scientifically evaluating welfare in commercial breeding kennels:...
TRANSCRIPT
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
