Scientific Assessment of the Welfare of Trapped Mammals—Key Considerations for the Use of the Sharp and Saunders Humaneness Assessment Model

Beausoleil, Ngaio J.; Baker, Sandra E.; Sharp, Trudy

doi:10.3390/ani12030402

Cited by 5 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 35 publications

(57 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…a score of 4D (4 on a 0-5 scale for suffering prior to death, and D on a scale of A-H for suffering due to mode of death) for ground-based chest shooting of wild dromedary camels (Camelus dromedarius) (Hampton et al 2016a). Such outputs are described as "systematic, holistic, data-based assessments" (Beausoleil et al 2022).…”

Section: Generation Of Scores In Assessmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking the utility of the Five Domains model

Hampton,

Hemsworth,

Hemsworth

et al. 2023

Anim. welf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Five Domains model is influential in contemporary studies of animal welfare. It was originally presented as a conceptual model to understand the types of impact that procedures may impose on experimental animals. Its application has since broadened to cover a wide range of animal species and forms of animal use. However, it has also increasingly been applied as an animal welfare assessment tool, which is the focus of this paper. Several critical limitations associated with this approach have not been widely acknowledged, including that: (1) it relies upon expert or stakeholder opinion, with little transparency around the selection of these individuals; (2) quantitative scoring is typically attempted despite the absence of clear principles for aggregation of welfare measures and few attempts to account for uncertainty; (3) there have been few efforts to measure the repeatability of findings; and (4) it does not consider indirect and unintentional impacts such as those imposed on non-target animals. These deficiencies lead to concerns surrounding testability, repeatability and the potential for manipulation. We provide suggestions for refinement of how the Five Domains model is applied to partially address these limitations. We argue that the Five Domains model is useful for systematic consideration of all sources of possible welfare compromise and enhancement, but is not, in its current state, fit-for-purpose as an assessment tool. We argue for wider acknowledgment of the operational limits of using the model as an assessment tool, prioritisation of the studies needed for its validation, and encourage improvements to this approach.

show abstract

Section: Generation Of Scores In Assessmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking the utility of the Five Domains model

Hampton,

Hemsworth,

Hemsworth

et al. 2023

Anim. welf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…General consensus is developed among panelists about the type, intensity, and duration of the animals' mental experiences through detailed discussion of the available evidence. While there is always a risk of 'group think' influencing such processes, presenting clear justification for the inferences made and the panel's confidence in the scientific support for those inferences will likely enhance confidence in the validity of the welfare outcomes of the evaluation (Beausoleil et al, 2022).…”

Section: Inference Of Affective Experiences Is Subjectivementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Reflecting this, the existing operational versions of the model deliberately use qualitative scales to evaluate the relative degree of compromise or enhancement of animal welfare state. For example, the Sharp and Saunders model uses ordinal (mild to extreme) rather than interval scales to assign impact scores in each Domain to ensure that the qualitative nature of the assessment is explicit (Beausoleil et al, 2022). Similarly, the ZAA tool grades are reported as positive, negative and neutral/ambiguous findings in each Domain.…”

Section: Outcomes Of Welfare Assessments Based On Affective States Sh...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the zoo community, the Five Domains has been incorporated into routine animal assessment as part of the Australasian Zoo and Aquarium Association's (ZAA) Member Accreditation Programme (https:// www.zooaquarium.org.au/public/Public/Animal-Welfare/ZAA-Accreditation.aspx) and in Zoos Victoria's in-house welfare assessment program (Sherwen et al, 2018). Similarly, the Sharp and Saunders Humaneness Assessment Model is an operational version of the Five Domains model used in Australia, New Zealand, and the UK to characterize and compare the negative welfare impacts of different methods of managing pest animals (Sharp and Saunders, 2011;Baker et al, 2022;Beausoleil et al, 2022). However, the Five Domains model has not yet been fully operationalized for the purposes of routine assessment and auditing within livestock and poultry production systems.…”

Section: Introduction To the Five Domains Model For Animal Welfare As...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Successfully operationalizing any theoretical model for practical welfare assessment presents a number of challenges and first requires a clear understanding of the philosophical basis of the model, its features, and any associated limits on interpreting the outcomes of its application (Beausoleil and Mellor, 2015a;Harvey et al, 2020;Beausoleil et al, 2022). The Five Domains model is predicated on the understanding of animal welfare as a state within the individual animal itself that arises due to the integration of its various mental experiences at a point in time.…”

Section: Introduction To the Five Domains Model For Animal Welfare As...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Application of the Five Domains model to food chain management of animal welfare: opportunities and constraints

Beausoleil¹,

Swanson²,

McKeegan³

et al. 2023

Front. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For businesses involved in animal production, ensuring high animal welfare standards has become the cornerstone of corporate social responsibility practices. Since animal welfare cannot be verified by consumers at the point of purchase, industry-led audits provide important assurance that animals used to produce food lived an acceptable quality of life and experienced a humane death. The Five Freedoms offer a simple tool to conceptualize the complex, multi-dimensional concept of animal welfare, and they have been widely adopted as a basic operational framework for compliance. However, the Five Freedoms are problematic in that they focus on the absence of negative welfare states, underemphasize the importance of positive experiences, are absolute, and represent a (mostly unattainable) ideal. The Five Domains model represents inter-related aspects of an animal’s welfare state, with four physical/functional domains used to infer likely mental experiences in the fifth domain. This model allows for consideration of both positive and negative affective experiences, recognizes degrees of welfare compromise, acknowledges that animals cannot be free from all negative experiences (and that indeed, some are essential for survival). Thus, the model better reflects current scientific understanding of animal welfare and – that ultimately, we are interested in how animals experience their lives. Nevertheless, caution is needed when inferring mental states, which can never be directly observed or measured, and hence the ultimate outcomes of the model’s application should be qualitative. Operationalization of the Five Domains offers several opportunities to improve the breadth and quality of welfare audits for production animals. The model can incorporate both resource/management- based and animal-based measures of welfare; the former reflect risks to animals’ welfare while the latter often provide direct information on the animal’s welfare state at the time of assessment. Existing welfare indicators may be linked to relevant mental states and evaluated accordingly, and new metrics may be scientifically identified. Importantly, the Five Domains structure demands scrutiny of the affective state consequences to animals of housing, handling, and husbandry procedures, and could improve the effectiveness of animal welfare training for auditors and stockpersons. Adoption of the Five Domains framework could facilitate improved communication about animal welfare in the food chain with customers and consumers.

show abstract

Technical assessment of mechanical and electronic traps to facilitate future improvements in trap efficacy and humaneness

Walther,

Bohot,

Ennen

et al. 2024

Pest Management Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUNDSnap traps and electronic traps are the main devices for non‐chemical management of rodent pests. Traps should be efficient and should not cause unnecessary suffering of animals. Harmonised, systematic test methods are required to make sure that mechanical forces or electrical parameters are optimal to achieve swift unconsciousness and death. This study aimed to describe technical trap properties that can be used to facilitate future improvements in trap efficacy and humaneness.METHODSWe constructed a device to assess spring energy, triggering force, impulse and clamping force and developed an arrangement to assess effective voltage, current, effective current and effective energy taking effect on rodent bodies in electronic traps ‐ all without the use of animals. Descriptive data of trap characteristics were collated.RESULTSAll factors showed variability among snap trap models and trigger types, and there was considerable overlap between mouse and rat traps. For most trap models, there was no difference among new snap traps and traps that had been trigged 20 times. Effective current and effective energy decreased with lower voltage input, but the traps indicated weak battery by LED lights, and one model switched of automatically when voltage was insufficient.CONCLUSIONWith the device and the electronic arrangement, the majority of snap trap models and electronic traps available on the market can be assessed in a standardised and repeatable way. Matching the data generated in this study with data on time for trapped target animals to reach irreversible unconsciousness and experiences from pest control practitioners should allow relating properties of traps to efficacy and animal welfare issues. This can support further development and optimisation of traps for non‐chemical rodent pest control.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

show abstract

Scientific Assessment of the Welfare of Trapped Mammals—Key Considerations for the Use of the Sharp and Saunders Humaneness Assessment Model

Cited by 5 publications

References 35 publications

Rethinking the utility of the Five Domains model

Rethinking the utility of the Five Domains model

Application of the Five Domains model to food chain management of animal welfare: opportunities and constraints

Technical assessment of mechanical and electronic traps to facilitate future improvements in trap efficacy and humaneness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About