Search

The success of welfare legislation for nonhuman animals rests upon primary producer compliance that, in turn, is affected by public willingness to pay (WTP) for such initiatives. Although the topic of the welfare of animals on farms (and relevant legislation) is becoming increasingly important to the Australian public, there remain relatively few recent assessments of the variables that may affect WTP and, therefore, support initiatives aimed at improving the welfare of animals living on farms. This study surveyed 1,224 community members in Queensland, Australia. The study assessed respondents' self-rated knowledge of, and concern regarding, farm animal welfare. In addition, the survey asked respondents how much more they would be prepared to pay for animal-based products to ensure that they came from a source where the Five Freedoms were met. Although self-rated knowledge and level of concern were found to affect WTP, the study found only concern for farm animal welfare actually predicted consumer behavior. Further analyses showed a potential confound between knowledge levels and locality. This article discusses the implications of this for future initiatives to increase WTP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are a number of nonhuman animal welfare monitoring schemes for animals on the farm in Australia and in other countries. Although the majority of such schemes are voluntary rather than legislated, some are nevertheless enforced through a number of customer requirements that industries must meet to gain access to markets. Animal welfare monitoring schemes rely on a number of measures, but the majority are based on simple measures of resource or management inputs with fewer animal-based measures; few are specific to animal welfare outcomes. Furthermore, most measures are used retrospectively, particularly where there has been a problem, to improve welfare for the next “batch” of animals and thus few measures can be used to predict animal welfare outcomes with these schemes. There is considerable uncertainty about the concept and consequently the measurement of animal welfare. Science has a clear contribution to make in forging better agreement on animal welfare assessment and also has important roles in both developing practical animal-based measures of animal welfare and validating that animal welfare monitoring schemes are worthwhile in improving at least some aspects of animal welfare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Annually, welfare shelters admit many dogs, including those whose caregivers surrender them or dogs who are strays. This article analyzes admission data from 3 metropolitan Australian shelters. The study collected data for a 1-year period and analyzed them to identify the characteristics of the typical shelter dog: patterns of relinquishment, sales, reclamation and euthanasia: and duration of stay and reasons underlying euthanasia, relinquishment, and postadoptive return. The study tracked more than 20,000 admissions during this period. To facilitate reclamation, the local Code of Practice requires a mandatory holding period for stray dogs; assessment for suitability for rehoming then occurs. Dogs failing the assessment are euthanized. Surrendered dogs can be assessed immediately. The Code of Practice also recommends that unsold dogs he euthanized 28 days postassessment. Typically, shelter dogs in Melbourne are strays, sexually entire, adult, small, and-usually-male. The majority of admissions are reclaimed or sold. Most reclamations occur within 4 days, and postadoptive return rates are low. That current desexing messages do not appear to have reached the owner of stray dogs to the same extent as they have other dog owners is a major finding, suggesting that a targeted education campaign may he required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]