In Tasmania, a small island state of Australia, wildlife is under increasing pressure from anthropogenic activities. Multiple species of native herbivores compete directly for resources with humans, such that wildlife populations are regularly managed to reduce their impact on agricultural and forestry landscapes. There is an increasing need to quantify the impacts of such wildlife management strategies on localised populations of Tasmania's iconic fauna. Gathering this information often requires capture and restraint of animals, but due to a paucity of published information on responses of wildlife to such techniques, regulatory bodies overseeing research do not always have complete information upon which to base decisions. In our study, the regulatory body designated manual restraint over chemical immobilisation as the preferred method, but current prescribed techniques can result in capture-related injuries including myopathy. To encourage dialogue on this welfare issue, we present observations on capture and restraint of the endemic Tasmanian pademelon (Thylogale billardierii). Three of 19 animals that were trapped as part of a research study exhibited symptoms consistent with capture myopathy. Results suggest that techniques involved with capture and manual restraint can be problematic for pademelons, and we present recommendations for preventative measures, including chemical immobilisation, to limit myopathy-related deaths.

The killing of animals is the subject of societal and political debate. Wild geese are caught and killed on a regular basis for fauna conservation and damage control. Killing geese with carbon dioxide (CO2) is commonly practiced, but not listed in legislation on the protection of flora and fauna, and societal concerns have been raised against this method. In this study, an experiment was carried out killing 30 wild-caught geese using either CO2 or a mixture of CO2 and argon (Ar). Brain function (EEG) and heart function (ECG) were measured to determine loss of consciousness and onset of death. The stage of unconsciousness was reached on average within one minute in both treatments (56 s for CO2 and 50 s for CO2 and Ar). States of minimal brain activity and ineffective heart beat were reached more quickly using CO2 compared to CO2 and Ar (112 versus 178 s for minimal brain activity and 312 versus 394 s for ineffective heart beat for CO2 and the mixture of CO2 and Ar, respectively). The mixture of carbon dioxide and argon did not significantly reduce time to loss of consciousness or death. Further studies on behaviour and stress physiology are needed to determine conclusively whether CO2 alone is a satisfactory agent to kill wild-caught geese as the lower CO2 concentration in the CO2-Ar treatment may act as a sedative and reduce the aversiveness of the animals during exposure to lethal gas concentrations.

In recent years, analysis of tissue samples has become a powerful tool in cetacean ecology since it provides information for effective conservation and management policies. Biopsy samples taken for such studies have been obtained by various means including crossbows, rifles, and pole systems. We investigated sampling success and the reaction of dusky dolphins (Lagenorhynchus obscurus) off the coast of Argentina to a biopsy pole system from 2008 to 2009. Using ad libitum behavioural sampling, we documented individual behavioural reactions to biopsy sampling immediately after a biopsy was taken. Log-linear models were used to determine whether there were significant differences in behavioural response for different group size, composition or behavioural context. In total, 109 sampling attempts were made and 58 biopsy samples were obtained (53.21% success rate). The intensity of individual response was influenced by group size and composition. Small groups (typically mother/calf) reacted more frequently than larger groups (generally mixed-age adults and juveniles). The behaviour of the animals prior to our approach for biopsy sampling also affected their response. Milling dolphins appeared to respond more intensively than dolphins socialising or travelling. In conclusion, biopsy sampling with the biopsy pole system presented here show generally mild and short-term reactions, though behaviour, group size and group composition affected the response. This information can be used to minimise the impact of biopsy sampling, and facilitate the collection of data critical to effective conservation strategies.

The welfare and productivity of South American camelids may be affected by stressful events. The purpose of this study was to validate a non-invasive method for stress monitoring using faecal samples and to apply it to evaluate a stressful event, such as confinement. For physiological validation, nine alpacas (Vicugna pacos) and six llamas (Lama glama) were subjected to pharmacological stimulation of their adrenal cortex. Serial faecal samples were collected during 48 h before and after stimulation. During confinement, faecal samples from six llamas were collected twice per day during six consecutive days. Faeces belonging to 18 vicuñas (Vicugna vicugna) were collected before and one day after their capture for confinement (Chacu). Faecal cortisol metabolites (FCM) were extracted from each sample and quantified by an 11-oxoaetiocholanolone enzyme immunoassay. Thirty-three and 28 h (median) after ACTH stimulation, FCM concentrations peaked with a ten- and eight-fold increase (median) above baseline in alpacas and llamas, respectively. There were no significant differences in FCM concentrations between sexes. In llamas, FCM concentrations peaked (4.7 times higher than baseline) after five days of confinement in females and after three days (2.7 times) in males. In vicuñas, three times higher FCM levels were observed the day after the start of confinement (in comparison to the starting values). Based on our findings, this non-invasive method is well suited to measure adrenocortical activity in alpacas, llamas and vicuñas. Thus, this method could help to improve management, handling and welfare in wild and domesticated South American camelids.

Animals under human management are often separated from conspecifics, which may lead to behaviour indicative of separation distress or grief. For the purposes of this paper, grief is considered as a biological response to separation, indicated by a bi-phasic ‘protest-despair’ behavioural response. It is reasonable to assume that only animals which are able to form complex social bonds can experience grief. Scientific experiments have suggested that some farm and laboratory animals experience distress or grief as a result of maternal separation and social isolation. However, little is known about whether the public believe that animals are capable of grief. Therefore, we surveyed 1,000 members of the public to establish what knowledge they have about grief in animals and to compare this to what we know in science. The survey revealed that 90% of the general public believed that some or all animals can experience grief, with 23% believing that all animals can grieve. They attributed grief more to companion animals and animals with higher level cognitive abilities than to farm animals and animals that may be feared. It is concluded that public belief about grief in animals extends beyond scientific evidence, and that educating people about scientific findings and management practices connected with grief and separation distress may improve the welfare of farm and laboratory animals.

Human activities may cause conservation concerns when animal populations or ecosystems are harmed and animal welfare concerns when individuals are harmed. In general, people are concerned with one or the other, as the concepts may be regarded as separate or even at odds. An online purposive survey of 339 British Columbians explored differences between groups that varied by gender, residency, wildlife engagement level and value orientation (conservation-oriented or animal welfare-oriented), to see how they rated the level of harm to wildlife caused by different human activities. Women, urban residents, those with low wildlife engagement, and welfare-orientated participants generally scored activities as more harmful than their counterparts, but all groups were very similar in their rankings. Activities that destroy or alter habitat (urban development, pollution, resource development and agriculture) were rated consistently as most harmful by all groups, including the most conservation-oriented and the most welfare-oriented. Where such a high level of agreement exists, wildlife managers should be able to design management actions that will address both conservation and animal welfare concerns. However, the higher level of concern expressed by female, low engagement and welfare-oriented participants for activities that involve direct killing indicates a need for wildlife managers to consult beyond traditional stakeholders.

Research synthesis, using techniques such as meta-analysis to combine the results of a number of studies, is a particularly useful technique when there are multiple studies with conflicting results, or where there may be conflicting interests, and can serve to extract the maximum information from animal experiments. The effect of conventional cages and alternative housing systems on measures of production, behaviour, physical and physiological condition in laying hens is an important question that would benefit from research synthesis. We found that statistical constraints did not allow the usual methods of meta-analysis, so as a first step towards quantitative comparison, we used a simple vote-counting approach based on the treatment means. We counted the number of papers in which conventional cages or alternative systems had a higher weighted mean for various response variables. Egg production was higher in conventional cages than in alternative systems, though this effect was probably mostly confined to the comparison with multi-level indoor systems. Bones were stronger from hens kept in alternative systems than those kept in conventional cages. We confirmed previous reviews that birds show more comfort behaviour and possibly dustbathing (or vacuum dustbathing) behaviour in alternative systems, but aggressive pecking did not differ between systems. Perhaps surprisingly, mortality, feather pecking and body wounds were not found to differ between systems. The latter findings suggest that the chance of a mortality or cannibalism outbreak may be no greater in alternative systems than in cage systems, but it should be noted that our analysis did not consider the magnitude of the difference in mortality. In conclusion, the meta-comparison undertaken here supports some but contradicts other conclusions reached in qualitative reviews.

This study examined the impact of rearing environment on the behavioural responses of wild European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) to standard laboratory husbandry procedures. We compared birds that had been caught from the wild as independent juveniles with birds taken from the nest and hand-reared in the laboratory from approximately ten days post-hatch. Although hand-rearing can increase habituation to humans and hence reduce fearfulness in laboratory birds, in other species maternal deprivation is also associated with increased stress-sensitivity in later life. Thus, the welfare benefits of hand-rearing are unclear. We investigated the interaction between rearing environment (12 hand-reared versus 12 wild-caught birds) and current laboratory housing conditions (enriched versus non-enriched cages and top-level cages versus bottom-level cages) on measures of behaviour before, during and after husbandry. Both wild-caught and hand-reared birds reacted to focal husbandry by moving to the periphery of their cages, indicative of high escape motivation during a stressful procedure. Wild-caught birds were overall less active than hand-reared birds. We found no difference in the response of the wild-caught and hand-reared birds to focal husbandry, but hand-reared birds were faster to resume normal behaviour following husbandry than wild-caught birds when housed in the top cages. We interpret our results as showing evidence for chronic depressive apathy (lower overall activity) coupled with greater fear (longer latencies to resume normal behaviour following husbandry) in the wild-caught birds in some environments. Our data support the conclusion that hand-rearing is associated with some welfare benefits for birds involved in laboratory research.

The objective of this study was to identify the extent of pre-stun shocks in a commercial broiler processing plant and to collect any evidence of their effect on broiler carcase and meat quality. The results showed that the degree of bird movement on entry to the water-bath was related to the incidence of pre-stun shocks, with heavier male birds showing less movement and correspondingly lower levels of pre-stun shocks. In a separate trial, 500 birds identified as receiving a pre-stun shock were compared with 500 control birds (no pre-stun shock). They were assessed for carcase downgrading conditions, red wing tips, wing haemorrhages, shoulder haemorrhages, breast muscle haemorrhages, the incidence of broken pectoral bones and also for meat quality defects. All downgrading conditions were subjectively assessed using photographic standards. The results of this study have shown that the incidence of pre-stun shocks has a significant effect both on carcase downgrading conditions and on meat quality. Pre-stun shocks are preventable and the poultry processing industry can improve both bird welfare and carcase and meat quality by ensuring that they do not occur.

The Welfare Quality® (WQ) protocols are increasingly used for assessing welfare of farm animals. These protocols are time consuming (about one day per farm) and, therefore, costly. Our aim was to assess the scope for reduction of on-farm assessment time of the WQ protocol for dairy cattle. Seven trained observers quantified animal-based indicators of the WQ protocol in 181 loose-housed and 13 tied Dutch dairy herds (herd size from 10 to 211 cows). Four assessment methods were used: avoidance distance at the feeding rack (ADF, 44 min); qualitative behaviour assessment (QBA, 25 min); behavioural observations (BO, 150 min); and clinical observations (CO, 132 min). To simulate reduction of on-farm assessment time, a set of WQ indicators belonging to one assessment method was omitted from the protocol. Observed values of omitted indicators were replaced by predictions based on WQ indicators of the remaining three assessment methods, resources checklist, and interview, thus mimicking the performance of the full WQ protocol. Agreement between predicted and observed values of WQ indicators, however, was low for ADF, moderate for QBA, slight to moderate for BO, and poor to moderate for CO. It was concluded that replacing animal-based WQ indicators by predictions based on remaining WQ indicators shows little scope for reduction of on-farm assessment time of the Welfare Quality® protocol for dairy cattle. Other ways to reduce on-farm assessment time of the WQ protocol for dairy cattle, such as the use of additional data or automated monitoring systems, should be investigated.

Collar-worn deterrents reduce predation by cats while collar-mounted ID enhances return of lost animals. A perception that collars are hazardous limits their use. We defined cases as ‘collar incidents’ (cat snagged its collar or caught a paw), ‘collar injuries’ (veterinary treatment needed for a collar incident), and ‘collar deaths’ (cat died), before integrating data from veterinarians, owners from the general public and owners from a welfare society. Despite biases associated with each of these groups, taken together, the results from these indicated that collar injuries or deaths are rare. Interviews with one hundred and seven veterinarians indicated an average rate of one collar injury observed per 2.3 years of veterinary practice. At one practice, over three years, only 0.33% of 4,460 cat cases were collar injuries, while 180 cat cases at four clinics during August and November 2011 included none. The 63 owners from the general public reported only one collar injury and no deaths in a lifetime of ownership, although 27% experienced collar incidents. In contrast, 22% reported cats needing treatment following road accidents, 53% reported cats needing treatment for fighting injuries and 62% had owned cats killed on the road. Most (62%) of the 55 respondents from a cat welfare society had experienced a collar incident, but only two cats needed treatment. One died. In contrast, 31 and 58% reported cats needing treatment for road accidents and fighting, respectively, and 41% had owned cats killed on the road. Fighting and road accidents are greater hazards to roaming cats than collars, which offer the compensatory benefits of mounting predation deterrents and ID tags.

Subsistence whale hunting dates back to 400AD (Perrin et al 2009). Large-scale industrialised whaling to provide whale oil commenced in the late nineteenth century. Hunts escalated in the early 20th century and reports to the International Whaling Commission (IWC) show that over two million great whales were killed in hunts in the Southern Ocean between 1925 and 1985 and that unreported ‘pirate’ whaling was also widespread (Clapham & Ivashenko 2009). In 1982, as several whale species neared extinction, the IWC agreed an international moratorium on commercial whaling, which took effect in 1986.

Whale watching is defined as tours by air, sea or land to view any of the 86 reported species of whales, dolphins and porpoises in their natural habitat where a commercial aspect exists (IFAW 1999). Whale-watching platforms include small boats, sailboats, cruise ships, inflatables, kayaks, helicopters and airplanes, and the activity can also include observation from land-based sites and approaches made by swimmers. In addition to being non-disruptive to the cetacean population, ‘responsible whale watching’ has many potential educational, environmental, scientific and socioeconomic benefits for human communities (Hoyt & Iñíguez 2008). As a result, tourism of this kind can have a positive effect on nature through the promotion of a general interest and awareness in cetaceans, sustainable economic growth for local economies (which are often otherwise struggling), therefore providing multiple benefits, including improved motivation to preserve marine wildlife.

The goals of this paper are to: define terms relevant to industrially induced, but unintentional, trauma to whales; place the issue in a context of the prevalence of such mortalities in North American east coast waters; examine pertinent case studies; summarise the resultant pathobiology; and from this infer likely welfare concerns.

The welfare of animals is a major factor affecting the acceptability of human activities, and hence their sustainability, and whales are the subject of much concern because they are considered to be sentient animals. The scientific study of animal welfare has developed rapidly and now allows evaluation of the effects on whale welfare of disturbance by boats, harpoon entry, pulling whales to a boat, capture procedures, the point of unconsciousness and consequences for animals that escape. Useful data are now being collected on some aspects but recent evidence shows that, on average, during the capture and killing of whales, there is a high magnitude of poor welfare and the procedure is not humane.

At present, there is no binding requirement within the International Whaling Commission (IWC) for presentation of animal welfare data and, in recent years, the whaling nations have stopped supplying data regarding the welfare implications of whaling for commercial purposes. In the past, although analyses of data were provided, the raw data were not publicly accessible. In 2006, an analysis was conducted of video footage of Japan's ‘scientific whaling’ in the Southern Ocean during the 2005/06 season. The results of the analysis suggested some severe animal welfare issues associated with the hunt based on a limited sample size. The case is made for the provision of such data to the IWC to be made compulsory. This would be achieved through an amendment to the IWC Schedule requiring specified animal welfare data. Such a schedule amendment should be drafted to include all forms of commercial whaling (including ‘scientific whaling’ and whaling under objection) and should build upon earlier proposals that were presented to the IWC between 2000 and 2003.

Animal ethics is concerned with an examination of the beliefs that are held about the moral status of non-human animals. It is concerned, therefore, not with describing how animals are treated but with how they ought to be treated. This paper focuses upon two particular ethical approaches chosen because they enable us to understand more clearly the debate about the moral status of animals in general, and whales in particular, as well as offering a way of maximising consensus in the debate. The first, which describes the dominant discourse within the International Whaling Commission (IWC), is based on the argument that our duties to non-human animals are indirect, such that their protection is dependent upon the degree to which it is in our interests to do so. This is the logic behind the discourse of anthropocentric conservation. The second approach is the ethic of animal welfare. Unlike anthropocentric conservationism, the animal welfare ethic is not based upon denying, or ignoring, the moral standing of non-human animals, and is consistent with the widespread acceptance, in theory and practice, that we do have direct duties to animals, that they do have moral standing.

Although the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling states it is:

its Article VIII allows any Contracting Government to:

The number of laws and standards regulating and protecting the welfare of animals is expanding around the world. The growing demand from policy-makers for expertise and advice on animal welfare in order to create these new regulations has been inspired by developments in both science and ethics, which are increasing our understanding of animals’ abilities and capacities.