Yamazaki 2015

Anthrozoös
A multidisciplinary journal of the interactions of people and animals
ISSN: 0892-7936 (Print) 1753-0377 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rfan20
A Survey of Companion-Animal Owners Affected

by the East Japan Great Earthquake in Iwate and
Fukushima Prefectures, Japan
Sakiko Yamazaki
To cite this article: Sakiko Yamazaki (2015) A Survey of Companion-Animal Owners Affected by
the East Japan Great Earthquake in Iwate and Fukushima Prefectures, Japan, Anthrozoös, 28:2,
291-304, DOI: 10.1080/08927936.2015.11435403
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2015.11435403
Published online: 16 Jun 2015.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 65
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rfan20
Download by: [University of California Santa Barbara] Date: 16 March 2016, At: 05:08
AZ 28(2)-text_Layout 1 4/20/15 3:41 PM Page 291
ANTHROZOÖS VOLUME 28, ISSUE 2 REPRINTS AVAILABLE PHOTOCOPYING © ISAZ 2015

PP. 291–304 DIRECTLY FROM PERMITTED PRINTED IN THE UK
THE PUBLISHERS BY LICENSE ONLY
A Survey of Companion-
Animal Owners Affected by
the East Japan Great
Earthquake in Iwate and
Fukushima Prefectures, Japan
Sakiko Yamazaki
Anthrozoös 2015.28:291-304.
Humane Society International, Tokyo, Japan

Address for correspondence: ABSTRACT The unprecedented East Japan Great Earthquake in March
Sakiko Yamazaki, 2011 impacted many humans as well as animals. To date, only national
Humane Society
International, surveys that do not necessarily focus on the heavily impacted areas have
3-4-25 Takeoka Kiyose-shi, been administered, and there is a lack of data on the situation for compan-
Tokyo 204-0023, Japan.
E-mail:
ion animals and their owners in these areas. This survey was administered
sakikoyamazaki@hotmail.com between June and November 2012 to pet owners in Iwate (n = 140) and
The original report that this
Fukushima (n = 149) Prefectures in north-eastern Japan, areas heavily af-
manuscript is based on was fected by the disaster. It explored the types of disaster preparations for pets
published in Japanese in engaged in by owners; the situation on evacuation with pets; the use of,
issue 16(2) of Fukushima-ken
Juishikai Kaiho. and need for, pet-related support after the disaster; and the associations
between pet attachment and disaster-related behaviors of pet owners. In
The views in the manuscript
are those of the author and total, 41.2% (n = 119) of all respondents were able to evacuate with their
not necessarily those of pets, and evacuation rates were especially low in Fukushima. With the
Humane Society
exception of preparation of pet food and other supplies, less than 50% of
International.
respondents engaged in different types of pet-related disaster preparations.
Especially in Fukushima, those who evacuated with their pets were better
prepared compared with those who could not. The rate of utilization of sup-
port was also low, with less than 50% of respondents utilizing each type of
support, regardless of pet-evacuation status and area. The need for support
was generally higher during the initial phase (immediately after the disaster;
30–40%) compared with the current phase (20–30%). However, in
Fukushima the difference between the initial and current phases was not
Anthrozoös
significant for both those who evacuated with their pets and those who
could not. Bivariate analyses indicated mixed results for the association
between disaster-related behaviors and pet attachment. Implications for
future disaster-prevention measures are discussed.
Keywords: animal relief, disaster, pet attachment, pet-related support

291
A Survey of Companion Animal Owners Affected by the East Japan Great Earthquake…
The unprecedented East Japan Great Earthquake struck the northern Tohoku Area
❖ of Japan on March 11, 2011 (hereon referred to as the 3.11 disaster). The 9.0 mag-
nitude earthquake also created a tsunami which swallowed most coastal townships
in Fukushima, Miyagi, and Iwate Prefectures. Fukushima also suffered a nuclear accident at
Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant of Tokyo Electric Power Company, and an exclusion
zone was established around the power plant. The disaster killed over 15,000 people1 and af-
fected many animals as well. There are no official records of the exact number of companion
animals that were impacted, but for dogs, estimates can be made using the number of dogs
registered under the Rabies Prevention Act, a mandatory registration system for all dog
owners. In Iwate, as of March 2010, there were 81,022 dogs registered (Ministry of Health,
Welfare and Labour (MHLW) 2011), and from the registrations and records of vaccinations, it
was estimated that approximately 4,000 dogs died from the disaster (Anonymous 2012). In
Fukushima, there were 118,072 dogs registered as of March 2010 (MHLW 2011), and there
were 5,800 dogs registered in the areas later designated as the exclusion zone (Anonymous
2011). For other types of companion animals it is difficult to estimate the damage since there
are no official registration systems or records. However, estimates made from pet ownership
rates2 suggest that tens of thousands of companion animals were impacted.
Past Literature
Anthrozoös 2015.28:291-304.
Prior to the Great Earthquake, a couple of Japanese surveys on pet owners’ awareness of dis-
aster prevention and response were administered (Hyogoken Nanbu Jishin Dobutsu Kyuen
Honbu Katsudo no Kiroku Henshu Iinkai 1996; Anicom Insurance, Inc. 2009). Since the 3.11
disaster, surveys regarding pet owners’ situations during the onset of the disaster have also
been administered. However, these are mainly surveys that do not target exclusively the heav-
ily impacted areas (Irisoyama, Inc. 2012; Pet & Family Small-Amount Short-Term Insurance
Company 2012; Japan Association for Promoting Harmonization Between People and Pets
(HAPP) 2011). Nevertheless, in conjunction with past academic literature, they offer insights into
how the plight of companion animals has been addressed during disasters.
Pet Evacuation
The Ministry of the Environment (MOE) reports that in Fukushima only 300 companion animals
evacuated with their owners (MOE 2012), but surveys not limited to respondents from heav-
ily impacted areas show that as high as 82% of pet owners evacuated with their pets when
the 3.11 disaster struck (Irisoyama, Inc. 2012). Similar to reports from other countries
(Hesterberg, Huertas and Appleby 2012), those from Japan indicate that many pet owners de-
sire to evacuate with their pets but may not necessarily have concrete plans for the actual
evacuation. For example, a national internet survey administered by HAPP (2011) reports that
approximately 80% of the respondents would evacuate with their pets in the case of a disas-
ter. In contrast, an internet survey conducted by the Pet & Family Small-Amount Short-Term
Insurance Company (2012) reports that an overwhelming majority of pet owners do not know
whether their local evacuation centers admit pets, despite the fact that the survey was
Anthrozoös
administered after the 3.11 disaster.

Past literature reports keeping multiple animals, keeping dogs outdoors, and not having
carriers for cats as risk factors that hinder evacuation of pet-owning households (Heath et al.
2001b). Others point out that pet ownership per se is not a risk factor for evacuation, while the
evacuation decision of many pet-owning households is nevertheless greatly influenced by fac-
292
tors such as issues on transporting and boarding pets (Hunt, Bogue and Rohrbaugh 2012).
Yamazaki
Hall et al. (2004) note that the assurance of the companion animals’ well-being is a major
factor in prompting owners to evacuate. Also, to rescue companion animals is given as the
most common reason owners return to an evacuated area (Hall et al. 2004), and owners may
risk their lives to do so (Thompson 2013). Having multiple animals was also given as a reason
by Japanese pet owners for not evacuating with their pets (HAPP 2011).
Preparation for Disasters
Results of surveys suggest that many Japanese pet owners have only prepared for disasters by
stocking food, water, and supplies for their companion animals (Anicom Insurance, Inc. 2009).
Also, while some surveys do not report any changes in disaster preparedness of pet owners since
the 3.11 disaster (Pet & Family Small-Amount Short-Term Insurance Company 2012), others
suggest that the event boosted disaster-prevention awareness among pet owners (HAPP 2011),
or prompted owners to start preparing for future disasters (Irisoyama, Inc. 2012).
Use of, and Need for, Support
No surveys have yet been published regarding the use of support after the 3.11 disaster, but
studies outlining past disaster-response operations have described providing support such
as search/rescue, veterinary care, boarding, and adoption of companion animals (Hudson
2001; Irvine 2004). In relation to need for support, difficulties such as procuring pet food, water,
Anthrozoös 2015.28:291-304.
and pet supplies have been reported by owners as actual needs that were experienced dur-
ing the first month after the 3.11 disaster (Irisoyama, Inc. 2012). A non-Japanese study has
also listed veterinary care and procurement of pet-friendly accommodations as needs after dis-
asters (Glassey and Wilson 2011).
Pet Attachment and Disasters
There are no published empirical studies in Japan that report associations between pet
attachment and disaster-related behaviors such as evacuation behaviors, but past non-
Japanese studies report mixed results on this topic. Low attachment and commitment
(Heath et al. 2001a) has been associated with failure to evacuate with pets. High commit-
ment to pets has been associated with human evacuation failure (Brackenridge et al. 2012),
while others report that both commitment and attachment are not associated with human
household evacuation (Heath et al. 2001b). As Irvine (2009) notes, behaviors during the
onset of a disaster are shaped by many different factors, including, but not limited to, the
human–animal bond, and the case-by-case combination of other factors, such as govern-
ment policies and the availability of resources, may possibly have more influence over
evacuation decisions.
Aims of Study
In order to fill the gap in information on pet owners in areas heavily affected by the 3.11 disaster,
this survey collected first-hand data from pet owners in Iwate and Fukushima Prefectures,
both heavily impacted areas. The survey was designed to provide information on owners and
companion animals, with a focus on the use of, and need for, pet-related support, since past
Anthrozoös
surveys only offer limited data related to these topics. The four aims of the survey were: 1) to
outline the situation related to how owners prepared for disasters and evacuation with pets,
2) to outline the situation regarding the use of support by owners and their pets, 3) to expli-
cate the needs for support during the initial phase immediately after the disaster and the current
phase, and 4) to examine the associations between preparation for disasters, use of and need
293
for support, evacuation with pets, and pet attachment.

Since this was an exploratory survey, only broad hypotheses were developed as follows.
Firstly, it was hypothesized that pet owners engaged in very little preparation and that they uti-
lized a lot of support after the disaster because they were unprepared. Secondly, it was hy-
pothesized that need for support would be higher during the initial phase compared with the
current phase when affected owners would have likely settled down. Lastly, it was hypothe-
sized that pet owners with higher pet attachment would evacuate with their pets, use more
support, and demand more support.
Methods
Respondents
Respondents were disaster-affected pet owners in Iwate and Fukushima Prefectures. They
qualified for the survey if they owned pets when the 3.11 disaster struck, but the magnitude
of damages suffered by the respondents was not taken into account.
In Iwate, respondents were recruited via Save Animals in Iwate (SAI), a private organiza-
tion that offers subsidies for the veterinary care of disaster-affected pets. The survey was dis-
tributed during their events targeting disaster-impacted pets and their owners, where relief
supplies and free animal-related consultation services were provided (distributed n = 132), and
to clients who applied for the subsidies of SAI at their member veterinary hospitals3 (distributed
Anthrozoös 2015.28:291-304.
n = 109). The events were held in Miyako City (June 2012) and Ofunato City (November 2012),
both coastal cities in Iwate which were heavily damaged by the tsunami. SAI has 10 member
veterinary hospitals; seven consented to participate and distribute the survey—five from coastal
cities hit by the tsunami and two in inland cities that had temporary housing communities.
In Fukushima, the survey was distributed to residents of temporary housing communi-
ties of evacuees who owned pets at the time the disaster struck (distributed n = 169). Upon
selecting these communities, Namie-machi, the most populated town in Futaba County
which constitutes the majority of the exclusion zone, was targeted.4 Approval for the ad-
ministration of the survey was obtained from the town office and a list of the heads of the
residents’ associations was also obtained. The majority of the residents of Namie-machi
had evacuated, and a little over 50% of them lived in temporary housing communities in
Nihonmatsu, Fukushima, and Minamisoma Cities. For reasons related to administering the
survey efficiently, communities in Nihonmatsu City were targeted. Individual communities
were chosen randomly so that both large and small communities would be reached.
Residents in the selected communities who owned pets at the time the disaster struck
were found through a separate, unpublished survey administered by CHEERS Co., Ltd. In
addition to residents of Namie-machi, animal-related stakeholders in Fukushima were
consulted to reach out individually to those who were living in other local authorities in the
exclusion zone.
Instrument
The instrument used was the “Questionnaire Regarding Disasters and Pets.” This question-
Anthrozoös
naire, developed for the study, consisted of the following sections: A) overall situation of pet-
keeping (types of pets, where kept, neuter status, registration and vaccination status of dogs),
B) Pet Attachment Scale (Sugita 20035; maximum score of 32 points, with higher scores
indicating stronger attachment), C) items regarding evacuation with pets, D) preparation for
disasters, E) the utilization of support after the disaster, and F) need for support during the
294
initial and current phases.

Yamazaki
Section D comprised eight things that owners can do to prepare for disasters, extracted
from materials for pet-owner education (Shinjuku Ward Health Center and Shinjuku Branch of
the Tokyo Veterinary Medical Association 2008; Japan Pet Care Association (JPCA) 2011;
MOE 2011). This created a Disaster Preparedness Scale (maximum of 8 points, with higher
scores indicating more preparedness).
Section E comprised seven items which were developed by reviewing animal-relief efforts
during past earthquakes in Japan.6 This created a Utilization of Support Scale (maximum of 7
points, with higher scores indicating more use of support).
In section F, the same items as in E (use of support) were used. Respondents were asked
to check the items that they wanted/want to use but could not/cannot use both at the time of
the disaster (initial phase) and at the current time (current phase). This created a Need for
Support Scale (maximum of 14 points, with higher scores indicating higher needs).
For sections D, E, and F, 1 point was allotted to the items selected by the respondents, and
0 points were allotted to those not selected by the respondents, to calculate the scores of the
corresponding scales.
Procedure and Analysis
In Iwate, self-administered surveys were directly handed out to respondents and collected at
events and member veterinary hospitals of SAI. In Fukushima, with the consent from the heads
Anthrozoös 2015.28:291-304.
of residents’ associations of selected temporary housing communities, self-administered sur-

veys were either posted on gates or mailed with return-mail envelopes to houses of potential
respondents. Returned questionnaires were checked for their completeness, and follow-up
was conducted for respondents with incomplete/incorrect responses. Telephone surveys were
used for those who could not be reached with the aforementioned procedures. For both areas,
questionnaires were distributed with an explanation which included information on the pro-
tection of respondents’ privacy. Since the administration of the questionnaire in Fukushima
was not in conjunction with any provision of support, 300-JPY prepaid cards were distributed
to respondents as incentives after filling out the surveys.
Because the respondents in Iwate were selected disproportionately, and as later shown,
there was a stark difference in pet-evacuation status among respondents in the two areas, all
analyses were conducted by pet-evacuation status (those who evacuated with all of their pets
versus those who could not evacuate with any of their pets) controlling for area. Chi-square
tests were used to examine results on disaster preparedness, and the use of, and the need
for, support. Pearson’s product moment correlation, Spearman’s rank correlation, and t-tests
were used to analyze the associations between attachment to pets and other variables. For
statistical analyses, SPSS for Windows 17.0 was used, and the significance level was set at
p < 0.1, to avoid the underestimation of the differences between subgroups.
Results
Demographics of Respondents
Anthrozoös
A total of 410 questionnaires (Iwate: n = 241; Fukushima: n = 169) were distributed. The collection
rate for all respondents was 73.2%, and the valid response rate was 70.5% (n = 289). In Iwate, the
collection rate was 61.4%, and the valid response rate was 58.1% (n = 140). In Fukushima, the
collection rate was 89.9%, and the valid response rate was 88.2% (n = 149).
In Iwate and Fukushima, 72.9% (n = 102) and 58.4% (n = 87) were females, respectively.
295
In Iwate, 26.4% (n = 37) were in their 40s, and 44.3% (n = 62) were in their 50s or over. In
Table 1. Percentage of pet owners who evacuated with their pets.

Iwate (n) Fukushima (n) All (n)
Evacuated with all pets 65.7% (92) 18.1% (27) 41.2% (119)
Evacuated with some pets 4.3% (6) 11.4% (17) 8.0% (23)
Could not evacuate with any pets 22.1% (31) 68.5% (102) 46.0% (133)
No response or N/A 7.9% (11) 2.0% (3) 4.8% (14)
Fukushima, 16.8% (n = 25) were in their 40s, and 74.5% (n = 111) were in their 50s
or over.
Pet Keeping
The most frequently owned companion animals were dogs and cats. In Iwate, 81.4%
(n = 114) owned dogs and 27.1% (n = 38) owned cats. In Fukushima, 51.0% (n = 76) owned
dogs and 38.9% (n = 58) owned cats. The rates of ownership for other animals were under
5% for both areas. Also, a majority of the respondents who lived with their companion animals
at the time the survey was administered (Iwate: n = 140; Fukushima: n = 116) kept all of their
animals indoors (Iwate: 81.4%, n = 114; Fukushima: 51.7%, n = 60).
In Iwate (n = 140) and Fukushima (n = 122), 33.6% (n = 47) and 44.3% (n = 54) of dog-
Anthrozoös 2015.28:291-304.
and cat-owning respondents spayed/neutered all of their animals, respectively. None of the
animals were spayed/neutered in 52.1% (n = 73) of households in Iwate and 40.2% (n = 49)
of households in Fukushima.
Over 80% of dog owners (Iwate: n = 114; Fukushima: n = 76) had registered their dogs
and had vaccination certificates for all of their dogs. In Iwate, 89.5% (n = 102) had registered
their dogs and 93.0% (n = 106) had vaccination certificates for all of their dogs. In Fukushima,
84.2% (n = 64) had registered their dogs and 82.9% (n = 65) had vaccination certificates for
all of their dogs.
Evacuation with Pets
Of all respondents, 41.2% (n = 119) were able to evacuate with all of their pets during the
onset of the 3.11 disaster, while 46.0% (n = 133) could not evacuate with any of their pets. In
Iwate and Fukushima, 65.7% (n = 92) and 18.1% (n = 27) of the respondents were able to
evacuate with all of their pets, and 22.1% (n = 31) and 68.5% (n = 102) could not evacuate
with any of their pets, respectively (Table 1).
Preparation for Disasters
The types of pet-related preparations engaged in by the respondents are shown on Table 2.
In Iwate, preparations most often engaged in were “storing extra supplies of pet food” (evac-
uated: 68.1%, n = 62; could not evacuate: 67.7%, n = 21) and “preparing extra supplies for
pets” (evacuated: 79.1%, n = 72; could not evacuate: 64.5%, n = 20) among both those who
evacuated with all of their pets (n = 92) and those who could not evacuate with any of their
pets (n = 31). Significantly more respondents who evacuated with their pets “socialized/obe-
Anthrozoös
dience trained their pets” compared with those who could not (␹2 = 3.91, df = 1, p < 0.05),
but there were no significant differences for other types of preparations.
In Fukushima, preparations most often engaged in were also “storing extra supplies of pet
food” (evacuated: 55.6%, n = 15; could not evacuate: 54.9%, n = 56) and “preparing extra
supplies for pets” (evacuated: 55.6%, n = 15; could not evacuate: n = 33.7%, n = 34) for both
296
those who evacuated with their pets (n = 27) and those who could not (n = 102). However,
Yamazaki
Table 2. Percentage of pet owners who engaged in each type of preparation.

Iwate (n) Fukushima (n)
Evacuated Could Not Evacuated Could Not
Evacuate Evacuate
Storing extra supplies of pet food 68.1% (62) 67.7% (21) 55.6% (15) 54.9% (56)
Preparing extra supplies for pets 79.1% (72) 64.5% (20) 55.6% (15) 33.7% (34)
Providing ID for pets 14.6% (13) 9.7% (3) 7.4% (2) 5.9% (6)
Preparing photos of pets in case
they get lost 34.4% (31) 45.2% (14) 37.0% (10) 19.6% (20)
Preparing health records for pets 23.9% (21) 13.3% (4) 18.5% (5) 2.9% (3)
Socializing/obedience training pets 46.1% (41) 25.8% (8) 29.6% (8) 7.8% (8)
Procuring places to temporarily
board pets 33.3% (30) 29.0% (9) 18.5% (5) 4.9% (5)
Participating in evacuation drills 25.8% (23) 16.1% (5) 3.7% (1) 2.0% (2)
Table 3. Scores of scales indicating disaster preparedness, use of support, need for support,
and pet attachment
Iwate Score (SD) Fukushima Score (SD)
Anthrozoös 2015.28:291-304.

Evacuate Evacuate
Disaster Preparedness Scale 3.16 (1.92) 2.71 (1.53) 2.19 (2.06) 1.32 (1.30)
Utilization of Support Scale 2.07 (1.77) 1.94 (1.88) 1.30 (1.27) 1.31 (1.64)
Need for Support Scale 4.16 (4.71) 3.94 (4.85) 4.41 (4.41) 4.01 (4.81)
Pet Attachment Scale 28.7 (3.94) 29.7 (2.83) 27.2 (5.22) 26.3 (4.69)
unlike Iwate, rates of preparation were significantly higher among those who evacuated with
their pets compared with those who could not for items “preparing extra supplies for pets”
(␹2 = 4.32, df = 1, p < 0.05), “preparing photos of pets” (␹2 = 3.63, df = 1, p < 0.1), “prepar-
ing health records for pets” (␹2 = 8.91, df = 1, p < 0.01), “socializing/obedience training pets”
(␹2 = 9.33, df = 1, p < 0.01), and “procuring places to temporarily board pets” (␹2 = 5.54,
df = 1, p < 0.05).
For all respondents (n = 289), the mean score for the Disaster Preparedness Scale was
2.32 (SD = 1.84, range = 0–8). In Iwate, there were no significant differences in the scores by
pet-evacuation status, but in Fukushima, those who evacuated with their pets scored signifi-
cantly higher than those who could not (t = 2.07, df = 31.68, p < 0.05) (Table 3).
Utilization of Support After the Disaster
The types of support used by the respondents are summarized in Table 4. In Iwate, the most
often used support was “provision of pet food” (evacuated: 56.8%, n = 50; could not evacu-
Anthrozoös
ate: 66.7%, n = 20) and “provision of veterinary care” (evacuated: 61.4%, n = 54; could not
evacuate: 41.9%, n = 13). Rates of utilization were significantly higher for those who evacu-
ated with their pets compared with those who could not for items “provision of pet supplies”
(␹2 = 3.10, df = 1, p < 0.1) and “provision of veterinary care” (␹2 = 3.52, df = 1, p < 0.1). The
rate of utilization was significantly lower for those who evacuated with their pets compared with
297
those who could not for “search/rescue of pets” (␹2 = 3.25, df = 1, p < 0.1).
Table 4. Percentage of pet owners who used each type of support.

Iwate (n) Fukushima (n)
Evacuate Evacuate
Provision of pet food 56.8% (50) 66.7% (20) 44.4% (12) 24.8% (25)
Provision of pet supplies 37.5% (33) 20.0% (6) 44.4% (12) 13.7% (14)
Provision of veterinary care 61.4% (54) 41.9% (13) 25.9% (7) 16.7% (17)
Hygienic care of pets 31.5% (28) 20.0% (6) 0.0% (0) 6.9% (7)
Temporary boarding of pets 15.9% (14) 26.7% (8) 11.1% (3) 27.5% (28)
Search/rescue of pets 5.9% (5) 16.7% (5) 3.7% (1) 41.2% (42)
Consultation on pet troubles 7.1% (6) 11.1% (3) 0.0% (0) 2.0% (2)
Table 5. Need for support (initial versus current phase, for Iwate).
Initial Phase (n) Current Phase (n)
Evacuated
Provision of pet food 46.7% (43) 31.5% (29)
Anthrozoös 2015.28:291-304.
Provision of pet supplies 41.3% (38) 26.1% (24)

Provision of veterinary care 34.8% (32) 27.2% (25)
Hygienic care of pets 41.3% (38) 25.6% (20)
Temporary boarding for pets 35.9% (33) 26.9% (21)
Search/rescue of pets 25.0% (23) 18.5% (17)
Consultation on pet troubles 30.4% (28) 16.3% (15)
Could not Evacuate
In Fukushima, the most often used support among those who evacuated with their pets
were “provision of pet food” and “provision of pet supplies” (44.4%, n = 12 each), and the
most often used support among those who could not was “search/rescue of pets” (41.2%,
n = 42). Rates of utilization were significantly higher for those who evacuated with their pets
for items “provision of pet food” (␹2 = 4.02, df = 1, p < 0.05) and “provision of supplies”
(␹2 = 12.52, df = 1, p < 0.01). Rates of utilization were significantly lower for those who evac-
Anthrozoös
uated with their pets for items “temporary boarding of pets” (␹2 = 3.12, df = 1, p < 0.1) and
“search/rescue of pets” (␹2 = 13.49, df = 1, p < 0.01).
For all respondents (n = 289), the mean score for the Utilization of Support Scale was 1.64
(SD = 1.65, range = 0–7). For both areas there were no significant differences in the scores by
pet-evacuation status (Table 3).
298
Yamazaki
Table 6. Need for support (initial versus current phase, for Fukushima).
Initial Phase (n) Current Phase (n)
Evacuated
Could not Evacuate
Anthrozoös 2015.28:291-304.
Need for Support

In Iwate, the type of support with the highest need during the initial phase was “provision of
pet food,” for those who evacuated with their pets (46.7%, n = 43), and “provision of pet food”
and “provision of pet supplies” for those who could not (41.9%, n = 13 each). Needs during
this phase ranged from approximately 20% to 45%. “Provision of pet food” was still needed
most during the current phase among those who evacuated with their pets (31.5%, n = 29),
and “hygienic care of pets” was needed most for those who could not (36.0%, n = 9). Needs
during this phase ranged from approximately 15% to 35%. Among those who evacuated with
their pets, there was significantly higher need during the initial phase compared with the cur-
rent phase for “provision of pet food” (␹2 = 4.47, df = 1, p < 0.05), “provision of pet supplies”
(␹2 = 4.77, df = 1, p < 0.05), “hygienic care of pets” (␹2 = 4.61, df = 1, p < 0.05), and “con-
sultations on pet troubles” (␹2 = 5.13, df = 1, p < 0.05). Differences were not significant among
those who could not evacuate with their pets (Table 5).
In Fukushima, the type of support most needed during the initial phase was “provision
of pet food” among those who evacuated with their pets (48.1%, n = 13), and “search/res-
cue of pets” (37.3%, n = 38) for those who could not. Needs during this phase ranged
roughly from 20% to 50%. During the current phase, “provision of pet supplies” and “pro-
vision of veterinary care” were needed most among those who evacuated with their pets
(37.0%, n = 10 each), and “provision of veterinary care” and “search/rescue of pets”
(27.5%; n = 28 each) were needed most among those who could not. Needs during this
Anthrozoös
phase ranged roughly from 15% to over 30%. There were no significant differences in the
levels of needs between the phases for all types of support, regardless of pet-evacuation
status (Table 6).
The mean score for the Need for Support Scale for all respondents (n = 289) was 4.20
(SD = 4.65, range = 0–14). In both areas, there were no significant differences in the mean
299
scores by pet-evacuation status (Table 3).

Attachment to Pets
For all respondents, the mean score for pet attachment was 27.8 (SD = 4.44; range = 12–32;
Cronbach’s alpha = 0.88). In both areas, there was no difference in pet attachment by pet-
evacuation status (Table 3), but the difference was significant when area was uncontrolled
(evacuated, n = 118: 28.4, SD = 4.29; could not evacuate, n = 133: 27.1, SD = 4.55; t = 2.23,
df = 249, p < 0.05).
The associations between pet attachment and other variables were inconsistent,
depending on pet-evacuation status and area. In Iwate, pet attachment was positively corre-
lated with the Disaster Preparedness Scale among those who evacuated with their pets
(rs = 0.19, p < 0.1) and with the Utilization of Support Scale among those who could not
(rs = 0.44, p < 0.05). Also, among respondents who could not evacuate with their pets, those
who used the support “search/rescue of pets” scored significantly higher on the attachment
scale compared with their counterparts who did not use this support (used support: 31.60,
SD = 4.91; did not use support: 29.36, SD = 3.00; t = 3.46, df = 28, p < 0.01). In Fukushima,
pet attachment was positively correlated with the Utilization of Support Scale among those who
evacuated with their pets (r = 0.33, p < 0.1).
Discussion
Anthrozoös 2015.28:291-304.
Although in Iwate more than 60% of participants responded that they were able to evacuate
with their companion animals, the rate of evacuation with pets was generally low, especially in
Fukushima. Respondents in Iwate were selected disproportionately, and the low evacuation
rates in Fukushima compared to those in Iwate may be attributed to this selection bias, as later
discussed. However, another factor is that when evacuation orders were issued in Fukushima,
authorities did not encourage residents to evacuate with their pets, and many thought that the
evacuation would only last a couple of days. Low evacuation rates suggest that pet-owner ed-
ucation on evacuation is needed in conjunction with concrete measures to encourage and
support evacuation with pets once a disaster strikes.
As hypothesized, many respondents had not engaged in preparations for disasters, with
the exception of stocking extra pet food and other pet supplies. This suggests that further
pet-owner education is needed to encourage owners to be thoroughly prepared. Furthermore,
generally, those who evacuated with their companion animals were more prepared, and this
tendency was particularly evident in Fukushima. A possible interpretation is that preparation
leads to higher success of evacuation, but no conclusions can be reached since owners who
are prepared for disasters may have a higher awareness in general and thus may be those who
are also successful in evacuating with their pets. For both areas, a higher percentage of those
who evacuated with their pets prepared by socializing/obedience training pets, compared with
those who could not, suggesting that this could be an effective way to prepare regardless of
the type of disaster.
As for utilization of support, in Iwate, provision of pet food and veterinary care were the
most often used types of support. In Fukushima, provision of pet food and supplies were
Anthrozoös
most often used among those who evacuated with their pets, and search/rescue and tem-
porary boarding of pets were most often used by those who could not. The high rate of uti-
lization of veterinary care seen in Iwate may be due to a selection bias, as later
discussed—respondents in Iwate were selected through SAI, an organization that subsidizes
veterinary care, so users of such support may have been selected disproportionately. Gen-
300
erally, the rate of utilization of support was higher for temporary boarding and search/rescue
Yamazaki
of pets among those who could not evacuate with their pets, and higher for other types of
support among those who evacuated with pets. The difference in the rate of utilization for
search/rescue of pets was particularly clear in Fukushima. Residents in Fukushima were not
allowed to return home for a while once they evacuated from the exclusion zone, and these
owners may have resorted to search/rescue efforts to have their companion animals brought
out. However, contrary to the hypothesis, most types of support were utilized by less than
50% of all respondents, suggesting that not many respondents made use of pet-related
support. This perhaps indicates the failure to efficiently deliver available support and related
information to those in need.
As hypothesized, the needs for support were higher during the initial phase compared
with the current phase in both areas, regardless of pet-evacuation status. However, this dif-
ference between phases was only significant for certain types of support among respon-
dents in Iwate who were able to evacuate with pets, suggesting that this subgroup had
restored their normal lives compared with other subgroups. In Iwate and among those who
evacuated with their pets in Fukushima, there was a strong need for provision of pet food
during the initial phase. Among respondents in Fukushima who could not evacuate with
their pets, search/rescue of pets was needed most. During the current phase, provision of
pet food was needed most among those who evacuated with their pets in Iwate, but the
Anthrozoös 2015.28:291-304.
support with the highest need changed in other subgroups. These results suggest that
providers of support should develop different strategies to reach out to those in need, de-
pending on the timing and the pet-evacuation status of those in need, and that provision of
relief supplies may be in high demand in various situations. However, in Fukushima, there
were no types of support, regardless of pet-evacuation status, for which the level of needs
were significantly different between the two phases, implying that there were continuing
needs for pet-related services. This likely reflects the situation in Fukushima, where the
communities are still far from complete recovery and where pet owners are still experiencing
various pet-related difficulties.
Results on the association between pet attachment and disaster preparedness,
utilization of support, and need for support were inconsistent between subgroups. For all
respondents, those who were able to evacuate with their pets had significantly higher at-
tachment scores compared with those who could not, but this result was also inconsis-
tent when examined by areas. There may be other influential variables unique to the
situation of the community which may have affected the association between pet attach-
ment and disaster-related behaviors across different subgroups. For example, there was
a clear difference in the nature of the disaster between Iwate and Fukushima. Iwate was
only struck by a conventional natural disaster, and the community had past experiences
responding to tsunamis. However, the nuclear accident in Fukushima was beyond the ex-
perience of the community, and in many instances there was government pressure to
leave companion animals behind. Furthermore, because the attachment measures were
collected after the disaster, cognitive dissonance may have taken place among those who
Anthrozoös
could not evacuate with their pets, to help deal with the guilt of leaving them behind. As
a result, the remembered attachment may have been especially lower in this subgroup,
influencing the association between pet attachment and disaster-related behaviors. Future
investigations should conduct multivariate analyses taking into consideration such
situational variables.
301
Limitations
One major limitation of this survey is that there was an obvious selection bias for the respon-
dents in Iwate, who were selected from clients applying for subsidies from SAI or during events
hosted by SAI. It is highly likely that these respondents who sought support on their own are
those with higher awareness. This can be said especially for Iwate, where only pet owners
who sought support were recruited, compared with Fukushima where owners were surveyed
regardless of utilization of support. This may have skewed responses in general pet-keeping
situations7 as well as those regarding disaster-related behaviors. Furthermore, because SAI
provides veterinary care-related services, this may have skewed the results on the use of
veterinary care in Iwate.
In addition, although the procedure in Fukushima allowed for higher return and valid-
response rates, there were also higher possibilities of socially desirable responses. The sur-
vey in Fukushima was posted on gates or mailed, so research staff had access to personal
information of the respondents such as the place of residence. For this reason, respondents
may have had more concerns about their responses not being anonymous. Such risks were
countered by distributing letters to all respondents, explaining the terms for protection of
their privacy.
Also, for this survey, only bivariate analyses controlling a limited number of variables
Anthrozoös 2015.28:291-304.
were conducted to examine associations between pet attachment and different variables.
Since the main purpose of the survey was to collect data that would outline the general
situation of affected owners, the design did not capture some of the crucial variables
described earlier which may influence the association between attachment and disaster-
related behaviors. Future studies should attempt to incorporate these variables and use
multivariate analyses.
Lastly, this study fails to capture the distress caused to owners from losing their pets
due to the disasters. Pet loss due to disasters is associated with post-disaster stress (Lowe
et al. 2009), and since the impact on the well-being of humans can make a compelling ar-
gument for governments to enhance their disaster response, future studies should strive to
cover this aspect.
Most Japanese surveys on companion animals and disasters since the 3.11 disaster do not nec-
essarily target the heavily impacted areas. Despite its limitations, this survey serves as a meaningful
step to understand situations for pet owners in areas most affected by the 3.11 disaster.
Acknowledgements
The author acknowledges the financial support of Humane Society International, without which
the present study could not have been completed. The author also extends her appreciation to
Save Animals in Iwate and CHEERS Co., Ltd. for supporting the administration of the survey.
Notes
1. As of November, 2013 (National Police Agency 2013).
Anthrozoös
2. Japan Pet Food Association (2010). In Tohoku Area, 11.7% had cats, 1.6% had small animals, 1.9% had
birds, 3.0% had turtles, and 15.3% had fish when the survey was administered in October 2010.
3. When applying to subsidies provided by SAI, clients must provide their address before and after the 3.11
disaster and present their victim’s certificate upon request. SAI terminated its subsidization program in
March 2014.
4. The population of Namie-machi was 20,905 (Statistics Bureau 2011); the population of the town in August
302
2013 is estimated to be 18,862 (Fukushima Prefecture 2013).

Yamazaki
5. Created based on a pet attachment scale used in Staats et al. (1996).

6. The following materials were reviewed for pet-related support provided during past earthquakes in Japan:
Hyogoken Nanbu Jishin Dobutsu Kyuen Honbu Katsudo no Kiroku Henshu Iinkai (1996), Japan Animal
Welfare Society (2005), Higuchi (2006), Niigataken Bosai Kaigi (2010), JPCA (n.d.), Kobe City Veterinary
Medical Association (n.d.), MOE (n.d.), and Niigata Veterinary Medical Association (n.d.).
7. For example, in Iwate the officially reported rate for the issuance of vaccination certificate is 84.6% in fiscal
year 2011 (MHLW 2011) versus 93.0% in this survey.
References
Anicom Insurance, Inc. 2009. 9 gatsu 1 nichi wa bosai no hi, petto no bosai taisaku ni kansuru chosa wo jisshi.
Anicom. http://www.anicom-sompo.co.jp/special/sp090827.html. Accessed on February 22, 2014.
Anonymous. 2011. Keikaikuiki petto hogo kaishi. Yomiuri Online. http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/feature/eq2011
/information/20110906-OYT8T00280.htm. Accessed on July 31, 2013.
Anonymous. 2012. Inu dakede 4000 biki ga gisei Iwate de dobutsu ireisai. Iza. http://www.iza.ne.jp/
news/newsarticle/event/disaster/552156/. Accessed on March 13, 2013.
Brackenridge, S., Zottarelli, L. K., Rider, E. and Carlsen-Landy, B. 2012. Dimensions of the human–animal bond
and evacuation decisions among pet owners during hurricane ike. Anthrozoös 25: 229–238.
Fukushima Prefecture. 2013. Shichoson betsu jinko dotai (heisei 23 nen 3 gatsu 1 nichi ~ heisei 25 nen 7 gatsu
31 nichi). Fukushimaken no Jinko Suii. http://wwwcms.pref.fukushima.jp/pcp_portal/PortalServlet?
DISPLAY_ID=DIRECT&NEXT_DISPLAY_ID=U000004&CONTENTS_ID=15846. Accessed on September
2, 2013.
Anthrozoös 2015.28:291-304.
Glassey, S. and Wilson, T. 2011. Animal welfare impact following the 4 September 2010 Canterbury (Darfield)
earthquake. Australian Journal of Disaster and Trauma Studies 2011–2: 49–59.
Hall, M. J., Ng, A., Ursano, R. J., Holloway, H., Fullerton, C. and Casper, J. 2004. Psychological impact of the
human–animal bond in disaster preparedness and response. Journal of Psychiatric Practice 10: 368–374.
Heath, S. E., Beck, A. M., Kass, P. H. and Glickman, L. T. 2001a. Risk factors for pet evacuation after a slow-
onset disaster. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 218: 1,905–1,910.
Heath, S. E., Kass, P. H., Beck, A. M. and Glickman, L. T. 2001b. Human and pet-related risk factors for
household evacuation failure during a natural disaster. American Journal of Epidemiology 153: 659–665.
Hesterberg, U. W., Huertas, G. and Appleby, M. C. 2012. Perception of pet owners in urban Latin America on
protection of their animals during disasters. Disaster Prevention Management 21: 37–50.
Higuchi, S. 2006. Menteki higai to jumin hinan. In Niigataken Chuetsu Jishin Higai Hokokusho.
http://coastal.nagaokaut.ac.jp/~jisin/report/ index.shtml. Accessed on December 12, 2011.
Hudson, L. C., Berschneider, H. M., Ferris, K. K. and Vivrette, S. L. 2001. Disaster relief management of
companion animals affected by the floods of Hurricane Floyd. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical
Association 218: 354–359.
Hunt, M. G., Bogue, K. and Rohrbaugh, N. 2012. Pet ownership and evacuation prior to Hurricane Irene. Animals
2: 529–539.
Hyogoken Nanbu Jishin Dobutsu Kyuen Honbu Katsudo no Kiroku Henshu Iinkai. 1996. Dai Jishin no Hisai
Dobutsu wo Sukuu tameni: Hyogoken Nanbu Jishin Dobutsu Kyuen Honbu Katsudo no Kiroku.
http://www.lib.kobe-u.ac.jp/directory/ eqb/book/7-156/. Accessed on December 8, 2011.
Irisoyama, Inc. 2012. Jishin to petto ni kansuru chosa. https://www.iris-pet.com/wan/event/jishin/. Accessed
on March 24, 2013.
Irvine, L. 2004. Providing for Pets During Disasters: An Exploratory Study. http://www.colorado.edu/
hazards/research/qr/qr171/qr171.html. Accessed on December 3, 2011.
Irvine, L. 2009. Filling the Ark: Animal Welfare in Disasters. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Japan Animal Welfare Society. 2005. Niigata chuetsudaishinsai hisai dobutsu ni tsuite no hokoku. JAWS Report
Anthrozoös
48 & 49: 1–3.

Japan Association for Promoting Harmonization Between People and Pets. 2011. Dai 9 kai inu no kainushi ni
taisuru ishikichosa anketo kekka hokoku – kainushi to petto no saigaiji no sonaeni kansuru anketo-.
http://www.happ.or.jp/files/111021_saigai.pdf. Accessed on October 27, 2012.
Japan Pet Care Association. n.d. Niigataken chuetsudaishinsai hisai dobutsu kyugo ni tsuite.
http://www.jpc.or.jp/activities/2011/06/23/cyuetsu/. Accessed on December 11, 2011.
303
Japan Pet Care Association. 2011. Hitoto dobutsu no bosai wo kangaeyou. http://www.jpc.or.jp/wp-
content/downloads/bousai2011.pdf. Accessed on November 15, 2011.
Japan Pet Food Association. 2010. Heisei 22 nendo zenkoku inu neko shiiku jittai chosa.
http://www.petfood.or.jp/data/chart2010/index.html. Accessed on July 29, 2013.
Kobe City Veterinary Medical Association. n.d. Hanshin awaji daishinsai ni okeru dobutsu kyugo no jissai.
http://www2.odn.ne.jp/~aam95110/sinsaibun.html. Accessed on December 12, 2011.
Lowe, S. R., Rhodes, J. E., Zwiebach, L. and Chan, C. S. 2009. The impact of pet loss on the perceived social
support and psychological distress of hurricane survivors. Journal of Traumatic Stress 22: 244–247.
Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. 2011. Todofukenbetsu no inu no torokutosu to yobochushatosunado
(heisei 18 nendo – heisei 23 nendo). http://www.mhlw.go.jp/bunya/kenkou/kekkaku-kansenshou10/01.html.
Accessed on July 31, 2013.
Ministry of the Environment. n.d. Shiryo 4 saigaiji ni okeru dobutsu no hogo kanri.
http://www.env.go.jp/nature/dobutsu/aigo/2_data/arikata/ h16_03/mat04.pdf. Accessed on December 8,
2011.
Ministry of the Environment. 2011. Itsumo isshoni itaikara petto dobutsu no saigai taisaku.
http://www.env.go.jp/nature/dobutsu/ aigo/2_data/pamph/h2309a/full.pdf. Accessed on November 30,
2011.
Ministry of the Environment. 2012. Chuo kankyo shingikai dobutsu aigo bukai (dai 30 kai) gijiroku.
http://www.env.go.jp/council/14animal/y140-30a.html. Accessed on July 29, 2013.
National Police Agency. 2013. Heisei 23 nen (2011 nen) tohokuchiho taiheiyooki jishin no higaijyoukyou to
keisatsu sochi. http://www.npa.go.jp/archive/keibi/biki/higaijokyo.pdf. Accessed on December 1, 2013.
Niigataken Bosai Kaigi. 2010. Niigataken chiiki bosai keikaku (shinsai taisaku hen) shinkyu taisho hyo.
Anthrozoös 2015.28:291-304.
http://www.pref.niigata.lg.jp/HTML_Article/ 988/303/shinsaishinkyuu.pdf. Accessed on December 12, 2011.

Niigata Veterinary Medical Association. n.d. Chuetsu daishinsai ni okeru katsudo keika.
http://www.niigatakenju.or.jp/05aigo/05pdf/04cyuetujishin.pdf. Accessed on December 10, 2011.
Pet & Family Small-Amount Short-Term Insurance Company. 2012. Petto no bosai taisaku ishikichosa.
http://www.petfamilyins.co.jp/news/120823.pdf. Accessed on March 21, 2013.
Shinjuku Ward Health Center, Department of Risk Management & Tokyo Veterinary Medical Association Shinjuku
Branch. 2008. Iza to iutoki ni saigai kara petto wo mamorutameni. http://awn.sub.jp/cn/snj
/hinan/08snjsaig.pdf. Accessed on November 15, 2011.
Staats, S., Miller, D., Carnot, M. J., Rada, K. and Turnes, J. 1996. The Miller-Rada Commitment to Pets Scale.
Anthrozoös 9: 88–94.
Statistics Bureau. 2011. Jinko nado kihon shukei kekka. Kokusei Chosa. http://www.stat.go.jp/data
/kokusei/2010/. Accessed on September 2, 2013.
Sugita, H. 2003. Inu no kainushi to inu ni taisuru aichakudo ga kainushi no shintaiteki kenkou to seishinteki
kenkou ni oyobosu kouka. JGSS Kenkyu Ronbunshu 2: 127–143.
Thompson, K. 2013. Save me, save my dog increasing natural disaster preparedness and survival by addressing
human–animal relationships. Australian Journal of Communication 40: 123–136.
Anthrozoös
304

Yamazaki 2015

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Yamazaki 2015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Anthrozoös

A multidisciplinary journal of the interactions of people and animals

ISSN: 0892-7936 (Print) 1753-0377 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rfan20

A Survey of Companion-Animal Owners Affected

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2015.11435403

Published online: 16 Jun 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

ANTHROZOÖS VOLUME 28, ISSUE 2 REPRINTS AVAILABLE PHOTOCOPYING © ISAZ 2015

Humane Society International, Tokyo, Japan

Keywords: animal relief, disaster, pet attachment, pet-related support

administered after the 3.11 disaster.

for support, evacuation with pets, and pet attachment.

initial and current phases.

of residents’ associations of selected temporary housing communities, self-administered sur-

Table 1. Percentage of pet owners who evacuated with their pets.

Table 2. Percentage of pet owners who engaged in each type of preparation.

Evacuated Could Not Evacuated Could Not

Table 4. Percentage of pet owners who used each type of support.

Provision of pet supplies 41.3% (38) 26.1% (24)

Consultation on pet troubles 22.5% (23) 22.5% (23)

Need for Support

scores by pet-evacuation status (Table 3).

2013 is estimated to be 18,862 (Fukushima Prefecture 2013).

5. Created based on a pet attachment scale used in Staats et al. (1996).

48 & 49: 1–3.

http://www.pref.niigata.lg.jp/HTML_Article/ 988/303/shinsaishinkyuu.pdf. Accessed on December 12, 2011.

You might also like