Does the Animal Welfare Act apply to free-ranging animals?

Despite the long-standing role that institutional animal care and use committees (IACUCs) have played in reviewing and approving studies at academic institutions, compliance with the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) is not always complete for government natural resource agencies that use free-ranging animals in research and management studies. Even at universities, IACUCs face uncertainties about what activities are covered and about how to judge proposed research on free-ranging animals. One reason for much of the confusion is the AWA vaguely worded exemption for "field studies." In particular, fish are problematic because of the AWA exclusion of poikilothermic animals. However, most university IACUCs review studies on all animals, and the Interagency Research Animal Committee (IRAC) has published the "IRAC Principles," which extend coverage to all vertebrates used by federal researchers. Despite this extended coverage, many scientists working on wild animals continue to view compliance with the AWA with little enthusiasm. IACUCs, IACUC veterinarians, wildlife veterinarians, and fish and wildlife biologists must learn to work together to comply with the law and to protect the privilege of using free-ranging animals in research.     

Ten practical realities for institutional animal care and use committees when evaluating protocols dealing with fish in the field

Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee’s (IACUCs) serve an important role in ensuring that ethical practices are used by researchers working with vertebrate taxa including fish. With a growing number of researchers working on fish in the field and expanding mandates of IACUCs to regulate field work, there is potential for interactions between aquatic biologists and IACUCs to result in unexpected challenges and misunderstandings. Here we raise a number of issues often encountered by researchers and suggest that they should be taken into consideration by IACUCs when dealing with projects that entail the examination of fish in their natural environment or other field settings. We present these perspectives as ten practical realities along with their implications for establishing IACUC protocols. The ten realities are: (1) fish are diverse; (2) scientific collection permit regulations may conflict with IACUC policies; (3) stakeholder credibility and engagement may constrain what is possible; (4) more (sample size) is sometimes better; (5) anesthesia is not always needed or possible; (6) drugs such as analgesics and antibiotics should be prescribed with care; (7) field work is inherently dynamic; (8) wild fish are wild; (9) individuals are different, and (10) fish capture, handling, and retention are often constrained by logistics. These realities do not imply ignorance on the part of IACUCs, but simply different training and experiences that make it difficult for one to understand what happens outside of the lab where fish are captured and not ordered/purchased/reared, where there are engaged stakeholders, and where there is immense diversity (in size, morphology, behaviour, life-history, physiological tolerances) such that development of rigid protocols or extrapolation from one species (or life-stage, sex, size class, etc.) to another is difficult. We recognize that underlying these issues is a need for greater collaboration between IACUC members (including veterinary professionals) and field researchers which would provide more reasoned, rational and useful guidance to improve or maintain the welfare status of fishes used in field research while enabling researchers to pursue fundamental and applied questions related to the biology of fish in the field. As such, we hope that these considerations will be widely shared with the IACUCs of concerned researchers.     

A self-assessment survey of the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee, Part 1: animal welfare and protocol compliance

Nearly half of all external grants from the US National Institutes of Health require approval by the recipient organization's Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) before the funds can be used for research with animals. Given that large sums of money are spent annually on research involving animals, studies evaluating the strengths, weaknesses and overall effectiveness of IACUCs and similar animal welfare committees are needed. The authors designed and carried out a self-assessment survey on IACUC function and effectiveness. They found that 98% of all respondents believed that their IACUCs advanced animal welfare, but in many instances, veterinarians' responses to individual survey items were significantly different from those of other IACUC members. Protocol compliance, protocol review training and better understanding among non-committee members of the need for regulatory oversight are some areas where improvements could be made. Less than 50% of respondents stated that literature searches to find alternatives to animal use or painful or distressful procedures were helpful.     

A collaborative approach to bridging the gap between wildlife managers and researchers

Although most wildlife professionals agree that science should inform wildlife management decisions, disconnect still exists between researchers and managers. If researchers are not striving to incorporate their findings into management decisions, support for research programs by managers can wane. If managers are not using research findings to inform management decisions, those decisions may be less effective or more vulnerable to legal challenges. Both of these situations can have negative consequences for wildlife conservation. We outline a collaborative research-management approach to bridging the gap between wildlife managers and researchers. We describe differences in perspectives, perceptions, and priorities between managers and researchers; outline how and why the divide between researchers and managers has likely occurred and continues to grow; and present specific strategies and recommendations to foster stronger collaborations between managers and researchers. We advocate increased synergy between managers and researchers based on a shared vision of conservation and a collaborative structure that rewards researchers and managers. Most importantly, we suggest that relationships and communication between managers and researchers must be established early in research development and decision-making processes, fostering the trust needed for collaboration. Institutions and agencies can facilitate these relationships by creating opportunities and incentives for integrating collaborative research into management decisions. We suggest this approach will strengthen ties between researchers and managers, increase relevance of research to management decisions, promote effectiveness of management decisions, reduce legal challenges, and ultimately produce positive, tangible, and lasting effects on wildlife conservation. © 2019 The Wildlife Society.     

Serving science and conservation: The biological materials request protocol of the New York Zoological Society

Biological materials obtained during routine veterinary treatment and necropsies on zoo and aquarium animals provide opportunities to study a wide variety of phenomena, many of which have important implications for wildlife conservation and captive animal management. Collection and shipment of biological materials require extensive coordination, and few zoological institutions have developed detailed, standardized protocols to facilitate these efforts. The value of using biological materials is reviewed and a set of policies and guidelines are outlined for their collection, preservation, and shipment. Several related issues are discussed, including health hazards and liability issues, permit requirements, and animal welfare considerations.     

A study of three IACUCs and their views of scientific merit and alternatives

Two ethical issues facing Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees [IACUCs] today are assessing scientific merit and the use of alternatives in research proposals. This study evaluated 3 IACUCs using a 19-question survey, with a 77.8% response rate. Although 76% of members answered that scientific merit should be more dili-gently assessed if more than slight pain is caused, 14% believed that assessing scien-tific merit is not the role of the IACUC. Nearly 86% agreed that the search for alterna-tives should be more diligent for protocols that incur more than slight pain to the animals involved. Some members believed that alternatives were not actively enough sought after, while others believed no viable alternatives existed. Additional guide-lines are needed to clarify these issues.     

Comparing invasive and noninvasive faecal sampling in wildlife microbiome studies: A case study on wild common cranes

In ecological and conservation studies, responsible researchers strive to obtain rich data while minimizing disturbance to wildlife and ecosystems. We assessed if samples collected noninvasively can be used for faecal microbiome research, comparing microbiota of noninvasively collected faecal samples to those collected from trapped common cranes at the same sites over the same periods. We found significant differences in faecal microbial composition (alpha and beta diversity), which likely did not result from noninvasive sample exposure to soil contaminants, as assessed by comparing bacterial oxygen use profiles. Differences might result from trapped birds' exposure to sedatives or stress. We conclude that if all samples are collected in the same manner, comparative analyses are valid, and noninvasive sampling may better represent host faecal microbiota because there are no trapping effects. Experiments with fresh and delayed sample collection can elucidate effects of environmental exposures on microbiota. Further, controlled tests of stressing or sedation may unravel how trapping affects wildlife microbiota.     

The habitat sampling and analysis paradigm has limited value in animal conservation: A prequel

In this essay, I make the case that our studies of wildlife and habitat are largely decoupled from any meaningful relationship to the distribution of the study species. The field that we broadly classify as wildlife–habitat relationships is characterized by an increasing number of studies that gather additional data on phenomena that are already well studied. I offer that unless we make changes to the fundamental aspect of study design, our studies will fail to advance conservation of species. The current habitat sampling and analysis paradigm involves identification of a convenient study area, drawing samples from the usual list of parameters, conducting a series of statistical analyses, comparing findings to other studies, and justifying publication by extrapolating findings to some unspecified larger area. Recommendations for management are usually vague and are seldom tested for efficacy. Most of our habitat studies have little relevance to the target species with regard to viability. Attempts to translate the “best scientific information” into a set of management guidelines for a species produce one size fits all documents. I describe how we usually compromise our studies well before data collection by failing to establish a cogent framework for sampling from an ecologically meaningful unit of a population, but rather sample based on funding priorities and convenience. Specifying the sampling universe for a species sets the stage for properly establishing the sampling frame. Although we always have a target population, that target is often the result of personal, political, or administrative interest, but has little to do with biological reality. I review various intraspecies levels that could be a focus for study, including subspecies and especially ecotypes. Although making assumptions about our study species and habitat parameters is a necessary step, carrying forward untested assumptions from previous studies and failing to test new ones substantially negates the application of research results to meaningful management actions. I include recommendations for enhancing studies of wildlife and habitat with the intent of altering the current norm of wildlife–habitat studies. © 2012 The Wildlife Society.     

IACUC issues associated with amphibian research

Numerous species of amphibians are frequently utilized as animal models in biomedical research. Despite their relatively common occurrence as laboratory animals, the regulatory guidelines that institutional animal care and use committees (IACUCs) must employ provide little in the way of written standards for ectothermic animals. Yet, as vertebrates, laboratory amphibians are covered by the National Research Council Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals and the Public Health Service (PHS) Policy for federally funded research. This article focuses on three issues that are relevant to IACUC oversight of the use of amphibians in research: (1) recommended educational requirements of investigators and animal care staff engaged in research with amphibians, (2) zoonoses and other issues of occupational health importance, and (3) indicators of stress and disease. Addressing these issues should enable investigators, IACUCs, and animal care staff to meet the regulatory expectations of the PHS and accrediting bodies such as the Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care International.     

Preparation of animals for use in the laboratory: issues and challenges for the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC)

Preparation of animals is important for optimization of animal welfare as well as to minimize interanimal variation, thereby strengthening the quality of data for in vivo studies. These issues are important in the work of institutional animal care and use committees (IACUCs), but they pose many challenges as well. This article provides IACUC members with a resource for use in determining whether and how preparation of animals for research affects the IACUC's responsibilities. The topics addressed are intended to serve as a starting point for consideration and discussion. Questions related to subject selection and acclimation of subjects to experimental housing and procedures are emphasized and should provide IACUC members with a framework for discussion of relevant questions. Guidelines are provided for promoting the acclimation of a number of species to experimental settings. Additional, potentially controversial points are also raised, including the effects on longitudinal data sets of changing subject preparation procedures. The roles of the IACUC in the research endeavor are multifaceted and continuously evolving. As empirical data are produced that affect additional aspects of animal care and use, it is important for these committees to be able to evaluate and, when appropriate, stimulate the implementation of improved procedures and strategies.     

Integrating terrestrial scavenging ecology into contemporary wildlife conservation and management

Scavenging plays a vital role in maintaining ecosystem health and contributing to ecological functions; however, research in this sub‐discipline of ecology is underutilized in developing and implementing wildlife conservation and management strategies. We provide an examination of the literature and recommend priorities for research where improved understanding of scavenging dynamics can facilitate the development and refinement of applied wildlife conservation and management strategies. Due to the application of scavenging research broadly within ecology, scavenging studies should be implemented for informing management decisions. In particular, a more direct link should be established between scavenging dynamics and applied management programs related to informing pharmaceutical delivery and population control through bait uptake for scavenging species, prevention of unintentional poisoning of nontarget scavenging species, the epidemiological role that scavenging species play in disease dynamics, estimating wildlife mortalities, nutrient transfer facilitated by scavenging activity, and conservation of imperiled facultative scavenging species. This commentary is intended to provide information on the paucity of data in scavenging research and present recommendations for further studies that can inform decisions in wildlife conservation and management. Additionally, we provide a framework for decision‐making when determining how to apply scavenging ecology research for management practices and policies. Due to the implications that scavenging species have on ecosystem health, and their overall global decline as a result of anthropic activities, it is imperative to advance studies in the field of scavenging ecology that can inform applied conservation and management programs.     

IACUC Challenges in Invertebrate Research

With billions of individuals and possibly hundreds of thousands of genera, invertebrates represent the largest number and greatest diversity of all animals used in research. Although the capacity for nociception is recognized in many invertebrate taxa, researchers and IACUC members are challenged by a lack of clear understanding of invertebrate welfare and by differing standards of moral concern for these taxa. In practice this has led IACUCs to consider invertebrates in two major groups: species worthy of increased moral concern approximating that shown to vertebrate species (this group includes cephalopods and to some extent decapod crustaceans) and all others. This dichotomy has led to differences in how invertebrate research is regulated and documented. This article presents two case studies illustrating specific concerns in invertebrate research protocols and then provides relevant information to address practical IACUC matters related to regulatory and ethical issues, sourcing and record keeping, risk management, assessment of pain and nociception in invertebrates, housing and husbandry, invasive procedures, veterinary care, and humane endpoints.     

Reflecting on ethical and legal issues in wildlife disease

Disease in wildlife raises a number of issues that have not been widely considered in the bioethical literature. However, wildlife disease has major implications for human welfare. The majority of emerging human infectious diseases are zoonotic: that is, they occur in humans by cross‐species transmission from animal hosts. Managing these diseases often involves balancing concerns with human health against animal welfare and conservation concerns. Many infectious diseases of domestic animals are shared with wild animals, although it is often unclear whether the infection spills over from wild animals to domestic animals or vice versa. Culling is the standard means of managing such diseases, bringing economic considerations, animal welfare and conservation into conflict. Infectious diseases are also major threatening processes in conservation biology and their appropriate management by culling, vaccination or treatment raises substantial animal ethics issues. One particular issue of great significance in Australia is an ongoing research program to develop genetically modified pathogens to control vertebrate pests including rabbits, foxes and house mice. Release of any self‐replicating GMO vertebrate pathogen gives rise to a whole series of ethical questions. We briefly review current Australian legal responses to these problems. Finally, we present two unresolved problems of general importance that are exemplified by wildlife disease. First, to what extent can or should ‘bioethics’ be broadened beyond direct concerns with human welfare to animal welfare and environmental welfare? Second, how should the irreducible uncertainty of ecological systems be accounted for in ethical decision making?     

Wildlife forensics using mitochondrial DNA sequences: Species identification based on hairs collected in the field and confiscated tanned Felidae leathers

To identify species based on samples without recognizable morphological characteristics, DNA-based approaches are the best option. Here, we describe two cases of the determination of species and geographical origin of wildlife specimens under the regulation of international treaties and domestic laws related to wildlife management in South Korea. First, hairs of suspected wild or reared endangered Asiatic black bears were analyzed using cytochrome oxidase I and the control region. Confiscated Felidae leathers were also investigated using cytochrome b, but they were proven to be fabricated canine leathers. These results were used as scientific evidence for wildlife-related law enforcement. Our results suggest that unrecognizable wildlife specimens can be identified efficiently using DNA sequence-based analysis. Finally, this study shows that conservation genetics research and its applications can be incorporated into wildlife forensic studies.     

Population genomics for wildlife conservation and management

Biodiversity is under threat worldwide. Over the past decade, the field of population genomics has developed across nonmodel organisms, and the results of this research have begun to be applied in conservation and management of wildlife species. Genomics tools can provide precise estimates of basic features of wildlife populations, such as effective population size, inbreeding, demographic history and population structure, that are critical for conservation efforts. Moreover, population genomics studies can identify particular genetic loci and variants responsible for inbreeding depression or adaptation to changing environments, allowing for conservation efforts to estimate the capacity of populations to evolve and adapt in response to environmental change and to manage for adaptive variation. While connections from basic research to applied wildlife conservation have been slow to develop, these connections are increasingly strengthening. Here we review the primary areas in which population genomics approaches can be applied to wildlife conservation and management, highlight examples of how they have been used, and provide recommendations for building on the progress that has been made in this field.     

Research in nondomestic species: experiences in reproductive physiology research for conservation of endangered felids

Tremendous strides have been made in recent years to broaden our understanding of reproductive processes in nondomestic felid species and further our capacity to use this basic knowledge to control and manipulate reproduction of endangered cats. Much of that progress has culminated from detailed scientific studies conducted in nontraditional laboratory settings, frequently at collaborating zoological parks but also under more primitive conditions, including in the field. A mobile laboratory approach is described, which incorporates a diverse array of disciplines and research techniques. This approach has been extremely useful, especially for conducting gamete characterization and function studies as well as reproductive surveys, and for facilitating the development of assisted reproductive technology. With continuing advances in assisted reproduction in rare felids, more procedures are being conducted primarily as service-related activities, targeted to increase effectiveness of species propagation and population management. It can be a challenge for both investigators and institutional animal care and use committees (IACUCs) to differentiate these service-based procedures from traditional research studies (that require IACUC oversight). For research with rare cat species, multi-institutional collaboration frequently is necessary to gain access to scientifically meaningful numbers of study subjects. Similarly, for service-based efforts, the ability to perform reproductive procedures across institutions under nonstandard laboratory conditions is critical to applying reproductive sciences for managing and preserving threatened cat populations. Reproductive sciences can most effectively assist population management programs (e.g., Species Survival Plans) in addressing conservation priorities if these research and service-related procedures can be conducted "on the road" at distant national and international locales. This mobile laboratory approach has applications beyond endangered species research, notably for other scientific fields (e.g., studies of hereditary disease in domestic cat models) in which bringing the laboratory to the subject is of value.     

Scent-Matching Dogs Determine Number of Unique Individuals From Scat

ABSTRACT Noninvasive scat sampling methods can generate large samples sizes, collected over vast landscapes, ideal for addressing wildlife conservation and management questions. However, the cost of genotyping scat samples limits the accessibility of these techniques. We describe detection-dog methods for matching large numbers of scat samples to the individual, reducing or eliminating the need for sample genotyping. Three dogs correctly matched 25 out of 28 samples from 6 captive maned wolves (Chrysocyon brachyurus) of known identity. Sample scent-matching can increase overall accessibility and breadth of applications of noninvasive scat-collection methods to important landscape scale problems in wildlife sciences.     

Have natural disasters created opportunities to initiate Big Cat Tourism in South America?

Livestock is the predominant biomass in terrestrial systems around the world, and conflict with livestock inventories continues to threaten large carnivore persistence in increasingly fragmented habitats. Nevertheless, social tolerance for large carnivores is increasing, as is interest in predator tourism, which can facilitate wildlife–livestock coexistence strategies. We report two case studies in which natural disasters led to a reduction in local livestock inventories, and subsequent economic hardships that in turn created opportunities for initiating predator tourism: jaguar tourism in the Pantanal of Brazil and puma tourism in the Patagonia steppe grasslands of southern Chile. Any time livestock numbers are reduced, whether through management decisions or natural disasters, may be considered opportunities to reduce dependency upon livestock and to weigh diversifying revenue streams via alternative activities, such as tourism. Livestock reductions in combination with a surge in the global demand for wildlife tourism have made jaguar and puma tourism an increasingly important economic activity for both regions. Well-managed predator tourism can be effective carnivore conservation, and if integrated among other strategies, can augment conservation agendas.     

Challenges and opportunities in population monitoring of cheetahs

Population monitoring is key to wildlife conservation and management but is challenging at the spatial and temporal extents necessary for understanding changes. Noninvasive survey methods and spatial capture–recapture (SCR) models have revolutionized wildlife monitoring by providing the means to acquire data at large scales and the framework to generate spatially explicit predictions, respectively. Despite opportunities for improved monitoring, challenges can remain in the study design and model fitting phases of an SCR approach. Here, we used a search-encounter design with multi-session SCR models to collect spatially indexed photographs and estimate changes in density of cheetahs between 2005 and 2013–2016 in the Masai Mara National Reserve (MMNR) in Kenya. Our SCR models of cheetah encounters suggested little change in cheetah density from 2005 to 2013–2016, with some evidence that density fluctuated annually in the MMNR. The sampling period length (5 vs. 10 months) and timing (early, late, full year) over which spatial encounters were modeled did not alter inferences about density when sample sizes were adequate (>20 spatially distinct encounters). Our average density estimate of ~1.2 cheetahs/100 km² is consistent with the impression that the MMNR provides important cheetah habitat in Africa. During most years, spatial distribution of vegetation greenness (proxy for ungulate habitat quality) accounted for important variation in encounter rates. The search-encounter design here could be applied to other regions for cheetah monitoring. While snapshot estimates of population size across time are useful for wildlife monitoring, open population models may better identify the mechanisms behind temporal changes.