Perception of available space during chimpanzee introductions: Number of accessible areas is more important than enclosure size

Restricting animals to different areas of their enclosure, for both brief and extended durations, is a key element of animal management practices. With such restrictions, available space decreases and the choices the animals can make are more limited, particularly in relation to social dynamics. When unfamiliar individuals are introduced to each other, group dynamics can be unpredictable and understanding space usage is important to facilitate successful introductions. We studied the behavioral, welfare-related responses of two groups of zoo-housed chimpanzees (n = 22) as they were introduced to each other and experienced a variety of enclosure restrictions and group composition changes. Our analysis of available space while controlling for chimpanzee density, found that arousal-related scratching and yawning decreased as the number of enclosure areas (separate rooms) available increased, whereas only yawning decreased as the amount of available space (m(2)) increased. Allogrooming, rubbing, and regurgitation/reingestion rates remained constant as both the number of enclosure areas and amount of space changed. Enclosure space is important to zoo-housed chimpanzees, but during introductions, a decrease in arousal-related scratching indicates that the number of accessible areas is more important than the total amount of space available, suggesting that it is important to provide modular enclosures that provide choice and flexible usage, to minimize the welfare impact of short- and long-term husbandry needs.

Getting It Straight: Accommodating Rectilinear Behavior in Captive Snakes-A Review of Recommendations and Their Evidence Base

Snakes are sentient animals and should be subject to the accepted general welfare principles of other species. However, they are also the only vertebrates commonly housed in conditions that prevent them from adopting rectilinear behavior (ability to fully stretch out). To assess the evidence bases for historical and current guidance on snake spatial considerations, we conducted a literature search and review regarding recommendations consistent with or specifying ≥1 × and <1 × snake length enclosure size. We identified 65 publications referring to snake enclosure sizes, which were separated into three categories: peer-reviewed literature (article or chapter appearing in a peer-reviewed journal or book, n = 31), grey literature (government or other report or scientific letter, n = 18), and opaque literature (non-scientifically indexed reports, care sheets, articles, husbandry books, website or other information for which originating source is not based on scientific evidence or where scientific evidence was not provided, n = 16). We found that recommendations suggesting enclosure sizes shorter than the snakes were based entirely on decades-old 'rule of thumb' practices that were unsupported by scientific evidence. In contrast, recommendations suggesting enclosure sizes that allowed snakes to fully stretch utilized scientific evidence and considerations of animal welfare. Providing snakes with enclosures that enable them to fully stretch does not suggest that so doing allows adequate space for all necessary normal and important considerations. However, such enclosures are vital to allow for a limited number of essential welfare-associated behaviors, of which rectilinear posturing is one, making them absolute minimum facilities even for short-term housing.

Environmental complexity and feeding enrichment can mitigate effects of space constraints in captive callitrichids

Non-human primates housed in zoos and laboratories often exhibit reduced activity and this poses welfare concerns. We examined the effects of enclosure types of differing size and environmental complexity on the activities of two species of callitrichids. We found that cotton-top tamarins housed in an enclosure of larger size and more environmental complexity showed higher activity levels, which was mainly contributed by more feeding/foraging activity. By contrast, Goeldi's monkeys housed in an enclosure of larger size and more environmental complexity showed lower activity levels, which was mainly contributed by less locomotory activity. In both species, off-exhibit groups housed in smaller enclosures did not show significantly less locomotory activity which would have been expected, as larger availability spaces should allow more opportunities for locomotion. Furthermore, the feeding enrichment had significant effects on increased feeding/foraging activity for both cotton-top tamarins and Goeldi's monkeys, irrespective of enclosure type. These results suggested that environmental complexity (or application of feeding enrichment) that provided more opportunities for natural foraging could have a larger effect on overall activity levels compared with larger enclosure sizes that should provide more locomotion opportunities. More importantly, it showed that even when enclosure space and complexity were limited, increased opportunities for foraging through the application of enrichment could increase species-typical behaviours. Such inexpensive, easy to implement enrichment methods should be applied to provide more complex environments for captive non-human primates, particularly in situations where there are logistical and/or cost constraints to the modification of physical exhibits.