The ethics of rodent control

Abstract

Because western societies generally see animals as objects of moral concern, demands have been made on the way they are treated, e.g. during animal experimentation. In the case of rodent pests, however, inhumane control methods are often applied. This inconsistency in the human-animal relationship requires clarification. This paper analyses the criteria that must be met when judging the use of animals during experiments, and investigates whether these can be applied in rodent control. This is important, because, until now, animal welfare has been less of an issue in pest control: effectiveness, hygiene and cost efficiency have been leading principles. Two options are available to solve the inconsistency: the first is to abandon the criteria used in animal experimentation; the second is to apply these criteria to both animal experimentation and rodent control. This latter option implies that rodent control methods should not lead to intense pain or discomfort, and any discomfort should have a short duration and should allow escaped rodents to lead a natural life. Adherence to this option will, however, require a shift in the design of rodent control methods: effectiveness will no longer be the leading principle. It will have to share its position with animal welfare and humaneness.

Vegetarianism, Sentimental or Ethical?

“…While I shall not engage with this view here, I shall discuss alternative methods to control their numbers below. Another difficult issue is the question if non-lethal traps should be preferred to trap rodents, as the claim has been made that confining and relocating rodents following trapping ''is probably extremely stressful'' (Meerburg et al 2008(Meerburg et al , p. 1209.…”

Rodent control and island conservation.

“…Protection levels for research animals vary between countries but a common framework lays the foundation for many laws that apply to the use of animals in research. Many counties follow criteria detailed in an authoritative report produced by the Nuffield Council established in 1991 (Meerburg et al, 2008). Generally the criteria are based around the concept of the 'three Rs' -refinement, reduction and replacement.…”

“…Increasingly, researchers recommend that the same considerations applied to research animals should be extended to rodent pests (Chapter 18;Littin, 2010). For example, once justification for pest control is clearly established (Litten et al, 2004) control methods should not lead to intense pain or discomfort, the duration of pain should be short and escaped rodents should still be able to live natural lives (Meerburg et al 2008). Adhering to the three R's means that both replacement (prevention of rodent presence) and refinement (i.e.…”

¿Es seguro para la salud humana y animal el uso de raticidas que contienen Salmonella?

“…Luego de la revisión de títulos, resúmenes y eliminación de duplicidades, se obtuvieron 37 artículos y 10 referencias secundarias relacionadas con la seguridad de raticidas basados en Salmonella, que fueron revisados a texto completo. Luego de evaluar las 47 referencias seleccionadas, se excluyó 35: 21 por no responder a la pregunta de investigación (9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28) , siete por no superar el criterio de calidad planteado en cuanto a sus conclusiones, resultados y métodos usados (4,6,8,(29)(30)(31)(32) , cuatro por no contar con texto completo (33)(34)(35)(36) y tres por idioma (37)(38)(39) . De las 12 publicaciones incluidas para revisión, seis correspondieron a seguridad en humanos (1,2,(40)(41)(42)(43) y seis en animales (44)(45)(46)(47)(48)…”