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

Keeper effect: Animals are more active in the presence of their caretakers

Zookeepers are the primary caretakers of animals, providing daily care through frequent and close interactions. From the animal's perspective, most of these daily interactions are likely to have positive outcomes. With consistent and reliable interactions, a human-animal relationship is expected to develop. Our aim of this study was to investigate if the presence of the primary keeper in the public viewing area of zoo exhibits impacts the behavior of animals. We observed the behavior of 15 individuals of six species in the presence and absence of their primary keeper. Overall, we observed animals being more active in their keeper's presence than when the keeper was not present. When we considered if the keeper was nearby around times of offered opportunities to animals (e.g., feeding, enrichment, and training), our results showed that animals were equally as active when the keeper was present before an opportunity and when no opportunity was offered. These equal activity levels imply that the keeper is a cue for a forthcoming event to the animals, which reflects anticipatory behavior. Overall, we demonstrate that keeper presence is an environmental context in which animals behave differently than in keeper absence.

Aquarium Visitors Catch Some Rays: Rays Are More Active in the Presence of More Visitors

Humans are a constant in the lives of captive animals, but the effects of human-animal interactions vary. Research on the welfare impacts of human-animal interactions focus predominantly on mammals, whereas fish have been overlooked. To address this lack of research, we assessed the impacts of aquarium visitors on the behaviors of ten members of four elasmobranch species: an Atlantic stingray (Dasyatis sabina), four southern stingrays (Hypanus americanus), two blue-spotted maskrays (Neotrygon kuhlii), and three fiddler rays (Trygonorrhina dumerilii). The rays engaged in a significantly higher proportion of active behaviors and a lower proportion of inactive behaviors when visitor density levels were high; however, there were no significant changes for negative or social behaviors. Individual analyses indicated that all three fiddler rays and one of the southern stingrays' active behaviors differed across visitor density levels, whereas there was no association between active behavior and visitor density levels for the other rays. Further research is needed to determine whether this pattern is an adaptive or maladaptive response to visitors, but this research provides much needed initial data on activity budgets within elasmobranch species.

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.

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.

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.

A Global Survey of Current Zoo Housing and Husbandry Practices for Fossa: A Preliminary Review

The fossa is a specialized Malagasy carnivore housed in ex situ facilities since the late 19th century. Moderate breeding success has occurred since the 1970s, and welfare issues (notably stereotypic pacing behaviour) are commonly documented. To understand challenges relating to fossa housing and husbandry (H&H) across global facilities and to identify areas of good practice that dovetail with available husbandry standards, a survey was distributed to ZIMS-registered zoos in 2017. Results showed that outdoor housing area and volume varied greatly across facilities, the majority of fossa expressed unnatural behaviours, with pacing behaviour the most frequently observed. All fossa received enrichment, and most had public access restricted to one or two sides of the enclosure. The majority of fossa were locked in/out as part of their daily management and forty-one percent of the fossa surveyed as breeding individuals bred at the zoo. Dense cover within an enclosure, restricted public viewing areas, a variable feeding schedule and limited view of another species from the fossa exhibit appear to reduce the risk of unnatural behavior being performed. The achievement of best practice fossa husbandry may be a challenge due to its specialized ecology, the limited wild information guiding captive care, and the range of housing dimensions and exhibit features provided by zoos that makes identification of standardized practices difficult. We recommended that holders evaluate how and when enrichment is provided and assess what they are providing for environmental complexity as well as consider how the public views their fossa.