Singh 1

Parnika Singh

Mr. Webb

AL 8th Grade Social Studies

9 April 2021

The Distribution of Pets in American Society

Introduction

Mahatma Gandhi once said, “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be

judged by the way its animals are treated.” In today’s world, pets are a regular part of society and

are treated extremely well. Our friends and families keep pets in their homes for a variety of

reasons and on TV, we watch advertisements for pet food and toys. Pets have always been a part

of Western civilization. The first-ever pet was likely dogs, as these animals were domesticated

by humans for hunting reasons. This caused an initial distribution of pets around the world,

especially throughout European society where pets were a sign of status. After dogs came horses

and cats, though these animals were domesticated much later in human history than the dog

(“Pet”). The primary bond distinguishing a pet-and-owner relationship is affection, as this is

what truly ties a pet to its owner and makes pets so relevant in today’s society (Brulliard). This

connection affects pet owners and the people around them, causing unintentional but powerful

consequences. Often, this relationship has been unabashedly sentimentalized in myth, art, and

literature. In today’s day and age, there are many different types of pets, such as birds, rabbits, or

exotic snakes. All of these pets have their own unique needs, such as specific food or housing,

which makes certain groups of people more or less attracted to them. How pets are distributed

can tell us a lot about our society and how it functions. The distribution of pets is caused by
 Singh 2

various demographic factors, such as income, ethnicity, and age, and it also betters society

economically, physically, and emotionally. 

Causes

The distribution of wealth directly impacts the distribution of pets in the USA, since

owning a pet costs money. States with a higher median household income, such as Washington

and Utah, making about $114,127.44 and $112,799.70 per year respectively, have a much higher

concentration of pet owners than states with a lower median household income, such as

Louisiana and Georgia which make $78,124.94 and $84,224.69 (PK) (Appendix). Pets are

expensive to take care of as they need food, toys, and veterinary care. Because of all these

combined fees, low-income families are unable to adopt or own many pets since they do not

have room in their budget to take care of an animal. On the other hand, higher-income families

do have this money, meaning they have the option to adopt and own a pet, a choice many low-

income families do not even have. Since low-income families cannot own a pet even if they do

want to, states with a lower median household income tend to have a lower distribution of pets

than states with a higher household income. Wealth also impacts other lifestyle factors, which

impact a person’s ability to adopt a pet. The Urban Institute says, “Homeowners are more likely

than renters to have pets. Fifty-seven percent of homeowners have pets compared with 37

percent of renters,” (Goodman, Strochak, Zhu). This makes a lot of sense, since one’s landlord

would not want an animal damaging the apartment. Because renters are often also people who

are living paycheck to paycheck and simply do not have the money to go out and permanently

buy a house, they can neither afford a pet nor actually keep one in their home, hence causing

higher-income states and counties to have a higher distribution of pets. 

 Singh 3

The distribution of race also impacts pet ownership since each racial group has its own

unique culture. Hispanic and Caucasian community members are more likely than average to

have pets in their households. Roughly 70 percent of Caucasian community members own at

least one pet and 69 percent of Hispanic community members are pet owners (Miles).

Historically, many Caucasian individuals lived on farms, prompting them to keep animals such

as lap dogs for comfort or cats to chase mice. Hispanic people also kept animals for similar

reasons, meaning that the keeping of animals is an ingrained part of the culture of these two

groups of people. This is why more predominantly Caucasian or Hispanic areas have a very

concentrated distribution of pets, such as in Wyoming or West Virginia (Appendix). The people

who live in these areas simply have a history of keeping pets and hence are more likely to do so.

But on the flip side, only 43 percent of Asian community members own at least one pet. (Miles).

In Asian culture, it is not common to own pets, since many Asian cultures think of animals as

dirty and therefore do not want to keep them inside the house. This idea stems from the

polytheistic religions of that region, which had animalistic demons and evil spirits. This notion

has existed for many years in Asian countries and is thus a foundational part of Asian culture.

So, when Asian families immigrate to the USA, they subconsciously bring this culture with them

and therefore do not adopt pets since it goes against their values. This anti-pet culture leads to a

low distribution of pets in areas that have many Asian immigrants, such as New York or

California (Appendix). So the distribution of races impacts the pet-owning culture of an area, and

hence the distribution of pets themselves. 

Age is another demographic characteristic that greatly influences and impacts the

distribution of pet ownership per state since lifestyle needs change with age. Between 2008 and

2018, the number of pet owners in the 55 and over category increased by 11.6 million, much
 Singh 4

more than any other age group (“Baby Boomers”). As people grow older, they become more

secluded as they lack the energy to go out and make new friends or try new things. Because of

this, many elderly folks feel rather lonely, and so they adopt pets to keep them company during

their retirement years. This is why states that tend to be retirement hotspots, such as Vermont,

have such a high distribution of pet owners (Appendix). The elderly population simply brings

pets into the state when they go there to retire. This however, is not at all true for younger

people. States like Colorado and California have a very low average age, 36.9 years and 36.8

years respectively, meaning both of these states are constituted of a very young population

(“Median-Age”). Both of them also have very low distributions of pet owners, 47.20% and

40.10% respectively (Appendix). The younger population is still trying to figure out what to do

with their lives and also exploring the world. Pets are a large responsibility that tie people down

and cost a lot of money, something many young people do not want yet. This younger population

also generally still has a very active social life, so they do not need pets for companionship

reasons. Both of these, in turn, leads to the states which have a lower average age having a lower

distribution of pet owners. The distribution of pet ownership also has a large impact on the way

certain states and their people function.

Implications

The distribution of pet owners directly impacts what kinds of jobs will be in demand in a

certain area and hence impacts the economy. Pet parents spend the most in the pet food and

veterinary services areas of the industry, but they also funnel plenty of money into the

manufacturing of pet supplies and toys, pet pharmaceuticals, grooming, boarding, wholesale and

retail trade involving pet products, and the emerging pet health insurance industry (Baxter). In an

area with a high distribution of pets, jobs in these industries will be in high demand by the
 Singh 5

population as they need veterinary care and other such services for their animals. Hence this

creates a larger job market for all kinds of different jobs in the pet industry, from becoming a vet

with a lot of training to working as a cashier in a pet store. All of these new jobs help people

make money and also lower the unemployment rate since individuals can now start working as a

pet groomer or pet food manufacturer. This also helps bolster the community’s economy since a

lot of new revenue is being generated from these jobs. The entirety of the pet industry also has a

large impact on the overall economy. Not only does the pet industry contribute more than $221

billion to the economy, but that also includes an impressive $23 billion in federal, state, and local

taxes (Hassel). As one can see, the pet industry is a large part of the country’s overall economy.

In a state with a high percentage of pet owners, there will be a greater revenue generated by the

pet industry, hence strengthening their economy and making it better prepared for things like

market crashes or dry spells, since the revenue is already so high. The large amount generated in

taxes also helps improve education, health care, and overall life for the residents of that state,

making them happier but also readier for when they need to get jobs themselves. This increases

the durability of the workforce and bolsters the economy even more.

A higher distribution of pets can also be linked to a more physically healthy population.

Studies by the CDC have shown that the bond between people and their pets can physically

decrease blood pressure, cholesterol levels, and triglyceride levels (“Healthy”). The bond of

affection between an owner and their animal helps calm a person down and reduce their stress

levels, decreasing the risk for many harmful conditions. These conditions can also cause many

different health issues, as both high cholesterol and high blood pressure can cause health

problems or even stroke. So, by keeping a pet, one lessens the risk of these conditions and hence

improves their overall health, as they now have a lesser risk of developing health issues. In a
 Singh 6

population where many people keep pets, an improvement in the general health of the population

will be seen as fewer people suffer from high blood pressure or high triglyceride levels because

of their pets, in comparison to a population that lives in an area with a low distribution of pet

owners. The responsibilities included in caring for a pet can also make one physically fitter. Dog

owners tend to be 14 times more likely than non-owners to walk for recreation and cat owners

tend to have better reflexes (Westgarth). Physical activity is very good for one’s health. It helps

strengthen muscles and bones, increase overall energy levels, help your skin become healthier,

and even better your memory and concentration. Owning a pet encourages one to exercise more,

and sometimes even forces one to exercise in the cases of taking a pet dog on a walk in the rain

or chasing down a pet cat. This in turn helps one become more physically healthy as they reap all

the benefits of exercising. In a population with a high concentration of pet owners, a larger group

of the population will be exercising in this manner, meaning the population will be healthier as

they will reap all the benefits of exercising. A population with a low pet ownership distribution

will be less healthy in general since this population is not prompted into exercising like the

former population is.

Pets help decrease feelings of loneliness in life and also boost one’s overall mental

health, making a kinder and more joyful society. The UK Mental Health Organization states,

“pets give their owners company, a sense of security and someone to share the routine of the day

with,” (“Mental Health”). By providing their owners with steady company, pets serve as a great

companion for people which helps decrease feelings of loneliness or isolation, as the owner now

has a friend with them at all times. Feelings of isolation and loneliness limit what a person can

accomplish, as these negative emotions make them feel as if they cannot make any new friends

or connections. Pets break this thought process and allow their owners to make new connections
 Singh 7

and foster relationships, creating a social impact and leading to a closer-knit and happier

population in areas where there is a high concentration of pet owners. In areas with a lower

distribution of pet owners, the population feels more isolated, and hence cannot create new

friendships, leading the population to be very individualistic and separated from one another.

Pets owners also state that their pets lead to conversations, as walking a dog often leads to

talking with other dog owners, and posting pictures of an exotic animal prompts other people

who own the same pet into commenting or responding (“Mental Health”). Pets create

opportunities for people to socialize by simply existing, as they allow humans to make

connections with one another. Pets provide a sort of common ground for many people, especially

if one lives in an area with many pet owners. This commonality allows for one to talk to others

and foster new friendships and relationships, making one feel less lonely and isolated as they

now have new friends. This leads to the population being closer to one another overall, and also

generally happier, which are both very positive consequences of pet ownership. 

Conclusion

Pets are clearly an integral part of our society, influencing it on every level. Companion

animals have always been an important part of human history, consistently providing us with joy

and happiness. This also shows how the wilderness is an essential part of human life, as the

natural mannerisms of these pets fill us with a happiness that nothing else could possibly

emulate. But our society as a whole does not quite reflect this naturalism with all of our

advanced technology and concrete buildings. Instead of embracing the nature that brings us such

joy, we try to separate ourselves from it via synthetic, manmade creations. In fact, humanity

actively tries to destroy nature by plundering its natural resources and trying to expand its

civilizations. This destruction is very counterproductive, as nature actively improves the lives of
 Singh 8

people, pets being the prime example of this. Yet for some reason, humanity is determined to

extinguish nature. Humanity needs to stop trying to escape from the natural world and instead

embrace it, just as they have embraced pets into their lives. This will benefit everyone, humans

and animals alike, and make the world a happier and freer place to live.
 Singh 9

Appendix:

Pet Ownership Distribution by State

 Singh 10

Works Cited:
Anonymous. “Baby Boomers and Millennials are Redefining Modern Pet Ownership Trends”

PR Newswire, 3 December 2019, https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/baby-

boomers-and-millennials-are-redefining-modern-pet-ownership-trends-reports-packaged-

facts-300963558.html

Anonymous. “Healthy Pets, Healthy People” CDC, 15 April 2019,

https://www.cdc.gov/healthypets/health-benefits/index.html

Anonymous. “Median Age by State” World Population Review, 3 January 2021,

worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/median-age-by-state.

Anonymous. “Pets and Mental Health” Mental Health Foundation,

https://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/a-to-z/p/pets-and-mental-health#:~:text=The

%20companionship%20that%20a%20pet,to%20live%20mentally%20healthier%20lives.

Ault, Alicia. “Ask Smithsonian: When Did People Start Keeping Pets?” Smithsonian Magazine,

28 September 2018, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/ask-

smithsonian-when-did-people-start-keeping-pets-180960616/

Baxter, Jamie. “Americans’ Pet Spending Reaches Record-Breaking High: $95.7 Billion” APPA,

27 February 2020, https://www.americanpetproducts.org/press_releasedetail.asp?id=205

Brulliard, Karin. “Why do we love pets? An expert explains.” The Washington Post, 3 November

2017, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/animalia/wp/2017/11/03/pets-arent-

wonder-drugs-heres-why-we-love-them-anyway/

Goodman, Laurie. Strochak, Sarah. Zhu, Jun. “A housing survey reveals five trends about

American pet owners” Urban Institute, 3 October 2018, https://www.urban.org/urban-

wire/housing-survey-reveals-five-trends-about-american-pet-owners
 Singh 11

Haseel, Nancy E. “$221.1 BILLION GENERATED BY THE U.S. PET INDUSTRY IN 2015”

American Pet Professionals, 3 February 2017,

https://americanpetprofessionals.com/tag/pet-industry-impact-on-the-us-economy/

Miles, Kristen. “Man's Best Friend - Multicultural Pet Ownership Trends” GoBranded, 31

October 2018, https://gobranded.com/branded-poll-multicultural-pet-ownership-trends/

“Pet.” Encyclopedia Britannica, 2 July 2020, https://www.britannica.com/animal/pet

PK. “Average Income by State, Median, Top & Percentiles [2020].” DQYDJ, 30 Dec. 2020,

dqydj.com/average-income-by-state-median-top-percentiles/

Westgarth, Carrie. “Dog owners are more likely to meet physical activity guidelines than people

without a dog: An investigation of the association between dog ownership and physical

activity levels in a UK community” Nature, 18 April 2019,

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-41254-6#:~:text=Dog%20owners%20were

%2014%20times,%25%20CI%201.27%E2%80%935.91).