Data and facts on how dog welfare advocates can help design a more equitable environment for dogs.
Jump to:
Public Transport | Road Safety | Hygiene
Highlights
Public Transport
Jump to: Dogs and Car Rides in Sydney, Australia | Support for Changing Pets on Public Transport Policy in Sydney
Dogs and Car Rides in Sydney, Australia
External link:
Jennifer L. Kent, Corinne Mulley, Riding with dogs in cars: What can it teach us about transport practices and policy?, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Volume 106, 2017, Pages 278-287, ISSN 0965-8564, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2017.09.014
Dog-Related Trips by Car
Activities undertaken by dog owners and dog-related trips by car
| n = 1257 | % of respondents who do the activity | Dog related trips per week (average) | Dog related trips per week (total) | % car based | Dog related trips by car per week |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Walk | 97% | 2.4 | 2308 | 26% | 609 |
| Dog park | 67% | 3.0 | 2530 | 51% | 1300 |
| Other recreational area | 78% | 2.4 | 2308 | 45% | 1046 |
| Dog training | 19% | 1.5 | 347 | 95% | 329 |
| Café, bar, shops | 53% | 1.4 | 945 | 51% | 481 |
| Visiting friends/family | 67% | 1 | 846 | 88% | 744 |
| Other activities | 28% | 1 | 351 | 92% | 323 |
| Aggregate | 9635 | 4832 |
Number of trips to the vet and the number by private car
| Average number of trips to the vet annually | Total trips to the vet annually | % car based | Total trips to the vet annually by car |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3.1 | 3908 | 86% | 3361 |
Frequency of vet visits and car access
| Household | More than twice a year | Once or twice a year |
|---|---|---|
| No car | 20 | 35 |
| 36.4% | 63.6% | |
| Car | 758 | 1068 |
| 41.5% | 58.5% |
Car ownership and timeliness of vet visits
| Household | Not delayed vet visit | Delayed vet visit |
|---|---|---|
| No cars | 19 | 27 |
| 41.3% | 58.7% | |
| 1 or more cars | 1058 | 84.5 |
| 87.8% | 11.3% |
Pets on Public Transport Policy
- Strong Support for Pets on Public Transport: 95% of participants supported allowing pets on public transport.
- Behavioral Change Anticipated: Almost 75% of participants indicated that allowing dogs on public transport would alter their behavior.
| If you could take your dog on public transport would you… | |
|---|---|
| Walk your dog more often? | 23.7% |
| Attend other activities with your dog more often? | 55.3% |
| Consider getting by with one fewer cars than you have (or without a car?) | 20.2% |
| Not change your behaviour at all? | 35.1% |
Selected characteristics of policies for pets on public transport, and car and dog ownership for 30 cities
| Country | City | Are dogs allowed? | Ticket required? | Time restrictions? | Cars per 1000 people (country) | Dogs per household (%) (country) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Denmark | Copenhagen | Yes | Yes | No | 480 | 23 |
| United Kingdom | London | Yes | No | No | 519 | 33 |
| Sweden | Stockholm | Yes | Yes | No | 520 | 17 |
| The Netherlands | Amsterdam | Yes | Yes | No | 528 | 33 |
| Belgium | Brussels | Yes | Yes | Yes | 559 | 29 |
| Switzerland | Zurich | Yes | Yes | Yes | 566 | 15 |
| Germany | Berlin | Yes | Yes | No | 572 | 17 |
| Germany | Munich | Yes | Yes | No | ||
| France | Paris | Yes | Yes | No | 578 | 30 |
| Austria | Vienna | Yes | Yes | No | 578 | 17 |
| Spain | Madrid | Yes | No | Yes | 593 | 29 |
| Spain | Barcelona | Yes | No | Yes | ||
| Canada | Vancouver | No | N/A | N/A | 662 | 51 |
| Canada | Toronto | Yes | No | Yes | ||
| Canada | Montreal | Yes | No | No | ||
| Italy | Milan | Yes | Yes | Yes | 679 | 29 |
| Italy | Rome | Yes | Yes | No | ||
| Australia | Sydney | No | N/A | N/A | 736 | 42 |
| Australia | Melbourne | No | N/A | N/A | ||
| USA | New York | No | N/A | N/A | 797 | 51 |
| USA | Chicago | No | N/A | N/A | ||
| USA | Los Angeles | No | N/A | N/A | ||
| USA | Dallas | No | N/A | N/A | ||
| USA | Phoenix | No | N/A | N/A | ||
| USA | Washington DC | No | N/A | N/A | ||
| USA | Portland | No | N/A | N/A | ||
| USA | Houston | No | N/A | N/A | ||
| USA | San Francisco | Yes | Yes | Yes | ||
| USA | Boston | Yes | No | No | ||
| USA | Seattle | Yes | No | No |
Data collected between 10th and 17th November 2016 from the website of each city’s public transport authority, OECD (2017), and Animal Medicines Australia (2016).
Research Summary | Back to Top
Support for Changing Transport Policies in Sydney, Australia
External link:
Jennifer L. Kent, Corinne Mulley, Nick Stevens, Challenging policies that prohibit public transport use: Travelling with pets as a case study, Transport Policy, Volume 99, 2020, Pages 86-94, ISSN 0967-070X, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.08.024
Stated support for a Pets on Public Transport (PetsPT) policy change
| Would you support a change to PetsPT policy in NSW? | % |
|---|---|
| Yes | 57.0 |
| No | 23.0 |
| I don’t feel strongly either way | 20.0 |
| Total responses | 1069 |
Stated intention to change behaviour on implementation of a PetsPT policy change
| If dogs were allowed on public transport, would you … | Number | % |
|---|---|---|
| Use public transport less | 224 | 21.2 |
| Use public transport more | 124 | 11.7 |
| Not change your public transport use at all | 710 | 67.1 |
| Total responses | 1058 | 100 |
Key concerns over PetsPT policy change
| What would be your main concerns? | Respondents citing this concern |
|---|---|
| The fact that dogs might leave a mess, or smell | 16.4% |
| The risk of a dog attack to myself or others | 14.2% |
| Public transport is already overcrowded | 14.1% |
| I am concerned about dog allergies for myself or others | 4.8% |
| Public transport is for serious trips, not for fun trips | 1.3% |
| Other: | 0.9% |
| Total responses | 1091 |
Research Summary | Back to Top
Road Safety
Jump to: Survey in New Zealand
Dog-Associated Road Safety Concern in New Zealand
External link:
Awawdeh L, Forrest RH. Dog-Associated Road Safety Concerns: A Pre-COVID Survey of New Zealand Pet Owners. Pets. 2024; 1(3):277-283. https://doi.org/10.3390/pets1030020
Dog Transport Behaviors
- 51% of respondents (n = 767) restrained or crated their dogs in or on their vehicle.
- Among those who didn’t restrain their dogs:
- 44% (n = 663) allowed their dogs to roam freely in the backseat only.
- 19% (n = 280) placed their dogs in the boot/hatchback area.
- 12% (n = 179) had their dogs on a passenger’s knee.
- 2% (n = 29) allowed their dogs on the driver’s knee.
- 7% (n = 105) permitted their dogs to roam freely throughout the entire vehicle.
- A small minority, 2% (n = 22), allowed their dogs to travel unrestrained on the deck of a ute or truck.
- Safe dog transportation was more likely among respondents with higher education levels and those who owned more dogs.
Research Summary | Back to Top
Hygiene
Jump to: Fecal Contamination of Urban Parks
Fecal Contamination of Urban Parks
External link:
Mori, K., Rock, M., McCormack, G. et al. Fecal contamination of urban parks by domestic dogs and tragedy of the commons. Sci Rep 13, 3462 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-30225-7
Contamination By Area
| Off-leash | Mixed | On-leash | No dogs | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of feces (n/ha/week) | 19.04 (± 2.77) | 2.38 (± 1.02) | 0.48 (± 0.13) | 0 |
| Fecal mass (g/ha/week) | 642.05 (± 109.01) | 123.33 (± 7.47) | 16.35 (± 4.78) | 0 |
- The City of Calgary has approximately 13,133 hectares (ha) of park areas in total.
- 1,221 ha of these are designated off-leash areas.
- The remaining 11,912 ha include “no-dog” parks and on-leash areas.
- During the snow-free period, an estimated 757.54 kg of fecal matter contaminates off-leash areas weekly (based on an average of 642.10 g per ha per week).
- For the remaining park areas (on-leash and “no-dog” parks), an estimated 665.79 kg of fecal matter is present weekly (assuming an average of 16.30 g per ha per week for on-leash areas).
- This results in an estimated total of 1,423.33 kg of fecal matter across all Calgary park areas every week during the snow-free period.