scientifically evaluating welfare in commercial breeding kennels:...

2018-10-27

Scientifically evaluating welfare in commercial breeding kennels: does high volume preclude

good welfare?

• Sources of detection dogs• Breed & societal considerations• Scientifically monitoring dog welfare

– Evaluating & extending working life– Ensuring quality of life

What’s the connection between CB welfare and detection dogs?!?

OR

Commercial dog breeding

• Commercial breeding helps to meet demand for purebred dogs

• Ethical and welfare (scientific) issues – What quality of life is acceptable?– How to meet physical, behavioral and psychological

needs? (Fraser et al., 1997; Broom, 1998; Webster, 2001)

• Owner-report studies indicate severe behavioral, psychological and physical problems (McMillan et al, 2011; 2013) – Increased public and stakeholder concerns

HOW CAN WELFARE-ORIENTED BREEDERS TO DISTINGUISH THEMSELVES FROM OTHERS?

CAN DEMAND BE MET SUSTAINABLY AND ETHICALLY?

Application to detection dogs: how do we know how ‘well’ dogs are doing?

Because dogs cannot consent to work or other human purposes for which we benefit, it is our ethical imperative to protect their welfare; at minimum this requires science and practice aimed at minimizing negative states and maximizing positive ones

Welfare: state of the animal in regards to its attempts to cope

Welfare or well-being is a continuum; ranges from very poor to very good w/in and across individuals

THREE CONCEPTIONS OF ANIMAL WELFARE (FRASER ET AL., 1997)

ANIMALS SHOULD:

Function wellGood healthNormal growth, reproduction

Feel wellMinimize negative feelings (pain, fear) Experience positive feelings (contentment)

Be able to lead reasonably natural livesPerform behaviors that are important to them Have natural elements in their living spaces

Behavior gives insight to both

Are the animals healthy?

Do they have what they want?

Dawkins, 2004. Animal Welf; 13:S3-7

But behavior is subjective!

Developing welfare assessment priorities

BEHAVIORAL AND MENTAL WELLNESS

Do the dogs have what they need?• Space• Social interactions• Exercise • Enrichment• Socialization

How can we know/objectively assess?

EVALUATING WELFARE IN COMMERCIAL BREEDING KENNELS

Purdue breeding dog welfare standards program

Phase 1—Standards writing & testing• Breeder enrollment• Research & benchmarking• Breeder education

Welfare status of dogs pre-and post-implementation of standardsFlooring and WelfareDental healthBehavioral management practicesPublic perceptions, consumer behavior, economics

EFFECTS OF MATERNAL STRESS DURING PRENATAL PERIOD

• FETAL DEVELOPMENT

• EFFECTS OF STRESS

• ↑ CORTISOL

• CHANGES ‘SET POINT’ HPA AXIS

• HIGH EMOTIONALITY AS ADULTS

INDICATORS OF BEHAVIORAL STATE

INDICATORS OF BEHAVIORAL STATE

Field Instantaneous Dog Observation

(FIDO) tool developed

Behavior: dogs’ responses to

approach categorized

Fight or flightFrozen

Stereotypic

Ambivalent Affiliative, Attention-

soliciting, Neutral

Bauer, A.L., Jordan, M., Colon, M., Shreyer, T. & Croney, C. 2017. Evaluating FIDO: Developing and pilot testing the Field Instantaneous Dog Observation tool. Pet Behaviour Science, 4, 1-15.

Methods

Two novice raters evaluated the behavior and physical appearance of dogs at 3 IN breeding kennels (n = 20/kennel)Dogs re-evaluated with the primary caretaker present• Identify effects of novel/unfamiliar people on

responses

What can FIDO tell us about the immediate welfare state of dogs at CB kennels?

62.2658.93

55.56

42.11

64.71 72.22 66.6763.16

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

All Facilities Facility 1 Facility 2 Facility 3

Percentage of Behavior* Types Expressed by Dogs

R Y G

O

O O

Benchmarking state-of-being

Two experts evaluated behavior & physical appearance of dogs at 24 commercial kennels (n = 20/kennel)

Range: 25-125 breeding females

Health BCS Tear Staining (moderate or severe)

Other

Few, minor problems observed

< 10 < 10 < 10

Pilot-test results

Behavior

Improvement in 83% (10) of the 12 sites that tested for 1 year

*The sampled population is skewed to positive

Breeder-reported outcomes

• Improved litter sizes and weights• Improved health impacts and spending• Behavioral changes • Improved breeder attitudes towards dogs • Increased transparency• Preparation for retirement/rehoming

– Beneficial housing & management changes

Housing & management changes

Refining on-site canine welfare assessment: evaluating the reliability of(FIDO) scoring

FIDO test appears to be valid indicator of fear

Correlation between RYG score & measures of fear in field-test

Conclusions

• FIDO scoring is useful in detecting fearfulness (of people)– Good field metric – Adaptation for other types of fear screening relevant to detection

dogs is feasible• Breeder practices influence fear

– High variation exists in management practices• Greater number of socialization practices associated with

lower hair cortisol levels (stress indicator)

Take-home questions & considerations

• High demand for detection dogs exists• Sustainability of dog supply requires local sourcing• US commercial breeders may provide sourcing options

• Dogs must be well selected, reared and screened• Consider welfare state, ethics, intended purpose

• Adult welfare impacts puppy performance• Progress on CB welfare and selection is ongoing• Collaboration with scientists, trainers, handlers and

those sourcing for detection may help meet demands

Can demand for dogs be met

while maintaining high welfare standards in commercial kennels?

Acknowledgements

• Welfare standards contributors & reviewers– ICAW, A. Beck, T. Grandin, B. Rollin, J.

Serpell, J. Floyd• Benchmarking research team

– T. Shreyer, A. Bauer, M. Colon, M. Jordan • Lab members

– *J. Stella, L. Mugenda, H. Flint, A. Pietraniec– Graduate students (M. Hurt)– Undergraduate assistants

• Participating dog breeders• Cooperating shelters

– Almost Home Humane Society, Humane Society of Indianapolis

SPONSORS

*THE STANTON FOUNDATION

QUESTIONS?

ccroney@purdue.eduhttps://vet.purdue.edu/discovery/croney/