Pet Pollution

Now that Americans have espoused planned parenthood, shouldn't their pets also? An article in the current Science and Public Affairs, a respected scientific magazine, asks that question in all seriousness. The answer is yes, according to the authors, Chemist Carl Djerassi, Veterinarian Wolfgang Jochle and Andrew Israel, a medical student. The first two are also top executives at Syntex, a firm that produces contraceptive pills.

The scientists reckon that there is a pet population explosion in the U.S. There already are as many as 110 million cats and dogs in America, which equals more than one dog or cat for every two humans. Every hour, between 2,000 and 3,500 puppies and kittens are born (v. 415 human babies). The authors make no Malthusian projections of a continent overrun with strays. They do, however, have a finely honed sense of the economics of pets.

Just to feed U.S. cats and dogs costs their owners some $1.35 billion a year, say the authors. So much pet food is consumed (6 billion Ibs. a year) that horsemeat supplies are running short. Private and public shelters destroy about 13.3 million dogs and cats a year -at a cost of almost $100 million. In addition, at least $50 million is spent yearly to control rabies and other pet-related health problems.

Then there are the environmental burdens. Every day, the authors estimate, America's dogs alone produce 3,500 tons of sidewalk-and lawn-fouling feces and 9.5 million gallons of urine. When the animals die, say the authors, "tons of dead animals are buried in city dumps, incinerated, or sent to rendering plants to be cooked, ground and used in fertilizer or cattle feed"1-all at some large cost to society.

Clearly a decrease in America's pet population is called for, conclude Djerassi et al. But how to achieve it? The death rate is already astonishingly high in the U.S.-12% of all pets are put to death each year in private and public pounds. (By contrast, the British, who have, proportionately, about the same number of pets as Americans, destroy only 1.6% of their dogs and cats in such shelters.) Logically, the final solution is a lowering of the birth rate. This can be done in a surprising number of ways, including ovariohysterectomies, vasectomies and various as yet undeveloped contraceptive pills.

Many pet owners, however, are unwilling to interfere with their pets' sex lives, either because of the cost or because of what the authors call "psychological needs." They speculate that "many people regard their pets as family members and are horrified at the concept of 'taking sex away.' Some male owners may want their pets roaming and impregnating as an unconscious protest against the sexual restrictions society and morality impose on them."

In spite of such psychological hangups, there is an answer: sexless pets. While no experiments have yet been conducted with dogs and cats, the authors report that rats have been made asexual by testosterone and estrogen injections at birth. Sexless dogs and cats may be next. Pet owners can only hope that the new little sexless creatures will be warm and furry and loyal.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.