Naturalness and Animal Welfare

Capturing wild animal welfare: a physiological perspective

Affective states, such as emotions, are presumably widespread across the animal kingdom because of the adaptive advantages they are supposed to confer. However, the study of the affective states of animals has thus far been largely restricted to enhancing the welfare of animals managed by humans in non-natural contexts. Given the diversity of wild animals and the variable conditions they can experience, extending studies on animal affective states to the natural conditions that most animals experience will allow us to broaden and deepen our general understanding of animal welfare. Yet, this same diversity makes examining animal welfare in the wild highly challenging. There is therefore a need for unifying theoretical frameworks and methodological approaches that can guide researchers keen to engage in this promising research area. The aim of this article is to help advance this important research area by highlighting the central relationship between physiology and animal welfare and rectify its apparent oversight, as revealed by the current scientific literature on wild animals. Moreover, this article emphasises the advantages of including physiological markers to assess animal welfare in the wild (e.g. objectivity, comparability, condition range, temporality), as well as their concomitant limitations (e.g. only access to peripheral physiological markers with complex relationships with affective states). Best-practice recommendations (e.g. replication and multifactorial approaches) are also provided to allow physiological markers to be used most effectively and appropriately when assessing the welfare of animals in their natural habitat. This review seeks to provide the foundation for a new and distinct research area with a vast theoretical and applied potential: wild animal welfare physiology.

Review of the Effects of Enclosure Complexity and Design on the Behaviour and Physiology of Zoo Animals

The complexity of the habitat refers to its physical geometry, which includes abiotic and biotic elements. Habitat complexity is important because it allows more species to coexist and, consequently, more interactions to be established among them. The complexity of the habitat links the physical structure of the enclosure to the biological interactions, which occur within its limits. Enclosure complexity should vary temporally, to be able to influence the animals in different ways, depending on the period of the day and season and throughout the year. In the present paper, we discuss how habitat complexity is important, and how it can positively influence the physical and mental states of zoo animals. We show how habitat complexity can ultimately affect educational projects. Finally, we discuss how we can add complexity to enclosures and, thus, make the lives of animals more interesting and functional.

“If you were a cow, what would you want?” Findings from participatory workshops with dairy farmers

When looking to improve animal welfare, it is essential to understand the viewpoints of stakeholders in the industry. Previous research has engaged stakeholders such as farmers, veterinarians, and the public to better understand future dairy industry directions. However, the use of perspective-taking as a tool to overcome farmer's focus on current barriers to the industry has not been explored. Therefore, the aims of this study were to have farmers take the perspective of the cow, to elicit: (1) farm elements that are essential to create a cow-centric dairy system, and (2) how this system can be achieved in the next 50 years. To do this, we employed participatory methods (photo elicitation, timelining) to generate discussion with 12 New Zealand dairy farmers. Pasture access is frequently cited as an integral component for promoting good welfare in dairy cows, thus, this cohort of farmers was considered a good case study as they all had experience managing cows in grazing systems. Participants were asked to create a cow-centric farm design, and a pathway to implementation. Following thematic analysis of the multiple data sources, the results are presented under the following three themes: (1) cow-centric farm designs (environmental considerations, cow handling and care), (2) timeline to achieve and sequence of implementation ("low hanging fruit" and long-term investments), and (3) assumptions and resources needed (including financial considerations, technology, farmer buy-in, regulations and enforcement and other stakeholder involvement). By better understanding how current industry practice aligns, and also differs, from what the cow would want, we can work towards future management systems that incorporate the requirements of all stakeholders, including the cow.

Sentience, Harmony and the Value of Nature

Concern for nature and for animal sentience are important public and political moral concerns. Using frameworks such as Harmony for Nature and One Health and the recent IPBES report on the Diverse Values of Nature, this paper considers how the two issues interrelate, in terms of our concepts of sentience and nature, and sentience-based values' importance in relation to nature-based values. Animals' sentience is part of nature, and part of its diversity, harmony, health and value. Sentient animals' feelings represent animals' evaluations of nature that go beyond valuing nature for solely for market-based and anthropocentric interests. Sentience is therefore relevant for measurement, leveraging and embedding sentience-based values in environmental concerns, including in environmental impact assessments, science-based UN policy-making, interdisciplinary and interagency collaboration, and to strengthen transformative and system-based action for nature.

Browse or browsing: Investigating goat preferences for feeding posture, feeding height and feed type

Goats naturally browse different forages in various postures; this differs from typical farm practice, thus there are opportunities to improve goat welfare by understanding what and how they like to eat. We investigated if feeding preference was related to posture, feeder height relative to the ground, and type of feed. Sixteen adult, Saanen cross females participated in two experiments comparing a floor-level feeder (grazing posture; farm standard), with an elevated feeder (browsing posture; Exp1) and a platform-level feeder (raised, grazing posture; Exp2), when two forages (leaves, grass) were offered. Measurements included feed intake (g of DM/feeder), feeder switching frequency, first feeder visited, latency to visit first feeder and exploration and non-feeding activity time. Effects of posture (Exp1), height (Exp2) and feed type were analyzed. Type of feed affected preference for feeding posture and height. All goats consumed leaves over grass (Exp1: POP: 188 ± 6.52 g, GRA: 20.3 ± 7.19 g; Exp2: POP: 191 ± 6.15 g, GRA: 0.231 ± 6.91 g; P < 0.001), and the feeder containing leaves was often visited first (Exp 1: GRA/POP: 94% of visits, P < 0.001, POP/GRA: 53%, P = 0.724; Exp 2: GRA/POP: 91%, P < 0.001; POP/GRA: 69%, P = 0.041). When goats received only leaves, they consumed more from the floor-level (162 ± 22.2 g) vs. elevated level (102 ± 21.9 g) feeder (P = 0.039). When goats received only grass, there was no posture or height preference; however, they changed feeders more frequently (at least 4x (Exp1) and 2x (Exp2) more than other combinations; P > 0.01). Feed intake was negatively affected by exploring time (Exp1 only: r = −0.541; P < 0.001) and performing non-feeding activities (Exp1: r = −0.698; P < 0.001; Exp2: r = −0.673; P < 0.001). We did not identify a preference for elevated feeding posture; however, we suggest that our short test (compared to previous work) encouraged goats to make choices based on line-of-sight and also that the elevated feeder design (replicated from previous work) made leaf access harder. Nonetheless, we highlight that some goats actively used the elevated feeder; this coupled with the clear preference for leaves over grass, suggests that offering feed type and presentation diversity would allow individuals to express their natural feeding behavior more fully.

The Social Construction of Narratives and Arguments in Animal Welfare Discourse and Debate

Stakeholders can hold conflicting values and viewpoints, on what animal welfare is and how a good life is achieved and can signal different problems, or problematize specific aspects of farm animal welfare, and propose different actions or interventions within food supply chains. The aim of the study is to explore the contribution of narrative and argumentative discourse to the social construction and framing of animal welfare and its implications. The methodological approach in this research is composed of two phases with phase 1 being the foundational structured literature search in both academic and grey literature. Phase 2 was the analysis of the secondary data from the literature review to develop a synthesized iterative paper and in doing so develop a typology of five narratives: the 'farming as a business' narrative, the 'religion-based' narrative, the 'research, legislative and political based narrative', the 'higher welfare' narrative, and the "animal rights/power-based" narrative. Our findings demonstrate the contestation within the stakeholder discourse of the articulation of why farm animals should have a good life. Performance-related perspectives are rooted in the value-laden language and narratives that shape the arguments regarding notions of good and bad welfare; the emergent positioning of positive welfare for farm animals as well as how to achieve a good life in practice. The novel contribution of this review is the application of an explanatory word-language-discourse-person-situation-environment framework in this specific context to inform future research on animal welfare discourse analysis.

A dynamic concept of animal welfare: The role of appetitive and adverse internal and external factors and the animal’s ability to adapt to them

Animal welfare is a multifaceted issue that can be approached from different viewpoints, depending on human interests, ethical assumptions, and culture. To properly assess, safeguard and promote animal welfare, concepts are needed to serve as guidelines in any context the animal is kept in. Several different welfare concepts have been developed during the last half decade. The Five Freedoms concept has provided the basis for developing animal welfare assessment to date, and the Five Domains concept has guided those responsible for safeguarding animal welfare, while the Quality of Life concept focuses on how the individual perceives its own welfare state. This study proposes a modified and extended version of an earlier animal welfare concept - the Dynamic Animal Welfare Concept (DAWCon). Based on the adaptability of the animal, and taking the importance of positive emotional states and the dynamic nature of animal welfare into account, an individual animal is likely in a positive welfare state when it is mentally and physically capable and possesses the ability and opportunity to react adequately to sporadic or lasting appetitive and adverse internal and external stimuli, events, and conditions. Adequate reactions are elements of an animal’s normal behavior. They allow the animal to cope with and adapt to the demands of the (prevailing) environmental circumstances, enabling it to reach a state that it perceives as positive, i.e., that evokes positive emotions. This paper describes the role of internal as well as external factors in influencing welfare, each of which exerts their effects in a sporadic or lasting manner. Behavior is highlighted as a crucial read-out parameter. As most animals under human care are selected for certain traits that may affect their behavioral repertoire it is crucial to have thorough ethograms, i.e., a catalogue of specific behaviors of the species/strain/breed under study. DAWCon highlights aspects that need to be addressed when assessing welfare and may stimulate future research questions.

Assessment of Welfare in Groups of Horses with Different Management, Environments and Activities by Measuring Cortisol in Horsehair, Using Liquid Chromatography Coupled to Hybrid Orbitrap High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry

Horses have always been animals used for companionship, work, transportation, and performance purposes over the history of humanity; there are different ways of managing horses, but studies on how horse welfare is influenced by different activities and managements are scanty. Understanding how the management, the environment, and the different uses of horses can affect the level of stress and well-being is important not only for people associated with horses. Three groups of horses with different management, environments, and activities were selected: (1) stabled horses ridden frequently, (2) horses that perform public order service under the Italian state police, and (3) free-ranging horses. Cortisol analysis was carried out on horsehair samples using liquid chromatography coupled to hybrid orbitrap high-resolution mass spectrometry (LC-HRMS/MS), a laboratory technique used for the first time to quantify horsehair cortisol. The selection of horses to be included in the three groups was carried out by including only subjects with positive welfare assessment in accordance with the horse welfare assessment protocol (AWIN). These analyses demonstrated that the cortisol levels detected in the horsehair of free-ranging animals were significantly higher compared to those detected in stabled and working horses. These results may have been a consequence of complex environmental, managerial, and behavioral factors, which should be worth further investigation

Animal Welfare and Resistance to Disease: Interaction of Affective States and the Immune System

Good management and improved standards of animal welfare are discussed as important ways of reducing the risk of infection in farm animals without medication. Increasing evidence from both humans and animals suggests that environments that promote wellbeing over stress and positive over negative emotions can reduce susceptibility to disease and/or lead to milder symptoms. We point out, however, that the relationship between welfare, immunity, and disease is highly complex and we caution against claiming more than the current evidence shows. The accumulating but sometimes equivocal evidence of close links between the brain, the gut microbiome, immunity, and welfare are discussed in the context of the known links between mental and physical health in humans. This evidence not only provides empirical support for the importance of good welfare as preventative medicine in animals but also indicates a variety of mechanisms by which good welfare can directly influence disease resistance. Finally, we outline what still needs to be done to explore the potential preventative effects of good welfare.

Supporting Zoo Asian Elephant (Elephas maximus) Welfare and Herd Dynamics with a More Complex and Expanded Habitat

Ensuring good health and welfare is an increasingly important consideration for conservation of endangered species, whether free-ranging or managed to varying degrees under human care. The welfare-based design of a new habitat for Asian elephants at the Oregon Zoo focused on meeting the elephants' physical, physiological, psychological, and social needs 24 h a day and across life stages. The habitat was designed to encourage activity, promote species-typical behaviors, support changing social dynamics, offer increased opportunities for choice, and provide biologically meaningful challenges. In this 4-year study, we monitored elephant health and welfare indicators throughout the transition and acclimation from the previous habitat to the new habitat. Several welfare indicators obtained through longitudinal hormone analyses, behavior assessments, and GPS measurement of walking distance and space use provided evidence that these goals were achieved. The elephants were more active and walked farther on a daily basis in the new habitat, with an average walking distance of over 15 km per day. A switch from primarily caretaker-delivered food to seeking food on their own indicates that the disbursement of food with less temporal and spatial predictability increased foraging opportunities, which better satisfies appetitive motivations important for psychological well-being. All individuals showed adaptive and normal adrenal responses to change and challenge, with the highest fecal glucocorticoid metabolite (FGM) concentrations and variability during the construction phase, and a return to previous baseline concentrations in the new habitat, suggesting they acclimated well to the new environment. The elephants expressed a diverse range of species-typical behaviors and demonstrated social dynamics of a healthy herd in both habitats with transitions of individuals through life stages. They exhibited more autonomy in choosing whom to associate with socially and also by choosing different aspects of their environment with regular indoor/outdoor access and extensive resource use in the new habitat. Findings indicate that the complexity and flexibility of the new habitat and habitat management has been effective in improving overall welfare by providing meaningful challenges and the opportunity to express appetitive behaviors, by offering choice in environmental conditions, and by providing the space and resource distribution to support evolving herd dynamics and increased social equity for individuals.

Does Smart Farming Improve or Damage Animal Welfare? Technology and What Animals Want

“Smart” or “precision” farming has revolutionized crop agriculture but its application to livestock farming has raised ethical concerns because of its possible adverse effects on animal welfare. With rising public concern for animal welfare across the world, some people see the efficiency gains offered by the new technology as a direct threat to the animals themselves, allowing producers to get “more for less” in the interests of profit. Others see major welfare advantages through life-long health monitoring, delivery of individual care and optimization of environmental conditions. The answer to the question of whether smart farming improves or damages animal welfare is likely to depend on three main factors. Firstly, much will depend on how welfare is defined and the extent to which politicians, scientists, farmers and members of the public can agree on what welfare means and so come to a common view on how to judge how it is impacted by technology. Defining welfare as a combination of good health and what the animals themselves want provides a unifying and animal-centered way forward. It can also be directly adapted for computer recognition of welfare. A second critical factor will be whether high welfare standards are made a priority within smart farming systems. To achieve this, it will be necessary both to develop computer algorithms that can recognize welfare to the satisfaction of both the public and farmers and also to build good welfare into the control and decision-making of smart systems. What will matter most in the end, however, is a third factor, which is whether smart farming can actually deliver its promised improvements in animal welfare when applied in the real world. An ethical evaluation will only be possible when the new technologies are more widely deployed on commercial farms and their full social, environmental, financial and welfare implications become apparent.

Use of Interactive Technology in Captive Great Ape Management

The conservation status of great apes (chimpanzees Pan troglodytes, gorillas Gorilla sp., orangutans Pongo sp., and bonobos Pan paniscus) is grave and zoological institutions are vital for maintaining numbers of these species and educating the public about their importance. Technology provides tools that can assist zoos in meeting these objectives. However, the extant research on technology use in zoos is potentially constrained by small sample sizes and there is no framework detailing the methodologies necessary for the successful incorporation of technology into great ape management. Therefore, this study aimed to determine current technology use in the management of captive great apes and whether technology-directed behaviour differs between ape genera. Primary carers of great apes in zoos were surveyed using a 43-question, online questionnaire. The purpose of integrating interactive technology into captive ape management was primarily for enrichment (53% of respondents), followed by research (20% of respondents). However, only 25% of respondents had apes directly engaged with technology. There were no differences in technology-directed behaviours between ape genera. By identifying differences in practice, this research marks the initial stage in developing a best practice framework for using technology.

Activity Time Budgets-A Potential Tool to Monitor Equine Welfare?

Simple Summary

Horses’ behavior is a good indicator of their welfare status. However, its complexity requires objective, quantifiable, and unambiguous evidence-based assessment criteria. As healthy, stress-free horses exhibit a highly repetitive daily routine, horses’ time budget (amount of time in a 24 h period spent on specific activities) can assist in equine welfare assessment. A systematic review of the literature yielded 12 papers that assessed equine time budgets for eating, resting and movement for a minimum of 24 continuous hours. A total of 144 horses (1–27 years old), 59 semi-feral and 85 domesticated horses, are included in this review. The reported 24 h time budgets for eating ranged from 10% to 66.6%, for resting from 8.1% to 66%, for lying from 2.7% to 27.3%, and for movement from 0.015% to 19.1%. The large variance in time budgets between studies can largely be attributed to differences in age and environmental conditions. Management interventions (free access to food, increased space, decreased population density) in domesticated horses yielded time budgets similar to semi-feral horses. The data support the importance of environmental conditions for horses’ well-being and the ability of time budgets to assist in monitoring horses’ welfare.

Abstract

Horses’ behavior can provide valuable insight into their subjective state and is thus a good indicator of welfare. However, its complexity requires objective, quantifiable, and unambiguous evidence-based assessment criteria. As healthy, stress-free horses exhibit a highly repetitive daily routine, temporal quantification of their behavioral activities (time budget analysis) can assist in equine welfare assessment. Therefore, the present systematic review aimed to provide an up-to-date analysis of equine time budget studies. A review of the literature yielded 12 papers that fulfilled the inclusion criteria: assessment of equine time budgets for eating, resting and movement for a minimum of 24 continuous hours. A total of 144 horses (1–27 years old), 59 semi-feral and 85 domesticated horses, are included in this review. The 24 h time budgets for foraging or eating (10–6.6%), resting (8.1–66%), lying (2.7–27.3%), and locomotion (0.015–19.1%) showed large variance between studies, which can largely be attributed to differences in age and environmental conditions. Management interventions in domesticated horses (ad libitum access to food, increased space, decreased population density) resulted in time budgets similar to their (semi-)feral conspecifics, emphasizing the importance of environmental conditions and the ability of time budgets to assist in monitoring horses’ welfare.

Happy or healthy? How members of the public prioritise farm animal health and natural behaviours

The importance given to minimising health issues and promoting natural behaviours is a polarising issue within farm animal welfare. It is predominantly thought that members of the public prioritise animals being able to behave naturally over other aspects of farm animal welfare, such as addressing health issues. However, public perspectives may be more multi-dimensional than is generally thought, with the importance given to these different elements of welfare dependent on the situation and state of the animals in question. To examine this, a factorial survey using vignettes, which experimentally manipulated the different levels of health (high health vs. low health) and natural behaviour provision (high behaviour vs. low behaviour), was completed by a sample (n = 810) representative of the UK population (on age, gender, ethnicity). Contrary to the predominant view, this study found animal health had the greatest effect on participants’ judgements, explaining more of the variance in their assessments of animal welfare than any other factor. However, findings also indicated that participants considered animal welfare to be most positive when both health issues are minimised and natural behaviours are promoted. Attitudes to natural behaviours also varied more between participants, with females, individuals who do not (regularly) eat meat and those with a greater belief in animal mind giving greater priority to natural behaviours. In the context of public and private welfare standards seeking to meet public expectations, this study provides important insights into how public perspectives of animal welfare are more nuanced than previously thought, influenced by the context of the animal, the aspect of welfare in question and personal characteristics.

Computational animal welfare: towards cognitive architecture models of animal sentience, emotion and wellbeing

To understand animal wellbeing, we need to consider subjective phenomena and sentience. This is challenging, since these properties are private and cannot be observed directly. Certain motivations, emotions and related internal states can be inferred in animals through experiments that involve choice, learning, generalization and decision-making. Yet, even though there is significant progress in elucidating the neurobiology of human consciousness, animal consciousness is still a mystery. We propose that computational animal welfare science emerges at the intersection of animal behaviour, welfare and computational cognition. By using ideas from cognitive science, we develop a functional and generic definition of subjective phenomena as any process or state of the organism that exists from the first-person perspective and cannot be isolated from the animal subject. We then outline a general cognitive architecture to model simple forms of subjective processes and sentience. This includes evolutionary adaptation which contains top-down attention modulation, predictive processing and subjective simulation by re-entrant (recursive) computations. Thereafter, we show how this approach uses major characteristics of the subjective experience: elementary self-awareness, global workspace and qualia with unity and continuity. This provides a formal framework for process-based modelling of animal needs, subjective states, sentience and wellbeing.

Visitors' perceptions of zoo-housed lesser anteater (Tamandua tetradactyla) welfare: Observation plays a larger role than a brief informative talk

There is a growing ethical concern in modern society about animals' quality of life. We hypothesize that zoo visitors' perception of zoo animal welfare, particularly in the case of lesser anteaters, changes positively after listening to scientific information. Visitors observing active lesser anteaters in their enclosures at Córdoba Zoo (Argentina) were asked to respond to a questionnaire about animal welfare. The treatment group (T) answered the questionnaire after listening to a brief informative talk based on local scientific studies on lesser anteaters. The control group (C) answered the questionnaire without hearing the informative talk. Visitors (87.2%) considered biological, sanitary, and sociocultural aspects to be necessary conditions for optimum wild zoo-housed animal welfare. The majority of visitors considered that natural surroundings provide the highest level of welfare for wild animals. Visitors in the T group ranked the zoo as providing a higher level of animal welfare than those in group C. In reference to management measurements, the T group agreed on the positive effect of the application of environmental enrichment (Likert Medians: C = 4 and T = 5; p = .0443). On the basis of their perception, most visitors in both groups stated that the lesser anteaters at Córdoba Zoo appeared to be in a good state of welfare. We interpret this as meaning that, what these Córdoba zoo visitors personally perceived while observing the lesser anteaters carried greater weight than what they learned from the informative talk, though the talk did slightly affect their opinion.

Naturalness and the Legitimacy of Thoroughbred Racing: A Photo-Elicitation Study with Industry and Animal Advocacy Informants

Simple Summary

The international thoroughbred industry is concerned about the public’s perception of racing. Therefore, the industry’s priorities are to address the publicly most visible and known welfare violations. However, common day-to-day racing practices also impact thoroughbred welfare. In this study, key industry informants and animal advocacy informants were interviewed to find out how they view common racing practices. For the interviews, photographs of thoroughbreds on race day were used, which the informants were asked to describe. Results show industry informants often naturalise, normalise, downplay or ignore the horses’ expressions, the impact of handling on the horse and the use of equipment. The animal advocacy informants tend to describe a horse whose nature is violated. In conclusion, the industry informants show limited interest in addressing common racing practices, and this places thoroughbred welfare at risk. Both groups of informants have different ideas about what is natural and what that means for thoroughbred welfare. With society’s understanding of welfare and of racing practices growing, the racing industry may be increasingly questioned about common racing practices. This article discusses the notion of naturalness in more detail and how it can be used to advance thoroughbred protection.

Abstract

The idea of what is natural has particular relevance in the thoroughbred racing and breeding discourse. It guides breeding regulations; influences how the thoroughbreds’ behaviour is perceived and has implications for husbandry, handling, training and racing practices. This study investigates how key industry and animal advocacy informants based in the US, Australia and the UK conceptualise naturalness within the context of common racing practices that potentially impact the horses’ welfare. The informants were interviewed using semi-structured interviewing and photo-elicitation. Four common images of thoroughbreds on race day were presented to elicit the informants’ responses. Differences emerged between how the two groups tended to describe the images and the role naturalness played in their conceptualisations. The findings were analysed using an updated version of the Layers of Engagement with Animal Protection developed by Bergmann to situate the informants’ conceptualisations of naturalness within the wider thoroughbred protection discourse. In conclusion, the industry informants tended to defend the status quo of common racing practices. They tended to naturalise and normalise these practices and downplay their welfare impact. This poses risks for thoroughbred welfare, which are amplified by misrepresentations of what is natural. With the public’s understanding of welfare and racing practices growing, racing’s legitimacy may be further questioned. Opportunities to leverage the potential of the notion of naturalness for thoroughbred protection are discussed.

A Ten-Stage Protocol for Assessing the Welfare of Individual Non-Captive Wild Animals: Free-Roaming Horses (Equus Ferus Caballus) as an Example

Knowledge of the welfare status of wild animals is vital for informing debates about the ways in which we interact with wild animals and their habitats. Currently, there is no published information about how to scientifically assess the welfare of free-roaming wild animals during their normal day-to-day lives. Using free-roaming horses as an example, we describe a ten-stage protocol for systematically and scientifically assessing the welfare of individual non-captive wild animals. The protocol starts by emphasising the importance of readers having an understanding of animal welfare in a conservation context and also of the Five Domains Model for assessing welfare. It goes on to detail what species-specific information is required to assess welfare, how to identify measurable and observable indicators of animals' physical states and how to identify which individuals are being assessed. Further, it addresses how to select appropriate methods for measuring/observing physical indicators of welfare, the scientific validation of these indicators and then the grading of animals' welfare states, along with assigning a confidence score. Finally, grading future welfare risks and how these can guide management decisions is discussed. Applying this ten-stage protocol will enable biologists to scientifically assess the welfare of wild animals and should lead to significant advances in the field of wild animal welfare.

Livestock Farming at the Expense of Water Resources? The Water–Energy–Food Nexus in Regions with Intensive Livestock Farming

Policymaking in the water–energy–food nexus is characterized by complex ecological, social, and economic interdependencies. Nexus research assumes these interactions to be overseen in the respective resource governance resulting in sectoral perspectives contributing to unsustainable outcomes. In Germany, the political priority given to the formation of an internationally competitive livestock sector by means of intensification, specialization and regional concentration has exerted sustained pressure on water and soil resources. The expansion of bioenergy plants promoted by the renewable energy act has exacerbated the situation. Despite the persistency of the ecological challenges, German policymakers only reacted when the European Commission referred Germany to the European Court of Justice. Current policy efforts to tackle the ecological problems are now provoking disruptions in the agrarian sector in regions with high nitrate concentrations in water resources. By combining the social-ecological systems framework with hypotheses derived from nexus research, we explore the interactions between food, water and energy systems and aim at understanding the unsustainable outcomes. We argue that the non-consideration of the complex interdependencies between the agricultural, the water and the energy system in policymaking and the divergence of policy goals constitute a major cause of unsustainable governance.

Interspecies Sustainability to Ensure Animal Protection: Lessons from the Thoroughbred Racing Industry

There is a disconnect between dominant conceptions of sustainability and the protection of animals arising from the anthropocentric orientation of most conceptualisations of sustainability, including sustainable development. Critiques of this disconnect are primarily based in the context of industrial animal agriculture and a general model of a species-inclusive conception of sustainability has yet to emerge. The original contribution of this article is two-fold: First, it develops a theoretical framework for interspecies sustainability. Second, it applies this to a case study of the thoroughbred racing industry. Interviews were conducted with thoroughbred industry and animal advocacy informants in the US, Australia and Great Britain. While industry informants claim thoroughbred welfare is seminal for industry sustainability, they adopt a market-oriented anthropocentric conception of sustainability and do not consider animal welfare a sustainability domain in its own right. Animal advocacy informants demonstrate a deeper understanding of welfare but some express discomfort about linking sustainability, welfare and racing. Eight analytical layers have been identified in the discourse in the interface of sustainability and animal protection, of which two have transformational potential to advance interspecies sustainability. Interspecies sustainability urgently needs to be advanced to ensure animal protection in the sustainability transition, and to not leave the defining of animal welfare and sustainability to animal industries.

Broiler welfare trade-off: A semi-quantitative welfare assessment for optimised welfare improvement based on an expert survey

In order to support decision making on how to most effectively improve broiler welfare an innovative expert survey was conducted based on principles derived from semantic modelling. Twenty-seven experts, mainly broiler welfare scientists (n = 20; and 7 veterinarians), responded (response rate 38%) by giving welfare scores (GWS, scale 0–10) to 14 benchmarking housing systems (HSs), and explaining these overall scores by selecting, weighing and scoring main welfare parameters, including both input and output measures. Data exploration followed by REML (Linear Mixed Model) and ALM (Automatic Linear Modelling) analyses revealed 6 clusters of HSs, sorted from high to low welfare, i.e. mean GWS (with superscripts indicating significant differences): 1. (semi-natural backyard) Flock (8.8^a); 2. Nature (7.7^ab), Label Rouge II (7.4^ab), Free range EU (7.2^ab), Better Life (7.2^ab); 3. Organic EU (7.0^bc), Freedom Food (6.2^bc); 4. Organic US (5.8^bcd), Concepts NL (5.6^abcdef), GAP 2 (4.9^bcd); 5. Conventional EU (3.7^de), Conventional US (2.9^ef), Modern cage (2.9^abcdef); 6. Battery cage (1.3^f). Mean weighting factors (WF, scale 0–10) of frequently (n> = 15) scored parameters were: Lameness (8.8), Health status (8.6), Litter (8.3), Density (8.2), Air quality (8.1), Breed (8.0), Enrichment (7.0) and Outdoor (6.6). These did not differ significantly, and did not have much added value in explaining GWS. Effects of Role (Scientist/Vet), Gender (M/F) and Region (EU/non-EU) did not significantly affect GWS or WF, except that women provided higher WF than men (7.2 vs 6.4, p<0.001). The contribution of welfare components to overall welfare has been quantified in two ways: a) using the beta-coefficients of statistical regression (ALM) analyses, and b) using a semantic-modelling type (weighted average) calculation of overall scores (CalcWS) from parameter level scores (PLS) and WF. GWS and CalcWS were highly correlated (R = ~0.85). CalcWS identified Lameness, Health status, Density, Breed, Air quality and Litter as main parameters contributing to welfare. ALM showed that the main parameters which significantly explained the variance in GWS based on all PLS, were the output parameter Health status (with a beta-coefficient of 0.38), and the input parameters (stocking) Density (0.42), Litter (0.14) and Enrichment (0.27). The beta-coefficients indicated how much GWS would improve from 1 unit improvement in PLS for each parameter, thus the potential impact on GWS ranged from 1.4 welfare points for Litter to 4.2 points for Density. When all parameters were included, 81% of the variance in GWS was explained (77% for inputs alone; 39% for outputs alone). From this, it appears that experts use both input and output parameters to explain overall welfare, and that both are important. The major conventional systems and modern cages for broilers received low welfare scores (2.9–3.7), well below scores that may be considered acceptable (5.5). Also, several alternatives like GAP 2 (4.9), Concepts NL (5.6), Organic US (5.8) and Freedom Food (6.2) are unacceptable, or at risk of being unacceptable due to individual variation between experts and farms. Thus, this expert survey provides a preliminary semi-quantified decision-support tool to help determine how to most effectively improve broiler welfare in a wide range of HSs.

The Natural Behavior Debate: Two Conceptions of Animal Welfare

The performance of natural behavior is commonly used as a criterion in the determination of animal welfare. This is still true, despite many authors having demonstrated that it is not a necessary component of welfare - some natural behaviors may decrease welfare, while some unnatural behaviors increase it. Here I analyze why this idea persists, and what effects it may have. I argue that the disagreement underlying this debate on natural behavior is not one about which conditions affect welfare, but a deeper conceptual disagreement about what the state of welfare actually consists of. Those advocating natural behavior typically take a "teleological" view of welfare, in which naturalness is fundamental to welfare, while opponents to the criterion usually take a "subjective" welfare concept, in which welfare consists of the subjective experience of life by the animal. I argue that as natural functioning is neither necessary nor sufficient for understanding welfare, we should move away from the natural behavior criterion to an alternative such as behavioral preferences or enjoyment. This will have effects in the way we understand and measure welfare, and particularly in how we provide for the welfare of animals in a captive setting.

A Review of Australian Animal Welfare Legislation, Regulation, Codes of Practice, and Policy, and Their Influence on Stakeholders Caring for Wildlife and the Animals for Whom They Care

The Australian constitution makes no mention of native animals. Responsibility for animal welfare is largely retained by the states and territories via a fragmented, complex, contradictory, inconsistent system of regulatory management. Given that most jurisdictions have expressly made the possession of wildlife unlawful, the action of taking and possessing an animal, to rehabilitate it, defies the regulatory process. In most jurisdictions, it is illegal to microchip, band, or mark an animal, meaning that no reliable method is available to monitor an animal. Each year, a minimum of 50,000 rehabilitated native animals are released back to the wild, with little post-release monitoring. Where required, the assessments of behavioural and health requirements to confirm suitability for release may be undertaken by people with either negligible or questionable qualifications. Whilst it can be appropriate to rehabilitate and release injured native animals back to the wild, there may be moral, ethical, and practical reasons for not releasing hand-reared orphan native animals. This article examines the evolution, and explains the consequences, of decentralised regulation on wildlife carers and rehabilitating animals. It recommends that the practice of placing hand-reared native animals into the wild, and the regulatory framework that provides for it, should be reviewed.

Dilemmas for Natural Living Concepts of Zoo Animal Welfare

This ethical discourse specifically deals with dilemmas encountered within zoological institutions, namely for the concept of natural living, and a new term-wilding. It is agreed by some that zoos are not ethically wrong in principle, but there are currently some contradictions and ethical concerns for zoos in practice. Natural living is a complicated concept, facing multiple criticisms. Not all natural behaviours, nor natural environments, are to the benefit of animals in a captive setting, and practical application of the natural living concept has flaws. Expression of natural behaviours does not necessarily indicate positive well-being of an animal. Herein it is suggested that highly-motivated behaviours may be a better term to properly explain behaviours of more significance to captive animals. Wilding refers to extrapolation of the natural living concept to treating an animal as wild, residing in a wild habitat. This definition is intrinsically problematic, as quite literally by definition, captivity is not a wild nor natural environment. Treating a captive animal exactly the same as a wild counterpart is practically impossible for many species in a few ways. This article discusses complexities of natural living versus natural aesthetics as judged by humans, as well as the possibility of innate preference for naturalness within animals. Zoos nobly strive to keep wild animals as natural and undomesticated as possible. Here it is argued that unintended and unavoidable genetic and epigenetic drift favouring adaptations for life in a captive environment may still occur, despite our best efforts to prevent this from occurring. This article further discusses the blurred lines between natural and unnatural behaviours, and the overlaps with more important highly-motivated behaviours, which may be better predictors of positive affective states in captive animals, and thus, better predictors of positive well-being and welfare. Finally, as we are now in the Anthropocene era, it is suggested that human-animal interactions could actually be considered natural in a way, and notwithstanding, be very important to animals that initiate these interactions, especially for "a life worth living".

Market-Based Governance in Farm Animal Welfare-A Comparative Analysis of Public and Private Policies in Germany and France

Simple Summary

Farm animal welfare policies are in transition: whereas agricultural policy is traditionally characterised by strong state steering, market actors are getting involved in this field. This study aims to improve understanding of these dynamics in the field of farm animal welfare. By conducting a comparative case study of public and private farm animal welfare policies in Germany and France, the findings illustrate how retailers are assuming a leading role in the field. By introducing animal welfare labels and purchasing guidelines, retailers react to rising societal concerns for the welfare of farmed animals. Governmental actors, conversely, are exercising restraint and engage in voluntary rather than regulatory policies. Contrary to the traditionally strong role of the state in agricultural policy, the contribution indicates a shift towards market-based governance in the field of farm animal welfare.

Abstract

The intensification of livestock production and the focus on economic gains of agricultural policy have resulted in animal welfare related challenges. In many countries the societal concern for the welfare of farmed animals is increasing. Whereas policymakers on the European Union’s level and in EU member states have passed specific farm animal protection laws, the existing policies do not always guarantee the welfare of farmed animals. At the same time, the engagement of market actors in the field is increasing. This article explores the development of public and private policies in two countries with very different levels of regulation. By conducting a comparative analysis of public and private policies in Germany and France, the findings illustrate that, although they have different starting points, retailers in both countries are getting increasingly involved in farm animal welfare. In addition, there is evidence that governmental policies are shifting from regulatory to voluntary approaches in cooperation with the private sector. Given that in both countries these dynamics are a very recent development, it remains to be seen whether governmental actors will (re-)assume the lead in the field, whether they will engage in cooperation with private actors, or whether they will leave the task of agricultural restructuring to the market.

Understanding natural behavior to improve dairy goat (Capra hircus) management systems

Public interest is stimulating farming industries to improve animal welfare in production systems. Indoor housing of ruminants has received scrutiny because of perceived intensiveness and lack of naturalness. Animal welfare has traditionally focused on health benefits (e.g., bedding management and reducing disease) and reducing negative experiences (e.g., painful husbandry practices). Recent attention to animals having “a life worth living” extends expectations to provide increased care and opportunities for positive experiences and natural behaviors. Although not all natural behaviors necessarily contribute to improved welfare, we present evidence for why many are important, and for how they can be promoted in commercial systems. Worldwide, commercial dairy goats (Capra hircus) are frequently housed in large open barns with space to move and soft bedding for lying; however, this is not sufficient to promote the range of natural behaviors of goats, which in turn suggests that commercial housing could be improved. The basis for this thinking is from the range of behaviors expressed by the Capra genus. Collectively, these species have evolved cognitive and behavioral strategies to cope with harsh and changing environments, as well as variable and limited vegetation. The rocky and often steep terrain that goats inhabit allows for predator avoidance and access to shelter, so it is not surprising that domesticated goats also seek out elevation and hiding spaces; indeed, their hoof structure is designed for the movement and grip in such rugged environments. The browsing techniques and flexibility in diet selection of wild, feral and extensively managed goats, appears to be equally important to housed goats, highlighting the need for more complexity in how and what goats are fed. Goats naturally live in small, dynamic groups, governed by complex social structures in which horns play a strong role. Commercial housing systems should consider the benefits of more natural-sized social groups and revisit the rationale behind horn removal. We suggest that cognitive stimulation is a potential welfare improvement for goats in commercial settings. Goat cognitive abilities, which enabled success in complex and variable social and physical environments, are unchallenged in uniform environments, potentially leading to negative affective states. We make suggestions for housing improvements that could be readily adopted into current systems without compromising production efficiency.

An Animal Welfare Risk Assessment Process for Zoos

There is a growing interest and need for zoos to develop and implement welfare assessment tools that are practical to use and provide meaningful results that can inform management decisions. This paper presents a process that was developed to support this type of evidence-based management in zoo animal welfare. The process is configured to facilitate institutional risk assessment, using an adapted version of the Five Domains Model for animal welfare assessment. It is designed to systematically analyse information gathered from zoo personnel in order to highlight areas of welfare risk, as well as areas that are performing well and areas requiring further investigation. A trial was conducted on three zoos over three years. Results of the trial suggest the process developed is practical and effective in identifying areas of welfare risk in a wide range of species in a zoo setting. It represents a further step towards achieving high-level animal welfare in zoos by integrating animal welfare as an institutional priority. The more zoos that employ such strategies, the greater the ability of the sector to advance the welfare of the animals in their care.