Pet Populations – and the Pandemic

At first glance, it was a matter somewhat surprising that the Petfood Manufacturers Association (PFMA) reportedly found it so easy to compile data for pet populations in the UK for 2021, owing to the disruption of daily life caused by measures to control the pandemic. In retrospect, however, the PFMA’s researchers will have had some aspects of hive research made easier by the measures taken to control the pandemic. Given the advice to, where ever possible, work from home, the researcher’s knock at the door will produce a welcome response. Lockdown will have been a trial for many people confined by government fiat to their dwelling places and the researcher’s visit may even have been positively welcomed.

The effects of the pandemic on pet populations in the UK appear to have been dramatic, though there may be side effects which have yet to make themselves apparent. More on that later. The Pet Food Manufacturers’ Association recent release of its annual pet population data for 2021, confirmed that 3.2 million households in the UK have acquired a pet since the start of the pandemic. This has largely been driven by the so-called ‘Gen Z’ – born between 1997 and 2012, and Millennials, born between 1981 and 1996, two thirds of new owners are aged 16 and 34 and 56 per cent of new pet owners have children at home. Although 74 per cent of respondents claim their pet has helped their mental health through the pandemic, ‘the study raises pet welfare concerns’.

According to the PFMA, ‘There are now 34 million pets in the UK, including 12 million cats and 12 million dogs, 3.2 million small mammals such as guinea pigs and hamsters, 3 million birds and 1.5 million reptiles. In total, this equates to 17 million households that are responsible for their pet’s welfare. Notably, over a third – 38 per cent – of new owners claim that having a new pet was like having a new baby and almost a fifth of families with children admitted that training ‘was more challenging than expected’. Sadly, 5 per cent have already had to give up a pet and this figure increased to 11 per cent among families.

Nicole Paley, PFMA’s deputy Chief Executive commented that PFMA’s research confirmed the belief that ‘many more people are benefitting from pet ownership’ and that PFMA ‘are reassured by the mental health findings’. However, it was clear that PFMA needed ‘to consider the welfare of these new pets. As the survey highlighted, introducing a pet to a household in Covid times could have repercussions or create some unexpected difficulties.

Paley also noted that PFMA had looked in more detail at the future concerns of new pet owners. Perhaps worryingly, although just 15 per cent had ‘a pet-friendly office environment, only 10 per cent were concerned about returning to work and spending less time with their pet. This figure increased among younger generations, with 15 per cent of 16-34 year olds ‘concerned about spending less time with their pet in the future’. Paley called for the PFMA to ‘work together with the pet care sector to ensure the 3.2 million households with new pets get the support they need’. Paley said that the support required was represented in terms of access to educational material, training and adequate flexible working from home ‘or pets in the office policies’.

RSPCA pet welfare expert Dr Samantha Gaines said that as these figures demonstrate, ‘a huge number of people have added a new pet to their family during lockdown’ while other pet owners had made the most of spending more time at home during the pandemic ‘to enjoy the company of their pets. Dr Gaines said that many of our pets ‘were now used to having us around all the time while others have never known any different so we have real concerns that life post-lockdown, both in terms of a new routine and spending time alone, could be really difficult for them to adjust’ which, as Dr Gaines observed, ‘is why it’s so important that owners start to prepare them now’. In the absence of this preparation, pets could be facing their own crisis.’

There is, as might be expected, a great deal in the literature regarding pets in the context of the pandemic. A disturbing article in the Guardian newspaper published on 1 December 2021 reported that ‘The cats and dogs that helped us through the pandemic are increasingly being dumped in the street or handed over to charities – and pet shelters are dealing with the fallout.

Pet Obesity

There is little doubt that ongoing economic development has brought significant advantages to much of the UK’s population, even if it sometimes associated with concerning physical aspects such as an overindulgence in food or alcohol. However, with the increased financial resources being enjoyed by many families, part of those additional resources may likely be spent on acquiring a pet.
As discussed above, with the intervention of the pandemic, the pet population of the UK has undergone an additional and, reportedly, substantial upwards further revision in pet numbers. In this context, veterinarians ‘have seen a worrying rise in obese pets’. The problem is not of recent standing. Another newspaper article highlighted the fact that pet obesity was ‘a growing problem’ in the UK – and the publication went on to highlight the fact that the article was ‘more than seven years old’. The article, quoting comments by the Peoples Dispensary for Sick Animals (PDSA) expressed concerns over the fact that ‘Increasing numbers of obese cats, dogs and rabbits are developing similar health problems to overweight humans’, adding that ‘lockdown had made things worse’.

The PDSA have engaged in a running commentary on the increasing problem of obesity in the nation’s pets. In a post on the PDSA’s website in 2019, it was reported that vets estimated that nearly half of dogs in the UK are overweight, pointing out that being obese puts dogs ‘at risk of health problems, and is likely to reduce how long they live’. PDSA stressed that it was ‘important to know what your dog’s ideal shape is and recognise when it changes’, stressing the fact that it was possible to control dogs’ weight with diet and exercise and urging dog owners to ‘Contact your vet if you are struggling to keep your dog at an ideal weight, they will always be happy to help’.

Dog Breeds and Behaviour

An interesting article in a recent edition of the Guardian newspaper cast doubt on the widespread view that the major determinant of dogs’ behavior is their breed.

This is an important element in anyone’s decision to acquire a dog. For example, Labradors are regarded as sociable and thus a good choice for a family with young children. Alternatively, Pit Bull terriers are popularly regarded as aggressive. This reflects development that have occurred since modern dog breeds began to emerge in the Victorian era, when the science of breeding began to be better understood and dogs began to be bred for specific purposes. They were also bred for physical characteristics – size, for example, ranging from the Great Dane to the tiny chihuahua.

From sociable Labradors to supposedly aggressive Pit Bulls, when it comes to canine behaviour there are no end of dog stereotypes. But research suggests such traits may have less to do with breed than previously thought. Recent research at the University of Massachusetts Medical School suggests that research revealed ‘a huge diversity of behaviour within each breed.’ One of the co-authors of the research findings said that anybody acquiring a dog would ‘have a really good chance of getting a dog that doesn’t match what people say that breed is supposed to be. Writing in the journal Science, the US researchers report how they analyzed survey responses relating to the physical traits and behaviour of 18,385 pet dogs, almost half of which were purebred, with genetic data analyzed for 2,155 of them.

Analysis of the survey results for purebred dogs suggested that about 9 per cent of behavioural variation was explained by breed. The researchers said that, for the most part, they had not seen strong differences between breeds but there were some aspects of the dogs’ behaviour that were connected to breed more than others. While no behaviour was exclusive to one breed, howling was more common among beagles, while Pit Bulls and retrievers were more ‘human sociable’, translated as comfortable with strangers.

There were also some differences based on dogs’ ‘ancestral functions’. For example, herding breeds were, among other traits, ‘more biddable’. But it remained that there was a high degree of variability between individual dogs, meaning it is difficult to predict a dog’s behaviour based on its breed.

To explore whether genetics explained the associations, the team analysed the behaviour of mutts that had different levels of ancestry from particular breeds. The results reveal some traits have a stronger genetic component than others. Labrador retriever ancestry was associated with mutts who had few qualms about getting wet, yet such ancestry appeared to have no link to human sociability. The researchers said that they would expect that, if Labrador retrievers were genetically more human social, they should see that young dogs, with more Labrador retriever ancestry to be more human social.

While the research team’s other analyses found that human sociability was ‘highly heritable, they noted the young dog results suggest that the genetic variants involved do not appear to be more common in particular breeds. Instead, differences between breeds for this trait may be down to environmental influences or, even, owners’ perceptions. But not all behaviours were found to be heritable, including how easily a dog is provoked by a ‘frightening trigger’ – a finding that suggests that how aggressive a dog is may have little to do with genetics.

The team says that the study ‘has implications for owners’.

Cats Behaviour

The RSPCA has recently published a useful checklist for those keeping cats which provides a guide to any departure from the cat’s normal behaviour pattern.

Cat keepers are urged to be ‘vigilant’ to any changes in t cat’s behaviour. Changes could be a sign of distress, boredom, illness or injury, stress or fear. Changes in the cat’s behaviour could include high levels of grooming, hiding, sleeping hunched or altered feeding/toileting habits; all indicative of stress or fear. In addition, look for unwanted habits such as aggression, spraying indoors, disappearing or avoiding people; all signs that suggest your cat is in pain or frightened. The RSPCA urges cat keepers, if any of these symptoms become ‘an ongoing problem’ to speak to a vet or another qualified person.

The RSPCA says that cats ‘can scare easily’, so cat keepers are urged to make sure they can reach everything they need -. bed, water, litter or outdoors – without passing things or other animals that may frighten them. The RSPCA also warns that if your cat is scared with no place to escape and hide, ‘it may become aggressive’. Provide constant access to safe hiding places where they can escape if they feel afraid. It was observed that cats sleep for many hours of the day but, when they’re awake they need opportunities to exercise. If they don’t go outside, provide suitable indoor activities to keep them active.

Cats naturally use objects to scratch, mark territory, strengthen muscles and sharpen their claws. To allow this natural behaviour, provide sturdy scratching posts which are tall enough for your cat to use fully stretched. This is particularly important for indoor cats.
The RSPCA proclaims that ‘Kindness is key!’ Never shout at or punish your cat, they are very unlikely to understand and can become more nervous or scared.

Whereas the penultimate paragraph refers in particular to cats that live largely indoors and, as in a highly built-up area, will have little opportunity to spend time out of doors, cats that live in a rural environment need a different regime. A cat’s natural instinct is to hunt its prey but there is a real concern domestic cats are impacting the welfare of local wildlife. To help prevent your cat bringing home unwanted surprises, and to protect local wildlife, the RSPCA recommend that cat keeper restrict outdoor access at dusk and dawn when wildlife is most active, at least an hour before sunset and an hour after sunrise. Access should also be restricted after bad weather such as rain, to allow birds to come out and feed. Finally, the RSPCA recommends attaching a bell to a quick-release safety collar.

Trust – What is it and why does it matter?

Trust is intangible and we can’t touch it. However, it plays a highly significant role in shaping our daily lives, with both positive and negative outcomes, as outlined in the following examples: –

• Positive – building personal and business relationships; buying petfood that pet owners believe will actively support their pet’s health.
• Negative – regional conflicts; the effect of Dilated Cardiomyopathy (DCM) on sales of “grain free” petfood.

Like all commercial enterprises, trust matters as it drives the success of the global petfood industry. History records that trust in commercial petfood was damaged by the melamine crisis of 2007 – 2008. This resulted in the largest and most costly recall in petfood industry history and the deaths of 000’s of pets. Anecdotal evidence also indicates that more pet owners became interested in making “homemade” petfood.

Trust or mistrust affects all aspects of business performance both internally and externally: –

• Internal effects – engaged workforce, with greater employee retention and increased productivity.
• External effects – customer brand loyalty; supplier relationships; relationship with regulatory authorities.

Collectively these trust / mistrust effects reach across all stakeholders involved in the petfood supply chain, including willingness of pet owners to purchase a petfood brand.

Trust is also important when it comes to innovation and market implementation of new products and impacts success, this is an important factor when we consider the need to implement sustainable raw materials and new food processing technologies in the petfood industry.

Humanisation of petfood and future evolution

Commercial petfood dates to the 1860’s with Spratt’s dog biscuits, with wet petfood entering the market in the 1920’s and dry kibble petfood appearing in the 1950’s. This indicates that petfood innovation is not new and continues to drive market growth now and in future.

For many years, the concept of humanisation has driven both market growth and innovation in the petfood industry and this trend is expected to continue in future. The term “humanisation” of petfood does not have a formalised, harmonised definition and means different things to different people. For examples, it includes concepts like: –

• Pet owner perception of pets as “members of the family”
• Formulation of ingredients that promote health and wellness
• Expectation of human food industry standards e.g., “human” grade ingredients; human food industry manufacturing, quality, and safety standards
• Adoption of human beliefs e.g., organic ingredients, “free range” poultry, vegan / vegetarian and flexitarian food.

Why trust in petfood matters more than ever.

Trust in food and petfood is essential to ensure it is safe, nutritious, legal and of the quality expected. When any of these fails, trust is damaged and we, our pets and the petfood industry businesses suffer undesirable effects like illness or we lose business. Ensuring safety, nutritional adequacy, legality, and quality requires a petfood system.

In general terms, a (human) food system can be considered as a complex interlinked web containing: stakeholders e.g., consumers, food producers, retailers and regulatory authorities; processes e.g., food manufacturing, distribution, retail; and external influences e.g., climate, diseases, environment, and consumer beliefs that affect the production and consumption of food. This concept also applies to petfood, but why is it important?

Clearly trust in safe, legal, and nutritious petfood of the quality expected is key to both pet owners and petfood manufacturers. However, trust is more likely to become of increasing importance as the industry faces up to challenges in the 21st Century.

Petfood in the 21st century faces new opportunities and challenges.

Based on ongoing humanisation, sustainability is a key trend that is likely to translate into the petfood industry on a growing basis, as pet owners become increasingly aware of issues like climate change and raw material availability. As a concept, sustainability embraces many aspects around a common theme of efficient resource utilisation including land use, greenhouse gas emissions, energy, water, packaging, and ingredients.

In addition to consumers (pet owners) pushing development of sustainability, it is likely that other stakeholders including the petfood manufacturing sector (pet food manufacturers and suppliers), and regulatory authorities will also drive the sustainability agenda. To achieve sustainability goals, it is likely that the petfood industry will implement the use of alternative sustainable ingredients e.g., insect protein, microalgae-based oils, and the possibility of new food processing technologies. In implementing these novel technologies this will align the petfood industry with the human food sector’s sustainability initiatives and further enhance the concept of petfood humanisation.

Whilst the fact that pet owners will be one of the driving forces for sustainability will help ensure engagement with novel technologies (ingredients and food processing), the industry must ensure effective messaging to build trust in these.

Consumer acceptance of alternative food ingredients and novel food processing technologies.

Like all industries, the on-going success of the global petfood industry depends on innovation in other parts of the consumer goods sector, lack of innovation is seen as contributory factors in business failure of companies like Blockbuster and Toys R Us1. We see many examples where innovation in human food systems translate into petfood including the use of ingredients to promote gut health in both humans and pets e.g., probiotics and pre-biotics and technologies like High-Pressure Processing (HPP) used to extend shelf-life and control foodborne pathogens in human foods like guacamole and “raw” petfood.

Often new foods can be seen as “Frankenfood” for example genetically modified food ingredients. Another example of food that faced challenges with consumer acceptance is sushi. Whilst widely accepted in Japan, when first introduced outside the region western consumers were at first reluctant to engage with the concept of eating “raw” fish. However, in the US alone the market value of sushi restaurants was estimated at US$ 22 billion in 20192 indicating how “alternative” foods have been accepted.

Acceptance of sushi has been identified by researchers in the US and Australia as a model in prediction of consumer acceptance of insects3.

A critical success factor in successful implementation of innovative concepts is how we convey and present the benefits and opportunities to consumers who might distrust these, as outlined in the examples above.

The impact of (mis)information sources on trust

Like it or loathe it, we live in the digital era where social media is an important source of (mis)information that we are bombarded with 24 hours a day. This is an important determinant of how we believe in trust.
Depending on how we respond to this information means the difference from positive or negative outcomes and actions. We see this in all walks of daily life from military conflict, how we engage with new products and how we purchase the petfood used to feed our pets daily. An indication of the growing importance of on-line sources of information is indicated in research reported in the USA in April 20214, this showed that use of social media by US adults grew from 5% to 72% in the period 2005 – 2021.

The information we see on-line influences our decision-making process where we have trust or mistrust in an event or a product that affects how we respond, for instance petfood purchasing decisions.

For many years we have known that on-line information sources influence petfood purchasing decisions. For example, a 2021 report5 on “grain free” petfood purchasing decisions in North America and Europe, indicated that over 40% of dog owners used online resources to get their information about pet food with the actual number depending on different demographic information (country, age etc.). This research is also in line with other findings on the importance of online sources, as indicated in a report on the Italian petfood sector6.

These reports also indicate the importance of other information sources including veterinarians, veterinary staff, and pet stores in influencing petfood purchasing decisions.

Whatever information source is used the important factor is that, depending on pet owner perception of the information, it either builds trust in the petfood or damages it.

Due to the interdependencies and complexity of any food system, including petfood, for effective successful change e.g., implementation of sustainable ingredients like insect protein, a “systems approach” is required. This helps us understand the factors and interdependencies that can affect trust in the food that our pets eat. For example, climate change might mean that some “conventional” petfood raw materials are no longer sustainable e.g., fish oil used for health and wellness in petfood or meat from livestock farming. For nutritional adequacy and society demands on sustainability, we might then consider sustainable alternatives like algal oil or insect protein.

Whilst these might be feasible from a technological perspective, successful implementation requires us to adopt a systems approach which considers all stakeholders, processes and external influences outlined above.

One key success factor is consumer (pet owner) engagement. This is fundamental to building trust and enables us to overcome any concerns about the sustainable alternatives and explain the benefits. Consumers are not “homogeneous” in their beliefs and many factors play a key role in how we perceive “new” food / ingredients, for example microalgae, in the food we eat7.

Due to the need to implement change in the human food system e.g., for sustainability, there is a lot of on-going research into trust in food systems, including how we engage and communicate with consumers. This is an area where the petfood industry might benefit in terms engagement with pet owners.

The question is how can we best use social media and other approaches to implement (food) messaging effectively to engage with pet owners and build trust in development and implementation of “next generation” petfood ingredients?

The answer here might also lie in humanization, with the petfood sector adapting and adopting the learnings from consumer engagement in “new” food systems and next generation ingredients. Time will tell!

References
1. Innovate Or Die: How A Lack Of Innovation Can Cause Business Failure viewed on-line on 16th March 2022 at https://www.forbes.com/sites/biancamillercole/2019/01/10/innovate-or-die-how-a-lack-of-innovation-can-cause-business-failure/?sh=4ec902122fcb
2. Market size of the sushi restaurant sector in the United States from 2011 to 2019, with a forecast for 2020 and 2021 https://lb-aps-frontend.statista.com/statistics/1176560/sushi-restaurant-industry-market-size-us/
3. Disgust, sushi consumption, and other predictors of acceptance of insects as food by Americans and Indians; Matthew B. Ruby, Paul Rozin, Disgust, sushi consumption, and other predictors of acceptance of insects as food by Americans and Indians, Food Quality and Preference, Volume 74, 2019, Pages 155-162,
4. Social Media Fact Sheet, April 2021, viewed on-line at Demographics of Social Media Users and Adoption in the United States | Pew Research Center on 3rd March 2022
5. Article Source: Grains on the brain: A survey of dog owner purchasing habits related to grain-free dry dog foods; Banton S, Baynham A, Pezzali JG, von Massow M, Shoveller AK (2021) Grains on the brain: A survey of dog owner purchasing habits related to grain-free dry dog foods. PLOS ONE 16(5): e0250806. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250806
6. Vinassa, M., Vergnano, D., Valle, E. et al. Profiling Italian cat and dog owners’ perceptions of pet food quality traits. BMC Vet Res 16, 131 (2020).
7. Consumer views about the Next Generation proteins for food in Europe, Arvola et al (Nextgen protein Eu project)

Osteoarthritis is one of the most commonly diagnosed joint diseases in ageing dogs and is recognised as the progressive degeneration and remodelling of synovial joints as the cartilage becomes damaged and triggers an inflammatory response which can cause great discomfort. Anderson et al., (2018) estimated 11.4% of dogs over 8 years old were affected by osteoarthritis. Although osteoarthritis has a known genetic influence, the disease can be exacerbated by the dog’s activity levels, diet and their breed, with larger breeds commonly experiencing osteoarthritis at some stage. Glucosamine & chondroitin are ingredients commonly included in complete and complementary pet foods designed for joint health support for senior dogs. Glucosamine regulates the synthesis of collagen in cartilage, whereas chondroitin inhibits the destructive enzyme pathway which breaks down the cartilage and joint fluid (Bhathal et al., 2017). Alongside this, both ingredients contribute towards the creation of glycosaminoglycans and proteoglycans, which are recognised for being building blocks for cartilage formation (Beale, 2004). Also supporting the body’s natural anti-inflammatory response is the organic sulphur compound Methylsulphonylmethane (MSM) (Brien et al., 2008).

Supplementation of pet foods with omega-3 fatty acids for a period of 6 months significantly improved the ability of geriatric dogs to rise from a resting position, and improved comfort whilst walking (Roush, 2010). Omega-3 fatty acids have been shown to support the anti-inflammatory response through increasing eicosanoids and reducing the activities of proteoglycan-degrading enzymes. Omega-3 fatty acids are commonly found in ingredients such as marine algae and fish oils. Furthermore, supplementing omega-3 fatty acids to senior dogs can also help support the immune system and positively modulate the gut microbiome when challenged (Fritsch et al., 2010).

Digestive health and fibre

Over time, senior dogs gut microbiota shows a gradual reduction in beneficial bacteria and an increase of facultative anaerobes which can generate an inflammatory response and increase oxidative stress (Pilla and Suchodolski, 2019). Changes in gastrointestinal function can result in inconsistent stool quality, longer colonic transit time and inefficient absorption of nutrients. The inclusion of fermentable fibre within the diet can significantly reduce the risk of enteric infection and improve nutrient absorption to overall improve quality of gut health and stools (Ephraim et al., 2020). Prebiotics such as fructooligosaccharides (FOS) and mannanoligosaccharides (MOS) promote the growth of the ‘good bacteria’, Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium (Swanson et al., 2002). Diets for senior dogs should also contain sufficient fibre to ensure adequate intestinal motility, typically this is included in pet foods with ingredients such as sugar beet pulp.
Cognitive health
Senior dogs may experience age related cognitive decline as a result of oxidative damage caused by free radicals which can lead to dysfunction of neural cells (Head et al., 2007). Dietary antioxidants like vitamins E and C, and selenium may be important in helping to maintain antioxidative defence in older dogs. Cognitive dysfunction syndrome (CDS) results from irreversible degeneration of the brain beyond normal aging, including changes in brain glucose metabolism and is more severe than age related cognitive decline. Salvin et al., (2010) estimated that 14.2% of dogs 8 years and older are affected by CDS. Prevalence of CDS increases with age but remains under-diagnosed by veterinarians. Dietary supplementation with medium-chain TAG (MCT) has been shown to improve cognitive function in aged dogs (Pan et al., 2010; Pan et al., 2017). There is consideration for the inclusion of omega-3 fatty acids to support cognitive health in ageing dogs.

Pet Populations

The Petfood Manufacturers Association (PFMA) is, arguably, the most consistent and reliable source of pet numbers data for the UK. Each year PFMA commissions new research into the UK’s pet populations so that both its members and the public can be provided with useful statistics. In addition, a sample of UK adults are interviewed by TNS/Solus Consulting, in face-to-face interviews.

However, in 2021, and due to, what else, the Covid Pandemic, the PFMA survey moved online. The change in methodology meant that the sample size of UK adults, at 5,093 respondents compared with the average 8,000 respondents surveyed in the previous four years, was smaller than usual and thus the current 2021 figures cannot and should not be directly compared to those of previous years. However, in order to substantiate the change in pet population, PFMA have spoken to industry colleagues and participants and it is widely recognized that there has been growth. In addition, PFMA annual Market Data scheme also suggests there has been a population increase over the last year.  However, due to the methodology change, it is not possible specifically to quantify the change in numerical terms.

Such as it is, the PFMA’s data suggests that, in 2021, there were an estimated 12.5 million dogs in the UK, constituting 33 per cent of all households. A total of 12.2 million cats, constituting 27 per cent of all households was the second largest pet keeping proportion of UK households. However, this is not to forget the vast number of other livestock living within the human orbit. These include a vast array of rodents, rabbits, indoor birds, ferrets, pigeons, horses and ponies and the inevitable hamsters. By and large, however, the latter recorded very small proportions of total UK households, ranging from 2 per cent for rabbits and indoor birds to a miniscule 0.1 per cent for mice.

Looking at PFMA data for the nine years covering 2011-2012 to 2019-2020, it would appear that the proportion of households in possession of a pet as fallen from 47 per cent in 2011-2012 to 41 per cent in 2019-20. However, this largely reflects declines in certain sectors. The only category of household pet ownership that has actually expanded over the periods under review is that of dogs; from 22 per cent of households in 2011-12 to 23 per cent in 2019-20. Since 2017-18, the proportion of households keeping a dog has fallen from 26 per cent to 23 per cent.

The other staple household pet, cats, shows a small decline over time, from 19 per cent of all households keeping a cat in 2012-13 to 16 per cent in 2019-20. The majority of the decline has taken place over the last three years. The proportion of households keeping other pets; from rabbits to guineapigs all show declines, albeit that the proportions in these cases are all in low single figures.

The PFMA is not the only body collecting data on pet populations. The Peoples’ Dispensary for Sick Animals (PDSA) also collects data although the latest data relets to 2020, data not have been collected in 2021. The PDSA data identifies 51 per cent of UK adults as owning a pet, with 26 per cent of UK adults keeping a cat with an estimated UK population of 10.9 million pet cats. An estimated 24 per cent of the UK adult population have a dog with an estimated population of 10.1 million pet dogs. An estimated 2 per cent of the UK adult population have a rabbit with an estimated population of 1 million pet rabbits.

Book Review

The publication, on 29 April, of ‘How to Love Animals in a Human Shaped World’ was lyrically described by its publisher as ‘a far-reaching, urgent, and thoroughly engaging exploration of our relationship with animals by the acclaimed Financial Times journalist, Henry Mance’.

Mance starts by describing a day on a beach in San Francisco in 2019, surrounded by no less than a thousand corgis. Mance notes that sand is not the natural environment for dogs ‘whose legs are only as long as ice lollies’. But this was Corgi Con, possibly the world’s largest gathering of corgis. Mance describes the scene as ‘weird’ and ‘glorious’. There were corgis in baby harnesses and corgis under parasols. There were corgis dressed as a shark, a lifeguard, a snowman. There were stalls selling sunglasses and socks for dogs. Mance overheard two people considering whether to buy a corgi-emblazoned cushion, but decided against it ‘on the basis that they already had one’.

For a Martian wishing to understand the depth of humans’ obsession with their pets – what Mance describes as the ‘the commoditization of animals and the merging of our humans’ social lives with theirs’, Corgi Con would have been an ideal first stop. Of course, in California, such extravaganza would not be regarded as unusual; San Francisco’s newest day care for dogs was charging up to $25,500 (£18,500) a year, more than the state’s minimum wage. Google declared dogs ‘an integral facet of our corporate culture’. But pet worship is worldwide; the Archbishop of Canterbury reportedly has said that pets can go to heaven, while ‘Japanese architects have designed a ramp to help dachshunds sunbathe alongside their owners’.

Mance argues that while our love for our pets is ‘easily dismissed as frivolous or private’, in a way, it is revolutionary. Pets represent humanity’s closest ties to another species and, ‘if they can sensitize us, and make us care for other sentient beings, they could change the course of history’. An exaggerated claim? For the last two years, Mance has been investigating how we treat other animals, including working in an abattoir and on a pig farm, as well as visiting fish markets and zoos.  We push slaughterhouses to the back of our minds. We delay turning to the destruction of forests and coral reefs on which wild animals depend. Compare that with domestic dogs and cats. As Mance observes, pets are animals whose lives we value, whose emotions we appreciate and whose flesh we wouldn’t dream of eating.

Mance notes that while wild parrots often live-in huge flocks, as pets they are mostly kept alone. Meanwhile, Lockdown has seen a pet boom. As Mance puts it ‘deprived of the company of other humans, people are seeking the company of animals instead’. Britain’s dog population has reportedly ‘exploded’, rising by an estimated two million. There have been additional complications. Soaring prices have fueled unscrupulous breeding and thefts. New owners have found themselves unable to ’socialise’ their puppies in a time of social distancing. They have struggled on, hoping that their pets would help their mental health, although, as Mance dryly remarks, therapy sessions might have been cheaper. Over a lifetime, caring for a dog can costs a minimum of £4,600 to £13,000, depending on the size of the animal; care costs can take the total above £30,000, says the animal charity PDSA. Americans’ pet spending has surpassed a reported $100 billion a year for the first time. Meanwhile, in anticipation of the end of the pandemic, shelters are preparing for a wave of unwanted animals.

In common with many parents, Mance hoped that having a pet would help to teach his children about nature. Growing up with a terrier, which he fondly remembers as the source of his internet passwords, he now has a cat, which generally lies on his laptop whenever he is trying to work, an experience which is shared by the present author. Yet Mance wonders if pet ownership is not what he describes as ‘a missed opportunity’, saying that mankind ‘needed a new relationship with nature’, instead we ended up with feline Instagram accounts. We love pets, yet accept factory farms and extinctions. Shouldn’t pets spur us to treat all animals better?

The first stumbling block is that our love for pets is not as ‘pure’ as we would like to think. Pet ownership is so ingrained that we rarely question its implications. The relationship can bring great joy, and not just to us: when was the last time you saw a person happier than a dog chasing a Frisbee? But that’s not the whole story.

We have a perception that being owned is an inherently positive experience. Mance is not convinced that it is. He argues that, by owning animals, we take control of their lives. We decide who they live with, when and if they socialize with others of the same species, and whether they can have offspring. Often, we feed them into obesity. Often, we decide when they die.

In Chile, many dogs roam the streets in packs. They have more freedom and, perhaps, more fun than their pampered cousins. In Europe and North America, many pets arguably live in a form of lockdown: they are well fed and safely homed, but they lack social interaction and autonomy. This lockdown lasts their whole lives. Mance notes that ‘we love our pets deeply, we want them to be happy, but we struggle to know what they are thinking’. We also expect them to fit in with our schedules and needs. In reality, many rabbits don’t want to be cuddled. It seems a reasonable assumption that pet fish and tortoises probably don’t value our company at all. Wild parrots often live in huge flocks, but as pets they are mostly kept alone; one study found that American owners spent only 15 minutes a day interacting with their parrots. Mance asks what are these highly intelligent birds meant to do the rest of the time? Similarly, when devoted dog owners return to their offices and work after lockdown, how are the dogs meant to react? Modern human societies may not be easy places to live: nearly three-quarters of dogs show at least one anxiety-related behaviour, such as sensitivity to loud noises. There is some evidence that free-roaming street dogs which, by definition, have more control over their lives, are less excitable. Heather Bacon, an animal welfare expert at the University of Edinburgh says that ‘We have a perception that being owned is an inherently positive experience. I am not convinced that it is’,

What we love about dogs, in particular, is that they offer us unconditional love. Yet this has ‘almost made us lazy about meeting their needs, Bacon says. Nowhere is this more evident than in breeding. Dogs were probably domesticated more than 20,000 years ago. Breeds, as we understand them today, have existed for less than two hundred years. They were standardized, often on entirely arbitrary, aesthetic criteria, based on dogs from small gene pools. This was the Victorian age of empire and of social hierarchy. Ideas of pure bloodlines and racial improvement were acceptable. London Zoo was trying, unsuccessfully as it happens, to domesticate wild animals. Dog breeders’ ability to manipulate a single species into very different shapes and sizes helped to inspire the proponents of eugenics.

Breeding has had indefensible results. Some of our most popular pets are brachycephalic dogs, such as pugs and French bulldogs, whose flat faces affect their airways and much else. Such dogs are as much as three times more likely to suffer respiratory problems. Some cannot close their eyes. Many cannot give birth without caesarean sections. Yet people find flat faces cute and loving. Some owners also believe that such dogs are low maintenance because they don’t require much exercise – in fact, the dogs just cannot breathe properly. One-fifth of dogs in the UK are flat-faced. In March, Lady Gaga offered a $500,000 reward after her French bulldogs were stolen. Mance observes that ‘It’s weird to value your dogs’ company so much, but value breeding for health so little’. We regard eugenics as morally beyond the pale; why should we celebrate the canine and feline equivalents?

Our unethical breeding also affects cats too: Scottish fold cats, which Taylor Swift and Ed Sheeran have helped to popularise, suffer a cartilage defect. Most Persian cats have at least one health disorder. Put a cat in a wheelie bin and you become a national hate figure; create a cat vulnerable to eye disease and you become a potentially wealthy breeder. As Dan O’Neill, a companion animal epidemiologist at the Royal Veterinary College, aptly puts it, ‘pets health problems are ‘actually human problems’.

Mance says that we could start to solve these human problems. Currently, pet-buyers often seem to be acting on a whim, like the hapless narrator in the novel Fleishman Is in Trouble, who panic-buys a miniature dachshund to turn his life around, but wakes up to find the dog urinating on his head. We could do our research, and stop trying to make fashion statements through animals. We could also try to offer our dogs choice – when Bacon walks her dogs, she let them help to choose the route: ‘It’s their walk, not mine. Advertisers could stop using French bulldogs and other unhealthy flat-faced dogs. Another option would be to push breeders to cross-breed – thus diversifying the gene pool, even though it breaks the supposed purity of the gene line. This is already being trialed in the Netherlands, where the government has restricted the breeding of purebred bulldogs and pugs. Why not be radical, and drop our obsession with pets’ appearance altogether? We regard eugenics as unacceptable, why should we celebrate the canine and feline equivalents? Mance argues that we should start, as he puts it, prizing mongrels. We need to think less about how our pets look, and more about how our world looks to them. The problem isn’t that we think of pets as almost human-like; it’s that we don’t think of them as human-like enough.

Even if pet owning is done well, it only brings us close to a small slice of the animal kingdom. At least 1,300 species of mammals, including both species of African elephant and 1,400 species of bird, such as snowy owls, are endangered. Few of these animals would live happily in our homes. To save other animals, humans must shrink their footprint on the natural world – by eating less meat, creating more protected areas, and so on.

The difficulty is that our love for our pets increases our footprint. We need more chickens, cows and fish to feed our pets: US dogs and cats eat as many calories in a year as 62 million American people, according to the UCLA geography professor Gregory Okin. Pets no longer just eat our offcuts, because we want them to have the best. As a result, feeding an average size dog can emit more than a tonne of greenhouse gases a year.

There’s more: in the US, cats have been estimated to kill between 1.3 and 4 billion birds and between 6.2 and 22.3 billion mammals each year. It’s not clear how big a chunk of the bird population this represents, or whether the cats are taking mainly weaker birds that wouldn’t have survived anyway. Mance finds this tricky; while he loves cats and birds, he values cats’ individual existence over most birds. He also recognize that cat and dog populations are doing well, while those of birds are not, and that this puts our ecosystems off balance. His cat has rarely brought anything back into the house, but Mance has to admit that his garden is not full of birds. Owners can try training their cats or attaching bells to their collars. Yet the failsafe way to protect birds is to keep your cat indoors: something that affects the quality of a cat’s life.

Dogs, too, impinge on wildlife – as shown by the sad recent incident on the River Thames where a pet dog savaged a seal known as Freddie. Farmers complain about dogs disturbing nesting lapwing and other birds. Other pets can be even more disruptive, Florida’s Everglades have been overrun by Burmese pythons and green iguanas, which have escaped or been released by bored pet-owners.

Mance stresses that this is not an argument against pets. It’s a call for balance. The world has close to an estimated billion dogs and several hundred million cats. Meanwhile, some of their closest wild relatives are treated entirely differently. Britain has found space for tens of millions of dogs and cats, but no wolves or lynx and ever fewer Scottish wildcats. If we really love animals, Mance argues that we should make sacrifices for them, whether or not they are disposed to curl up on our sofa. If pets represent our deeper love for the natural world, perhaps we could match every pound we spend on them with a pound given to conserve wild animals.

In many places, conscientious humans often refer to their pets as companion animals, and constitute themselves as guardians rather than pet owners. For many people, however, this phrasing doesn’t quite work. It implies that animals are only our companions if we keep them in our homes. Yet where Mance is concerned, the birds in our cities, the beavers in our rivers, the pine martens in our forests are also our companions too, and our wellbeing depends on their survival.

Due to the pandemic, Corgi Con is not scheduled to go ahead this year. I hope it does, but I also hope pet owners look beyond it. There is more to loving animals than owning them.

This is an important book, for pet keepers and non-pet keepers alike. Mance concludes that our pets should be the beginning of our love for other animals, not the end.

How to Love animals in a human shaped world is published by Cape

New Pet Dog, New Car?

A recent report indicates that a survey of 2,000 drivers with dogs revealed that more than a fifth – 22 per cent – bought or adopted their most recent dog after the start of lockdown.
More than a third – 35 per cent – of recent dog owners said they had to buy a larger or more practical vehicle because of their new pet, spending an average of £7,594.

Manufactured Meat

The reason that many people say that they have given up consuming meat and have turned to a vegetarian diet is that they cannot reconcile their desire for meat with the knowledge that, to eat meat, sentient creatures must die.

If a household makes the decision to go vegetarian or, even, vegan then the family dog can likewise be administered a similar diet.

And the cat? Ah No! Cats must eat meat. They are ‘obligate carnivores’ which means cats cannot be vegetarian.

Their bodies need certain nutrients which can only be found from animal meat and which they are physically unable to make themselves. An example of these are Taurine and Arginine, which are essential building blocks for your cat’s health. Without them, your cat could become extremely ill. Taurine deficiency can cause dangerous heart problems and eye issues that can lead to blindness.

Four further rules for feeding your cat. Choose a cat food that is complete rather than complementary so that your pet gets a complete, balanced diet. Cats like to eat away from other cats. Keep food, water and litter trays in different places so your cat knows that their food and water are clean. Finally, your cat needs fresh water, which should be changed daily.

Missing Moggies

With apologies, and thanks, to the Camden New Journal, the local North London newspaper that drew attention to the increasing problem of missing cats.

An increase in the number of pet keepers is responsible for a growing missing cat problem, say pet detectives searching for a lost cat, a Norwegian Forest, a breed of domestic cat originating in Northern Europe. This natural breed is adapted to a very cold climate, with a top coat of glossy, long, water-shedding hair and a woolly undercoat for insulation.

in North London’s Belsize Park, a retired police officer turned animal sleuth Tom Watkins, the founder of Animal Search UK – said ‘keepers’ are generally people living alone and habitually feed cats that don’t belong to them. But they then go further by taking them inside and keeping them for a period of time or, even, forever.

Mr Watkins, whose search team was out last week trying to locate a one-year-old Norwegian Forest cat not seen since 5 April, said he believes more people have become ‘keepers’ due to loneliness during the coronavirus lockdown.

He said ‘We’ve found out over the last twenty-one years of working in this ­profession, that there are always ­different reasons that cats, in particular, go missing. These range from sadly being involved in road traffic collisions, losing their way after something spooks them and they run out of their normal territory, becoming locked in sheds and outbuildings by mistake or being ‘adopted’ – some call it stolen – by persons we refer to in the trade as ‘keepers’.

However, for one family, matters ended up on a happier note. One North London family has been reunited with a lost cat, a 14-year-old feline with a thyroid problem, eight weeks after he went missing.

The cat’s keeper said, following the recovery, that ‘I’d just like to say to people please don’t feed cats that aren’t your own, don’t feed them, and don’t keep them, as much as you may want to. You don’t know what illnesses they may have and how much their family is going to miss them.’

The role of opportunity in the origins of commercially prepared pet food and moist pet food

The domestication of cats and dogs as animals dates back to ancient times with the greatest increase in their acceptance as household pets in the 19th Century. The catalyst for this trend can be linked to three factors: – the Industrial Revolution, the rising status of the middle class and the commercialisation of prepared pet food.

Aligned with this we see the introduction of the first commercial pet food in 1860’s by businessman James Spratt. The opportunity for Spratt’s “Patented Meat Fibrine Dog Cake” reportedly originated from his observation of street dogs eating sailor’s hardtack biscuits in the docks of Liverpool, UK (1)

The birth of canned pet food occurred in 1922, when US businessmen Chappel Brothers saw the opportunity of canning “surplus” horse meat as a source of “lean red meat” for balanced diet food for dogs (2). Whilst no longer widely accepted in pet food in today’s society on the basis that horses are seen nowadays as companion animals, consumption of horsemeat by humans was more widespread in the 1920’s.

Key points in the history of pet food and the stimulus for commercialisation and market growth are summarised in Table 1.

In recent years, development of innovative new products in the petfood evolutionary process, often arises from a combination of pet owner demand for “premiumization” and “humanization”. For example, premium / super premium wet pet food formats that take their inspiration from human foods e.g., wet pet food with a liquid centre looks similar in appearance to “melt-in-the-middle” chocolate souffles; soup for cats that looks like consommé.

The concept of “Premiumization” first originated in human consumer goods e.g., alcohol where consumers wanted products that “provide greater benefits and characteristics” compared to “standard” products. This impression of “premium” quality can be real or perceived in the mind of the consumer. In the context of pet food, this might mean parameters like: –

• GMO free ingredients and products
• Marketing terms e.g., “holistic” create an impression of “greater benefits and characteristics” achieved through a combination of factors e.g., natural raw materials, additive free, greater transparency in ingredient inclusion etc.
• Higher protein content compared to “standard” products.

It should also be noted that pet food “humanisation” extends beyond the actual pet food product and includes expectations on petfood manufacturing business philosophy and product beliefs, for example: –

• Use of human food industry approaches to quality and food safety management systems, giving rise to the “If it’s good enough for me, it’s good enough for my pet” belief.
• Lifestyle choices and beliefs that match their own lifestyle choices e.g., “natural”, sustainable etc.
• Extension of human lifestyle choices are also stimulating petfood market growth e.g., the growth of the vegan pet food market.

In recent years, it is clearly evident that evolution of wet pet food has been closely linked to trends in the human food sector. The question is where next for wet pet food evolution?

Will veganism and flexitarianism drive the rebirth of meat analogues in wet petfood?

For many reasons, humans are turning more to the purchase and consumption of meat analogues, as a means of reducing meat consumption. The question is “What is a meat analogue and why is there growing interest in them”?

There are many definitions of meat analogue and one of the most useful is from Dekkers, Boom and van der Goot(3) : –

“Meat analogues are products that can replace meat in its functionality, being similar in product properties/ sensory attributes, and that can also be prepared by consumers as if they were meat.”

Typically, meat analogues for human consumption are manufactured from sustainable plant-based proteins giving rise to many of their perceived benefits including: – animal welfare, greenhouse gas emissions / carbon footprint and health benefits compared to meat consumption. These factors are contributory to increased interest in veganism and a “flexitarian” approach to eating (consumption of a varied diet based on meat eating and plant-based protein eating on different days, with the overall effect of reduced meat consumption).

Meat analogues are not new and date back to Classical and Medieval times where seitan (based on wheat gluten) and tofu (based on soya bean) were examples. Although these are still used, in the context of human food, a more widely known example of plant-based meat analogues is “Texturized Vegetable Protein” (TVP). Traditionally made using low moisture extrusion, and based on soya or wheat gluten, TVP is available in many forms that mimic either pieces of meat, minced meat, or fibrous steak-like meat pieces. TVP has also been used in wet petfood in the 1980 – 1990’s, where its fibrous structure was designed to mimic beef or chicken steak.

In addition to TVP, the concept of using other meat analogues in wet petfood is not a recent innovation. The petfood industry has seen many other meat analogue technologies developed and patented over the last 60 years, some of which have been implemented on a commercial scale. There are many factors that affect commercialisation and these include cost and consumer acceptance / perception of meat analogues i.e., are they affordable and do they look like “real” meat. Examples used commercially include: –

• Heat-set emulsion-based meat analogues – this is the basis of both human food sausage manufacture and the widely implemented “Oven Formed Meat” technology used to heat-set meat chunks for use in chunks-in-gravy and chunks-in-jelly products
• Gelled meat analogues – Examples include those based on sodium alginate gelation and also konjac glucomannan gelation. Both technologies have also been used in human food to make imitation glace cherries, pimento pieces and konjac noodles

Development of “next generation” meat analogues is the subject of extensive science and technology research. Compared to the pioneering early developments, “next generation” meat analogues are designed to better satisfy consumer needs especially cost and sensory appeal (taste, smell, texture). In other words, they must overcome the barriers of cost and authenticity compared to “real” meat, associated with historical forms of meat analogue. With these aims in mind many new technologies are being developed including high-moisture extrusion and shear cell technology(3).

Challenges and opportunities in use of “next generation” meat analogues in wet petfood.

The concept of plant-based / vegan petfood is not new and in recent years we have seen both dry and wet complete petfoods enter the marketplace. If we look at vegan wet petfood, typically the structure often appears similar to “all meat” pate or hybrid meat / cereal products that have been on the market for many years. For product differentiation, some include TVP pieces in the product along with other inclusions like fruit or vegetables.

In recent years, the petfood industry has seen many new start-up’s enter the market. These start-up’s often utilise different business models compared to “traditional” petfood manufacturers. One factor is “disruptive innovation” and this factor could offer a route to market for many of the emerging “next generation” meat analogue technologies once these are ready for commercialisation.

Another factor that opens opportunities for plant-based meat analogues (PBMA) in wet petfood is the supply chain vulnerabilities evident during the recent Covid-19 pandemic. Many experts believe that PBMA offer opportunities to reduce meat supply chain vulnerabilities evident during the pandemic (4) that saw a surge in market demand for plant-protein foods. This might result in greater interest in PBMA in wet petfood as pet owners mirror their own buying patterns in what they buy for their pets.

Research by many different groups, for example Dodd et al (2019)(5), indicate that more pet owners would be willing to buy vegan petfood but the biggest barrier to overcome is convincing evidence on the (long-term) nutritional adequacy of these products. This is a key research need if we are to see greater acceptance of plant-based petfood.

The petfood industry has thrived on converting opportunities into reality and enjoyed market growth as a result. However, in doing so the industry has had to overcome many challenges.

With the realisation that PBMA or maybe “hybrid” meat analogues based on plant and meat ingredients offer many opportunities there is no escaping the fact that challenges exist. However, if the industry adopts a collaborative approach, involving all stakeholders including pet owners, veterinarians, nutritionists, food scientists and food technologists then there is greater probability that these challenges can be overcome.

References

1) One Nation Under Dog,. M. Schaffer, 2009, Macmillan, 9780805091465
2) Philip. L. Chappell 1923 – Ken-L-Ration viewed online on 4th May 2021 at https://history.rockfordpubliclibrary.org/localhistory/?p=36608
3) Birgit L. Dekkers, Remko M. Boom, Atze Jan van der Goot, Structuring processes for meat analogues, Trends in Food Science & Technology, Volume 81, 2018, Pages 25-36.
4) Protein and produce in a post-COVID-19 world, viewed online on 12th May 2021 at https://www.mintel.com/blog/food-market-news/protein-and-produce-in-a-post-covid-19-world
5) Dodd SAS, Cave NJ, Adolphe JL, Shoveller AK, Verbrugghe A (2019) Plant-based (vegan) diets for pets: A survey of pet owner attitudes and feeding practices. PLoS ONE 14(1): e0210806.