The There Is No Poop Fairy campaign began in Albuquerque, New Mexico, in 2014 to encourage dog owners to pick up their dogs’ waste so that it does not contaminate the Rio Grande through stormwater runoff. This research aimed to understand the success of the campaign using a survey of local dog owners. Results suggest that the campaign was successful based on its reach and influence on self-reported pickup frequency and showed that those who were aware of the campaign reported higher frequencies of dog waste pickup, greater environmental concern, and greater awareness about the effects of dog waste on stormwater quality.
AtenstaedtR. L.JonesS.2011. “Interventions to Prevent Dog Fouling: A Systematic Review of the Evidence.” Public Health125 (2): 90–92. doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2010.09.006.
5.
BenderRalfGrouvenUlrich. 1997. “Ordinal Logistic Regression in Medical Research.” Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London31 (5): 546–51.
6.
Bernalillo County. 2016. “FY 2016 MS4 Annual Report in Compliance with Watershed Based Permit NMR04A000.” Albuquerque: State of New Mexico Natural Resource Services.
7.
Bernalillo County. 2017. “FY 2017 MS4 Annual Report in Compliance with Watershed Based Permit NMR04A000.” Albuquerque: State of New Mexico Natural Resource Services.
BorthwickFiona. 2009. “Governing Pets and Their Humans: Dogs and Companion Animals in New South Wales, 1966–98.” Griffith Law Review18 (1): 185–201. doi:10.1080/10383441.2009.10854635.
10.
BrookshireDavid S.GuptaHoshin V.MatthewsOlen Paul. 2012. Water Policy in New Mexico: Addressing the Challenge of an Uncertain Future. New York: RFF Press.
11.
CarterSimon Bruce.2016. “Establishing a Framework to Understand the Regulation and Control of Dogs in Urban Environments: A Case Study of Melbourne, Australia.” SpringerPlus5 (1): 1190. doi:10.1186/s40064-016-2843-8.
12.
City of Albuquerque. 2016. “Storm Water Management Program (SWMP).” Albuquerque: City of Albuquerque.
13.
ClopperC. J.PearsonE. S.1934. “The Use of Confidence or Fiducial Limits Illustrated in the Case of the Binomial.” Biometrika26 (4): 404–13. doi:10.2307/2331986.
14.
DegelingChrisRockMelanieRogersWendyRileyTherese. 2016. “Habitus and Responsible Dog-Ownership: Reconsidering the Health Promotion Implications of ‘Dog-Shaped’ Holes in People’s Lives.” Critical Public Health26 (2): 191–206. doi:10.1080/09581596.2015.1026876.
15.
DergesJaneLynchRebeccaClowAngelaPetticrewMarkDraperAlizon. 2012. “Complaints about Dog Faeces as a Symbolic Representation of Incivility in London, UK: A Qualitative Study.” Critical Public Health22 (4): 419–25. doi:10.1080/09581596.2012.710738.
16.
DillmanDon A.SmythJolene D.ChristianLeah Melani. 2014. Internet, Phone, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. 4th ed.Hoboken: John Wiley.
17.
EtikanI.MusaS. A.AlkassimR. S.2016. “Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling.” American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics5 (1): 1–4. doi:10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11.
18.
FarrowKatherineGrolleauGillesIbanezLisette. 2017. “Social Norms and Pro-environmental Behavior: A Review of the Evidence.” Ecological Economics140:1–13. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.04.017.
19.
GómezEdwin. 2013. “Dog Parks: Benefits, Conflicts, and Suggestions.” Journal of Park and Recreation Administration31 (4): 79–91.
20.
GrahamTaryn M.GloverTroy D.2014. “On the Fence: Dog Parks in the (Un)leashing of Community and Social Capital.” Leisure Sciences36 (3): 217–34. doi:10.1080/01490400.2014.888020.
21.
GrossMatthiasHortaAna. 2016. “Dog Shit Happens: Human-Canine Interactions and the Immediacy of Excremental Presence.” In Microsociological Perspectives for Environmental Sociology, edited by BrewsterBradley H.PuddephattAntony J., 159–76. London: Routledge.
22.
HollanderM.WolfeD. A.1973. Nonparametric Statistical Methods. New York: John Wiley.
23.
JacksonSara. 2010. “Pets as Generators of Social Capital: A Preliminary Review of Primary Evidence.” Resilience: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Science and Humanitarianism1:27–39.
24.
JasonL. A.ZolikE. S.1981. “Modifying Dog Litter in Urban Communities.” American Journal of Public Health71 (7): 746–47.
OvergaauwPaul A. M.van ZutphenLindaHoekDeniseYayaFelix O.RoelfsemaJeroenPinelliElenavan KnapenFransKortbeekLaetitia M.2009. “Zoonotic Parasites in Fecal Samples and Fur from Dogs and Cats in The Netherlands.” Veterinary Parasitology163 (1–2): 115–22. doi:10.1016/j.vetpar.2009.03.044.
28.
Parsons Water & Infrastructure. 2005. Middle Rio Grande Microbial Source Tracking Assessment Report. Austin: Parsons Water & Infrastructure.
29.
PembertonNeil. 2017. “The Burnley Dog War: The Politics of Dog-Walking and the Battle over Public Parks in Post-industrial Britain.” Twentieth Century British History28 (2): 239–67. doi:10.1093/tcbh/hww045.
30.
Prat-OrtegaGenísde la RochaJaime. 2018. “Selective Attention: A Plausible Mechanism Underlying Confirmation Bias.” Current Biology28 (19): R1151–54. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2018.08.024.
31.
PutnamRobert D.1993. Making Democracy Work. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
32.
PutnamRobert D.2001a. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon and Schuster.
33.
PutnamRobert D.2001b. “Social Capital: Measurement and Consequences.” Isuma: Canadian Journal of Policy Research2:41–51. doi:10.1017/S1474746403001052.
34.
RockMelanie J.2013. “Pet Bylaws and Posthumanist Health Promotion: A Case Study of Urban Policy.” Critical Public Health23 (2): 201–12. doi:10.1080/09581596.2012.749343.
35.
RockMelanie J.GrahamTaryn M.MassoloAlessandroMcCormackGavin R.2016. “Dog-Walking, Dog-Fouling and Leashing Policies in Urban Parks: Insights from a Natural Experiment Designed as a Longitudinal Multiple-Case Study.” Landscape and Urban Planning153:40–50. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.04.018.
36.
RohlfVanessa I.BennettPauleen C.ToukhsatiSamiaColemanGrahame. 2010. “Why Do Even Committed Dog Owners Fail to Comply with Some Responsible Ownership Practices?” Anthrozoos23 (2): 143–55. doi:10.2752/175303710X12682332909972.
37.
ThacherJ.MarseeM.PittsH.HansenJ.ChermakJ.ThomsonB.2011. Assessing Customer Preferences and Willingness to Pay: A Handbook for Water Utilities. Denver: Water Environment Federation.
38.
TooheyAnn M.McCormackGavin R.Doyle-BakerPatricia K.AdamsC. L.RockMelanie J.2013. “Dog-Walking and Sense of Community in Neighborhoods: Implications for Promoting Regular Physical Activity in Adults 50 Years and Older.” Health and Place22:75–81. doi:10.1016/j.healthplace.2013.03.007.
39.
TooheyAnn M.RockMelanie J.2011. “Unleashing Their Potential: A Critical Realist Scoping Review of the Influence of Dogs on Physical Activity for Dog-Owners and Non-owners.” International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity8 (46): 46–54. doi:10.1186/1479-5868-8-46.
40.
TooheyAnn M.RockMelanie J.2015. “Newspaper Portrayals, Local Policies, and Dog-Supportive Public Space: Who’s Wagging Whom?” Anthrozoös28 (4): 549–67. doi:10.1080/08927936.2015.1052285.
UrbanikJulieMorganMary. 2013. “A Tale of Tails: The Place of Dog Parks in the Urban Imaginary.” Geoforum44:292–302. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2012.08.001.
43.
VagiasWade M.2006. “Liker-type Scale Response Anchors.” Clemson, South Carolina: Clemson International Institute for Tourism & Research Development. Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, Clemson University.
44.
WoodLisaGiles-CortiBillieBulsaraMax. 2005. “The Pet Connection: Pets as a Conduit for Social Capital?” Social Science and Medicine61 (6): 1159–73. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.01.017.
45.
WoodLisaMartinKarenChristianHayleyHoughtonSteveKawachiIchiroVallesiShannenMcCuneSandra. 2017. “Social Capital and Pet Ownership—A Tale of Four Cities.” SSM-Population Health3:442–47. doi:10.1016/j.ssmph.2017.05.002.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
