20.1.1 History of Animal Relocation

Animal relocation for adoption started with small‐scale, individual breed rescue in the last two decades of the twentieth century. Shortly thereafter, some animal welfare organizations in the northeastern United States participated in regular high‐volume transports of mostly small dogs and puppies to meet an increasing demand for adoptable dogs (Zawistowski and Morris 2013). It was not until 2005 during the response efforts following Hurricane Katrina that the use of large‐scale companion animal relocation began to take shape more broadly. The challenges and successes that were a part of the evacuation and rescue during Katrina paved the way for major milestones and shifts in animal welfare, including the large‐scale use of relocation to address companion animal homelessness as well as the development of best practice documents to guide relocation programs using a variety of transport methods (see Figure 20.1). This massive undertaking, the public response, and the number of animals placed in homes through relocation led to a new way to manage the regional imbalance of animals needing shelter and people seeking pets.

As used in this chapter, “animal relocation” refers to the long‐distance movement of a group of healthy companion animals from one geographic region to another for the purposes of adoption. “Transport” and “transportation” are used to refer to an individual route, regardless of distance, or the logistics and process of animal movement itself. Animals are also commonly relocated as part of a natural or man‐made emergency response effort and to provide access to otherwise unavailable services. Specific transport accommodations and considerations that relate to these scenarios will be addressed briefly, though, as described below, an animal’s physical and behavioral needs during transport remain the same regardless of the distance or rationale for relocation.

20.1.2 Purpose and Indications

Animal relocation programs are used as a tool to address companion animal homelessness. Through the creation of effective partnerships, they aim to balance population discrepancies between areas where the homeless pet population exceeds adoption demand (known as sources) and organizations located where there is a higher demand for animal adoption than can be met locally (known as destinations). In doing so, over‐burdened source shelters can divert resources that would have been needed for basic animal care toward operational enhancements and the development of new programs that offer sustainable, local solutions to animal welfare problems. Similarly, animal relocation programs allow destination shelters to capitalize on their successes in medical and behavioral care, increasing opportunities for positive outcomes for animals and, in many cases, generating resources that can be used to support the source shelter. Well‐designed animal relocation programs are a win‐win‐win scenario that support improved welfare for individual animals as well as the animal (and human) populations in both communities.

Source shelters must have the ability and resources to effectively select and prepare relocation candidates. The benefits of relocation should outweigh the risks for the individual animals involved and the animals selected should meet the needs of the destination shelter’s community. Animal relocation is only one of the tools source communities may use to manage their populations. Well‐rounded sheltering programs will focus on local, long‐term solutions and must not consider relocation a substitute for local community action or a key budget item to maintain financial viability. Some examples of programs that should be used in conjunction with relocation are those that: reduce or divert intake, proactively manage community cat populations, remove barriers to adoption or foster care, enlist foster homes to serve as adoption ambassadors, work with the local government to create animal‐friendly regulations that support community animal and public‐health, and focus on creative and innovative ways to decrease length of stay and place animals in homes.

Indications for relocation in a destination community can be numerous and compelling. A community imbalance of available and desirable pets for adoption is often the catalyst to explore a relocation partnership. While the demand for adoptable pets has increased over the past few decades (Rowan and Kartal 2018), in many communities the increasing complexity of medically and behaviorally challenged animals in the shelter may decrease adoptions. When the public is unable to find animals with the characteristics they expect or desire, they may become disillusioned with the lack of variety and seek pets from other sources. Although the shelter may be beloved in the community and have established themselves as the go‐to place for information and services for animals, a lack of available animals can jeopardize that hard‐won relationship. Animal relocation programs can provide solutions to each of these concerns. In addition, community excitement and the desire for animals that may now be unusual in the region often further increase local demand, driving shelters to increase the number of animals they can accept into their program.

Animal relocation is not without risk to physical or behavioral health and welfare; it is key to remember that the destination often drives the level of risk and its impact on animal welfare during transportation to their community. As such, the responsibility to select appropriate source partners and transporters falls primarily on the destination. It is the responsibility of the destination to ask questions not only about the behavioral and medical history of the animals that will be coming to their facility, but the appropriateness of the transport vehicle and the practices that will be used to move animals. Ensuring humane conditions must be the guiding principle of each transport from start to finish; if essential provisions for safety of both the animals and the drivers cannot be met, the transport should not proceed. The animals’ needs are the same regardless of a partner’s immediate ability or aspiration to meet them. Once substandard care has been accepted, it becomes more challenging to seek higher ground. A positive outcome does not negate the need to meet minimal standards for both drivers and animals and continually strive toward better practices. Simply surviving a transport is not enough, the conditions should be such that the animals in our care can thrive

20.1.3 Guidelines and Regulations

A number of professional animal welfare organizations have published recommendations, guidelines, and best practices for the responsible relocation of dogs and cats for adoption (see Box 20.1). The Association of Shelter Veterinarians’ (ASV’s) Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters was the first such document with a designated Animal Transport section (ASV 2010). This report, founded in the Five Freedoms, addresses responsibilities of individuals and organizations participating in animal relocation programs from the point of origin, through the transportation itself, to the destination. The Association for Animal Welfare Advancement (AAWA) created Companion Animal Transport Programs Best Practices that “are generally accepted as those that will produce the best results for animals” and that focus on the operational aspects of such programs (AAWA 2019). In addition, the AAWA’s document discusses considerations of the role of animal transport programs and their impact on organizations and communities. Recommendations specific to both ground and air transport are described as are limited considerations specific to the transportation of animals in emergency response scenarios. The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) and Association of Shelter Veterinarians offer best practices for Non‐Emergency Relocation of Dogs and Cats for Adoption that focus on aspects of program design and operation that have direct impacts on animal health and welfare (AVMA 2020a). Special precautions for the responsible handling of vulnerable populations of animals (e.g., young animals, brachycephalic dogs, cats, pregnant animals, seniors) are enumerated. Additional publications of note include the National Alliance of State Animal and Agricultural Emergency Programs’ Animal Evacuation and Transportation Best Practices and the International Air Transport Association’s Live Animals Regulations. The former focuses on disaster response planning and the pros and cons of different types of vehicles used to transport animals, while the latter focuses on commercial airline requirements and governmental regulations.

The guidelines and best practices described above should be followed to ensure relocation programs operate in a manner that minimizes risks and maximizes benefits to all stakeholders, including:

• Animals involved in the relocation program
  
• Animals not involved in the relocation program (source and destination shelters and their communities)
  
• Drivers, animal handlers, animal care staff
  
• Veterinarians (shelter, USDA‐accredited, and community)
  
• Shelter leadership and specialty staff (behavior, public relations, development, etc.)
  
• Adopters.

Adhering to these practices, even when they may seem challenging, is critical for ensuring the long‐term success and viability of animal relocation programs nationwide. Following voluntary guidelines mitigates the need for regulatory interventions that may limit or eliminate this lifesaving tool from the animal welfare playbook.

While essential for both short and long‐term success, industry guidelines largely remain just that—guidelines—and not legal requirements. (Note that the Animal Welfare Act sets federal law regulating minimum standards of care and treatment for certain animals bred for commercial sale, used in research, transported commercially, or exhibited to the public. See https://www.nal.usda.gov/animal‐health‐and‐welfare/animal‐welfare‐act for more information.) Legal requirements for animal relocation programs vary widely by state and may include everything from animal vaccination protocols to housing requirements to minimum holding periods. Some transporters and importing agencies may be required to register with various regulatory bodies prior to participating.

It is important that organizations familiarize themselves with the specific requirements of both the source and destination states. However, while some states may require documentation of companion animals being exported from their state, it is principally the destination state’s regulations for importation of companion animals that must be adhered to. Such importation is regulated by the United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA‐APHIS) and the state veterinarian in the destination state. The USDA‐APHIS’s Pet Travel webpage (https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/pet‐travel) directs users to each state’s individual importation and exportation requirements. As requirements can and do change without notice, they should be checked regularly.

Written confirmation of an animal’s health and fitness for travel along with a statement indicating the animal is free from contagious disease must accompany each animal. Such documentation is referred to as a Certificate of Veterinary Inspection (CVI) (i.e., health certificate) and in most, but not all, jurisdictions must be signed by a veterinarian accredited by the USDA to perform such inspections as a representative of the federal government. It is the signing veterinarian’s obligation to familiarize themselves with the requirements for entry into the destination state and ensure that each animal certified for importation meets those requirements. CVIs typically must be completed within a maximum of 30 days from the date of entry (although many jurisdictions require shorter time periods) and must be submitted to the destination state veterinarian’s office. A variety of electronic CVI services are available and can assist with proper completion and submission of the required information. See Box 20.2.

International transports are subject to additional regulations and standards that should be researched thoroughly. Careful consideration should be taken before importing animals from other countries; in many cases prolonged quarantine periods and importation permits are required to minimize the risk of introducing a foreign animal disease to the destination locale (Polak 2019). Long journeys can be arduous for animals that are unfamiliar with confinement and a lack of appropriate safeguards can result in severe and devastating consequences.

The authors are unaware of any import requirements, CVI declarations, or local regulations that address behavioral health. Therefore, it is the responsibility of partnering organizations to ensure the behavioral suitability of animals selected for transport (see Section 20.4.3).

20.1.4 Program Models

Companion animal relocation programs can operate under a variety of models that vary based on resource requirements, risk for disease transmission, financial costs, and number of animals served. Core considerations for any model include the distance between source communities and destination communities, the shelter population targeted for relocation, and the mode of transportation (see Figure 20.2).

Local, regional, national, and international transport are all common models used by agencies seeking to relocate populations of animals in need. In general, operating costs and risk for disease transmission increase with distance travelled, so local transport should be considered first. Choosing a partner that is located within the same community, state, or region is more cost‐effective and efficient than national or international options and builds connections that can improve animal welfare in the surrounding area. Proactively monitoring animal welfare trends in the region and engaging in outreach within the source or destination state can enhance existing partnerships and identify new ones.

International transport is also pursued by some organizations. Such programs carry the greatest costs and have been repeatedly associated with the introduction of novel diseases (Polak 2019). Prior to accepting transport from an international source, organizations should carefully consider the needs of partners that are closer to home and the impact of international partnerships on their own mission. Criteria for animal selection must take into account suitability for adoption, disease management, long‐term quality of life, and the effects of extensive travel on the animals. Shelters that are accepting international transports may find it useful to have a written policy statement regarding the reasons behind the decision to accept these animals.

Regardless of the geographic model selected there are an array of transport options available. The type of transportation will depend on the population being moved, the numbers of animals that will be relocated at one time, and the distance the animals will be travelling. Organizations that have a small number of animals to move may use volunteers driving personal vehicles or a small rented van. This option is well suited for animals that are part of a harder‐to‐place population with specific medical or behavioral needs. Nursing or pregnant animals and their offspring or exotic pets can also benefit greatly from this quiet, focused mode of transport. It is important to consider the implications to the organization when using vehicles that are not owned by the organization. Insurance, liability waivers, safety protocols, and a written Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) should all be a part of the creation of a relocation program, even one that only involves a small number of volunteers and animals.

Organizations with a consistent need to move a larger population of animals may still choose to operate their own transport vehicle. In this model an appropriately sized cargo van, cargo trailer, or specialty vehicle should be specifically outfitted for animal transport. The agency may select trained volunteers or staff to drive the animals that are identified and accepted for transport. Transports under this model usually travel regionally or across several states to partner with an appropriate destination. Another common model is facilitated transport through a paid or unpaid third party. The transport company or organization may manage the entire relocation process, including contact and placement of animals between the source and destination, or may simply provide the transportation. Multi‐shelter transports between more than one source and/or destination may also participate in this model. Transports that involve a hub or aggregator shelter that gathers animals regionally from smaller partners are often a part of the third‐party model. It is important to be sure that the third‐party transporter is reputable, insured, and that the transport vehicle is outfitted in such a manner to ensure a safe and comfortable ride for the animals entrusted to their care. Meeting with the transporter, asking for references, visually reviewing the vehicle(s) to be used, requiring copies of any licenses and insurance policies, and watching loading or unloading at another facility can help to develop a full picture of the service the transporter is providing. The total number of animals on the individual transport, whether appropriately sized and safe kennels are required, the required pre‐transfer medical preparation, and the number of partners that are allowed to place animals in one vehicle should all be known and considered before deciding that this transporter is an appropriate choice.

Regardless of the specific program model employed, standing operating procedures must outline the type of vehicle the animals will be travelling in, the distance the drivers will be travelling, the road types and route to be driven, standards for low‐stress driving, what resources are in place to ensure safety for both the animals and drivers along the way, and the plans for emergency situations such as adverse weather or vehicle breakdown, including mechanisms for emergency animal removal. The creation of an emergency plan should happen prior to starting a relocation program. Drivers should receive training in basic first aid, management of safety equipment such as a fire extinguisher, and have a rehearsed evacuation plan for every animal on board, incorporating stress reduction techniques. Consideration should be given to vehicle breakdowns, accidents, ill or injured animals or people on the transport, and a contingency plan should be readily available for each potential transport issue. Contingency plans can include the location of partner organizations, including veterinary hospitals, along the travelled route that are willing to be on stand‐by and offer assistance. Securing a contract with a national towing service that can support vehicle needs regardless of location is imperative. Some resourceful organizations have added a shuttle vehicle that follows the primary transport vehicle so that resources and assistance are readily available in case of emergency.

To ensure a relocation partnership is built on a strong foundation and expectations are in alignment, organizations should prepare and sign an MOU that sets realistic expectations and spells out the responsibilities of each party. Agreements codified in an MOU are a less formal way of building a relationship that does not imply a legal commitment but creates a place to document and follow up on expectations.

In the authors’ opinion, distance is a key component of transport stress for both the drivers and the animals on a transport. Mapping out routes and using United States Department of Transportation (DOT) guidelines as a rule of thumb will keep staff, volunteers, and pets safer. Having two drivers on the transport provides an excellent layer of protection if there is an accident or breakdown that requires removal of all animals on board but does not eliminate the chances of sleep‐deprived driving. Transports that cover thousands of miles, involve travel at odd hours, or have prolonged durations with sporadic or no rest put all vehicle occupants, as well as others traveling on the same roadways, at unnecessary risk (Hoffman 2020; Dillane 2020). As little as one to two fewer hours of sleep can result in 2–10 times the crash rate—a rate equivalent to that of driving under the influence (Tefft 2016).

20.2.1 Vehicle Selection and Upfitting

20.2.1.1 Ground Transport

The selection of a vehicle is an exciting and daunting part of a program’s evolution. There are many companies that design and provide a variety of vehicles specific for animal movement. Most of those contain specialized stainless‐steel units originally designed for animal control functions rather than long‐distance relocation. Customization and features are usually available and require knowledge on the part of the organization in order to select all options that best meet the needs of the organization and fit the program model. Costs beyond the vehicle purchase should be a part of the initial and ongoing funding plan so that the program created is a sustainable model.

The first consideration is the vehicle type and size that is appropriate for the program. The number of animals the organization would like to relocate, the available resources needed to safely accomplish that task, and the location of the destinations should all be taken into account. A smaller vehicle is often nimbler, and the movement of fewer animals more frequently allows for improved conditions during transport as well as faster placement of animals at the destination. Although it is appealing to consider loading a bus or a tractor trailer full of animals, it is nearly impossible to maintain safe and humane conditions in such a scenario. In the authors’ experience, as the number of animals on a transport increases so does the stress level and the possibility of disease exposure and spread.

The factory‐installed cargo climate control unit should be avoided when ordering a vehicle. The location, airflow, distribution of heat and cold, and power of pre‐installed units are not sufficient to combat the increased internal heat that comes from the body temperatures of the occupants and the amount of space that needs to be cooled or heated. Such systems are designed to perform functions for static items (like flowers) and do not provide for live animal comfort and safety. These units often “pool” cool or warm air in just one area of the vehicle rather than creating an even airflow throughout the vehicle so that animals at the top of the vehicle experience a similar temperature to animals at the bottom of the vehicle. The additional attachment kits that come with many of these units contain corrugated tubes or PVC pipes that create additional hard‐to‐reach surfaces that are difficult to sanitize. For these reasons, an appropriate low‐profile roof‐mounted climate control unit is recommended for animal transport vehicles. An evaluation should be completed to determine the cooling capacity of the proposed unit; consideration must be given to the fact that the changing exterior temperature and the heat output of animals are not constant and will directly impact the ability of the unit to maintain the internal temperature. The size of the unit should be approximately twice that of what might be expected if only considering the amount of space that needs to be cooled. Selecting and maintaining a unit that can easily manage the anticipated load will extend the life of the unit and create peace of mind that a comfortable and safe environment is being created for the animals on the transport.

Insulation is an important consideration for a transport vehicle. Both trailers and vans require proper insulation on the sides, roof, and floor of the interior of the vehicle. The layer of insulation must be completely covered and sealed with a non‐permeable surface so that there is no possibility of moisture leaching into the insulation when the vehicle interior is cleaned and disinfected. An insulated floor mat covered with bedliner or diamond plate flooring (or a combination of the two) will greatly reduce road heat that affects the comfort of animals housed on the lowest level of the vehicle housing units. Meeting with contractors and upfitters prior to ordering the vehicle will help to expedite the process and ensure the desired result.

Once a type of vehicle has been selected, the type, size, and number of kennels can be considered and are a crucial component of animal safety and comfort. Kennels should be structurally sound, appropriately sized for the animal and length of transport, unable to collapse, designed to minimize the possibility of injury or escape, easy to clean and disinfect, and durable enough for repeated use. When kennels will be placed on both sides of the vehicle animals will need to be provided with a disinfectable barrier to reduce visual stimulation and act as a physical barrier to respiratory droplets. Roll‐down outdoor solar shades can serve this purpose without restricting climate control (see Figure 20.3). Although stainless‐steel built‐in kennels are easy to clean and attractive, there are drawbacks to having kennels that cannot be removed in an animal relocation vehicle. When faced with a breakdown or an accident, safe and expedient removal of the animals can be impossible for the driver and assistant in such a vehicle. Selecting kennels that can be securely attached to the walls of the vehicle and easily removed without removing the animals from the safety of the kennel is crucial. In some vehicles, custom‐built cargo control bars can be installed to accomplish these goals (see Figure 20.4). When writing protocols and selecting equipment, all of these criteria must be a part of the initial plan for success.

The importance of monitoring and safety in an animal relocation vehicle cannot be stressed enough. Whether using a trailer, a bus, or a van cargo space, monitors and alarms for carbon monoxide, temperature, and humidity and the ability to visualize and hear the animals in the cargo area should be a part of every vehicle design. When driving a van, a bulkhead unit that separates the driver cab from the animal area is essential for driver safety. Items in the cargo area, even when well fastened, can become projectiles in an accident. While allowing the drivers in the cab to have open access to the animals creates an additional monitoring opportunity, that should not be a substitute for driver safety and must be carefully thought out: a bulkhead with a door or opening is a better option than an open vehicle if constant access is desired for care and monitoring of the animals.

Regulations and proper licensing of a vehicle and the drivers is another programmatic consideration related to vehicle selection. Department of Transportation regulations that require a commercial driver’s license (CDL) or Medical Examiner’s Certificate must be considered when planning a program and operating a large vehicle. Drivers that obtain a CDL are in high demand and can qualify for a rate of pay much higher than most shelter personnel; finding and retaining a CDL driver can be challenging, and the need for one can drive up the cost of the program. Designing a program that includes, at a minimum, two drivers that can manage the selected vehicle while understanding and complying with all state and federal regulations is crucial.

20.2.2 Transportation Requirements