Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-wxvwp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-13T23:35:28.397Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Welfare assessment in pet rabbits

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

F Schepers,
P Koene and
B Beerda
F Schepers
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, Wageningen University, Marijkeweg 40, 6709 PG Wageningen, The Netherlands
P Koene*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, Wageningen University, Marijkeweg 40, 6709 PG Wageningen, The Netherlands
B Beerda
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, Wageningen University, Marijkeweg 40, 6709 PG Wageningen, The NetherlandsAdaptation Physiology Group, Department of Animal Sciences, Wageningen University, Marijkeweg 40, 6709 PG Wageningen, The Netherlands
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: Paul.Koene@wur.nl
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

One million pet rabbits are kept in The Netherlands, but there are no data available on their behaviour and welfare. This study seeks to assess the welfare of pet rabbits in Dutch households and is a first step in the development of a welfare assessment system. In an internet survey, housing systems, general up-keep and behaviour of pet rabbits were reported by their owners. The answers of 912 respondents were analysed with behavioural observations carried out on 66 rabbits in as many households. The rabbits were observed in their home cage and during three fear-related tests: a contact test, a handling test and an open-field test. The survey revealed that the average lifespan of the rabbits is approximately 4.2 years (the maximum potential lifespan is 13 years) and solitary housing appears to reduce lifespan. Close to half of respondents subjected their rabbit(s) to solitary housing and the majority housed them in relatively small cages (< 5,000 cm2). Health risks may arise from a failure to inoculate rabbits and via inappropriate diet. During the contact test, solitary-housed rabbits made more contacts with a human than group-housed rabbits and rabbits in a small housing system made more contacts than those in a large system. Observations in the home cage differed greatly compared with the natural time budget of rabbits, ie displaying increased stereotypic behaviour and decreased foraging and, in solitary-housed rabbits, a complete lack of social behaviour. Nearly 25% of rabbits displayed strong resistance to being picked up, indicating socialisation problems. During the open-field test, solitary-housed rabbits sat up more than social-housed rabbits suggesting increased fearfulness. These findings indicate that the conditions in which pet rabbits are kept often have a negative impact on their welfare, further underlining the need to study this in greater detail.

Keywords

animal welfarebehaviourfear testshousing conditionspet rabbitswelfare assessment

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 18 , Issue 4: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on the Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm and Group Level , November 2009, pp. 477 - 485
Copyright
© 2009 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Altman, P and Dittmer, P 1972 Lifespan: Animals Biology Data Book pp 229–235. Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology: Bethesda, MS, USAGoogle Scholar
ASPCA undated General Rabbit Care. http://www.aspca.org/pet-care/small-pet-care/general-rabbit-care.html. (Accessed on 13 February 2009)Google Scholar
Bilkó, AA and Altbäcker, V 2000 Regular handling early in nursing period eliminates fear response toward human beings in wild and domestic rabbits. Developmental Psychobiology 36: 78–87Google Scholar
Blue Cross undated Housing and Companionship for Your Rabbits. http://www.allaboutpets.org.uk/getdoc/bc6f15ae-4c34-4bfd-b41b-6d33c689cda5/housing-and-companionship-for-your-rabbits.aspx. (Accessed on 13 February 2009)Google Scholar
Chu, L, Garner, JP and Mench, JA 2004 A behavioural comparison of New Zealand White rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) housed individually or in pairs in conventional laboratory cages. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 85: 121–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowan, DP 1987a Aspects of the social organisation of the European wild rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus). Ethology 75: 197–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowan, DP 1987b Group living in the European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus): mutual benefit or resource localization? Journal of Animal Ecology 56(3): 779–795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daniewski, W and Jezierski, T 2003 Effectiveness of divergent selection for open-field activity in rabbits and correlated response for body weight and fertility. Behaviour genetics 33(3): 337–345CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dierenbescherming undated Aanschaf & Verzorging. http://www.dierenbescherming.nl/dier-en-welzijn/omgang-metdieren/in—om-het-huis/kleine-huisdieren/aanschaf—verzorging. (Accessed on 13 February 2009). [Title translation: Purchase and maintenance]Google Scholar
Fenner, F and Fantini, B 1999 Biological Control of Vertebrate Pests, The History of Myxomatosis, an Experiment in Evolution. CABI Publishing: New York, USACrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forkman, B, Boissy, A, Meunier-Salaun, M-C, Canali, E and Jones, RB 2007 A critical review of fear test used on cattle, pigs, sheep, poultry and horses. Physiology and Behavior 92: 340–374Google ScholarPubMed
Gun, D and Morton, DB 1995 Inventory of the behaviour of New Zealand White rabbits in laboratory cages. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 45: 277–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, LT and Berthelsen, H 2000, The effect of environmental enrichment on the behaviour of caged rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus). Applied Animal Behaviour Science 68: 163–178Google ScholarPubMed
Held, SDE, Turner, RJ and Wootton, RJ 1995 Choices of laboratory rabbits for individual or group-housing. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 46: 81–91Google Scholar
HRS undated Rabbit Homes. http://exoticpets.about.com/cs/rabbits/a/rabbithomes.htm. (Accessed on 15 April 2007)Google Scholar
Jones, SE and Phillips, CJC 2005 The effects of mirrors on the welfare of caged rabbits. Animal Welfare 14: 195–202Google Scholar
Kraft, R 1979a Vergleichende Verhaltensstudien an Wild- und Hauskaninchen I. Zeitschrift für Tierzüchtung und Züchtungsbiologie 95: 140–162. [Title translation: Comparative behaviour studies of wild and domestic rabbits I]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraft, R 1979b Vergleichende Verhaltensstudien an Wild- und Hauskaninchen II. Zeitschrift für Tierzüchtung und Züchtungsbiologie 95: 165–179. [Title translation: Comparative behaviour studies of wild and domestic rabbits II]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, M 1991 Social behaviour in young domestic rabbits under semi-natural conditions. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 32: 269–292Google Scholar
Lidfors, L 1997 Behavioural effects of environmental enrichment for individually caged rabbits. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 52: 157–169Google Scholar
Muser Leyvraz, A, McBride, EA and Bishop, F 2007 Influence of management on the behaviour of pet rabbits in Switzerland. In: Kakuma, Y (ed) 16th Annual meeting of the International Society for Anthrozoology ‘The Power of Animals: Approaches to Identifying New Roles for Animals in Society’ pp 23. 4-5 October 2007, Teikyo University of Science & Technology, Tokyo, JapanGoogle Scholar
Nelissen, M 1975 On the diurnal rhythm of activity of Oryctolagus cuniculus (Linne, 1758). Acta Zoologica et Pathologica Antverpiensia 61: 3–18Google Scholar
PAT undated Pet Advisory Committee Working Group on Rabbits Report. http://www.petadvisory.org.uk/worddocs/PAC_ Rabbits_Report_final.doc. (Accessed on 13 February 2009)Google Scholar
RDA 2006 Gedeelde zorg, feiten en cijfers. http://www.raad-voordierenaangelegenheden.nl/files/rda-2006_02.pdf. (Accessed on 13 February 2009). [Title translation: Shared care: fact and figures]Google Scholar
RSPCA 2007 Handle With Care, Rabbits. http://www.rspca.org.uk/servlet/Satellite?blobcol=urlblob&blob-header=application%2Fpdf&blobkey=id&blobtable=RSPCABlob&blobwhere=1099596629449&ssbinary=true&Content-Type=application/pdf. (Accessed on 13 February 2009)Google Scholar
RWAF 2004 The RWF Guide to Keeping your Rabbits Outdoors. http://www.rabbitwelfare.co.uk/resources/content/leaflet_pdfs/SECS130807.pdf. (Accessed on 13 February 2009)Google Scholar
Seaman, SC, Waran, NK, Mason, G and D’Eath, RB 2008 Animal economics: assessing the motivation of female laboratory rabbits to reach a platform, social contact and food. Animal behaviour 75: 31–42Google Scholar
Selzer, D 2000 Vergleichende Untersuchungen zum Verhalten von Wild- und Hauskaninchen unter verschiedenen Haltungsbedingungen. Dissertation, Justus-Liebig University, Giessen, Germany. [Title translation: Comparative studies in the behaviour of wild and domestic rabbits under different housing conditions]Google Scholar
SKB 2009 Konijnen, Alles Wat u Wilt Weten Over. http://www.konijnenbelangen.nl/folders/folders/verzorging2009_1.pdf. (Accessed on February 2009)Google Scholar
Stodart, E and Myers, K 1964 A comparison of behaviour, reproduction and mortality of wild and domestic rabbits in confined populations. CSIRO Wildlife Research 9: 144–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Würbel, H and Garner, JP 2007 Refinement of rodent research through environmental enrichment and systematic randomization. National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research 9: 1–9Google Scholar