1
|
Plácido M, Tallo-Parra O, Salas M. Cinereous Vulture ( Aegypius monachus) Welfare Monitoring in a Breeding Center during the Breeding Season. J APPL ANIM WELF SCI 2024:1-18. [PMID: 39344441 DOI: 10.1080/10888705.2024.2409158] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2024] [Accepted: 09/09/2024] [Indexed: 10/01/2024]
Abstract
One of the conservation measures of the globally near-threatened cinereous vulture is restoring populations via translocations, with some vultures originating from breeding centers. These centers need to have reproductive success, and securing good welfare levels should be a priority due to the negative implications a compromised welfare has on reproduction. Thus, assessing welfare in breeding centers is essential. Remote methods should be preferred, such as behavior analysis and use of space using camera systems. The study's first objective was to develop an activity budget that could be used as a baseline for detecting behavior irregularities. The second was to determine if behavior analysis and use of space could detect potential welfare issues in a breeding center. The study developed an activity budget that could be used as a standard for behavior analysis for the captive population. Behavior irregularities were detected, and the potential need to improve the enclosure and its surroundings were noticed. Altogether, the proposed methodology and results will contribute to the detection of possible welfare issues in breeding centers and, consequently, improve reproductive success and species' conservation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Margarida Plácido
- Antwerp Zoo Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerpen, Belgium
- Department of Animal and Food Science, School of Veterinary Science, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain
| | - Oriol Tallo-Parra
- Department of Animal and Food Science, School of Veterinary Science, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain
- Animal Welfare Education Centre, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain
| | - Marina Salas
- Antwerp Zoo Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerpen, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gandia KM, Elliott J, Girling S, Kessler SE, Buchanan-Smith HM. The Royal Zoological Society of Scotland's Approach to Assessing and Promoting Animal Welfare in Collaboration with Universities. Animals (Basel) 2024; 14:2223. [PMID: 39123748 PMCID: PMC11311029 DOI: 10.3390/ani14152223] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2024] [Revised: 07/25/2024] [Accepted: 07/26/2024] [Indexed: 08/12/2024] Open
Abstract
Good zoos have four aims-to conserve species, educate the public, engage in research, and provide recreation-all of which can only be achieved when underpinned by high animal welfare standards. In this paper, we share the approach that The Royal Zoological Society of Scotland's (RZSS) Edinburgh Zoo and Highland Wildlife Park take to animal welfare. We highlight the role that animal welfare research, in collaboration with universities, has had in enabling the zoo to take an evidence-based approach to welfare and to put findings into practice. We share the collaborative process through which we developed and piloted the current animal welfare assessment tools, how they were validated, and how they were tested for reliability as part of a long-term collaboration between the Royal Zoological Society of Scotland and the University of Stirling: (1) the RZSS Welfare Assessment Tool, a 50-question animal welfare assessment adapted from the British and Irish Association of Zoos and Aquariums (BIAZA) Toolkit; and (2) the Stirling Toolkit, a package of evidence-based resources for behavioural-data collection. Our aim is to facilitate standardised, evidence-based approaches to assessing animal welfare which, when finalised, can be used collaboratively across zoos.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristine M. Gandia
- Psychology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, UK
| | - Jo Elliott
- Royal Zoological Society of Scotland, 134 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh EH12 6TS, UK
| | - Simon Girling
- Royal Zoological Society of Scotland, 134 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh EH12 6TS, UK
| | - Sharon E. Kessler
- Psychology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ghimire R, Brown JL, Thitaram C, Bansiddhi P. Comparison of animal welfare assessment tools and methodologies: need for an effective approach for captive elephants in Asia. Front Vet Sci 2024; 11:1370909. [PMID: 38532794 PMCID: PMC10964907 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2024.1370909] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/15/2024] [Accepted: 02/23/2024] [Indexed: 03/28/2024] Open
Abstract
Welfare is a fundamental aspect of animal management and conservation. In light of growing public awareness and welfare concerns about captive elephants, there is an urgent need for comprehensive, globally coordinated efforts for Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) that participate in religious, logging, or tourist activities in range countries where the majority reside, and where welfare issues have been identified but not addressed. This review provides a comparative analysis of available animal assessment tools. Each offers distinct features for assessment that allow institutions to select criteria for specific needs and available resources. Most are applied to general animal welfare assessments, although some are tailored to particular species, including elephants. The tools span diverse formats, from digital to primarily paper-based assessments. Assessments operate at individual and institutional levels and across multiple welfare domains. Methodologies rely on keeper ratings or expert evaluations, incorporate numerical scoring and Likert scales for welfare grading, and encompass inputs including behaviors, health, and physiological indicators. For tourist camp elephants, one challenge is that the tools were developed in zoos, which may or may not have application to non-zoological settings. Digital tools and assessment methodologies such as keeper ratings face logistical challenges when applied across tourist venues. As with any tool, reliability, validity, and repeatability are essential and must address the unique welfare challenges of diverse captive settings. We propose that a holistic, context-specific, evidence-based, and practical tool be developed to ensure high elephant welfare standards in non-zoological facilities throughout Asia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Raman Ghimire
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand
| | - Janine L. Brown
- Center of Elephant and Wildlife Health, Chiang Mai University Animal Hospital, Chiang Mai, Thailand
- Elephant, Wildlife, and Companion Animals Research Group, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand
- Center for Species Survival, Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, Front Royal, VA, United States
| | - Chatchote Thitaram
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand
- Center of Elephant and Wildlife Health, Chiang Mai University Animal Hospital, Chiang Mai, Thailand
- Elephant, Wildlife, and Companion Animals Research Group, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand
| | - Pakkanut Bansiddhi
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand
- Center of Elephant and Wildlife Health, Chiang Mai University Animal Hospital, Chiang Mai, Thailand
- Elephant, Wildlife, and Companion Animals Research Group, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Krönke F, Xu L. Sensory Stimulation as a Means of Sustained Enhancement of Well-Being in Leopard Geckos, Eublepharis macularius (Eublepharidae, Squamata). Animals (Basel) 2023; 13:3595. [PMID: 38066945 PMCID: PMC10705344 DOI: 10.3390/ani13233595] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2023] [Revised: 11/13/2023] [Accepted: 11/15/2023] [Indexed: 10/16/2024] Open
Abstract
Although the private keeping of reptiles has boomed in most western countries since the millennium, studies dealing with the recognition and promotion of welfare in these reptiles seem to represent a blind spot of scientific attention. The vast majority of studies from the field of animal welfare science still concern mammals and birds. The leopard gecko is probably the most common lizard that is kept in domestic terrariums worldwide. Due to its characteristic as an ecological generalist, it is easy to keep and breed, and it is considered a good "starter reptile" for beginners as it "condones" husbandry mistakes, even for extended periods. However, being a mass species is not a second-class classification. They, too, have an equal claim to good well-being as all animals in human care. The aim of the study was to test the hypothesis of whether an increase in stimulus density leads to an increase in activity and behavioural diversity and, thus, an increase in welfare. For this purpose, 18 leopard geckos were fed insects that were ≤1 cm in size, and both the quantity and quality of behaviour was documented and analysed in the pre-intervention, intervention and post-intervention stages. In addition, it was of interest whether behavioural indicators could be identified that indicate a state of positive well-being. The results showed that this type of enrichment led to a quantitative doubling of the activity levels from the baseline (total of 12,519 behavioural elements) to the intervention (total of 25,366 behavioural elements). And even 11 months after the introduction of small insect feeding (post-intervention total of 23,267 behavioural elements), the activity level was still significantly increased. The behavioural diversity, as the absolute number of behavioural categories across all 18 leopard geckos, also increased, although less than the behavioural intensity, between the baseline (5507 behavioural categories) and intervention (6451 behavioural categories) and between the baseline and post-intervention (6079 behavioural categories). The results clearly show that feeding small insects to leopard geckos is a very efficient tool to increase the welfare of leopard geckos. Attractively, this feeding regime can be implemented by any leopard gecko keeper without significant additional cost or time, and therefore, these methods have a potentially high impact.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Frank Krönke
- Auffangstation für Reptilien e.V. München, Rescue Center for Reptiles, Kaulbachstrasse 37, 80539 München, Germany
| | - Lisa Xu
- Statistical Consulting Unit, StaBLab, Department of Statistics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Ludwigstrasse 33, 80539 München, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Littlewood KE, Heslop MV, Cobb ML. The agency domain and behavioral interactions: assessing positive animal welfare using the Five Domains Model. Front Vet Sci 2023; 10:1284869. [PMID: 38026638 PMCID: PMC10656766 DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2023.1284869] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/29/2023] [Accepted: 10/12/2023] [Indexed: 12/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Animal welfare denotes how an animal experiences their life. It represents the overall mental experiences of an animal and is a subjective concept that cannot be directly measured. Instead, welfare indicators are used to cautiously infer mental experiences from resource provisions, management factors, and animal-based measures. The Five Domains Model is a holistic and structured framework for collating these indicators and assessing animal welfare. Contemporary approaches to animal welfare management consider how animals can be given opportunities to have positive experiences. However, the uncertainty surrounding positive mental experiences that can be inferred has resulted in risk-averse animal welfare scientists returning to the relative safety of positivism. This has meant that aspects of positive welfare are often referred to as animal 'wants'. Agency is a concept that straddles the positivist-affective divide and represents a way forward for discussions about positive welfare. Agency is the capacity of individual animals to engage in voluntary, self-generated, and goal-directed behavior that they are motivated to perform. Discrete positive emotions are cautiously inferred from these agentic experiences based on available knowledge about the animal's motivation for engaging in the behavior. Competence-building agency can be used to evaluate the potential for positive welfare and is represented by the Behavioral Interactions domain of the Five Domains Model. In 2020, The Model was updated to, amongst other things, include consideration of human-animal interactions. The most important aspect of this update was the renaming of Domain 4 from "Behavior" to "Behavioral Interactions" and the additional detail added to allow this domain's purpose to be clearly understood to represent an animal's opportunities to exercise agency. We illustrate how the Behavioral Interactions domain of The Model can be used to assess animals' competence-building agency and positive welfare. In this article, we use the examples of sugar gliders housed in captivity and greyhounds that race to illustrate how the agentic qualities of choice, control, and challenge can be used to assess opportunities for animals to exercise agency and experience positive affective engagement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katherine E. Littlewood
- Animal Welfare Science and Bioethics Centre, School of Veterinary Science, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
| | - Morgan V. Heslop
- Animal Welfare Science and Bioethics Centre, School of Veterinary Science, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
| | - Mia L. Cobb
- Animal Welfare Science Centre, Faculty of Science, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Campbell-Ward M. Quality-of-Life Assessments in Zoo Animals: Not Just for the Aged and Charismatic. Animals (Basel) 2023; 13:3394. [PMID: 37958149 PMCID: PMC10648866 DOI: 10.3390/ani13213394] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2023] [Revised: 10/17/2023] [Accepted: 10/29/2023] [Indexed: 11/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Zoos should aim to provide all of their animals with a good quality of life (QoL) throughout all life stages. In parallel with the evolution of QoL assessment questionnaires and tools in human and domestic animal settings, in recent times, some individual zoos and zoo industry associations have incorporated such instruments into their animal management practices. This has been conducted predominantly to inform, monitor, and document end-of-life decision-making for large, charismatic mammals. There is scope to expand the use of these tools to improve their utility, validity, reliability, and value to an animal welfare program. Assessment of QoL is a complex task given that the notion being measured is abstract and self-determined, and the design and purpose of the tools to do this require careful consideration. This review explores the QoL concept as it applies to animals, the assessment indications and methodologies relevant to a zoo setting, and the importance of considering QoL at any life stage across species. An overview of current thinking and the applications and limitations of QoL evaluation of captive wild animals is offered to promote and aid facility practice reviews and to help direct future innovations that leverage concurrent and converging advances in zoo animal welfare science.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michelle Campbell-Ward
- Sydney School of Veterinary Science, Faculty of Science, The University of Sydney, Camden, NSW 2570, Australia;
- School of Agricultural, Environmental and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2650, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Tidière M, Colchero F, Staerk J, Adkesson MJ, Andersen DH, Bland L, Böye M, Brando S, Clegg I, Cubaynes S, Cutting A, De Man D, Derocher AE, Dorsey C, Elgar W, Gaglione E, Anderson Hansen K, Jungheim A, Kok J, Laule G, Goya AL, Miller L, Monreal-Pawlowsky T, Mucha K, Owen MA, Petersen SD, Pilfold N, Richardson D, Richardson ES, Sabo D, Sato N, Shellabarger W, Skovlund CR, Tomisawa K, Trautwein SE, Van Bonn W, Van Elk C, Von Fersen L, Wahlberg M, Zhang P, Zhang X, Conde DA. Survival improvements of marine mammals in zoological institutions mirror historical advances in human longevity. Proc Biol Sci 2023; 290:20231895. [PMID: 37848064 PMCID: PMC10581765 DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2023.1895] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2023] [Accepted: 09/21/2023] [Indexed: 10/19/2023] Open
Abstract
An intense public debate has fuelled governmental bans on marine mammals held in zoological institutions. The debate rests on the assumption that survival in zoological institutions has been and remains lower than in the wild, albeit the scientific evidence in support of this notion is equivocal. Here, we used statistical methods previously applied to assess historical improvements in human lifespan and data on 8864 individuals of four marine mammal species (harbour seal, Phoca vitulina; California sea lion, Zalophus californianus; polar bear, Ursus maritimus; common bottlenose dolphin, Tursiops truncatus) held in zoos from 1829 to 2020. We found that life expectancy increased up to 3.40 times, and first-year mortality declined up to 31%, during the last century in zoos. Moreover, the life expectancy of animals in zoos is currently 1.65-3.55 times longer than their wild counterparts. Like humans, these improvements have occurred concurrently with advances in management practices, crucial for population welfare. Science-based decisions will help effective legislative changes and ensure better implementation of animal care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Morgane Tidière
- Interdisciplinary Centre on Population Dynamics (CPop), University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
- Department of Biology, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense, Denmark
- Conservation and Science Department, Species360, 7900 International Drive, Suite 300, Minneapolis, MN 55425, USA
| | - Fernando Colchero
- Interdisciplinary Centre on Population Dynamics (CPop), University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
- Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
- Department of Primate Behavior and Evolution, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Deutscher Pl. 6, 04103 Leipzig, Germany
| | - Johanna Staerk
- Interdisciplinary Centre on Population Dynamics (CPop), University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
- Department of Biology, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense, Denmark
- Conservation and Science Department, Species360, 7900 International Drive, Suite 300, Minneapolis, MN 55425, USA
| | | | - Ditte H. Andersen
- Department of Biology, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense, Denmark
| | - Lucie Bland
- Conservation and Science Department, Species360, 7900 International Drive, Suite 300, Minneapolis, MN 55425, USA
- Eureka Publishing, Thornbury, Australia
| | - Martin Böye
- Centre de Recherche et d'Etude pour l'Animal Sauvage, Planète Sauvage, 44710 Port Saint Pere, France
| | - Sabrina Brando
- AnimalConcepts, PO Box 378, 03725 Teulada, Alicante, Spain
| | - Isabella Clegg
- Animal Welfare Expertise, The Knoll, Woodlands, Combe Martin, EX34 0ATLittleton Manor, Winchester SO22 6QU, UK
| | - Sarah Cubaynes
- CEFE, Univ Montpellier, CNRS, EPHE-PSL University, IRD, Montpellier, France
| | - Amy Cutting
- Polar Bear International, PO Box 3008, Bozeman, MT, USA
| | - Danny De Man
- European Association of Zoos and Aquaria (EAZA), Plantage Middelaan 45, 1018-DC Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Andrew E. Derocher
- Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta; Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6G 2E9
| | - Candice Dorsey
- Association of Zoos and Aquariums, 8403 Colesville Road Ste 710, Silver Spring, MD 20910, USA
| | - William Elgar
- Zoo Miami, 12400 SW 152 Street, Miami, FL 33177, USA
| | - Eric Gaglione
- Georgia Aquarium, 225 Baker Street, Atlanta, GA 30313, USA
| | - Kirstin Anderson Hansen
- Department of Biology, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense, Denmark
- Marine Biological Research Center, University of Southern Denmark, Hindsholmvej 11, 5300 Kerteminde, Denmark
| | - Allison Jungheim
- Como Park Zoo and Conservatory, 1225 Estabrook Dr., Saint Paul, MN 55103, USA
| | - José Kok
- Ouwehands Zoo, Grebbeweg 111, 3911 AV Rhenen, The Netherlands
| | - Gail Laule
- Mandai Wildlife Group, 80 Mandai Lake Road, Singapore 729826
| | | | - Lance Miller
- Chicago Zoological Society, Brookfield Zoo, Brookfield, IL, USA
| | | | - Katelyn Mucha
- Conservation and Science Department, Species360, 7900 International Drive, Suite 300, Minneapolis, MN 55425, USA
| | - Megan A. Owen
- San Diego Zoo Wildlife Alliance, 15600 San Pasqual Valley Rd., Escondido, CA, USA
| | | | - Nicholas Pilfold
- San Diego Zoo Wildlife Alliance, 15600 San Pasqual Valley Rd., Escondido, CA, USA
| | - Douglas Richardson
- Zoological Consultancy Ltd, Columba Cottage, Mill Rd, Kingussie PH21 1LF, UK
- EAZA Polar Bear EEP, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Evan S. Richardson
- Environment and Climate Change Canada, Unit 150–234 Donald Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3C 1M8, Canada
| | - Devon Sabo
- Columbus Zoo and Aquarium, 4850 W. Powell Road, PO Box 400, Powell, OH 43065-0400, USA
| | - Nobutaka Sato
- Asahiyama Zoological Park, Kuranuma, Higasiasahikawacho, Asahikawa city, Japan
| | | | - Cecilie R. Skovlund
- Conservation, Copenhagen Zoo, Roskildevej 38, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
- Section of Animal Welfare and Disease Control, Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Grønnegårdsvej 8, 1870 Frederiksberg, Denmark
| | - Kanako Tomisawa
- Omuta City Zoo, 163 Showa-machi, Omuta, Fukuoka 836-0871, Japan
| | - Sandra E. Trautwein
- Conservation and Science Department, Species360, 7900 International Drive, Suite 300, Minneapolis, MN 55425, USA
| | - William Van Bonn
- A. Watson Armour III, Center for Animal Health and Welfare, Animal Care and Science Division, John G. Shedd Aquarium, Chicago, IL 60605, USA
| | - Cornelis Van Elk
- Independent practitioner, Arendsweg 98, Enschede 7544RM, The Netherlands
| | | | - Magnus Wahlberg
- Department of Biology, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense, Denmark
- Marine Biological Research Center, University of Southern Denmark, Hindsholmvej 11, 5300 Kerteminde, Denmark
| | - Peijun Zhang
- Mammal and Marine Bioacoustics Laboratory Institute of Deep-sea Science and Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Sanya 572000, People's Republic of China
| | - Xianfeng Zhang
- Institute of Hydrobiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
| | - Dalia A. Conde
- Interdisciplinary Centre on Population Dynamics (CPop), University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
- Department of Biology, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Brando S, Norman M. Handling and Training of Wild Animals: Evidence and Ethics-Based Approaches and Best Practices in the Modern Zoo. Animals (Basel) 2023; 13:2247. [PMID: 37508025 PMCID: PMC10375971 DOI: 10.3390/ani13142247] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2023] [Revised: 07/01/2023] [Accepted: 07/05/2023] [Indexed: 07/30/2023] Open
Abstract
There is an ethical responsibility to provide all animals living in human care with optimal and positive well-being. As animals living in zoos and aquariums frequently interact with their human caregivers as part of their daily care routines, it is both relevant and essential to consider the impact of these interactions on animal well-being. Allowing animals to have choice and control in multiple areas of their lives, such as by providing opportunities for them to voluntarily participate in their own care through, for example, positive reinforcement training, is an essential component of good animal well-being programs. This review aims to describe evidence-based approaches, ethics, and best practices in the handling and training of the many taxa held in zoos and aquariums worldwide, drawing from work in related animal care fields such as laboratories, farms, rescue, and sanctuaries. The importance of ongoing animal well-being assessments is discussed, with a particular focus on the need for continued review and refinement of processes and procedures pertaining to animal training and handling specifically. Review, enquiry, assessment, evaluation, and refinement will aim to dynamically support positive well-being for all animals.
Collapse
|
9
|
Bartolomé A, Carazo P, Font E. Environmental enrichment for reptiles in European zoos: Current status and perspectives. Anim Welf 2023; 32:e48. [PMID: 38487426 PMCID: PMC10936270 DOI: 10.1017/awf.2023.43] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2023] [Revised: 04/28/2023] [Accepted: 05/25/2023] [Indexed: 03/17/2024]
Abstract
Zoos and aquaria are paying increasing attention to environmental enrichment, which has proven an effective tool for the improvement of animal welfare. However, several ongoing issues have hampered progress in environmental enrichment research. Foremost among these is the taxonomic bias, which hinders our understanding of the value of enrichment for neglected groups, such as reptiles. In this study, we evaluated the status of environmental enrichment for reptiles in European zoos using a survey approach. A total of 121 zoos (32% response rate) completed our main survey, focusing on the use of different enrichment types for reptiles. We found significant differences in the use and/or type of enrichment between reptile groups. Tortoises (family Testudinidae) and monitor lizards (genus Varanus) were the most enriched taxa while venomous snakes were the least. The enrichment types most used across taxa were structural/habitat design and dietary. A second, more detailed, questionnaire followed, where participants were questioned about specific enrichment techniques. A total of 42 enrichment methods were reported, with two being represented across all taxa: increasing structural/thermal complexity and enrichment objects. Finally, we present information from participating zoos on enrichment goals, assessment methods, sources of information for enrichment ideas, and whether enrichment for reptiles is considered essential and/or implemented routinely. Results suggest that, although usage is widespread across European zoos, our understanding of enrichment for reptiles needs to be re-evaluated, since many of the techniques reported tread a fine line between basic husbandry and actual enrichment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alicia Bartolomé
- Ethology lab, Cavanilles Institute of Biodiversity and Evolutionary Biology, University of Valencia, Spain
| | - Pau Carazo
- Ethology lab, Cavanilles Institute of Biodiversity and Evolutionary Biology, University of Valencia, Spain
| | - Enrique Font
- Ethology lab, Cavanilles Institute of Biodiversity and Evolutionary Biology, University of Valencia, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Cohen S, Ho C. Review of Rat ( Rattus norvegicus), Mouse ( Mus musculus), Guinea pig ( Cavia porcellus), and Rabbit ( Oryctolagus cuniculus) Indicators for Welfare Assessment. Animals (Basel) 2023; 13:2167. [PMID: 37443965 DOI: 10.3390/ani13132167] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2023] [Revised: 06/17/2023] [Accepted: 06/21/2023] [Indexed: 07/15/2023] Open
Abstract
The monitoring and assessment of animals is important for their health and welfare. The appropriate selection of multiple, validated, and feasible welfare assessment indicators is required to effectively identify compromises or improvements to animal welfare. Animal welfare indicators can be animal or resource based. Indicators can be collated to form assessment tools (e.g., grimace scales) or animal welfare assessment models (e.g., 5 Domains) and frameworks (e.g., 5 Freedoms). The literature contains a wide variety of indicators, with both types needed for effective animal welfare assessment; however, there is yet to be an ideal constellation of indicators for animal-based welfare assessment in small mammals such as guinea pigs (Cavia Porcellus), mice (Mus musculus), rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus), and rats (Rattus norvegicus). A systematic review of grey and peer-reviewed literature was performed to determine the types of animal-based welfare indicators available to identify and assess animal health and welfare in these small mammals maintained across a wide variety of conditions. The available indicators were categorised and scored against a selection of criteria, including potential ease of use and costs. This review and analysis aim to provide the basis for further research into animal welfare indicators for these species. Future applications of this work may include improvements to animal welfare assessments or schemes, guiding better management, and implementing future strategies to enable better animal welfare.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shari Cohen
- Melbourne Veterinary School, Animal Welfare Science Centre, University of Melbourne, Parkville 3010, Australia
- School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Camden 2570, Australia
| | - Cindy Ho
- Melbourne Veterinary School, Animal Welfare Science Centre, University of Melbourne, Parkville 3010, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
DiVincenti L, McDowell A, Herrelko ES. Integrating Individual Animal and Population Welfare in Zoos and Aquariums. Animals (Basel) 2023; 13:ani13101577. [PMID: 37238007 DOI: 10.3390/ani13101577] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2023] [Revised: 05/05/2023] [Accepted: 05/07/2023] [Indexed: 05/28/2023] Open
Abstract
Over the last 50 years, animal welfare science has advanced dramatically, especially in zoos and aquariums. A shifting focus from population-level welfare parameters such as reproductive success and longevity (macroscopic, big-picture concepts) to the subjective experience of individual animals (microscopic, focused concepts) has led to more effective animal welfare assessments and improvements in animal welfare. The interplay between individual animal and population welfare for captive animals is critical to the way zoos and aquariums operate to realize their welfare and conservation missions, especially when these missions conflict with one another. In this report, we explore the intersection of individual animal and population welfare in zoos and aquariums and how these two concepts may support one another or be in conflict.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Allen McDowell
- North Carolina Aquarium on Roanoke Island, P.O. Box 967, Manteo, NC 27954, USA
| | - Elizabeth S Herrelko
- Smithsonian's National Zoo and Conservation Biology Institute, Washington, DC 20008, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
de Azevedo CS, Cipreste CF, Pizzutto CS, Young RJ. Review of the Effects of Enclosure Complexity and Design on the Behaviour and Physiology of Zoo Animals. Animals (Basel) 2023; 13:ani13081277. [PMID: 37106840 PMCID: PMC10135285 DOI: 10.3390/ani13081277] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2023] [Revised: 04/03/2023] [Accepted: 04/04/2023] [Indexed: 04/29/2023] Open
Abstract
The complexity of the habitat refers to its physical geometry, which includes abiotic and biotic elements. Habitat complexity is important because it allows more species to coexist and, consequently, more interactions to be established among them. The complexity of the habitat links the physical structure of the enclosure to the biological interactions, which occur within its limits. Enclosure complexity should vary temporally, to be able to influence the animals in different ways, depending on the period of the day and season and throughout the year. In the present paper, we discuss how habitat complexity is important, and how it can positively influence the physical and mental states of zoo animals. We show how habitat complexity can ultimately affect educational projects. Finally, we discuss how we can add complexity to enclosures and, thus, make the lives of animals more interesting and functional.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cristiano Schetini de Azevedo
- Departamento de Biodiversidade, Evolução e Meio Ambiente, Instituto de Ciências Exatas e Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto, Campus Morro do Cruzeiro, s/n Bauxita, Ouro Preto 35400-000, Brazil
| | | | - Cristiane Schilbach Pizzutto
- Programa de Pós-graduação em Reprodução Animal, Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária, Universidade de São Paulo, Avenida Dr. Orlando Marques de Paiva, 87, Cidade Universitária Armando Salles de Oliveira, São Paulo 05508-270, Brazil
| | - Robert John Young
- School of Science, Engineering and Environment, University of Salford Manchester, Peel Building-Room G51, Salford M5 4WT, UK
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Lamon TK, Slater MR, Moberly HK, Budke CM. Welfare and Quality of Life Assessments for Shelter Cats: A Scoping Review. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/j.applanim.2022.105797] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|
14
|
An Approach to Assessing Zoo Animal Welfare in a Rarely Studied Species, the Common Cusimanse Crossarchus obscurus. JOURNAL OF ZOOLOGICAL AND BOTANICAL GARDENS 2022. [DOI: 10.3390/jzbg3030032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective welfare assessments play a fundamental role in ensuring that positive welfare is achieved and maintained for animals in captivity. The Animal Welfare Assessment Grid (AWAG), a welfare assessment tool, has been validated for use with a variety of both domestic and exotic species. It combines both resource- and animal-based measures but relies heavily on knowledge of the species to effectively assess welfare. Many zoo species are understudied in the wild due to their cryptic nature or habitat choice; therefore, the published literature needs to be supported with captive behavioural observations and zoo records. Here we adapted previously published AWAG templates to assess the welfare of Crossarchus obscurus. A total of 21 factors were identified, and the final template was used to retrospectively score the welfare of two male and two female C. obscurus at Marwell Zoo, UK, validating the use of this process for preparing a welfare assessment for a species where the published literature is scarce.
Collapse
|