Visitor effects on zoo orangutans in two novel, naturalistic enclosures

Human-animal interactions and machine-animal interactions in animals under human care: A summary of stakeholder and researcher perceptions and future directions

Animals under human care are exposed to a potentially large range of both familiar and unfamiliar humans. Human-animal interactions vary across settings, and individuals, with the nature of the interaction being affected by a suite of different intrinsic and extrinsic factors. These interactions can be described as positive, negative or neutral. Across some industries, there has been a move towards the development of technologies to support or replace human interactions with animals. Whilst this has many benefits, there can also be challenges associated with increased technology use. A day-long Animal Welfare Research Network workshop was hosted at Harper Adams University, UK, with the aim of bringing together stakeholders and researchers (n = 38) from the companion, farm and zoo animal fields, to discuss benefits, challenges and limitations of human-animal interactions and machine-animal interactions for animals under human care and create a list of future research priorities. The workshop consisted of four talks from experts within these areas, followed by break-out room discussions. This work is the outcome of that workshop. The key recommendations are that approaches to advancing the scientific discipline of machine-animal interactions in animals under human care should focus on: (1) interdisciplinary collaboration; (2) development of validated methods; (3) incorporation of an animal-centred perspective; (4) a focus on promotion of positive animal welfare states (not just avoidance of negative states); and (5) an exploration of ways that machines can support a reduction in the exposure of animals to negative human-animal interactions to reduce negative, and increase positive, experiences for animals.

An International Investigation of the Prevalence of Negative Visitor Behaviour in the Zoo

Negative visitor behaviour is an understudied area of zoo research, even though negative actions can have serious implications for animal welfare. This research project investigated the prevalence of negative visitor behaviours at four different zoos. It included observations of visitors at seven different taxa exhibits and three different types of enclosures. A modified version of behaviour sampling was used to record visitor behaviour and the activity of the animals, while a negative binomial regression was conducted to test the significance of several predictor variables against the number of negative behaviours observed. Negative visitor behaviour was relatively common, occurring in 57% of observations. Banging was the most commonly observed negative action. Negative behaviours were influenced by zoo (p < 0.001), species (p < 0.001) and the number of visitors present (p < 0.001). The charismatic species were the most harassed animals included in the study, while children were the most likely to engage in negative behaviour. Negative visitor behaviours occurred more frequently when animals were active and in close proximity to visitors. It is imperative for zoos to understand visitors' behaviour so that they can effectively communicate with their visitors to minimise negative actions and promote better animal welfare.

A comprehensive investigation of negative visitor behaviour in the zoo setting and captive animals' behavioural response

Negative visitor behaviour in zoos such as banging, shouting and feeding animals are unwanted, but under-studied, visitor actions. It is not known how prevalent negative behaviour is, which species or enclosure type receives the most negative behaviour or how these behaviours affect zoo-housed animals. In this study, a comprehensive assessment of negative visitor behaviour, using an innovative methodology, was conducted at 25 different enclosures at Fota Wildlife Park, Ireland. Additionally, animal activity level and out of sight behaviour was observed. Descriptive statistics and general linear models were used to investigate which variables affected behaviour. Banging was the most common negative behaviour, while Humboldt penguins, lion-tailed macaques and Sumatran tigers were the most harassed species. Negative actions increased as visitor number increased and at traditional-style viewing areas. Active animal behaviour and out of sight animals were effected as negative visitor behaviours increased, but there appeared to be a tolerance threshold before a behavioural response was observed. By understanding negative behaviours, zoos can strive to reduce them and promote positive animal welfare.

The Impact of Visitors on Non-Primate Species in Zoos: A Quantitative Review

Visitors are a prominent feature in the lives of zoo animals, and their presence can cause a range of impacts on zoo animals (typically classed as positive, negative or neutral impacts), commonly referred to as the ‘visitor effect’. This paper quantitatively collates the literature on the visitor effect in non-primate species, investigates the types of measures used to assess impacts of visitors on animals and considers whether impacts vary across non-primate species in zoos. In total, there were 105 papers which had investigated the impact of zoo visitors on 252 non-primate species/species groups. There has been a steady increase in visitor effect research in zoos since 2012 and this body of work incorporates species from avian (28% study species), reptilian (9%), amphibian (2%), fish (4%) and invertebrate taxa (1%). However, there is still a bias towards mammalian species (56%). The response to visitors varied across taxa. Amphibians responded negatively to visitors more frequently than would be expected by chance (p < 0.05), birds responded neutrally more frequently than would be expected by chance (p < 0.05) and fish responded neutrally and ‘unknown’ more frequently than would be expected by chance (p < 0.05). This review highlighted a number of animal-based metrics which have been used to assess the impacts of visitors on animals, with measures used varying across taxa. Moving forwards, it is recommended that moving forwards researchers incorporate a suite of measures, incorporating those which are meaningful in terms of being representative of individual animal experiences and animal welfare, collected in a manner which should capture those metrics accurately.

Factors affecting the behavior of captive white rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum) and the accuracy of ad-hoc keeper data

Although white rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum) are common in captivity, few behavioral studies have been conducted and there is seemingly no research for immersive exhibits where potential for visitor effects is high. Moreover, little information exists on possible effects of weather and temperature on rhino outside their native range. Here we analyze 14,501 observations of rhino in a drive-through enclosure. Data were collected by researchers (n = 12,160 datapoints) and keepers (n = 2341 datapoints) over a 4-month period. We aimed to: (1) quantify behavior using detailed researcher-collected data and contemporaneous but ad hoc keeper-collected data; (2) compare datasets statistically; (3) establish effects of visitors, temperature, and weather on behavior; and (4) assess the influence of visitors on similarity of researcher/keeper datasets. Activity budgets were similar to the wild and the single previous study from a traditional (nondrive-through) enclosure. There was some discrepancy in activity budgets between researcher and keeper data due to significant differences in recorded frequency of two rare behaviors (horn rub; social interaction) and two behaviors that could be easily confused (grazing vs. standing with head-down): recording of other behaviors matched well. Weather and temperature affected behavior, with rhino becoming more sedentary (-locomotion, grazing; +resting, standing, and sedentary eating of hay) on hot/sunny days compared to cool/wet days. The number of visitor vehicles had a fairly negligible effect but resting was lower on busy days, possibly as vigilance increased. The match between researcher/keeper datasets was lowest when visitor numbers were high, suggesting visitors might affect keeper ability to accurately record behavior.

The effects of visitors and social isolation from a peer on the behavior of a mixed-species pair of captive gibbons

Human visitors affect the behavior of captive animals, which is the so-called visitor effect. The number and behavior of visitors may influence stress-related behaviors in captive animals, such as self-scratching, yawning, and visitor-directed vigilance. A social group setting can be applied to alleviate such negative visitor effects and facilitate social behavior and interactions between individuals. In this study, we examined how the number and behavior of visitors are related to stress-related behaviors of a captive mixed-species gibbon pair comprising a yellow-cheek gibbon (Nomascus gabriellae) and a white-handed gibbon (Hylobates lar). The two gibbons were separated during the study period, and we examined whether the social isolation stimulated the visitor effect. The frequency of stress-related behaviors of the gibbons increased and the social playing between them decreased proportionally to visitor number. In the indoor enclosure, the gibbons increased their visitor-directed vigilance when visitors shouted or struck the glass partition. Our findings indicate that the number and behavior of visitors negatively affect captive gibbons and that a mixed-species social setting can help gibbons reduce visitor-induced stress. Future studies with larger sample sizes will improve the understanding of the visitor effect and the social setting in the captivity.

Do zoo-housed primates retreat from crowds? A simple study of five primate species

An animal's welfare state is directly influenced by the mental state, which is shaped by experiences within the environment throughout the animal's life. For zoo-housed animals, visitors to the zoo are a large part of that environment and a fluctuating influence within it. This study examines the impact of zoo visitors on the space use of five species of zoo-housed primates (Eastern black-and-white colobus monkeys, Colobus guereza, n = 5, Allen's swamp monkeys, Allenopithecus nigroviridis, n = 2, DeBrazza's monkeys, Cercopithecus neglectus, n = 3, Bolivian gray titi monkeys, Callicebus donacophilus, n = 3, and crowned lemurs, Eulemur coronatus, n = 3). Specifically, we considered whether primates' distance from visitor areas changed as crowd sizes increased. Data were collected using the ZooMonitor app. Observers recorded spatial coordinates for each animal over periods ranging from 12 to 32 months. Data were analyzed using two types of regression models (linear and logistic) to examine the influence of visitors on the location of the primates. Both analyses revealed a statistically significant but small decrease in primate distance from visitor viewing glass as the number of visitors increased. Behavioral indicators of welfare were also unaffected by the presence of visitors. These results suggest that, with additional validation, distance from visitors may be one promising, simple way to evaluate the influence of visitors on primate welfare.

Dither: A unifying model of the effects of visitor numbers on zoo animal behavior

Interest in the impact of human presence on the behavior and well-being of zoo and aquarium animals is increasing. Previous work has conceptualized the presence of zoo visitors as having one of three impacts on the behavior of animals in zoos: positive, negative, or neutral. Research suggests the same species may exhibit all three responses under different conditions, calling into question whether the positive/negative/neutral framework is the most useful way of considering visitor impact on animal behavior. Here we present a model of visitor effects that unifies these three predictions. Our model suggests that zoo-goers may provide a "dither effect" for some animals living in zoos. We posit animals may show nonlinear behavioral responses over a range of visitor densities, effectively exhibiting changes in both comfortable and anxiety-like behaviors under different levels of human presence. We tested this model during two COVID-19 related closures at the San Francisco Zoo, studying seven species for evidence of nonlinear relationships between visitor numbers and animal behavior. Our results support the dither effect acting in several species observed.

Island Life: Use of Activity Budgets and Visibility to Evaluate a Multi-Species Within-Zoo Exhibit Move

Modern zoos strive to construct habitats which both enable and encourage animals to engage in species-specific behaviour, without compromising their visibility to visitors. Here, we present the findings of a within-zoo move to a custom-built exhibit (Islands at Chester Zoo, UK) with respect to the behaviour of four mammal species; the Sumatran orangutan (Pongo abelii), crested macaque (Macaca nigra), Malayan tapir (Tapirus indicus) and the Malayan sun bear (Helarctos malayanus). We used full activity budgets along with Compositional Data Analysis (CoDA) to gain insight into how the move to a more naturalistic exhibit influenced behaviour. Engagement in abnormal behaviour remained low during the study period for all four species, suggesting no adverse responses to the change in environment. Following the move, both the non-human primate species spent more time engaged in positive social interactions with conspecifics, highlighting the importance of social support during enclosure moves. Time spent visible to the public was largely unaffected by the enclosure move for the Sumatran orangutan, whilst the movement to a new environment increased visibility for the Malayan sun bear and decreased visibility for the crested macaque and Malayan tapir. We demonstrate the value of monitoring behaviour throughout the translocation of zoo-housed species and outline the positive behavioral impacts of providing individuals with naturalistic, species-appropriate environments.

Comparing Space Use and Fecal Glucocorticoid Concentrations during and after the COVID-19 Closure to Investigate Visitor Effects in Multiple Species

We used the COVID-19 pandemic closure at the Saint Louis Zoo to examine visitor effects on space use and glucocorticoid levels in banteng, grizzly bears, polar bears, and western lowland gorillas. The study was divided into four six-week phases: closure in spring 2020, reopening in summer 2020, fall 2020, and spring 2021 as a seasonal comparison. Space use data were collected using video, and fecal samples were assayed for glucocorticoids. Generalized linear models were used to examine differences in zone occupancy and glucocorticoids between phases. The banteng spent more time near visitors, and glucocorticoids were only temporarily elevated in two of five animals when visitors returned. The grizzly bears spent more time in their habitat than in the den, and the polar bear spent more time near viewing areas after visitors returned. Glucocorticoids did not differ significantly between the closure and reopening for any bears. The gorillas spent less time close to visitors immediately after reopening but this effect waned by fall; glucocorticoid data were not available. Overall, based on space use and glucocorticoid levels, we suggest visitor effects on the gorillas are neutral, on the grizzly bears are neutral or positive, and are positive on the banteng and polar bear.

Is Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) Wounding Frequency Affected by the Presence Versus Absence of Visitors? A Multi-Institutional Study

Visitor effect studies have had inconsistent results, due in part to the inability to control for all confounding variables such as time of day, seasonal weather patterns, and so forth. This study represents the first instance where chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) wounding frequencies were investigated across extensive time periods in the presence and complete absence of visitors, thus eliminating many visitor-related variables. Additional variables were eliminated through the zoo selection process, based on institutional responses to a 29-question survey, providing a novel approach to the question of visitor effects. The aim of this study was to determine if visitors were associated with a change in chimpanzee wound event frequencies across four 51-day time conditions, three of which occurred prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and one during the first wave of pandemic-related zoo closures. We analyzed the archival records of 21 chimpanzees housed at three U.S. zoos. Due to the small number of wound events across all study windows, frequencies of “no wound” events were analyzed. A chi-square goodness of fit test was performed to determine whether the frequency of “no wound” events was equal between the “open” and “closed” trials. Results indicate that the frequencies did not differ, suggesting that chimpanzee welfare, as it relates to wounding, may not be adversely affected by zoo visitors.

The Impact of COVID-19 Zoo Closures on Behavioural and Physiological Parameters of Welfare in Primates

Primates are some of the most cognitively advanced species held in zoos, and their interactions with visitors are complex. The COVID-19 pandemic provided a unique opportunity to understand the impact of zoo visitors on animals, in comparison to "empty zoos". This study sought to understand the impact of facility closures and subsequent reopenings on behavioural and physiological parameters of welfare in four primate species housed in the UK: bonobos (Pan paniscus) (n = 8), chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) (n = 11), and western lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) (n = 6) held at Twycross Zoo (TZ); and olive baboons (Papio anubis) (n = 192) held at Knowsley Safari (KS). Behavioural data were collected from April-September 2020 (KS) and November 2020-January 2021 (TZ). Faecal samples were collected during morning checks from October-November (TZ) and July-November 2020 (KS). Faecal glucocorticoid metabolites (FGMs) were measured using ELISA kits. Statistical analysis for behavioural observations was undertaken using general linear models. Enclosure usage was assessed using t-tests and Mann-Whitney U-tests as appropriate. Bonobos and gorillas spent less time alone when facilities were open to the public (p = 0.004, p = 0.02 respectively). Gorillas spent less time resting when the facility was open to the public (p = 0.04), and chimpanzees engaged in more feeding (p = 0.02) and engagement with enrichment (p = 0.03) when the zoo was open to the public than when it was closed. Olive baboons performed less sexual and dominance behaviour and approached visitor cars more frequently when the safari park was opened to the public than they did the ranger's vehicle during closure periods. There were no significant changes in physiological parameters for any of the study species. The results suggest variable impacts of the zoo closures on zoo-housed primates. We recommend future work that seeks to understand the impact of individual-level differences on "visitor effects" and that differences between animal experiences in zoos and safari parks are further explored in a range of species.

Applying Behavioral and Physiological Measures to Assess the Relative Impact of the Prolonged COVID-19 Pandemic Closure on Two Mammal Species at the Oregon Zoo: Cheetah (A. jubatus) and Giraffe (G. c. reticulata and G. c. tippelskirchii)

The effect of visitor presence on zoo animals has been explored in numerous studies over the past two decades. However, the opportunities for observations without visitors have been very limited at most institutions. In 2020, the Oregon Zoo was closed, in response to the global SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic, from 15 March 2020 to 12 July 2020, resulting in approximately four consecutive months without visitor presence. This study aimed to quantify potential behavioral and hormonal changes expressed during two transition periods in zoo visitor attendance: the initial time period before and after closure in March 2020 and time before and after reopening in July 2020. Fecal glucocorticoid metabolite (fGM) concentrations of resident giraffes (n = 2) and cheetahs (n = 2) were tracked using enzyme immunoassay (EIA) analyses. Average fGM concentrations during the two transition periods were compared using a two-way mixed ANOVA. Additionally, twice-weekly scan sampling was used to quantify behavioral observations across the transitions, which were analyzed as individual behavior proportions. Individual behavior proportions were compared across the Zoo's opening status and time of day using Kruskal-Wallis (H) tests. The results of our analyses showed the following outcomes: (1) significant increases in fGM concentrations for cheetahs and giraffes between the transition periods but not within them; (2) a significant increase in time spent 'not visible' in the cheetahs in the second transition period; and (3) increased vigilance behaviors in the giraffes immediately after the Zoo's closure. However, the changes observed in fGM concentrations may be more strongly correlated with concomitant social changes (giraffes) and some medical events (cheetahs) rather than with the Zoo's opening status. Nevertheless, this study was able to quantify differences in behavioral frequencies and fGM concentration in cheetahs and giraffes at the Oregon Zoo during the times of transition between visitor's presence and absence. The results indicate that, while there was a possible, but relatively minor impact of the presence and absence of visitors on some behaviors, the differences observed in fGM concentration may have been more affected by some of the concomitant social changes and medical events that happened during the same period than by the presence or absence of visitors.

Behavioral Implications of the Complete Absence of Guests on a Zoo-Housed Gorilla Troop

Research conducted on the effects that zoo visitors have on primate behavior has yielded inconsistent patterns. This study aims to contribute to the growing body of literature regarding visitor effects on zoo-housed primate's activity budgets, with the purpose of quantifying the behavioral variability under two conditions: guest presence and guest absence. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many zoos were closed to the public for varying lengths of time. The Buffalo Zoo was closed to guests for an 18-week period including the summer of 2020, which allowed us to effectively control for zoo guest presence. This case report compares data on the zoo's gorilla troop from the same time period in 2019. We found inconsistent results, similar to prior studies conducted with zoo-housed gorilla troops. Most gorillas were observed foraging less and exhibiting more inactivity in 2020, whereas the adult male silverback showed the opposite pattern. Abnormal or undesirable behaviors were performed less frequently when guests were absent however, these differences were not significant. We encourage others to compare behavior patterns during the pandemic shutdown to add to our knowledge base of visitor effects. We suggest that researchers do not try and generalize their individual and troop results to the entire population of gorillas in managed care, as both intrinsic and extrinsic factors contribute to individual differences in behavioral response.

Evaluating the Effect of Visitor Presence on Nile Crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus) Behavior

Visitor presence has been shown to affect the behavior of animals in zoos. However, studies to date have not included a wide range of taxonomic groupings, and thus, the effect is poorly understood for many species. Here, we compared the behavior of Nile crocodiles (Crocodylus niloticus) in the presence and absence of visitors for the first time. Data were collected at Disney’s Animal Kingdom® over two months during normal operating conditions and during the same two months the following year when the park was closed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, totaling 158 observation hours. Significant differences in crocodile behavior were observed between park operating conditions; however, the direction of change varied by behavior and average differences were generally small. In addition, we found that time of day, temperature and month significantly affected behavior, often with greater magnitude than visitor presence. This highlights the importance of accounting for environmental variables when evaluating and interpreting the behavior, and ultimately welfare, of reptiles in zoos. Collectively, the data suggest the overall effect of visitors on crocodile behavior was small and neutral from a welfare perspective. This study highlights the importance of taxonomic diversity in studying the visitor effect.

Widespread Behavioral Responses by Mammals and Fish to Zoo Visitors Highlight Differences between Individual Animals

The impact that humans have on zoo animals can vary based on the species of animal, exhibit design, and individual differences in behavioral responses. We independently analyzed data from 10 never-published studies that examined the impact of zoo visitors on zoo animal behavior. Of the 16 species studied, 90.9% of the mammal species and 60.0% of the fish species demonstrated a change in at least one behavior based on zoo visitor abundance or visitor behavior (e.g., noise, solicitation of interactions from zoo animals). In addition, behavioral changes associated with zoo visitors were present in animals housed in exhibits where there was direct contact with zoo visitors, as well as in exhibits where there was indirect contact and no direct contact. Individuals often varied in their behavioral responses, and some individuals appeared to seek out interactions with visitors. Our findings demonstrate that short-term research projects can provide valuable insight into individual animal-level and species-level responses to visitor abundance and visitor behavior in the zoo setting. We recommend that behavioral assessments focus on the analysis of behaviors of individual animals whenever possible, and we recommend that exhibits provide areas that allow for animals to retreat from the public view.

Human-Animal Interactions in Zoos: What Can Compassionate Conservation, Conservation Welfare and Duty of Care Tell Us about the Ethics of Interacting, and Avoiding Unintended Consequences?

Human-animal interactions (HAIs) in zoos can be rewarding for both humans and animals, but can also be fraught with ethical and welfare perils. Contact with animals can be beneficial for all parties involved, and can indeed lead to pro-conservation and respect for nature behaviours being adopted by humans after so-called "profound experiences" of connecting or interacting with animals. Yet, human-animal interactions may also increase certain individuals' desires for inappropriate wild-animal 'pet' ownership, and can convey a false sense of acceptability of exploiting animals for "cheap titillation". Indeed, this has been reflected in a recent research review conducted on animal-visitor interactions in zoos from a number of different countries and global regions. These are unintended consequences that "modern, ethical zoos" would try to minimise, or avoid completely where possible, though most zoos still offer close-contact experiences with their animals. Three ethical frameworks that may be beneficial for ethically run zoos to incorporate when considering human-animal interactions are: Compassionate Conservation, Conservation Welfare and Duty of Care. These three ethical frameworks are concerned with the welfare state and outcomes for individual animals, not just the population or species. Human-animal interactions in zoos may be acceptable in many circumstances and may be beneficial to both animal and human participants; however, they must be closely monitored through welfare tracking tools. The World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA) has published guidelines for human-animal interactions that are mandatory for member institutions to adhere to, although whether these guidelines are taken as mandatory or suggestions at individual institutions is unknown. Some suggestions for relevant extensions to the guidelines are suggested herein. Melding Duty of Care and the two Conservation ethical frameworks would be ideal for assessing the ethical acceptability of such interactions as they currently occur, and for considering how they should be modified to occur (or not) into the future in zoological settings.

Zoo-housed mammals do not avoid giving birth on weekends

There is evidence that zoo visitor presence can influence the behaviour and, in some cases, adrenal response of zoo animals, and can sometimes compromise animal welfare. In some laboratory studies, significantly more primate births have been reported on weekends, when fewer people are working there, compared with weekdays when staffing levels are at their highest. Here, we investigate whether there is evidence of a "weekend effect" on births in zoo animals as a result of visitor numbers. Unlike laboratories, zoos are typically busier with visitors on weekends than on weekdays, although staffing levels remain fairly consistent across days of the week. If zoo animal parturition is sensitive to human presence, then fewer births would be expected on weekends compared with weekdays. We tested this using birth data and visitor numbers on the entrance gate from zoo records across 16 species representing artiodactyls, perissodactyls, carnivores and primates at four British zoos, to see whether there is an association between mean daily birth rates and average visitor numbers. We predict that, if there is a visitor effect, daily births should be lower on weekends than weekdays and should correlate with mean daily visitor numbers. Results showed that births for all 16 species were randomly distributed through the week, and there was no significant decline in births on weekends. We conclude that the "weekend effect", if such a thing exists, does not appear to be a feature of zoo births, suggesting that elevated weekend visitor numbers are not sufficiently stressful to trigger delayed parturition.

The Visitor Effect on Zoo Animals: Implications and Opportunities for Zoo Animal Welfare

Simple Summary

Research has shown that an animal’s welfare is highly dependent on how various individual animal factors (e.g., species traits, genetics, temperament and previous experience) interact with environmental features (e.g., social grouping, enclosure design and sensory environment). One prominent feature of a zoo’s environment is the presence of visitors. Decades of research on the visitor effect in zoos has demonstrated that visitors can have negative, neutral or positive impacts on zoo animal behaviour and welfare. This paper reviews the literature on the implications and potential opportunities of human–zoo animal interactions on animal behaviour and welfare, with the aim of stimulating interest, understanding and exploration of this important subject.

Abstract

Achieving and maintaining high standards of animal welfare is critical to the success of a modern zoo. Research has shown that an animal’s welfare is highly dependent on how various individual animal factors (e.g., species traits, genetics, temperament and previous experience) interact with environmental features (e.g., social grouping, enclosure design and sensory environment). One prominent feature of the zoo environment is the presence of visitors. Visitor contact can be unpredictable and intense, particularly in terms of auditory and visual interaction. Depending on an animal’s perception of this interaction, visitors can have either negative, neutral or positive impacts on zoo animal behaviour and welfare. This paper reviews the literature on the implications and potential opportunities of human-zoo animal interactions on animal behaviour and welfare, with the aim of stimulating interest, understanding and exploration of this important subject. The literature to date presents a mixed range of findings on the topic. It is possible this variation in the responses of zoo animals to visitors may be due to species-specific differences, the nature and intensity of the visitor interactions, enclosure design, and individual animal characteristics. Analysing these studies and better understanding animal preferences and motivations can provide insight into what animals find negatively and positively reinforcing in terms of visitor contact in a specific zoo setting. This understanding can then be applied to either safeguard welfare in cases where visitors can have a negative impact, or, conversely, it can be applied to highlight opportunities to encourage animal-visitor interaction in situations where animals experience positive emotions associated with visitor interaction.

Activity budget and spatial distribution of Bennett's wallabies (Macropus rufogriseus) in open versus closed exhibit designs

Although many studies investigating the impacts of zoo exhibit designs on captive animals exist, none have been performed on how they influence the behavior and welfare of captive Bennett's wallabies (Macropus rufogriseus). Here, we assess the impact of exhibit design on the activity budget and spatial distribution of Bennett's wallabies. We compared animal behavior in two open exhibits (i.e. physical interaction between animals and visitors permitted) to two closed exhibits (i.e. physical interaction between animals and visitors prohibited). Behavioral data were collected using focal sampling, and spatial distribution was recorded on exhibit maps at regular time intervals. We found a significant increase in feeding and interactive behaviors in closed exhibits in comparison to open exhibits. However, other behaviors such as resting, locomotion, and vigilance did not vary with design. Functional use of space was similar between both designs; however, the effect of habituation may be relevant to consider in future studies. Although some support for visitor effects were present, our study provided no evidence for strong impacts of exhibit design on Bennett's wallaby welfare. Our study emphasizes the need for additional research into the impacts of how zoo environments affect Bennett's wallaby behavior and welfare.

Extending Ethnoprimatology: Human-Alloprimate Relationships in Managed Settings

The majority of studies in ethnoprimatology focus on areas of sympatry where humans and nonhuman primates (hereafter, primates) naturally coexist. We argue that much can be gained by extending the field’s scope to incorporate settings where humans manage most aspects of primates’ lives, such as zoos, laboratories, sanctuaries, and rehabilitation centers (hereafter, managed settings). We suggest that the mixed-methods approach of ethnoprimatology, which facilitates examination of both humans’ and primates’ responses to one another, can reveal not only how humans’ ideas about primates shape management strategies, but also how those management strategies affect primates’ lives. Furthermore, we note that a greater focus on managed settings will strengthen links between ethnoprimatology and primate rights/welfare approaches, and will introduce new questions into discussions of ethics in primatology. For example, managed settings raise questions about when it might be justifiable to restrict primates’ freedom for a “greater good,” and the desirability of making primates’ lives more “natural” even if this would decrease their well-being. Finally, we propose that because ethnoprimatology is premised on challenging false dichotomies between categories of field site—specifically, between “natural” and “unnatural” free-ranging populations—it makes sense for ethnoprimatologists to examine settings in which humans exert considerable control over primates’ lives, given that the distinction between “wild” and “captive” is similarly unclear.

Zoo Animal Welfare: The Human Dimension

Standards and policies intended to safeguard nonhuman animal welfare, whether in zoos, farms, or laboratories, have tended to emphasize features of the physical environment. However, research has now made it clear that very different welfare outcomes are commonly seen in facilities using similar environments or conforming to the same animal welfare requirements. This wide variation is almost certainly due, at least in part, to the important effects of the actions of animal care staff on animal welfare. Drawing mostly on the farm animal literature, we propose that this "human dimension" of animal welfare involves seven components: (1) positive human-animal interaction, (2) consistency and familiarity of keepers, (3) treating animals as individuals and taking account of their personalities, (4) the attitudes and personalities of keepers, (5) the keepers' knowledge and experience, (6) the keepers' own well-being, and (7) the influence of facility design on how keepers and others interact with the animals. We suggest that attention to these human factors provides major scope for improving the welfare of animals in zoos.

Complexities of Using Wild versus Captive Activity Budget Comparisons for Assessing Captive Primate Welfare

Activity budget comparisons between groups or individuals in the wild and those in captivity are commonly used to determine the range of wild-type behaviors that nonhuman animals in captivity perform. These comparisons are conducted with the view that individuals displaying a greater range of wild-type behaviors have enhanced welfare. Such comparisons have a greater appeal when it comes to primates because increased levels of anthropomorphism toward primates lead to welfare concerns. However, the validity of such comparisons has not been assessed. From the reviewed literature, some of the main complexities identified when defining "good welfare" using activity budgets were the ideas of behavioral motivation and adaptation, obstacles when using the wild as a benchmark for good welfare, study methods causing possible variances in behavior, and social and environmental factors. It is proposed that such influencing factors would be controlled for adequately in future studies with the use of multiple indices to measure welfare and methods that infer positive emotional states. It is hoped we can then build evidence of an animal's emotional state and allow welfare to be inferred to a higher degree.

The effects of zoo visitors on Quokka (Setonix brachyurus) avoidance behavior in a walk-through exhibit

The behavior of zoo animals may be influenced by visitors, with possible implications on animal welfare. We examined the effects of the presence of visitors on the presence and visibility of free-ranging quokkas (Setonix brachyurus) in preferred areas of a walk-through enclosure at Melbourne Zoo, Australia. In a controlled experiment, two visitor treatments were randomly imposed: (1) enclosure open to visitors as normal ("Open") and (2) enclosure closed to visitors ("Closed"). Treatments were imposed for 2-day periods, with five replicates of each treatment (10 2-day periods in total). Instantaneous point sampling of camera footage at 1-min intervals from 09:00 to 16:00 hr each day recorded the location and visibility of quokkas. Data were analyzed using a two-factor ANOVA (visitor treatment and study area), with 2-day summary values as the unit of analysis. While the presence of quokkas in the study areas was not affected by treatment, fewer (p < 0.05) quokkas were visible from the visitor paths and more (p < 0.05) quokkas were obscured from the visitor paths in the "Open" treatment than the "Closed" treatment. Number of quokkas differed between study areas across treatments (p < 0.01), but there was no interaction (p > 0.05) between visitor treatment and study area. The reduction in quokka visibility when visitors were present indicates that visitors were at least moderately fear provoking for the quokkas in this experiment, but further research is required to examine the effects of visitor presence and behaviors on the behavior and stress physiology of quokkas in walk-through enclosures, as there may be possible welfare implications.

Visitor effect on the behavior of a group of spider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyi) maintained at an island in Lake Catemaco, Veracruz/Mexico

We analyzed the effect of human visitors on the behavior of a group of spider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyi) kept on a small tourist island. Although the spider monkey is a common species in zoos, there are very few specific studies on visitor effects on these monkeys. We conducted behavioral observations on the group of spider monkeys to evaluate the effect of visitors. We also used actimetry devices to measure the variations in the spider monkeys' locomotor activity associated with human presence. With regard to the effect on behavior, we found an increase in self-directed behaviors and a decrease in vocalization, both associated with human presence. Moreover, our results suggest that when people feed monkeys, there is an increase in agonistic behaviors. On the other hand, we found that changes in activity levels in response to human presence vary among individuals. We conclude that changes in spider monkeys' behavior could provide evidence of the negative effect of visitors in our study conditions. Although we discuss the differences in activity levels due to differences in social position, further research is required this topic. Our results can be used to inform management plans for this species in captivity. Improving this relationship between humans and non-human primates through tourism education programs would benefit ecotourism and therefore species conservation programs.

Zoo agent's measure in applying the five freedoms principles for animal welfare

BACKGROUND

Animal welfare should be prioritized not only for the animal's life sustainability but also for supporting the sustainability of living organism's life on the earth. However, Indonesian people have not understood it yet, thereby still treating animals arbitrarily and not appreciating either domesticated or wild animals.

AIM

This research aimed to analyze the zoo agent's action in applying the five freedoms principle for animal welfare in Taman Satwa Taru Jurug (thereafter called TSTJ) or Surakarta Zoo and Gembira Loka Zoo (GLZ) of Yogyakarta Indonesia using Giddens structuration theory.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The informants in this comparative study with explorative were organizers, visitors, and stakeholders of zoos selected using purposive sampling technique. The informants consisted of 19 persons: 8 from TSTJ (Code T) and 10 from GLZ (Code G) and representatives from Natural Resource Conservation Center of Central Java (Code B). Data were collected through observation, in-depth interview, and Focus Group Discussion and Documentation. Data were analyzed using an interactive model of analysis consisting of three components: Data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing. Data validation was carried out using method and data source triangulations.

RESULTS

Food, nutrition, and nutrition level have been given consistent with the animals' habit and natural behavior. Animal keepers always maintain their self-cleanliness. GLZ has provided cages according to the technical instruction of constructing ideal cages, but the cages in TSTJ are worrying as they are not consistent with standard, rusty, and damaged, and animals have no partner. Some animals in GLZ are often sick, whereas some animals in TSTJ are dead due to poor maintenance. The iron pillars of cages restrict animal behavior in TSTJ so that they have not had freedom to behave normally yet, whereas, in GLZ, they can move freely in original habitat. The animals in the two zoos have not been free from disruption, stress, and pressure due to the passing over vehicles.

CONCLUSION

There should be strategic communication, information, and education, community development, and law enforcement for the animal welfare.

The effects of environmental and visitor variables on the behavior of free-ranging ring-tailed lemurs (Lemur catta) in captivity

The effect of the zoo environment on captive animals is an increasingly studied area of zoo research, with visitor effects and exhibit design recognized as two of the factors that can contribute to animal welfare in captivity. It is known that in some situations, visitors may be stressful to zoo-housed primates, and this may be compounded by environmental factors such as the weather, the time of day, and zoo husbandry routines. Exhibit design and proximity of the public are also known to influence behavioral response of primates to visitors; however, there is minimal research on free-ranging zoo animals, even though they are potentially subjected to intense interactions with visitors. The current study explores the effect of the zoo environment, several visitor variables and specific animal-visitor interactions on the behavior of free-ranging ring-tailed lemurs (Lemur catta) at Fota Wildlife Park, Ireland. Data were obtained through scan samples collected over 18 months (n = 12,263) and analyzed using a range of statistical tests, including general estimating equations (GEE). Results demonstrate that the free-ranging lemurs' behavior at Fota Wildlife Park is affected by season, weather and time of day. Similarities in feeding behavior exist between the free-ranging group and lemurs in the wild when resources are plentiful. Visitor variables had a limited effect on lemur behavior and behavioral diversity level. Lemurs rarely reacted to visitors when specific interactions were considered. Generally, the results indicate that the ring-tailed lemurs in this study have adapted well to the zoo environment and habituated to visitors.

Effect of weather conditions and presence of visitors on adrenocortical activity in captive African penguins (Spheniscus demersus)

A number of potential stressors are present in captive environments and it is critically important to identify them in order to improve health and welfare in ex situ animal populations. In this study, we investigated the adrenocortical activity of a colony of African penguins hosted in an immersive zoo in Italy, with respect to the presence of visitors and local microclimatic conditions, using the non-invasive method of assessing faecal glucocorticoid metabolites (FGMs). The penguins' exhibit is a large naturalistic outdoor enclosure, which closely reproduces the natural habitat of this species. Data collection took place from the beginning of June to the end of August 2014, during the period of maximum flow of visitors. We carried out 12 sampling periods, each involving 2 consecutive days; during the first day we counted the visitors and we registered the meteorological data, and on the second day, we collected the faecal samples, which amounted to a total of 285 faecal samples. Our results showed that the number of visitors did not influence the adrenocortical activity of the African penguins. Conversely, the local microclimatic conditions did influence the physiological stress on these birds. We found that an increase of the daily mean temperature induced a significant increase in FGM concentrations, although humidity and wind speed had a moderating effect on temperature and reduced the heat-induced stress. Moreover, we calculated two climatic indices, commonly used to assess the thermal discomfort in animals, namely the THI (Temperature-Humidity Index) and WCI (Wind Chill Index), and we detected a positive relationship between their values and the FGM levels, demonstrating that these indices could be useful indicators of weather discomfort in African penguins. Our study shows that the simulating naturalistic conditions could have significant benefits for zoo animals, such as reducing the negative effect of visitors. Nevertheless, it should be taken into account where the zoological facility is located and if the local microclimatic conditions are compatible with the hosted species, to ensure that they do not differ greatly from their natural habitat.

Impacts of visitor number on Kangaroos housed in free-range exhibits

Free range exhibits are becoming increasingly popular in zoos as a means to enhance interaction between visitors and animals. However very little research exists on the impacts of visitors on animal behaviour and stress in free range exhibits. We investigated the effects of visitor number on the behaviour and stress physiology of Kangaroo Island (KI) Kangaroos, Macropus fuliginosus fuliginosus, and Red Kangaroos, Macropus rufus, housed in two free range exhibits in Australian zoos. Behavioural observations were conducted on individual kangaroos at each site using instantaneous scan sampling to record activity (e.g., vigilance, foraging, resting) and distance from the visitor pathway. Individually identifiable faecal samples were collected at the end of each study day and analysed for faecal glucocorticoid metabolite (FGM) concentration. When visitor number increased, both KI Kangaroos and Red Kangaroos increased the time spent engaged in visitor-directed vigilance and KI Kangaroos also increased the time spent engaged in locomotion and decreased the time spent resting. There was no effect of visitor number on the distance kangaroos positioned themselves from the visitor pathway or FGM concentration in either species. While there are limitations in interpreting these results in terms of fear of visitors, there was no evidence of adverse effects animal welfare in these study groups based on avoidance behaviour or stress physiology under the range of visitor numbers that we studied.

Effect of partial covering of the visitor viewing area window on positioning and orientation of zoo orangutans: A preference test

The window of the visitor viewing area adjacent to an animal platform in an orangutan enclosure was altered to produce three viewing treatments in a randomized controlled experiment. These treatments were window uncovered, left side of the window covered or right side of the window covered. Observations were conducted on the orangutans present on the platform, and on their location (left or right side), and orientation (towards or away from the window) while on the platform. The partial covering of the window had little effect on the proportion of time orangutans spent on the viewing platform, or on the direction they faced when on the platform. When the orangutans were facing towards the window, and the right side was uncovered, irrespective of whether the left side was covered, they spent about three quarters of the time on the right side, suggesting a preference for the right side of the platform. However, when the right side was covered and the left side uncovered, the animals facing towards the window spent only about a quarter of the time on the right side, that is, they spent more time on the uncovered side. The results suggest that the orangutans have a preference to position themselves to face the window of the visitor viewing area.

Hediger revisited: how do zoo animals see us?

Contact with people, both familiar (e.g., caretakers) and unfamiliar (e.g., members of the public), is a significant part of the lives of nonhuman animals in zoos. The available empirical evidence shows that in many cases this contact represents a source of stress to the animals, although there is sufficient overall ambiguity in these studies to suggest that the effect of people on the animals is much more complex than this. A possible way to try to understand human-animal relationships in the zoo is to ask how the animals might perceive the humans with whom they have contact, and here this question is explored further, using a framework first published by Hediger as a starting point. Hediger suggested that zoo animals might perceive people as an enemy, as part of the inanimate environment, or as a member of the same species. He supported these categories with anecdotal evidence, which was all that was available at the time, but more empirical evidence is available now, so it is appropriate to revisit these categories. The evidence suggests that animals discriminate both conspecific and heterospecific others, rather than just viewing familiar people as members of their own species, and that additional categories (stimulating part of the environment and friendship) may be warranted. These categories are then placed in a general model that suggests how relationships of different qualities, and hence different perceptions of each other, might develop between animals and the people they are in contact with in zoos.