A Ten-Stage Protocol for Assessing the Welfare of Individual Non-Captive Wild Animals: Free-Roaming Horses (Equus Ferus Caballus) as an Example.

Andrea M Harvey,David J Mellor,Ngaio J Beausoleil,Daniel Ramp

doi:10.3390/ani10010148

Andrea M Harvey, David J Mellor + Show 2 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10010148

Copy DOI

Abstract

Simple SummaryVital for informing debates about the ways we interact with wild animals and their associated habitats is knowledge of their welfare status. To date, scientific assessments of the welfare of free-roaming wild animals during their normal day-to-day lives are not available, in part because the required methodology had not been developed. Accordingly, we have devised, and here describe, a ten-stage protocol for systematically and scientifically assessing the welfare of individual non-captive wild animals, using free-roaming horses as an example. Applying this ten-stage protocol will enable biologists to scientifically assess the welfare of wild animals and should lead to significant advances in the field of wild animal welfare.Knowledge of the welfare status of wild animals is vital for informing debates about the ways in which we interact with wild animals and their habitats. Currently, there is no published information about how to scientifically assess the welfare of free-roaming wild animals during their normal day-to-day lives. Using free-roaming horses as an example, we describe a ten-stage protocol for systematically and scientifically assessing the welfare of individual non-captive wild animals. The protocol starts by emphasising the importance of readers having an understanding of animal welfare in a conservation context and also of the Five Domains Model for assessing welfare. It goes on to detail what species-specific information is required to assess welfare, how to identify measurable and observable indicators of animals’ physical states and how to identify which individuals are being assessed. Further, it addresses how to select appropriate methods for measuring/observing physical indicators of welfare, the scientific validation of these indicators and then the grading of animals’ welfare states, along with assigning a confidence score. Finally, grading future welfare risks and how these can guide management decisions is discussed. Applying this ten-stage protocol will enable biologists to scientifically assess the welfare of wild animals and should lead to significant advances in the field of wild animal welfare.

Highlights

There is a growing awareness of how human activities, including wildlife population management and rehabilitation, land management and other conservation activities, may influence the welfare of free-roaming animals in the wild [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8]
In light of the above observations, we describe a ten-stage protocol designed to guide wildlife biologists and others who wish to apply a systematic, scientifically based approach for assessing the welfare of individual free-roaming wild animals
For free-roaming horses residing on open grassland or desert habitat, direct observations or drones may be the most effective way to obtain animal-based data

Summary

Introduction

There is a growing awareness of how human activities, including wildlife population management and rehabilitation, land management and other conservation activities, may influence the welfare of free-roaming animals in the wild [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8]. While valuable for some conservation purposes, such metrics provide little information about the welfare of individual animals within populations. The welfare of individual animals can influence the success of some conservation activities. Poor welfare may reduce fitness and reproductive success, and alter population trajectories. The public are increasingly aware of, and concerned about wild animal welfare [3,13]. Having knowledge of the welfare status of individual wild animals may contribute information directly relevant to ethical, legal and political debates about the ways in which we interact with wild animals and their associated habitats [14]

Objectives

Methods

Conclusion