Animal Welfare
Animal Welfare Science
Investigates the effects of environment, management practices, husbandry procedures, handling methods, transport conditions, lairage facilities, stunning techniques, and slaughter methods on animal welfare. This includes assessing the impact of these factors on the physical and psychological well-being of animals.
Utilizes a multidisciplinary approach, integrating veterinary epidemiology, animal behavior studies, immunological responses, productivity metrics, physiological assessments, and pathological examinations.
Focuses on the actual effects of human actions and interventions on animals, emphasizing empirical data and scientific evidence.
Animal Ethics
Engages in debates concerning the ethical acceptability of various forms of animal use, considering moral and philosophical perspectives.
May incorporate findings from animal welfare science (e.g., published research data) to inform ethical arguments and decisions.
Considers the question of how humans should treat animals from a moral and ethical standpoint, addressing issues such as animal rights, moral obligations, and responsible stewardship.
Animal Welfare Legislation
Establishes regulations and legal frameworks governing the use of animals, based on societal ethics, scientific knowledge of animal welfare, and policy considerations.
Considers how humans must treat animals in accordance with legal standards and regulatory requirements, outlining specific duties, responsibilities, and prohibitions.
Animal Welfare
Encompasses three interconnected disciplines: Animal Welfare Science, Animal Ethics, and Animal Welfare Legislation, each contributing unique perspectives and expertise to the field.
Key Questions
Are animals aware of themselves and their surroundings, possessing consciousness and self-awareness?
Can animals experience suffering, including pain, distress, fear, and other negative emotional states?
Do humans have moral responsibilities towards animals, and if so, what is the nature and scope of these obligations?
Morals vs. Ethics
Morals: Define personal character, values, and beliefs that guide individual behavior and moral judgment.
Ethics: A system of rules, principles, or standards that govern conduct within a specific context, such as professional ethics or animal ethics.
Definition of Animal Welfare
Broom (1986): "The state of an animal as regards its attempts to cope with its environment," emphasizing the animal's ability to adapt and thrive in its surroundings.
Welfare is a wide term that embraces both the physical and mental well-being of the animal, encompassing health, comfort, and emotional state.
Needs
Need: A requirement, fundamental in the biology of the animal, to obtain a particular resource or respond to a particular environmental or bodily stimulus (Broom and Johnson, 1993), essential for survival and well-being.
If a need is not provided for, there will be an effect of physiology or behaviour, indicating compromised welfare.
Negative physiological or behavioural effects linked to a resource indicate inappropriate human care, highlighting the importance of meeting animals' needs.
Hierarchy of Needs
Not all needs are equal in terms of importance and impact on animal welfare.
Provision of food and water is a fundamental need, essential for survival and basic physiological function.
Provision of a comfortable lying area may not be as important, although it still contributes to overall well-being.
Life-sustaining needs are the most critical for survival.
Health-sustaining needs support long-term health and vitality.
Comfort providing needs enhance overall quality of life.
The Five Freedoms and Five Provisions
Framework for promoting farm animal welfare, originally developed by the Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) in the UK.
Freedom from thirst, hunger, and malnutrition.
Provision: By providing ready access to fresh water and a diet to maintain full health and vigour, ensuring animals have adequate nutrition.
Freedom from discomfort and exposure.
Provision: By providing an appropriate environment including shelter and a comfortable resting area, protecting animals from adverse weather conditions.
Freedom from pain, injury, and disease.
Provision: By prevention or rapid diagnosis and treatment, minimizing suffering and promoting health.
Freedom from fear and distress.
Provision: By ensuring conditions and treatment which avoid mental suffering, minimizing stress and anxiety.
Freedom to express normal behaviour.
Provision: By providing sufficient space, proper facilities, and company of the animal’s own kind, allowing natural behaviors.
Welfare Continuum
Welfare varies over a continuum from very good to poor, reflecting the spectrum of experiences animals may have.
Studies of welfare are most effective if a wide range of measures is used (Broom, 1986), capturing the complexity of animal well-being.
Continuum ranges from excellent to awful, representing the full range of welfare states.
Welfare Continuum using the 5 Freedoms
Continuum applied to each of the five freedoms, ranging from worst to best for each, providing a nuanced assessment of welfare.
Welfare Assessment
Welfare is usually assessed by investigating:
Severity: e.g., severity of any clinical illness, indicating the degree of harm or suffering experienced by the animal.
Duration: how long animals have been affected (days, weeks, months), reflecting the persistence of welfare challenges.
Chronic clinical conditions are generally considered to be more of a problem than acute (depending on severity), due to their long-term impact on welfare.
Number of animals affected: Indicates whether the problem is at individual animal level or a system-wide problem (can also indicate duration), highlighting the scope of welfare concerns.
Applying the Five Freedoms
Freedom from thirst, hunger, and malnutrition:
Achieved by ready access to fresh water and a diet to maintain full health and fitness, ensuring basic nutritional needs are met.
Direct and indirect indicators are used to assess compliance.
Examples:
Undernutrition: Insufficient calorie intake leading to weight loss.
Restricted access to feed: Limited feeding times or inadequate food availability.
Inadequate trough space: Overcrowding at feeding areas, limiting access for some animals.
Single source of feed: Lack of dietary variety, potentially leading to nutrient deficiencies.
Malnutrition: Imbalanced diet lacking essential nutrients.
White veal production: Controversial practice involving severe dietary restrictions.
Mineral deficiency: Insufficient intake of essential minerals.
Thirst: Dehydration due to inadequate water intake.
Restricted access to water: Limited watering times or inaccessible water sources.
Frozen pipes: Unavailability of water due to freezing in cold climates.
Freedom from discomfort and exposure:
Achieved by providing an appropriate environment including shelter & a comfortable resting area, protecting animals from adverse conditions.
Mammals and birds are homeothermic, regulating their internal body temperature.
Thermoneutral zone: between upper and lower critical temperatures, where animals can maintain body temperature without expending extra energy.
Temperature requirements vary according to species and age, necessitating tailored environmental management.
Within the thermoneutral zone, animals can regulate temperature by sweating/panting, changing posture, etc.
Thermal and Physical Comfort
Thermal Comfort
Welfare inputs: Ambient temperature, relative humidity, air flow, stocking density, housing design, thermal properties of housing material, influencing the thermal environment.
Welfare outputs: Shivering, panting, external body temperature, spacing behaviour, indicating how animals respond to thermal conditions.
Physical Comfort (dairy cow example)
Welfare inputs: Cubicle barrier design, stocking density, floor type, bedding type, feed barrier design, affecting physical comfort and mobility.
Welfare outputs: Bruised soles, soft feet, neck calluses, knee and hock swellings, long lying bout times, indicating physical comfort and health.
Freedom from Pain, Injury & Disease
Objective is to prevent or rapidly diagnose and treat pain, injury, and disease, minimizing suffering and promoting well-being.
Many species perceive pain similarly to humans, suggesting a shared capacity for nociception and emotional response.
Do not assume animals show pain similarly to humans; prey species (e.g., cattle) have evolved not to show overt signs of pain, requiring careful observation.
Indicators of pain may include failure to keep clean, scruffy coat, and appearance, signaling compromised health and welfare.
Freedom to Express Normal Behavior
Development of abnormal behavior indicates poor welfare, suggesting unmet needs or adverse conditions.
Stereotypies: repetitive, invariant behavior patterns with no obvious goal or function (Mason, 1991), indicating chronic stress or deprivation.
Examples: rocking, pacing, tongue rolling, reflecting underlying psychological distress.
What is ‘natural’/normal behavior? Understanding species-specific behaviors is essential for providing appropriate environments.
Behavioral Indicators of Welfare State
Behavior can be assessed by looking for disruptions to usual patterns of behavior, indicating changes in welfare state.
Time spent lying: Deviations from normal lying patterns may indicate discomfort or health issues.
Social interactions: Altered social behavior may reflect stress, fear, or social disruption.
Comfort behavior: Reduced self-grooming or other comfort behaviors may indicate discomfort or illness.
Freedom from Fear and Distress
Described as an unpleasant emotion elicited by:
Danger: Perceived threats to safety and security.
An expectation of pain: Anticipation of physical harm or discomfort.
A state of alarm: Heightened arousal and anxiety in response to perceived threats.
Fear represents an adaptive response (stress) to protect from potential harm, but chronic fear can compromise welfare.
Common sources (i.e., welfare inputs) of fear include:
Novel stimuli: Unfamiliar objects, environments, or situations.
Humans: Negative interactions or handling practices.
Social disturbance: Disruption of social groups or hierarchies.
Husbandry procedures: Routine management practices that may cause fear or stress.
Handling: Restraint or manipulation of animals.
Transport: Confinement and movement of animals.
Are the Freedoms Equally Important?
How to combine the freedoms into one ‘overall’ level of welfare requires consideration of their relative importance.
Dependent on the background of the person doing the assessment, reflecting differing values and priorities.
Attitudes of Animal Science Faculty members towards animal welfare (Heleski et al., 2004):
Responses varied by species or experience, highlighting the influence of expertise.
Poultry scientists found toe and beak trimming less of a concern than non-poultry scientists, reflecting industry practices.
Pig scientists found early weaning of piglets and gestation crates less of a concern than non-pig scientists, reflecting industry practices.
Dairy scientists found lameness in cattle more of a concern than non-dairy scientists, due to its prevalence and impact.
Females on average had higher ‘empathy’ scores than males, suggesting gender differences in attitudes.
People with more liberal political views had higher ‘empathy’ scores, indicating ideological influences.
People with lower ‘religiosity’ scores had higher ‘empathy’ scores, suggesting the role of religious beliefs.
Results reflect only this particular group of people; could be different for consumers, vets, farmers, etc., highlighting the diversity of perspectives.
Biological Understanding and the 5 Freedoms
Negative experiences generated by sensory inputs, physiology (hunger, pain, etc), sensory inputs that contribute to cognitive assessment (fear, boredom etc).
Negative affects elicit behaviors necessary for survival (increase respiration rate, seek water etc).
Minimising these survival-critical affects may not make the overall affective balance a positive one – e.g., providing water alone to relieve thirst may not improve the overall welfare of the animal.
Environmental improvements work – enrichment can enhance positive experiences.
Animals that experience high levels of discomfort/pain etc. are not motivated to utilize opportunities to engage in rewarding behaviours – importance of therapeutic intervention to alleviate suffering.
Constraints on Providing Welfare Opportunities
Different sectors experience various constraints on providing welfare opportunities.
Zoos: originally survival, now enrichment etc, reflecting evolving priorities.
Livestock: originally disease and production, now heavily regulated (cost), due to increasing concerns about animal welfare.
Research: emphasis on uniformity to demonstrate treatment effects may conflict with individual animal needs.
Three R’s: Replace, Reduce, Refine – guiding principles for ethical animal research.
The Five Domains Model for Assessment of Animal Welfare
Measurable domains:
Nutrition (includes hydration): Assessing food and water intake and quality.
Environment: Evaluating physical and social surroundings.
Health (includes injury): Monitoring disease and injury.
Behaviour: Observing behavioral patterns and responses.
Mental State: Assessing emotional and cognitive experiences.
Considers both measurable physical and functional components as well as mental components (modified from Beausoleil and Mellor 2015), providing a comprehensive framework.
Domains Explained:
1: Nutrition
Positive: Enough water & food; balanced and varied diet, supporting optimal health.
Negative: Restricted water & food; poor food quality, leading to malnutrition and suffering.
2: Environment
Positive: Physical environment comfortable or pleasant, promoting relaxation and well-being.
Negative: Uncomfortable or unpleasant physical features of environment, causing stress and discomfort.
3: Health
Positive: Healthy, fit and/or uninjured, allowing normal function and activity.
Negative: Disease, injury and/or functional impairment, causing pain and suffering.
4: Behaviour
Positive: Able to express rewarding behaviours, promoting psychological well-being.
Negative: Behavioural expression restricted, leading to frustration and stress.
5: Mental State
Negative Experiences:
Thirst
Hunger
Malnutrition malaise
Chilling/overheating
Hearing discomfort
Breathlessness
Pain
Debility, weakness
Nausea, sickness
Dizziness
Anger, frustration
Boredom, helplessness
Loneliness, depression
Anxiety, fearfulness /distress
Panic, exhaustion
Positive Experiences:
Drinking pleasures
Taste pleasures
Chewing pleasures
Physical comforts
Satiety
Vigour of good health & fitness
Calmness, in control
Reward
Goal-directed engagement
Maternally rewarded
Excited playfulness
Sexually gratified
Affectionate sociability
Quality of Life - A Life Worth Living
A Quality of Life (QoL) scale where the different categories are defined in terms of the relative balance of positive and negative experiences animals may have (adapted from [32]).
A good life: The balance of salient positive and negative experiences is strongly positive. Achieved by full compliance with best practice advice well above the minimum requirements of codes of practice or welfare.
A life worth living: The balance of salient positive and negative experiences is favourable, but less so. Achieved by full compliance with the minimum requirements of code of practice or welfare that include elements which promote some positive experiences.
Point of balance: The neutral point where salient positive and negative experiences are equally balanced, representing a threshold of acceptability.
A life worth avoiding: The balance of salient positive and negative experiences is unfavourable, but can be remedied rapidly by veterinary treatment or a change in husbandry practices.
A life not worth living: The balance of salient positive and negative experiences is strongly negative and cannot be remedied rapidly so that euthanasia is the only humane alternative.
The Three Orientations
Physical Status:
Biological function: Assessing physiological health and performance.
Natural living: Providing opportunities for species-typical behaviors.
Mental Status:
Affective state: Evaluating emotional experiences and psychological well-being.
EU Directive 98/58/EC
Lays down the minimum standards for the protection of all farmed animals across the European Union.
"An animal is in a good state of welfare if it is healthy, comfortable, well-nourished, safe, able to express innate [natural] behaviour, and if it is not suffering from unpleasant states such as pain, fear, and distress" (OIE 2008), defining key elements of animal welfare.
Key EU Legislation on the Welfare of Farm Animals
1974: Protection of animals in slaughterhouses (updated in 1993 and 2013), ensuring humane slaughter practices.
1977: Protection of animals during transport (updated in 2005), minimizing stress and injury during transit.
1986: Protection of laying hens (updated in 1999), addressing housing and management practices.
1991: Protection of calves and pigs (consolidated in 2008), improving welfare standards in these sectors.
1998: General protection of all farm animals, establishing basic principles for animal care.
Legislation in Ireland
Animal Health and Welfare Act 2013, providing a comprehensive legal framework for animal protection.
Greyhound Racing Act 2019, regulating welfare standards in the greyhound racing industry.
Prohibition on Tail Docking and Dew Claw Removal (Dogs) Regulations 2014, restricting certain surgical procedures.
Welfare of Greyhounds Act 2011, specifically addressing the welfare of greyhounds.
One Welfare
Ireland's Animal Welfare Strategy 2021-2025, promoting an integrated approach to animal welfare.
Highlights interconnectedness of:
Animal Welfare
Human Well-being
Environment Conservation
Addresses issues such as:
Poverty & Local Community Support
Pets/Companion Animals
Farm/Working Animals
Wildlife
Consumers
Involves multidisciplinary inspections and cross-agency collaborations to address:
Animal/Human Abuse
Socioeconomical Issues
Food Safety
Sustainability
Increased Productivity
Livestock/Farmer Wellbeing