Genetic Engineering and Other Factors That Might Affect Human-Animal Interactions in the Research Setting

Evidence exists, particularly in the welfare literature of nonhuman animals on the farm, that the interaction between nonhuman animals and the personnel who care for them can have a strong effect on the animals' behavior, productivity, and welfare. Among species commonly used for biomedical research, mice appear to be the least-preferred species in animal care facilities. A review of the literature and observations of animal care staff interacting with mice indicated that the following factors may influence this: their small size, their particular behavioral characteristics, and husbandry constraints (such as housing in ventilated racks). In addition, this study questioned whether animal care personnel have a different perception of genetically engineered animals and whether this, in turn, has an effect on their interactions with these animals. The ability to carefully observe an animal's behavior is key in carrying out an animal-wellness assessment and in minimizing pain and distress. Attention to human-animal interactions in the research setting represents an opportunity for refinement for large numbers of animals and potentially for reduction of animal use.     

Zoo Animal Welfare: The Human Dimension

ABSTRACT

Standards and policies intended to safeguard nonhuman animal welfare, whether in zoos, farms, or laboratories, have tended to emphasize features of the physical environment. However, research has now made it clear that very different welfare outcomes are commonly seen in facilities using similar environments or conforming to the same animal welfare requirements. This wide variation is almost certainly due, at least in part, to the important effects of the actions of animal care staff on animal welfare. Drawing mostly on the farm animal literature, we propose that this “human dimension” of animal welfare involves seven components: (1) positive human–animal interaction, (2) consistency and familiarity of keepers, (3) treating animals as individuals and taking account of their personalities, (4) the attitudes and personalities of keepers, (5) the keepers’ knowledge and experience, (6) the keepers’ own well-being, and (7) the influence of facility design on how keepers and others interact with the animals. We suggest that attention to these human factors provides major scope for improving the welfare of animals in zoos.     

An hourly variation in zoo visitor interest: measurement and significance for animal welfare research

A methodological difficulty facing welfare research on nonhuman animals in the zoo is the large number of uncontrolled variables due to variation within and between study sites. Zoo visitors act as uncontrolled variables, with number, density, size, and behavior constantly changing. This is worrisome because previous research linked visitor variables to animal behavioral changes indicative of stress. There are implications for research design: Studies not accounting for visitors' effect on animal welfare risk confounding (visitor) variables distorting their findings. Zoos need methods to measure and minimize effects of visitor behavior and to ensure that there are no hidden variables in research models. This article identifies a previously unreported variable—hourly variation (decrease) in visitor interest—that may impinge on animal welfare and validates a methodology for measuring it. That visitor interest wanes across the course of the day has important implications for animal welfare management; visitor effects on animal welfare are likely to occur, or intensify, during the morning or in earlier visits when visitor interest is greatest. This article discusses this issue and possible solutions to reduce visitor effects on animal well-being.     

Welfare issues of genetically modified animals

Genetically engineered animals have opened new frontiers in the study of physiology and disease processes. Mutant animals offer more accurate disease models and increased precision for pathogenesis and treatment studies. Their use offers hope for improved therapy to patients with conditions that currently have poor or ineffective treatments. These advantages have fostered an increase in studies using mice in recent years, a development viewed with alarm by those who oppose the use of animals in research. Scientists point out that the mice are replacing more sentient species, such as nonhuman primates, and are increasing the quality of research being conducted. They assert that study of genetically engineered animals will eventually permit decreases in numbers of animals used in research. Nevertheless, the increase in use of genetically altered animals presents many challenges in reviewing protocols and providing care. Identification and resolution of any welfare problems is a responsibility that is shared by institutional animal care and use committee, veterinary, animal care, and research staffs. To identify potential welfare concerns, a database such as TBASE () can be searched to learn what has been reported for established mutant lines. In addition, newly created lines should be monitored by a surveillance system and have phenotype assessment to identify the effects of altering the genome. Methods of ensuring welfare can include treatment of conditions produced, restriction of gene expression to tissues of interest or to certain time periods, and establishment of endpoints for removing animals from a study before problems appear.     

An Hourly Variation in Zoo Visitor Interest: Measurement and Significance for Animal Welfare Research

A methodological difficulty facing welfare research on nonhuman animals in the zoo is the large number of uncontrolled variables due to variation within and between study sites. Zoo visitors act as uncontrolled variables, with number, density, size, and behavior constantly changing. This is worrisome because previous research linked visitor variables to animal behavioral changes indicative of stress. There are implications for research design: Studies not accounting for visitors' effect on animal welfare risk confounding (visitor) variables distorting their findings. Zoos need methods to measure and minimize effects of visitor behavior and to ensure that there are no hidden variables in research models. This article identifies a previously unreported variable—hourly variation (decrease) in visitor interest—that may impinge on animal welfare and validates a methodology for measuring it. That visitor interest wanes across the course of the day has important implications for animal welfare management; visitor effects on animal welfare are likely to occur, or intensify, during the morning or in earlier visits when visitor interest is greatest. This article discusses this issue and possible solutions to reduce visitor effects on animal well-being.     

Visitors' Effects on the Welfare of Animals in the Zoo: A Review

Since the 1970s, research about zoo visitors' effects on the welfare of nonhuman animals in captivity has intensified. Numerous studies have shown that characteristics such as visitor presence, density, activity, size, and position are associated with animal behavioral and—to alesser extent physiological—changes. Studies usually interpret these changes as negative (undesirable) or positive (enriching), but it remains unclear whether they significantly impinge on animal welfare. To make confident conclusions about visitors' effects necessitates more studies using (a) a wider range of animal groupings, (b) measures of stress, (c) visitor-animal variables, and (d) other methodological improvements In the meantime, in addition to further research, individual zoos need to emphasize (a) monitoring the stress indicators of their captive animals, (b) observing visitor behavior, and (c) ensuring that staffs are aware of the “visitor effect” concept.     

Impacts of natural history and exhibit factors on carnivore welfare

To improve the welfare of nonhuman animals under professional care, zoological institutions are continuously utilizing new methods to identify factors that lead to optimal welfare. Comparative methods have historically been used in the field of evolutionary biology but are increasingly being applied in the field of animal welfare. In the current study, data were obtained from direct behavioral observation and institutional records representing 80 individual animals from 34 different species of the order Carnivora. Data were examined to determine if a variety of natural history and animal management factors impacted the welfare of animals in zoological institutions. Output variables indicating welfare status included behavioral diversity, pacing, offspring production, and infant mortality. Results suggested that generalist species have higher behavioral diversity and offspring production in zoos compared with their specialist counterparts. In addition, increased minimum distance from the public decreased pacing and increased offspring production, while increased maximum distance from the public and large enclosure size decreased infant mortality. These results have implications for future exhibit design or renovation, as well as management practices and priorities for future research.     

Visitors' effects on the welfare of animals in the zoo: a review

Since the 1970s, research about zoo visitors' effects on the welfare of nonhuman animals in captivity has intensified. Numerous studies have shown that characteristics such as visitor presence, density, activity, size, and position are associated with animal behavioral and—to alesser extent physiological—changes. Studies usually interpret these changes as negative (undesirable) or positive (enriching), but it remains unclear whether they significantly impinge on animal welfare. To make confident conclusions about visitors' effects necessitates more studies using (a) a wider range of animal groupings, (b) measures of stress, (c) visitor-animal variables, and (d) other methodological improvements In the meantime, in addition to further research, individual zoos need to emphasize (a) monitoring the stress indicators of their captive animals, (b) observing visitor behavior, and (c) ensuring that staffs are aware of the “visitor effect” concept.     

Why should we care about nonhuman animals during times of crisis?

Incentives to care for nonhuman animals derive in part from the extent to which people depend on animals for food, for livelihood, and for cultural and psychological reasons as well as from the duty to protect animals in their care. When attention is turned to solving and preventing animal welfare problems at times of crisis, it becomes clear that those problems are also associated with problems for human welfare and environmental impact. The incidence and spread of animal diseases is affected by how animals are treated, and this can have very important effects. Similarly, during disasters caused by either natural or human-made events, outcomes for animals are important both in themselves and for their effects on humans and the environment. The need to plan and prepare to care for animals in advance of disease pandemics and disasters—and then to provide coordinated, measured management in response when such crises occur—requires collaboration between all agencies involved as well as increasing attention and resources.     

Behavioral and hormonal consequences of transporting giant pandas from China to the United States

Zoological institutions strive to ensure the welfare of nonhuman animals in captivity. Part of this effort involves reducing the level of distress experienced by an animal to the greatest extent possible. However, some necessary zoo management practices such as transportation induce stress responses. An extensive literature exists concerning the animal welfare implications of road transportation for farm and laboratory animals. There has, however, been little focus on the effects of air transportation on wild animals in captivity. Because many endangered species are transported by air for breeding purposes, it is especially important to study the effects of stress on these species. This study investigated the behavioral and hormonal consequences of transporting 4 giant pandas (2 male-female pairs) by air from China to the United States. An autoregressive test revealed that urinary cortisol measures were highest for 2 subjects, Lun Lun and Tian Tian, during the flight than during the remainder of the 30-day period posttransport (p < .01). No long-term behavioral changes or problems emerged as a result of the transport. The study found that more research is needed to develop a complete understanding of transportation stress and welfare in captive wildlife.     

Belief in Animal Mind among Spanish Primary School Children

Beliefs concerning the mental experiences of nonhuman animals have been related to how people treat, see, and take care of nonhuman animals. Whereas this issue has been the subject of several studies on adults, few have been conducted with children. Taking advantage of a recently published scale, the Child-BAM questionnaire, we aimed to explore the beliefs in animal minds of Spanish primary school children. The study also considered the effects of a child's age, school year group, gender, and pet ownership on their beliefs in animal mind. The Child-BAM questionnaire, concerning the mental capabilities of eight different species (human, chimpanzee, dog, cow, otter, sparrow, frog, and fish), was distributed at a primary school sited in Cordoba, Spain. A total of 416 participants were included aged between 6 and 13 years. Each child provided scores for animals’ ability to have intelligence, experience pain, fear, happiness, and sadness, and total scores for the eight species were calculated. The results showed that children's beliefs about animal minds differed depending on the type of animal, and that children were more likely to believe in the emotional capacities of animals rather than their cognitive capabilities. Dogs achieved similar scores to humans regarding all capabilities, and higher than any other species, while the cow, fish, and frog generally scored the lowest. Age, school year group, and having a companion animal at home affected beliefs in animal minds, whereas gender had no effect. This study highlights cultural similarities in children's beliefs about animal minds and the potential importance of this variable for future research in child–animal interactions.     

Vulnerable Subjects? The Case of Nonhuman Animals in Experimentation

The concept of vulnerability is deployed in bioethics to, amongst other things, identify and remedy harms to participants in research, yet although nonhuman animals in experimentation seem intuitively to be vulnerable, this concept and its attendant protections are rarely applied to research animals. I want to argue, however, that this concept is applicable to nonhuman animals and that a new taxonomy of vulnerability developed in the context of human bioethics can be applied to research animals. This taxonomy does useful explanatory work, helping to pinpoint the limitations of the 3Rs/welfare approach currently adopted in the context of animal experimentation. On this account, the 3Rs/welfare approach fails to deliver for nonhuman animals in experimentation because it effectively addresses only one element of their vulnerability (inherent) and paradoxically through the institution of Animal Ethics Committees intended to protect experimental animals in fact generates new vulnerabilities that exacerbate their already precarious situation.     

Exploring Children’s Perspectives on the Welfare Needs of Pet Animals

Children are increasingly viewed as important recipients of educational interventions to improve animal welfare, yet research examining their perspectives is lacking, particularly within the UK. Helping children to care appropriately for animals depends, not least, on an ability to understand the needs of different species and correctly identify cues given by the animal that indicate its welfare state. This study began to explore: (a) children’s perceptions of welfare needs, focusing on four common pet animals; (b) influences on the development of knowledge; (c) beliefs about whether or not (all) animals are sentient, and (d) their confidence in identifying when their own pets are in need. Fourteen focus groups were carried out with 53 children aged 7 to 13 years. Findings highlighted an affirmative response that animals have feelings (dogs especially), albeit with doubts about this applying universally. There was wide variation in children’s knowledge of welfare needs, even among owners of the animal in question. Conversely, some children lacked confidence in spite of the extensive knowledge they had developed through direct experience. An important finding was a perceived difficulty in identifying the needs of particular species or specific types of need in their own pets. Fitting well with a recent emphasis on “positive welfare,” children felt that many animals need demonstrative love and attention, especially cats and dogs. While there is clearly scope for educating children about common needs and cues that indicate animals’ welfare state, other areas pose a greater challenge. Emotional connection seems important in the development of extensive knowledge and concern for welfare. Accordingly, animals that do not possess the kind of behavioral repertoire that is easy to interpret or allows for a perceived sense of reciprocity are possibly at risk of negative welfare experiences.     

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?     

Institutional and IACUC responsibilities for animal care and use education and training programs

Training and instruction of personnel are important components of animal care and use programs because they help to ensure the health and welfare of the animals and the integrity of the research or testing results. Training also helps to promote the consideration of alternatives, recognition of animal pain and distress, appropriate use of pain-relieving agents, aseptic technique, pre- and post-procedural care, and personnel health and safety. While individuals who provide the care for or conduct research or testing in laboratory animals should take personal responsibility for ensuring that they have the skills to perform their duties, the institution is ultimately responsible for ensuring their competency. The institution is also responsible for providing the training or instruction that is required by federal legislation, regulations, and policies. The institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) is responsible for ensuring, as part of their review of research activities, that the personnel are capable of performing the procedures described. The IACUC must also assess the institution's training program as part of their semiannual animal care and use program review and make recommendations regarding training to the institutional official. This article provides a comprehensive overview of the US regulatory mandates for training and personnel qualification.     

Equine Welfare in England and Wales: Exploration of Stakeholders' Understanding

Investigating how those responsible for the care of nonhuman animals understand the concept of animal welfare is important for animal welfare improvement. In-depth interviews with 31 equine stakeholders were used to explore their perceptions and understanding of welfare. The results showed the stakeholders understood the concept of welfare in 4 ways. Firstly, welfare was understood in terms of the provision of resources—for example, food. Secondly, a “horse-centered” understanding of welfare was articulated; this understanding included the horses' mental state and was linked to natural behavior. Thirdly, the word welfare had negative connotations, and for some, good welfare was achieved through avoidance of negative states. Finally, interviewees discussed incidents that occurred in their own familiar contexts but suggested that these were not welfare problems. Evidence indicated that the ways in which equine stakeholders understood the concept of welfare might have been acting as a barrier to the alleviation of some equine welfare problems. There is a need for strategies aimed at improving equine welfare to consider stakeholder constructs of welfare and the ways in which these constructs are generated and acted upon.     

Life-long well being: applying animal welfare science to nonhuman primates in sanctuaries

Nonhuman primates have become common in sanctuaries, and a few such facilities even specialize in their care. Sanctuaries can improve the well being of many unwanted primates, especially in terms of housing and socialization. However, diverse facilities call themselves sanctuaries, and they have varying conditions, care programs, and restrictions. In addition, a general lack of regulation of sanctuaries for nonhuman animals creates problems in enforcing even minimal standards. The application of animal welfare science in the sanctuary setting can help foster high standards and empirically based decision making. Sanctuaries offer excellent environments for studying primates without the limitations inherent in breeding, exhibition, and medical research facilities. However, some sanctuaries avoid scientific study. Many sanctuaries have little opportunity to study animal welfare in a systematic manner due to financial considerations or a lack of specific expertise among staff and volunteers. Most published sanctuary research involves reintroduction procedures at sanctuaries in source countries. Nevertheless, one chimpanzee sanctuary's successes in performing long-term studies and using simple evaluation methods, such as check sheets, have demonstrated the benefits of applying animal welfare science to sanctuary-housed nonhuman primates.     

Life-Long Well Being: Applying Animal Welfare Science to Nonhuman Primates in Sanctuaries

Nonhuman primates have become common in sanctuaries, and a few such facilities even specialize in their care. Sanctuaries can improve the well being of many unwanted primates, especially in terms of housing and socialization. However, diverse facilities call themselves sanctuaries, and they have varying conditions, care programs, and restrictions. In addition, a general lack of regulation of sanctuaries for nonhuman animals creates problems in enforcing even minimal standards. The application of animal welfare science in the sanctuary setting can help foster high standards and empirically based decision making. Sanctuaries offer excellent environments for studying primates without the limitations inherent in breeding, exhibition, and medical research facilities. However, some sanctuaries avoid scientific study. Many sanctuaries have little opportunity to study animal welfare in a systematic manner due to financial considerations or a lack of specific expertise among staff and volunteers. Most published sanctuary research involves reintroduction procedures at sanctuaries in source countries. Nevertheless, one chimpanzee sanctuary's successes in performing long-term studies and using simple evaluation methods, such as check sheets, have demonstrated the benefits of applying animal welfare science to sanctuary-housed nonhuman primates.     

Case Studies of the Impacts of Cataract Surgery on Crested Penguin Welfare

As nonhuman animals age, geriatric individuals require additional care and veterinary support to ensure their well being. The focus on lifelong care is a relatively newer approach when providing good welfare, and few studies have examined how veterinary care impacts behavior at different ages or how best to accommodate geriatric individuals in zoos. The objectives of this study were to (a) assess both the immediate and long-term (one year later) behavioral impacts of cataract removal for macaroni (Eudyptes chrysolophus) and southern rockhopper (Eudyptes chrysocome) penguins; (b) compare the behavior of penguins following cataract surgery to that of other conspecifics in the same habitat; and (c) monitor the impacts of cataract surgery on swimming behavior using time-depth recorders. Individual responses to cataract removal differed in direction and magnitude, and these mixed results highlight that welfare is experienced and thus measured at the individual level. Positive responses included increased habitat use, increased time spent swimming, and increased rates of affiliative interactions. This study highlights the importance of assessing welfare impacts of veterinary interventions on geriatric individuals.     

“Animals Like Us”: Identifying with Nonhuman Animals and Support for Nonhuman Animal Rights

While anthropomorphizing nonhuman animals has been shown to increase identification with them and, by extension, concern for their wellbeing, little research has directly tested whether identifying with nonhuman animals is similarly associated with concern for their wellbeing. We tested hypotheses related to this premise across three cross-sectional studies. In study 1 (n = 224), we tested the hypothesis that therians—a group of people who self-identify with nonhuman animals, show greater concern for nonhuman animal rights than non-therian furries—people with a fan-like interest in media featuring anthropomorphized animal characters. In study 2 (n = 206), we further tested this hypothesis using implicit and explicit measures of identification with nonhuman animals to predict behavioral intentions to support nonhuman animal rights. In study 3 (n = 182), we tested the generalizability of our findings in a sample of undergraduate students. Taken together, the studies show that explicit, but not implicit, identification with nonhuman animals predicts greater support for their rights. The implications of these findings for research on anthropomorphism and animal rights activism are discussed, as well as the limitations of these findings and possible avenues for future research.