Dataset Information

Where Are We on the Animal Welfare Map? Using GIS to Assess Stakeholder Diversity and Inclusion.

ABSTRACT: Inequities exist in all facets of society, and animal welfare organizations (AWOs) and their communities are no exception. These organizations interface with multiple stakeholder groups. An active analysis of stakeholder groups to identify under-served areas and communities has not been performed. Using stakeholder data from Toronto Humane Society (THS) from 2015-2019, this study performed a retrospective spatial analysis to identify well served and under-served geographic areas for adopters, surrenders, public veterinary service (PVS) clients, volunteers and foster parents, using Hot Spot analysis. Correlation analysis was performed to determine whether the spatial distribution of the groups correlated with the four socioeconomic metrics of the 2016 Ontario Marginalization Index (residential instability, material deprivation, dependency, and ethnic concentration), and a metric representing the distribution of Indigenous residents. For each stakeholder group, there were well served areas, typically in central Toronto where THS is located, and under-served areas, typically in the north-west and north-east corners of Toronto and in the surrounding cities of the Greater Toronto Area. The area served by THS PVS extended further north than the other hot spot areas. The number of adopters increased as the residential instability metric increased, whereas the number of adopters decreased as the ethnic concentration metric increased. The rate of surrenders increased as the Indigenous metric increased. Public Veterinary Service clients increased as the residential instability, material deprivation, and Indigenous metrics increased. One of the primary limitations of this study was the confounding factor of distance from THS. Individuals living further from THS are less likely to utilize its services, particularly if there is another accessible AWO nearby, and therefore may appear to reflect an under-served population that may not truly be under-served. A regional approach would help to overcome this limitation. The results provide useful insights into stakeholder engagement and provide a foundation for analysis of more targeted areas, as well as for strategies to reach under-served demographics. Similar analyses by other AWOs would be helpful to address inequities in a larger geographic area. Animal welfare organizations can improve program effectiveness by adding data analytics skills to the more traditional skills associated with this sector.

SUBMITTER: Roberts KC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8710581 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Prioritization of animal welfare issues can help identify which areas most require research funding and raise awareness of best practices. A modified Delphi method was used to obtain expert opinion on the highest priority welfare issues for UK farmed livestock. Fifty-eight UK-based experts were recruited onto the study, with a minimum of 3 years experience of working with either cattle, pigs, poultry, or small ruminants (12-16 experts per group). Experts were chosen to represent a broad range of opinions. Two rounds of surveys were conducted online using Online Survey, and the final round was an in-person workshop with 21 experts. In the first survey, experts were provided with a comprehensive list of species-specific welfare issues derived from the literature. Participants were asked to score each welfare issue, for (i) severity, (ii) duration, and (iii) prevalence on a 6-point Likert scale. The results of the first survey were reviewed and the welfare issues which scored a neutral-to-high response (scores 3-6) were carried forward. In round 2, participants were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with the rankings that were made from the results of round 1. The final stage of the process was a workshop, which consisted of a combination of group exercises and discussions, to reach the final consensus. Welfare priority lists were divided into two categories: severity/duration, and prevalence, to identify the priority welfare issues affecting individual animals and the population, respectively. Across all farmed species common concerns were inadequate or inappropriate nutrition, inability of stockpeople to recognize or treat welfare issues (such as pain or behavioral problems), lameness, chronic or endemic health issues, euthanasia and mortality and morbidity of neonates. Specific concerns related to behavioral restriction and damaging or abnormal behavior in pigs, poultry and dairy animals, inadequate housing for pigs and poultry, consequences of breeding decisions in pigs and poultry, and lack of access to veterinary care in sheep and beef. This Delphi process resulted in consensus on the most significant welfare challenges faced by UK livestock species and can help to guide future research and education priority decisions.

Project description:Accredited zoological facilities are committed to fully understanding the behavioral, mental, and physical needs of each species to continuously improve the welfare of the animals under their professional care and detect when welfare has diminished. In order to accomplish this goal, internally consistent and externally valid indicators of animal welfare are necessary to advance our understanding of the current welfare status of individual animals. Historically, efforts have focused on monitoring visible or observable signs of poor health or problem behavior, but lack of signs or problems does not necessarily demonstrate that an individual animal is thriving. The current study examined fecal hormone metabolite levels and behavior for two species of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus and Tursiops aduncus) from 25 different accredited zoological facilities. At the time of the study, all facilities were accredited by the Alliance of Marine Mammal Parks and Aquariums and/or the Association of Zoos and Aquariums. This was part of the multi-institutional study 'Towards understanding of the welfare of cetaceans in zoos and aquariums" commonly referred to as the Cetacean Welfare Study. Behavioral diversity was calculated using the Shannon Diversity Index on species-appropriate behavioral events. Behavioral diversity was compared to the fecal metabolites of cortisol, aldosterone, and the ratio of cortisol to dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) as well as the stereotypic behavior of route tracing. Similar to previous studies on other species, there was a significant inverse relationship between behavioral diversity and both fecal cortisol metabolites and route tracing. Additionally, a significant inverse relationship also exists between behavioral diversity and the ratio of fecal cortisol to DHEA metabolites. Behavioral diversity and fecal aldosterone metabolites were not associated. Additional research is still needed to validate behavioral diversity as an indicator of positive animal welfare for bottlenose dolphins and across species. However, based on current results, facilities could utilize behavioral diversity combined with other measures of welfare to more comprehensively evaluate the welfare of bottlenose dolphins.

Project description:Several precision livestock farming (PLF) technologies, conceived for optimizing farming processes, are developed to detect the physical and behavioral changes of animals continuously and in real-time. The aim of this review was to explore the capacity of existing PLF technologies to contribute to the assessment of pig welfare. In a web search for commercially available PLF for pigs, 83 technologies were identified. A literature search was conducted, following systematic review guidelines (PRISMA), to identify studies on the validation of sensor technologies for assessing animal-based welfare indicators. Two validation levels were defined: internal (evaluation during system building within the same population that were used for system building) and external (evaluation on a different population than during system building). From 2,463 articles found, 111 were selected, which validated some PLF that could be applied to the assessment of animal-based welfare indicators of pigs (7% classified as external, and 93% as internal validation). From our list of commercially available PLF technologies, only 5% had been externally validated. The more often validated technologies were vision-based solutions (n = 45), followed by load-cells (n = 28; feeders and drinkers, force plates and scales), accelerometers (n = 14) and microphones (n = 14), thermal cameras (n = 10), photoelectric sensors (n = 5), radio-frequency identification (RFID) for tracking (n = 2), infrared thermometers (n = 1), and pyrometer (n = 1). Externally validated technologies were photoelectric sensors (n = 2), thermal cameras (n = 2), microphone (n = 1), load-cells (n = 1), RFID (n = 1), and pyrometer (n = 1). Measured traits included activity and posture-related behavior, feeding and drinking, other behavior, physical condition, and health. In conclusion, existing PLF technologies are potential tools for on-farm animal welfare assessment in pig production. However, validation studies are lacking for an important percentage of market available tools, and in particular research and development need to focus on identifying the feature candidates of the measures (e.g., deviations from diurnal pattern, threshold levels) that are valid signals of either negative or positive animal welfare. An important gap identified are the lack of technologies to assess affective states (both positive and negative states).

Project description:While perceptions of animal welfare have been assessed in veterinary students and students internationally, there remains a gap in research concerning undergraduate and graduate student perspectives of animal welfare in animal science programs at colleges and universities across the United States. A survey was developed to assess current animal science student perspectives of the importance of animal welfare as part of their education, their knowledge of available educational opportunities, and resources they think should be included in animal welfare curricula. An online survey was distributed to a national listserv of university administrators of animal science programs in the United States. A total of 624 survey responses were statistically summarized. Most respondents were undergraduate students (78.0%, n = 487), between the ages of 18 and 24 (85.9%, n = 536), and female (86.1%, n = 537). Results indicated that despite most respondents not taking an animal welfare course previously (60.7%, n = 379), most students strongly agreed that the inclusion of an animal welfare course is an important part of the animal science curriculum (72.0%, n = 449), that animal welfare is an important component of their education (63.1%, n = 394), and that animal welfare courses would be helpful for their future careers (70.0%, n = 437). When asked what attributes would be most important in an animal welfare class, students identified many different types of information and resources. The majority of respondents answered that discussing current hot topics in animal welfare (76.1%, n = 475), ethical discussions (76.0%, n = 474), and practical, applied questions (75.3%, n = 470) were important course components. Suggestions for future research include investigating how animal science student perceptions change before and after taking an animal welfare course and exploring opportunities to expand formal welfare education in animal science departments. Inclusion of animal welfare into the curriculum is critical as many of the students currently enrolled in animal science departments will become the future stakeholders in animal-focused industries.

Project description:The number of born piglets per litter has increased in Swedish pig industry, and farmers are struggling to improve piglet survival. A common practice is to make litters more equally sized by moving piglets from large litters to smaller to make sure that all piglets get an own teat to suckle. Litter equalization is not always enough, as many sows have large litters and/or damaged teats, which results in an insufficient number of available teats. One way to solve this problem is to use nurse sows. A nurse sow raises, and weans, her own piglets before receiving a foster litter. The objectives of this study were to address how the use of nurse sows affects the welfare of sows and piglets and to explore how it impacts the contribution margin of pig production in Sweden. A literature search was made to investigate welfare aspects on sows and piglets. As there were few published studies on nurse sows, an expert group meeting was organized. In order to explore the impact on the contribution margin of pig production, a partial budgeting approach with stochastic elements was used for a fictive pig farm. Standard templates for calculating costs and benefits were supplemented with figures from existing literature and the gathered expert opinions. In Sweden, the minimum suckling period is 28?days while published studies involving nurse sows, all from outside of Sweden, weaned the piglets at 21?days. A Swedish nurse sow will thus get longer lactation period which might increase the risk of poor body condition, damaged teats, and shoulder ulcers. This indicates a reduced welfare of the sow and may lead to impaired fertility and increased culling risk. On the other hand, the piglet mortality could be reduced with the use of nurse sows, but the separation and mixing of piglets could be stressful. The partial budgeting suggested that the nurse sow system is slightly more profitable (+6,838 Swedish krona) per farrowing group during one dry and one lactation period compared to the conventional system. The result is, however, highly dependent on the input values, and welfare aspects were not considered in the calculations.

Dataset Information

Where Are We on the Animal Welfare Map? Using GIS to Assess Stakeholder Diversity and Inclusion.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets