Search

Simple Summary: News media is one of the major sources of publicly available information on animal welfare law enforcement. It has previously been established that the media are strong influences of public perceptions. Therefore, it is possible that news reports on animal cruelty offences are shaping public understanding of penalties for animal cruelty. To understand how penalties are portrayed in the media, we collected 71 Australian news articles which reported on penalties for animal cruelty over a 6-month period from 1 June 2019 to 1 December 2019. Using thematic analysis, three themes were identified: (1) laws are not good enough; (2) laws are improving; and (3) reforms are unnecessary. A connection between public perceptions, media reporting and statutory reform efforts to increase maximum penalties is proposed, which potentially could explain why the Australian public appear displeased with the penalties handed down by courts for animal cruelty offences. Further sociological research is required to confirm this theory. Media portrayals of animal cruelty can shape public understanding and perception of animal welfare law. Given that animal welfare law in Australia is guided partially by 'community expectations', the media might indirectly be influencing recent reform efforts to amend maximum penalties in Australia, through guiding and shaping public opinion. This paper reports on Australian news articles which refer to penalties for animal cruelty published between 1 June 2019 and 1 December 2019. Using the electronic database Newsbank, a total of 71 news articles were included for thematic analysis. Three contrasting themes were identified: (1) laws are not good enough; (2) laws are improving; and (3) reforms are unnecessary. We propose a penalty reform cycle to represent the relationship between themes one and two, and 'community expectations'. The cycle is as follows: media reports on recent amendments imply that 'laws are improving' (theme two). Due to a range of inherent factors in the criminal justice system, harsher sentences are not handed down by the courts, resulting in media report of 'lenient sentencing' (theme one). Hence, the public become displeased with the penal system, forming the 'community expectations', which then fuel future reform efforts. Thus, the cycle continues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: The acceptability of methods for managing cats' and dogs' undesired encounters with wildlife remains a contested issue. Despite a wealth of research on the effectiveness of management strategies, successful implementation is reliant on public perceptions and attitudes towards the different strategies. This paper reports on the results of a survey which sought to understand the attitudes of a self-selected group of residents in Queensland, Australia, towards various management actions for controlling dog and cat populations and behaviour (hereafter managing dogs and cats). Our respondents collectively grouped strategies into those that directly cause wild (i.e., feral) dog and cat deaths and those that allow wild dogs and cats to live a 'natural' life, with the acceptability of the first group of strategies varying by gender and age. These important variations in beliefs and attitudes require careful management within each community for the success of any program to control wild dogs or cats. Many humans have created close relationships with wildlife and companion species. Notwithstanding that companion species were at some point themselves wild, some wild (i.e., feral) and domesticated (owned) dogs and cats now have significant impacts on wildlife. Many strategies exist to control the impact of dogs and cats on wildlife, but the successful implementation of management initiatives is tied to public opinions and the degree of acceptability of these measures. This paper reports the findings of a survey assessing the beliefs of residents in Queensland, Australia, about dog and cat impacts on wildlife, and their attitudes towards various strategies and options for controlling wild (i.e., feral) and domesticated (owned) dogs and cats. The responses of 590 participants were analysed. Our respondents collectively grouped strategies into those that directly cause wild dog and cat deaths and those that allow wild dogs and cats to live a 'natural' life, which is a variation on past research where respondents grouped strategies into lethal and non-lethal methods. Community acceptability of strategies that directly cause wild dog and cat deaths (each assessed using five-category Likert scores) was lower amongst females and respondents aged 34 years or less. Gender expectations in most places and cultures still predominately suggest that women are more 'caring', supportive of animal welfare, and perhaps cognizant that wild dogs and cats are also sentient creatures and appreciate the problematic tension between controlling wild and companion species. Age-related differences may reflect the changing social values of communities at different points in time. There was high support for regulations that enforce responsible pet ownership but not for the importance of pet-free suburbs, which the majority of respondents considered unimportant. These important variations in beliefs and attitudes require careful management within each community for the success of any program to control wild dogs or cats. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Religious slaughter has recently attracted public attention as a result of media portrayal of several high-profile Australian and international events. The requirements of domestic religious slaughter practice, including animal welfare provisions, appear to be poorly understood by the Australian public. This paper summarizes the welfare science and regulatory framework around halal and shechita slaughter in Australia. Current knowledge on public viewpoints on these practices is examined, and areas for future social science research are proposed. In spite of wide-ranging and extensive animal welfare protection being provided by the law, we propose that the complexity of the legislative arrangement reduces transparency and undermines the strength of protection to animals provided by law. Avenues for legal reform are proposed. There is also a need for more active public engagement to increase community knowledge about religious slaughter practices, and to counter Islamophobia and anti-Semitic attitudes. While religious slaughter is not a new practice in Australia, it has recently attracted public concern regarding questions of animal welfare following unfavourable media coverage. However, the details of religious slaughter practices, including related animal welfare provisions, appear to be poorly understood by the Australian public, and no existing literature concisely synthesises current regulations, practices, and issues. This paper addresses this gap by examining the processes associated with various types of religious slaughter and associated animal welfare issues, by reviewing the relevant legislation and examining public views, while highlighting areas for further research, particularly in Australia. The paper finds shortcomings in relation to transparency and understanding of current practices and regulation and suggests a need for more clear and consistent legislative provisions, as well as increased independence from industry in the setting of the standards, enforcement and administration of religious slaughter. A starting point for legal reform would be the relocation of important provisions pertaining to religious slaughter from delegated codes to the responsible act or regulation, ensuring proper parliamentary oversight. In addition, more active public engagement must occur, particularly with regard to what constitutes legal practices and animal welfare standards in the Australian context to overcome ongoing conflict between those who oppose religious slaughter and the Muslim and Jewish communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Animal cruelty or neglect is an emotive social issue. Animal welfare legislation is the primary tool for defining, penalizing and hopefully deterring animal cruelty. A number of issues arising at all stages of the animal law enforcement process have been previously identified. These issues contribute to a discrepancy between the written law and the realities of the animal law enforcement process: the 'enforcement gap'. This paper reviews the available resources to identify the causes of this 'gap'. It is argued that the 'gap' is caused by numerous factors derived from all stages of the enforcement process: (1) reporting acts of animal cruelty, (2) ambiguity and shortcomings derived from the language used in animal welfare legislation (3) the nature of enforcement authorities, and (4) court determination on the matter. In order to reduce the enforcement gap and bring the expectations closer to reality, further research is needed. Previous research has identified a number of issues arising at all stages of the animal law enforcement process. These issues contribute to an enforcement gap between the written law, as it relates to the penalties laid out in statutes, and the reality of the animal law justice system. This paper identifies and investigates the contributors to this gap. The identified factors discussed are (1) the role of the public in reporting animal cruelty, (2) the ambiguity of the language used in animal welfare legislation, (3) the nature of enforcement authorities, and (4) the role of the courts. Thus, the causes of the enforcement gap are multifactorial, derived from all stages of the enforcement process. Further research on the enforcement model and public education, in addition to debate on legislative reforms, will be needed to address this gap. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Much controversy surrounds the management of Australia's unowned urban cat population. The longstanding practice of trapping and killing urban stray cats and kittens that are not reclaimed or adopted has proven ineffective at reducing their numbers. In addition, it has been shown that shelter staff tasked with the repeated killing of healthy animals often face severe mental health consequences. A growing body of scientific evidence from Australia and elsewhere indicates that a non-lethal alternative, trap-neuter-return (TNR), can be effective at reducing urban stray cat numbers. TNR has also been associated with declines in feline intake and euthanasia at animal shelters. A large-scale trial of TNR in Australia is warranted and needed urgently. An extensive yet fundamentally flawed argument against such a trial is presented in a recently published article, "A Case of Letting the Cat out of the Bag—Why Trap-Neuter-Return Is Not an Ethical Solution for Stray Cat (Felis catus) Management," by Crawford et al. In the text that follows, we provided a rebuttal to the Crawford et al. paper and argued that TNR is an ethical, scientifically sound solution for the management of Australia's urban stray cats. The recently published article, 'A Case of Letting the Cat out of the Bag—Why Trap-Neuter-Return Is Not an Ethical Solution for Stray Cat (Felis catus) Management,' by Crawford et al. warrants rebuttal. The case presented in the paper, opposing the initiation of TNR trials in Australia, ignores peer-reviewed evidence which substantiates the effectiveness of TNR at reducing unowned urban cat numbers. In addition, the paper's authors offer a number of unrealistic recommendations, which are little more than a rebranding of the failed status quo. Urban stray cats have long been considered a problem across Australia. Current practice calls for the trapping and killing of thousands of healthy urban stray cats and kittens each year with no apparent effect on the total population. In contrast, the literature offers numerous examples, including two recent studies in Australia, of reductions in urban stray cat numbers where TNR has been implemented. TNR has also been associated with reduced feline intake and euthanasia at shelters, which improves both animal welfare and the well-being of shelter staff. A large-scale trial of TNR in an urban Australian context is scientifically justified and long overdue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Cane toads are a highly invasive species that present a serious threat to most vertebrates that eat them. In Australia, their spread from the point of introduction in 1935 has seen them occupy any suitable habitat across the north of the country, with the potential to be transported to locations in southern Australia. Control and safe removal of unwanted toads presents ethical and occupational health risks to those engaged in such activities. This study describes an efficient method of control suitable for application under field conditions anywhere in Australia. The euthanasia of cane toads under field conditions presents a number of logistical and animal welfare challenges. One recommended method of control involves the use of carbon dioxide in plastic bags. This paper describes the minimum amount of time (4 h) required to efficiently euthanase toads with a carbon dioxide concentration of 4.96% under field conditions experienced in northern Australia. Discussion is also provided on the issues of safe disposal of biological and plastic waste associated with the application of this method. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: To retain social license to operate, achieving and maintaining high standards of animal welfare need to be institutional priorities for zoos. In order to be confident in the delivery of high standards of animal welfare, a holistic evidence-based approach to welfare assessment is required. This should include a combination of institutional-level assessments, individual animal monitoring tools, and applied research targeted at advancing our understanding of species needs and preferences in zoos. Progress has certainly been made in the zoo sector in development of research programs and individual animal welfare monitoring tools. Comparatively less focus has been applied to institutional-level assessment processes. This paper aims to fill this gap and presents an outline of a welfare risk assessment process developed and trialed at three zoos over a three year period and discussion of the potential value it offers, as well as the limitations of its use. There is a growing interest and need for zoos to develop and implement welfare assessment tools that are practical to use and provide meaningful results that can inform management decisions. This paper presents a process that was developed to support this type of evidence-based management in zoo animal welfare. The process is configured to facilitate institutional risk assessment, using an adapted version of the Five Domains Model for animal welfare assessment. It is designed to systematically analyse information gathered from zoo personnel in order to highlight areas of welfare risk, as well as areas that are performing well and areas requiring further investigation. A trial was conducted on three zoos over three years. Results of the trial suggest the process developed is practical and effective in identifying areas of welfare risk in a wide range of species in a zoo setting. It represents a further step towards achieving high-level animal welfare in zoos by integrating animal welfare as an institutional priority. The more zoos that employ such strategies, the greater the ability of the sector to advance the welfare of the animals in their care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: All of the veterinary schools in Australia and New Zealand worked together to develop the online One Welfare learning and teaching portal (OWP) for sharing teaching resources to assist veterinary graduates to become leaders in animal welfare and ethics (AWE). The materials in the portal are organised around eight key themes including two overarching themes of animal ethics and animal welfare science, and six context-specific themes: companion animals; animals used in research and teaching; livestock/production animals; animals used for sport, recreation or display; animals in the wild, and aquatic animals. The arrangement of these resources aligns with those of the Australian Animal Welfare Strategy (AAWS). As part of the OWP development, animal welfare educators from the eight veterinary schools met and used modified deliberative polling to prioritise resource development. Surveys of students and educators in all participating schools investigated their attitudes to current AWE issues across six context-specific themes: companion animals; animals used in research and teaching; livestock/production animals; animals used for sport, recreation or display; animals in the wild and aquatic animals. The prioritised resources include (1) student AWE essays arranged by subject; (2) an online reflection tool that can be used repeatedly to gain understanding of change in attitudes over time; (3) eight overarching themes that host a group of interactive scenarios; (4) research papers for each context-specific theme; (5) a bank of multiple choice questions with feedback to support AWE assessment; (6) a novel online discussion tool 'Chatterbox;' and (7) a 'toolbox' containing directions to the doglogbook, an owner app designed to monitor management practices, and evaluate quality of life in dogs. This article introduces the online One Welfare learning and teaching portal (OWP) and describes its development, use, importance and relevance to animal welfare and ethics (AWE) stakeholders. As animal welfare issues increase in importance, veterinarians must be trained to lead the science that underpins AWE discourses. The OWP is a collection of resources designed to engage and challenge veterinary science students as they become advocates for animals. It was developed collaboratively by all eight veterinary schools in Australia and New Zealand, and funded by the Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching. Surveys to investigate the attitudes of students and educators to AWE issues in six context-specific themes based on the Australian Animal Welfare Strategy (AAWS) (companion animals; animals used in research and teaching; livestock/production animals; animals used for sport, recreation or display; animals in the wild and aquatic animals) were administered through all participating schools. Students assigned more importance to Day One competence in knowledge of welfare concepts than did educators for the following groups: production animals, companion animals, animals in the wild, aquatic animals, animals used in research and teaching, and animals used for sport, recreation or display (all p < 0.01). Agreement between educators and students was closer regarding the importance of Day One competence for euthanasia for all six context-specific themes (p < 0.01–0.03). Students assigned more importance than educators to social, economic and cultural drivers of welfare outcomes in production animals (p < 0.01); slaughter and preslaughter inspections in production animals (p < 0.01); animal abuse and hoarding in companion animals (p < 0.01); shelter medicine in companion animals (p < 0.01); disaster preparedness in wildlife animals (p < 0.01); pain and distress caused by fishing in aquatic animals (p < 0.01); conscientious objection related to animals held for research and teaching (p < 0.01); behaviour, selection and training of animals used for sport, recreation and display (p = 0.046) and educating the public around sporting animal welfare (p < 0.01). Agreement between educators and students was closer for strategies to address painful husbandryprocedures in production animals (p = 0.03); behaviour and training of companion animals (p = 0.03); veterinarians' duties to wild animals in wildlife (p = 0.02); the 3Rs in animals held for research and teaching (p = 0.03) and ownership responsibility in sporting animals (p = 0.01). This report discusses the reasons for differences among students and educators as they approach these issues. The portal is expected to gather more content as veterinary schools in other countries use its resources and users submit scenarios and discussion topics that reflect local needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Australia exports large numbers of live cattle and sheep by sea to many destinations. Increasingly high animal welfare standards are being required of all livestock industries, and reports of substantial mortality events on some voyages have raised public concerns regarding animal welfare. Mortality rates alone do not assure stakeholders that livestock experience adequate welfare throughout the voyage. Determining the animal welfare status of large animal consignments is complex and requires many measures that are focused on the environment and resources provided, and also on how the animals respond to their surroundings. A list of measures, appropriate for use on cattle and sheep that enter the livestock export supply chain, was determined by reviewing three international welfare assessment protocols, and consulting the Australian livestock export standards and an animal health handbook used by shipboard veterinarians and stockpersons. After preliminary testing of the measures on a sheep and cattle voyage, we propose a protocol that is potentially practical and applicable for pen assessments for both species at pre-export and destination feedlot facilities and during sea transport. Proposing a protocol is the first step towards developing a system that evaluates livestock welfare throughout the export supply chain, and will contribute to improved industry transparency. Australian livestock industries face increased scrutiny from animal welfare groups and society, and the long-distance transport of livestock by sea has recently gained particular attention. Other than non-compliance with broad regulatory standards and voyage mortality rates, there is minimal information to ascertain the welfare of exported livestock. There is currently no standardised, validated animal welfare assessment protocol for livestock on-farm prior to live export or when undergoing transport. This study describes a novel assessment protocol suitable for use on live feeder and slaughter animals exported by sea from Australia. Health and welfare indicators for use in the livestock export supply chain were identified by reviewing three internationally recognised animal welfare assessment protocols for livestock; Welfare Quality®, AWIN and AssureWel, as well as consulting with industry compliance standards and guidelines. This paper proposes a welfare protocol designed to assess sheep and beef cattle exported by sea from Australia, and incorporates environmental-, resource-, management- and animal-based measures. In collaboration with industry, this welfare protocol can be tested on commercial livestock consignments, and be used for ongoing management, for increased transparency and to provide feedback to operators for continuous improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]