'Vets must be strong advocates for animal rights'.

Steven McCulloch, European veterinary specialist in animal welfare science, ethics and law, argues that the veterinary profession must support animal rights, but not the abolition of animal use.

Attitudes and Behaviours Towards Cats and Barriers to Stray Cat Management in Bulgaria.

This research uses an online questionnaire (n = 1148) to survey the Bulgarian public's attitudes and behaviors toward owned and stray cats and explore potential barriers to stray cat population management. Generally, the survey participants indicated positive attitudes toward stray cats, with 82.0% of the respondents reporting feeling sorry for stray cats. Semi-ownership behaviors were prevalent, with 82.5% feeding stray cats but only 18.1% neutering the cats they fed, posing a barrier to stray cat management. Overall, the respondents held mixed attitudes toward neutering. Of all cat owners sampled (n = 859) only 47.2% had neutered all their cats and 44.4% of owners allowed cats outdoor access or their cats lived exclusively outdoors. Multinomial logistic regression predicted that intact cats were more likely to be allowed to roam free and reproduce, which may present a significant barrier to stray cat population management. This is the first academic survey on attitudes toward cats in Bulgaria and the findings should contribute to stray cat management and ultimately improve feline welfare.

Wild Fish Welfare in UK Commercial Sea Fisheries: Qualitative Analysis of Stakeholder Views.

An estimated 1.5-2.7 billion wild fish are caught by UK commercial sea fishing fleets annually. Most are subjected to severe stressors during capture; stunning is rare and gutting alive is common practice. Fish are recognised in UK law as sentient beings, but commercially caught wild fish are excluded from welfare protections. Animal welfare impacts in wild capture sea fisheries are therefore on a massive scale, with major potential for legislative and market-based reforms. Interviews were conducted with 18 experts working within the fishing and seafood industry, fisheries management, scientific research and animal/fish advocacy organisations. The findings reveal a significant welfare gap between societally acceptable ways to treat sentient animals and the reality of capture fisheries. The participants pointed to harms caused to fish throughout different stages of the capture process caused by combinations of variables from fishing gear and methods to biological, environmental and other factors, noting that all require mitigation. Interviews revealed that the nature of harms may be exacerbated by conservative attitudes towards brutal practices in the industry, driven by profit and efficiency and free from legal restraint. To address the welfare gap, stakeholders favour engagement with the industry to improve understanding of harms and to identify mutually beneficial and shared objectives through alleviating stressors to fish in the capture process. This empirical research is focused on UK wild capture sea fisheries. However, given the dearth of welfare legislation globally, it has significance for fishing nations and the many billions of wild sea fish captured each year around the world.

'The UK must ban farrowing crates'.

Steven McCulloch, head of research at the Conservative Animal Welfare Foundation, argues that the UK should ban the use of farrowing crates for pigs and the veterinary profession must provide its full support.

Beliefs and Attitudes of British Residents about the Welfare of Fur-Farmed Species and the Import and Sale of Fur Products in the UK.

Around 100 million animals are killed annually for the global fur trade, with 85% reared on fur farms and 15% trapped in the wild. Fur farming is banned across the United Kingdom (UK) under the Fur Farming (Prohibition) Act 2000 in England and Wales and parallel legislation in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Despite the farming bans, the import and sale of fur products to the UK have continued, largely due to European Union (EU) membership. The UK left the EU in 2020 and the British government is exploring a potential ban on the import and sale of fur post-Brexit. This paper reviews public surveys on attitudes to fur farming in the UK from 1997 to 2021. It then reports the results of an online questionnaire to investigate in greater depth the beliefs of UK residents (n = 326) about the welfare of animals used in fur production, knowledge of the legal context of the fur trade and attitudes toward a ban on the import and sale of fur in the UK. A large majority (86%) of respondents believed that fur-farmed animals do not experience a good life. Over four-fifths (83%) disagreed that it is morally acceptable for the UK government to ban fur farming and yet continue to import and sell fur from producers overseas, with over three-quarters (78%) supporting a legal ban on the import and sale of fur in the UK.

Surviving the Wildlife Trade in Southeast Asia: Reforming the 'Disposal' of Confiscated Live Animals under CITES.

Increased focus on the illegal global wildlife trade has resulted in greater numbers of live animals confiscated by authorities, increasing the need to manage these animals responsibly. Most wildlife seizures take place in Southeast Asia, with global demand for live animals fuelling much of the trafficking. Guidelines for the 'disposal' of live specimens are provided by the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), although individual Parties must implement provisions through national laws and regulations. 'Disposal' is the term used for the management of illegally traded wildlife upon confiscation. Confiscated live animals can be euthanised (i.e., killed), repatriated to their native country and released, or kept in captivity. This study investigates barriers to proper care and disposal of confiscated live animals in Southeast Asia, where roughly one quarter of the global multibillion dollar illegal wildlife trade takes place. Interviews were conducted with 18 professionals working within conservation, wildlife crime, and confiscated live animal management. Eight limitations to the proper care and disposal of confiscated wildlife were identified: (1) political will, (2) policy, (3) funding, (4) capacity, (5) expertise (6) attitudes and behaviours, (7) exploitation, and (8) corruption. Based on interviews, we propose seven key reforms to support the efficient and humane management of illegally traded wildlife for national authorities and CITES parties. These are wildlife seizure management, legislative support, enhanced political will, demand reduction, global participation, registry of rescue centres, and terminology change. This research highlights major barriers to the proper care and disposal of live confiscated animals and proposes key reforms to improve the conservation of threatened species and the welfare of millions of illegally traded animals.

Yoga, Ahimsa and Consuming Animals: UK Yoga Teachers' Beliefs about Farmed Animals and Attitudes to Plant-Based Diets.

Yoga is a holistic discipline originating in ancient India. Yoga has links with Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism based on a shared philosophical framework of unity with all beings and belief in ahimsa, meaning non-harming. There is debate in the international yoga community about the spiritual, ethical and health-related links between yoga and plant-based diets. This mixed methodology research investigates the beliefs about the moral status of farmed animals and attitudes towards plant-based diets of UK yoga teachers. A sequential mixed-methods design employing a questionnaire and semi-structured interviews is used. This paper focuses on the questionnaire-based phase of the research. Key results are: (i) UK yoga teachers have very progressive beliefs about the moral status of farmed animals; (ii) 29.6% of UK yoga teachers follow a plant-based diet (n = 446), which is 25-fold the proportion in the wider UK population; (iii) 73.9% desire to follow a plant-based diet; (iv) 68.6% regard plant-based diets as best aligned to their yogic practice; and (v) UK yoga teachers with more progressive beliefs about farmed animals and with more self-reported knowledge of agriculture abstain from consuming animal products to a greater extent. The far higher proportions of UK yoga teachers following vegetarian and plant-based diets, relative to the wider population, are likely based on applying yogic teachings such as the principle of ahimsa through abstaining from the consumption of animal products.

Brexit and Animal Welfare Impact Assessment: Analysis of the Opportunities Brexit Presents for Animal Protection in the UK, EU, and Internationally.

The British people voted in a 2016 referendum to leave the European Union (EU). Brexit presents threats and opportunities to animal protection in the United Kingdom (UK), the EU, and internationally. This paper discusses opportunities for animal protection in terms of five criteria. These are first, political context; second, regulatory changes; third, economic and trade factors; fourth, institutional- and capacity-related factors; and fifth, EU and international considerations. Brexit permits reform of UK agricultural policy outside of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to reward high welfare as a public good. The Agriculture Bill, however, does not suggest a radical reform agenda for animal welfare. Brexit permits a ban on live exports, but the UK Government is consulting on improving welfare, not prohibition. Brexit provides an opportunity to ban the import and sale of fur, but the UK Government has signalled it will work to improve welfare in fur farming. Brexit permits the UK to prohibit the import and sale of foie gras, but the Government has stated a ban may be challenged at the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Brexit allows more stringent Pet Travel Scheme (PETS) requirements to reduce puppy smuggling. Lucy's Law and stricter enforcement will also mitigate the problem. New sentience legislation provides the opportunity for a fully independent and properly constituted UK Animal Welfare Advisory body conducting animal welfare impact assessments and ethical appraisal. The Government has proposed sentience legislation but there is a major risk it will not be in place before the UK leaves the EU. The Government has expanded the remit of the Farm Animal Welfare Committee, which is not fully independent and is dominated by veterinary members and agricultural interests. Brexit provides some opportunities for animal protection with radical reform of agricultural policy, prohibition of live exports, and banning the import and sale of fur and foie gras. Pre-Brexit, the Government has not demonstrated the political will and commitment to realise these opportunities.

Brexit and Animal Welfare Impact Assessment: Analysis of the Threats Brexit Poses to Animal Protection in the UK, EU and Internationally.

The British people voted in a 2016 referendum to leave the European Union (EU). Brexit presents both threats and opportunities to animal protection in the United Kingdom (UK), EU and internationally. This paper discusses threats to animal protection in terms of five criteria. These are first, political context; second, regulatory changes; third, economic and trade factors; fourth, institutional and capacity-related factors; and fifth, EU and international considerations. The EU has the most progressive animal welfare laws in the world. The Conservative Government delivering Brexit has a mixed record on animal protection. Major time and resource constraints inherent in Brexit risk negatively impacting animal protection. Brexit is projected to have a negative economic impact, which is generally associated with lower animal welfare standards. The development of Brexit policy suggests there to be a substantial risk that the major threat of importing lower welfare products to the UK will materialise. Brexit will reduce the political influence of the progressive animal protection lobby in the EU. Post-Brexit, the politically and economically weakened EU and UK risks a detrimental impact on animal protection on an international scale. Brexit poses substantial threats to animal protection, with a high risk that many threats will materialise. Further research is needed to assess the opportunities presented by Brexit to judge whether Brexit will be overall positive or negative for animal protection.

Brexit and Animal Protection: Legal and Political Context and a Framework to Assess Impacts on Animal Welfare.

The British people voted to leave the European Union (EU) in a 2016 referendum. The United Kingdom (UK) has been a member of the EU since the Maastricht Treaty was signed in 1993 and before that a member of the European Communities (EC) since 1973. EU animal health and welfare regulations and directives have had a major impact on UK animal protection policy. Similarly, the UK has had a substantial impact on EU animal protection. Brexit represents a substantial political upheaval for animal protection policy, with the potential to impact animal welfare in the UK, EU and internationally. Brexit's impact on farmed animals will determine the overall impact of Brexit on animals. A major threat to animal welfare is from importing lower welfare products. A major opportunity is reform of UK agricultural policy to reward high welfare outside the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). A soft Brexit, in which the UK remains in the single market and/or customs union, mitigates the threat of importing lower welfare products. A harder Brexit means threats to animal welfare are more likely to materialise. Whether threats and opportunities do materialise will depend on political considerations including decisions of key political actors. The Conservative Government delivering Brexit has a problematic relationship with animal protection. Furthermore, Brexit represents a shift to the political right, which is not associated with progressive animal protection. There is significant political support in the Conservative Party for a hard Brexit. Further research is required to investigate whether the various threats and opportunities are likely to materialise.

A Proposal for a UK Ethics Council for Animal Policy: The Case for Putting Ethics Back into Policy Making.

Substantial controversy is a consistent feature of UK animal health and welfare policy. BSE, foot and mouth disease, bovine TB and badger culling, large indoor dairies, and wild animals in circuses are examples. Such policy issues are inherently normative; they include a substantial moral dimension. This paper reviews UK animal welfare advisory bodies such as the Animal Health and Welfare Board of England, the Farm Animal Welfare Council and the Animals in Science Committee. These bodies play a key advisory role, but do not have adequate expertise in ethics to inform the moral dimension of policy. We propose an "Ethics Council for Animal Policy" to inform the UK government on policy that significantly impacts sentient species. We review existing Councils (e.g., the Nuffield Council on Bioethics and The Netherlands Council on Animal Affairs) and examine some widely used ethical frameworks (e.g., Banner's principles and the ethical matrix). The Ethics Council for Animal Policy should be independent from government and members should have substantial expertise in ethics and related disciplines. A pluralistic six-stage ethical framework is proposed: (i) Problematisation of the policy issue, (ii) utilitarian analysis, (iii) animal rights analysis, (iv) virtue-based analysis, (v) animal welfare ethic analysis, and (vi) integrated ethical analysis. The paper concludes that an Ethics Council for Animal Policy is necessary for just and democratic policy making in all societies that use sentient nonhuman species.

The RCVS codes of conduct: what's in a word?

In 2012, the RCVS introduced a new Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Surgeons, replacing the Guide to Professional Conduct which had existed until then. Is a common Code relevant for the veterinarian's many roles? There's more to think about here than just the change of name, write Steven McCulloch, Michael Reiss, Peter Jinman and Christopher Wathes.