Our Position Statements represent evidence-based views of the Society on important animal issues. We use these statements to educate and raise awareness to improve the lives of all animals.
Since there are homeless pets awaiting adoption, the Regina Humane Society (RHS) strongly advocates that persons wishing to acquire a pet obtain one from a shelter or other source of homeless animals, such as breed rescues, and rescue groups that embrace spay and neuter requirements, or from responsible owners (See Keeping Companion Animals as Pets Position Statement) looking to re-home animals in their care.
If a suitable pet cannot be adopted through these sources, the Society recommends obtaining a pet only through a compassionate, responsible breeder.
Breeding animals responsibly takes a lot of diligence and hard work. Responsible breeders:
The Regina Humane Society does not support purchasing or otherwise acquiring animals from irresponsible breeders.
The Canadian Federation of Humane Societies (CFHS), Canadian Kennel Club (CKC) and the Canadian Veterinary Medicine Association (CVMA) also offer guidance in selecting an appropriate pet from a responsible source through these publications:
The Regina Humane Society (RHS) supports the transfer of companion animals to and from other reputable rescue/shelter organizations to assist with alleviating pet overpopulation or to serve the individual needs of animals requiring specialized care and/or placement.
Transfer programs are a useful tool in saving animal lives by networking available resources among reputable rescue/shelter agencies. RHS transfer programs fall into two categories:
By transferring adoptable animals to the RHS from other areas, the Society can save lives while assisting shelters and rescues in neighboring areas in lowering their animal populations. This allows source shelters and rescues to direct more resources to prevention programming and the animals that remain in their care.
The RHS will transfer companion animals from other shelters/rescues only when experiencing excess capacity to care; including but not limited to space, staffing, behavior and/or veterinary resources. Excess capacity will not include space that can reasonably be expected to be required for City of Regina Impound or quarantine purposes.
The Regina Humane Society’s first priority is to provide for the needs of companion animals in the City of Regina. If the transfer of animals becomes an option, the RHS will attempt to fulfill transfer requests and needs following the below priorities:
Potential source organizations may be either non-profit animal sheltering agencies or rescue groups that directly serve open-admission shelters or underserved communities.
While some communities are experiencing success in reducing pet overpopulation through established adoption, spay/neuter, outreach and education programs, others continue to struggle with addressing overpopulation and resulting unwanted animals. Many communities do not have large enough populations to provide homes for all of the animals in need of homes.
Animal shelter intake numbers can vary dramatically throughout the year. At times, the RHS does not have adoptable pets in adequate number or diversity to support public demand. Families determined to adopt a specific type of pet may turn to other sources to acquire a pet which may not be animal-welfare focused in their operations.
The RHS may transfer animals to other organizations based on need. If the RHS has a surplus of adoptable animals in its care or adoptable animals require a change of venue to support their adoption, transfer may be pursued. At times, the Society’s resources or animal care policies do not support the required medical or behavioral rehabilitation needs of animals in its care.
The Society will pursue transfer of these animals to agencies which are able to meet the animal’s rehabilitation or recovery requirements and provide the opportunity to find appropriate homes.
Potential accepting transfer organizations may be either non-profit animal sheltering agencies or rescue groups that may specialize in certain breeds, medical or behavioral conditions. All efforts are made by RHS to ensure the accepting organization is a rescue/shelter in good standing and that policies and procedures align with those of the RHS.
All organizations involved with incoming/outgoing RHS transfers, must adhere to the Regina Humane Society Transfer Agreement. This agreement includes language to ensure appropriate legal possession, compliance, and disclosure as well as appropriate care and keeping. An animal that is deemed not adoptable by the receiving organization due to health or behavioral concerns will be referred back to the original rescue/shelter for return transfer unless the animal is in extreme distress and humane euthanasia is required, as prescribed by the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association Veterinarian’s Oath and the Animal Protection Act of Saskatchewan.
The Regina Humane Society (RHS) supports pets as gifts only for individuals who have expressed a sustained interest in owning them, and have the ability and preparedness to care for them responsibly.
Breed characteristics such as size, energy level and grooming requirements as well as the prospective pet owner’s lifestyle need to be taken into consideration when selecting a pet as a gift.
Because pets are typically more than a decade-long commitment, RHS encourages gift-givers to provide gift certificates so the gift recipient can be involved in choosing their future pet.
Turning away someone interested in adopting a pet for a gift, likely will mean they will turn to another avenue (internet, pet store, classifieds, etc.) to obtain the pet, which could support an irresponsible breeding operation and unsterilized pet. Pets given as gifts are not a new concept, however many animal organisations disagree on the practice under the notion that someone given such a gift is ill-suited to care for it. It is understandable to have concerns over allowing someone to adopt on behalf of a third party. The assumptions are that the animal will be returned to a shelter or rescue, be abandoned or face neglect and abuse.
However, research indicates that this fear is based upon anecdotal and unsubstantiated assertions. There are no statistical findings that support that giving animals as gifts are not in their best interest. This misconception may not only prevent the movement of rescue animals to potentially loving homes, but may also drive potential adopters toward unscrupulous and inhumane sources for pets. Contemporary research has resulted in a re-evaluation of this belief and sufficient evidence has been presented supporting the giving of animals as gifts.
Research indicates that the highest majority of pet owners who received pets as gifts thought it either increased or had no impact on their love or attachment to that pet and the vast majority of these pets are still in the home, further supporting the notion that pets given as gifts are not at higher risk for abandonment.
Studies also reveal that pets acquired as gifts are less likely to be relinquished than pets acquired by the individual and identified “unwanted gift” as a reason given for pet relinquishment to be less than 1% of all animals entering the shelters surveyed.
The Regina Humane Society (RHS) opposes the giving of animals as prizes.
Acquiring a pet is the start of a multi-year dependent relationship. For that relationship to be successful, it is essential that the needs of both the owner and the pet be met by matching the owner’s housing, lifestyle and capabilities, with the care requirements of the pet. Owning an animal requires planning and preparation prior to acquisition as well as long-term responsibility and commitment. Acquiring an animal as a prize does not allow for such preparation or consider the needs of the owner or animal.
The Regina Humane Society (RHS) recognizes the serious public policy issue of inappropriate aggression by dogs. The Society’s goal is to create safe communities where humans and dogs co-exist and enrich each other’s lives. The RHS opposes breed specific legislation (or “breed bans”) as a strategy for addressing incidents of aggression and reducing dog bites.
While politically popular, breed-specific legislation does not reduce the incidence or severity of dog bites, penalizes responsible pet owners, destroys innocent dogs and are impossible to enforce. Instead, the Society endorses holistic and effective preventative and enforcement strategies that apply to all breeds and all dog owners. A community approach to responsible pet ownership, one that focuses on the behavior of the dog and the owner, is the best way to protect public safety and promote animal welfare.
Breed specific legislation (BSL) is legislation that prohibits or restricts the keeping of dogs of specific breeds, dogs presumed to be specific breeds, mixes of specific breeds and/or dogs presumed to be mixes of one or more of those breeds [1]. The most severe form of BSL is a complete ban; but BSL also includes regulations that impose separate requirements on a particular breed. BSL, in all of its forms, results in the destruction of many pet dogs.
Various breeds have been or currently are targeted by BSL, but most recently the regulations have typically been enforced against “Pit bull” types. In this case, most dogs commonly referred to as a pit bull are either a mix of other breeds or are pure-bred of a breed often misidentified as a pit bull. “Pit-bulls” are not a dog breed. Rather than a specific breed, pit bull is more of a generic term to describe a group of dogs with similar characteristics — much as are “hound” and “terrier” — and encompasses both mixes and pure-bred dogs of many breeds. Other dogs commonly affected by BSL include: Rottweilers, German Shepherds, Akita, “Alapaha Blue Blood Bulldogs”, Alaskan Malamute, “American Bandogge”, American Bulldog, American Staffordshire Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, Belgian Malinois, Bullmastiff, Bull Terrier, Cane Corso, Chow Chow, Dalmatian, Doberman Pinscher, Dogo Argentino, “Fila Brasileiro”, Miniature Bull Terrier, Neapolitan Mastiff, Perro de Presa Canario, Shar Pei, Siberian Husky, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, “Tosa Inu”, and wolf-hybrids. Chihuahuas and Labrador Retrievers have also been the subject of breed bans.
Intense focus on select and isolated incidents of serious dog bites incites fear and hysteria and this is not a sound basis for making effective public policy.
The following organizations do not endorse BSL: Ontario Veterinary Medical Association, Canadian Veterinary Medical Association, Canadian Kennel Club, Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council of Canada, Canadian Association of Pet Trainers, National Companion Animal Coalition, Canadian Federation of Humane Societies, Toronto Humane Society, American Animal Hospital Association, American Bar Association, American Dog Owner’s Association, American Humane Association, American Kennel Club, American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, American Veterinary Medical Association, American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior, Association of Pet Dog Trainers, Australian Veterinary
Association, Best Friends Animal Society, British Veterinary Association, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Federation of Veterinarians in Europe, Humane Society of the United States, International Association of Canine Professionals, National Animal Control Association, National Animal Interest Alliance, National Association of Obedience Instructors, Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (UK & Australia), United Kennel Club, and the White House Administration. In addition, many other provincial and local-level veterinary medical associations and humane organizations oppose BSL.
BSL is widely seen as ineffective public policy.
There is no evidence from studies of dog bites that one kind of dog is more likely to bite a human being than another kind of dog. A recent American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) survey covering 40 years and two continents concluded that no group of dogs should be considered disproportionately dangerous [2]. Additionally, in a recent study published in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association on rare events of dog bite-related fatalities, the researchers identified a striking co-occurrence of multiple, controllable factors in these cases [3]. Breed was not identified as a factor.
Breed specific legislation has not succeeded in reducing dog bite-related injuries wherever in the world it has been enacted. A survey of reported dog bite rates in 36 Canadian municipalities found no difference between jurisdictions with BSL and those without [4].
The Province of Ontario enacted a breed ban in 2005 targeting pit bull/American pit bull terriers, Staffordshire/American Staffordshire bull terriers and all dogs that look like them. In 2010, based on a survey of municipalities across the Province, the Toronto Humane Society reported that, despite five years of BSL and the destruction of “countless” dogs, there had been no significant decrease in the number of dog bites [5]. In 2012, the Ontario Veterinary Medical Association held BSL responsible for the unnecessary euthanasia of over 1,000 dogs and puppies, many with no history of violence against people or animals.
Winnipeg, Manitoba enacted a breed ban in 1990. Winnipeg’s rate of dog bite-injury hospitalizations is virtually unchanged from that day to this, and remains significantly higher than the rate in breed-neutral Calgary. Calgary, where responsible pet ownership is emphasized, saw a five-fold reduction over 20 years – from 10 bites per 10,000 people in 1986 to two per 10,000 people in 2006 [6].Rather than banning breeds, Calgary uses strong licensing and enforcement plus dog safety public education campaigns.
There are a range of factors which play a key role in canine aggression including;
BSL is difficult to enforce, costly, diverts resources, penalizes responsible pet owners, is open to challenge and demonstrably ineffective.
Breed specific legislation is problematic for many reasons:
The trend in prevention of dog bites continues to shift in favor of multifactorial approaches focusing on improved ownership and husbandry practices, better understanding of dog behavior, education of parents and children regarding safety around dogs and consistent enforcement of dangerous dog/reckless owner ordinances in communities. Effective laws hold all dog owners responsible for the humane care, custody and control of all dogs regardless of breed or type.
Successful models for dealing with canine aggression do exist. Rather than directing new funds to create and attempt the enforcement of politically charged, yet ineffective public policy, such funds should be directed towards efforts that truly make communities safer. Some recommendations for municipalities to consider regarding dangerous or vicious dogs include:
Free-roaming or “community cats” include stray cats which were one-time pets but are now lost, missing, or abandoned, and feral cats. Stray cats are typically accustomed to human contact and tame enough for re-homing. Feral cats are defined as those cats which are the offspring of stray or feral cats and are not accustomed to human contact. Ultimately, all community cats are domestic animals that, due to human neglect, have been forced to live as wild animals. As such, their care is society’s responsibility.
The RHS believes that community-wide initiatives are needed to address the issue of community cats. Such initiatives may include programs such as affordable and accessible spay/neuter; Trap Neuter Release (TNR) programs; public education on responsible cat ownership; information about responsible sources for obtaining cats; and promotion of permanent identification of cats to increase the number of strays returned to their owners.
Given the origin of community cat colonies, the RHS strongly believes that the management of these animals is a responsibility to be assumed not only by the RHS but also by the municipality and the community. It is imperative, however, that cooperation and collaboration of key stakeholders is sought, in order to manage the community cat situation effectively in both the short and long-term. Coordinated action by the RHS, the City of Regina and Cat Rescue Groups will lead to a solution for the City of Regina.
The RHS believes that, given the poor quality of life community cats typically lead, as well as broader concerns such as the environmental impact and public health, the goal of community cat management programs should be to gradually eliminate free roaming cat colonies by a process of “aging out” their members. In this scenario, colonies would be maintained in a healthy state where their quality of life is maximized and they are prevented from reproducing, leading to the eventual attrition of members. Demonstrable signs of a successfully managed colony include colony stabilization and an on-going decline in colony cat numbers, especially kittens.
Unfortunately, animal-loving community members may inadvertently create more animal suffering by feeding unsterilized stray cats, who then breed, and create more homeless kittens. Should a caring individual wish to feed a stray cat, that individual must also be willing to accept life-long commitment to that animal including sterilizing it and providing lifelong shelter and veterinary care. If an individual does not wish to make that lifelong commitment, they should work with the RHS or a cat rescue organization who will do the best for that animal and ensure that no new stray kittens are born.
The RHS supports community cat management programs that adopt a ‘stabilize and maintain’ approach. This approach provides a multi-faceted way of dealing with the issue, including:
The RHS does not support managed colonies in areas where endangered or threatened prey species are present; in areas where it is likely that the cats themselves may be subjected to harm or abuse; or where there is little or no community acceptance, as this too could jeopardize the safety of the animals. In such cases, the RHS recommends capture and adoption, or where adoption is not possible, euthanasia.
The responsibilities of a feral cat colony caretaker include ensuring that all cats in the colony are feral and not simply someone’s pet. They are to be humanely captured, sterilized, vaccinated, tested for infectious disease and provided with a sanitary feeding station with fresh water and food, given access to an insulated and heated shelter, treated for illnesses and injuries, and accepted by neighbors and landlords. A properly managed feral cat colony is healthy and stable. It must be impeccably managed to ensure no new kittens are born.
Local residents, animal welfare organizations and municipal agencies should be informed of the activities of the Trap Neuter and Release program and the location of urban colonies. The location of urban colonies should be away from residential areas. Cats should be appropriately managed and maintained so they do not become a nuisance to neighboring properties. Representatives of the Trap Neuter Release organization should be available and accessible if questions, problems, illnesses, or injuries arise.
The Regina Humane Society emphasizes that animal training, behavior prevention strategies, and behavior modification programs should follow the scientifically based guidelines of learning theory, which includes positive reinforcement, operant conditioning, classical conditioning, desensitization, and counter conditioning. The RHS recommends training practices which focus on reinforcing desirable behaviors and removing the reinforcement for undesirable behaviors. Methods causing fear, pain, distress or anxiety are unacceptable.
Positive reinforcement should be the first line of teaching, training and behavior change program considered, and should be applied consistently. Positive reinforcement is associated with the lowest incidence of aggression, attention seeking, and avoidance/fear in learners. Modern scientifically-based training should emphasize teamwork and a harmonious relationship between animals and humans that fulfills both species’ needs. Most of all, it should be a fun and enjoyable experience for everyone involved.
As such, the Regina Humane Society supports the use of humane training methods that are based on and supported by current scientific knowledge of learning theory and animal behavior, including:
Historically, training methods focused almost exclusively on the use of force and coercion to obtain the desired behavior. Animals trained using these methods often perform out of fear and anxiety. Based on research and evidence, there has been a shift towards reward-based methods of training, such as clicker training and the use of food, toys, praise, and other rewards as motivators. Animal behaviorists conclude that training techniques that employ punishment rather than rewards-based methods do not improve obedience and actually increase problematic behaviors.
Confrontational methods of training such as the use of physical force, rolling, growling, or staring down may increase the likelihood of aggressive responses. The use of shock collars is associated with short-term and long-term negative consequences including fear and anxiety. Training methods utilizing pain, fear, distress or anxiety, are to be condemned.
With respect to canines; there has been resurgence in using “dominance” and wolf behaviors as a factor in dog behavior and dog-human relationships. While wolves and dogs share some similarities in behavior, there are many more significant differences. Dog training and behavior modification strategies that rely primarily on misinterpretations of wolf behavior are therefore irrelevant, ineffective and can lead to serious negative complications.
The theory that dogs will attempt to dominate an owner supports training methods that respond with force and aggression. This only serves to create an adversarial relationship filled with miscommunication and even more misunderstanding. The unfortunate result is often anxiety, stress and fear in both dogs and humans towards each other. The use of techniques such as the “alpha roll” on dogs, which is based on these mistaken beliefs about dogs and wolves, has no place in modern dog training and behavior modification. Dogs often respond to this perceived threat with increased fear and aggression, which may serve to make a behavior problem worse and ruin the dog-owner relationship.
Physical or psychological intimidation hinders effective training and damages the relationship between humans and animals. Companion animals thrive in an environment that provides them with clear structure and communication regarding appropriate behaviors, and one in which their need for mental and physical stimulation is addressed. Techniques that create a confrontational relationship between animals and humans are outdated.
It is important to prevent the abuses and potential repercussions of unnecessary, inappropriate, poorly applied or inhumane uses of punishment. The potential effects of punishment can include aggression or counter-aggression; suppressed behaviors; increased anxiety and fear; physical harm; a negative association with the owner or handlers; and increased unwanted behavior, or new unwanted behaviors.
Positive Reinforcement occurs when a behavior is strengthened by producing some desirable consequence.
Operant Conditioning is a form of learning in which an individual’s behavior is modified by its consequences. Two complementary motivations drive operant conditioning: the maximization of positive outcomes and minimization of aversive ones.
Classical Conditioning is a form of learning in which one stimulus, the conditioned stimulus, comes to signal the occurrence of a second stimulus, the unconditioned stimulus.
Desensitization is the process of pairing positive experiences with an object, person, or situation that causes fear or anxiety.
Counter Conditioning is the conditioning of an unwanted behavior or response to a stimulus into a wanted behavior or response by the association of positive actions with the stimulus.
The Regina Humane Society opposes the long-term and/or indiscriminate tethering and indoor/outdoor confinement practices of companion animals without due regard for their physical and/or psychological well-being. Confinement is defined as any means used to restrict and/or seclude a companion animal. If companion animals are to be temporarily confined in some manner, the methods and manner must be humane and must not cause the animals any physical or mental distress or harm.
While some circumstances may require the temporary confinement of animals, there are safe and humane methods of doing so by incorporating appropriate supervision and measures taken to ensure the animal is not deprived of companionship, care, exercise and attention. Tethering and confinement must never become a way of life. The RHS supports animals being raised and kept in an environment that promotes and maintains their emotional and psychological needs as well as their physical well-being.
Five Freedoms: “The Five Freedoms” is a core concept in animal welfare that originated in a UK government report in 1965 and was then refined by the Farm Animal Welfare Council. The Five Freedoms are considered applicable to all animals. It states that an animal’s primary welfare needs can be met by safeguarding the following five freedoms:
Distress: The Saskatchewan Animal Protection Act states that an animal is in distress if it is:
(a) Deprived of adequate food, water, care or shelter;
(b) Injured, sick, in pain or suffering; or
(c) Abused or neglected
The Regina Humane Society (RHS) is opposed to the declawing (onychectomy) of cats for routine purposes. Surgical amputation of the last digit of the paw holding the nail is extremely painful. Because of the discomfort associated with this surgery and the potential for future negative behavioral or physical effects, the RHS does not support declawing in lieu of alternative solutions to prevent unwanted scratching behavior. The RHS believes that declawing cats should only be performed when medically necessary or as a last resort when all alternatives have been exhausted.
The RHS strongly endorses the necessity for education regarding this procedure and the potential for negative consequences, as well as tools and techniques available to prevent and minimize behavioral problems so the procedure may be avoided.
Declawing is an elective and ethically controversial procedure, which is not medically necessary for cats in most instances. Declawing involves the amputation of the third phalanx of each digit. This is a painful procedure and maintains the potential for short and long term pain and lameness following the procedure.
Declawing is not merely the removal of the claws, as the term “declawing” implies. In humans, fingernails grow from the skin, but in animals that hunt prey, the claws grow from the bone; therefore, the last bone is amputated so the claw cannot re-grow. The last bone of each of the ten front toes of a cat’s paw is amputated. Also, the tendons, nerves, and ligaments that enable normal function and movement of the paw are severed. An analogous procedure applied to humans would be cutting off each finger at the last joint.
Medical drawbacks to declawing include pain in the paw, infection, tissue necrosis (tissue death), permanent or temporary lameness, and back pain. Removing claws changes the way a cat’s foot meets the ground and can cause pain similar to wearing an uncomfortable pair of shoes. There can also be a regrowth of improperly removed claws, nerve damage, and bone spurs.
Psychological and behavioral implications to this procedure can be long-lasting. Some cats are so traumatized by declawing that their personalities change. Cats that were once lively and friendly may become withdrawn and introverted after declawing. Others, because they are deprived of their primary means of defense, become nervous, fearful, and/or aggressive and will resort to their only means of defense, their teeth. The constant state of stress caused by the feelings of defenselessness may make some cats more prone to disease. Stress often leads to physical and psychological disorders including the suppression of the immune system, cystitis and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).
Sometimes when declawed cats use the litter box after surgery, their feet are so tender that they associate the new pain with the litter box. They may permanently make this association which can result in a life-long aversion to the litter box. Other cats, because they cannot mark with their claws will mark with urine. This may result in inappropriate elimination problems that can further result in the relinquishment of the cat to a shelter and subsequent euthanasia. Many declawed cats become so traumatized by such a painful mutilation that they spend their days perched on doors or refrigerators, out of reach of real and imaginary predators who they no longer have any defenses against.
It’s important to understand that scratching is a normal feline behavior. It is a means for cats to mark their territory both visually and with scent. Scratching also assists with nail conditioning, whole body stretching and maintenance of necessary claw motion used in hunting, climbing and defense. A cat’s primary means of defense is their claws. Non-declawed cats will use their front paw claws to stave off a threat by swiping. Without these claws, declawed cats have to resort to biting to protect themselves.
There is a wide variety of approaches available to help minimize unwanted scratching, including scratching posts, artificial nail caps, regular nail trimming, calming pheromones and appropriate environmental enrichment. Providing acceptable (to the cat) scratching surfaces and areas may require some trial and error. Various methods can be employed to make unacceptable scratching surfaces more undesirable to the cat. Minimizing rough play and cat proofing certain areas may also help. If the behavior is anxiety driven; it is important to determine the root cause. Most cats are sensitive to changes in the home or routine. In all of these cases, education is required to assist people in becoming familiar with techniques to positively reinforce desirable behaviors and minimize unwanted scratching behaviors.
Declawing for routine purposes is strongly discouraged by both the American Veterinary Association (AVMA) and the Canadian Veterinary Association (CVMA). This procedure is either banned or considered extremely inhumane and only performed under extreme circumstances in almost 30 countries worldwide, and many US cities.
The Regina Humane Society (RHS) accepts the participation of domesticated animals in appearances for public entertainment, recreation or competition only when the following criteria are met:
In all events where domestic animals are kept or used, humane and ethical treatment is essential and animals must be depicted and utilized with respect.
Circumstances where domestic animals are commonly used for entertainment, recreation and competition include, but are not limited to; animal shows, fairs and exhibitions, animals used in movies, film and television, circuses and travelling shows, petting zoos, rodeos, equestrian, racing, sledding, agility trials, endurance etc.
For any activities in which domestic animals are used, steps must be taken to ensure the animals are treated humanely; with dignity, respect and with the well-being of the animal at the forefront of consideration. Animals must be raised and kept in an environment that promotes and maintains their emotional and psychological needs in addition to their physical needs.
The Society encourages all organizations involved in such events to develop and abide by guidelines or standards that ensure humane treatment and respect for the animals involved, as well as to provide ongoing veterinary care and oversight and to allow external third party review and/or assurance of animal welfare standards.
The RHS believes it is possible to participate with domestic animals in certain events that, when conducted in a humane manner, are pleasurable for both people and animals and that such interaction may enhance the human/animal bond.
The RHS does not support:
Domesticated Animal: an animal, as the horse or cat, that has been tamed and kept by humans as a work animal, food source, or pet, especially a member of those species that have, through selective breeding, become notably different from their wild ancestors (Dictionary.com).
Five Freedoms: a core concept in animal welfare that originated in a UK government report in 1965 and was then refined by the Farm Animal Welfare Council. The Five Freedoms are considered applicable to all animals. It states that an animal’s primary welfare needs can be met by safeguarding the following five freedoms:
Distress: As defined by Saskatchewan animal welfare laws.
The Regina Humane Society makes every effort to prevent medically and behaviourally sound animals in our care from being euthanized.
In addition, to reduce the causes for euthanasia in our community, the Regina Humane Society provides behaviour advice and support, provides subsidized sterilization for financially disadvantaged pet owners, educates the public on the benefits of spay and neuter and responsible pet ownership, and promotes the need for lifelong veterinary care.
The Regina Humane Society provides alternatives to euthanasia wherever possible, but will perform euthanasia to end the unnecessary suffering of companion animals when no other viable options exist, or when the number of animals being cared for exceeds the Society’s sheltering and other capabilities and all other care resources have been exhausted.
The Regina Humane Society does not have time limitations placed on an animal’s stay in the shelter, but does have space limitations on the number of animals it can shelter at any one time. So long as they are physically and mentally healthy and there is space available at the shelter, animals in the RHS adoptions area remain available for adoption.
The Regina Humane Society is an open admission shelter and accepts all companion animals, including those that are ill, injured, feral, and behaviourally unsound.
Each animal is considered for adoption on an individual basis. The role of the Regina Humane Society is to act in the best interest of the animal’s well-being, while considering the availability of resources and the safety of people and other animals in the community.
Animals are offered every possible and reasonable option for re-homing/adoption. These options include, but are not limited to, foster care, placement partners, surgical procedures that improve the health and adoptability of treated animals, socializing, behaviour intervention, and enrichment programs.
The Regina Humane Society (RHS) is committed to finding good homes for dogs and cats. Successful adoptions are not dependent on payment of a fee. Fee-waived or reduced-fee adoption promotions have the potential to increase adoptions without compromising the quality of the animal’s life. All fee-waived or reduced-fee adoptions at RHS undergo the same adoption process as full fee adoptions.
Free pets are available from many sources in the community. By adopting from the RHS through adoption fee-waived promotions, pets entering the community are spayed/neutered, vaccinated, licensed and microchipped. It is a myth that fee-waived or reduced-fee adoptions will mean that the adopter may not provide a qualified home or love their pet. Just as ability to pay for an animal does not correlate to ability to pay for ongoing care costs, desire to access a free animal does not correlate to inability to pay for ongoing care costs.
Research confirms that fee-waived adopted pets are just as loved and valued as ones with a price tag. According to numerous studies:
The Regina Humane Society supports and encourages multiple forms of identification for dogs and cats including:
Pet owners must update their contact information with their licensing municipality, microchip or tattoo registry to ensure expedient return of lost pets. Although an animal may have identification, responsibility still remains on the owner to attend their local animal agencies to actively look for their pet if they are lost.
Should a pet become lost, those wearing identification are more likely to be returned to their owners. Because tags can be lost, tattoos can fade and microchips can migrate, multiple forms of identification provide back-up for the others.
Under the City of Regina Animal Bylaw, pets found as a stray without identification are held for 3 days, pets with identification are held for 10 days. Following these holding periods, the pet can legally become someone else’s property.
The Regina Humane Society (RHS) recognizes the legitimacy of the human/companion animal bond. It is the Society’s belief that the keeping of appropriate, carefully maintained pets benefits both humans and animals.
RHS believes that in an urban setting like the City of Regina, companion animals should be domesticated or domestic-bred animals whose physical, emotional, behavioral and social needs can be readily met as companions in the home, or in close daily relationship with humans.
The Regina Humane Society believes that responsible pet ownership encompasses the following:
The Regina Humane Society (RHS) opposes the non-therapeutic alteration of companion animals by surgical or other invasive methods for cosmetic, competitive or behavioural purposes. Non-medical and cosmetic procedures include: devocalization (de-barking) of dogs, tail docking and/or ear cropping, cosmetic dentistry, tattooing (other than for identification purposes), body piercing and onychectomy (see RHS Position Statement on Declawing of Cats). The RHS does recognise that some procedures may be undertaken by a licensed veterinarian for legitimate therapeutic reasons to alleviate suffering, for reasons of welfare or as a last resort when all alternatives have been exhausted.
Many of these procedures are limited and/or banned in numerous countries worldwide. Currently in Canada, veterinarians in six provinces (NL, PE, NS, NB, MB, SK) are prohibited from performing various cosmetic surgeries (2). There is no scientific evidence that cosmetic surgeries provide any welfare or medical benefit to animals. There is evidence to suggest that some procedures cause acute and chronic pain (2). Serious health and/or animal welfare concerns can result from these procedures, including:
The Regina Humane Society supports ovariohysterectomy or ovariectomy (spay) and castration (neuter) of pediatric dogs and cats from 8 weeks of age in the care of an animal shelter to control the overpopulation problem in these species if the animal meets appropriate qualifications (e.g. meets weight requirement, healthy).
Individual veterinarians have the right/responsibility to decide on what age they will perform the procedure. Just as for other veterinary medical and surgical procedures, veterinarians should use their best medical judgment in deciding at what age spay/neuter should be performed on individual animals.
Each year thousands of homeless or unwanted dogs and cats are euthanized in animal shelters and humane societies in North America. Spaying and neutering are the cornerstone of any program to reduce the cat and dog overpopulation thereby reducing the numbers of animals relinquished and euthanized each year. One important component of the spay/neuter efforts of animal welfare organizations to reduce overpopulation and euthanasia is pediatric (prepuburtal, early age) spay and neuter.
The Regina Humane Society (RHS) provides a safe haven for stray and homeless companion animals and is committed to treating all animals in its care with respect and dignity. As such, the RHS does not sell or transfer companion animals in its care, whether dead or alive, for invasive research purposes or for harvesting organs, tissues or blood. The RHS does support upper level disease surveillance of its animal population where the data collection method is minimally invasive. e.g. urine, fecal, hair or blood collection. Other medical procedures which would benefit the animal’s health and well-being are also supported.
The RHS supports the education of students of veterinary medicine through student rotations in Shelter Medicine, practicum or other supervised placements in the shelter and lectures, tours and other educational events.
The Regina Humane Society (RHS) is opposed to any selective breeding practices that are likely to compromise the welfare of companion animals. In particular, RHS opposes selection for physical features or behaviours that directly or indirectly result in suffering. Such practices have the potential to affect multiple generations and thus large numbers of animals, and may impinge – with varying severity and duration – on their ability to experience the Five Freedoms. Moreover, animals with known detrimental genetic predispositions should not be bred.
RHS recognizes the value of the relationship between people and their companion animals, and believes these animals should have the best possible chance of experiencing good welfare throughout their lives. Accordingly, RHS believes that breeders of companion animals should prioritize health, temperament and quality of life, and avoid those practices that lead to poor physical and psychological welfare.
As a result of selective breeding, many companion animals experience unacceptably high levels of disability and disease. Examples include (but are not limited to):
RHS opposes breed standards that require or encourage the destruction of healthy animals simply because of their appearance instead of sterilizing and placing them with responsible owners.
RHS also opposes breed standards that require cosmetic surgeries such as ear cropping and tail docking.
RHS encourages national breed clubs and the Canadian Kennel Club (CKC) and Canadian Cat Association (CCA) to review and revise such standards to fully protect the welfare of animals.
Since there are homeless pets awaiting adoption, the Regina Humane Society strongly advocates that persons wishing to acquire a pet obtain one from a shelter or other source of homeless animals, such as breed rescues, rescue groups, or responsible owners looking to re-home animals in their care.
People who decide to acquire a specific breed of animal should locate a breed rescue group or a responsible breeder. (See Acquiring Companion Animals from a Responsible Source).
The Regina Humane Society does not support purchasing or otherwise acquiring animals from irresponsible breeders. (See Acquiring Companion Animals from a Responsible Source).
Spaying of females (ovariectomy or ovariohysterectomy) and neutering of males (castration) is necessary and desirable for both the effective control of unwanted animal populations.
As such, the Regina Humane Society supports:
NOTE: Pet owners should consult with their veterinarian about the right spay/neuter options for their pet.
The Regina Humane Society believes species suitable to be companion animals include dogs, cats, rabbits, small birds, ferrets and select other small mammals, small reptiles and fish. Where they may be kept legally and responsibly, domestic-bred farm animals can also be maintained as companions.
The Regina Humane Society (RHS) is opposed to the participation of wild or exotic animals in appearances for public entertainment, recreation or competition whether taken from the wild or captive bred, and is opposed to taking animals from the wild for this purpose.
The RHS is opposed to the exhibition and display of large marine mammals in commercial venues or theme parks, and is opposed to taking animals from the wild for this purpose.
The RHS strongly opposes the further capture and captive breeding of wild or exotic animals for entertainment and is opposed to the permanent confinement of wild and exotic animals unless the Five Freedoms can be met in the captive environment. While individuals and organizations should ultimately phase out collections of these animals, in the interim, they must strive to meet the Five Freedoms at all life stages, both on and off exhibit, by employing management practices and species-specific enclosures that meet the physiological, emotional and behavioral needs of the animals.
Circumstances where non-domestic animals are currently used for entertainment, recreation and competition include, but are not limited to; zoos and aquariums, animal shows, fairs and exhibitions, animals used in film, movies and television, circuses and travelling shows, etc.
The RHS does not believe that the capture and/or confinement of wild or exotic animals can sufficiently address all aspects of the animal’s Five Freedoms. It is not possible to meet the complex physical, behavioral and social needs of wild, exotic or marine mammals in captivity. Natural habitat is difficult to simulate, both in size and comparison. Wild or exotic animals maintained in a travelling environment for entertainment purposes (i.e. circuses, travelling menageries) will also be deprived of the Five Freedoms.
Capture and transport of wild animals can cause stress, injury or death. Capture also disrupts the natural family/social units formed in the wild. Captive facilities, with logistical constraints, commercial considerations and space limitations, cannot provide adequate conditions that allow these natural social structures to form. Animals that survive capture and transport are often unable to acclimate to captivity.
Wild or exotic animals in many venues are not bred to propagate the species for return to their native habitat, but rather to provide a steady supply of animals for performances. The development of stereotypies (e.g. pacing) is commonly seen in captive environments. This can occur due to close confinement, lack of exercise and other physical requirements, inability to express natural behaviors, and/or lack of appropriate socialization and mental stimulation. Existing evidence suggests, for instance, that the welfare of captive animals with large home ranges (e.g., bears, felids, elephants) and high cognitive abilities (e.g., great apes, cetaceans) is severely compromised (BCSPCA).
The RHS believes there is no educational value in seeing wild or exotic animals perform unnatural or dangerous behaviors and from a human safety perspective, wild animals are never entirely predictable or completely under control. Large wild animals also cannot be trained without using inhumane training methods.
The RHS supports appropriate legislation to ensure greater protection for wild, exotic and marine mammals in their natural habitat. The RHS supports and encourages public education providing these efforts do not involve removing animals from or disturbing their natural environment or family groups.
Zoos, aquariums, sanctuaries, rehabilitation centers or animal reserves may be considered humane if they directly support rehabilitation efforts, scientific research, technological developments and educational efforts, and contribute to field conservation efforts that ultimately preserve wild animals in their native habitats. These organizations may rehabilitate and release, provide sanctuary for those who would not survive release, breed and reintroduce endangered animals into native environments under government sanctioned conservation or environmental protection oversight and/or conduct humane scientific animal research. Entities such as these typically provide community education outreach programs to help support their conservation and animal welfare efforts.
These facilities (if doing so) must participate in tightly controlled breeding programs and take responsibility for all animals and offspring, even when no longer under direct care. Excess young should not be permitted except to maintain appropriate gender balances and social groupings. No “surplus” animals may be sent to “canned hunts” auctions, medical research facilities, or private individuals. These facilities must be strictly managed with no hands-on human interactions, safe and hygienic facilities, natural and large enclosures with appropriate opportunities to exhibit natural behaviors as well as transparency to the public regarding practices and statistics.
Domesticated Animal: an animal, as the horse or cat, that has been tamed and kept by humans as a work animal, food source, or pet, especially a member of those species that have, through selective breeding, become notably different from their wild ancestors (Dictionary.com).
Wild Animal: an animal, such as the tiger or bear, which has not been domesticated. Wild animals may be exotic or indigenous, wild-born or captive-bred.
Exotic Animal: Species that are non-domesticated, non-indigenous wild animals, whether wild born or captive bred.
Distress: As defined by Saskatchewan animal welfare laws.
Five Freedoms: a core concept in animal welfare that originated in a UK government report in 1965 and was then refined by the Farm Animal Welfare Council. The Five Freedoms are considered applicable to all animals. It states that an animal’s primary welfare needs can be met by safeguarding the following five freedoms:
The Regina Humane Society (RHS) opposes the breeding and keeping of exotic or wild animals, including their hybrids, as companion animals, and to the importation and commercial trade in exotic or wild animals destined for the pet market.
The Regina Humane Society opposes the capture, transport, ownership, or breeding of wild/exotic animals except where these practices are conducted by authorized and licensed parties for the well-being of these animals or species; for example for the re-population of the species, or re-introduction of the species into its natural habitat.
There is no doubt that many exotic pet owners truly care for their animals. However, they often find themselves unable to provide their pets with an appropriate living environment that ensures both the health and well-being of the animal and the safety of the community.
The Regina Humane Society is prepared to assist individuals in possession of wild or exotic animals in identifying the most appropriate sanctuary or rescue organization to provide future care for these animals.
The RHS maintains that wild/exotic animals are inappropriate companion animals for a variety of reasons.
In Saskatchewan, people who obtain wildlife should be aware of The Saskatchewan Captive Wildlife Regulations that make it illegal for anyone other than a licensed rehabilitation organization to hold wildlife species in captivity.
Regina’s Wascana Centre includes this in its bylaws:
Except as may be authorized by the authority or the director, either in writing or by an erected sign, no persons shall, save within a building: within the centre injure, move, disturb or destroy any nesting bird, bird’s nest or eggs or set any trap or snare or injure, kill, or attempt to kill or have possession of any wild animal or bird. Any individual in possession of wildlife within our city must also abide by any City of Regina animal bylaws.
Injured or orphaned wild animals should be cared for by licensed wildlife rehabilitators whose objective is to return the animals to the wild. Wild animals who become dependent on humans must be provided environments and care appropriate to their needs.
The Regina Humane Society supports preventative and proactive methods of population control that reduce or eliminate the need for lethal intervention.
Non-lethal preventative alternatives include exclusion techniques and non-harmful physical or chemical deterrents to address perceived pests through integrated pest management techniques, which minimize the impact on the environment and other animal species.
Only when human health or herd/flock health are at serious risk, and where non-lethal methods have been exhausted, should methods of lethal control that minimize suffering and cause a quick death be considered. Such lethal methods should only be used as an exception and implemented during emergencies to alleviate a serious problem that has not been proactively addressed.