Animal welfare: why many traps are banned

Selectivity: a trap is triggered by the animal itself. It has no eyes and no judgement. The less selective a method is, the more often it affects animals it was never meant for – pets, protected species, young animals or birds. Experts then speak of non-target catches.

Killing effectiveness or freedom from injury: if a trap is meant to kill, it must do so very quickly and reliably. Snares and many improvised devices do not: they injure, strangle or hold the animal for a long time. If a trap is meant to catch alive, it must not injure the animal. International humane trapping standards therefore assess traps among other things by how quickly they lead to unconsciousness or what injuries occur in live capture.

Waiting time: even the best live-catch trap causes stress. A caught animal cannot protect itself from rain, sun or cold, it is thirsty and afraid, and it can injure itself trying to escape. That is why many countries require very frequent checks.

Glue traps are particularly problematic from an animal welfare perspective. An animal that gets stuck cannot free itself, panics, injures itself and often dies slowly. They also frequently catch non-target animals such as small birds or hedgehogs. That is why they are banned or restricted in some countries. Anyone with mouse problems chooses humane alternatives and checks local rules.

Many people automatically consider live traps to be animal-friendly. That is only true under strict conditions: if the trap is checked very often, the animal cannot hurt itself inside, and it is clear what happens to it afterwards. Simply releasing a wild animal somewhere else is often not a good solution: it does not know the new area, may find no shelter or food, and can come into conflict with other animals. In many countries, catching and relocating wild animals is also allowed only for those authorised.

A third point is general animal-welfare law. In many countries it forbids causing an animal pain, suffering or harm without good reason. That also applies to improvised devices someone has built themselves.

The most animal-friendly solution is almost always that no animal needs to be caught at all. Wild animals go where they find food, water or shelter. If these attractions disappear, the animals usually stay away on their own. Closing bins, not leaving pet food outside, keeping food scraps out of the compost and collecting fallen fruit – that often helps a lot already.

With buildings, the point is to close access points properly. What matters is this: never close an opening while an animal or its young are still inside. Trapped animals die miserably. Professionals know how to make sure a space is empty and which protection periods apply.

A wildlife-friendly garden can, by the way, do both: offer animals a habitat and still avoid conflicts. A hedgehog gap in the fence is welcome, an open bin is not.

The three test questions do not only help with traps. You can apply them to any method people use to act on animals: who else is affected? How much does the animal suffer? How long does it last? This lets you judge, for example, advertising for pest-control products or survival videos critically.

For assessing individual products, however, these criteria are not enough. Testing bodies, authorities and professional firms know whether a particular trap is approved or a product is permitted. This knowledge base deliberately gives no product recommendations and no legal advice.

That many traps are banned today is the result of a long public debate. In the EU, the use of leghold traps was banned as early as the early 1990s. Later, the EU, Canada and Russia concluded an agreement on international humane trapping standards – an example of how animal-welfare criteria are translated into concrete rules.

Wildlife management nevertheless remains a field of difficult trade-offs: protecting buildings, health, agriculture and species conservation can conflict. That is exactly why decisions about interventions lie with trained professionals and authorities, not with individuals using improvised means.