An assessment of animal welfare impacts in wild Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus) management

SE Baker*: Affiliation:
University of Oxford, Department of Zoology, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK
M Ayers: Affiliation:
Precision Pest Management Solutions Ltd, Iveson Drive, Leeds LS16 6BG, UK
NJ Beausoleil: Affiliation:
Massey University, Animal Welfare Science and Bioethics Centre, School of Veterinary Science, Palmerston North, 4410, New Zealand
SR Belmain: Affiliation:
Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich, Central Avenue, Chatham Maritime, Kent ME4 4TB, UK
M Berdoy: Affiliation:
University of Oxford, Biomedical Services, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK
AP Buckle: Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, The University of Reading, Reading RG6 6AS, UK
C Cagienard: Affiliation:
Pest Solutions, 10 Seaward Place, Glasgow G41 1HH, UK
D Cowan: Affiliation:
Newcastle University, School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle, UK
J Fearn-Daglish: Affiliation:
JFD Field Biologist, Derby, Derbyshire, UK
P Goddard: Affiliation:
Banchory, Aberdeenshire, UK
HDR Golledge: Affiliation:
Universities Federation for Animal Welfare, The Old School, Brewhouse Hill, Wheathampstead AL4 8AN, UK
E Mullineaux: Affiliation:
Capital Veterinary Services Ltd, Edinburgh, UK
T Sharp: Affiliation:
Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Tocal Agricultural Centre, Paterson, NSW, Australia
A Simmons: Affiliation:
Ilminster, Somerset, UK
E Schmolz: Affiliation:
German Environment Agency, Section IV 1.4, Berlin, Germany
*: * Contact for correspondence: [email protected]

Article contents

Abstract
References

Rights & Permissions

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus) are considered one of the most significant vertebrate pests globally, because of their impacts on human and animal health. There are legal and moral obligations to minimise the impacts of wildlife management on animal welfare, yet there are few data on the relative welfare impacts of rat trapping and baiting methods used in the UK with which to inform management decisions. Two stakeholder workshops were facilitated to assess the relative welfare impacts of six lethal rat management methods using a welfare assessment model. Fifteen stakeholders including experts in wildlife management, rodent management, rodent biology, animal welfare science, and veterinary science and medicine, participated. The greatest welfare impacts were associated with three baiting methods, anticoagulants, cholecalciferol and non-toxic cellulose baits (severe to extreme impact for days), and with capture on a glue trap (extreme for hours) with concussive killing (mild to moderate for seconds to minutes); these methods should be considered last resorts from a welfare perspective. Lower impacts were associated with cage trapping (moderate to severe for hours) with concussive killing (moderate for minutes). The impact of snap trapping was highly variable (no impact to extreme for seconds to minutes). Snap traps should be regulated and tested to identify those that cause rapid unconsciousness; such traps might represent the most welfare-friendly option assessed for killing rats. Our results can be used to integrate consideration of rat welfare alongside other factors, including cost, efficacy, safety, non-target animal welfare and public acceptability when selecting management methods. We also highlight ways of reducing welfare impacts and areas where more data are needed.

Keywords

animal welfare commensal rodent Norway rat pest control United Kingdom wildlife management

Type: Research Article
Information: Animal Welfare , Volume 31 , Issue 1 , February 2022 , pp. 51 - 68

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.31.1.005 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: © 2022 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

AVMA (American Veterinary Medical Association) 2020 AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals. AVMA: Shaumberg, IL, USAGoogle Scholar

Baker, SE, Ellwood, SA, Tagarielli, VL and Macdonald, DW 2012 Mechanical performance of rat, mouse and mole spring traps, and possible implications for welfare performance. PLoS ONE 7: e39334. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0039334 CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Baker, SE, Macdonald, DW and Ellwood, SA 2017 Double standards in spring trap welfare: ending inequality for rats (Rodentia: Muridae), mice (Rodentia: Muridae) and moles (Insectivora: Talpidae) in the United Kingdom. In: Davies, MP, Pfeiffer, C and Robinson, WH (eds) Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Urban Pests pp 139–145. Birmingham, UKGoogle Scholar

Baker, SE, Maw, SA, Johnson, PJ and Macdonald, DM 2020 Not in my backyard: public perceptions of wildlife and ‘pest con-trol’ in and around UK homes, and local authority ‘pest control’. Animals 10: 222. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10020222 CrossRef Google Scholar

Baker, SE, Sharp, TM and Macdonald, DW 2016 Assessing ani-mal welfare impacts in the management of European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus), European moles (Talpa europaea) and car-rion crows (Corvus corone). PLoS One 1: e0146298. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0146298 CrossRef Google Scholar

Baker, SE, Shaw, RF, Atkinson, RPD, West, P and Macdonald, DW 2015 Potential welfare impacts of kill-trapping European moles (Talpa europaea) using scissor traps and Duffus traps: a post-mortem examination study. Animal Welfare 24: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.24.1.001 CrossRef Google Scholar

Battersby, SA 2015 Rodents as carriers of disease. In: Buckle, AP and Smith, RH (eds) Rodent Pests and their Control pp 81–100. CABI International: Wallingford, UK. https://doi.org/10.1079/9781845938178.0081 CrossRef Google Scholar

Beausoleil, NJ, Fisher, P, Littin, KE, Warburton, B, Mellor, DJ, Dalefield, RR and Cowan, P 2016 A systematic approach to evaluating and ranking the relative animal welfare impacts of wildlife control methods: poisons used for lethal control of brush-tail possums (Trichosurus vulpecula) in New Zealand. Wildlife Research 43: 553–565. https://doi.org/10.1071/WR16041 CrossRef Google Scholar

Beausoleil, NJ and Mellor, DJ 2015a Introducing breathlessness as a significant animal welfare issue. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 63: 44–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/00480169.2014.940410 CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Beausoleil, NJ and Mellor, DJ 2015b Advantages and limitations of the Five Domains model for assessing welfare impacts associat-ed with vertebrate pest control. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 63: 37–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00480169.2014.956832 CrossRef Google Scholar

Berdoy, M and Drickamer, LC 2007 Comparative social organ-ization and life history of Rattus and Mus. In: Wolff, JO and Sherman, PW (eds) Rodent Societies: an Ecological and Evolutionary Perspective pp 380–392. University of Chicago Press: Chicago, USAGoogle Scholar

Boulet, M, Borg, K, Faulkner, N and Smith, L 2021 Evenly split: Exploring the highly polarized public response to the use of lethal methods to manage overabundant native wildlife in Australia. Journal for Nature Conservation (Jena) 61: 125995. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2021.125995 CrossRef Google Scholar

BPCA (British Pest Control Association) 2018 The Use of Air Guns in Pest Control; Code of Best Practice, First Edition. British Pest Control Association: UKGoogle Scholar

Bright, PW and Morris, PA 1994 Animal translocation for con-servation – performance of dormice in relation to release meth-ods, origin and season. Journal of Applied Ecology 31: 699–708. https://doi.org/10.2307/2404160 CrossRef Google Scholar

Broom, DM 1999 The welfare of vertebrate pests in relation to their management. In: Cowan, DP and Feare, CJ (eds) Advances in Vertebrate Pest Management pp 309–329. Filander Verlag: Furth, GermanyGoogle Scholar

Buckle, AP and Eason, CT 2015 Control methods: Chemical. In: Buckle, AP and Smith, RH (eds) Rodent Pests and their Control pp 123–154. CAB International: Wallingford, UK. https://doi.org/10.1079/9781845938178.0123 CrossRef Google Scholar

Buckle, AP and Smith, RH 2015 Rodent Pests and their Control. CAB International: Wallingford, UK. https://doi.org/10.1079/9781845938178.0000 CrossRef Google Scholar

CABI (Centre for Agriculture and Bioscience International) 2019 Invasive Species Compendium. www.cabi.org/isc/datasheet/46829 Google Scholar

Colombe, S, Jancloes, M, Riviere, A and Bertherat, E 2019 A new approach to rodent control to better protect human health: first international meeting of experts under the auspices of WHO and the Pan American Health Organization. Weekly Epidemiological Record 17: 197–203Google Scholar

Cox, P and Smith, RH 1992 Rodenticide ecotoxicology: pre-lethal effects of anti-coagulants on rat behaviour. Proceedings of the Fifteenth Vertebrate Pest Conference p 86. 1992, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, USAGoogle Scholar

Croft, S, Aegerter, JN, Beatham, S, Coats, J and Massei, G 2021 A spatially explicit population model to compare manage-ment using culling and fertility control to reduce numbers of grey squirrels. Ecological Modelling 440: 109386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2020.109386 CrossRef Google Scholar

CRRU UK (Campaign for Responsible Rodenticide Use UK) 2021 CRRU UK Code of Best Practice; Best Practice Guidance for Rodent Control and the Safe Use of Rodenticides. Revision August 2021. Campaign for Responsible Rodenticide Use UK. pp 36. www.thinkwildlife.org/code-of-best-practice/Google Scholar

Defra (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) 2009 Spring trap and collarum test criteria. Defra: London, UKGoogle Scholar

Dizney, L, Jones, PD and Ruedas, LA 2008 Efficacy of three types of live traps used for surveying small mammals in the Pacific Northwest. Northwestern Naturalist 89: 171–180. https://doi.org/10.1898/NWN08-18.1 CrossRef Google Scholar

Dubois, S, Fenwick, N, Ryan, EA, Baker, L, Baker, SE, Beausoleil, NJ, Carter, S, Cartwright, B, Costa, F, Draper, C, Griffin, J, Grogan, A, Howald, G, Jones, B, Littin, KE, Lombard, AT, Mellor, DJ, Ramp, D, Schuppli, CA and Fraser, D 2017 Consensus principles for ethical wildlife control. Conservation Biology 31: 753–760. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12896 CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

EC (European Commission) 2019 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/637 of 23 April 2019 approving cholecalcif-erol as an active substance for use in biocidal products of prod-uct-type 14. Official Journal of the European Union L 109/13. pp 6Google Scholar

Ennaceur, A, Michalikova, S and Chazot, PL 2009 Do rats really express neophobia towards novel objects? Experimental evidence from exposure to novelty and to an object recognition task in an open space and an enclosed space. Behavioural Brain Research 197: 417–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2008.10.007 CrossRef Google Scholar

EU (European Union) 2020 Product assessment report of a bioci-dal product for national authorisation applications; Selontra® Product Type PT 14 Cholecalciferol. Case number in R4BP: BC-LS050091-32. Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 concerning the making available on the market and use of biocidal products. file:///C:/Users/uzdb0086/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INe tCache/Content.Outlook/9IETAM6A/105196_Selontra_fPAR__O ct_2020_non_confidential.pdfGoogle Scholar

FAWC (Farm Animal Welfare Council) 2009 Farm Animal Welfare in Great Britain: Past, Present and Future. FAWC: London, UKGoogle Scholar

Fenwick, N 2014 Evaluation of the humaneness of rodent capture using glue traps. The Canadian Association for Humane Trapping: CanadaGoogle Scholar

FERA 2011 Evaluating the potential of analgesics to improve the humaneness of anticoagulant rodenticides; SID 5 Research Project Final Report (Rev. 07/10). Defra. http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Default.aspx?Menu=Menu&Module=Mor e&Location=None&Completed=2&ProjectID=17716Google Scholar

Fischer, B and Lamey, A 2018 Field deaths in plant agriculture. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 31: 409–428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-018-9733-8 CrossRef Google Scholar

Fisher, P, Beausoleil, NJ, Warburton, B, Mellor, DJ, Campion, M and Booth, L 2010 How humane are our pest control tools? (09-11326). Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Biosecurity New Zealand Technical Paper No: 2011/01. Landcare Research: Lincoln, New ZealandGoogle Scholar

Frantz, SC and Padula, CM 1983 A laboratory test method for evaluating the efficacy of glueboards for trapping house mice. In: Kaukeinen DE (ed) Vertebrate Pest Control and Management Materials, Fourth Symposium pp 209–225. American Society for Testing and Materials: Philadelphia, USA. https://doi.org/10.1520/STP30182S CrossRef Google Scholar

Fraser, D 2008 Understanding Animal Welfare; The Science in its Cultural Context. Wiley-Blackwell: Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar

Galef, BG and Buckley, LL 1996 Use of foraging trails by Norway rats. Animal Behaviour 51: 765–771. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1996.0081 CrossRef Google Scholar

GEA (German Environment Agency) 2021 Liste der geprüften Mittel und Verfahren zur Bekämpfung von Gesundheitsschädlingen, Krätzmilben und Kopfläusen gemäß § 18 Infektionsschutzgesetz as of May 1, 2021. German Environment Agency, Germany. https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/dokument/liste-ss-18-infektionsschutzgesetz. [Title translation: List of tested agents and methods for the control of health pests, scabies mites and head lice according to § 18 Infection Protection Act]Google Scholar

Gregory, N 2004 Physiology and Behaviour of Animal Suffering. Blackwell: Oxford, UK. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470752494 CrossRef Google Scholar

Himsworth, CG, Feng, AYT, Parsons, K, Kerr, T and Patrick, DM 2013 Using experiential knowledge to understand urban rat ecology: A survey of Canadian pest control professionals. Urban Ecosystems 16: 341–350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-012-0261-4 CrossRef Google Scholar

Hsieh, H, Simons, M, Hartman, J and Dale, H 2017 Effects of social housing on cannibalism in mice and rats. International Journal of Toxicology 36: 74–74Google Scholar

Jacob, J and Buckle, A 2018 Use of anticoagulant rodenticides in different applications around the world. In: van den Brink, N, Elliott, J, Shore, R and Rattner, B (eds) Anticoagulant Rodenticides and Wildlife. Emerging Topics in Ecotoxicology (Principles, Approaches and Perspectives) pp 11–43. Springer: Cham, Denmark. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64377-9_2 CrossRef Google Scholar

Jansen, P 2011 The Goodnature® A24 automatic rat & stoat Kill Trap; evaluation of humaneness. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjspcare-2011-000020.72 CrossRef Google Scholar

Jolly, SE, Eason, CT and Frampton, C 1993 Serum-calcium lev-els in response to cholecalciferol and calcium carbonate in the Australian brushtail possum. Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology 47: 159–164. https://doi.org/10.1006/pest.1993.1074 CrossRef Google Scholar

Kenward, RE and Hodder, KH 1998 Red squirrels (Sciurus vul-garis) released in conifer woodland: the effects of source habitat, predation and interactions with grey squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis). Journal of Zoology 244: 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1998.tb00003.x CrossRef Google Scholar

Kraaijeveld-Smit, F 2015 Ethics in rodent control. In: Buckle, AP and Smith, RH (eds) Rodent Pests and their Control pp 315–329. CAB International: Wallingford, Oxfordshire, UK. https://doi.org/10.1079/9781845938178.0315 CrossRef Google Scholar

Lambert, M, Vial, F, Pietravalle, S and Cowan, D 2017 Results of a 15-year systematic survey of commensal rodents in English dwellings. Scientific Reports 7: 15882. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-15723-9 CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Littin, KE and Mellor, DJ 2005 Strategic animal welfare issues: ethical and animal welfare issues arising from the killing of wildlife for disease control and environmental reasons. Revue Scientifique et Technique Office International des Epizooties 24: 767–782. https://doi.org/10.20506/rst.24.2.1611 CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Littin, KE, Mellor, DJ, Warburton, B and Eason, CT 2004 Animal welfare and ethical issues relevant to the humane control of vertebrate pests. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 52: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/00480169.2004.36384 CrossRef Google Scholar

Littin, KE, O’Connor, C and Eason, C 2000 Comparative effects of brodifacoum on rats and possums. In: Zydenbos, SM (ed) Proceedings the 53rd New Zealand Plant Protection Conference pp 310–315. January 2000, New Zealand. https://doi.org/10.30843/nzpp.2000.53.3701 CrossRef Google Scholar

Lund, M 2015 Commensal rodents. In: Buckle, AP and Smith, RH (eds) Rodent Pests and Their Control pp 19–32. CABI International: Wallingford, UK. https://doi.org/10.1079/9781845938178.0019 CrossRef Google Scholar

Macdonald, DW and Barrett, P 1993 Mammals of Britain and Europe. Harper Collins: London, UKGoogle Scholar

MAF 2008 Proposal to Prohibit the Sale and Use of Rodent Glueboard Traps. Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Biosecurity: New ZealandGoogle Scholar

Mason, G and Littin, K 2003 The humaneness of rodent pest control. Animal Welfare 12: 1–37Google Scholar

Meerburg, BG, Singleton, GR and Kijlstra, A 2009 Rodent-borne diseases and their risks for public health. Critical Reviews in Microbiology 35: 221–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408410902989837 CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Mellor, DJ and Beausoleil, NJ 2015 Extending the ‘Five Domains’ model for animal welfare assessment to incorporate positive welfare states. Animal Welfare 24: 241–253. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.24.3.241 CrossRef Google Scholar

Mellor, DJ and Reid, CSW 1994 Concepts of animal well-being and predicting the impact of procedures on experimental animals. In: Baker, RM, Jenkin, G and Mellor, DJ (eds) Improving the Well-being of Animals in the Research Environment pp 3–18. Australian and New Zealand Council for the Care of Animals in Research and Training (ANZCCART): Glen Osmond, South Australia, AustraliaGoogle Scholar

Morriss, GA and Warburton, B 2014 Modifying the Victor (R) Easy Set (R) Rat Trap to improve the animal welfare of stoats and ship rats trapped in New Zealand. PLoS One 9: e86760. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0086760 CrossRef Google Scholar

Nakayama, SMM, Morita, A, Ikenaka, Y, Mizukawa, H and Ishizuka, M 2019 A review: poisoning by anticoagulant rodenti-cides in non-target animals globally. Journal of Veterinary Medical Science 81: 298–313. https://doi.org/10.1292/jvms.17-0717 CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Natural England 2010 The Animal Welfare Act 2006: What it means for wildlife. Technical Information Note TIN072. Natural England: Sheffield, UKGoogle Scholar

Parrott, D, Quy, R, Van Driel, K, Lurz, P, Rushton, S, Gurnell, J, Aebischer, N and Reynolds, J 2009 Review of red squirrel con-servation activity in northern England. A Report by Fera to Natural England (NECR019). Natural England: Sheffield, UKGoogle Scholar

Pearson, E, Ortega, YK and Ruggiero, LF 2003 Trap-induced mass declines in small mammals: mass as a population index. The Journal of Wildlife Management 67: 684–691. https://doi.org/10.2307/3802675 CrossRef Google Scholar

PMA (Pest Management Alliance) 2017 Code of Best Practice: Humane use of Rodent Glue Boards. https://www.pmalliance.org.uk/codes-of-best-practice/Google Scholar

Prout, DM and King, CM 2006 The effect of handling under anaesthetic on the recapture rate of wild ship rats (Rattus rattus). Animal Welfare 15: 63–66Google Scholar

PSD (Pesticides Safety Directorate) 1997 Assessment of humaneness of vertebrate control agents. Evaluation of fully approved or provisionally approved products, no 171. Defra and the PSD: York, UKGoogle Scholar

Pyzyna, BR, Trulove, NF, Mansfield, CH, McMillan, RA, Ray, CN and Mayer, LP 2018 ContraPest®, a new tool for rodent control. In: Woods, DM (ed) Proceedings of the 28th Vertebrate Pest Conference. University of California, Davis, CA, USA. https://doi.org/10.5070/V42811054 CrossRef Google Scholar

RRAG (Rodenticide Resistance Action Group) 2018 The UK Rodenticide Resistance Action Group: Response to ECHA public consultation on cholecalciferol. https://circabc.europa.eu/sd/a/0d7998e3-f58b-4678-b403-3d14d4c60b53/13_RRAG%20Cholecalciferol_03_04_18%20FINAL.pdf Google Scholar

Ryan, EA 2021 Non-target interactions and humane evaluation of a captive bolt trap on commensal rodents. MSc Thesis, University of British Columbia, CanadaGoogle Scholar

Schlötelburg, A, Geduhn, A, Schmolz, E, Friesen, A, Baker, S, Martenson, N, Le Laidier, G, Urzinger, M, Klute, O, Schröer, D, Brigham, A and Puschmann, M 2021 NoCheRo-Guidance for the Evaluation of Rodent Traps. Part A Break back/Snap traps. German Environment Agency: Dessau, Germany. https://www.umweltbun-desamt.de/publikationen/nochero-guidance-for-the-evaluation-of-rodent-traps Google Scholar

Schmolz, E 2010 Efficacy of anticoagulant-free alternative bait products against house mice (Mus musculus) and brown rats (Rattus norvegicus). Integrative Zoology 1: 44–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-4877.2010.00191.x CrossRef Google Scholar

Sharp, T and Saunders, G 2011 A Model for Assessing the Relative Humaneness of Pest Animal Control Methods, Second Edition. Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Canberra, Australia. http://www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/welfare/aaws/humaneness-of-pest-animal-control-methods Google Scholar

Špur, N, Pokorny, B and Šorgo, A 2016 Attitudes toward and acceptability of management strategies for a population of hood-ed crows (Corvus cornix) in Slovenia. Anthrozoös 29: 669–682. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2016.1228766 CrossRef Google Scholar

Talling, JC and Inglis, IR 2009 Improvements to trapping standards. DG ENV. https://ec.europa.eu/environment/biodiversity/animal_welfare/hts/pdf/Final_ report.pdfGoogle Scholar

Walther, B, Ennen, H, Geduhn, A, Schlötelburg, A, Klemann, N, Endepols, S, Schenke, D and Jacob, J 2021 Effects of antico-agulant rodenticide poisoning on spatial behavior of farm dwelling Norway rats. Science of the Total Environment 787: 147520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147520 CrossRef Google Scholar

Zhelev, G, Lyutskanov, M, Petrov, V, Mihaylov, G, Marutsov, P, Koev, K and Tsvetanov, TS 2013 Efficacy of a cellulose-based rodenticide for control of warfarin-resistant black rats (Rattus rat-tus). Bulgarian Journal of Veterinary Medicine 16: 134–140Google Scholar