Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T09:54:14.528Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Using behaviour to assess animal welfare

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

MS Dawkins
MS Dawkins*
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK
*
marian.dawkins@zoo.ox.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Rather than construct lists of many different welfare indicators and give each of them the same weight, I argue that the assessment of animal welfare should be directed at answering two key questions: I) Are the animals healthy? 2) Do they have what they want? Behaviour has a major role in answering both. Behaviour is currently used to help answer the first question through its use in the clinical and pre-clinical assessment of pain, injury and disease, and potentially could have an even greater role, particularly if used in conjunction with new technology. Behaviour is also of crucial importance in gauging what animals want, most obviously in the use of choice and preference tests, but also through other methods that are particularly suitable for on-farm welfare assessment. These include quantitative observations of the spatial distribution of animals and of behavioural ‘indicators’ of what animals want, such as vocalisations.

Keywords

animal welfarebehaviourchoiceclinical assessmentpainpreference
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 13 , Issue S1: Science in the Service of Animal Welfare: Proceedings of the UFAW International Symposium, Edinburgh, 2-4 April 2003 , February 2004 , pp. S3 - S7
Copyright
© 2004 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Appleby, M C and Hughes, B O 1997 Animal Welfare. CAB International: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Bradshaw, R H, Kirkden, R D and Broom, D M 2002 A review of the aetiology and pathology of leg weakness in broilers in relation to welfare. Avian and Poultry Biology Reviews 13: 45–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, D M 1988 The scientific assessment of animal welfare. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 20: 5–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, D M and Johnson, K G 1993 Stress and Animal Welfare. Chapman and Hall: London, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cockrem, J F and Rounce, J R 1994 Faecal measurements of oestradiol and testosterone allow the non-invasive estimation of plasma steroid concentrations in the domestic fowl. British Poultry Science 35: 433–443CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Darwin, C 1872 The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. University of Chicago Press: London, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, M S 1980 Animal Suffering: the Science of Animal Welfare. Chapman and Hall: London, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, M S 1983 Battery hens name their price: consumer demand theory and the measurement of ethological ‘needs’. Animal Behaviour 31: 1195–1205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, M S 1990 From an animal's point of view: motivation, fitness and animal welfare. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13: 1–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, M S 2001 How can we recognize and assess good welfare? In: Broom, D M (ed) Coping with Challenge: Welfare in Animals, including Humans pp 63–76. Dahlem University Press: Berlin, GermanyGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, M S, Cook, P A, Whittingham, M C, Mansell, K A and Harper, A E 2003 What makes free-range broilers range? In situ measurement of habitat preference. Animal Behaviour 66: 151–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, M S, Edmond, A, Lord, A, Solomon, S and Bain, M Time course of changes in egg-shell quality, faecal corticosteroids and behaviour as welfare measures in the laying hen. Animal Welfare: in press.Google Scholar
Dehnhard, M, Schreer, A, Krone, O, Jewgenow, K, Krause, M and Grossmann, R 2003 Measurement of plasma corticosterone and fecal glucocorticoid metabolites in the chicken (Gallus domesticus), the great cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo), and the goshawk (Accipiter gentilis). General and Comparative Endocrinology 131: 345–352CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
FAWC (Farm Animal Welfare Council) 1992 FAWC updates the five freedoms. The Veterinary Record 131: 357Google Scholar
Fraser, D and Broom, D M 1990 Farm Animal Behaviour and Welfare. CAB International: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D and Matthews, L R 1997 Preference and motivation testing in animal welfare assessment. In: Appleby, M C and Hughes, B O (eds) Animal Welfare pp 159–173. CAB International: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Hughes, B O 1983 Headshaking in fowls: the effect of environmental stimuli. Applied Animal Ethology 11: 45–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, R B 1997 Fear and distress. In: Appleby, M C and Hughes, B O (eds) Animal Welfare pp 75–87. CAB International: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Keeling, L J 1995 Spacing behaviour and an ethological approach to assessing optimal space allocations for laying hens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 44: 171–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kestin, S C, Knowles, T G, Tinch, A E and Gregory, N G 1992 Prevalence of leg weakness in broiler chickens and its relationship with genotype. The Veterinary Record 131: 190–194CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mason, G and Mendl, M 1993 Why is there no simple way of measuring animal welfare? Animal Welfare 2: 301–319Google Scholar
Mason, G J and Latham, N R 2004 Can't stop, won't stop: is stereotypy a reliable animal welfare indicator? In: KirkWood J K, Roberts E A and Vickery S (eds) Proceedings of the UFAW.Google Scholar
International Symposium ‘Science in the Service of Animal Welfare’, Edinburgh, 2003 Animal Welfare 13: 557–569 (Suppl)Google Scholar
McBride, G, James, J W and Shoffner, R N 1963 Social forces determining spacing and head orientation in a flock of domestic hens. Nature 197: 1272–1273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petherick, C and Rushen, G 1997 Behavioural restriction. In: Appleby, M C and Hughes, B O (eds) Animal Welfare pp 89–105. CAB International: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Rutherford, K M D 2002 Assessing pain in animals. Animal Welfare 11: 31–54Google Scholar
Sherrington, C S 1906 The Integrative Action of the Nervous System. Scribner's: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Solomon, S 1997 Egg and Eggshell Quality. Iowa State University Press: Ames, USAGoogle Scholar
Stricklin, W R, Graves, H B and Wilson, L L 1979 Some theoretical and observed relationships of fixed and portable spacing behavior of animals. Applied Animal Ethology 5: 201–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorp, B H 1994 Skeletal disorders in the fowl: a review. Avian Pathology 23: 203–236CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Toates, F 1995 Stress: Conceptual and Biological Aspects. John Wiley and Sons: Chichester, UKGoogle Scholar
Weary, D M and Fraser, D 1995 Calling by domestic piglets: reliable signals of need? Animal Behaviour 50: 1047–1055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weeks, C A, Danbury, T D, Davies, H C, Hunt, P and Kestin, S C 2000 The behaviour of broiler chickens and its modification by lameness. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 67: 111–125CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wingfield, J C, Hunt, K, Breuner, C, Dunlap, K, Fowler, G S, Freed, L and Lepson, J 1997 Environmental stress, field endocrinology and conservation biology. In: Clemmons, J R and Buckholz, R (eds) Behavioral Approaches to Conservation in the Wild pp 95–131. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar