Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
3.4
2.1
Journals
Diversity
Special Issues
Wildlife Welfare
share announcement

Wildlife Welfare

A special issue of Diversity (ISSN 1424-2818). This special issue belongs to the section "Animal Diversity".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (30 November 2024) | Viewed by 15755

Special Issue Editor

Dr. Miriam A. Zemanova

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
1. Environmental Sciences and Humanities Institute, University of Fribourg, Chemin du Musée 4, 1700 Fribourg, Switzerland
2. Animalfree Research, Postgasse 15, 3011 Bern, Switzerland
3. Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics, 91 Iffley Road, Oxford OX4 1EG, UK
Interests: wildlife welfare; conservation genetics; humane education; animal ethics; landscape ecology

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Human activities, both intentional and unintended, constitute the biggest threat to wildlife, and are the reason for the current biodiversity crisis. For example, deforestation, habitat destruction, poaching, wildlife trafficking, or pollution all threaten the existence of many species and ecosystems. These activities might also cause physical injury, disease, fear, or suffering in wildlife. Furthermore, some direct human interventions, such as species management, wildlife research, and reintroductions might also have negative consequences for the wellbeing of individual animals. Therefore, animal welfare considerations should be a part of the discussions on biodiversity conservation. The focus of this Special Issue is on the different aspects of wildlife welfare, including both theory and empirical research. We welcome original research papers, reviews, and opinion pieces.

Topics of interest include:

  • Compassionate conservation;
  • Ecotourism;
  • Human–wildlife conflict;
  • Hunting;
  • Impact of climate change on wildlife;
  • Invasive species management;
  • Non-invasive wildlife research methods;
  • Poaching;
  • Wildlife rehabilitation;
  • Wildlife trade;
  • Wildlife welfare assessment.

Dr. Miriam A. Zemanova
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Diversity is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2100 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • the 3Rs principles
  • animal welfare
  • compassionate conservation
  • wildlife rehabilitation
  • welfare biology
  • zoos

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (4 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

14 pages, 693 KiB  
Article
Exposure of American Black Bears (Ursus americanus) to Ticks, Tick-Borne Diseases, and Intestinal Parasites in Wisconsin
by Nika S. Reichert, Daniela Mathieu, Christopher J. Katz and Kent A. Hatch
Diversity 2024, 16(9), 537; https://doi.org/10.3390/d16090537 - 2 Sep 2024
Viewed by 885
Abstract
We surveyed 159 American black bears (Ursus americanus) over a period of three years for the occurrence of ticks, tick-borne diseases, and intestinal parasites in Wisconsin. We collected blood from the bears to test for the presence of antibodies to Borrelia [...] Read more.
We surveyed 159 American black bears (Ursus americanus) over a period of three years for the occurrence of ticks, tick-borne diseases, and intestinal parasites in Wisconsin. We collected blood from the bears to test for the presence of antibodies to Borrelia burgdorferi (Lyme disease), Rickettsia rickettsii (Rocky Mountain spotted fever (RMSF)), Babesia, Ehrlichia, Ehrlichia canis, Brucella canis, and Anaplasma phagocytophilum. We also examined scat samples for intestinal parasites. We commonly found the tick Dermacentor variabilis, but also present the first report of Rhipicephalus sanguineus on black bears. We detected antibodies to Lyme disease and RMSF. We detected antibodies to E. canis for the first time in a bear and both antibodies to R. rickettsii and A. phagocytophilum for the first time in a black bear in Wisconsin. No antibodies for Babesia or Br. canis were detected. We found eggs of the intestinal parasite Baylasascaris transfuga as well as a low number of Toxascara leonina and unknown Capillaria species occurrences in the examined feces. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Wildlife Welfare)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

22 pages, 2354 KiB  
Article
Wildlife Emergency Response Services Data Provide Insights into Human and Non-Human Threats to Wildlife and the Response to Those Threats
by Elodie C. M. Camprasse, Matthias Klapperstueck and Adam P. A. Cardilini
Diversity 2023, 15(5), 683; https://doi.org/10.3390/d15050683 - 18 May 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 2361
Abstract
Our transformation of global environments into human-dominated landscapes has important consequences for wildlife. Globally, wildlife is interacting with humans or impacted by human activities, which often results in negative outcomes such as population declines, disruption of social bonds, biodiversity loss, imperilment of threatened [...] Read more.
Our transformation of global environments into human-dominated landscapes has important consequences for wildlife. Globally, wildlife is interacting with humans or impacted by human activities, which often results in negative outcomes such as population declines, disruption of social bonds, biodiversity loss, imperilment of threatened species, and harm to individual animals. Human and non-human threats to wildlife can be challenging to quantify and tend to be poorly understood especially over large spatial scales and in urban environments. The extent to which such damage is mitigated by reactive approaches (e.g., wildlife rescue) is also not well understood. We used data from the main state-based Wildlife Emergency Response Services (WERS) in Victoria, Australia to address these issues. The data, which describe tens of thousands of cases of threats to wildlife annually over a ten-year period, allowed a detailed characterisation of the type and extent of threats in the state. We identified the main common and threatened species impacted by various threats and showed that the vast majority of them were anthropogenic (e.g., vehicle collisions, cat attacks, and entanglements). The extent to which different taxonomic groups and species were impacted by various threats differed and threats were dependent on locations. The Greater Melbourne area was identified as a hotspot for threats to wildlife. The WERS was able to source service providers for thousands of animals annually, facilitating their assessment, release into the wild and rehabilitation. However, every year, thousands of animals died or were euthanased and thousands more were left unattended. WERS case reports are increasing and there is a growing service–demand gap. Whilst studies reporting on the demand and response of WERS are rare, situations in other parts of Australia and the world might be similar. This highlights the urgent need to understand and mitigate human and non-human threats to wildlife, particularly in urban environments, where the rate of biodiversity loss is high. We discuss opportunities and barriers to doing so. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Wildlife Welfare)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

21 pages, 1711 KiB  
Article
The Reptile Relocation Industry in Australia: Perspectives from Operators
by Chantelle M. Derez and Richard A. Fuller
Diversity 2023, 15(3), 343; https://doi.org/10.3390/d15030343 - 28 Feb 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 5612
Abstract
Thousands of reptiles are relocated annually in Australia, yet there has been relatively little research aimed at understanding how the reptile relocation industry operates. An online questionnaire was distributed to anyone who had relocated a reptile between April 2019 and April 2020, including [...] Read more.
Thousands of reptiles are relocated annually in Australia, yet there has been relatively little research aimed at understanding how the reptile relocation industry operates. An online questionnaire was distributed to anyone who had relocated a reptile between April 2019 and April 2020, including wildlife relocators, wildlife rehabilitators and the general public. The questionnaire explored demographics, decision-making and concerns about how the industry functions, through 24 questions and two opportunities to provide open-ended comments. We received 125 responses and 123 comments from operators in all Australian states and territories. Beliefs about appropriate times and places for reptile releases were not reflected in practice for the majority of operators. Confidence about reptiles remaining at recipient sites was low regardless of how many years’ experience an operator had. Escaped captive native reptiles were encountered by most operators, and a quarter of operators were called out to exotic non-native snakes. Operators across all levels of experience indicated a need for changes within the industry, including increased training and professionalism, and more scientific studies on the outcomes of relocations to address concerns about the impacts that the industry has on the wildlife that it is trying to protect. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Wildlife Welfare)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

28 pages, 688 KiB  
Article
Fundamental Concepts, Knowledge Gaps and Key Concerns Relating to Welfare and Survival of Stranded Cetaceans
by Rebecca M. Boys, Ngaio J. Beausoleil, Matthew D. M. Pawley, Katherine E. Littlewood, Emma L. Betty and Karen A. Stockin
Diversity 2022, 14(5), 338; https://doi.org/10.3390/d14050338 - 26 Apr 2022
Cited by 8 | Viewed by 5343
Abstract
Wildlife management can influence animal welfare and survival, although both are often not explicitly integrated into decision making. This study explores fundamental concepts and key concerns relating to the welfare and survival of stranded cetaceans. Using the Delphi method, the opinions of an [...] Read more.
Wildlife management can influence animal welfare and survival, although both are often not explicitly integrated into decision making. This study explores fundamental concepts and key concerns relating to the welfare and survival of stranded cetaceans. Using the Delphi method, the opinions of an international, interdisciplinary expert panel were gathered, regarding the characterisation of stranded cetacean welfare and survival likelihood, knowledge gaps and key concerns. Experts suggest that stranded cetacean welfare should be characterised based on interrelated aspects of animals’ biological function, behaviour, and mental state and the impacts of human interventions. The characterisation of survival likelihood should reflect aspects of stranded animals’ biological functioning and behaviour as well as a 6-month post-re-floating survival marker. Post-release monitoring was the major knowledge gap for survival. Welfare knowledge gaps related to diagnosing internal injuries, interpreting behavioural and physiological parameters, and euthanasia decision making. Twelve concerns were highlighted for both welfare and survival likelihood, including difficulty breathing and organ compression, skin damage and physical traumas, separation from conspecifics, and suffering and stress due to stranding and human intervention. These findings indicate inextricable links between perceptions of welfare state and the likely survival of stranded cetaceans and demonstrate a need to integrate welfare science alongside conservation biology to achieve effective, ethical management at strandings. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Wildlife Welfare)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-4
Back to TopTop