Ethical considerations in fish research

Fishes are used in a wide range of scientific studies, from conservation research with potential benefits to the species used to biomedical research with potential human benefits. Fish research can take place in both laboratories and field environments and methods used represent a continuum from non-invasive observations, handling, through to experimental manipulation. While some countries have legislation or guidance regarding the use of fish in research, many do not and there exists a diversity of scientific opinions on the sentience of fish and how we determine welfare. Nevertheless, there is a growing pressure on the scientific community to take more responsibility for the animals they work with through maximising the benefits of their research to humans or animals while minimising welfare or survival costs to their study animals. In this review, we focus primarily on the refinement of common methods used in fish research based on emerging knowledge with the aim of improving the welfare of fish used in scientific studies. We consider the use of anaesthetics and analgesics and how we mark individuals for identification purposes. We highlight the main ethical concerns facing researchers in both laboratory and field environments and identify areas that need urgent future research. We hope that this review will help inform those who wish to refine their ethical practices and stimulate thought among fish researchers for further avenues of refinement. Improved ethics and welfare of fishes will inevitably lead to increased scientific rigour and is in the best interests of both fishes and scientists.     

What are 60 warblers worth? Killing in the name of conservation

Ecological research sometimes entails animal suffering and even animal killing. The ethical appropriateness of animal suffering and killing in conservation research may entail considerations that differ from many other kinds of research. This is true, insomuch as conservation research is specifically motivated by an ethical premise: an appreciation for non-human life. In striking contrast with other academic fields (e.g. medicine), however, the ethical dimension of conservation research is only rarely discussed. When it is discussed, it tends to be characterized by logical errors. These errors are important because they are general (i.e. both common and with far-reaching implications), and they are easily made by intelligent people; especially those with no formal training in ethics or logic. Failure to recognize these errors could stymie efforts to increase the ethical quality of ecological research conducted in the name of conservation.
We take advantage of a recently published dialogue concerning the ethical appropriateness of a specific field experiment that entailed killing black-throated blue warblers, Dendroica caerulescens . Both sides of this debate exemplify the kinds of errors to which we refer. In this paper we briefly review the arguments presented on each side of this debate, highlight their mistakes, and indicate necessary corrections. We argue that: (1) compliance with animal research regulations, while important, inadequately accommodates the ethical aspects of animal research, and (2) individual ecologists ought to understand themselves what does and does not represent sound and valid arguments for ethical decisions. Finally, we discuss how any ecological researcher might begin to apply our analysis to his or her own research.     

And How Are We Supposed to Pay for Health Care? Views of the Poor and the Near Poor on Welfare Reform

The welfare reform debate focuses on the characteristics of who gets government benefits and who pays for them. People perceive the welfare reform debate as the white middle class denying benefits to poor people of color. But larger questions regarding the U.S. lack of comprehensive social policy for health care, education, and child care lurk behind these concerns. Drawing on research with public assistance recipients and working- and middle-class people, in this paper I explore the ways that people interact with and perceive government social programs. I argue that both attitudes and proposed solutions toward welfare reflect different access to government programs and resources such as jobs, savings, and social supports among people who have and have not accessed welfare. Since economic disparity in the United States correlates highly with race, the debate over welfare reform also involves racial attitudes. Changing both the welfare debate and poverty in the United States must start by providing universal benefits, [ public policy, poverty, welfare reform, race, United States ]     

Challenges of Compassionate Conservation

ABSTRACT

The substantial and urgent threats to the prosperity of individual nonhuman animals and the survival of species necessitate a changed approach to conservation. The current practice of seeing conservation and animal welfare as contradictory goals is not helpful. It is proposed that the approach should bring together parties to address the common root causes and to find innovative ways to accommodate multiple interests by translating beautifully written and ethically complex theories into pragmatic tools. Compassionate conservation provides a contemporary framework for animal welfare professionals and ecologists to develop new approaches. Simple tools can help in identifying areas of agreement and areas of dispute. While engaging with both ethics and animal welfare science will move animal welfare discussions forward, working together will identify shared values and goals and perhaps reveal ways to save species, one animal at a time, before it is too late.     

Animal morality: What is the debate about?

Empirical studies of the social lives of non-human primates, cetaceans, and other social animals have prompted scientists and philosophers to debate the question of whether morality and moral cognition exists in non-human animals. Some researchers have argued that morality does exist in several animal species, others that these species may possess various evolutionary building blocks or precursors to morality, but not quite the genuine article, while some have argued that nothing remotely resembling morality can be found in any non-human species. However, these different positions on animal morality generally appear to be motivated more by different conceptions of how the term “morality” is to be defined than by empirical disagreements about animal social behaviour and psychology. After delving deeper into the goals and methodologies of various of the protagonists, I argue that, despite appearances, there are actually two importantly distinct debates over animal morality going on, corresponding to two quite different ways of thinking about what it is to define “morality”, “moral cognition”, and associated notions. Several apparent skirmishes in the literature are thus cases of researchers simply talking past each other. I then focus on what I take to be the core debate over animal morality, which is concerned with understanding the nature and phylogenetic distribution of morality conceived as a psychological natural kind. I argue that this debate is in fact largely terminological and non-substantive. Finally, I reflect on how this core debate might best be re-framed.     

Culture in humans and other animals

The study of animal culture is a flourishing field, with culture being recorded in a wide range of taxa, including non-human primates, birds, cetaceans, and rodents. In spite of this research, however, the concept of culture itself remains elusive. There is no universally assented to concept of culture, and there is debate over the connection between culture and related concepts like tradition and social learning. Furthermore, it is not clear whether culture in humans and culture in non-human animals is really the same thing, or merely loose analogues that go by the same name. The purpose of this paper is to explicate core desiderata for a concept of culture and then to construct a concept that meets these desiderata. The paper then applies this concept in both humans and non-human animals.     

Current status and future directions of applied behavioral research for animal welfare and conservation

The papers that follow in this special issue reflect the state of knowledge and theory in the fields of animal welfare and conservation behavior. A particular focus is placed on how enrichment can be used judiciously to improve welfare and to prepare captive animals for release back to the wild. However, my purpose here is not simply to reiterate what the contributors of this special issue have said, but to provide an overview of the major themes, problems, and opportunities in applied animal behavior related to conservation and welfare. I review major issues in three interrelated areas: captive welfare, captive breeding, and conservation behavior research for wild populations. Despite many advancements in welfare science, one of the most significant impediments to a predictive science of welfare is the need to further refine theories advanced to explain environment–welfare relationships. I provide a brief overview of ten theories that have been proposed to explain good or poor welfare and suggest that they need to be made more conceptually distinct so that clear hypotheses can be articulated, and predictions made and tested. Captive breeding programs for ex situ conservation have borrowed and applied many of the concepts involved in welfare science to great advantage. Other keys to successful breeding programs include applying knowledge of social organization and processes to enhance reproduction; for example, finding the right combination of individuals to get animals breeding. However, behaviorists are only recently learning how to manipulate behavioral mechanisms, such as signaling behavior and mate choice, to optimize captive breeding for conservation. The emerging field of conservation behavior has played a role in captive breeding, but also is poised to play a major role in in situ conservation. Applied behavioral research can illuminate a number of issues important to conservation, including behavioral responses to habitat fragmentation and human disturbance (e.g., pollutants, noise, and light), and human–animal conflict (e.g., crop-raiding). Behavioral decisions made when animals are dispersing and selecting habitat for settlement determine the distribution of animals on the landscape and are important to understand for improving reserve and habitat corridor design. Captive–release and translocation programs require detailed behavioral knowledge to predict responses to novel environments and ensure that animals are adequately prepared for environmental change. This review underscores that many of the behavioral processes of interest to welfare science are also important for conservation behavior: perception, stress, assessment and decision-making rules, and other behavioral and physiological mechanisms. If properly understood, these mechanisms can be manipulated in the service of conservation goals, moving the field of conservation behavior from implication to application. A better integration of the disciplines of animal welfare and conservation behavior – together tackling problems at multiple levels of analysis – will further these goals.     

非人灵长类饲养与管理过程中的福利保障

实验动物饲养管理和福利保障的问题已越来越被国际社会所关注.与发达国家相比,中国对实验动物福利的研究及大众化意识则相对滞后.中国作为世界上最大的实验灵长类动物的饲养与出口国,每年遭受的国际贸易损失始终位居全球首位.为此,本文引入了实验灵长类福利的"5个自由"理论:1)动物有避免干渴、饥饿和营养不良等不利因素影响的自由;2)动物有获得舒适生活条件的自由;3)动物有脱离痛苦、受伤和疾病骚扰的自由;4)动物有表达自然行为的自由;5)动物有脱离恐惧和心理压力的自由.在上述理论的基础上,提高实验动物福利应具体从饲养的物理环境、营养供给、饲养管理、繁殖管理及饲养环境的多样性等几方面着手.通过总结国际与此相关的研究进展,旨为中国相关研究提供素材和为完善国内现行的法规及标准提出一些思路.     

The Customer Isn't Always Right—Conservation and Animal Welfare Implications of the Increasing Demand for Wildlife Tourism

Tourism accounts for 9% of global GDP and comprises 1.1 billion tourist arrivals per annum. Visits to wildlife tourist attractions (WTAs) may account for 20–40% of global tourism, but no studies have audited the diversity of WTAs and their impacts on the conservation status and welfare of subject animals. We scored these impacts for 24 types of WTA, visited by 3.6–6 million tourists per year, and compared our scores to tourists’ feedback on TripAdvisor. Six WTA types (impacting 1,500–13,000 individual animals) had net positive conservation/welfare impacts, but 14 (120,000–340,000 individuals) had negative conservation impacts and 18 (230,000–550,000 individuals) had negative welfare impacts. Despite these figures only 7.8% of all tourist feedback on these WTAs was negative due to conservation/welfare concerns. We demonstrate that WTAs have substantial negative effects that are unrecognised by the majority of tourists, suggesting an urgent need for tourist education and regulation of WTAs worldwide.     

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?     

Punishment and cooperation in nature

Humans use punishment to promote cooperation in laboratory experiments but evidence that punishment plays a similar role in non-human animals is comparatively rare. In this article, we examine why this may be the case by reviewing evidence from both laboratory experiments on humans and ecologically relevant studies on non-human animals. Generally, punishment appears to be most probable if players differ in strength or strategic options. Although these conditions are common in nature, punishment (unlike other forms of aggression) involves immediate payoff reductions to both punisher and target, with net benefits to punishers contingent on cheats behaving more cooperatively in future interactions. In many cases, aggression yielding immediate benefits may suffice to deter cheats and might explain the relative scarcity of punishment in nature.     

An analysis of the Home Office Statistics of Scientific Procedures on Living Animals, Great Britain 2004

The 2004 Statistics of Scientific Procedures on Living Animals were released by the Home Office in December 2005. They indicate that, for the third year running, there has been a significant increase in the number of laboratory animal procedures undertaken in Great Britain, and that increasing numbers of animals are involved. The overall trends in the use of toxicological and non-toxicological procedures involving animals are described. Particular emphasis is placed on the production and use of genetically modified animals, the production of biological materials, and acute toxicity testing. The use of non-human primates and dogs is also discussed. The implications of these latest statistics are considered with reference to the implementation of the Three Rs and their consequences for animal welfare.     

Ecology and welfare of aquatic animals in wild capture fisheries

The expansion of commercial aquaculture production has raised awareness of issues relating to the welfare of aquatic animals. The “Five Freedoms” approach to animal welfare was originally devised for farmed terrestrial animals, and has been applied in some countries to aquatic animals reared in aquaculture due to several commonalities inherent within food production systems. There are now moves towards assessing and addressing aquatic animal welfare issues that may arise in wild capture fisheries. However, all “five freedoms” are regularly contradicted in the natural environment, meaning this concept is inappropriate when considering the welfare of aquatic animals in their natural environments. The feelings-based approach to welfare relies on a suffering centered view that, when applied to the natural aquatic environment, requires use of value judgements, cannot encompass scientific uncertainty regarding awareness in fish, elasmobranchs and invertebrates (despite their unquestioned welfare needs), and cannot resolve the welfare conundrums posed by predator–prey interactions or anthropocentrically mediated environmental degradation. For these reasons, the feelings-based approach to welfare is inadequate, inappropriate and must be rejected if applied to aquatic animals in wild capture fisheries, because it demonstrably ignores empirical evidence and several realities apparent within the natural aquatic environment. Furthermore, application of the feelings-based approach is counterproductive as it can alienate key fisheries stakeholders, many of whom are working to address environmental issues of critical importance to the welfare, management and conservation of aquatic animal populations in their natural environment. In contrast, the function-based and nature-based approaches for defining animal welfare appear appropriate for application to the broad range of welfare issues (including emerging environmental issues such as endocrine disruption) that affect aquatic animals in their natural environment, without the need to selectively ignore groups such as elasmobranchs and invertebrates. We consider that the welfare needs of aquatic animals are inextricably entwined with the need for conservation of their populations, communities and their environment, an approach that is entirely consistent with the concept of ecosystem-based management.     

Animals in flow – towards the scientific study of intrinsic reward in animals

The concept of flow, a state of complete absorption in an intrinsically rewarding activity, has played a pivotal role in advancing notions of human well-being beyond minimising suffering towards promoting flourishing and thriving. While flow has played a fundamental role in human positive psychology, it has not yet been explored in non-human animals, leaving an enormous void in our understanding of intrinsic motivation in animals. As ethology and related fields keep progressing in uncovering complex cognitive and affective capacities of non-human animals, we propose the time is ripe to translate the concept of flow to animals. We start by embedding flow in the topic of intrinsic motivation and describe its impact on positive human psychology and potentially positive animal welfare. We then disambiguate flow from related concepts discussed in the animal literature. Next, we derive experimental approaches in animals from the canonical characteristics of flow in humans and provide guidelines for both inducing and assessing flow by focusing on two characteristics that do not necessarily depend on self-report, namely resistance to distraction and time distortion. Not all aspects of the human flow experience are (yet) translatable, but those that are may improve quality of life in captive non-human animals.     

Zoonotic schistosomiasis in non-human primates: past, present and future activities at the human-wildlife interface in Africa

Schistosomiasis is one of the world's most widely distributed and prevalent parasitic diseases. Less widely recognized is that some species of Schistosoma, including several that commonly affect humans, also cause disease in other mammalian species; in particular, infections in non-human primates are known. With interest increasing in emerging zoonotic diseases, the status of schistosomiasis as a zoonotic infection is in need of re-appraisal, especially in light of advances in application of molecular screening and epidemiological tools where newly reported infections raise general animal welfare and conservation concerns. Focusing on Africa, this review provides a summary of the occurrence of schistosomiasis in non-human primates and discusses new ways in which surveillance for schistosomiasis should be integrated into more effective conservation management and disease control strategies. Emphasis is on the more common forms of human schistosomiasis, their clinical manifestations and epidemiological significance in terms of infection reservoir potential.     

Further role of zoos in conservation: Monitoring wildlife use and the dilemma of receiving donated and confiscated animals

The role of zoos in conservation has evolved. Additional roles that zoos can play in conservation include monitoring live wildlife use (one of the main threats for many species). Zoos in many parts of the world are offered animals by the public and are required to receive animals confiscated by the authorities. By quantifying these animals, zoos can monitor live wildlife use rates and trends and obtain relevant information on the environment of a region which can assist in situ conservation management. Zoos are sometimes forced to receive unwanted animals from the public or the authorities. Receiving these animals is a burden for zoos. Agreements between zoos and governments are important to take care of these animals and to optimize the use of conservation resources. It is not possible or desirable to maintain all donated and seized animals. The International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources provides useful guidelines on what to do with them. In all cases, species conservation should take precedence over individual animal welfare. These issues are illustrated with data collected at Zoológico Regional Miguel Alvarez del Toro (ZOOMAT) in Chiapas, southern Mexico. Zoo Biol 24:115–124, 2005. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Animal psychology and ethology in Britain and the emergence of professional concern for the concept of ethical cost

It has been argued that if an animal is psychologically like us, there may be more scientific reason to experiment upon it, but less moral justification to do so. Some scientists deny the existence of this dilemma, claiming that although there are scientifically valuable similarities between humans and animals that make experimentation worthwhile, humans are at the same time unique and fundamentally different. This latter response is, ironically, typical of pre-Darwinian beliefs in the relationship between human and non-human animals. Another irony is that debate about such issues has facilitated the participation once more of philosophers in questions concerning experimental psychology: ironic because laboratory-oriented psychologists, especially since the turn of the last century, had been eager to establish the independence of their subject from any influence of philosophy and its investigative methods, as well as from any kind of anthropomorphism.In Britain, certainly more so than in the United States, ethical constraints have prevented the development of psychological research with animals along certain routes. By the 1980s British professional and academic societies had published codes of conduct and guidelines for their members, in part responding to public concern about the welfare of animals in the psychological laboratory. What led to the establishment of these codes and guidelines? This paper analyses the historical background against which professional concern for ethical cost in experimental animal psychology began to take shape, leading to the societies’ open pronouncements of the 1980s.     

The use of non-human primates in biological and medical research: evidence submitted by FRAME to the Academy of Medical Sciences/Medical Research Council/Royal Society/Wellcome Trust Working Group

The Academy of Medical Sciences, the Medical Research Council, the Royal Society and the Wellcome Trust are undertaking a study into the use of non-human primates in biological and medical research. An independent working group of scientific experts, led by Sir David Weatherall, aims to produce a report summarising the findings of this study, early in 2006. The trends in primate research, and the nature and effects of recent and proposed changes in the global use of non-human primates in research, will be investigated. The associated ethical, welfare and regulatory issues, and the role and impact of the Three Rs principles of refinement, reduction and replacement will also be reviewed. As part of this study, a call for evidence was made. The evidence submitted by FRAME emphasised that the use of non-human primates for fundamental research or for regulatory testing still fails to take into account the fact that, although non-human primates are anatomically and physiologically similar to humans, they are not necessarily relevant models for studies on human disease or human physiology. FRAME continues to believe that we have a duty to ensure that these animals are not used without overwhelming evidence that they are the only suitable and relevant models for use in work of undeniable significance.     

Centring individual animals to improve research and citation practices

Modern behavioural scientists have come to acknowledge that individual animals may respond differently to the same stimuli and that the quality of welfare and lived experience can affect behavioural responses. However, much of the foundational research in behavioural science lacked awareness of the effect of both welfare and individuality on data, bringing their results into question. This oversight is rarely addressed when citing seminal works as their findings are considered crucial to our understanding of animal behaviour. Furthermore, more recent research may reflect this lack of awareness by replication of earlier methods – exacerbating the problem. The purpose of this review is threefold. First, we critique seminal papers in animal behaviour as a model for re-examining past experiments, attending to gaps in knowledge or concern about how welfare may have affected results. Second, we propose a means to cite past and future research in a way that is transparent and conscious of the abovementioned problems. Third, we propose a method of transparent reporting for future behaviour research that (i) improves replicability, (ii) accounts for individuality of non-human participants, and (iii) considers the impact of the animals' welfare on the validity of the science. With this combined approach, we aim both to advance the conversation surrounding behaviour scholarship while also serving to drive open engagement in future science.     

Exploring the effectiveness of integrated conservation and development interventions in a Central African forest landscape

Integrated conservation and development projects (ICDPs) have had limited success in addressing the often conflicting objectives of conservation and development. We developed a model with local participants to explore the trade-offs between conservation and development in southeastern Cameroon, where illegal hunting is regarded as the greatest challenge to conservation. We simulated the effects of different ICDP strategies by varying the degree of focus on antipoaching activities, anticorruption measures and direct development investments, and by varying the overall budget for such activities. Our outcome variables were numbers of selected wildlife species and household incomes. The model outcomes from the different scenarios were used to stimulate debate among stakeholders. Contributing to poverty alleviation while maintaining current animal population sizes will be extremely difficult and will require long-term external financial support. Devoting greater attention to improving local environmental governance emerged as the highest priority for this investment. We used the model outputs to inform some of the major policy makers in the region. Participatory modeling is a valuable means of capturing the complexities of achieving conservation at landscape scales and of stimulating innovative solutions to entrenched problems.