Cat owners' perception on having a pet cat during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic may affect the lives of pet animals. We aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the welfare of pet cats across countries, as well as the owners' experience in relation to their cat(s). An online survey containing 21 questions was distributed internationally. Questions were related to information about the cat and its behaviour and health, changes in the household due to the pandemic, and how the owner related to the cat. The survey was completed by 324 respondents from 25 different countries. The survey showed that keeping pet cats during the COVID-19 pandemic did not create problems for the owners, except some difficulties in acquiring veterinary care. The majority (67.3%) of respondents reported no changes in their cats' behaviour. When behavioural changes were reported, they were mostly of a positive nature. Owners who took more measures in relation to the cat to prevent the spread of the virus, e.g., reduced contact, were 1.8 times more likely to report changes in the behaviour of their cats but also 3.8 times more likely to report difficulties related to the care of the cat during the pandemic. Two-third of the respondents indicated a reduction of their own psychological tensions due to having a cat during the pandemic. We concluded that the welfare of pet cats, as reported by the owners, was not adversely affected by the pandemic and the human-cat interaction had positive effects on the owners during the lockdown.

An estimation of the financial consequences of reducing pig aggression.

Animal welfare scientists have accumulated knowledge and developed interventions to improve livestock welfare, but these are poorly adopted in commercial practice. Animal welfare interventions are rarely tested for economic viability and this limits their uptake. This study employs Stochastic Partial Budgeting (SPB) to determine the viability of animal welfare improvements. Aggression between pigs is used as an example because there is a large literature base from which to draw interventions, and the problem has persisted for decades without resolution. Costs and benefits of three interventions to control aggression (pre-weaning socialisation, synthetic maternal pheromones and large social groups) were estimated by reviewing the academic and industry literature and by conducting a survey of sixteen pig farmers. The net effects were compared to farmers' willingness to pay (WTP) for interventions to reduce aggression as identified by recent research. Results are consistent with prior research which indicates that improving animal welfare generally comes at a cost to producers. Nevertheless, pre-weaning socialisation resulted in a neutral or positive net effect 38% of the time and should be central to campaigns promoting the control of aggression in the industry. Exposing pigs to synthetic maternal pheromones did not improve profitability but the net costs were small and within the realms of WTP for a sub-group of farmers with animal welfare goals. The net costs of converting existing buildings in order to house pigs in large social groups were beyond the realms of farmers' WTP. The approach adopted in this study, of combining SPB with WTP from the sector, should be extended to other animal welfare issues.

Changes in the health and behaviour of pet dogs during the COVID-19 pandemic as reported by the owners.

The COVID-19 pandemic affects human health, movement and behaviour, and this may consequently influence the behaviour and health of their pets. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pet dogs' behaviour, as reported by their owners, as well as the owners' experience in relation to their dogs. We hypothesized that dog owners who underwent lockdown or quarantine would indicate more behavioural changes in their dogs and experience support in having a dog during the pandemic. An international online survey asked dog owners questions regarding their household, the dog, and dog-related changes during the pandemic. A total of 688 surveys, collected May-June 2020, were analysed. Respondents were from across Europe (87 %), the Americas (9%), and Asia and Australia (together 4%). Data were analysed in GLMM models with a binary distribution and country included as random variable. The main predictor variable was whether the respondent experienced lockdown (300 respondents, 44 %), quarantine (76 respondents, 11 %) or no restrictions (312 respondents, 45 %). Respondents who underwent lockdown or quarantine were 1.8 times more likely to report behavioural changes in their dogs (p = 0.02), with more negative behavioural changes in the dogs reported by respondents in lockdown than expected by chance. However, overall behavioural changes were more often positive (30 %) than negative (24 %). Respondents in lockdown were 2.6 times more likely to report health changes in their dogs (p = 0.02). The dog was perceived as a source of support during the pandemic: 65 % of the respondents indicated reduced tension due to their dog and 47 % indicated that the ability to walk the dog outside was another benefit. Advantages were reported more by respondents in lockdown and quarantine as compared to respondents who did not face these restrictions (p < 0.001). Difficulties in dog care were increased for respondents who experienced lockdown or quarantine (p < 0.01) and those who had no garden as compared to those who did (p < 0.001). One-third of the respondents took dog-related measures to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, and this was associated with more behavioural changes and more difficulties. In conclusion, lockdown, and to a lesser extent quarantine, may influence the dogs' behaviour and health, or the owners' awareness of it, and can contribute to a perceived tension-reduction in the owners.

Pig farmers' willingness to pay for management strategies to reduce aggression between pigs.

When deciding whether to invest in an improvement to animal welfare, farmers must trade-off the relative costs and benefits. Despite the existence of effective solutions to many animal welfare issues, farmers' willingness to pay for them is largely unknown. This study modelled pig farmers' decisions to improve animal welfare using a discrete choice experiment focused on alleviating aggression between growing/finishing pigs at regrouping. Eighty-two UK and Irish pig farm owners and managers were asked to choose between hypothetical aggression control strategies described in terms of four attributes; installation cost, on-going cost, impact on skin lesions from aggression and impact on growth rate. If they did not like any of the strategies they could opt to keep their current farm practice. Systematic variations in product attributes allowed farmers' preferences and willingness to pay to be estimated and latent class modelling accounted for heterogeneity in responses. The overall willingness to pay to reduce lesions was low at £0.06 per pig place (installation cost) and £0.01 per pig produced (running cost) for each 1% reduction in lesions. Results revealed three independent classes of farmers. Farmers in Class 1 were unlikely to regroup unfamiliar growing/finishing pigs, and thus were unwilling to adopt measures to reduce aggression at regrouping. Farmers in Classes 2 and 3 were willing to adopt measures providing certain pre-conditions were met. Farmers in Class 2 were motivated mainly by business goals, whilst farmers in Class 3 were motivated by both business and animal welfare goals, and were willing to pay the most to reduce aggression; £0.11 per pig place and £0.03 per pig produced for each 1% reduction in lesions. Farmers should not be considered a homogeneous group regarding the adoption of animal welfare innovations. Instead, campaigns should be targeted at subgroups according to their independent preferences and willingness to pay.

Farmer Perceptions of Pig Aggression Compared to Animal-Based Measures of Fight Outcome.

Several animal welfare issues persist in practice despite extensive research which has been linked to the unwillingness of stakeholders to make changes. For example, most farmers do not perceive pig aggression to be a problem that requires action despite the fact that stress and injuries are common, and that several solutions exist. Frequent exposure to animal suffering could affect farmer responses to distressed animals. This study investigated for the first time whether this occurs, using pig aggression as a focus. Using video clips, 90 pig farmers judged the severity of aggression, level of pig exhaustion and the strength of their own emotional response. Their judgments were compared to objective measures of severity (pigs' skin lesions and blood lactate), and against control groups with similar pig experience (10 pig veterinarians) and without experience (26 agricultural students; 24 animal science students). Famers did not show desensitization to aggression. However, all groups underestimated the outcome of aggression when they did not see the fight occurring as compared to witnessing a fight in progress. We suggest that farmers be provided with evidence of the economic and welfare impact of aggression as indicated by lesions and that they be advised to score lesions on affected animals.

Factors Influencing Farmer Willingness to Reduce Aggression between Pigs.

Aggression between pigs remains an important animal welfare issue despite several solutions existing. Uptake of livestock welfare research relies on various stakeholders being willing to recommend or adopt changes to farm structure or management (e.g., veterinarians, researchers, farmers). This survey provides insight into the attitudes and practices of 122 UK and Irish pig farmers regarding aggression between growing pigs. Our aim was to understand why mitigation strategies are not adequately implemented. The majority of farmers mixed pigs at least once during production and had tried at least one mitigation strategy in the past. Farmers expressed limited willingness to implement strategies in the future, and a structural equation model revealed that this was directly influenced by their beliefs about the outcome of controlling aggression, and their perception of their ability to implement the necessary changes. Willingness was indirectly influenced by their perceptions of aggression as a problem and views of relevant stakeholder groups. Veterinarians had the greatest impact on farmer behavior. We recommend that researchers test research findings in practice, calculate cost-benefits of implementation, and transfer knowledge through various sources. This study showed that structural equation modeling is a valuable tool to understand farmer behavior regarding specific and entrenched animal welfare issues.