Ciska De Ruyver, Kristof Baert, Emma Cartuyvels, Lies Al Beernaert, Frank Am Tuyttens, Herwig Leirs, Christel Ph Moons
{"title":"评估十四种家鼠(Mus musculus)、挪威鼠(Rattus norvegicus)和黑鼠(Rattus rattus)控制和调度方法对动物福利的影响。","authors":"Ciska De Ruyver, Kristof Baert, Emma Cartuyvels, Lies Al Beernaert, Frank Am Tuyttens, Herwig Leirs, Christel Ph Moons","doi":"10.1017/awf.2022.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Population control of the house mouse (<i>Mus musculus</i>), Norway rat (<i>Rattus norvegicus</i>) and black rat (<i>Rattus rattus</i>) is common practice worldwide. Our objective was to assess the impact on animal welfare of lethal and non-lethal control methods, including three dispatch methods. We used the Sharp and Saunders welfare assessment model with eight experts scoring eleven control methods and three dispatch methods used on the three species. We presumed the methods were performed as prescribed, only taking into account the effect on the target animal (and not, for example, on non-target catches). We did not assess population control efficacy of the methods. Methods considered to induce the least suffering to the target animal were captive-bolt traps, electrocution traps and cervical dislocation, while those with the greatest impact were anticoagulants, cholecalciferol and deprivation. Experts indicated considerable uncertainty regarding their evaluation of certain methods, which emphasises the need for further scientific research. In particular, the impact of hydrogen cyanide, chloralose and aluminium phosphide on animal welfare ought to be investigated. The experts also stressed the need to improve Standard Operating Procedures and to incorporate animal welfare assessments in Integrated Pest Management (IPM). The results of our study can help laypeople, professionals, regulatory agencies and legislators making well-informed decisions as to which methods to use when controlling commensal rodents.</p>","PeriodicalId":7894,"journal":{"name":"Animal Welfare","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10937213/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"<i>Assessing animal welfare impact of fourteen control and dispatch methods for house mouse (</i>Mus musculus<i>), Norway rat (</i>Rattus norvegicus<i>) and black rat (</i>Rattus rattus<i>)</i>.\",\"authors\":\"Ciska De Ruyver, Kristof Baert, Emma Cartuyvels, Lies Al Beernaert, Frank Am Tuyttens, Herwig Leirs, Christel Ph Moons\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/awf.2022.2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Population control of the house mouse (<i>Mus musculus</i>), Norway rat (<i>Rattus norvegicus</i>) and black rat (<i>Rattus rattus</i>) is common practice worldwide. Our objective was to assess the impact on animal welfare of lethal and non-lethal control methods, including three dispatch methods. We used the Sharp and Saunders welfare assessment model with eight experts scoring eleven control methods and three dispatch methods used on the three species. We presumed the methods were performed as prescribed, only taking into account the effect on the target animal (and not, for example, on non-target catches). We did not assess population control efficacy of the methods. Methods considered to induce the least suffering to the target animal were captive-bolt traps, electrocution traps and cervical dislocation, while those with the greatest impact were anticoagulants, cholecalciferol and deprivation. Experts indicated considerable uncertainty regarding their evaluation of certain methods, which emphasises the need for further scientific research. In particular, the impact of hydrogen cyanide, chloralose and aluminium phosphide on animal welfare ought to be investigated. The experts also stressed the need to improve Standard Operating Procedures and to incorporate animal welfare assessments in Integrated Pest Management (IPM). The results of our study can help laypeople, professionals, regulatory agencies and legislators making well-informed decisions as to which methods to use when controlling commensal rodents.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7894,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Animal Welfare\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10937213/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Animal Welfare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/awf.2022.2\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Animal Welfare","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/awf.2022.2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Assessing animal welfare impact of fourteen control and dispatch methods for house mouse (Mus musculus), Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus) and black rat (Rattus rattus).
Population control of the house mouse (Mus musculus), Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus) and black rat (Rattus rattus) is common practice worldwide. Our objective was to assess the impact on animal welfare of lethal and non-lethal control methods, including three dispatch methods. We used the Sharp and Saunders welfare assessment model with eight experts scoring eleven control methods and three dispatch methods used on the three species. We presumed the methods were performed as prescribed, only taking into account the effect on the target animal (and not, for example, on non-target catches). We did not assess population control efficacy of the methods. Methods considered to induce the least suffering to the target animal were captive-bolt traps, electrocution traps and cervical dislocation, while those with the greatest impact were anticoagulants, cholecalciferol and deprivation. Experts indicated considerable uncertainty regarding their evaluation of certain methods, which emphasises the need for further scientific research. In particular, the impact of hydrogen cyanide, chloralose and aluminium phosphide on animal welfare ought to be investigated. The experts also stressed the need to improve Standard Operating Procedures and to incorporate animal welfare assessments in Integrated Pest Management (IPM). The results of our study can help laypeople, professionals, regulatory agencies and legislators making well-informed decisions as to which methods to use when controlling commensal rodents.
期刊介绍:
Animal Welfare is an international scientific and technical journal. It publishes the results of peer-reviewed scientific research, technical studies and reviews relating to the welfare of kept animals (eg on farms, in laboratories, zoos and as companions) and of those in the wild whose welfare is compromised by human activities. Papers on related ethical, social, and legal issues and interdisciplinary papers will also be considered for publication. Studies that are derivative or which replicate existing publications will only be considered if they are adequately justified.
Papers will only be considered if they bring new knowledge (for research papers), new perspectives (for reviews) or develop new techniques. Papers must have the potential to improve animal welfare, and the way in which they achieve this, or are likely to do so, must be clearly specified in the section on Animal welfare implications.