Understanding Subordinate Animal Welfare Legislation in Australia: Assembling the Regulations and Codes of Practice

Rethinking the Three Rs: Growing Momentum Toward a New Gold Standard in Australian Research

Recent years have seen increasing recognition of the scientific, economic and ethical benefits of the use of non-animal models in advancing preclinical research, giving reason to rethink the application and framework of the Three Rs. However, to benefit from the economic advantages of shifting to such alternative methods, and to realise Australia's drug development potential, legislative reform is essential. Such reform should be responsive to international regulations that encourage the use of animal-free methods, and be coupled with a corresponding re-evaluation of current Three Rs frameworks and principles. If these supportive changes, and the recommendations from the 2023 Australian Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) Futures Non-animal models report, are implemented concurrently - with government support paramount- then a new gold standard for scientific research in Australia could be created in which the use of non-animal models and animal-free methods is the default.

Using institutional ethnography to analyse animal sheltering and protection I: Animal protection work

Animal protection laws exist at federal, provincial and municipal levels in Canada, with enforcement agencies relying largely upon citizens to report concerns. Existing research about animal protection law focuses on general approaches to enforcement and how legal terms function in the courts, but the actual work processes of animal law enforcement have received little study. We used institutional ethnography to explore the everyday work of Call Centre operators and Animal Protection Officers, and we map how this work is organised by laws and institutional polices. When receiving and responding to calls staff try to identify evidence of animal 'distress' as legally defined, because various interventions (writing orders, seizing animals) then become possible. However, many cases, such as animals living in deprived or isolated situations, fall short of constituting 'distress' and the legally mandated interventions cannot be used. Officers are also constrained by privacy and property law and by the need to record attempts to secure compliance in order to justify further action including obtaining search warrants. As a result, beneficial intervention can be delayed or prevented. Officers sometimes work strategically to advocate for animals when the available legal tools cannot resolve problems. Recommendations arising from this research include expanding the legal definition of 'distress' to better fit animals' needs, developing ways for officers to intervene in a broader range of situations, and more ethnographic research on enforcement work in jurisdictions with different legal systems to better understand how animal protection work is organised and constrained by laws and policies.

How Well Does Australian Animal Welfare Policy Reflect Scientific Evidence: A Case Study Approach Based on Lamb Marking

The development and substance of animal welfare policy is subject to a range of social, cultural, economic, and scientific influences that commonly vary within and between countries. Discrepancies in policy can create confusion and mistrust among stakeholders and consumers and limit the ability to create a uniform minimum level of requirements to safeguard animal welfare, as well as create a level 'playing field' for farmers when trading with other jurisdictions. The livestock sector is receiving growing scrutiny globally for real and perceived violations of animal welfare, for example, the practice of mulesing in Australia. This article explores animal welfare legislation within Australia and how it reflects the scientific evidence surrounding routine husbandry practices in sheep, including tail docking, castration, and mulesing. While there is some variation between state and territory legislation, the most notable concern is the lack of enforceable recommendations surrounding the evidence-based use of analgesia and anaesthesia for painful husbandry procedures. The age at which these procedures are recommended to be performed is relatively consistent across Australian jurisdictions, but there is a marked difference compared to international legislation. The global context of animal welfare legislation, public perception, and producer perception of these procedures are also discussed, highlighting the difficulty of creating robust animal welfare legislation that promotes a good standard of welfare that is respected worldwide whilst being practical in an Australian setting given our unique geography and climatic conditions.

Euthanasia and Pain in Canine Patients with Terminal and Chronic-Degenerative Diseases: Ethical and Legal Aspects

Euthanasia is commonly performed in veterinary medicine to humanely induce the death of an animal when its quality of life is affected by pain or chronic degenerative diseases. The choice of euthanasia is a bilateral decision that represents a challenge for both the veterinarian and the owner of the animal due to the close emotional human-animal bond. Currently, there is legislation that can orient veterinarians concerning euthanasia and the causes that would justify this resolution. However, it is still controversial, and deciding it as the last available resort requires considering it from a medical, legal, and moral perspective. Therefore, this review aims to explore the ethical and legal implications of euthanasia in canine patients. It will analyze the reason that can justify euthanasia in animals with pain or terminal and chronic degenerative diseases, highlighting the importance of effective communication, ethical knowledge, and consideration of euthanasia as a multimodal resolution.

Global and Brazilian Scenario of Guidelines and Legislation on Welfare in Pig Farming

Simple Summary

As with all production animals, pigs need environments suitable for their species, which results in less stress and suffering and more productivity. Therefore, there are quality standards and good management and production practices that must be followed to ensure their well-being. In this sense, over the last few years, many advances have been made, banning or restricting practices capable of causing suffering to animals in most producing countries. This review seeks to explore current global and Brazilian regulations on good production practices in swine farming.

Abstract

The evolution of scientific knowledge regarding animal sentience, together with the growing concerns of consumers regarding current production models, has brought with it the responsibility of reviewing many practices carried out in industrial swine farming, with the purpose of improving the life quality of animals throughout the entire production cycle. In this sense, many initiatives have been taken by European Union, OIE and other countries to abolish questionable practices from an animal welfare point of view, being signed through legislation or normative instructions, which guide governments and companies on the best practices to be adopted. Among the main changes that have taken place in swine farming are the ban or reduction in the use of cages for sows, restrictions on the age at weaning, ban on painful procedures such as surgical castration, tail and teeth clipping, as routine procedures or without the use of anesthesia/analgesia. In addition, these acts also prescribe practices that must be adopted in order to respect the natural behavior of animals, such as the use of environmental enrichment. This review aims to address the main advances made over the last few years in the protection of swine, as well as Brazilian initiatives in this regard.