Animal Welfare Science Update Issue 70 – October 2020
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Animal Behaviour, Animal Welfare and the Scientific Study of Affect
WellBeing International WBI Studies Repository 5-2009 Animal Behaviour, Animal Welfare and the Scientific Study of Affect David Fraser University of British Columbia Follow this and additional works at: https://www.wellbeingintlstudiesrepository.org/emotio Part of the Animal Studies Commons, Comparative Psychology Commons, and the Other Animal Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Fraser, D. (2009). Animal behaviour, animal welfare and the scientific study of affect. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 118(3), 108-117. This material is brought to you for free and open access by WellBeing International. It has been accepted for inclusion by an authorized administrator of the WBI Studies Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Animal Behaviour, Animal Welfare and the Scientific Study of Affect David Fraser University of British Columbia KEYWORDS animal behaviour, animal welfare, affect, emotion, qualitative research ABSTRACT Many questions about animal welfare involve the affective states of animals (pain, fear, distress) and people look to science to clarify these issues as a basis for practices, policies and standards. However, the science of the mid twentieth century tended to be silent on matters of animal affect for both philosophical and methodological reasons. Philosophically, under the influence of Positivism many scientists considered that the affective states of animals fall outside the scope of science. Certain methodological features of the research also favoured explanations that did not involve affect. The features included the tendency to rely on abstract, quantitative measures rather than description, to use controlled experiments more than naturalistic observation, and to focus on measures of central tendency (means, medians) rather than individual differences. -
Submission from Sentient, the Veterinary Institute for Animal Ethics: Criminal Code Amendment (Animal Protection) Bill 2015
The Veterinary Institute for Animal Ethics Submission from Sentient, The Veterinary Institute for Animal Ethics: Criminal Code Amendment (Animal Protection) Bill 2015 To the Committee Secretary, Senate Standing Committees on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport As an independent association of veterinarians and associates solely dedicated to animal welfare and ethics, we have serious concerns about the proposed federal Criminal Code Amendment (Animal Protection) Bill 2015. Thank you for the opportunity to submit these concerns. They form the basis of our complete rejection of this Bill, which we regard as regressive, misleading, and detrimental to the public interest and animal welfare. 1. The Bill will hinder the detection and prosecution of malicious cruelty to animals perpetrated within animal enterprises: This Bill will result in the prosecution of individuals or organisations who, in the public interest, obtain undercover footage of malicious cruelty to animals that would otherwise never be exposed. The Bill will not lead to greater efficiency in prosecuting the perpetrators of such cruelty, and is likely to hinder prosecutions by placing unrealistically short time frames on the mandatory submission of evidence. In effect, the prosecution of ‘whistleblowers’ themselves will deter the collection of further evidence, deflecting attention away from the more pertinent issue: animal cruelty complaints. Consider the recent response by State and Territory Governments to the exposure by ABC’s Four Corners and animal activists of live baiting in the greyhound racing industry1 - this response has included (at the time of writing) investigations and likely prosecutions, stronger penalties for live baiting, lifelong bans on individuals, and the establishment of independent regulatory reviews, including a review by the Chief Veterinarian of Victoria. -
Functional Aspects of Emotions in Fish
Behavioural Processes 100 (2013) 153–159 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Behavioural Processes jou rnal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/behavproc Functional aspects of emotions in fish ∗ Silje Kittilsen Norwegian School of Veterinary Science, Norway a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t Article history: There is an ongoing scientific discussion on whether fish have emotions, and if so how they experience Received 19 March 2013 them? The discussion has incorporated important areas such as brain anatomy and function, physiological Received in revised form and behavioural responses, and the cognitive abilities that fish possess. Little attention has however, been 10 September 2013 directed towards what functional aspects emotions ought to have in fish. If fish have emotions – why? Accepted 11 September 2013 The elucidation of this question and an assessment of the scientific evidences of emotions in fish in an evolutionary and functional framework would represent a valuable contribution in the discussion on Keywords: whether fish are emotional creatures. Here parts of the vast amount of literature from both biology and Emotions Behaviour psychology relating to the scientific field of emotions, animal emotion, and the functional aspects that Cognition emotions fulfil in the lives of humans and animals are reviewed. Subsequently, by viewing fish behaviour, Psychology physiology and cognitive abilities in the light of this functional framework it is possible to infer what Fish functions emotions may serve in fish. This approach may contribute to the vital running discussion on Evolution the subject of emotions in fish. In fact, if it can be substantiated that emotions are likely to serve a function in fish similar to that of other higher vertebrate species, the notion that fish do have emotions will be strengthened. -
AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals: 2020 Edition*
AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals: 2020 Edition* Members of the Panel on Euthanasia Steven Leary, DVM, DACLAM (Chair); Fidelis Pharmaceuticals, High Ridge, Missouri Wendy Underwood, DVM (Vice Chair); Indianapolis, Indiana Raymond Anthony, PhD (Ethicist); University of Alaska Anchorage, Anchorage, Alaska Samuel Cartner, DVM, MPH, PhD, DACLAM (Lead, Laboratory Animals Working Group); University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama Temple Grandin, PhD (Lead, Physical Methods Working Group); Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado Cheryl Greenacre, DVM, DABVP (Lead, Avian Working Group); University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee Sharon Gwaltney-Brant, DVM, PhD, DABVT, DABT (Lead, Noninhaled Agents Working Group); Veterinary Information Network, Mahomet, Illinois Mary Ann McCrackin, DVM, PhD, DACVS, DACLAM (Lead, Companion Animals Working Group); University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia Robert Meyer, DVM, DACVAA (Lead, Inhaled Agents Working Group); Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, Mississippi David Miller, DVM, PhD, DACZM, DACAW (Lead, Reptiles, Zoo and Wildlife Working Group); Loveland, Colorado Jan Shearer, DVM, MS, DACAW (Lead, Animals Farmed for Food and Fiber Working Group); Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa Tracy Turner, DVM, MS, DACVS, DACVSMR (Lead, Equine Working Group); Turner Equine Sports Medicine and Surgery, Stillwater, Minnesota Roy Yanong, VMD (Lead, Aquatics Working Group); University of Florida, Ruskin, Florida AVMA Staff Consultants Cia L. Johnson, DVM, MS, MSc; Director, -
Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Australia
15 16 \L 77 ,, 0010 <3- kg^PCA^, 26, .!:- A ^^;;.t^ Q ^ for all creatures great a small ~ 61 Q JUL 20/5 ~ ~ ^, *, o *S' % \* 70 $0 to 3 July 2015 The Hon Rick Mazza MLC Chair Select Committee into the Operations of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Western Australia (Inc) Legislative Council Parliament House GPO Box All , PERTH WA6837 \ Dear Mr Mazza RSPCA Australia submission to the Select Committee into the operations of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Western Australia (Inc) As one of Australia's oldest and most trusted charities as well as being the nation's leading animal welfare organisation, I am pleased to attach a submission from RSPCA Australia that provides information on the objectives and operations of the RSPCA in Australia against the terms of reference. The RSPCA's commitment to improving animal welfare in Australia commenced in the 1870s and we look forward to the next one hundred and fifty years of service. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you would like further information. \ Yours sincerely A^-,\ HSFCA A. :\'~, I'M 111. ,\EN 99 668 65.1 249 Heather Neit Chief Executive Officer P (11.28? 8300 RSPCA Australia F 02 628? 8311 E ,\,, rl@r\1:1, , Dr. IAI ,,, 151, '" ill, ; .,, PCI 80, 265 Dual" VV, .\I ACT 2600 ,^. .q, RSPCA,^, 26, RSPCA Australia submission to the Select Committee into the operations of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Western Australia (Inc) 3 July 2015 Objectives of the RSPCA The RSPCA in Australia rose out of a need to improve the lives of the thousands of horses literally being worked to death in the streets of Victoria in the 1870s. -
Did Eating Human Poop Play a Role in the Evolution of Dogs?
WellBeing International WBI Studies Repository 4-24-2020 Did Eating Human Poop Play a Role in the Evolution of Dogs? Harold Herzog Animal Studies Repository Follow this and additional works at: https://www.wellbeingintlstudiesrepository.org/sc_herzog_compiss Recommended Citation Herzog, Harold, Did eating Human Poop Play a Role in the Evolution of Dogs? (2020), 'Animals and Us' Blog Posts, Psychology Today, 24 August, 118. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/animals-and- us/202008/did-eating-human-poop-play-role-in-the-evolution-dogs This material is brought to you for free and open access by WellBeing International. It has been accepted for inclusion by an authorized administrator of the WBI Studies Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Did Eating Human Poop Play a Role in the Evolution of Dogs? The consumption of human feces may have influenced canine evolution. Posted Aug 24, 2020 Source: Photo by K. Thalhotter/123RF “Poop is central to the story of how dogs came into our lives," write Duke University dog researchers Brian Hare and Vanessa Woods in their wonderful new book, Survival of the Friendliest: Understanding Our Origins and Rediscovering Our Common Humanity. I think they may be right. Molly, our beloved Labrador retriever, certainly loved to eat poop. Sometimes she would chow down on her own feces, and at other times, she preferred excrement of the cows that lived behind our house. Mary Jean and I found this practice (coprophagia) disgusting. We were not alone. Ben Hart and his colleagues at the University of California at Davis School of Veterinary Medicine surveyed nearly 3,000 dog owners about their pet’s penchant for poop. -
Species Image of Mandible Dietary Ecology
Species Image of Mandible Dietary Ecology Acomys cahirinus Omnivore – Seeds, fruits, (Northeast African insects, food scavenged from humans, shrubs (green leaves), spiny mouse) molluscs, carrion. Omnivore - (Nowak, 1999) Aplodontia rufa Herbivore – forbs, grasses, ferns. (mountain beaver) Specialised Herbivore – (Samuels, 2009). Bathyergus suillus Herbivore – grass, sedge, roots, (Cape dune mole- bulbs, tubers. rat) Specialised Herbivore – (Samuels, 2009). Cannomys badius Herbivore – roots, bamboo, (Lesser bamboo rat) shoots, grasses. Occasional seeds and fruits. Specialised Herbivore – (Samuels, 2009). Capromys pilorides Omnivore – Bark leaves, fruits, (Desmarest’s hutia) small vertebrates, ground and tree level vegetation. Omnivore - (Nowak, 1999). Castor canadensis Herbivore – Leaves, bark, bud (North American and roots, cambium (softer tissue of trees beneath bark). Beaver) Specialised Herbivore – (Samuels, 2009). Cavia porcellus Herbivore – Leaves, roots and (Domestic guinea tubers, fruits, flowers, lettuce etc. (rely on humans). pig) Specialised Herbivore (Cavia aperea) - (Samuels, 2009). Cricetomys Omnivore – Fruits, vegetables, gambianus nuts, insects, molluscs, roots (sweet potatoes etc.). (Northern giant pouched rat) Omnivore – (Nowak, 1999). Ctenomys opimus Diet for this species has not (Highland tuco-tuco) been extensively documented. Assuming that it is like other tuco-tuco, it is a herbivore – Grasses and roots primarily. Specialised Herbivore (Ctenomys conoveri) - (Samuels, 2009). Dasyprocta (Agouti - Species unknown. Assuming -
Public Workshop, a Lot of It Is Stemming from C
FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION CENTER FOR BIOLOGICS EVALUATION AND RESEARCH CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH FECAL MICROBIOTA FOR TRANSPLANTATION: SCIENTIFIC AND REGULATORY ISSUES CENTER FOR BIOLOGICS, EVALUATION AND RESEARCH (FDA) AND THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES (NIH) [This transcript has not been edited or corrected, but appears as received from the commercial transcribing service. Accordingly, the Food and Drug Administration makes no representation as to its accuracy.] Bethesda, Maryland Thursday, May 2, 2013 A G E N D A Welcome and Opening Remarks: KAREN MIDTHUN, MD Director, CBER/FDA FRED CASSELS, PhD Branch Chief of Enteric and Hepatic Diseases,DMID/NIAID Session I: The Microbiome in Health and Disease Part I: Moderator: MELODY MILLS, PhD NIAID/NIH Panelists: LITA PROCTOR, PhD National Human Genome Research Institute PHILLIP TARR, MD Washington University, School of Medicine in St. Louis YASMINE BELKAID, PhD National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases ERIC G. PAMER, MD Sloan-Kettering Institute VINCENT B. YOUNG, MD, PhD University of Michigan Session II: The Microbiome in Health and Disease Part II Moderator: DAVID RELMAN, MD Panelists: ROBERT BRITTON, PhD Michigan State University LINDA S. MANSFIELD, MS, VMD, PhD Michigan State University EMMA ALLEN-VERCOE, PhD University of Guelph * * * * * P R O C E E D I N G S (8:43 a.m.) MS. MIDTHUN: Good morning, can you hear me? Okay, very good. Well, first off I'd like to welcome all of you. Thank you so much for coming today. I'm Karen Midthun, the Director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research which is one of the Centers within the Food and Drug Administration. -
Coprophagia” Is Defined As the Ingestion of Any Type of Faeces, and Is a Common Complaint of Dog Owners
Homeward Bound Golden Retriever Rescue Golden Rule Training Canine Corprophagia "Coprophagia” is defined as the ingestion of any type of faeces, and is a common complaint of dog owners. For humans it can seem disgusting and embarrassing for our dogs to engage in this behavior. It is somewhat a natural act for dogs, but as we domesticate our pets, we expect these behaviors to disappear; however, they are still animals with natural instincts! A dog may eat its own faeces, those of another dog or the faeces of another species. Dogs commonly eat the faeces of cats with which they share a household (or farm animals). The only circumstance in which coprophagia is considered a normal behavior is when a mother dog eats the faeces of her pups from the time of their birth until about 3 weeks of age. It is felt that the mother does this to keep the area clean until the pups are able to move away from it to defecate. A clean area may be less likely to attract predators in the wild. What behaviors are linked with corprophagia? Coprophagia may be a behavioral or a medical problem. It may be a type of behavioral coping mechanism for an animal that is caught in a stressful situation, such as a sudden environmental change. It can also be a tactic to avoid punishment for having a bowel movement in an inappropriate area. Coprophagia can inadvertently be taught to a puppy or adult during housetraining; if the puppy or dog is scolded or he sees the owner 'cleaning up' the bowel movement in the house, the puppy may learn to 'hide' the bowel movement by eating it. -
Book of Abstracts
Dr. John Miller (University of Sheffield) Animals, Capital, Literature and the Victorians: Writing the Fur Trade The difference between what we think of as ‘animal’ and what we think of as ‘human’ is routinely conceptualised as a fullness on the side of the human against a poverty on the side of the animal. In response, animal studies, in its emergence over the last twenty years or so, has set about dismantling this crude logic and broadening the scope of humanities research to include the nonhuman. Although at this juncture of the twenty first century, animal studies has the status of an emerging field of study, many of its central concerns are significant ingredients of nineteenth-century thought. Evolutionary theory radically destabilised entrenched ideas of human–animal difference; animal advocacy flowered, through the work of the RSPCA, the vegetarian society and the humanitarian League amongst others; the connections of discourses of species to discourses of race, class and gender became increasingly clear, and increasingly subject to debate, as the century progressed. At the same time, the use of animal bodies in a developing commodity culture accelerated to a remarkable degree, marking the Victorian period, in particular, as an era of extraordinary violence. This paper explores one of the most disturbing examples of this objectification of animal life: the global fur trade. I am interested especially in the ways in which literary fiction both bolstered and contested the conceptions of value behind the fur trade’s commodifying processes. How, I ask, do literature and capital entwine in the imagining of animals as resources to be consumed? Simone Rebora (Università di Verona) “It’s as semper as oxhousehumper!” James Joyce’s animalisation of the human Few animals can be met through the works of James Joyce. -
Reading Magazine 2013
Year 9 Reading Magazine 2013 © Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, 2013 Mind your reflection When you look into a mirror, you know that your reflection isn’t another person. Many scientists wonder if other animals also have this ability. Understanding your own thoughts and feelings is described in psychology as the ‘theory of mind’. Some scientists believe that if an animal recognises its reflection, it is showing signs of a theory of mind. To use a mirror to test an animal’s theory of mind, scientists put animals in front of a mirror and let them look at their reflection. The scientists then remove the mirror and put a coloured dot on the animal’s body before bringing the mirror back. The animal can only see the dot when looking in the mirror. If they touch the dot on their own Frogs don’t recognise their own reflection body after seeing the reflection, the scientists assume that the animal identifies the image in the The mirror test might sound easy, mirror as theirs, and not belonging but even humans can’t pass the test to a separate animal. until they are at least 18 months old. So the next time you look in Many animals, such as dogs, can the mirror, remember that it wasn’t pass the mirror test, as well as always so easy! chimpanzees, dolphins and even magpies. 22 TEACH THAT OLD Home RSPCA opposes croc safari hunting in NT DOG SOME TRICKS NATIONAL AWARDS RSPCA OPPOSES CROCODILE RECOGNISE ‘GOOD SAFARI HUNTING IN NT EGGS’ The RSPCA is strongly opposed to the introduction of WHALING REPORT safari style hunting in the Northern Territory. -
Australian Animal Protection Law Journal Issn 1835-7008
AUSTRALIAN ANIMAL PROTECTION LAW JOURNAL ISSN 1835-7008 Australia’s first peer-reviewed Animal Law journal (2011) 5 AAPLJ EDITOR John Mancy ASSISTANT EDITOR Jacquie Mancy-Stuhl Published by John Mancy t/as LEGAL BULLETIN SERVICE 18 Wavell St., Carlingford, N.S.W. 2118 Australia E-mail: [email protected] © 2008 John Mancy t/as Legal Bulletin Service (2011) 5 AAPLJ ! 1! CONTENTS DEFINING THE PUPPY FARM PROBLEM: An Examination of the Regulation of Dog Breeding, Rearing and Sale in Australia Katherine Cooke …… 3 THE RIGHTS OF ANIMALS AND THE WELFARIST APPROACH TO PROTECTION: May the Twain Meet? Stephen Keim SC & Tracy-Lynne Geysen … 26 SHOOTING OUR WILDLIFE: An Analysis of The Law and its Animal Welfare Outcomes for Kangaroos & Wallabies Keely Boom and Dror Ben-Ami … 44 TOWARDS THE LEGAL PROTECTION OF ANIMALS IN CHINA Deborah Cao … 76 NOTES Whaling Update (Celeste Black) … 82 Bobby Calves: an example of the Standards Development Process (Elizabeth Ellis) ... 89 CASE NOTES Australian Consumer and Competition Commission v CI & Co Pty Ltd & Ors 1 (Ian Weldon ) … 96 BOOK REVIEWS 102 • Animal Rights What Everyone Needs To Know • Kitty McSporran Saves the Animals ANIMAL LAW COURSES 2011-12 104 1 [2011]FCA 1511. (2011) 5 AAPLJ ! 2! Defining the Puppy Farm Problem: An Examination of the Regulation of Dog Breeding, Rearing and Sale in Australia By Katherine Cooke ! ‘Human beings do not treat animals harshly because they are classified as property; animals are classified as property so that human beings can legally treat them harshly.’2 This article examines the regulation of dog breeding, rearing and sale in Australia.