scholarly journals Assessing Animal Welfare in Animal-Visitor Interactions in Zoos and Other Facilities. A Pilot Study Involving Giraffes

Animals ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. 153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simona Normando ◽  
Ilaria Pollastri ◽  
Daniela Florio ◽  
Linda Ferrante ◽  
Elisabetta Macchi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Wild Animal ◽  
Assessment Procedure ◽  
Pilot Test ◽  
Cultural Changes ◽  
Multifaceted Approach ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Animal Welfare Assessment ◽  
The Impact

In recent years, awareness of the controversial aspects connected with wild animal-visitor interactions (AVIs) in zoos and other facilities has increased due to cultural changes. Therefore, the need to apply transparent procedures to evaluate AVIs programs in zoos and similar facilities has also increased. This study presents results of animal welfare’s assessment of a pilot test of a protocol based on six steps that aim to explore and assess the overall value of AVIs considering the impact both on animals and visitors. In the present paper, we discuss the multifaceted approach to animal welfare assessment during animal-visitor interactions, combining quantitative behavioural observations/analysis and a welfare risk-assessment procedure, which forms the basis of the six-step protocol. Pilot testing of said approach to animal welfare assessment involved giraffes (Giraffa camelopardalis) in an Italian zoo. No change in behaviour, suggestive of an increased welfare risk to the animals, was found. The risk analysis reported overall low risks for welfare, whereas enclosure analysis highlighted that the enclosure was suitable for allowing interactions without jeopardising animal welfare, mainly because it allowed animals to choose whether to interact or withdraw from interactions without decreasing the space available to them.

scholarly journals A Retrospective Literature Evaluation of the Integration of Stress Physiology Indices, Animal Welfare and Climate Change Assessment of Livestock

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 1287
Author(s):  
Edward Narayan ◽  
Michelle Barreto ◽  
Georgia-Constantina Hantzopoulou ◽  
Alan Tilbrook
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Physiological Stress ◽  
Livestock Production ◽  
Stress Physiology ◽  
Objective Measures ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Animal Welfare Assessment ◽  
The Impact

In this retrospective study, we conducted a desktop-based analysis of published literature using the ScienceDirect™ search engine to determine the proportion of livestock research within the last 7 years (2015–2021) that have applied animal welfare assessment combining objective measures of physiological stress and evaluation of climate change factors in order to provide an account of livestock productivity. From the search results, 563 published articles were reviewed. We found that the majority of the literature had discussed animal production outcomes (n = 491) and animal welfare (n = 453) either individually or in conjunction with another topic. The most popular occurrence was the combination of animal welfare assessment, objective measures of stress physiology and production outcomes discussed collectively (n = 218). We found that only 125 articles had discussed the impact of climate change (22.20%) on livestock production and/or vice versa. Furthermore, only 9.4% (n = 53) of articles had discussed all four factors and published research was skewed towards the dairy sector. Overall, this retrospective paper highlights that although research into animal welfare assessment, objective measures of stress and climate change has been applied across livestock production systems (monogastrics and ruminants), there remains a shortfall of investigation on how these key factors interact to influence livestock production. Furthermore, emerging technologies that can boost the quantitative evaluation of animal welfare are needed for both intensive and extensive production systems.

scholarly journals PSIV-33 The Animal Welfare Assessment Contest® as a Tool to Promote Animal Welfare Education

2020 ◽  
Vol 98 (Supplement_4) ◽  
pp. 468-468
Author(s):  
Sharon Kuca ◽  
Lindsey McKinney ◽  
Cia Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Students ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Educational Tool ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Behavioral Indicators ◽  
Animal Welfare Science ◽  
Computer Based ◽  
Animal Welfare Assessment ◽  
Strongly Agree

Abstract Established in 2001, the Animal Welfare Assessment Contest® (AWJAC®) aims to be an innovative educational tool for enhancing understanding and awareness of welfare issues affecting animals used for human purposes (e.g., research, agriculture, entertainment, companionship). The contest is open to participation by veterinary, undergraduate, and graduate students who may participate as individuals or as part of a team. A limited number of veterinarians are also eligible to compete as non-placing participants. Participation in the contest entails assessment of live and computer-based scenarios encompassing data, photographs, and videos of animals in comparable situations. Students then use the information obtained to rank the welfare of the animals in those situations on the basis of physiologic and behavioral indicators, with attention to facilities and management, and present their analyses orally to expert judges. The species featured change each year of the contest. At the completion of each contest, participants and coaches are asked to anonymously complete a written survey. The quantitative and qualitative results of this survey are used to determine if the contest has achieved its aims and incorporate suggestions for improvement of future contests. The majority of survey respondents from the five contests held between 2014–2018 report they either strongly agree or agree that the AWJAC increased their knowledge of animal welfare science (98%, n = 549) and was an overall valuable experience (99%, n = 547) that they would recommend to their peers (98%, n = 550). Respondents cited networking opportunities and diversity of species featured in the contest as key reasons the contest is valuable. Given these results, the AWJAC is successfully achieving its aims to increase animal welfare knowledge in an innovative way.

scholarly journals The Impact of ‘Selfie’ Tourism on the Behaviour and Welfare of Brown-Throated Three-Toed Sloths

Animals ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
pp. 216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gemma Carder ◽  
Tinka Plese ◽  
Fernando Machado ◽  
Suzanne Paterson ◽  
Neil Matthews ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Future Study ◽  
Average Duration ◽  
Wild Animal ◽  
Wild Animals ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Bradypus Variegatus ◽  
Focal Observation ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Physical Manipulation

The use of wild animals as photo props is prevalent across the globe and is widely recognised to represent a potential animal welfare concern. However, detailed information regarding the specific impacts of such activity on wild animal behaviour is currently lacking. Herein, we investigated how brown-throated three-toed sloths (Bradypus variegatus) were handled by tourists, and how sloths behaved during wildlife ‘selfies’ taken in Manaus, Brazil and Puerto Alegria and Iquitos in Peru. In total, we observed 17 sloths (during 70 focal observations) that were provided for use in wildlife selfies on 34 different tours. We found that an average number of 5 people held each sloth during each focal observation. For 48.6% of the time the sloths were handled in a way which involved physical manipulation of the sloths’ head and/or limbs and/or being held by the claws. From the eight different types of sloth behaviour observed, we found that the two types performed for the longest average duration of time were surveillance (55.3%) and limb stretching (12.6%). Our findings show that when being handled sloths were frequently held in ways that may compromise their welfare. Although to date the behaviour of sloths while being handled has not been reported in any published literature, in this study we document certain behaviours which may act as indicators of compromised welfare. We suggest that our data provides a potential baseline for future study into the behaviour and welfare of sloths.

scholarly journals Is the profitability of Canadian tiestall farms associated with their performance on an animal welfare assessment?

2018 ◽  
Vol 101 (3) ◽  
pp. 2359-2369 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Villettaz Robichaud ◽  
J. Rushen ◽  
A.M. de Passillé ◽  
E. Vasseur ◽  
D.B. Haley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Animal Welfare Assessment

scholarly journals Test−Retest Reliability of the ‘Welfare Quality® Animal Welfare Assessment Protocol for Sows and Piglets’. Part 1. Assessment of the Welfare Principle of ‘Appropriate Behavior’

Animals ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Friedrich ◽  
Krieter ◽  
Kemper ◽  
Czycholl
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Correlation Coefficient ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Appropriate Behavior ◽  
Assessment Protocol ◽  
Smallest Detectable Change ◽  
Welfare Quality ◽  
Animal Welfare Assessment ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

The present study’s aim was to assess the test−retest reliability (TRR) of the ‘Welfare Quality® animal welfare assessment protocol for sows and piglets’ focusing on the welfare principle ‘appropriate behavior’. TRR was calculated using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (RS), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), smallest detectable change (SDC), and limits of agreement (LoA). Principal component analysis (PCA) was used for deeper analysis of the Qualitative Behavior Assessment (QBA). The study was conducted on thirteen farms in Northern Germany, which were visited five times by the same observer. Farm visits 1 (F1; day 0) were compared to farm visits 2 to 5 (F2–F5). The QBA indicated no TRR when applying the statistical parameters introduced above (e.g., ‘playful‘ (F1–F4) RS 0.08 ICC 0.00 SDC 0.50 LoA [−0.62, 0.38]). The PCA detected contradictory TRR. Acceptable TRR could be found for parts of the instantaneous scan sampling (e.g., negative social behavior (F1–F3) RS 0.45 ICC 0.37 SDC 0.02 LoA [−0.03, 0.02]). The human−animal relationship test solely achieved poor TRR, whereas scans for stereotypies showed sufficient TRR (e.g., floor licking (F1–F4) RS 0.63 ICC 0.52 SDC 0.05 LoA [−0.08, 0.04]). Concluding, the principle ‘appropriate behavior’ does not represent TRR and further investigation is needed before implementation on-farm.

scholarly journals Developing an Animal Welfare Assessment Protocol for Cows in Extensive Beef Cow–Calf Systems in New Zealand. Part 1: Assessing the Feasibility of Identified Animal Welfare Assessment Measures

Animals ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 1597 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Baby Kaurivi ◽  
Richard Laven ◽  
Rebecca Hickson ◽  
Tim Parkinson ◽  
Kevin Stafford
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Assessment Protocol ◽  
Beef Cow ◽  
Cattle Management ◽  
Assessment Measures ◽  
Animal Welfare Assessment ◽  
Cow Calf ◽  
On Farm

Potential measures suitable for assessing welfare in pasture-based beef cow–calf systems in New Zealand were identified from Welfare Quality and UC Davis Cow-Calf protocols. These were trialled on a single farm and a potential protocol of 50 measures created. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of the measures included in this protocol on multiple farms in order, to develop a credible animal welfare assessment protocol for pasture-based cow–calf farms systems in New Zealand. The assessment protocol was trialled on 25 farms over two visits and took a total of 2.5 h over both visits for a 100-cow herd. The first visit in autumn included an animal welfare assessment of 3366 cows during pregnancy scanning, while the second visit in winter included a questionnaire-guided interview to assess cattle management and health, and a farm resource evaluation. Through a process of eliminating unsuitable measures, adjustments of modifiable measures and retaining feasible measures, a protocol with 32 measures was created. The application of the protocol on the farms showed that not all measures are feasible for on-farm assessment, and categorisation of identified animal welfare measures into scores that indicate a threshold of acceptable and non-acceptable welfare standards is necessary.

Animal welfare assessment benchmarking as a tool for health and welfare planning in organic dairy herds

2004 ◽  
Vol 155 (8) ◽  
pp. 237-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. N. Huxley ◽  
D. C. J. Main ◽  
H. R. Whay ◽  
J. Burke ◽  
S. Roderick
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Dairy Herds ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Organic Dairy ◽  
Animal Welfare Assessment
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document