Coverage
Why isn’t my city here?
Almost certainly because your city has never published the data. Only eighteen places in the United States release individual pet records including the animal’s name, and two metros account for about three quarters of every record that exists.
1. Most cities publish nothing
This is the reason for almost every absence. Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, Philadelphia, Dallas, San Diego, San Francisco, Washington, Denver, Atlanta, Miami, Boston, Nashville, Detroit, Portland and Minneapolis publish no pet records at name level. There is no state registry anywhere in the country. Dallas and Louisville publish licence data with breed and date but leave the animal’s name out.
If you would like your city in here, the people to ask are your own city’s open data team. It costs them almost nothing: the data already exists in their licensing system.
2. One city publishes it but forbids this use
Seattle releases pet licences and marks the dataset public domain, but the city’s data policy says that where data “can be readily sorted, filtered, or configured as a list of individuals, it is not to be used for a commercial purpose”, following Washington state law. This site carries advertising, so it is commercial. Seattle stays out until the city tells us otherwise in writing. It is a shame, because Seattle is one of the very few places that licenses cats.
3. Some we refuse to use
Sussex County, Delaware publishes owner names, full street addresses, email addresses and telephone numbers alongside the dog. Arlington, Virginia publishes owner street addresses. Both are legally available and neither will ever appear here. A dog’s name is a fun fact. Its owner’s home address is not.
What is coming
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, which is Pittsburgh and its suburbs, and Cambridge, Massachusetts. Both publish cleanly and both are public domain dedications. After that, the shelter datasets from Austin, Long Beach, Sonoma County, Norfolk and Bloomington, which cover cats as well as dogs.