Capturing wild birds with mist nets is very common for studying many aspects of avian biology. However, except for adrenocortical reactivity, little is known about other physiological responses to this potentially stressful procedure. Here, we focused on body temperature (Tb) in migratory songbirds, as large numbers are caught for population monitoring and studies of migratory biology. Tb is sensitive to acute stress in other vertebrates and contexts, usually showing an increase (stress-induced hyperthermia). We sampled garden warblers (Sylvia borin), whinchats (Saxicola rubetra) and barn swallows (Hirundo rustica) captured with mist nests using standard protocols at an island stopover site in the central Mediterranean during spring migration. Tb was measured within 3 min (T0), 30 min (T30) and 180 min (T180) from the time the bird hit the net, using an analogue probe inserted into the throat, and a body condition score was calculated for each bird. In the garden warbler, but not the other two species, a slight but significant reduction in Tb occurred after 180 min. In all species, the change in Tb after 3 h of confinement was positively correlated to the change in ambient temperature (Ta) but not to body condition. The mean (± SEM) change in Tb over 3 h was −1.68 (± 0.16)°C for garden warblers, therefore within the expected range of normothermy in small birds. Such reduction in Tb is contrary to the expectation of stress-induced hyperthermia; these results suggest that garden warblers are able to modulate their body temperature and that these small changes are influenced by fluctuations in ambient temperature. Therefore, Tb might not be a good indicator of capture stress in small passerine migrants. Our results also indicate that restraint for ringing procedures is unlikely to have adverse effects on Tb regulation of migratory birds, if held within the time-frame typical of ringing operations.

Accelerometers are used to remotely monitor activity in various species in studies that quantify pain, document behavioural patterns, and measure individual activity differences. Studies validating accelerometers typically quantify various active states; however, targeting states specific to periods of inactivity, such as sitting, sleeping, and standing, has the potential to more accurately quantify inactive behaviours commonly associated with behavioural changes related to pain, sickness, or injury. Our objectives were two-fold: first, validate a commercially available accelerometer (Actical®) for quantifying inactivity in laying hens and, second, compare inactivity levels between hens with severely fractured keel bones and hens with minimal to no keel damage. Correlation between the inactivity level as measured by the accelerometer compared to live, focal observation of stationary, inactive behaviours was high; therefore, the Actical® accurately quantifies inactive states in laying hens. Following validation, the Actical® accelerometer was used to quantify inactivity level differences between hens with or without keel-bone damage. Severely fractured hens spent less time motionless, than hens with minimal to no keel damage. Further investigation into inactivity differences related to keel status before and after acquisition of keel fractures is warranted. Use of the accelerometer has the potential to improve animal welfare research by quantifying the effect of pain or sickness on activity level, mapping daily activity patterns, and measuring individual differences in general activity.

An understanding of the factors influencing the human-animal relationship is relevant in the development of welfare interventions for working equids. However, the link between the psychological attributes of animal owners, such as empathy level and pain perception, and the welfare state of working horses is yet to be studied. Here, we assessed working horse owners’ empathy, their perception of equine pain and how these relate to the welfare state of their horses. The relationship between empathy and perception of equine pain was also explored. One hundred owners of working horses were studied, along with their working horses (n = 127). Self-reported rating scales were used for measuring animal-oriented empathy, human-oriented empathy and owners’ perception of equine pain; higher scores in the three scales indicated higher levels of empathy and higher perception of equine pain. An animal welfare index based on direct measures was applied where higher scores indicate a poorer welfare state. Most of the owners had high levels of empathy towards both animals and humans and a high perception of equine pain. According to the animal welfare index, 15.7% of horses had a poor welfare state. Higher levels of empathy and equine pain perception in owners were correlated with a better animal welfare condition, with owner's empathy level towards animals explaining over 60% of horses’ welfare. Moreover, empathy towards animals was positively correlated with human-oriented empathy and perception of equine pain. We therefore suggest that strategies oriented to improve welfare of working horses should consider education programmes aimed at promoting the development of empathy in caretakers.

This study was designed to determine whether feedback from welfare assessments, using the Horse Welfare Assessment Protocol, affected actual horse welfare in 21 stables. After the first assessment, stable managers in the high feedback (HF; n = 10 stables) group were supplied with extensive information and support regarding the welfare measures and relevance of the results. The low feedback (LF; n = 11 stables) group only received the results without additional information. Upon re-assessment, six months later, no significant changes were seen in the stable overall (SO) score in either group. Significant changes occurred in individual measures; in the HF group more fresh-air inlets were open but water drinker function and ocular discharge deteriorated. In the LF group, the feeding troughs were cleaner but mane and tail condition deteriorated. Both groups had cleaner water troughs and less equipment chafing but the sum of relative air humidity (RH) and temperature (T) deteriorated. Significant decreases occurred in the stable welfare issues (SWI) score; the HF group decreased from 93.3 to 72.0 and the LF group from 113.3 to 91.3. There were also nonsignificant changes; in the HF group, 71 measures and five stables improved while 63 measures and five stables (50%) deteriorated. In the LF group, 65 measures and seven stables improved while 62 measures and four stables deteriorated. The observed improvements in both groups suggest that assessment alone (with no detailed feedback) might raise awareness but we cannot yet conclude whether or not the type of feedback affects overall horse welfare.

In this study, we sought to explain why dairy farmers give importance to various use and non-use values of animal welfare. In particular, we examined how the farmers could be segmented according to the relative importance they give to various use and non-use values in animal welfare and whether this segmentation could be explained by farmers’ personal values and personality traits. Based on a latent class analysis using best-worst scaling data on 123 Swedish dairy farmers, three segments of farmers were found: animalcentred, human-centred and business-orientated. These groups were related to measures of farmers’ personal values and personality traits in a point-biserial correlation and a hierarchal multinomial logistic regression analysis. The results suggest that the segmentation is related to personal values, but not to personality traits. This finding is important from a policy perspective, because the existence of different segments of farmers who are motivated by different values in animal welfare indicates a need to approach different farmers in different ways if policy is to succeed in improving animal welfare. It also indicates a possibility to influence the segments to improve animal welfare by measures that are sensitive to value dynamics of the farmers.

This paper focuses on the reliability of the multi-criteria evaluation model included in the Welfare Quality® protocol for growing pigs to aggregate the animal-based indicators, first to criteria, then to principle level and finally to an overall welfare score. This assessment was carried out in a practical application study on a sample of 24 farms in Germany. Altogether, 102 protocol assessments were carried out in repeated visits to these farms in order to evaluate the inter-observer and test-retest repeatability of the overall scores calculated by the multi-criteria evaluation system. Reliability is then assessed by the calculation of different reliability and agreement parameters: Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficients (RS), Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC), Smallest Detectable Changes (SDC) and Limits of Agreement (LoA). Inter-observer repeatability was insufficient for the criteria comfort around resting, absence of injuries, expression of social behaviours, expression of other behaviours, good human-animal relationship and positive emotional state as well as for the principles good housing and appropriate behaviour. This is probably due in the main to insufficient repeatability of the underlying indicators that have been revealed in previous studies. Test-retest repeatability is predominantly insufficient. Overall, the present results highlight the importance of absolutely reliable indicators at the baseline level. Furthermore, it could be shown that the calculation procedure is partly incorrect and consequently needs correction. Therefore, this study is an important contribution to the future progression of the Welfare Quality® protocols and animal welfare assessment tools in general.

The Welfare Quality® (WQ) protocol for on-farm dairy cattle welfare assessment describes 33 measures and a step-wise method to integrate the outcomes into 12 criteria scores, grouped into four principle scores and into an overall welfare categorisation with four possible levels. The relative contribution of various welfare measures to the integrated scores has been contested. Using a European dataset (491 herds), we investigated: i) variation in sensitivity of integrated outcomes to extremely low and high values of measures, criteria and principles by replacing each actual value with minimum and maximum observed and theoretically possible values; and ii) the reasons for this variation in sensitivity. As intended by the WQ consortium, the sensitivity of integrated scores depends on: i) the observed value of the specific measures/criteria; ii) whether the change was positive/negative; and iii) the relative weight attributed to the measures. Additionally, two unintended factors of considerable influence appear to be side-effects of the complexity of the integration method. Namely: i) the number of measures integrated into criteria and principle scores; and ii) the aggregation method of the measures. Therefore, resource-based measures related to drinkers (which have been criticised with respect to their validity to assess absence of prolonged thirst), have a much larger influence on integrated scores than health-related measures such as ‘mortality rate’ and ‘lameness score’. Hence, the integration method of the WQ protocol for dairy cattle should be revised to ensure that the relative contribution of the various welfare measures to the integrated scores more accurately reflect their relevance for dairy cattle welfare.

There has been an increased demand by some sections of society for higher farm animal welfare standards. In response, a number of programmes marketing products of animal origin, produced under higher animal welfare standards, have been established on the market in recent years. However, the market segments for products from so-called animal welfare programmes (AWPs) have remained small. Farmers are considered an important stakeholder group for higher market shares of more animal welfare-friendly products. Farmers’ decision to adapt their production to the requirements of AWPs is multi-dimensional, but always linked to financial incentives. Since little is known about the financial attractiveness of higher animal welfare standards in livestock farming, this study investigates the perceived economic success of 579 conventional farmers keeping livestock on their farms. The survey data were analysed using propensity score matching to assess the average effect of participation in AWPs on a farm's perceived profitability, liquidity and stability from the farmer's point of view. No significant effect was found of participation in AWPs on the economic success of farmers. The implications of this result are two-fold. On the one hand, it suggests that it is of particular importance to create further financial incentives to encourage farmers to take part in these programmes. On the other, it shows that farmers’ concerns that the required costly and highly specific investments will pay off are unfounded, as farmers participating in AWPs rate their own financial situation as equivalent to that of their colleagues not participating in AWPs.

Following a period of consultation in 2017, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) has recently published an updated Code of Practice for the Welfare of Meat Chickens and Meat Breeding Chickens in England. The Code came into force in March 2018.

There are approximately 8.5 million dogs, 8 million cats and 1 million horses in the United Kingdom. According to the Animal Welfare Act 2006 (Section 9), any person responsible for an animal is required to take all reasonable steps to meet the needs of that animal. Under the Act, the needs of an animal are based on the ‘Five Freedoms’ and are considered to be:

In 2008, a Report found that there were a number of welfare concerns for zoo-housed elephants in the United Kingdom (UK) (Harris et al 2008). Many elephants had foot or joint problems (over half the national herd was either mildly or severely lame), 75% of the herd was classed as ‘overweight’ or ‘very overweight’, and many elephants exhibited abnormal behaviour (stereotypies). Subsequent to this Report, the British and Irish Association of Zoos and Aquariums (BIAZA) formed the Elephant Welfare Group and were tasked by the UK Government with improving the welfare of captive elephants over the next ten years.

The European Directive 2010/63/EU adopted in 2010 updated and replaced the previous legislation that had been in place since 1986. This Report, and accompanying staff working document, meet the requirement of Article 58 of the 2010 Directive for a review of the Directive by 10th November 2017.

The European Commission (EC) is the executive body of the European Union (EU) that represents and upholds the interests of the EU as a whole. Part of the role of the EC is to promote animal welfare and earlier this year the Commission published a Report on the impact of animal welfare international activities on the competitiveness of European livestock producers in a globalised world.

The number of wild animals in travelling circuses is small — at the end of the 2017 touring season there were only two travelling circuses and the licenses covered 19 animals (six reindeer, four zebra, three camels, three racoons, a fox, a macaw, and a zebu). However, for a number of years, ethical concerns have been raised over the keeping of wild animals in travelling circuses and six years ago, in response to these concerns, the Government introduced the Welfare of Wild Animals in Travelling Circuses (England) Regulations 2012.