“Ultimately, we do not recommend banning the sale and use of glue traps as a way to improve welfare. Based on our research, this intervention does not look promising when considering counterfactuals due to the small amount of suffering prevented by averting a glue trap death. This is mostly because the alternative methods of pest control that would be most commonly used after a ban on glue traps appear to be rodenticides and snap traps, and death from rodenticides seems worse than from a glue trap.
Although when compared to a glue trap death, a snap trap death looks better than a rodenticide death looks worse, the average amount of suffering averted is dragged down by this likelihood of replacement. Based on this and on our analysis of the cǒfounder counterfactuals, we do not recommend this charity get started this year. However, we think that it might be worth trying to convince an existing organization to do this intervention themselves.
Also, their report also has a section on why snap traps are better than live traps or glue traps:
“Animal protection organizations ̈such as the RSPCA advocate for the use of snap traps over live traps and glue traps, and many pest control organizations also recommend using snap traps over glue traps.”
Yes, I think mice are a potential area of animal welfare improvement. Charity Entrepreneurship wrote a report on an intervention for campaigning to ban the sale and use of glue traps, but they concluded it’s not as cost-effective as donating to or working for existing top animal welfare charities:
Also, their report also has a section on why snap traps are better than live traps or glue traps:
Super useful, thanks!