Public attitudes toward the use of technology to create new types of animals and animal products.

Philosophers have used thought experiments to examine contentious examples of genetic modification. We hypothesised that these examples would prove useful in provoking responses from lay participants concerning technological interventions used to address welfare concerns. We asked 747 US and Canadian citizens to respond to two scenarios based on these thought experiments: genetically modifying chickens to produce blind progeny that are less likely to engage in feather-pecking (BC); and genetically modifying animals to create progeny that do not experience any subjective state (i.e. incapable of experiencing pain or fear; IA). For contrast, we assessed a third scenario that also resulted in the production of animal protein with no risk of suffering but did not involve genetically modifying animals: the development of cultured meat (CM). Participants indicated on a seven-point scale how acceptable they considered the technology (1 = very wrong to do; 7 = very right to do), and provided a text-based, open-ended explanation of their response. The creation of cultured meat was judged more acceptable than the creation of blind chickens and insentient animals. Qualitative responses indicated that some participants accepted the constraints imposed by the thought experiment, for example, by accepting perceived harms of the technology to achieve perceived benefits in reducing animal suffering. Others expressed discomfort with such trade-offs, advocating for other approaches to reducing harm. We conclude that people vary in their acceptance of interventions within existing systems, with some calling for transformational change.

Public attitudes toward dairy farm practices and technology related to milk production.

Dairy farm systems have intensified to meet growing demands for animal products, but public opposition to this intensification has also grown due, in part, to concerns about animal welfare. One approach to addressing challenges in agricultural systems has been through the addition of new technologies, including genetic modification. Previous studies have reported some public resistance towards the use of these technologies in agriculture, but this research has assessed public attitudes toward individual practices and technologies and few studies have examined a range of practices on dairy farms. In the present study, we presented participants with four scenarios describing dairy practices (cow-calf separation, the fate of excess dairy calves, pasture access and disbudding). Citizens from Canada and the United States (n = 650) indicated their support (on a 7-point scale) toward five approaches (maintaining standard farm practice, using a naturalistic approach, using a technological approach, or switching to plant-based or yeast-based milk production) aimed at addressing the welfare issues associated with the four dairy practices. Respondents also provided a text-based rationale for their responses and answered a series of demographic questions including age, gender, and diet. Participant diet affected attitudes toward milk alternatives, with vegetarians and vegans showing more support for the plant-based and yeast-based milk production. Regardless of diet, most participants opposed genetic modification technologies and supported more naturalistic practices. Qualitative responses provided insight into participants' values and concerns, and illustrated a variety of perceived benefits and concerns related to the options presented. Common themes included animal welfare, ethics of animal use, and opposition toward technology. We conclude that Canadian and US citizens consider multiple aspects of farm systems when contemplating animal welfare concerns, and tend to favor naturalistic approaches over technological solutions, especially when the latter are based on genetic modification.

The effect of feeding enrichment methods on the behavior of captive Western lowland gorillas.

Three feeding enrichment treatments were tested in an outdoor yard used by six Western lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla). In "Yard-toss," forage was thrown by hand over one third of the yard. In "Set-up," forage and browse were hand-scattered throughout the yard. "Set-up Enriched" was similar with the addition of either a hay- and forage-filled feeder or forage-filled boomer ball(s) suspended from a climbing structure. Each treatment was presented on 5 d. Behavior was recorded for 30 min before (baseline) and 30 min after the start of each treatment. All treatments led to more foraging and less inactivity compared with baseline (P80.05), but Yard-toss was the least effective, likely because resources were clumped and monopolized by dominant animals. In Set-up Enriched, dominant animals had the greatest increase in foraging (P=0.03), partly because they generally monopolized the suspended items, but this allowed others to forage at ground level. This separation of the animals likely explains why Set-Up Enriched led to more foraging than all other treatments (P80.05). Findings show that for these hierarchical animals, enrichment resources are most effective when distributed widely, including vertically, and that enrichment strategies must take social structure into account.