Printable VersionAnimal Hoarders
Animal hoarders live secretive, reclusive lives. Their closest companions are the animals they abuse. In the following story, from the RSPCA’s Animals magazine, Winter 2005, the RSPCA reveals the latest profiling and research on the terrifying problem of animal hoarders and the cost to the animals in their care. And, we reveal the increasing burden on the resources of welfare organisations such as the RSPCA.
Animal hoarders are everywhere. We show you how to identify them and what you can do to help stop them. Animals’ special report on hoarders contains shocking pictures and descriptions of the conditions in which hoarders keep their animals.
If this upsets you, do not continue.
The cost
Approximately 20,000 animals are being kept in a living hell by animal hoarders in NSW.Hoarders are people who accumulate more animals than they can possibly care for, and the figures, according to RSPCA chief veterinarian Mark Lawrie, are frightening.
“In the USA there are an estimated 70,000 animal hoarders,” he said.
“And the USA has ten times the population of Australia. So we estimate there could be up to 2000 people hoarding animals in this country.
“There are probably around 700 animal hoarders in NSW. They would have an average of 30 animals each, meaning there are potentially around 20,000 animals in the hands of animal hoarders. We see approximately 200 new cases every year.
“Most veterinary clinics would have one animal hoarder amongst its clients.
“Many of these animals would be breeding and contributing to the problems associated with animals owned by hoarders – temperament and behaviour problems and untreated veterinary conditions.
“The tragedy is that it is these problems which ultimately make many of them unsuitable for re-homing.
“This is a problem that the RSPCA and the community needs to deal with and so we are taking a much more active role in this area.
“But the frightening thing is it places a huge burden on the RSPCA through legal costs and the care of sometimes hundreds of animals who need to be protected until they are rehabilitated and rehomed.
“Animal hoarding results in an enormous financial burden on animal welfare organisations and communities.
“Even with the co-operation of the hoarder, rescue operations, veterinary care, and housing of animals can run into many thousands of dollars. To make matters worse, hoarders will often fight through the courts to keep their animals. In these cases, costs are tens of thousands of dollars for ongoing animal care and housing and litigation. In some cases these costs are never recovered,” Dr Lawrie said.
Research from the USA indicates that hoarders probably exist in every community. They may even be thought of as animal lovers in their local community but the reality is very different. Typically they live a reclusive life in appalling filth and squalor with an ever increasing number of grossly neglected, starving, ill and dying animals, whose most basic needs are not being met.
The animal hoarder often appears intelligent and clearly believes they are the saviour of their animals. But they are in complete denial about the extreme suffering they are inflicting and the living hell to which their captives are subjected.
Recognition of the problem is the first step in reducing its impact and getting much needed help. Co-ordinated efforts by law enforcement, mental health and social workers, legislators, animal welfare organisations, veterinarians and the media are critical in finding effective solutions.
The profile
- An animal hoarder is most often female, middle-aged to elderly and usually single.
- Any animal from cats to dogs to horses to pigeons can be hoarded.
- It is common for a hoarder to have between 30 and 200 animals.
- In most cases, animal faeces and urine accumulates in living areas. In about a quarter of cases this includes the hoarder’s bed.
- Dead or sick animals are usually present and most hoarders deny their animals are suffering despite overwhelming evidence that they are.
- Hoarders are often intelligent and able to attract sympathy.
- They come from all sorts of backgrounds, including professionals such as nurses, psychologists and aged care workers.
- They are often secretive and socially isolated.
- They can be cunning and deceptive, will move house to avoid prosecution and are notorious for starting up again elsewhere.
- Even after conviction they do not stop unless psychiatric help is obtained.
The consequences
Animal hoarding results in extreme suffering, affecting large numbers of animals for prolonged periods. The extent of abuse, neglect and social deprivation is such that euthanasia is often the only practical option for many of the animals rescued from these situations.A hoarder’s house is usually unfit for human or animal habitation, basic sanitation is lacking and often plumbing or electricity doesn’t work because fear of discovery prevents the hoarder from seeking repairs. The house generally poses an increased risk to the local community from fire hazard and disease. Rat and insect infestations and odours create problems for neighbours.
In recent years a clear link has been established between animal and human abuse. Hoarders often neglect other family members such as children, dependent parents or disabled adults. There is also often significant self-neglect.
Education of both the public and animal care workers about this condition is essential to bring about early intervention and to prevent people from inadvertently “enabling” the hoarder.
Hoarders commonly receive animals from local people who know that they will always take one more. They may even obtain animals from vets or pounds who have no idea they are sending animals to a hoarder. There is often misguided public sympathy and support for hoarders who are perceived as animal lovers but we need to be quite clear that these people are serial animal abusers.
Legislation is needed which:
- defines an animal hoarder.
- emphasises that the hoarder does not recognise the problem.
- increases the penalty for animal hoarding.
- prescribes psychiatric help for offenders.
- requires they bear the cost of rescue and care of their animals.
The warning signs - especially for veterinarians
- A long list of pets, usually only taken to the vet once.
- No routine vaccination or desexing, usually only taken to the vet late in the course of illnesss.
- Evasive about how many pets they have.
- May seek heroic and futile care for animals they claim to have recently found.
- Animals may be bathed or perfumed to conceal odour.
- The hoarder may take a relatively present - able pet to the vet, but seek medication for more seriously ill animals at home.
- Claim to have found or rescued an animal which appears to have been confined in filthy conditions (for example, strong smell of urine, overgrown claws, muscle atrophy).
- An interest in rescuing more animals by checking notice boards and questioning other clients.
The carers
I first came across Eddy when he was brought to the vet clinic with 16 other border terriers. The condition of the dogs was a shock. They were very smelly and emaciated, along with their other problems.
Eddy had mange on his feet and he was scared of everything. But there was something special about him that made him stand out to me.
Although he was terrified, he really craved affection. He responded to affection immediately and that is quite normal when a dog has had to compete with so many others to have its needs met.
Once I took him home, he bonded quickly with my other dog but he had a few unusual quirks. Toilet training was a challenge, taking him for a walk was difficult because he is scared of cars. He stands up and growls at the television and barks to protect me from it.
When my Mum is knitting, that disturbs him too. I have a sarong that he thinks is alive and when the curtains move in the breeze he thinks they are alive too. And he is terrified of the mobile phone.
I have found that he progresses along quite well and we can work on his issues until they seem to be resolving, then his problems come back again. I try to reinforce that he has nothing to worry about, that he is in a safe environment. I go up to the object that frightens him and show him that it won’t hurt him and I reward him when he doesn’t react.
It’s also important that he has a route to get away and doesn’t feel trapped.
He is very scared of going in the car so we try to do short trips to socialise him to it.
Eddy also has nightmares and he screams in his sleep. He also has an obsession with leaning on something while he is sleeping and that is probably because he had to lean on the wall of the cage to support himself for so long.
He is obsessed with food and also with water, he will drink until he vomits.
However, he is a lovely little fellow, I don’t think he will ever be a normal dog, border terriers have quite eccentric personalities anyway, but his experiences have scarred him.
- Alison Weir
RSPCA veterinary nurse
This is Elvis, a young affen pinscher who needs a very understanding home. Elvis was rescued from an animal hoarder and has a life-long medical problem. Elvis’ daily medication for a pancreatic disorder costs about $30 a week.He is a favourite with RSPCA Yagoona staff who believe that after all he has been through, he needs a second chance to be happy.
Shelter supervisor Donna Hough would love to see Elvis find the right home. “He is so cute, he dances for us and he has a lovely nature. It seems wrong to put him to sleep when he would be a great pet for someone.” If you can help Elvis, please phone (02) 9770 7555.
The victims
RSPCA Yagoona shelter supervisor, Donna Hough works at the sharp end of the problem of animal hoarding – dealing with the victims.She has seen hundreds of animals come through the shelter who have little or no hope of finding a home because of the conditions they have come from – squalid, overcrowded, stressful and deprived.
“The shelter has taken in hundreds of dogs from serial offenders. We’ve had cocker spaniels from an animal hoarder who has been known to us for many years, Maltese terriers from two convicted hoarders, chihuahuas, Chinese crested dogs, and many others,” Donna said.
“When they come in, we know it means a lot of work for everyone. It’s a very intense time. Bathing and grooming is usually an issue and you can pretty much guarantee they’ve all got health issues – ear problems and teeth problems.
“The shelter has to assist with getting them booked in and finding places for them, which can be difficult.
“Unless they are seriously ill and have to stay in the clinic, the animal attendants take over their general care.
“Sometimes it is difficult to get them to eat properly, they are not used to eating out of bowls and have to be hand fed soft food for the first month. Many of them won’t eat on their own because they are used to the presence of lots of other dogs.
“There is a huge emotional cost involved in dealing with animals from hoarders. Often a lot of them aren’t suitable for re-homing or they are suffering, so they have to be euthanased.
“A lot of them don’t cope well with being here and it’s not as though you have one dog and you can work on its problems. You have 20 or 40 dogs all with the same issues.
“Those issues can include extreme timidness and lack of socialisation. They are usually never lead-trained and some of them panic if they are left on their own and try to escape.
“They often can’t relate to new feeding routines, in their previous homes, whatever they had to eat was thrown on the ground. And toilet training is never easy.
“It’s really distressing to see so many dogs suffering. It’s a challenge to find them homes and it’s very rewarding when we do.
“But people taking them on need to know where they come from and that they will have issues that may take years to overcome,” she said.
The problem
Dr Viktoria Sundakov is a psychiatrist who is involved in a survey of animal hoarders in NSW with Sydney South West Area Health Service and the RSPCA.She believes that animal hoarding may be an indication of a serious psychiatric or psychological disorder.
“In Australia, hoarding is an under-researched area. Most of the evidence comes from the US-based International Hoarding of Animals Research Consortium,” Dr Sundakov said.
“They have done two studies based on two series of cases (one of 54 and one of 71 cases), gained from animal welfare organisations in the USA. What they found was that a quarter of all animal hoarders ended up in permanent institutional care within several years.
“Therefore, we know that at least 25 per cent of cases had a psychological or psychiatric disorder such as dementia, brain damage or a psychotic illness. It is also very probable that a large proportion of the remaining 75 per cent of cases may also have had diagnosable illnesses, but the studies did not look at this specifically.
“So it is very probable that animal hoarding may be an indication of some sort of psychiatric or psychological problem,” she said.
“A lot of these cases could be treatable and even if it’s only 25 per cent, that’s a lot of animals who can be saved from hoarders and a lot of hoarders who can be treated,” she said.
Dr Sundakov says there are many psychiatric disorders with which hoarding has been linked. These include major psychiatric disorders such as the psychotic disorders, dementia, obsessive compulsive disorder, depression, anorexia, organic psychiatric disorders and personality disorders in particular those with attachment abnormalities.
“No single diagnosis fully explains animal hoarding. This is why more research is required to better understand it,” she said.
“Depending on the diagnosis, for some, treatment will be easier than for others.”
Dr Sundakov says the most difficult cases are those with personality disorders with attachment abnormalities.
“The evidence to date from the US is that most animal hoarders are older women without family or children who may have had a disrupted or difficult childhood themselves and as adults have had difficulties building relationships. For them their animals provide a sense of self, identity and family. If these people do not want treatment, such as psychotherapy, then there is very little that can be done.
Even the most serious animal hoarders may be able to hide their problem, according to Dr Sundakov.
“Even if people have a psychiatric illness they may still be able to live full lives and hold down jobs. They could be friends or neighbours who you would never know have an illness. It doesn’t need to permeate every aspect of their lives.
“For example, if someone has a delusional disorder where they are convinced they are on a special mission to save animals, it doesn’t mean that it will affect the other areas of their life.
“We all have little habits that we know we shouldn’t do and are socially ashamed of but we continue to do, such as smoking, and we are all capable of keeping them secret,” she said.
“In cases where there is not a diagnosable psychiatric or psychological illness, those people will be the most capable of keeping it secret. As a society, we do not pry into people’s lives.
“In every suburb there’s a run down, derelict house. If it’s just an old, eccentric person we don’t get involved. It’s only when neighbours notice noise and smell that people get involved.”
Dr Sundakov said there are signs which can indicate someone may have a psychiatric illness.
“These include saying things which sound odd or irrational, things which have no basis in reality and can not be corrected by reasoning with the person,” she said.
“Abnormal speech such as loud and fast speech which is difficult to interrupt and is erratic and incoherent, jumping from topic to topic.”
Collecting empty bottles of alcohol could also be an indication of alcohol related brain damage which could lead to hoarding.
“And in anyone over 65 who hoards animals, there should be a high rate of suspicion that they may be developing dementia,” she said.
Animal hoarding is notoriously difficult to treat with the RSPCA reporting high recidivism rates. In one US study the recidivism rate was over 25 per cent.
Dr Sundakov says the treatment depends on the diagnosis and that for some, treatment will be more successful than for others.
She said the most important thing was to have a high level of suspicion that animal hoarders may have an underlying illness and to refer them to their local community mental health services where they will be assessed and offered services if they need them.
“These are difficult cases and each one is a big burden. The more services who work together on them, the easier it is.
“The major victims are the animals but sometimes there are many other victims involved. The hoarders may have an untreated illness and other members of the community in particular those with a poor immune system, the elderly and children are potentially at risk of illness from disease transmitted by animals,” Dr Sundakov said.
The Courts
There is increasing concern in the community that cruelty offenders are not truly punished by our courts for their crimes. Most cruelty matters are dealt with by way of a small fine and rare gaol sentences are often overturned by a higher court.Many animal welfare supporters are concerned when the courts hand back an animal to an abuser or an animal hoarder is not banned from owning animals.
Sue Schreiner is an acting NSW magistrate of 30 years’ experience, and she puts the view from the bench. Magistrates don’t dismiss animal cruelty as a minor crime, she says, but are bound to do justice according to the law.
She argues the community needs more information before criticising the courts.
“The community itself has a fragmented approach to cruelty,” Ms Schreiner said.
People may become outraged about cruelty to kittens, but are not as concerned about the eggs they eat.
“Even within the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, there is ambiguity – some acts of cruelty are sanctioned by introducing concepts such as unnecessary and unjustifiable pain,” she said.
“Everyone would say they don’t like animal cruelty, but the fact is that we condone a great deal of it.
“There is no absolute prohibition on animal cruelty in our law and it is important that people understand that the position of the court is to act impartially.
“I suggest there is no general agreement in the community as to an appropriate penalty in any particular case, especially cruelty.
“Cruelty to anyone, including animals, is never relative, but deciding what is an appropriate penalty is relative because animal cruelty cases are one of the many kinds of cases which come before the courts every day.
“There is everything from bail or committal hearings for murder, to domestic violence, fraud or catching undersized fish.
“And while cruelty to animals is extremely important and serious, it has to be seen as part of the variety of offences the courts deal with.
“Of all the cases that come before the court, there are interest groups such as anti-domestic violence groups for example, who all have their axe to grind and think their issue deserves the highest penalty.
“In some respects every penalty imposed for animal cruelty could always be considered inadequate because the offence deals with behaviour towards a very vulnerable being.
“And while as a magistrate I don’t mind criticism, reporting of court decisions should be balanced and take into account the facts of the case and the legal principles which have to be applied.
“I can understand a lot of the criticism of magistrates and the frustration. But the public need to be informed of the legal principles involved in sentencing and the facts of the case. Then they can then constructively enter into the debate about whether a sentence is appropriate.”
Ms Schreiner said that emerging knowledge of the link between animal cruelty and human violence is even more reason for cautious sentencing.
“It is all the more reason for imposing a penalty which involves counselling or alternatives to gaol. I get the impression that most people want an offender to go to gaol, but gaol is not always a solution,” she said.
“Punishment must fit the crime – but in whose opinion? If the courts were to adopt a populist approach and seek to satisfy the community outrage as often whipped up by the media at the expense of doing justice, then the community as a whole suffers.”
Pressure from the community on politicians has its place, Ms Schreiner said. “But I certainly wouldn’t want to see mandatory sentences for animal cruelty. One size does not fit all,” she said.
Ms Schreiner said magistrates undergo continuing judicial education on issues such as animal cruelty and welcome speakers from many organisations such as the RSPCA.
The outcomes
Of 125 adult cases of animal cruelty prosecuted between July 2000 and February 2005 in NSW:2% (or three offenders) went to gaol
59% (74 offenders) received fines between $25 and $4000
5% (6 offenders) received community service orders
The remainder received good behaviour bonds. Some charges were dismissed.
Of 123 cases of aggravated cruelty:
5% (six offenders) went to gaol
49% (60 people) were fined between $50 and $5000
10% (12) received community service orders
2% (2) received suspended jail sentences
13% (16) were placed on good behaviour bonds.
Some charges were dismissed.
The solution
The RSPCA believes the reality of animal suffering should be brought home to cruelty offenders.
While the RSPCA respects that the courts are bound by law and must consider all the facts, our inspectors also work with facts. It is their role to bring offenders before the courts if those facts reveal a breach of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.
Inspectors work hard to bring their matters before the courts and have a significant emotional investment in both the outcome of the case and the welfare of the animals involved in it.
But in my 14 years’ experience at the RSPCA (as an inspector, chief inspector and now in my role as Deputy CEO), I can only remember four cases where the punishment truly fitted the crime.
In two of those cases a gaol term was imposed and in the other two the penalty was a significant fine and a ban on owning animals. Prohibition orders (bans) which are often the only way to stop people offending again, are rare.
Only just recently in the case of the kitten burns victim William, a gaol sentence was overturned by the District Court and a 100 hours community service order imposed. It concerns me greatly that there appears to be no consistency between the courts and when sentences such as this are easily overturned, it sends the wrong message.
We need sentences which will deter other people committing acts of cruelty.The RSPCA recently circulated a petition which has collected thousands of signatures.
Twelve thousand people signed the petition calling on the courts to impose penalties which reflect the seriousness with which the community views animal cruelty.
We are grateful for the community’s support – it shows we are not alone in our campaign for reform.
- Steve Coleman, RSPCA Deputy CEO
 |  |  |  |