Rodeo in New Zealand

When I was about 7 years old and living in Whitianga (Coromandel Peninsula, North Island of New Zealand), my parents took my brother and I to the local rodeo event. It was a big day out for the (then) small town and the surrounding area. There were food stalls, craft markets, and bulls and stallions were being ridden. Teenagers could ride calves and young children could have a go at riding a ‘wild’ sheep. Rodeo events like this have been going on every year for decades. It is just what you do. The area has sheep and beef farms and rodeo is a natural accompaniment. Everyone got into the spirit of the day – fun and laughter followed. The champion stallion rider was venerated.

I rode a sheep that day. My parents (mostly mum – she is from a farming background) convinced me to give it a go. I remember it being fun. But I also remember asking my mum afterwards if she thought the sheep enjoyed it as well. That was the first and last rodeo event we attended.

Rodeo events are most popular in countries or regions with historical ties to rural agriculture. The USA is well-known for its rodeo – particularly in Southern States such as Texas, and the mid-west; ‘cowboy states’. Australia also has a penchant for rodeo.

In New Zealand, rodeo events are held up and down the country during the summer months. These events are advertised as ‘family friendly’ and an entertaining day out. Most are run by the New Zealand Rodeo Cowboys Association (NZRCA), which overseas 35 rodeos annually (Report to Accompany the code of welfare: Rodeos).

So, what is the problem?

Rodeo is unacceptable to a growing number of people. Anti-rodeo Facebook groups (e.g. Anti Rodeo Action NZ and New Zealand Anti-Rodeo Coalition) have a large number of followers. These groups host anti-rodeo demonstrations across New Zealand. Many of those who are opposed to rodeo cite animal welfare grounds – rodeo events are seen as “legalised animal cruelty” (SPCA New Zealand). It has been argued that the events at rodeos are unnecessary displays of ‘archaic’ stockperson skills. This includes: calf roping; horse and/or bull bucking; and steer wrestling.

“Is putting animals in a stressful situation like this justified? If you look at the cost benefit analysis, the benefit is sport for the participants and entertainment for a crowd. I don’t see that putting animals through this kind of fear and stress is justified by the benefits.”

(Virginia Williams, animal welfare consultant vet) [1]

Several groups publicly oppose rodeo events or aspects of them: SPCA New Zealand, the New Zealand Veterinary Association (NZVA), Lions Clubs New Zealand, and The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand (to name a few).

Researchers from The University of Queensland’s Centre for Animal Welfare and Ethics and School of Agriculture and Food Sciences, along with those from Toulouse University, conducted a study on the effects of calf roping [2]. Their findings conclude that calf roping causes stress to the animals. However, only stress hormones and limited behavioural data were assessed. Detailed behavioural assessments may have been more informative – and potentially indicated extreme negative welfare states experienced by the calves. Interestingly, the study was funded by a rodeo body: the Australian Professional Rodeo Association (APRA).

The other side of rodeo

Other than the obvious entertainment value for people attending the events, and sporting value for the competitors, it could be argued that the animals used would not exist but for rodeo. It is also important to consider the animal’s entire life, not just the time it is performing, or entertaining. When not competing, many of these animals are lavishly fed and allowed to do as they please. If their whole life is ‘better’ in rodeo than it may otherwise be, this may change our assessment [1].

The Code of Welfare for Rodeos

The use of animals for entertainment purposes is ethically divisive. On one side are those who see it as ‘just a bit of fun’ or important to rural agriculture; on the other side are those who maintain that the use of animals for entertainment is abhorrent. Occupying the middle ground are those who support some aspects of rodeo and not others, and those whose issue is not with using animals for entertainment, but with the welfare consequences of this particular entertainment event on the animals involved.

“My contention is that at least some of the rodeo events are unreasonable and unnecessary and cause unreasonable and unnecessary pain and distress.” [1]

Suffice to say, rodeo is a contentious topic. For this reason, the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC) received a large number of submissions when conducting their 10-yearly review of the Code of Welfare for Rodeos . The Code has expectations for appropriate treatment of animals used in rodeos and identifies what is inappropriate. NAWAC published a report to accompany The Code, which details the reasoning behind their recommendations and these differences of opinion. It is an interesting read and shows how truly divisive this topic is. I will summarise some of the key issues here:

  • Societal views on the use of animals in rodeos, i.e. is it ethical?
    • Limited relevance to NZ culture, e.g. outdated stockperson skills
    • Not good for NZ’s reputation as animal welfare leader and its ‘clean, green’ image
    • Calf events have been banned in a number of other countries
    • Little economic value to NZ
    • Positive role of rodeo in rural cohesion
  • Stockmanship – how do we assess animal welfare at rodeos?
    • Veterinarian should be present at rodeos – last say in all welfare decisions
    • Animal welfare officer to identify issues and work with veterinarian
  • The use of spurs on bucking animals – it is necessary?
    • Prohibition of spurs called for – their use causes pain to animals
    • Spurs provide a point of contact to remain on bucking animals – removing them would make it difficult for a contestant to remain seated
  • Specific events – calf welfare in rope and tie events
    • This event is believed to be particularly stressful
    • But in the few studies performed (at the date of report), ‘detrimental physiological damage’ was not reported
    • Not all NAWAC members could agree that the event should be discontinued – there was not enough evidence for significant pain and distress
    • The Code has ‘Recommended Best Practice’ to not use calves in rodeo events
  • Children’s events
    • Effect on children exposed to ‘disrespectful’ animal treatment – animal abuse linked to abuse of people
    • Rodeos are family-orientated – children involved as part of family unit
    • Sheep disallowed for this purpose – too small to handle being ridden
  • Health, injury, and disease – should fireworks be used?
    • Add interest to the event
    • Unexpected noise and movement causes fight or flight response in horses and cattle
    • Fireworks, pyrotechnics and gas fired explosions not to be used at rodeos

The Code itself is a longer read (28 pages). It also references the NZ Rodeo Association on page 7:

“The New Zealand Rodeo Association holds a number of training days for new contestants and for those wishing to learn more about rodeo events.”

This makes the reader nervous about the potential for bias and collusion. A legal document has a responsibility to be impartial and exclude vested interests. The Code is seen by some “as a shield to protect a defendant in the face of prosecution”. It may well be less than 10 years before it is updated to reflect ethical concerns.

In summary

Society’s expectations of animal welfare standards are constantly evolving – practices that were once acceptable no longer are or may become unacceptable in the future. Therefore, it is vital that we continue to discuss and debate these issues and respond to public concerns.

References
  1. Flagler, B., Blazing saddles, in VetScript. 2016.
  2. Sinclair, M., et al., Behavioral and Physiological Responses of Calves to Marshalling and Roping in a Simulated Rodeo Event. Animals, 2016. 6(5).
Advertisements

The problem of brachycephalic dogs in New Zealand: Why has Trade Me banned some of them?

As of the 1 March 2018 ‘Trade Me’ New Zealand, our biggest online trading website, will no longer allow three brachycephalic dog breeds to be sold through their platform: Pugs, French Bulldogs, and British Bulldogs. This is a huge win for the welfare of these animals.

What are brachycephalic dogs?

The word brachycephalic literally breaks down to ‘short’ ‘head’. It refers to animals (it’s not just a dog problem!) with short faces/snouts. The classic example is the Pug – with its squishy face and big eyes. The Persian cat is another example. The muzzle, or snout, of these animals has essentially been reduced in length over time via breeding. It has become a desirable characteristic.

post 15 pug
The Pug is a good example of a brachycephalic dog breed

For many people, the attraction of these dogs is in their resemblance to babies or children. A small, round face makes them ‘cute’ and ‘adorable’. This factor is becoming even more important as many people are choosing not to have children, or delaying until later in life. Instead, their pet may play the role of this family member in their life.

What is wrong with these dogs?

The problem with breeding to reduce the length of these dog’s snouts/muzzles is what has happened as a result [1]. The bony structures of the head have reduced in size, but in most cases the soft tissue in the back of the mouth and throat has remained the same. This means these dogs have to breathe around this extra tissue. Other things have happened as a result of the bony changes:

  • The size of their nostrils is reduced – they are tiny! Many of these dogs’ struggle to get enough air through their nose and so resort to ‘open mouth’ breathing;
  • Their trachea, or airway, is too small for them. It is also very weak. They really have to work hard to get air into their lungs – sometimes they work TOO hard and their airway collapses. This is an emergency situation!

Overall, their breathing could be likened to trying to suck air through a thin drinking straw that has cloth over one end. Most of these dogs have to breathe with their mouth open, and snorts or snoring sounds result from the extra soft tissue in their mouth flopping into their airway.

This snoring sound may seem ‘cute’ to many people, but it actually means the dog is struggling to breathe properly! Their small airway and all that soft tissue in their mouth is making it very difficult for them.

These dogs get very hot in Summer and can often over-heat to the point of suffering from heat stroke – another emergency situation. Dogs in general cannot sweat as well as people. This means they rely on open-mouth breathing to cool them down. If a dog is not able to breathe very well, as is the case in these ‘brachy’ dogs, then this can be a problem. And again, if they work too hard breathing, their weak airways can collapse!

Other issues with these dogs include: their eyes bulge out of their skull resulting in dry eyes and sometimes ulcers; skin conditions and/or infections due to excess facial skin – all those rolls and folds are the perfect breeding ground for bacteria; and often these dogs struggle to give birth as puppies’ heads are too big for their mothers’ pelvic bones to pass through. Most British Bulldogs are delivered via caesarean section with the help of a veterinarian.

How has it got to this point?

Because so many people want these dogs, there are a lot of people breeding them. It is big business! One puppy can fetch thousands of dollars. But because dog breeding is unregulated in New Zealand, there are no rules about who can do it and how. As a result, people have kept breeding for what people want – short ‘cute’ snouts. Supply equals demand. The problem has got worse.

Not only this, but oftentimes breeding animals (the parents) are kept in poor conditions and become ‘breeding machines’. There are obviously exceptions to the rule, and voluntary members of organisations, such as Dogs NZ (formerly the New Zealand Kennel Club) are bound by self-imposed breeding regulations. However, many ‘backyard’ breeders of these dogs are less conscientious.

What can we do?

This move by Trade Me to stop these three breeds being sold on their platform has been celebrated by many animal welfare organisations and veterinarians. By stopping a major avenue for the sale of ‘backyard’ bred dogs, there is hope yet! This will stop unwitting puppy buyers from purchasing their pet ‘sight unseen’. Often these puppies are sent to them, or they collect them from a mutual meeting place, so that the breeding area and parents are not seen. These buyers have no idea what conditions the parents are in (what their purchase is supporting), or what the parents are like (a good indication of what their puppy may be like).

However, as the New Zealand Veterinary Association (NZVA) has proposed, there are still things that can be done. Their webpage has a list of additional information and their companion animal spokesperson, Rochelle Ferguson, has written a Spinoff feature with advice. To summarise, before adopting prospective owners should:

  • Consider adopting a dog from a shelter, rather than buying one that may be supporting poor breeding practise;
  • Visit the breeder and meet the parents of the puppy they are considering adopting;
  • Support breeders who screen for inherited diseases and who don’t breed puppies with these extreme features;
  • Ask about the mother’s health and whether a caesarean was needed;
  • Consider whether the mother’s (and other dogs) behavioural needs are being met by the breeder. This all affects the puppy.

In the future:

  • Regulations that require people to have a license to breed and sell puppies would be beneficial;
  • Sales on premises (and not ‘sight unseen’ or online) could be a requirement.

I will conclude by quoting Rochelle’s message:

“The fallout from puppies that have been irresponsibly bred is shouldered, not by the breeders who profit from their sale, but by the families that purchase these animals and the veterinarians that treat them.”

References
  1. Packer, R.M.A., et al., Impact of Facial Conformation on Canine Health: Brachycephalic Obstructive Airway Syndrome. Plos One, 2015. 10(10).

 

Understanding New Zealand animal welfare legislation: The Animal Welfare Act, Codes of Welfare, and new Regulations

Ngā mihi o te tau hou / Happy New Year! (in te Reo Māori)

This is a post I have been meaning to write for some time. I finally have a moment to sit and reflect on the new(ish) New Zealand Animal Welfare Regulations.

These regulations were proposed in 2015 and many were introduced in 2016 and 2017 – with more to follow in 2018. They are specific to certain species or types of animal, or refer to particular ways we manage animals, e.g. transport regulations.

Background to New Zealand animal welfare legislation

I should probably put some context around these regulations – why do we need them? We already have The Animal Welfare Act 1999 and Codes of Welfare in New Zealand. The Animal Welfare Act is a piece of legislation, whereas the Codes of Welfare are not – this means they are not enforceable as such. I will explain further.

I like to think of The Animal Welfare Act as working to reduce the extreme negative end of the spectrum of animal welfare states. It talks about ‘obligations’, ‘liability’, and that we should ‘attend properly’ to animals, etc. It is a really useful document to refer to when people have done really bad things to or with animals – when there is pain and suffering involved. The Codes of Welfare are at the other end of the spectrum and are ‘Best Practice’ documents. They expand on The Animal Welfare Act by setting minimum standards and recommending guidelines for best practice. They are also more specific. Where The Animal Welfare Act talks about animals in general, The Codes are broken down into specific animals and/or interventions, or things we may do to animals. Examples of Codes include: circuses, dairy cattle, dogs, horses and donkeys, and painful husbandry procedures.

The gap for animal welfare regulations

As we can see, The Act and Codes of Welfare are at the extreme ends of the spectrum. And although Codes do specify minimum standards for animal care, they tend to be used when rebutting complaints, and not as a means of prosecution or enforcement. If an animal cruelty complaint is laid against a person in charge of an animal, then proof of adherence to these minimum standards can be used as a rebuttal of this complaint. In effect, if the basics are provided for an animal, it is hard for anyone to say anything different. In addition, the process of bringing animal carers to prosecution can be difficult and expensive. This, again, only results in extremely bad cases being prosecuted.

This is where The Regulations come in. They essentially use the minimum standards already in place (with minor adjustments) to allow for better enforcement of The Act. To do this they clarify the rules already in place to protect animal welfare. In essence, they specify that if you do this, you will be punished with that. There is less ambiguity surrounding what is required of those caring for, or who are responsible for, animals. The regulations are meant to be an additional tool for animal welfare inspectors, and in most cases do not require evidence of pain and suffering.

What regulations will we have in New Zealand animal welfare law?

In early 2016, the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) sought feedback on 91 animal welfare regulations they had proposed. The broad categories for these regulations were: live animal exports; care of, and conduct towards, animals; and surgical and painful procedures. MPI travelled around the country with ‘roadshows’ publicising the regulations. Attendance was widely encouraged and there was a chance for feedback to be given and questions answered. Official written submissions to MPI totalled 1,400.

It was interesting to attend one of these ‘roadshows’ at Massey University in Palmerston North. There were many interested parties with varied views (for/against) the proposed regulations. A particularly heated discussion was had about the ‘dog tail docking’ regulation. It was clearly of high interest to dog breeders and owners. A short history of tail docking in New Zealand is given in this excellent post. Due to the issues proposed, MPI commissioned an independent review of the science and arguments for and against tail docking. The full report is available here. Essentially, the findings suggest that tail docking of dogs is a surgical procedure of major significance – with the potential to cause considerable pain and distress. The costs outweigh any potential benefits making it an unjustifiable act. A policy was approved in July 2017 to restrict tail docking of dogs. The restrictions mean that it can only be performed by a registered veterinarian, using analgesia, for therapeutic purposes, i.e. in response to a significant injury or disease. Therefore, dogs whose tails are damaged in some way may still have them docked – if a veterinarian believes this is the best therapy. Final approval to create the regulation is still pending at the time of writing.

Other regulations are already in place – particularly those relating to bobby (usually young male) calves and the export of live animals. Four regulations covering the welfare of calves were in place for the spring calving season in 2016 and a further three for 2017 calving, while those covering the export of live animals were confirmed in July 2016.

Examples of important regulations include: the mandatory use of pain relief for disbudding cattle, standards for the transportation of lame animals, that calves must be 4 days of age before being transported off farm, a maximum 12-hour journey time for young calves, young calves being prohibited from being sent cross the Cook Strait by sea (i.e. from North to South Island and vice versa), and the prohibition of killing calves by blunt force trauma to the head – other than in an emergency.

The future for animal welfare regulations

A number of regulations will be progressed in 2018. These broadly relate to: tail docking/castration (horses, sheep, llama and alpaca, and roosters), other surgical procedures in production animals and companion animals (e.g. hot branding, velvetting, cropping of ears in dogs, and Caslick’s procedures in horses), and dentistry.

Of particular interest to veterinarians, the stock transport regulation relating to lame animal’s says that “A person in charge of a lame cattle beast, sheep, deer, pig or goat commits an offence if they permit the animal to be transported”. In contrast to current practice, liability has been placed on suppliers presenting lame animals for transport, rather than transporters. Veterinarians may therefore find themselves being called upon for additional certification of lame animals for transport.

Final thoughts

In conclusion, the Animal Welfare Regulations are promising, and although some did not make the final cut (mostly due to issues with wording and meaning), there are plenty of good regulations being progressed that will improve the welfare of animals in New Zealand.

Beyond the regulations, there is still scope for further reforms in animal welfare legislation. In an earlier post, I wrote about the excellent work Dr Rebecca Ledger is doing using the Five Domains Model for forensic animal behaviour analysis in Canada. This is something we could really embrace in New Zealand. In addition, using animal abuse cases to create ‘links’ to domestic violence could lead to improvements in both animal and human welfare. The Veterinary Council of New Zealand has a guidance document relating to this here.

We still have much to do, but this is a great start!

 

The New Zealand National Cat Management Strategy Draft

This post has been a long time coming. I had been holding out for a resolution to the New Zealand National Cat Management Strategy proposal that was released in draft form in September 2016. However, a recent article in The Dominion Post hints that Wellington is going ahead without The Strategy, as the capital city looks towards new rules for the management of cats (and other animals). This follows on from the bylaw Wellington introduced last year, implemented early 2018, which mandates that all domestic cats over 12 weeks of age be microchipped and that all such microchips be registered with the NZ Companion Animal Register (NZCAR).

Maybe I should back up a little here. What is going on in New Zealand with our domestic cats? It has long been recognised that cats on islands, such as New Zealand, cause problems by predating upon wildlife [1] – and there is particular concern for native and endangered species. New Zealand has many beautiful native bird species, most of which have evolved without the need to protect themselves from predators such as cats (who were introduced later by humans). This puts them at risk of declining numbers and potential extinction. Several ‘predator-free’ (predators also include: stoats, rats, and possums) islands and land-based reserves have been established in New Zealand, in order to provide a protected environment for native species. However, there is still a need to protect the wildlife not within the confines of these sheltered areas, and to provide future-proof environments. There is a plan to make New Zealand predator-free (of possums, rats, and stoats) by the year 2050. However, this plan does not extend to cats.

Some large cities (e.g. Wellington – our capital city) are near several of these protected areas, and native bird habitats often extend outside their sheltered zone. This, in addition to wildlife already resident in the capital, has been causing problems with owned domestic (and often feral) cats. Cats are skilled hunters [1], and unfortunately their hunting zones may overlap with native bird habitats. A call to ban domestic cats in New Zealand did not go down particularly well with cat owners. New Zealand is unique, in that unlike many other countries that favour dogs, cats are our most popular companion animal pet [2]. And cat owners can be very protective of their right to own a feline friend. This provides for an interesting clash between wildlife advocates and domestic cat owners.

There is an obvious need for compromise and so representatives from various interest groups sat down together and drafted the NZ National Cat Management Strategy. The Strategy’s working group is made up of members from: The New Zealand Veterinary Association (NZVA); NZVA Companion Animal Veterinarians (CAV); New Zealand Companion Animal Council (NZCAC); Royal New Zealand Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RNZSPCA); Morgan Foundation; and Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ). The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) and the Department of Conservation (DOC) are technical advisory members. “The key principles of the strategy are the promotion of responsible cat ownership, humane cat management, and environmental protection.” (The Strategy pg7). The Strategy makes a point of recognising the positive benefits and value in cat ownership, but also acknowledges the impact cats have on native species. This gives credit to both sides of the argument for (e.g. ‘Feline Rights New Zealand’) and against (e.g. Gareth Morgan and The Morgan Foundation) cats in New Zealand.

A summary of The Strategy is available here. Briefly, the 17 key recommendations agreed by the group relate to: (1) the recognition that cats are sentient animals; (2) a focus on non-lethal control methods; (3) the identification of different cat populations (owned, feral, stray, etc.); (4) management programmes targeted specifically at stray cats; (5) targeted trap-neuter-return programmes for stray cats; (6) communication and collaboration with all stakeholders; (7) addressing inconsistencies in legislation; (8) implementing a national cat management task force; (9) A National Cat Management Act that allows for the creation and implementation of cat bylaws; (10) incremental changes to legislation; (11) cat management advisory groups for local governments; (12) evaluation of cat management strategies; (13) the reporting of these evaluations; (14) a centralised national database of cat management statistics; (15) an integrated approach to cat management; (16) those implementing cat management strategies understand the animal welfare implications and best practice for the techniques; and (17) identifying areas of high conservation value and implementing strict controls for these areas. According to the RNZSPCA, The Strategy was due to be presented to Government before the end of last year. It will be interesting to see what eventuates.

Blog post 7 image
A native New Zealand Tui enjoys the spring flowers at Massey University, Palmerston North

What will the future of cat ownership in New Zealand look like? And what are some things we could be doing now to help? Keeping cats indoors at night is likely to reduce some of their predation habits. The use of anti-predation cat collar covers may also be beneficial [3]. Having your cat(s) microchipped now could also be a good idea. Microchipping is the recommended best practice method for identification of cats in the New Zealand Companion Cats Code of Welfare, and is preferred to collar use. Desexing cats is another key owner responsibility. Chatting to (as opposed to criticising) cat owners about the harmful effects of cats on our wildlife, and giving them a few things they can try now to combat these effects, will go a long way to help New Zealand resolve this issue. Words written by a cat lover.

“There will always be cats in New Zealand and the only viable route to effective cat management is to implement facilitating legislation and simultaneously work with the stakeholders involved with all cat populations to find agreed solutions that are acceptable and have a realistic chance of reducing cat numbers and mitigating cats’ negative impact on wildlife.” (The New Zealand National Cat Management Strategy Draft 2016)

Here is a short YouTube video about the New Zealand National Cat Management Strategy.

References

  1. Medina, F.M., et al., A global review of the impacts of invasive cats on island endangered vertebrates. Global Change Biology, 2011. 17(11): p. 3503-3510.
  2. New Zealand Companion Animal Council Inc., Companion Animals in New Zealand. 2016: Auckland, New Zealand.
  3. Willson, S.K., I.A. Okunlola, and J.A. Novak, Birds be safe: Can a novel cat collar reduce avian mortality by domestic cats (Felis catus)? Global ecology and conservation, 2015. 3: p. 359-366.

 

Edit (30th April 2017):

As a result of an email taking issue with my recommendation of anti-predation cat collars and their safety to cats, I would like to clarify the type of collar I suggest.

I recommend those that fit over the cat’s current (quick release or breakaway) collar and are open at one end – so that both collars release if the cat gets caught. An example of them can be found here: https://www.birdsbesafe.com/ and can be made yourself with instructions found here:

While I was away…

As I have been on holiday (and a little bit MIA while preparing for my PhD Confirmation), I thought I would write a post on what I have missed. I am still playing catch-up, so this is not exhaustive, but these are a few matters of interest that have come up while I have been away:

AVA Conference 2017

The program for the 2017 AVA Conference in Melbourne came out just before I left. It has a great line-up of animal welfare talks. I am disappointed that I will not be able to make it this year, but I will be at the ANZCVS Science Week instead – I hope to see you there.

UFAW International Symposium 2017

The line-up for the UFAW 2017 Symposium looks fantastic too! The theme is ‘Measuring animal welfare and applying scientific advances – Why is it still so difficult?’. This is something very close to my heart and another one I wish I could attend. But unfortunately, the PhD calls. I will begin interviews for my second study this year.

OIE vacancy for specialist in Animal Welfare

Earlier in the month the OIE listed this amazing job opportunity in Animal Welfare based in Brussels, Belgium. The closing date is the 3rd of March 2017. If only I was ready for this great opportunity…

Cats to keep their claws in NJ?

New Jersey could be one of the first states in the USA to restrict declawing of cats to only those deemed necessary by a veterinarian. This could pave the way to restrictions throughout the entire USA. In New Zealand, “The declawing of cats to alleviate social or behavioural problems should be contemplated only when retraining has proved ineffective and euthanasia is the only alternative” (Code of Welfare 2007 – Companion cats). This stance will not be changing with the new Animal Welfare regulations in New Zealand. Cats have claws and removing them simply because they lead to traits that we regard as ‘undesirable’ bears a strong resemblance to ear cropping and tail docking in dogs.

On the subject of cats

Because ‘cat welfare matters’, this next story is about ‘designer cats’. Dogs have had plenty of attention recently as we have heard about the issues associated with brachycephalic (flat-faced) breeds. But it’s not just dogs whose welfare is negatively affected by breed standards. Our feline friends have problems too! International Cat Care has written a great article that tells us the truth about ‘designer cats’. A cat with short legs? How adorable! Not so for the cat…check out their radiographs. And brachycephalic cats have problems too. We need to breed for function, not form. “…many (if not all) of these cats are likely to suffer pain and/or compromised welfare.”

Women in Science

A little off topic, but our welfare is important too! This last one begins with a conversation I overheard while on holiday. I was waiting to order my brunch at a café and overheard three women behind me. Their topic for discussion? Which of their friends had ‘got the fattest’ after high school. Wouldn’t it have been nice if I had overheard them discussing which friend had done great things with her life? Who had a fantastic career? Who was doing ‘well’? Now don’t get me wrong, I am not one to talk. I have joined in similar discussions in my time. But what good is this doing us? This lead me to think about how women undersell ourselves and each other and how this could affect our success. The 11th of February was International Day of Women and Girls in Science and I pretty well missed it. We need to support women in science to achieve great things. I love hearing about what women are accomplishing every day. My main PhD supervisor is a fantastic scientist. She has, and will continue to, achieved great things. Let’s celebrate a little better next year so that we can support women to achieve even more – for science and animal welfare! Mark it in your calendar.

 

 

 

Cat Friendly Veterinarians

Following on from my previous post on environmental enrichment for New Zealand cats, this post will focus on some things veterinarians can do to improve the lives of their feline patients.

There are many ways we can increase the number of positive experiences pet cats have. Not least is helping to ensure their experiences when visiting a veterinary clinic are less negative, and more positive [1, 2]. This is where individual veterinarians and clinics come in. If a cat is not ‘happy’ about going to the clinic, then an owner is less likely to bring their pet to the veterinarian as often as they may otherwise [3, 4]. Feline environmental enrichment is not just good for the cat; it is good business.

How can we treat our cat patients with kindness? (and differently to dogs)

Cat are not just mini dogs. They respond very differently towards veterinary consultations. From the cat that refuses to leave its carrier, to the one who refuses to go back in; the cat who stiffens up and tries to draw blood, to the one who just wants to rub its face all over you. We know there are many differences even between cats. However, there are a few things we can do to make life a little easier for those that are struggling with going to see a veterinarian.

cat-friendly-vets

Cat carrier training

For starters, training cats to not completely hate the idea of going in their cat carrier can make life much easier for everyone. This is something that owners will need to work on at home, but as veterinary professionals we can help pick up on these problems and guide owners in the right direction. If a cat is not apparently ‘happy’ about going in a carrier, then an owner is probably going to think twice about bringing ‘Fluffy’ in to get that cough looked at. This can be bad for the cat, and bad for business.

Dr Sarah Ellis (@sarahlhellis) has written an excellent blog post on Katzenworld about how to train cats to like their carrier. The post starts off with some tips about what makes a good cat carrier and then goes through how to counter-condition cats to their own carrier. It would be a great post for veterinary professionals to be familiar with and then make owners aware of. A veterinarian could quite easily have a chat to an owner about carrier training if they mention having troubles, or if the cat is clearly not happy about going back in at the end of a consultation. It could even just be something we casually ask, for example ‘How does fluffy like her carrier?’.

I was in a pet store recently (acquiring more toys for my spoilt felines) and happened to be walking past a couple who were looking at cat carriers. They were complaining about their cat not liking the one they already own. They saw the cat toys I had and (guessing I had a menagerie) asked me which one I used for my cats. As a busy-body (and cat enthusiast) I could not help but ask them if they had ever heard of cat carrier training. They had not and were very interested to hear about it. I gave them the link and they (happily) trotted off to have a read.

Cat friendly veterinary practices

Veterinarians and clinics with cat friendly approaches can also get involved in feline environmental enrichment. Once cats arrive at the clinic, in the carrier they have now learnt to like, it is up to us to make that experience as positive as possible. Not only do we want them to come back, but we also want to tip the balance of their possible experiences towards the positive side as much as possible [1, 2] – if we are aiming to be the animal welfare advocates that the New Zealand Veterinary Council would like us to be.

Low stress handling techniques and clinic design can have a massive impact on the experiences of our feline patients. Many clinics could be re-designed with feline patients in mind (e.g. separate dog and cat waiting areas, separate consulting rooms, and separate hospitalisation areas with each species comfort in mind), but there are also simple cost-effective ways of providing for our feline patients. Cats do not respond well to aggressive handling techniques. How many veterinarians or veterinary nurses have ‘lost’ a cat after pushing it too far? It makes it very difficult to work with them in the future – and the owners are never very impressed. The International Society of Feline Medicine (ISFM) recognise this and have written an excellent article [5] in The Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery about feline-friendly handling guidelines.

The ISFM are also responsible for the worldwide Cat Friendly Clinic programme, designed to increase the number of cat friendly veterinary clinics by providing free information – to enable clinics to work towards a voluntary accreditation scheme. The importance of handling cats in clinics is emphasised by this scheme. Once accredited, veterinary clinics can advertise this accreditation to cat owners and are then eligible to be listed on the ISFM website. Veterinarians and clinics can register their interest for free to receive more information about this accreditation scheme.

In addition to all these differences in the ways we treat our feline patients, there are some things we can do for them that we are already doing for dogs. Providing yummy cat friendly treats in consult rooms can be used to reinforce any positive experiences and counter-condition pets to the veterinary clinic [6]. If it makes it easier to examine an overweight cat after a few treats are given, then this is probably going to do more good than potential harm – so long as we are clear with the owner why we are doing it in this instance. Giving cats a little more time, once out of their carrier, to acclimatise themselves to the room (as we so often allow for in dogs) is also likely to help the consult go smoothly.

These are just a few of the ways that, as veterinarians, we can improve the lives of our feline patients – at least during the time that we have some control over their experiences. Enriching the lives of cats is not just good for them; it is also good for us.

References

  1. Green, T.C. and D.J. Mellor, Extending ideas about animal welfare assessment to include ‘quality of life’ and related concepts. New Zealand Veterinary Journal, 2011. 59(6): p. 263-71.
  2. Yeates, J.W. and D.C.J. Main, Assessment of positive welfare: A review. Veterinary Journal, 2008. 175(3): p. 293-300.
  3. McMillan, F.D., Maximizing quality of life in ill animals. Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association, 2003. 39(3): p. 227-235.
  4. Vogt, A.H., et al., AAFP-AAHA feline life stage guidelines. Journal of feline medicine and surgery, 2010. 12(1): p. 43-54.
  5. Rodan, I., et al., AAFP and ISFM Feline-Friendly Handling Guidelines. Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery, 2011. 13(5): p. 364-375.
  6. Westlund, K., To feed or not to feed: Counterconditioning in the veterinary clinic. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 2015. 10(15): p. 433-437.

Studying for an ANZCVS Membership Examination

Are you a registered veterinarian working in New Zealand or Australia who wants an extra challenge? Do you have a particular subject area that interests you and makes you want to learn more? And/or do you just want a few extra letters after your name? You might want to consider sitting an examination for Membership of the Australian and New Zealand College of Veterinary Scientists (ANZCVS). This is something I am currently working towards, and I just wanted to share what I have learnt so far about the Membership process.

Disclaimer: This post is designed to increase awareness of veterinary membership examinations and therefore gives details of the process from the author’s perspective. The author is in no way affiliated with the ANZCVS and details of the examination process may change – you should check out the ANZCVS website and Candidate Handbook for official information.

IMG_2644
Malibu helping me study the Five Domains Model

Eligibility

First things first, who can sit the exams? There are a few basic requirements, namely that you:

  1. Are eligible to be registered as a veterinarian in New Zealand or Australia and;
  2. Graduated at least 3.5 years before taking an exam.

This is fairly standard across the board. On the Application Form, they also ask you to provide your curriculum vitae and emphasise “the extent of your experience in the area in which you are applying for examination”. It does mention on the Membership Page that you should have spent at least 4 years in a full-time ‘veterinary activity’ between graduating and sitting the exam. So this is something to think about.

At this point it is also a good idea to check out the individual Subject Guidelines for additional requirements.

Choosing a Subject

So which subject are you going to sit your Membership examination in? There are a lot to choose from! They are currently divided into three categories:

  • Category 1 are the subjects that are examined every year. These are the big four of: Small Animal Medicine, Small Animal Surgery, Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care, and Veterinary Radiology (Small Animal)
  • Category 2 are examined every second year – you will need to find out when exactly. The ‘Membership Examination 2017’ offerings are available now.
  • Category 3 are no longer offered, but have been at some point in the past

When you are choosing a subject, it is a good idea to read the individual Subject Guidelines for the areas you are interested in. They tend to list the learning outcomes for the particular subject and give a list of recommended reading. Although this list is not exhaustive, it will give you a pretty good idea of what you will be studying.

It is fairly important to be interested in the study area!

Practicalities of the Examinations: where, when, and how much?

Again, check out the ‘Membership Examinations 2017’ on the website for 2017 dates and fees.

How much does it cost? The 2017 examination fee is set at A$1,323. This does not include your flights and accommodation to sit the oral and/or practical examination(s) on the Gold Coast in Australia.

Where and when do I sit it? The written examinations are sat in June and are available at various testing locations throughout New Zealand and Australia. However, the oral and/or practical examination(s) are held in June/July on the Gold Coast in Australia – it is coupled with the College Science Week.

Find out More

I have tried to hyperlink the relevant areas throughout this post, but I still recommend you:

  • Visit the ANZCVS website, which has information on the Membership Page
  • Check out the Candidate Handbook for more details
  • Read up on the Subject Guidelines and Chapter overviews
  • Think about it!
  • Apply – applications have to be in early (31st October in the year before your exam)!
  • Find a mentor (more about this in the Candidate Handbook) and download Sample Examination Papers
  • Talk to people! I cannot over-stress the importance of this. As I mentioned, the subject guidelines are not exhaustive and may be a little overwhelming. I highly recommend finding someone that has successfully sat the same examination so that you can pick their brain for tips and tricks.

I have found going to veterinary conferences (e.g. AVA, NZVA, and College Science Week) really helpful. There’s tonnes of awesome people to meet and a lot of good study material is presented in the relevant stream(s) for your subject. You could even meet your examiners there!

That is probably enough information to get you started. If you have any comments or questions, please get in touch.