This is the last issue of Animal Welfare to be produced from start to finish by the present editorial team. The Assistant Editor is leaving us to return to Australia and I retire this autumn from both the Editorship of the Journal and the Directorship of UFAW.

This issue of the journal contains, for the first time, a Guest Editorial. This type of contribution, which is to be an occasional feature of the journal, is written at the invitation of the Editor-in-Chief and allows eminent outsiders to pass informed comment on current and controversial animal welfare problems. The first of these Guest Editorials is by David Bowles, the European Officer of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), and describes the background to and the present situation re the attempt by the European Community to ban the importation of furs obtained by the use of the leghold (gin) trap. He paints a somewhat gloomy picture of what happens when European animal welfare interests fall foul of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) obligations.

With this issue, Animal Welfare enters its fifth year. The format has not changed since the journal was inaugurated in 1992: the material published is still essentially refereed scientific/technical articles and signed book reviews. There has, however, recently been an increase in the number of pages per issue. This enlargement not only means that the journal is better ‘value for money’, it is becoming necessary now that Animal Welfare is attracting a rising number of quality manuscripts.

There has been increasing policy debate about farm animal welfare over the last 5-10 years in a number of countries, particularly concerning the need for government intervention, for example by means of legislation. Assessment of farm animal welfare policy requires some evaluation of the associated relative costs and benefits involved. When considering the benefits, it is desirable not only to collate scientific evidence about the effects of policy on the welfare of animals but, also on the extent to which citizens in society want such a policy and the benefits that they perceive to result from it. This paper describes an exploratory survey which tests the application of a technique, contingent valuation, to estimate, in money terms, the benefits that people perceive to be associated with specific measures to improve farm animal welfare through eliciting their willingness to pay for welfare legislation (a case-study relating to the banning of battery cages in egg production is used). The study shows that the methodology could provide very useful information to policy makers and others interested in public perceptions and concerns about animal welfare, and public support for animal welfare policies.

Four aspects of lighting which may influence the behaviour and physiology of housed poultry are light intensity, photoperiod, light source and wavelength. These factors are frequently manipulated in an attempt to improve productivity and to facilitate management practices. This review examines the effects of such manipulation upon the welfare of the birds. The majority of papers on lighting in poultry houses deal with their effects upon performance, rather than on factors associated with behaviour and health which may impinge upon welfare. Data about the preferences of birds for different lighting conditions are almost entirely lacking, but the practice of housing birds in relatively low light intensity is considered likely to lead to sensory deprivation in species where vision is important. Tentative recommendations are given pending the results of future research as to appropriate light intensity, photoperiod and light sources for domestic poultry.

Possible welfare benefits of qualitative rather than quantitative food restriction were investigated with growing female broiler breeder chickens (Ross 1). In Experiment 1, body-weight gains from 2 to 6 weeks of age were compared among different diet dilution, appetite suppression and low protein treatments, with free access to food at all times, to identify qualitative treatments causing weight gains similar to that recommended in the Ross 1 Parent Stock Management Manual. Based on these results, four diet dilution (400g kg−1 unmolassed sugar-beet pulp, 300 and 600g kg−1 oat hulls, 500g kg−1 softwood sawdust) and one appetite suppression (50g kg−1 calcium propionate) treatments were compared with two quantitative restriction (the recommended daily ration and twice that amount) and one ad libitum control treatments, from 2 to 10 weeks of age, in Experiment 2. As well as growth, food intake, excreta production and digestibility, measurements were also made of behaviour and blood indices of stress. Several conclusions were drawn. Different methods of qualitative food restriction can be used to control growth rate within desired limits. Problems with these methods include reduced uniformity in weight gain, increased excreta production and/or increased cost. Although they appear to suppress abnormal oral behaviours, they do not alter the increased general activity which is correlated with suppression of growth rate, and which may more accurately reflect associated hunger. Suppression of abnormal oral behaviours may only rarely correspond with reduction in blood indices of stress, and so cannot be taken to indicate improved welfare. Some of these methods can add to physiological stress. Finally, there was insufficient evidence of improved welfare, based on both behavioural and physiological criteria, to justify advocating the suitability of any of these methods for commercial use.

If we agree that improvements in animal welfare should be determined primarily through legislation, we would probably also agree that it is important not to disregard an issue merely because laws have been changed and solutions appear to have been found. As in all contracts, it is vital to read the small print and to follow an issue right through to the end. The saga of improving global trapping methods provides a salutary lesson for both.

Captive primates rarely have to spend as much time searching for, obtaining and processing food as do their wild counterparts. Enrichment techniques designed to encourage captive primates to spend more species-appropriate amounts of time in foraging behaviours have been successful. The present study measured the behavioural effects of four feeding enhancements: two devices (mats and puzzles) and two foods (produce and frozen juice), on four cohorts (n = 63) of single-caged, yearling rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta). Devices required considerable manipulation to retrieve rewards, whereas enrichment foods required additional processing. Analyses compared periods when one of the enhancements was available to interim periods when no enhancements were available. Planned comparisons revealed that subjects spent more time feeding, and less time inactive, self-grooming, exploring and behaving socially when feeding enrichment was available. Significantly more time was spent feeding when enrichment foods were provided, but more time was spent playing and using enrichment when devices were in the cage. More time was spent self-grooming and exploring with the acrylic puzzle than with the artificial turf mat. Subjects spent significantly more time feeding when produce was available than when frozen juice was available. Feeding enhancements resulted in more species-typical patterns of activity for single-caged, yearling rhesus. Since feeding devices were used in species-typical activities in addition to feeding, devices may be more valuable than foods. Feeding enrichment programmes which combine stimulating devices with foods that are novel and require processing can positively affect the behaviour of captive primates.

Cage space requirements for non-human primates in the United States of America are less than those in European countries. Studies in support of the assumption that the US legal minimum cage size provides adequate space have limited value because they only tested cages without structural enhancement. It is not surprising that non-human primates cannot be animated to be more active or to behave in more species-typical manners by only providing them with extra barren space. Explicitly stipulating that all cages have to be equipped with properly installed, elevated structures appropriate to each species and age category would make the US standards more adequate. Such structures would no longer restrict the caged primate to an unnatural, permanent terrestrial lifestyle but would allow the animal to make use of the arboreal, ‘safe’ dimension to which she/he is biologically adapted. Minimal height requirements will have to be upgraded in the US to accommodate these ethological considerations.

It is commonly assumed that animals suffer if they cannot perform behaviours seen in wild conspecifics. Although comparisons with the behaviour of wild conspecifics are a popular method of assessing the welfare of captive animals, their validity has not been fully assessed. Homeostatic models of motivation suggest that many behaviours are stimulus driven rather than internally generated. Thus, it is possible that the non-performance of some wild-type behaviours does not necessarily compromise animal welfare, unless welfare is defined as being compromised by such non-performance. The flexibility of wild animal behaviour and the fact that animals free to perform the complete range of wild behaviours can suffer, must also put into the question the validity of such comparisons. Technical criticisms also arise when one considers the difficulty of constructing accurate and unbiased time budgets for wild animals. It is possible that the expressions of wild-type behaviours correlate with enhanced welfare, rather than cause enhanced welfare. Thus, if the consequences of behaviour are more important than the expression of behaviour itself, environmental enrichment does not necessarily need to rely upon the performance of wild-type behaviours for the improvement of animal welfare. Therefore, although behavioural comparisons with wild animals can be considered as potentially useful indicators of behavioural differences, they cannot always be relied upon to give an objective assessment of animal welfare. To make an assessment of welfare, behavioural comparisons with wild animals should be used in conjunction with other techniques to demonstrate that the consequences of non-performance of wild behaviours results in impoverished welfare.

There are many definitions of animal welfare. These do not only differ in their meaning, but also in their function for making a broad concept accessible for scientific research. Lexical [dictionary] definitions establish what the common meaning is of the concept to be studied, and help to find some concrete phenomena which are related to the often vague and general descriptive terms. Explanatory definitions provide an elementary theoretical background for studying the phenomena. Operational definitions contain the parameters used in concrete measurements. In each step we reduce the concept to more measurable elements but lose other elements of the concept. In the case of animal welfare this results in an evolution of definitions which makes animal welfare more objectively assessable. But it also results in an erosion: development of a confusing diversity in parameters and a loss of the moral aspect of the concept of animal welfare. This erosion has a negative influence on political decisionmaking. It is important to recognize the possibilities and limitations of problem solving, based on ‘animal welfare science’.

To assess the validity of using wild behavioural data as a welfare indicator for zoo animals, the time budgets of 19 captive giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis), from four zoos were compared with the time budgets of wild giraffe from Hwange National Park, Zimbabwe. Differences were shown to exist between the behaviour of wild and captive giraffe. However, only the duration of lying differed significantly across zoos. Correlations demonstrated that both enclosure size and feed restriction affected the locomotor activity of giraffe. An attempt to quantify observer influence upon the behaviour of wild giraffe was made. Different methods of observation were shown to significantly affect the time budget established. The extent to which wild giraffe behaviour can be used as a welfare indicator for captive conspecifics is discussed, as are the problems inherent in such a study. The difficulties in constructing an alternative welfare measure using prevalence to veterinary problems, are briefly considered. Methods by which captive giraffe welfare can be improved are discussed, particularly concerning the provision of browse to allow more natural feeding patterns to be established.

In the Family Pen System piglets and fatteners grow up in species-specific family groups that correspond to the normal social organization of domestic pigs. The feasibility of a technologically improved version of this alternative housing system, originally designed by Alex Stolba, was tested on a commercial farm for two and a half years. Eighty-one litters were born in three family groups within this period. Average cycle length was 170 ± 24 (SD) days, resulting in 2.15 litters per sow per year. All piglets were suckled for at least seven weeks. In 53.8 per cent of the cycles lactational oestrus occurred before the piglets were seven-weeks-old. The litters of sows which did not show lactational oestrus were artificially weaned and returned to the family group as soon as the sow had been served. At the beginning there were problems with piglet health and crushing, but in the last 21 months of the study there was a stable reproductive performance of 19.5 piglets (28-days-old) reared per sow per year (n = 53 litters). Sows that had been raised themselves in the Family Pen System reared 21.4 piglets per year (n = 25 litters). In conclusion, the technologically improved version of the Family Pen System was found to be practicable on a commercial farm.

Despite the number of dolphins that have been kept in dolphinaria, and the many behavioural studies that have been conducted on captive dolphins, few have focused on their welfare. Some behaviours have been described in detail, but insufficient attention has been paid to the diurnal variations in their occurrence.

Behavioural observations were conducted upon two groups (two and six individuals each) of captive bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncates) over a period of six weeks. Behavioural descriptions were produced and the amount of time the animals spent engaged in different behaviours was sampled. General trends of both groups and differences in patterns of variation throughout the day were also analysed. The use of area by the dolphins and their degrees of association were recorded. Considerable individual variation and differences between the two groups were observed.

In comparing the behaviour of different dolphins and in considering their welfare it is necessary to take into account their marked degree of individuality. The observations have shown that behavioural data such as variability of behaviour patterns, spontaneous variations in the daily activities and frequency of playing and exploration may constitute good welfare indicators. It is argued that social diversity, appropriate physical characteristics of the pools, existence of play objects in the pools, easy access to visual contact with people, and frequent interactions with the trainers throughout the day at unscheduled times may be important ways of improving environmental stimulation.

There is growing interest in and support for the development of disease prevention measures in free-living wildlife and for the rescue, treatment and rehabilitation of wild animals that are sick and injured. In some cases these endeavours may be of importance to the conservation of populations but frequently they are undertaken for welfare rather than conservation reasons. There are circumstances in which wildlife welfare can be improved by therapeutic intervention but the difficulties, and their potentially harmful consequences, should not be underestimated. Interventions for the welfare of free-living wild animals whose fate we control or influence and which are therefore, to some extent, under our stewardship, are consistent with the tradition of humanity for and stewardship of domesticated or captive animals. However, it is suggested here that the decision to treat sick or injured free-living wild animals should not be based on welfare grounds alone.

Eight baboon groups (Papio sp.) were observed for over one hundred scan samples both before and after the provision of structural enrichment. Additions to their home-cage included a galvanized ladder suspended horizontally by chains and a plastic drum hung from the ladder. Observations were conducted for three weeks before and three weeks after the structures were added to determine changes in space use. The baboons ‘ age-sex class and location were recorded at 10 minute intervals over a 60 minute time period. Groups were categorized as small, medium or large for analysis. The baboons spent most of their time on the floor and the bench and this pattern did not change with the addition of the new structures. The female baboons used the new structures an average of 16.5 per cent of the observation time, the males used them 13.6 per cent of the time, and the infants used them 10.1 per cent of the time. Of the new structures, males, females and infants all used the ladder the most. Females and infants used areas that were inaccessible to males and no group size differences were found.

Stereotypic behaviour is generally associated with animals maintained in restrictive environments, and has rarely been described in wild or free-ranging animals. The difference between captive and wild populations may be due to their genetic predisposition or to experience of environmental factors. To investigate genetic and environmental factors, we compared the behaviour of 12 wild caught voles and their 9 pups with that of 12 laboratory reared voles and 14 laboratory bred pups. All voles were observed twice. Adults were observed after 10 days housing in a cage, containing food, water, sawdust and hay, and again after 60 days. Pups were observed in the same cages 10 and 60 days after weaning. For each observation, the voles’ behaviour was recorded both undisturbed in this cage, and following introduction to an unfamiliar cage. Locomotor stereotypies were observed in laboratory adults, but not in wild caught voles, which spent less time on all locomotor activities and more time under cover than laboratory voles. There was no difference in mortality or fecundity of laboratory and wild caught voles, so there appeared to be no selective advantage to stereotyping. There was no difference in the behaviour of wild and laboratory pups, so early environmental experience of the cage environment, rather than parental background, was an important factor in the development of locomotor stereotypies in this species. Pups that developed stereotypies by 60 days spent less time under cover and more time walking and climbing after 10 days than voles that did not develop stereotypic behaviour. Stereotypic behaviour may therefore have been derived from persistence of locomotor behaviour. Wild caught voles may have failed to develop locomotor stereotypies, either because they did not perform a locomotor response to captivity or because older voles are less prone to develop novel responses to external cues. It would, therefore, be dangerous to use the absence of stereotypic behaviour as a reliable indicator of welfare without taking into account the animal's prior experience.

The periparturient behaviour of silver-fox females inside traditional and modified breeding boxes was video-recorded. The behaviour was analysed from 24 hours before parturition to 72 hours after, and in three diurnal periods. Twenty litters had the traditional simple breeding box, whereas 14 litters had a box with a narrow entrance tunnel. Compared to females in traditional boxes, females in tunnel boxes spent more time sleeping inside the box both before and after parturition, cleaning newborn cubs and grooming cubs while lying down, but less time looking out of the box. Excavation performed on the floor prior to parturition was performed equally often in both box types. The differences between box types were particularly pronounced for primiparous vixens. During the three postparturient days most differences in behaviour between box types were only found during working hours (0800-1500h). At this time females in non-tunnel boxes spent considerably less time sleeping and more time in locomotion within the box, looking out of the box, walking into or out of the box, standing partly out of the box, or staying out of the box, than females in tunnel boxes. Cub mortality was lower in tunnel boxes than in non-tunnel boxes. The results indicate that females in tunnel boxes had a more relaxed behaviour and were able to nurture their offspring more effectively. They did not watch their surroundings as frequently as females in traditional breeding boxes. Giving silver foxes a breeding box with an entrance tunnel may improve the welfare of both female and offspring.

Ethological observations of the introduction of new charges into a large mixed-sex group in a dog shelter, and the later behaviour of the dogs in the run, were used to investigate a method of early assessment of the dogs’ reactions to the new situation. Subjects were divided qualitatively into four categories according to their interactional behaviour during the first two days (‘dog-oriented’, ‘human-oriented’, ‘dog & human friendly’, ‘asocial’). This classification was compared to an independent division resulting from statistical analysis of the dogs ‘ entry-sequences, and was found to be consistent for 80 per cent of dogs. One week after entry, both female and male dogs received distinctively fewer social interactions by conspecifics and tended to direct more interaction-initiating behaviour towards the keeper, thus demonstrating an integration process; females became more physically active and initiated significantly more interactions with other dogs; for males, the contrary was found. Qualitative comparison between first visitors and regular guests suggest that experienced dogs integrate faster, showing fewer behavioural signs of distress and engaging more often in investigatory behaviour. Results indicate that the assessment of dogs from their behaviour during the entry-sequence is a valid method to predict later tendencies. Males and females should be handled differently during introduction. The stress of entry into an existing group can therefore be reduced, improving the animals’ welfare.