In different parts of the world the claim is increasingly being made that continuous confinement of pet cats (Felis catus) is beneficial for both wildlife conservation and cat welfare. The first part of the claim is almost incontrovertible, but the second is misleading. The assertion that confined animals have superior welfare is rooted in thinking pre-dating the 1960s that equates welfare with physical health. By contemporary accounts of animal welfare, confinement of animals presents major welfare risks, and this recognition has been a major driver of refinement in livestock industries, e.g. moves towards free-range systems. Yet, these risks have not been widely acknowledged in debates over pet cat management. We argue that the current pervasive rhetoric from conservationists and some regulators that cat confinement is beneficial for wildlife and cats is, at best, confusing health with welfare. At worst, it is a deliberate attempt to mislead the public through portraying a win-win scenario where, instead, a trade-off must be navigated. Failure to recognise this trade-off undermines conservation goals three-fold. First, it limits the efficacy of behaviour change interventions to increase confinement. Second, it erodes public trust in organisations perceived as knowingly misleading the public. Finally, it reduces the incentive to make the one decision yielding long-term benefits for both cats and ecosystems; ceasing to own cats at all. Policy-makers should be wary of the allure of false win-win narratives when tackling contentious issues that require trade-offs to be made.

This study relied on the affective events theory and the social exchange theory to develop a framework that explains how situational factors (daily micro-interruptions) enhance affective reactions (negative affect) and, in turn, impair health conditions (mental health) at work. We further delineate theoretical arguments to propose the pet-human’s health effect by demonstrating that pets are boundary conditions that attenuate this relation, and as such are protective conditions for employees’ mental health. We conducted a 5-day diary study with two groups of participants, one with participants who owned pets (N = 82 x 5 = 410), and the other who did not own pets (N = 87 x 5 = 435). The multilevel results showed an indirect effect of daily micro-interruptions on individuals’ mental health through negative affect, with a daily backdrop of poorer mental health for those who did not own a pet (compared to those who owned a pet). These results evidence the benefits of owning a pet for individuals’ mental health, even at work, and as such provide recommendations for teleworking practices. Moreover, this study resorts to an innovative and robust data collection method to demonstrate the pet-human’ health effect. This study expands knowledge on the role of pets in working daily routines and shows that pets may be a personal resource for individuals while working.

In recent years there has been an increased interest in studies related to the welfare of avian species commonly kept as companion animals, specifically those in the order Psittaciformes, commonly referred to as ‘parrots’. During this time the biology and behaviour of wild parrots has also become better understood, aiding the assessment of welfare in captive environments. The impact of the pet trade on wild parrot populations has also become clear. This order now has more globally threatened species than almost any other major group of birds. Many significant aspects of parrot behaviour in the wild, such as flocking, social interaction with conspecifics, foraging on a variety of foods and flight, are denied to varying degrees to parrots kept as companion animals. Captive parrots show high levels of stereotypy, suggesting poor welfare. Welfare may be improved by appropriate environmental enrichment and changes in the social environment of captive parrots kept as companion animals; however, such changes require that caretakers have sufficient knowledge, resources and motivation to accommodate such conditions. The concept of companion animal suitability is an important consideration when developing regulations or policy aimed at improving the welfare of animals kept as companions. Although individual exceptions exist and the level of suitability may vary depending on species, in general, their presence in the pet trade has resulted in serious animal welfare and conservation challenges for parrots, indicating that these animals may be unsuitable as human companions.

Municipal regulations and humane movement policies often restrict or discourage the use of ‘exotic’ species as companion animals. However, confusion arises because the term ‘exotic’ is used in various ways, and because classifying species as exotic or non-exotic does not satisfactorily distinguish suitable from unsuitable companion animals. Even among commonly kept species, some appear to be much more suitable than others. Instead, decisions about suitable companion animal species need to be based on a number of relevant issues. As ethical criteria, we considered that keeping a companion animal should not jeopardize - and ideally should enhance - its welfare, as well as that of its owner; and that keeping a companion animal should not incur any appreciable harm or risk of harm to the community or the environment. These criteria then served as the basis for identifying and organizing the various concerns that may arise over keeping a species for companionship. Concerns include how the animals are procured and transported, how well their needs can be met in captivity, whether the animal poses any danger to others, and whether the animal might cause environmental damage. These concerns were organized into a checklist of questions that form a basis for assigning species to five proposed categories reflecting their suitability as companion animals. This assessment framework could be used in creating policy or regulations, and to create educational and decision-making tools for pet retailers, animal adoption workers, and potential owners, to help prevent animals from being placed in unsuitable circumstances.

Six veterinary practices participated in a study of cats involved in road accidents. Of 127 cats, 93 survived, of which 58 had moderate to very severe injuries. The mean period of hospitalisation was five days and the mean length of veterinary treatment was 23 days. The cost of treatment was less than £400 for 84% of cats. Owners of 51 surviving cats completed questionnaires within three to five months of the accident. The mean time it took for their cats to recover was 47 days (n = 41; range 1-150 days). Eight cats had not recovered within five months, four of which had had a limb amputated. The severity of the cats’ injuries correlated positively with the cost of treatment, length of hospitalisation and treatment, and time to recovery (rs > 0.69, P < 0.001). Behavioural changes were noted in 34 cats; 23 were described as being more nervous, going outdoors less, or being more fearful of cars, roads or going outdoors. Half of the owners treated their cat differently: 17 restricted the time their cat spent outdoors and II worried more about their cat. The effects of the accident on the owner's emotions and finances were measured using a scale from I (minimum) to 7 (maximum). Most owners registered a score of 5, 6 or 7 for effect on emotions and I, 2 or 4 for effect on finances; the scores were not correlated. Road accidents are an important cause of poor welfare in cats and their owners.

How and why dog owners select a specific breed may impact upon the health of the dog they acquire, and upon the wider health of the breed they select. Brachycephalic breeds are rapidly increasing in popularity despite increasing evidence linking brachycephalism with chronic and severe health conditions. This study used a questionnaire to explore pre-, during and post-purchase behaviours and attitudes of dog-owners who own popular brachycephalic dog breeds (n = 3 breeds) compared to popular non-brachycephalic dog breeds (n = 7 breeds). The survey received 1,427 valid responses. Brachycephalic breed owners were younger, more likely to live with children, and to be buying their chosen breed for the first time. The factor that most highly influenced brachycephalic owners’ decisions to buy their breed was appearance, followed by breed size suited to lifestyle, good dog breed for children and good companion breed. Perceived health of the breed was less influential in decision-making for brachycephalic owners compared to non-brachycephalic owners. The way in which owners acquired their dog differed by breed type, with brachycephalic owners more likely to use puppyselling websites to find their dog, less likely to see either parent of their puppy, and less likely to ask to see any health records. Despite many brachycephalic breed health issues being directly related to conformation, appearance remains the most significant determinant in why people desire these breeds. More targeted educational interventions are needed to change buyer attitudes and, if ineffective, other more direct mechanisms (eg legislation) may be required to protect canine welfare.

Although community services support ageing-in-place, older adults often report feelings of loneliness and social isolation. Unmet emotional needs are associated with poorer health, reduced functional abilities and increased mortality in this population. Pet ownership is an avenue worth exploring to reduce these adverse outcomes. This scoping review maps main findings and identifies key gaps with respect to the pros and cons of pet ownership in community-dwelling older adults pertaining to psycho-social, physical and functional outcomes. Scientific and grey literature published from January 2000 to July 2018 was searched. Data selection and extraction were performed by the first author and a sub-sample was co-validated by two co-authors. A total of 62 sources were included for descriptive and thematic analysis. A variety of pros (increased physical activity, wellbeing) and cons (grief, risk of falls) pertaining to psycho-social and physical outcomes were identified. Not many functional outcomes (support for daily routines) were mentioned, and few studies explored the simultaneous balance between the pros and cons of pet care. Further research exploring both clinicians’ and older pet owners’ perspectives is needed to deepen our understanding of the importance of considering companion animals in older adults’ daily lives and to strike a balance between perceived risks and benefits.