Several factors can confound the assessment of distress. They are: (1) balancing the objectivity of the measured indices with subjective judgements about what are acceptable and unacceptable levels of distress; (2) ensuring that the parameters used do indeed reflect distress, and not other phenomena; (3) avoiding erroneous predictions, based on anthropocentric projections and not scientific observations, about expected distress levels in situations which have not yet been examined; and (4) meeting the high cost of rigorous studies in this complex area in which a wide range of factors may affect the outcome.
Reducing the distress caused by castration, tail docking or dehorning may be achieved by choosing an age when the distress response is least, choosing the least distressing method, or using anaesthesia (local, general) or systemic analgesia. When a method is identified which causes the least distress, its widespread use on farms should not be recommended unless it is also practicable. To do so will not benefit either the livestock concerned or the industry. Political and trade pressures related to overseas perceptions of New Zealand animal welfare standards require responses based on rigorous scientific assessment. Those responses are likely to involve, as appropriate, vigorous defences of current practices or the adoption of new approaches.
Keywords: NZSAPAB; Behaviour; castration; dehorning; docking distress; methods; practicalities; recommendations; research constraints; physiology.