Are They Really Trying to Save Their Buddy? The Anthropomorphism of Animal Epimeletic Behaviours

The Promise of Behavioral Tracking Systems for Advancing Primate Animal Welfare

Simple Summary

Computerized tracking systems for primates and other animals are one of the great inventions of the 21st century. These systems have already revolutionized the study of primatology, psychology, neuroscience, and biomedicine. Less discussed is that they also promise to greatly enhance animal welfare. Their potential benefits include identifying and reducing pain, suffering, and distress in captive populations, improving laboratory animal welfare, and applying our understanding of animal behavior to increase the “natural” behaviors in captive and wild populations, especially those under threat. We are optimistic that these changes will greatly increase the welfare of primates, including those in laboratories, zoos, primate centers, and in the wild.

Abstract

Recent years have witnessed major advances in the ability of computerized systems to track the positions of animals as they move through large and unconstrained environments. These systems have so far been a great boon in the fields of primatology, psychology, neuroscience, and biomedicine. Here, we discuss the promise of these technologies for animal welfare. Their potential benefits include identifying and reducing pain, suffering, and distress in captive populations, improving laboratory animal welfare within the context of the three Rs of animal research (reduction, refinement, and replacement), and applying our understanding of animal behavior to increase the “natural” behaviors in captive and wild populations facing human impact challenges. We note that these benefits are often incidental to the designed purpose of these tracking systems, a reflection of the fact that animal welfare is not inimical to research progress, but instead, that the aligned interests between basic research and welfare hold great promise for improvements to animal well-being.

Family Member, Best Friend, Child or 'Just' a Pet, Owners' Relationship Perceptions and Consequences for Their Cats

Describing the relationship with one's cat in human terms might reflect an underlying anthropomorphic view of the relationship which might be associated with an owner's behavior towards their cat and the cat's living environment. Owners self-categorized the relationship with their cat as either a 'member of the family', 'as a child', 'best friend', or 'a pet animal'. The extent to which owner- and cat-related factors influence these four relationship descriptions are examined in survey data of approximately 1800 cat owners. Differences in outdoor access, care during absence of the owner, and access to the bedroom are examined between the four relationship perceptions. The owner's age and household composition, ideas about their cat's equality, support, and dependency, and whether their cat is a pedigree were significantly associated with relationship description and explained 46% of the variance. Owners who perceive their cat as a child or best friend see their cat as loyal, empathetic, equal to family, and dependent on them for love and care. Their cats are less often left in the care of others, are allowed more often in the bedroom and have less often (unrestricted) outdoor access. Moreover, cats perceived as children are more likely to live in a multi-cat household. Our results provide insight in the factors that are related to different (anthropomorphic) perceptions of the human-cat relationship and how perceptions relate to the living environment of cats.

Anthropomorphism and Its Adverse Effects on the Distress and Welfare of Companion Animals

Anthropomorphic practices are increasing worldwide. Anthropomorphism is defined as the tendency to attribute human forms, behaviors, and emotions to non-human animals or objects. Anthropomorphism is particularly relevant for companion animals. Some anthropomorphic practices can be beneficial to them, whilst others can be very detrimental. Some anthropomorphic behaviors compromise the welfare and physiology of animals by interfering with thermoregulation, while others can produce dehydration due to the loss of body water, a condition that brings undesirable consequences such as high compensatory blood pressure and heat shock, even death, depending on the intensity and frequency of an animal's exposure to these stressors. Malnutrition is a factor observed due to consumption of junk food or an imbalance in caloric proportions. This can cause obesity in pets that may have repercussions on their locomotor apparatus. Intense human-animal interaction can also lead to the establishment of attachment that impacts the mental state and behavior of animals, making them prone to develop aggression, fear, or anxiety separation syndrome. Another aspect is applying cosmetics to pets, though scientific studies have not yet determined whether cosmetic products such as coat dyes, nail polish, and lotions are beneficial or harmful for the animals, or to what extent. The cohabitation of animals in people's homes can also constitute a public health risk due to infectious and zoonotic diseases. In this context, this paper aims to analyze the adverse effects of anthropomorphism on the welfare of companion animals from several angles-physiological, sanitary, and behavioral-based on a discussion of current scientific findings.

Freedom and Animal Welfare

Simple Summary

There is an ongoing debate on the ethics of keeping animals in captivity and particularly as to whether freedom matters to their welfare. Freedom is a continuum, and zoo animals are provided with some freedoms that wild animals are not (such as freedom from hunger or disease) but may also lack some freedoms (such as behavioural choice). In this paper, we look at how freedom may benefit animal welfare by allowing them access to the resources they need, as well as through the additional value of a free life itself. In the end, we call for more scientific work on comparisons between the welfare of captive and wild animals, as we cannot guess what is good for animals without conducting research to find out. Knowing more about the welfare of captive and wild animals and how it relates to the amount of freedom they experience will allow us to discover what is important for animal welfare and make decisions that better reflect the animals’ own point of view.

Abstract

The keeping of captive animals in zoos and aquariums has long been controversial. Many take freedom to be a crucial part of animal welfare and, on these grounds, criticise all forms of animal captivity as harmful to animal welfare, regardless of their provisions. Here, we analyse what it might mean for freedom to matter to welfare, distinguishing between the role of freedom as an intrinsic good, valued for its own sake and an instrumental good, its value arising from the increased ability to provide other important resources. Too often, this debate is conducted through trading intuitions about what matters for animals. We argue for the need for the collection of comparative welfare data about wild and captive animals in order to settle the issue. Discovering more about the links between freedom and animal welfare will then allow for more empirically informed ethical decisions regarding captive animals.