Use of an expert elicitation methodology to compare welfare impacts of two approaches for blood sampling European badgers (Meles meles) in the field.

Simple item page
dc.citation.volume33
dc.contributor.authorColloff A
dc.contributor.authorBaker SE
dc.contributor.authorBeausoleil NJ
dc.contributor.authorSharp T
dc.contributor.authorGolledge H
dc.contributor.authorLane J
dc.contributor.authorCox R
dc.contributor.authorSiwonia M
dc.contributor.authorDelahay R
dc.coverage.spatialEngland
dc.date.accessioned2024-08-07T20:02:27Z
dc.date.available2024-08-07T20:02:27Z
dc.date.issued2024-03-15
dc.description.abstractIn the UK and Republic of Ireland, the European badger (Meles meles) is considered the most significant wildlife reservoir of the bacterium Mycobacterium bovis, the cause of bovine tuberculosis (bTB). To expand options for bTB surveillance and disease control, the Animal and Plant Health Agency developed a bespoke physical restraint cage to facilitate collection of a small blood sample from a restrained, conscious badger in the field. A key step, prior to pursuing operational deployment of the novel restraint cage, was an assessment of the relative welfare impacts of the approach. We used an established welfare assessment model to elicit expert opinion during two workshops to compare the impacts of the restraint cage approach with the only current alternative for obtaining blood samples from badgers in the field, which involves administration of a general anaesthetic. Eleven panellists participated in the workshops, comprising experts in the fields of wildlife biology, animal welfare science, badger capture and sampling, and veterinary science. Both approaches were assessed to have negative welfare impacts, although in neither case were overall welfare scores higher than intermediate, never exceeding 5-6 out of a possible 8. Based on our assessments, the restraint cage approach is no worse for welfare compared to using general anaesthesia and possibly has a lower overall negative impact on badger welfare. Our results can be used to integrate consideration of badger welfare alongside other factors, including financial cost and efficiency, when selecting a field method for blood sampling free-living badgers.
dc.description.confidentialfalse
dc.edition.edition2024
dc.format.paginatione17-
dc.identifier.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38510423
dc.identifier.citationColloff A, Baker SE, Beausoleil NJ, Sharp T, Golledge H, Lane J, Cox R, Siwonia M, Delahay R. (2024). Use of an expert elicitation methodology to compare welfare impacts of two approaches for blood sampling European badgers (Meles meles) in the field.. Anim Welf. 33. (pp. e17-).
dc.identifier.doi10.1017/awf.2024.16
dc.identifier.eissn2054-1538
dc.identifier.elements-typejournal-article
dc.identifier.issn0962-7286
dc.identifier.numbere17
dc.identifier.piiS0962728624000162
dc.identifier.urihttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/71226
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherCambridge University Press
dc.publisher.urihttps://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/animal-welfare/article/use-of-an-expert-elicitation-methodology-to-compare-welfare-impacts-of-two-approaches-for-blood-sampling-european-badgers-meles-meles-in-the-field/B5AD3A33868C34097657CE7FA53AD6
dc.relation.isPartOfAnim Welf
dc.rights© Crown Copyright - Animal & Plant Health Agency, 2024
dc.rightsCC BY-ND 4.0
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/
dc.subjectFive Domains model
dc.subjectanimal welfare
dc.subjectbadgers
dc.subjectblood sampling
dc.subjectexpert opinion
dc.subjectwildlife health surveillance
dc.titleUse of an expert elicitation methodology to compare welfare impacts of two approaches for blood sampling European badgers (Meles meles) in the field.
dc.typeJournal article
pubs.elements-id487705
pubs.organisational-groupOther
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Published version.pdf
Size:
624.04 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
487705 PDF.pdf
Download
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Evidence.pdf
Size:
456.09 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
S0962728624000162sup001.pdf
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
9.22 KB
Format:
Plain Text
Description:
Download
Collections
Journal Articles