Veterinary needs for animal cruelty recognition and response in the United States center on training and workplace policies.

OBJECTIVE: To better understand the experiences and perceptions of veterinary professionals in the US responding to suspected cases of animal cruelty. SAMPLE: 1,027 US veterinary professionals. PROCEDURES: An anonymous survey was distributed via social media and veterinary professional associations between October 15 and November 15, 2020. RESULTS: Responses indicated that more cases of suspected animal cruelty were seen by those who reported having had cruelty training and in workplaces with emergency intake or a relationship with law enforcement. In addition, suspected cases were more likely to be reported to authorities by respondents who indicated there was a workplace policy for handling cruelty cases and by individuals who indicated that they were aware that they were mandated reporters. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The important needs for veterinary professionals in relation to animal cruelty are more training to recognize animal cruelty, workplace policies for reporting, and knowledge of reporting laws.

Effects of participating in the annual Animal Welfare Assessment Contest on veterinary students' self-perceived knowledge of and attitudes toward animal welfare science and their career choices.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of participating in the annual Animal Welfare Assessment Contest (AWJAC) on veterinary students' self-perceived knowledge of and attitudes toward animal welfare science and on participants' career choices. SAMPLE: 46 veterinary students who participated in the AWJAC from 2014 through 2017. PROCEDURES: The study consisted of 2 parts. In part 1, a survey regarding participation in the AWJAC was emailed to all 138 veterinary students who participated in the contest from 2014 through 2017. In part 2, a self-selected subset of 4 survey respondents were interviewed by telephone regarding their AWJAC experience. RESULTS: Forty-six of 138 (33%) AWJAC participants responded to the online survey. When respondents were asked to rate the attitudes they held before and after participating in the AWJAC, significant increases were identified for engaging with animal welfare topics in their professional decision-making, making career choices based on their interest in animal welfare, and having their interest in animal welfare shape their professional career choices. Analysis of telephone interview transcripts revealed 3 major themes regarding AWJAC participation: defining animal welfare, the value of networking, and professional preparedness. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results suggested that participation in the AWJAC heightened veterinary students' self-perceived awareness of animal welfare science, provided participants an opportunity to expand their professional networks, and prepared participants for entrance into the veterinary profession by enhancing communication and critical thinking skills.

Veterinarians and Humane Endings: When Is It the Right Time to Euthanize a Companion Animal?

Current advances in technologies and treatments provide pet owners and veterinarians with more options for prolonging the life of beloved pets, but can simultaneously lead to ethical dilemmas relating to what is best for both animal and owner. Key tools for improving end-of-life outcomes include (1) sufficient training to understand the valid ethical approaches to determining when euthanasia is appropriate, (2) regular training in client communication skills, and (3) a standard end-of-life protocol that includes the use of quality of life assessment tools, euthanasia consent forms, and pet owner resources for coping with the loss of a pet. Using these tools will improve outcomes for animals and their owners and reduce the heavy burden of stress and burnout currently being experienced by the veterinary profession.

Measuring motivation in swine: the food-metric scale.

Understanding how nonhuman animals such as swine respond to their environment and understanding how to provide them with a good quality of life involves using a range of experimental approaches. More and more, ethological researchers are turning to operant methods to answer some of these questions. Employing an operant such as a lever, researchers can assess how hard animals will work to get access to environmental resources: increased space or social contact. It is difficult, however, to determine how the effort made by the animals relates to the degree to which they need the resource and, in particular, how to interpret intermediate levels of responding. One approach to understanding the level of need is to compare it with familiar states of deprivation such as hunger. Food is an environmental resource known to range from low to high value depending on deprivation level. Depriving animals of a fixed proportion of their daily ad libitum intake allows the animals to demonstrate the levels of responding produced at satiation: 23 hr deprivation and a range of intermediate points. The resulting scale has both empirical and intuitive value and can help in understanding the value of various degrees of operant effort. Ultimately, this information will help in deciding which environmental conditions should be provided to swine as part of routine husbandry.

Thinking outside our cages.

Researchers seem to be stuck reiterating the now-familiar argument that barren boxes are bad for welfare and that rodents are due ethical consideration. But the prerequisites for real progress are new kinds of arguments, new types of data, and removal of very real practical and cultural obstacles to implementation of meaningful enrichment. We must discover what we have to do to effectively change the practices of people who have care and control of rodents in the laboratory, not just husbandry staff but those who develop the institution's protocols, job descriptions, and resourcing. Researchers are inventers of information, and like any inventor we should experience no satisfaction until our ideas are fully implemented-and we must be an active participant in that process. If we are asking animal caretakers to make deep, paradigmatic changes in their thinking, it is imperative that we in turn develop an emotionally positive understanding of areas important to them. For unless the welfare advocates truly understand the issues such as budgets, biosecurity, and branding, why should the people responsible for those subjects listen to us?

Noise exposure, music, and animals in the laboratory: a commentary based on Laboratory Animal Refinement and Enrichment Forum (LAREF) discussions.

The effects of noise, in general, and music, in particular, on the behavior and welfare of animals in the laboratory deserve a great deal of empirical study. However, many laboratories must develop their current practices on the basis of sparse and conflicting data. With this commentary we seek to establish some of the factors that should be taken into account in deciding how to deal with sources of uncontrolled or deliberate sound and, specifically, in determining whether to play music in the laboratory. Views differ, however, the balance of evidence supports the use of quiet music during nonhuman animals' active periods, if this practice is introduced with an awareness of the risks to welfare and research.

Short communication: rat's demand for group size.

Social isolation compromises the welfare of rats. However, it is not clear how many rats should be housed together under laboratory conditions. Pair housing, sometimes recommended over group housing, may help avoid aggression and disease transmission. Female rats, however, showed the highest average demand for a group size of 6 (versus 1, 2, 4, and 12) when stocking density was maintained at 20 cm2/rat. This finding contributes to work suggesting that rats should be group housed. This article shows that further studies are required into the actual risks of disease and injury associated with group versus pair housing.

Shelter enrichment for rats.

Nest boxes are a simple and effective form of environmental enrichment. Rats accept a wide range of nest-box types but have the strongest relative T-maze preference for enclosed, opaque, thermoplastic boxes. All laboratories should provide their rats some type of nest box, depending on the most convenient and effective method.

Cage size preference in rats in the laboratory.

The size of an enclosure is an integral part of how well it accommodates a nonhuman animal's welfare; however, most enrichment studies concentrate on modifying the area inside the enclosure rather than enlarging it. It has been suggested that rats have little need for more cage space, but there is no empirical evidence about rats' need for space. This experiment provides preliminary evidence for the preferences of 5 male and 5 female albino rats using T-maze choices followed by 5 min dwelling times. The rats showed a moderate but significant preference for the larger of 2 cages [540 cm2 vs. 1,620 cm2; binomial z, p <.05]. When the rats shared the chosen cage with 4 familiar cage mates, their preference for the larger cage did not become any stronger [paired t[9] = -.820, p >.05]. The results suggest that rats should be given a somewhat larger space allowance but could share it with up to 4 other rats.