. No association was found between the severity of the bite and the type of biting dog. In adults, bites often occurred when the victim was trying to separate fighting dogs, while in children the bites occurred when the dog was disturbed. The study of breeds involved in the bites did not reveal any significant discrepancies in relation to frequency or severity of bites and, therefore, could not support the definition of any of the breeds as “dangerous”.

AcknowledgementsThank you to InVs and Zoopsy who have funded this research.

Thank you to all physicians and veterinarians who filled in the form under difficult circumstances.

Thank you to victims and to dog owners who accepted to participate to the survey.

19

References1Hon KL, Fu CC, Chor CM, et al. Issues associated with dog bite injuries in children and adolescents assessed at the emergency department. Pediatr Emerg Care 2007;23:445-449.2Schalamon J, Ainoedhofer H, Singer G, et al. Analysis of dog bites in children who are younger than 17 years. Pediatrics 2006;117:e374-379.3De Keuster T, Lamoureux J, Kahn A. Epidemiology of dog bites: a Belgian experience of canine behaviour and public health concerns. Vet J 2006;172:482-487.4Langley RL. Animal-related fatalities in the United States-an update. Wilderness Environ Med 2005;16:67-74.5Marsh L, Langley J, Gauld R. Dog bite injuries. N Z Med J 2004;117:U1043.6Peters V, Sottiaux M, Appelboom J, et al. Posttraumatic stress disorder after dog bites in children. J Pediatr 2004;144:121-122.7Kahn A, Robert E, Piette D, et al. Prevalence of dog bites in children: a telephone survey. Eur J Pediatr 2004;163:424.8Kahn A, Bauche P, Lamoureux J. Child victims of dog bites treated in emergency departments: a prospective survey. Eur J Pediatr 2003;162:254-258.9De Munnynck K, Van de Voorde W. Forensic approach of fatal dog attacks: a case report and literature review. Int J Legal Med 2002;116:295-300.10Overall KL, Love M. Dog bites to humans—demography, epidemiology, injury, and risk. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2001;218:1923-1934.11Sacks JJ, Sinclair L, Gilchrist J, et al. Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;217:836-840.12Heath SE, Chomel BB. Risk factors, prevention and prophylaxis of dog bites for disaster response personnel in the United States. Prehospital Disaster Med 1998;13:58-62.13Langley J. Controlling dangerous dogs. N Z Med J 1997;110:427-428.14Langley RL, Morrow WE. Deaths resulting from animal attacks in the United States. Wilderness Environ Med 1997;8:8-16.15Dog-bite-related fatalities—United States, 1995-1996. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1997;46:463-467.16Sacks JJ, Lockwood R, Hornreich J, et al. Fatal dog attacks, 1989-1994. Pediatrics 1996;97:891-895.17Pinsolle J, Phan E, Coustal B, et al. [Dog bites on the face. Apropos of 200 cases]. Ann Chir Plast Esthet 1993;38:452-456.18Gottlieb JO, Misfeldt JC. [Dog bites in the sledge-dog districts of Greenland]. Ugeskr Laeger 1992;154:2824-2827.

20

19Sacks JJ, Sattin RW, Bonzo SE. Dog bite-related fatalities from 1979 through 1988. JAMA 1989;262:1489-1492.20Beck AM, Loring H, Lockwood R. The ecology of dog bite injury in St. Louis, Missouri. Public Health Rep 1975;90:262-267.

KeywordsBites, survey, breed specific law, children, risk assessment, severity factor

21

Efficacy Evaluation Of D.A.P.® Diffuser Versus Placebo Diffuser For Guide Dogs Completing

The Final Stage Of Training Program Leading To Graduation As A Working Guide Dog With

A Visually Impaired PersonT. L. DePorter*1, G.M. Landsberg,2,3 A. Beck,4

1Oakland Veterinary Referral Services, 1400 S. Telegraph Rd. Bloomfield Hills, MI, 48302 United States

2North Toronto Animal Clinic, 99 Henderson Avenue Thornhill, Ontario Canada3CanCog Technologies Inc., 120 Carlton St. Suite 204 Toronto, Ontario, Canada

4Ceva Santé Animale, 10 Avenue La Ballastière 33500 Libourne France*Corresponding author: theresadax@aol.com

Introduction A double blind placebo-controlled study was conducted at Leader Dogs for the Blind (LD) (www.Leaderdog.org Rochester Hills, MI, USA) to ascertain how D.A.P.® Dog Appeasing Pheromone would enhance training and graduation success of professionally trained guide dogs.Leader Dogs for the Blindis a private nonprofit organization which has trained and graduated more than 14,000 guide dogs since it was founded in 1939. The dogs are raised in private homes by volunteer puppy raisers until approximately one year of age then the dogs return to the Rochester Hills, Michigan training campus. The dogs are kenneled on campus during the 4 month formal harness and guide dog training program which is taught by professional instructors.

Guide dogs provide life-changing independence, mobility and safety for a visually impaired person. The dogs are provided free of charge to people who are blind and visually impaired and guide dog recipients come to Leader Dog (LD) from all over the world to learn skills necessary to utilize a guide dog. The eligible visually impaired person becomes a ‘student’ enrolled in a 26-day live-in residence training program at the Michigan campus. On the third day of the program, the trained guide dog is issued and moved from the kennel housing to dormitory to live and train with their assigned student 24 hours a day. This residence period is a challenging adjustment period for both the dog and student as they learn to work together as a guide dog team and hope to complete the program by graduating together.

RK Anderson Resident Award

22

The hypothesis was that D.A.P.® could reduce stress and facilitate learning, bonding and promote a positive effect on graduation success for guide dogs at this pivotal stage of the program. For this study, the primary objective was to assess the efficacy of D.A.P.® diffuser versus placebo diffuser in improvement of learning and adaptation of the dogs during training at LD school. The secondary objective was to assess the effect of D.A.P.® diffuser versus placebo diffuser on the development of bond with a visually impaired recipient during class and following graduation.

Materials and methodsThis study included all eligible dogs in 2 LD classes and thirty-nine student/dog teams were enrolled. A D.A.P.® or a placebo diffuser was plugged in each dormitory room before the student arrived at the residence hall and remained beyond the student’s departure. Each dormitory room is similar in size and furnishings. The diffuser was placed in a similar location in each room. Participation was voluntary and all eligible students agreed to participate. The researchers, students and trainers were all blinded to the identity of placebo and D.A.P.® diffusers. Each student/dog team are in their room at night and during break periods throughout the day as determined by the intensive training program. Each dog was estimated to be in their room and thus in the vicinity of the diffuser for 10-13 hours/day. The students and dogs share common living areas such as dining rooms and study areas but the dogs are generally not in other resident’s rooms.

Behavior and training assessment: Each dog was assessed by the trainer as compared to their expectation of the ideal Leader Dog. The Visual Analogue Scale was standardized to a 10 cm line on which LD trainers and supervisors were asked to record their interpretation of the dog’s activities and behavior on 20 assessments relative to their impression of the ideal leader dog candidate. This method was utilized for its ease of use, ability to quantify results, minimal exploitation of LD resources and because it relies on the expert opinion of these renowned trainers. Some criteria were identified in which the extremes were both undesirable and the optimal dog would score in a moderate range, rather than an extreme range. For such criteria the author devised a two-tailed VAS to evaluate the full range of possible behaviors. For example, dogs which displayed an extreme interest in food were more likely to steal food or be distracted by food while working whereas dogs with minimal interest in food were difficult to maintain weight and a regular elimination schedule. The ideal LD candidate displays a moderate appetite. Trainers completed a VAS form at the end of weeks 1 and 3 and LD supervisors were asked to complete the same assessment at the

23

end of week 3. Each dog and student team was evaluated in accordance with the vigorous graduation criteria established by Leader Dogs for the Blind and International Guide Dog Federation (IGDF).

Bond assessment by “Turnover”: Leader dog trainers and supervisors observe the dogs for turnover which indicates bond and development of a successful working team. Turnover is described as the dog’s transition from looking to the familiar trainer for cues, guidance or attention to looking to the student for cues, guidance and attention. The dog’s turnover is characterized by many signs such as resting in physical contact or proximity, facial expression and attention, and appropriate solicitation of petting or attention. Dogs which fail to turnover may be especially attentive to trainers, supervisors or other familiar Leader Dog personnel. Successful turnover is an observable manifestation of the development of the teamwork and essential relationship between a guide dog and the visually impaired person. Failure to turnover may be related to human factors and some students are not prepared for this relationship. Successful turnover at Leader Dogs was believed to occur around the 10th day of class but this had not been validated. Turnover was also anecdotally correlated to successful graduation and ultimate success as a team once the dog graduates. Turnover will be scored daily (except Sundays) by each trainer until day 17 or 21 days if dogs not sufficiently achieved “turnover” by day 17. The Leader Dog trainers assessed “turnover”, by visual analogue scale (VAS) score on a 10 cm line. Each dog was assessed by the trainer as compared to their expectation of the ideal Leader Dog.

Statistical analysis: The trial was run according to a monocentric, placebo-controlled, randomized study, with 2 parallel groups (D.A.P.® diffuser vs control group). Qualitative variables were assessed with Chi-square or Fisher exact test were used according to theoretical values obtained. Quantitative variables were assessed with ANOVA (ANalysis Of VAriance) for comparing the treatment groups.

ResultsThirty-nine dogs were assigned to visually impaired recipients and the study assessments were completed by the Leader Dog trainers and supervisors. The trainers completed a VAS single tail assessment on 12 assessments and two tailed assessments on 8 behavioral trait items. There were not statistically significant differences between the treatment groups on these trait assessments. One assessment asked the trainer their “overall assessment of the dog as a future leader dog” score by visual analogue scale on a 10 cm line (7.92 versus 6.5) which did correlate with successful graduation (p= 0.013) (ANOVA).

24

The visual analogue scale was beneficial to objectively and efficiently score bond development (“turnover”), socialization, adaptability, distractibility, and obedience. Turnover, which represents the dogs bond, was scored daily. Though the D.A.P.® group showed higher turnover scores (mean of 6.3 compared to 5.8 on day 6) a statistically significant treatment effect of D.A.P.® was not detectable. The investigator set the criterion at 80% of the dogs reaching and maintaining a score of 8 or higher which occurred on the 13th day.

D.A.P.® diffuser group graduation rate was 17/17 (100%) compared to the placebo group graduation rate of 17/21 (80.9%) with 4 placebo dogs failing due to behavior related causes. The treatment groups were evaluated for achievement of graduation and the findings favored the D.A.P.® group. One dog became ill and was removed from the program. The graduation rate difference between the treatment groups did not reach statistical significance (p=0.11) (Fisher exact test), however, all 4 of the dogs failing due to behavior were from the placebo group (p=0.11).

DiscussionTurnover at Leader Dogs for the Blind has been reported anecdotally to occur around 10 days after the dog has been assigned in this residence program. While this terminology is used loosely to describe the development of a working relationship and will vary between individuals, it is interesting to consider this effect. In this study, independent of treatment group, the turnover occurred actually around the 13th day. This corresponded to the second Monday after the dogs were assigned so the author speculates the weekend relaxation periods may have an important effect on bond. There were also peaks in turnover which occurred on Monday and a general plateau or decrease in scores during the working week. This may reflect the stress the students faced as they encountered new training challenges for themselves and their dogs. It is interesting to consider what the critical bond development period is for working dog and the relatively standardized set of experiences for these dogs and students allow us to score development of turnover.

Many factors necessarily influence the successful graduation of a guide dog. Statistical analysis did not reveal a treatment effect for individual assessment criteria. Comparison of many trainer assessments confirmed no single factor predicts graduation, trainers overall assessment of candidate as compared to the ideal Leader Dog predicted graduation. Treatment Group assessment for individual criteria was not beneficial due to the wide range of responses by individual dogs—insufficient numbers of dogs were included in the study to

25

compare dogs with similar responses. Further, comparison of many trainer assessments confirmed any one individual factor surveyed did not predict successful graduation. That is, dogs could fail for a variety of reasons. However, when the trainers single overall assessment score of the canine candidate was compared to the ideal Leader Dog: visual analogue scale score on a 10 cm line (7.92 versus 6.5) this did correlate with successful graduation (p= 0.013) (ANOVA). This confirmed the trainers could indeed predict which dogs are going to graduate and thus presumably they provided good assessments of the other criteria. With so many different factors influencing success or failure, it is not surprising this study did not detect a treatment effect for any individual criteria.

Though the D.A.P.® treatment effect on graduation rate was not statistically significant, this finding is important considering the cost of training each guide dog exceeds $40,000 so the cost of behavioral related failure for 4 dogs at this stage of training exceeds $160,000. All dogs are provided to the visually impaired person free of charge. The low number of subjects and the ceiling effect in which all of the dogs in the D.A.P.® treatment group did graduate are factors to consider in interpreting the statistics.

ConclusionThe dogs which are assigned to students are selected by Leader Dog trainers for their exceptional abilities and high likelihood of graduation. Despite all the preparation and professional training, the transition from living in a kennel for 4 months to living with a new visually impaired caretaker is stressful for these talented dogs. The D.A.P.® group had a 19.1% higher graduation rate suggesting D.A.P.® improved these highly trained dogs’ graduation success during final stage of training to become working guide dog. The findings in this study warrant further investigation and larger numbers of participants. D.A.P.® is known to be beneficial for dogs who suffer from anxiety or fear but the results of this study suggest D.A.P.® may be beneficial for helping well-trained and emotionally stable dogs to cope with training stresses and lifestyle challenges.

Acknowledgements Gary Landsberg DVM, DACVB, dip ECVBM-CA was co-investigator for this study. This study was sponsored by Ceva Santé Animale, Libourne, France and guided by CEVA representative Alexandra Beck, DVM.

KeywordsPheromone, dog, guide dog

26

Determining the Effectiveness of Secondary Positive Reinforcement

Training In Elephants (Elephas Maximus) In Nepal—A Feasibility Study

A. Fagen,* N. Acharya, G. KaufmanTufts University Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, Massachusetts, USA

Institute of Agriculture and Animal Science, Chitwan, Nepal*Corresponding author: Ariel.Fagen@Tufts.edu

AbstractThis project set out to determine the effectiveness of secondary positive reinforcement training in free contact elephants in Nepal to voluntarily participate in a trunk wash for the purposes of tuberculosis (TB) testing. Five female elephants, four juveniles and one adult, were enrolled in the study. The program began with training five initial basic tasks (Trunk Up, Trunk Here, Bucket, Blow and Steady), stringing these tasks together in appropriate combinations, and then introducing the solution used for the sample medium to reliably create the complex behavior chain necessary for a trunk wash. Data was collected in the form of minutes of training, number of offers made for each training task and success rate on each task in performance tests. Four out of five elephants, all juveniles, successfully learned the trunk wash in 35 sessions or less. The mean total training time was 378 minutes, with each session lasting a mean duration of 12 minutes. The mean number of offers required to pass the associated performance test for an individual task ranged from 54.25 (+/- 25.3) offers to 263.6 (+/- 51.43) offers. The overall passing rate improved from a mean score of 36.0% (+/- 9.2) in the first test administered to 89.3% (+/- 1.3) in the last test. This study proves that it is feasible to efficiently train juvenile, free contact, traditionally trained elephants in Nepal, who have no prior experience with positive reinforcement training, to voluntarily and reliably participate in a trunk wash using only secondary positive reinforcement techniques.

AVSAB First Place Student Award

27

The Use and Perception of Canine Behavioral Assessments In Sheltering Organizations

S. D’Arpino, S. Dowling-Guyer*, A. Shabelansky, A.R. Marder, G.J. Patronek

Center for Shelter Dogs, Animal Rescue League of Boston, MA, USA* Corresponding author: sdowling@arlboston.org

Abstract Sheltering organizations face challenges when caring for and rehoming dogs with problem behaviors. Many organizations use behavior evaluations or temperament tests to identify problem behaviors in shelter dogs yet little is known about their use in the sheltering industry. An online survey was conducted in order to explore characteristics of sheltering organizations, use of behavior evaluations, challenges dogs with problem behaviors present, and perceived benefits and challenges to implementing a behavior evaluation program. Members of an online adoptable pet listing services received an emailed invitation and link to participate in an online survey. In total, 1,313 members responded from 1,264 organizations. Results were refined to include only the 1,132 respondents from private organizations. Nearly as many respondents indicated a dog’s behavior could limit admission to their organization (59.2%) as indicated shelter resource restrictions (such as space) would limit admission (60.5%), highlighting the challenge problem behaviors in dogs presents to sheltering organizations. Only 28.4% of respondents reported their organization uses a formal behavior evaluation, with 59.8% of those using one of their own design. Usage varied by organizational characteristics, such that respondents from organizations with physical shelters (37.6%), organizations with physical shelters and paid staff (46.6%), and organizations with higher intake volumes (63.3% at organizations with 1,000+ dogs in 2009) all reporting higher rates of use. The results of this survey highlight an educational opportunity about the value, appropriate use, and proper construction of behavior evaluations in a sheltering environment.

Introduction Dogs with problem behaviors present challenges to sheltering organizations working to rehome them. Sheltering organizations may use an assessment of some kind to identify behavior problems and evaluate the adoption prospects of their shelter dogs (Christensen et al. 2007, Dowling-Guyer et al. 2011, van der Borg et al. 1991, Valsecchi et al. 2011). However, there is little information available about the actual use of such assessments at sheltering organizations. This survey was conducted to understand the challenges dogs with problem behaviors present to sheltering organizations, how behavioral assessments are

28

used, if at all, to identify problem behaviors, and organizational characteristics associated with such use. Perceived benefits and challenges to implementing a behavioral assessment were also explored.

Materials and MethodsIn January 2011, approximately 13,000 members of a national, online, adoptable pet listing service were emailed an invitation and link to participate in an online survey about the admittance and adoption of dogs at their organization. Respondents had to be employees or volunteers at private or municipal sheltering organizations which helped dogs with or without a physical shelter. There were 1,313 respondents representing 1,264 organizations.

Data were tabulated in SPSS v18 (PASW v18). Chi-square tests were used to test for significant associations between categorical data. For all statistical tests, a p-value <0.05 was considered significant.

ResultsThe vast majority of respondents were female (92%), with the most common titles being President (28%) and Shelter Director/Manager (15%). Since 86% of respondents identified their organization as private rather than municipal, the remaining analyses focus on just private organizations (n=1,132), with 32.7% of respondents from organizations with a physical shelter (PS) and 53.2% without a physical shelter (NoPS).

Although only 21.1% of respondents reported paid staff at their organization (full- or part-time), this percentage increased to 50.1% at PS organizations, compared to just 3.3% at NoPS organizations, p<.001. Conversely, 84.2% of respondents from NoPS organizations reported their organization was staffed entirely by volunteers, as opposed to 38.7% of PS organizations, p<.001.

Just 9.4% of respondents described their organization as “open admission”, that is, “accepting any dog presented to it” (definition used in the survey), whereas 60.5% said that shelter limitations such as available space might prevent their organization from accepting a dog. Nearly as many (59.2%) indicated behavioral issues might prevent admission, compared to just 27.4% citing health issues as possibly preventing admission. Respondents from PS and NoPS organizations reported similar rates for health and age admission restrictions (p=n.s.), however, PS organizations were more likely to report restrictions due to shelter facility limitations (68.9% cf. 55.3%) but less likely to report restrictions due to behavioral issues (54.3% cf 62.2%) than NoPS organizations, p=<.01.

29

Moving from admission to rehoming, respondents rated aggression to people as the most challenging problem to deal with when adopting dogs out. Aggression to adults and children was rated the most highly (mean=4.40, median=5.0) on a five point scale where 1=not a challenge at all and 5=a great challenge, followed by aggression to another dog (mean=3.54, median=4.0), and aggression over food or possessions (mean=3.26, median=3.0). When asked how their organization collects behavioral information about admitted dogs, 81.6% of respondents indicated their top source as a verbal conversation with relinquishing owners, followed by daily unrecorded observations by shelter staff (75.5%), a formal intake questionnaire completed by relinquishing owners (63.6%), and daily recorded observations by shelter staff (39.8%). Only 28.4% of respondents reported that their organization used a formal behavior evaluation. Formal behavior evaluations were reported to be used more frequently at PS organizations (37.6%) than NoPS ones (22.7%), p<.001; at PS organizations with paid staff (46.6%), p<.001; and organizations with higher intake volumes (63.3% at organizations with 1,000+ dogs in 2009), p<.001.

Of those organizations using a formal behavior evaluation (n=321), 59.8% described the evaluation as being one of the organization’s own design. NoPS organizations reported higher use of custom designed evaluations (72.3%) that PS organizations (47.5%), p<.001. For those organizations using a packaged, publicly-available behavior evaluation (n=92), 40.2% of organizations had changed it in some way to adapt it to the needs of the organization.

When asked what were the most important characteristics for a behavior evaluation to have, respondents selected the following as the top three: provides information about the dog’s behavior including problematic behavior (45.4%); high predictive value (predicts dog’s behavior in the home with high degree of accuracy) (35.6%); and provides clear guidelines on dog’s suitability for adoption (33.7%). Respondents selected the following as the top four reasons which would prevent sheltering organizations from using behavior evaluations: Staff lacks experience doing behavior evaluations (54.2%); does not identify all problems (31.9%); requires additional staff (31.7%); and low or unknown predictive value (30.7%).

DiscussionDogs with problem behaviors present challenges to sheltering organizations, particularly behaviors related to aggression. Identifying those behaviors early is important in order to understand the dog’s needs, placement priorities or limitations, as well as what resources will be needed from the sheltering organization to work with and place that dog. Yet less than a third of organizations in this sample used a formal behavior evaluation to identify those problems in a standardized

30

manner. Usage varied by organization characteristics, with higher intake volume and presence of a physical shelter all associated with higher usage rates. However, even in segments with higher use of behavior evaluations, the evaluations of choice tended to be developed in-house. These custom-designed evaluations tend to have limited or no validation research behind them, making it difficult to know how reliable and valid the evaluation is. In addition, they may have little to no standardization, which limits the usefulness of the evaluation even within the authoring organization. Even when packaged evaluations were used, changes were made which modified the evaluation. These changes could impact the psychometric properties of the evaluation and thus limit their capabilities.

Interestingly, respondents want evaluations that are able to predict a dog’s behavior in the home, as well as identify problematic behaviors. They also indicated a desire for evaluations to provide clear guidelines on a dog’s suitability for adoption. It is possible that respondents are not aware that changes made to validated evaluations may impact the properties of the evaluation. Though certainly the use of behavior evaluations differ by organizational segment, the results of this survey highlight an educational opportunity about the value, appropriate use, and proper construction of behavior evaluations in a sheltering environment.

AcknowledgementsThis research was funded by the generous support of the Frank Stanton Foundation. The authors wish to thank Petfinder.com for their support and assistance as well as the continued support of Kinesis Survey Technologies.

ReferencesChristensen E, Scarlet J, Campagna M, Houpt KA, 2007. Aggressive behavior in adopted dogs that passed a temperament test. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 106: 85-95.Dowling-Guyer S, Marder A, D’Arpino S, 2011. Behavioral traits detected in shelter dogs by a behavior evaluation. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 130: 107–114.Van der Borg JAM, Netto WJ, Planta DJU, 1991. Behavioral testingof dogs in animal shelters to predict problem behavior. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 32: 237–251.Valsecchi P, Barnard S, Stefanin C, Normando S, 2011. Temperament test for re-homed dogs validated through direct behavioral observation in shelter and home environment Journal of Veterinary Behavior 6: 161-177.

Keywords Behavior evaluation, dog, shelters, temperament test

31

Bred To Fight: Evaluating Play In Pit Bull Puppies

From Fighting LinesK. Collins*, P. Reid, L. Martinez

ASPCA Anti-Cruelty Behavior Team, Humane Society of Missouri * Corresponding author: kristen.collins@aspca.org

AbstractIn July of 2009, following the largest dogfighting seizure in U.S. history, experts from the ASPCA Anti-Cruelty Behavior Team and the Humane Society of Missouri were tasked with the behavioral evaluation of approximately 500 dogs, including 198 puppies. Presented with this unique opportunity to gather information about the onset of intraspecific aggression in fighting dogs, we conducted repeated evaluations to track behavioral changes in the puppies as they matured. All puppies between the ages of six weeks and six months were evaluated at two- to four-week intervals over the course of three months. Predatory motor patterns seen in play directed toward a plush puppy model were reminiscent of the aggressive sequence observed in adult fighting dogs. However, the 34 puppies in our random sample rarely exhibited these motor patterns during play with each other, and few aggressive encounters were observed.

IntroductionScientists have produced several theories in their quest to determine the purpose of animal play, including the idea that play serves to prepare an animal for the performance of behaviors essential for survival (Groos, 1898). Many species’ play repertoires include predatory motor patterns and, naturally, it has been proposed that engaging in these patterns serves as practice for the development of hunting behavior (Bekoff, 1974). In the domestic dog, motor patterns performed during play often include parts of the canid predatory sequence, including eyeing, stalking, chasing and biting (Coppinger & Coppinger, 2001). To create dogs equipped with the behavioral attributes they need to do various jobs, breeders have exaggerated and deleted certain parts of this sequence (Coppinger & Coppinger, 2001). For example, border collies specialize in the eye-stalk-chase portions of the predatory sequence and, ideally, refrain from biting when they herd sheep.

The pit bull terrier and its progenitors have been used for many purposes, including bull and bear baiting, boar hunting, controlling livestock and

32

dogfighting (Jessup, 1995). Despite these different tasks, the pit bull’s job requirements boil down to the performance of behaviors at the end of the predatory sequence: biting and holding or biting, holding and shaking. It stands to reason that these motor patterns probably occur during pit bull play.

In this study, investigators observed the play behavior of a group of pit bull puppies from fighting lines. Our goal was to identify changes in the frequency and duration of biting, holding and shaking over repeated play sessions and to examine the relationship, if any, between these behaviors and aggression toward conspecifics.

Materials and MethodsA sample of 34 subjects was randomly chosen from a pool of 198 pit bull puppies seized during a multi-state dogfighting raid in July, 2009. After confiscation, the puppies were housed in kennels or crates at a temporary shelter. Sixteen litters were represented in the sample. Nineteen puppies were male and 15 were female. At the time of Evaluation 1, puppies ranged from 6 to 14 weeks of age. At the time of Evaluation 2, puppies ranged from 8 to 18 weeks of age. At the time of Evaluation 3, puppies ranged from 10 to 25 weeks of age.

The puppies were evaluated at least three times, at two- to four-week intervals over the course of three months. Our full behavior evaluation assessed sociability with people, tolerance of handling and restraint, resource guarding and behavior during three play subtests: interaction with a littermate, an unfamiliar playmate and a life-sized, plush puppy model. This study focused only on behavior during the play subtests over the puppies’ first three evaluations. Evaluations were performed inside rooms separated from the kennel area. During the first two play subtests, puppies were released simultaneously and allowed to interact in the test area for two minutes. During the third subtest, the test puppy was released facing the fake puppy and allowed to move around the area for two minutes. One handler stayed in the test area, seated on the floor, during play with real puppies. A second handler stayed in the test area, also seated on the floor, during play with the fake puppy. This handler held the fake puppy and moved it around, mimicking the movement of a real puppy.

Data Collection and AnalysisVideo of the play sessions was coded in slow motion (play speed set at 0.5). ODLog® video coding software was used to measure the duration and frequency of aggressive behavior, as well as playful biting, holding and shaking. Variables

33

were defined as follows: “aggression”: test puppy exhibits stiff body posture and growls, snarls, snaps, shows teeth or bites, no evident provocation; “bite”: test puppy takes any part of other puppy’s body or fake puppy into mouth; “hold”: test puppy bites and holds other puppy or fake puppy in mouth for three seconds or more; “shake”: test puppy takes other puppy or fake puppy into mouth, applies some degree of pressure and moves head quickly back and forth, in opposite directions, at least once.

SPSS Statistics 17.0 was used for data analysis. McNemar’s test was used to compare each subtest at different evaluation periods, and Kappa was used to evaluate agreement beyond chance (p-values ≤ 0.05 were considered significant).

Results No puppies showed aggressive behavior toward the fake puppy. Aggression was rarely seen during play with real puppies. Only three puppies showed aggressive behavior toward other puppies (one toward a littermate only; two toward a littermate and an unfamiliar puppy). All five aggressive interactions occurred during Evaluation 3 and were ritualized displays (growling, snarling and snapping without physical contact).

During at least one of the three evaluations, most puppies included some combination of biting, holding and shaking in their play repertoire (Fig. 1). However, the majority of the puppies directed these behaviors toward the fake puppy rather than a littermate or playmate (Fig. 2).

Figure 1

34

Figure 2

During play with the fake puppy, the number of puppies that bit and held for three seconds or more significantly increased between Evaluations 1 and 2, and the number that shook the fake puppy significantly increased between Evaluations 2 and 3 (Fig. 3). However, no age-related patterns were detected. Among individual puppies, there was no agreement beyond chance between hold duration or shaking frequency during play with the fake puppy and these same measures during play with littermates or playmates.

Figure 3

Asterisk denotes statistically significant increase.

DiscussionSince Michael Vick’s highly publicized prosecution in 2007, humane organizations have shown increasing interest in placing seized fighting dogs in adoptive homes. However, some claim that even young puppies should not be adopted as companions due to a strong tendency toward intraspecific aggression

35

in these animals. To date, no scientific evidence exists to support or refute such claims. In conducting our study, we hoped to identify potential warning signs of future aggression in “game-bred” puppies by mapping behavioral changes and noting the emergence of aggressive behaviors during play.

Contrary to our expectations, based on anecdotal reports of early fighting in pit bull litters, the puppies in our sample showed little aggression during social interactions. Although they did playfully bite, hold and shake the fake puppy, which we believe they perceived as a toy, they rarely exhibited these motor patterns during play with each other. Because we did not find any obvious age-related patterns in our data, we believe that the increases in hold time and shaking behavior were not purely maturational. Physical and cognitive development may have played a role, but we likely witnessed multiple factors at work. Perhaps, in this case, repeated play with the fake puppy honed the puppies’ ability to perform specific behaviors. Another possibility is that the changes we observed had more to do with enhanced motivation than improved skill. Maybe the puppies simply learned that biting, holding and shaking something feels good. As tug-of-war has always been a game enjoyed by dogs of all breeds, this explanation makes intuitive sense.

Our study raises several questions. Virtually all puppies use their mouths during play with each other, with people and with toys. But is the tendency to bite and hold or bite, hold and shake during play exaggerated in fighting pit bull puppies compared to other puppies? If so, what kinds of developmental changes and experiences contribute to the expression of these hypertrophied behaviors and, more importantly, why do some fighting-line pit bulls eventually direct them toward conspecifics? When and how do inhibited, normal predatory motor patterns during social play become part of serious battle in the pit? These and other questions should be explored in future research. For now, the ontogeny of fighting behavior in game-bred pit bulls remains a mystery.

AcknowledgementsWe thank Patricia McMillan Loehr, MSc, Margaret Slater, DVM, PhD, Randall Lockwood, PhD, and the Humane Society of Missouri for their expertise and assistance with this project.

ReferencesBekoff, M. 1974. Social play in coyotes, wolves, and dogs. Bioscience, 24: 225–230.

Coppinger, R. & Coppinger, L. 2001. Dogs: A New Understanding of Canine

36

Origin, Behavior, and Evolution. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Groos, K. 1898. The Play of Animals. D. Appleton, New York.

Jessup, D. 1995. The Working Pit Bull. TFH Publications, Neptune City, New Jersey.

KeywordsAggression; animal fighting; behavior; dog; play; predatory motor patterns

37

Assessing Conspecific Aggression in Fighting DogsP. Reid* and K. Collins

ASPCA Anti-Cruelty Behavior Team, Urbana, USA*Corresponding author: pam.reid@aspca.org

AbstractAmerican Pit Bull Terriers that have been bred for fighting with other dogs are of particular interest to animal welfare organizations. Since the widely publicized Michael Vick dogfighting case, the public has made it known that it wants these dogs rehabilitated and re-homed whenever possible. But evaluating these dogs for suitability as pets presents special challenges. The summer of 2009 saw the largest dogfighting bust in US history. Over 400 adults and puppies were seized from properties in several states. The ASPCA Behavior Team was tasked with evaluating these dogs and we took the opportunity to collect data to address the use of a simulated dog to assess dog-dog aggression. Using real dogs as stimuli in an evaluation is both stressful and risky. We contrasted the behaviour of the test pit bulls toward four stimuli: a dog of the opposite sex, a dog of the same sex, a lifesize plush dog that looked like a Labrador retriever, and a control object of similar size but relatively formless. The fake dog turned out to be a valid stimulus—dogs that reacted with aggression toward the real dogs were also highly likely to display aggression toward the fake dog.

IntroductionSince the infamous Michael Vick dogfighting case, humane organizations have been increasingly pressured to give pit bulls seized during raids a second chance. To identify dogs that are suitable for adoption and assist with their placement in appropriate homes, performing behavior evaluations is essential. However, using stimulus “helper” dogs to test for conspecific aggression can be dangerous and stressful for both dogs and evaluators. Contact between the dogs must be limited for safety reasons. But it can be extremely difficult, even for seasoned professionals, to differentiate an excited dog from an aggressive one without allowing direct interaction. With this challenge in mind, we sought to assess the validity of a stuffed dog model as an evaluation tool.

Artificial models work to elicit species-typical behavior in a variety of animals. Models have been used to study fish behavior (Peeke et al. 1969), to train marsupials to recognize invasive predators (McLean et al. 2000) and to assess responses to different tail lengths in dogs (Leaver et al. 2008). Would our fighting dogs react to a fake dog as though it were real? And would the dogs that exhibit aggressive behavior toward real dogs also exhibit aggression toward our dog

38

model? To address these questions, we observed the reactions of almost 300 fight-bred pit bulls, confiscated from several properties in a 2009 dogfighting raid.

Materials and MethodsThe subjects were 292 adult pit bull dogs, all seized from illegal dogfighting operations in July 2009. There were 165 females and 127 males, ranging in age from 6 months to approximately 10 years. To our knowledge, all were reproductively intact except for one male. Several of the dogs had physical disabilities, including missing eyes and limbs, resulting from their history of pit fighting. The animals were housed in a warehouse, contained in kennels or crates. All were housed singly with the exception of lactating females kept with their puppies.

The evaluation process began 15 days after the raid. It took roughly six days to complete all the evaluations. Each dog was put through a series of tests designed to mimic everyday experiences. We observed the dogs’ reactions to being handled, to play solicitation, and to being scolded. We gave them a bowl of food and attempted to remove it while they were eating. We offered them a pig’s ear and then tried to take it away. We approached with a life-sized child doll to gauge their reaction to children.

In addition, each dog was presented with a series of four stimuli: (1) a friendly dog of the opposite sex, (2) a friendly dog of the same sex, (3) a lifelike dog model, and (4) a control object of similar size that was relatively formless. Order of presentation was varied such that half of the dogs experienced a real dog prior to the fake dog and half experienced the fake dog before the real dogs. Precautions were taken to ensure that the dogs were not able to injure each other during the assessment.

Dogs were scored on their reaction to each stimulus and classified as Friendly, Fearful, Neutral, Pushy, Aggressive, or Sexual. To be considered aggressive, the dog had to exhibit clear-cut signs of aggression: growling, showing teeth, snarling, snapping or biting. We used Cohen’s kappa coefficient to detect greater than chance agreements between the dogs’ responses to the four stimuli and McNemar’s test for the paired data (fake versus same sex dog, fake versus opposite sex dog, etc.).

ResultsDogs reacted in a similar fashion toward the two real dogs, with only slightly less aggression exhibited toward the opposite-sex animal. Reactions to the fake dog fell along a similar distribution, although more sexual behavior was directed toward the model than toward the real dogs. Most dogs responded neutrally to the control object.

Looking specifically at aggression, the dogs reacted comparably to the real and the fake stimuli, whereas they did not react to the control object. There was substantial agreement between responses to the same-sex dog and to the dog

39

model. Of the dogs that were aggressive to the same-sex dog, 81% were also aggressive to the model (Kappa=0.68; 95% CI: 0.72-0.89). The correlation was only slightly lower for the opposite-sex dog (Kappa=0.57; 95% CI: 0.68-0.88).

DiscussionEvaluating this large population of fight-bred pit bulls was a unique opportunity. Scientifically, these dogs are a curiosity because they have been selected, through the efforts of humans, to exhibit extreme—often lethal—aggression toward conspecifics of both sexes. We found the incidence of aggression toward other dogs to be significantly higher (27.6%) than what has been observed in shelter dogs (14.3%), although still not as high as we anticipated given the history of these dogs.

The dog model appeared to be a reasonable mock-up for eliciting species-typical behavior. The dogs’ responses toward the fake dog were similar to their responses to real dogs and dramatically different from their reactions to the control object.

Based on these findings, our recommendation is to test with a fake dog first when evaluating fighting pit bulls. If no aggression is exhibited, test with a same-sex dog. With this procedure, a small number of dogs will be mistakenly identified as aggressive but few truly aggressive dogs will be missed. While testing in this manner doesn’t eliminate the need for real dogs, it substantially reduces the risk to dogs and evaluators alike.

AcknowledgementsWe thank Patricia McMillan Loehr, Margaret Slater, Randall Lockwood, and Humane Society of Missouri for their expertise and assistance with this project. Animal Rescue League of Boston provided comparison data on shelter dogs.

ReferencesLeaver SDA & Remchen TE, 2008. Behavioural responses of Canis familiaris to different tail lengths of a remotely-controlled life-size dog replica. Behaviour 145: 377-390.

McLean IG, Schmitt NT, Jarman PJ, Duncan C & Wynne CDL, 2000. Learning for Life: Training Marsupials to Recognise Introduced Predators. Behaviour 137: 1361-1376.

Peeke HVS, Wyers EJ & Herz MJ, 1969. Waning of the aggressive response to male models in the three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus L.) Animal Behaviour 17: 224-228.

KeywordsAggression, animal fighting, evaluation, pit bull dog

40

Fractious or Feral—Assessing the Adoptability of Cats in an Animal Shelter Setting

Petra A. Mertens*San Diego Humane Society & SPCA, California, USA

*Corresponding author: pmertens@sdhumane.org

AbstractEach year, animal rescue organizations care for millions of cats who enter animal shelters with little or no information regarding the cats’ socialization history and behavior. Shelter staff has to make decisions regarding the cats’ disposition based on the animals’ intake history, presumed socialization status and the behaviors displayed in the shelter. After a holding period that lasts typically 1-3 days (Slater et al. 2010), it is not always possible to determine if a cat’s fractious behavior is due to a lack of socialization or other factors, such as fear in response to traumatic experiences or the exposure to the unfamiliar environment.

The goal of this prospective observational study is to assess how many cats who are fractious at the time of intake change their behavior during a habituation period that is followed by a period of behavior modification and can later be placed successfully. Additionally, it is of interest if intake information or behavior patterns seen at intake can be used to predict the cats’ outcomes.

For this purpose, we monitored the behavior of all cats over 8 weeks of age who were considered as a stray animal and entered San Diego Humane Society & SPCA animal shelter between July 1st and September 30th 2011. In addition to reviewing the intake history, cats enrolled in the study underwent a standardized behavior assessment within the first three days after intake. Cats who were deemed not adoptable due to extremely fearful and aggressive behaviors during the first assessment where allowed to habituate for an additional period of five to seven days before their behavior was assessed again. Cats who were still not considered adoptable but had shown some desirable change in behavior were enrolled in a behavior modification program, using methods based on habituation and counter conditioning. Approximately 30 days after their arrival at the shelter, the cats underwent the third and final behavior assessment.

IntroductionIn animal sheltering, the term ‘feral’ is at times used liberally. It is applied to cats who show fractious behavior as they enter a shelter after being trapped. Cats within this heterogeneous group may include true feral cats, defined as free

41

ranging cats who have not received any or insufficient socialization to humans during critical periods of their behavior development (Bradshaw et al. 1999). While about 88% of owner relinquished cats show good sociability upon arrival in a shelter (Marston & Bennett 2009), some socialized cats will be fractious in the novel surrounding. Entering the shelter without an owner history, the behavior of some free roaming, lost, abandoned, or ‘loosely’ owned cats may be less sociable on intake despite their primary socialization (Slater et al. 2010) leading staff to assume that they are feral. A study of cats entering all Melbourne shelters between 2005 and 2006 showed that sociability of the cats entering the shelter was negatively correlated with age which might reflect decreased ability to adjust or less behavior flexibility in older cats (Marston & Bennett 2009).

There is no standardized tool available that allows shelter staff to reliably distinguish between the behavior of a feral cat and a socialized cat who is fearful in a novel environment. There is a commonly held notion within the sheltering community that fearful but socialized cats tend to remain still or motionless when approached by a person whereas feral cats are likely to flee frantically. This assumption is anecdotal and has not been verified (Slater et al. 2010).

Only 15% of shelters developed guidelines or standardized tests for the assessment of the behavior of cats that come into their care (Slater et al. 2010). If cats fail to adjust to the new environment within a stray hold period of one to three days, 74% of shelters surveyed by Slater et al. (2010) decide on the animals’ disposition after this brief wait period. In 2003, Michigan animal shelters euthanized 57% of the 134,405 cats that entered the state’s shelters, amounting to approximately 3% of all owned cats who reside in the state (Bartell et al. 2005). Decisions to euthanize cats in shelters are made at a time during which cats have not had a chance to adjust to the setting. Comparing 35 owner surrendered cats and the 51 other cats entering a Nebraska shelter, Dybdall et al. (2007) feel that owner surrendered cats struggle more to adjust than ‘stray’ cats based on brief behavior observations that were made the first three days of the cats’ stay.

Laboratory studies show that simple changes in daily routine and unpredictable handling without changing the setting or housing result in chronic stress for cats, causing lasting physiological and marked behavioral changes without signs of habituation over a period of 21 days (Carlsted et al. 1993). This illustrates that cats struggle significantly to adjust to even minor change and novelty. And while monetary considerations, space limitations, and herd health problems have to drive the policies of many shelters it is likely that a number of fractious cats might

42

not be feral and could—if given predictability, an ability to avoid interactions, and time to habituate—be more successful in the shelter setting.

We hypothesized that a number of cats who normally would be euthanized due to their fractious behavior within the first week after intake will change behavior over time, if we give them more time to adjust. Based on the results of a standardized behavioral assessment that was conducted within the first three days after intake, we wanted to determine if we could detect behavioral differences between cats who adjusted and those who failed to adjust in hopes that we could predict later behavior and help better triage cats regarding their likelihood to be successful candidates for placement in a new home.

Materials and MethodsIn this prospective, observational study, we monitored the behavior of all cats over eight weeks of age who were considered as a stray animal and entered San Diego Humane Society and SPCA’s (SDHS) animal shelter between July 1st and September 30th 2011. In addition to reviewing the intake history, the 462 cats underwent a standardized behavior assessment within the first three days after intake. The 114 cats (24.8%) who were deemed not adoptable due to extremely fearful and aggressive behaviors during the first assessment where allowed to habituate for an additional period of five to seven days before their behavior was assessed again.

The 49 cats who were still not considered adoptable but had shown some desirable change in behavior were enrolled in a behavior modification program for up to two week, using methods based on habituation and classical counter conditioning. Approximately 30 days after their arrival at the shelter, the cats underwent the third and final behavior assessment. Cats who continued to show extreme fear or aggression were euthanized as they were—based on the organization’s policy and procedures—categorized ‘behaviorally unhealthy’ and considered not adoptable.

ResultsOverall, 51.7% (59) cats who were considered ‘not adoptable’ at the time of intake were euthanized for behavior reasons. One cat was reclaimed by an owner and ten cats were euthanized for various medical reasons.

Thirty-nine percent of the cats who were considered ‘not adoptable’ at the time of intake changed their behavior to a degree that allowed the organization to make them available for adoption and place them into a new home. The behavior of cats at intake was a poor predictor for the final outcomes.

43

DiscussionThe time frame of 30 days set for the final assessment of the cats in this study was selected predominately based on logistical and organizational considerations. It is possible that additional improvements in the cats’ behavior could have been achieved if the cats were allowed more time to adjust. However, it was typically apparent earlier on if a cat was going to make sufficient progress as change occurred gradually. Very few cats showed behavioral changes abruptly or towards the end of the study period.

While some cats changed their behavior completely and were very sociable, others who were ultimately placed in new homes remained overall shy and initially fearful when they encountered unfamiliar persons. We are unable to determine if the degree of primary socialization, individual variations in personality or varying behavior flexibility played a role in the cats’ ability to adjust as they may have had limited socialization, allowing them to habituate to human contact or no initial socialization at all.

It was apparent, however, that behavior at intake—without additional information such as a finder’s report on the cat’s history—is not a reliable predictor for determination of outcome.

Our experiences led SDHS to continue the program, allowing us to work with cats who enter the organization fearfully or aggressively. Cats who have an established history of being stray or feral, and cats who are too aggressive to be handled safely are euthanized after the first behavioral assessment. Cats with a history of non-aggressive human contact, cats without sufficient information, and cats who show some improvement in the time between intake and the second behavioral assessment are allowed to remain the shelter for an additional period of time to determine if additional time to habituate and behavior modification allow the cats to make the progress needed to allows us to place them into new homes.

AcknowledgementsMy sincere thanks go to San Diego Humane Society behavior assessment team for testing the cats who entered this study. I’m grateful for the team’s help with the implementation of the cats’ behavior modification programs. I would like to thank Dr. Stephen Meyer for his support in managing the data that we collected.

44

ReferencesBarlett PC, Barlett A, Walshaw S, Halstead S 2005. Rates of euthanasia and adoption for dogs and cats in Michigan animal shelters. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 8: 97-104.

Bradshaw JWS, Horsfield GF, Allen JA, Robinson IH 1999. Feral cats: their role in the population dynamics of Felis catus. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 61: 15-16.

Carlstead K, Brown JL, Strawn W 1993. Behavioural and physiological correlates of stress in laboratory cats. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 38: 143-158.

Dybdall K, Strasser R, Katz T 2007. Behavioral differences between owner surrender and stray domestic cats after entering an animal shelter. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 104: 85-94.

Gouveia K, Magalhaes A, de Sousa L 2011. The behavior of domestic cats in a shelter: Residence time, density and sex ratio. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 130: 53-59.

Lord LK, Reider L, Herron ME, Graszak BS 2008. Health and behavior problems in dogs and cats one week and one month after adoption from animal shelters. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 233: 1715-1722.

Marston L, Bennett PC 2009. Admission of cats to animal welfare shelters in Melbourne, Australia. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 12: 198-213.

Slater MR, Miller KA, Weiss E, Makolinski KV, Weisbrot LAM 2010. A survey of the methods used in shelters and rescue programs to identify feral and frightened pet cats. Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery 12: 592-600.

KeywordsAnimal shelter, behavior assessment, cat, feral

45

Factors Contributing to the Selection and Non-Selection of Cats By Potential

Adopters: A Pilot Study (N=97)L. C. Sinn*

Behavior Solutions for Pets, Hamilton, VAProfessor, Northern Virginia Community College, Sterling, VA

* Corresponding author: lsinndvm@gmail.com

AbstractFactors that contribute to the selection and non-selection of cats by potential adopters including cat and adopter characteristics and environmental conditions were examined. An electronic survey was conducted of cat adopters who completed the adoption process during 2011 at the Loudoun County Animal Shelter located in Waterford, Virginia. The survey was developed utilizing a previously validated questionnaire that addressed adopter motivation as well as cat and environmental factors (Gurkow, 2001). A response rate of 41% (n=97) was achieved and all responses were able to be used for analysis. The results indicate that adopters primarily choose a cat for companionship and that cat behavioral factors such as friendliness, playfulness and willingness to interact with the adopter are the primary criteria used for selection. Cage location also plays a role in the selection process. The results further indicate that physical traits including gender and neuter status do not have a major impact on cat selection by adopters. Together these findings suggest that to increase adoption rates, shelters should focus their efforts on improving cat sociability and training and enhancing opportunities for adopters to view and interact with cats. Shelters should also be cognizant that elements of the shelter environment such as cage location and the presence of toys can have a significant impact on cat selection by adopters.

ReferencesFantuzzi, J. M., Miller, K. A. and Weiss, E. (2010). Factors Relevant to Adoption of Cats in an Animal Shelter. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 13, 174-179.

Gurkow, N. (2001). Factors Affecting the Welfare and Adoption Rate of Cats in An Animal Shelter (Master of Science-Thesis). The University of British Columbia.

Gurkow, N. and Frazer, D. (2006). The effect of housing and handling practices on the welfare, behaviour and selection of domestic cats (Felis sylvestris catus) by adopters in an animal shelter. Animal Welfare, 15, 317-377.

46

Kry, K. and Casey, R. (2007). The Effect of Hiding Enrichment on Stress Levels and Behavior of Domestic Cats (Felis sylvestris catus) in a Shelter Setting and the Implications for Adoption Potential. Animal Welfare, 16, 375-383.

Lepper, M., Kass, P. H., and Hart, L. A. (2002). Prediction of Adoption Versus Euthanasia Among Dogs and Cats in a California Animal Shelter. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 5(1), 29-42.

Luescher , A.U. & Medlock, R.T. (2009). The Effects of Training and Environmental Alterations on Adoption Success of Shelter Dogs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 117(1), 63-68.

National Council on Pet Population Study & Policy (2011). The Shelter Statistics Survey 1994-1997. Retrieved September 14, 2011 from http://www.petpopulation.org/statsurvey.html

Neidhart, L., & Boyd, R. (2002). Companion Animal Adoption Study. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 5(3), 175.

47

The Effects of Social Training and Other Factors On Adoption Success of Shelter Dogs

A. Protopopova*, A.J. Gilmour, R.H. Weiss, J.Y. Shen, C.D.L. WynneUniversity of Florida, Florida, USA

* Corresponding author: aprotopo@ufl.edu

AbstractThe issue of canine overpopulation in the United States has become increasingly evident as animal shelters euthanize close to 250,000 adoptable dogs each year. The present study hypothesized that dogs trained to gaze into potential adopters’ eyes will be perceived as more attractive and will thus have a greater likelihood of being adopted. In addition, we investigated other individual factors that may predict adoption success. For each dog in the study, we tracked outcomes (adoption or euthanasia), physical characteristics, and mode of intake. The dogs in the group trained to gaze at people were not significantly more likely to be adopted. Breed type and mode of intake were predictive of adoption (P < 0.001 and P < 0.05 respectively) and length of stay (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01 respectively). All Toy Breed whereas only 49.1% of Fighting Breed type dogs were adopted and 77.8% of owner surrendered whereas only 38.5% of confiscated dogs were adopted. Size was predictive of length of stay only (P < 0.01). Small dogs stayed on average for 16.3 days (SD = 11.5) and large dogs stayed on average for 26.3 days (SD = 11.1). A second experiment found that adopted dogs were perceived as more physically attractive. The average rating for the adopted and euthanized groups were 0.50 (SD = 0.08) and 0.46 (SD = 0.09) respectively (P < 0.05). These findings suggest that other factors besides behavior may be more important to adopters when considering adoption of a dog.

AcknowledgementsFunding for this project was provided by Morris Animal Foundation, Merial, and Maddie’s Shelter Medicine Program. The authors thank the administration and staff of Alachua County Animal Services for their support and to Dr. Cinda Crawford and Dr. Andreas Keil for their guidance. The authors thank the student assistants who dedicated many hours to this project and Dmitri Kisten for the development of the survey software.

Keywords Adoption, dog, overpopulation, shelter, training

48

Outcomes of an Animal Shelter Program for Dogs With Separation Related Behaviors

Petra A. Mertens* and Crista L. CoppolaSan Diego Humane Society & SPCA, California, USA

*Corresponding author: pmertens@sdhumane.org

AbstractMany animal shelters classify dogs that display separation related behaviors as behaviorally “unhealthy”. In most cases, an unhealthy status results in the animal being euthanized. The goal of this prospective, observational study was to determine if dogs that display separation related behaviors in the shelter environment during a previously validated test could be successfully placed in new homes. Dogs of either gender that were more than one year old at the time of intake were eligible for enrollment in the study if they didn’t show other behavior issues concurrently and were physically healthy. After completing a medical work up including a physical exam, blood work and urinalysis, the dogs were enrolled in a separation related behavior (SRB) protocol. They received basic training, environmental enrichment, and drug therapy (clomipramine 2 mg/kg bid po) while available for adoption. Potential adopters were required to attend pre adoption consultations with a veterinarian and behaviorist to discuss the importance of continued treatment, both medically and behaviorally. Adopters received a two-week supply of clomipramine (2mg/kg bid po) for the dog as well as diazepam (0.5 mg/kg po prn 30 min before departure). They were asked to contact their regular veterinarian as soon as possible after adopting the dog to ensure continuity of care. Preadoption behavior consultations included detailed information on separation related behaviors, management tools and behavior modification techniques. Post adoption consultations were offered and scheduled upon request. Phone follow-up was conducted at one week, two weeks, one month and three months to evaluate adoption success, owner compliance and successful management of SRB. Adoption success was measured based on retention and satisfaction with the dog in the new home. Compliance was measured based on follow-up with regular veterinarian, continuation of drug therapy and implementing of behavior modification protocols. Successful treatment was assessed based on the presence of separation related behaviors in the home.

IntroductionSeparation anxiety, separation distress or separation-related behaviors (SRB) are terms that are commonly used interchangeably. They are typically defined as

49

unwanted behaviors that only occur when a dog is separated from his or her social partner. The most common symptoms, shown alone or in combination with others, are destructive behavior, vocalization and inappropriate elimination. Other signs include restlessness, aggression, self-mutilation and repetitive behaviors. Common physiological responses to social isolation are hyper salivation, trembling or tachycardia (Flannigan & Dodman, 2001; Lund & Jorgensen 1999; McCrave 1991; Schwartz 2003).

SRB are a problem that affects a large proportion of dogs in the general population. A survey of dog owners in the U.K. showed that more than a quarter of all dogs displayed some SRB (Bradshaw et al. 2002). SRB are poorly tolerated by owners and therefore a common reason for dogs to be referred for behavior therapy, making up between 20 to 40% of the referral population (Simpson 2000; Voith & Borchelt 1996).

SRB has been identified as a primary reason leading owners to surrender their dogs to humane organizations, making for 33% of the relinquished dogs in the UK (Bailey 1993; Marston & Bennett 2003; Miller et al. 1996). Others argue that relinquishment itself may lead subsequently to an abnormally strong attachment with a new owner and to the development of SRB (Flannigan & Dodman 2001; Voith & Borchelt 1996). Yet, surveys of general populations of dogs found no relationship between the occurrence of SRB and the dogs’ origin (Bradshaw et al. 2002).

Materials and MethodsA prospective, observational study was designed to determine if adult shelter dogs that showed SRB in a standardized behavior assessment could be accurately identified and successfully placed in new homes. Placement success was based on retention, level of satisfaction with their dog and owner compliance with recommendation made at time of adoption.

Bristol University (Casey, personal communication 2011) developed the robust SRB test for the animal shelter setting, predicting the occurrence of SRB after placement in a new home. Dogs were evaluated for SRB using the three minute long test that was included San Diego Humane Society and SPCA’s (SDHS) routine behavior assessment. Every dog entering SDHS is evaluated three to five days after intake unless legal or medical reasons require the test be postponed. The behavior assessment has been standardized by SDHS and is conducted by staff members who have been trained and certified as a handler or observer. The evaluation is composed of 11 subtests including kennel behavior, sociability,

50

handling, play behavior, resource guarding, mental sensitivity, reactivity towards strangers, behavior with a baby doll, social isolation, behavior towards a cat and conspecifics. During the social isolation subtest, subject dogs were left alone in the evaluation room where they had spent approximately 10 minutes with the handler during the behavior evaluation. Dogs were left off-leash with a rawhide that had been used in their previous resource guarding subtest. Dogs were videotaped and evaluated for SRB including attention to exit points, panting, pacing, increased rate of movement, vocalization, destruction (objects and exit points), escape attempts, elimination, panting and greeting behavior upon return of the handler. Latency, duration and escalation of the behaviors over time were also noted. Social isolation recordings were initially viewed and screened by the trained observers of the behavior assessment team using a scoring sheet. Dogs that displayed apparent signs of SRB were flagged for review by the authors for inclusion in this study. Once dogs were enrolled in the study they underwent a medical work up (PE, CBC, SAP, UA as well as additional testing if needed in individual cases) and received clomipramine HCL (2 mg/kg bid po) while in SDHS’s care. Dogs were made available for adoption and potential adopters were initially alerted by adoption counselors to the potential for SRB. Once an interested party had decided on adoption, consultations were scheduled with a staff behaviorist and a staff veterinarian to discuss SRBs, behavior modification exercises, management and drug therapy, respectively. Adopters also received detailed handouts discussing these topics.

Dogs were sent home with a two week supply of clomipramine as well as diazepam to ease transition and to ensure continued care. Adopters were strongly advised to see their local veterinarian as soon as possible for continued care.

After the dogs’ placement in their new home, owners of SRB dogs were offered a post adoption consultation with the behaviorist and received follow-up calls at one week, two weeks, one month and three months following adoption. Follow-up questions included whether they had seen their regular veterinarian, if they were still giving the prescribed medication and at what dosage, if they had noted SRB when the dog was left alone, if they had practiced the recommending behavior modification exercises and management tools, if they were satisfied with their chosen dog and if they were experiencing any other behavior problems with the dog.

ResultsBetween November 1st 2011 and April 1st 2012, 28 dogs were identified with SRB that met our inclusion criteria. In this time frame, a total of 1493 dogs entered the organization (excluding dogs whose owners requested euthanasia at intake

51

and animals that were dead upon arrival). Twenty-three of the 28 dogs were successfully enrolled in the SRB study. Two dogs were euthanized for medical reasons, one dog was transferred to another humane organization, and two dogs were reclaimed by their owners.

The SRB dogs’ mean age was 3.1 years. The group consisted of eight male dogs and 15 female dogs. Aside from a Bassett hound and a Beagle, the dogs appeared to be mixed breed dogs with seven dogs that were classified as Pit Bull type dogs and five dogs that were listed as Chihuahua.

To date, 15 (23) dogs were successfully placed while the remaining dogs are still available for adoption. Five dogs were returned after their initial placement and three were placed again successfully. One dog was euthanized after being returned due to severe aggression to humans. One adopter took advantage of the free post-adoption consultation.

Follow-up was obtained from thirteen of the fifteen dogs placed in a new home. Seven of these dogs were still on the full prescribed dose of medication at one week post adoption. SRBs were reported in three of the dogs after placement in a new home. Two of the adopters practiced the behavior modification exercises recommended and discussed at the time of adoption. All adopters reported being satisfied with their dog.

DiscussionBased on follow-up information provided by owners of dogs placed from this program, adoption of dogs identified as having SRB was overall successful. Young animals and dogs that fail to resemble a Pit Bull type dog appeared to be placed more quickly than their counter parts which reflect an overall trend in this setting. The adopters of the dogs were highly satisfied with their choices. The low frequency or SRB noted in dogs after their placement in a new home may have been affected by the validity of the test, the adopters’ perception of the dogs’ behaviors, a life style among adopters that makes issues less likely to occur, or the preventative value of the information provided in the consultation. However, compliance with drug therapy, management techniques and behavior modification exercises was very poor and there is an assumption that the services offered had little impact on the outcomes of the placement.

The experiences from this study lead us to advise against offering a program for the treatment of SRB that were identified using this behavioral assessment test. Preadoption consultation and medication may be useful for dogs that were

52

surrendered or returned to a shelter if the dogs have an established history of SRB in the previous home.

AcknowledgementsWe thank Dr. Rachel Casey for granting permission to use the separation related behavior test.

ReferencesBlackwell E, Casey RA, Bradshaw JWS 2006. Controlled trial of behavioural therapy for separation-related disorders in dogs. Veterinary Record 158 (16): 551-554.

Bradshaw JWS, Blackwell EJ, Rooney NJ, Casey RA 2002. Prevalence of separation related behavior in dogs in southern England. Proceedings of the 8th ESCVE Meeting on Veterinary Behavior Medicine, Granda, Spain.

Bailey G 1993. Behavioural problems in re-homed dogs. In: Fisher J (Ed) The behaviour of dogs and cats. Stanley Paul & Co. Ltd., London

Flannigan G, Dodman N.H. 2001. Risk factors and behaviors associated with separation anxiety in dogs. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 219: 759-775.

Lund DJ, Jorgensen MC 1999. Behavior patterns and time course of activity in dogs with separation problems. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 63: 219-236

Marston LC, Bennett PC 2003. Reforging the bond—towards successful canine adoption. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 83: 227-245.

McCrave EA 1991. Diagnostic criteria for separation anxiety in the dog. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Small Animal Practice 21: 329-342.

Miller DD, Staats SR, Partlo C, Rada K. (1996) Factors associated with the decision to surrender a pet to an animal shelter. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 209: 738-742

Schwartz S 2003. Separation anxiety syndrome in dogs and cats. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 222: 1526-1532

Simpson, B.S. (2000) Canine separation anxiety. Compendium for Continuing Education for Practicing Veterinarians 2: 328-337

Voith VL, Borchelt PL 1996. Separation anxiety in dogs. In: Readings in Companion Animal Behaviour, Voith VL Borchelt P (eds). Veterinary Learning Systems, New York, USA. 124-139.

KeywordsAnimal shelter, dog, separation related behavior

53

Effects of Preadoption Counseling For Owners On Separation Anxiety In Shelter Dogs

M. Herron1, L. Lord2, S. Husseini*1Dept. of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, 2Dept. of Veterinary Preventive Medicine

Ohio State University, College of Veterinary Medicine.*Corresponding author: Husseini.4@osu.edu

The efficacy of preadoption counseling in the education and prevention of separation anxiety problems was tested in a prospective, randomized, parallel-group study. Participants included 133 new owners of dogs 6 months of age and older. Prior to adoption, 66 of these owners were chosen at random, according to a computerized random number generator, to receive five minutes of counseling on separation anxiety. The remaining 67 owners that did not receive counseling served as the control group. A follow-up survey was conducted one month post adoption. 19 dogs in the total population were reported to have separation anxiety. There was no significant correlation for counseling to decrease the incidence of separation anxiety. Data shows that owners in both groups were performing most recommendations given during counseling. Of the 6 dogs relinquished, 3 were returned with the primary complaint of having separation anxiety. Dogs that were reported to have separation anxiety were more likely to show nervous or panicked behavior as the owner prepared to leave (p=0.00) and signs of neediness (p=0.031). Individual symptoms of separation anxiety such as destructive behavior, house-soiling, barking, and escaping had no significant variations between the two groups. Having another dog in the home was not protective for separation anxiety. There was a slight trend for putting food in a toy to be protective of separation anxiety (p=0.129). Owners in the treatment group were more likely than control to put food inside a toy (p=0.00); this suggests that preadoption counseling was implemented by the owners in the home. Owner compliance supports the idea that counseling is a useful tool for owners. Further investigation should be done to find more specific, effective prevention tools for owners to use in the home to minimize the development of separation anxiety.

KeywordSeparation anxiety, behavior, shelter dogs, relinquishment, owner education

AVSAB Second Place Student Award

54

The Use of a Controversial Procedure as Part of a Successful Comprehensive

Treatment of Serious Interdog Aggression Between Household Dogs

E. K. MeyerVeterinary Behavior Clinic, Gaithersburg, MD

Corresponding author: VetBehaviorClinic@comcast.net

Interdog aggression among household dogs is a commonly encountered problem in clinical behavioral medicine. Once an accurate diagnosis is made, strategies can be implemented to prevent aggressive events and reduce the likelihood of human and canine injury in the event preventative efforts fail. This case report describes the successful use of dental disarming (canine teeth crown reduction with vital pulp therapy) as part of a comprehensive and ongoing therapeutic plan in a case of serious aggression between two household dogs.

On February 9th, 2010, the clients presented their three dogs: Chava (4-year-old, 22 kg, f/s terrier mix), Chispa (4-year-old, 9 kg, f/s terrier mix), and Chula (6-year-old, 25 kg f/s Labrador Retriever mix). All dogs had been obtained within a few weeks of each other 3 years prior to presentation. During that 3-year period, Chava had attacked Chispa four times. The attacks occurred during situations when Chava was highly aroused or in pain and the attacks were uninhibited, with a bite/hold/shake technique. Chispa sustained multiple punctures and lacerations around the neck and back during each event. The three most recent fights had been extremely difficult to stop and the client received multiple bite wounds to his hands during the process. The client required treatment at the emergency room for wounds sustained during the last fight. Except for these four incidents, the two dogs were friendly and interactive with one another. Unrelated to these events, Chispa would growl at either larger dog if she had a bone or food. However, neither Chava nor Chula reacted aggressively toward Chispa in these situations.

A diagnosis of arousal-induced, displaced aggression was made and a treatment plan was outlined, including continuing administration of fluoxetine that had been started by the referring veterinarian 3 weeks prior to presentation, reducing stressful situations for Chava, identifying behavioral signals of stress in Chava to prevent altercations, and implementing strategies to minimize injury to people and animals should prevention fail and Chava aggress. Safety measures included

55

leaving a harness and traffic lead on Chava, keeping a spiked collar and a vest on Chispa, and having a break stick available.

The option of dental disarming of the canine teeth was discussed because of the size disparity between Chispa and Chava, the unpredictability of the attacks, the lack of warning behavior, and history of injury to both people and dogs. The clients exercised the dental disarming option several weeks later as an outpatient procedure. A crown reduction with vital pulp therapy was performed on all four canine teeth1 by a board-certified veterinary dentist.

Upon re-examination four months later, no fights had occurred but there was observable tension by the front door, especially related to the arrival of visitors and mail coming through the mail slot. Recommendations to replace the slot with a mailbox, disengage the doorbell, separate Chispa from the larger dogs when answering the door, and desensitize the dogs to people entering the home were recommended.

The dogs were reevaluated on July 13, 2011, 17 months after initial evaluation. At that time, the owners reported that Chava had attacked Chispa by the front door twice in the preceding 2 months. In both cases, because of the dental disarming, Chava was easily pulled off of Chispa and there was no injury to either dog or human. The dogs resumed their normal demeanors immediately following the events and remained friendly with each other in all other situations. Chava’s fluoxetine dose was increased from 20 mg once a day to 25 mg once a day. Chula was started on fluoxetine, as her high level of excitement by the door seemed to trigger Chava’s aggression. Chava was eventually stabilized at 25 mg fluoxetine once a day. The clients were again counseled to remove the mail slot and prevent Chava from accessing Chispa by the front door.

The dogs were again evaluated for a fourth time on February 18, 2012, 25 months following initial consultation. Of concern was an aggressive event that was quite different when compared with previous events. In the most recent aggressive incident, Chispa attacked Chula, which had never occurred in the past. Chava, who was in a different part of the home, rushed in upon hearing the fight and attacked Chispa. As before, Chava was easily pulled off Chispa and there were no punctures or lacerations suffered by the dogs or owners. Upon further questioning, it was discovered that two young cats had been adopted several weeks prior to the event and Chispa, the only “lap dog,” was becoming increasingly stressed by the attention the cats were receiving. Chispa would growl whenever the cats approached her when she was on an owner’s lap. Chispa’s

56

attack on Chula was triggered by Chula approaching when Chispa was on a highly favored visitor’s lap.

The treatment plan included consideration of re-homing Chispa to her favored relative or reducing her stress through medication and minimizing her favored owner’s interaction with the cats. The clients chose not to rehome Chispa and Chispa is now also on fluoxetine. She has stabilized at 5 mg fluoxetine administered once a day. As of April 29, 2012, no aggressive events were reported.

This case illustrates a situation where dental disarming was used as a way of minimizing injury to both canine and human household members as part of a comprehensive plan that appropriately addresses underlying causes and employs multiple modalities of treatment and management. This procedure allowed the household to remain intact without subjecting the owner to injury and the smaller dog to a high risk of serious or even fatal injury.

ReferencesNiemiec BA, Mulligan TW, 2001. Vital pulp therapy. J Vet Dent 18:154-156.

57

Practice-Based Behavior Modification by a Veterinary TechnicianM. Duxbury*, L. Reichl, D. Emerson

Behavior Service, Veterinary Medical Center, University of MN*Corresponding author: mduxbury@umn.edu

Providing adequate veterinary care for anxious and reactive pets can be challenging when their behavior in the veterinary clinic precludes safe examination and handling. The way the pet and clinic staff responds to each other impacts the client’s perception of competence and quality of care. Clients may be embarrassed by their pets’ behavior or feel unwelcome at the clinic.

This presentation will describe three dogs whose initial behavior posed a barrier to good medical care, but responded well to behavior modification in scheduled training visits within the clinic setting. In each case, behavior modification was performed by an experienced veterinary behavior technician and supervised by a DACVB or behavior resident at the University of Minnesota Veterinary Medical Center.

Case 1 was a terrier who responded within a few sessions to counter-conditioning to accept insulin injections so that he could be treated successfully at home. Case 2 was referred prior to a scheduled surgery because the dog was aggressive to veterinary staff. The dog responded to desensitization and counter-conditioning within 5-6 sessions and returned to its original practice for successful pre-surgical handling. Case 3 had more widespread anxiety, fear and reactivity and has been in training sessions 2-4 times per month for the last 4 years, reaching milestones that could not have been predicted at the outset.

These cases highlight an emerging practice model where a qualified veterinary behavior technician working with a veterinarian can add to practice value by improving patient care, client satisfaction and practice income.

58

A Proposed New Perspective On Teaching Veterinary Behavioral Medicine

N. Harell*Koret School of Veterinary Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel

*Corresponding author:vetbehaviorclinic@gmail.com

AbstractBehavioral medicine is a relatively new field of specialty in veterinary medicine. Its innovative nature, combined with the fact that, for centuries, most problem behaviors in animals were addressed by other animal-care professionals, renders it difficult to be accepted as a legitimate veterinary field, even among veterinarians. The purpose of this paper is to present a new approach to teaching behavior medicine to veterinary students and presenting it to veterinary clinicians, as well as to other animal care professionals. This, in order to clarify its legitimacy as a veterinary field and distinguish it from other professions which deal with other, various aspects of animal behavior.

IntroductionFor the past 25 years, veterinarians have delved into the science of animal behavior with the goal of providing diagnoses and treatment plans for behavior problems in their patients through the use of evidence-based medicine. Until only a few decades ago, treating behavior problems was done by para-medical professionals of various backgrounds, including trainers and non-veterinary behaviorists. At that time, veterinarians diagnosing and treating behavior problems were considered to be practicing in a field not overtly veterinary. In fact, in some veterinary schools, animal behavior (and not behavior medicine) is still taught by non-veterinarians.

In this paper, two emerging trends in veterinary behavior medicine are emphasized as a basis for a new approach to teaching behavior medicine both to veterinary students and to practicing veterinary clinicians, as well as introducing this concept to other professionals in the field of animal care with the purpose of recognizing veterinarians as authorities on animal behavior.

The first trend has been emphasized at the 2010 North American Veterinary Medical Educational Consortium, stating that “expertise in animal behavior should be considered a foundational competency in veterinary medical education”. This statement implies that behavior medicine is now recognized as an integral field of veterinary medicine. The second trend is the fast-evolving recognition,

59

through clinical research, of both the impact of behavior on physical health, as well as that of physical health on behavior of animals.

Despite the above, many people—both of the veterinary profession and others, still feel that “behavior” is distinct from “medicine”, estranging veterinarians and students from applying behavioral skills in clinical practice; and directing the general public to seek help from sources other than the veterinarian when confronted with a problem behavior of an animal. Furthermore, the role of the veterinary behaviorist and its difference from the role of professionals such as trainers is often unclear to the public, to animal-care professionals and also to other veterinarians. Thus, the general confusion as to who should be diagnosing and treating various problem behaviors, still largely remains. A new perspective is proposed for teaching the concept of “behavior medicine” on the levels of the veterinary student, clinician, and other animal-care professionals. This concept regards “behavior” as a body system, similarly to other body systems which possess a distinct anatomy and physiology. As such, this system is in constant interaction with other body systems and is inseparable from them - just as, for example, are the cardiovascular and the endocrine systems. Pathologies of various etiologies may occur within this system, manifesting as behavioral disease. Thus, to be well-educated and skilled in general veterinary medicine, the student and the clinician must study the anatomy, physiology and pathophysiology of the behavioral system together with the studies of all other body systems. A second implication of this approach is, that it helps to clarify the major roles of the veterinary behaviorist: diagnosing and treating behavioral pathologies using various treatment modalities which include behavior and environmental modification as well as medical and surgical therapeutics; and diagnosing pathologies which are influenced by combined medical and behavioral factors – bearing in mind that “medical” and “behavioral” cannot always be teased apart.

So far, this approach has been presented at different levels to veterinary students, clinicians, authorities in veterinary education and nonveterinarians such as dog trainers and dog handlers, with favorable responses. Hence, in the author’s view, this approach will facilitate the acceptance of behavior medicine as an integral part of veterinary medicine both by veterinary professionals, and the general public.

ReferencesAmerican College of Veterinary Behaviorists website http://www.dacvb.org/resources/for-veternarians-become-board-certified/veterinary-education/

60

Carlson, NR, (2013) Emotion (pp 359-392), Learning and Memory (pp 434-478). In: Physiology of Behavior, Pearson Education, 11th edition Gustafson S, 2011. A Contemporary Approach to Equine Behavior Education. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Veterinary Behavior Meeting. Cape Town, South Africa

Mills DS, 2011 “The silent ouch!”: Recognizing the importance of pain in equine problem behaviour. In: Proceedings of the 17th ESVCE Study Day. Avignon, France Overall KL, (2003) Medical Differentials with Potential Behavioral Manifestations. Veterinary Clinics of North America, Small Animals 33: 213-229. Virga V, (2003) Behavioral Dermatology. Veterinary Clinics of North America, Small Animals 33:231-251

KeywordsVeterinary behavioral medicine, teaching

61

Using Model Dogs to Mould BehaviorE. Feltes

The Behavior Clinic, Ohio, USA*Corresponding author: Dr.Feltes@TheBehaviorClinic.com

This unique treatment approach employed through our clinic involves the use of model dogs in the behavior modification program for patients diagnosed with aggression to unfamiliar dogs. The model dog is ‘walked’ on-lead at a distance to recreate the stimulus of seeing an unfamiliar dog. Measurements are taken with regards to the starting distance, distance to interest in the model and distance to reactivity to the model. Using the model dogs allows us to test these dogs without stress, fear or anxiety being induced in a live dog (the stimulus dog) which may result in associated behavioral fallout.

It is proposed that the use of a non-live stimulus may enhance communication with and compliance of the client. This technique allows the veterinarian, credentialed veterinary behavior technician and client the ability to solely focus their attention on one dog instead of two. Many owners are unable to focus when working with a live stimulus dog due to their concern that their dog will potentially create undue stress or physically harm another dog. Removing that concern, allows for all attention to be directed towards addressing the details of the behavior modification techniques (such as timing, criteria setting, body language observation skills and ‘bail out’ procedures) and the patient’s response. Communication detailing the body language being displayed by the patient can be discussed with the owner without distraction. The ability to solely focus on the behavior modification technique of the individual client and individual patient’s response enhances the veterinarian and credentialed veterinary behavior technician’s ability to communicate effectively with the client and may improve compliance.

View publication statsView publication stats