Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T17:25:57.319Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Enriching the Lives of Zoo Animals, and Their Welfare: Where Research Can be Fundamental

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

M H Robinson
M H Robinson*
Affiliation:
National Zoological Park, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 20008, USA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

As zoos have evolved, conservation and conservation education have become primary tasks. To achieve the maximum educational impact, zoos are enriching animal habitats so that their occupants display a wide range of activities that are attractive to the visitor, and unattractive activities are eliminated and reduced. Because public perceptions of the attractiveness of animal behaviour may not coincide with welfare realities, there can be a tension between the requirements of desirable exhibits and those of maximally promoting animal welfare. Zoo animals differ from domesticated animals in human care in several respects. These differences are discussed and set in the context of the sometimes competing aims of enhancing welfare and promoting educational exhibits. An outline history of zoo enrichment programmes suggests that the subject is in need of systematization. The range of data available for improving zoo exhibit designs, and the lives of zoo animals, is reviewed. It is concluded that fundamental data on the environmental needs of many of the wild animals maintained in zoos are deficient in many important areas. Consequently, there is an urgent need to increase such research. Zoo habitats could be excellent places for such fundamental studies, which would feed back into field studies. At the same time, habitat enrichment in zoos cannot await such research and must proceed pragmatically using the range of insights described in this paper. In particular, functional substitution is advocated as a means of enrichment wherever this can be made acceptable to the broad public; its educational value in combatting naive anthropomorphism is stressed. Naturalism in enrichment is criticized as reinforcing anthropomorhisms, but is desirable for promoting global habitat conservation.

Keywords

animal welfareenrichmentexhibit designresearchzoos
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , May 1998 , pp. 151 - 175
Copyright
© 1998 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Adams S and G Babladelis 1977 An ecological approach to animal groups in zoos. International Zoo News 24(5): 14–22, 25 (6): 8–15Google Scholar
Bayne, K, Dexter, S, Mainzer, H, McCully, C, Campbell, G, and Yamada, F 1992 The use of artificial turf as a foraging substrate for individually housed rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). Animal Welfare 1: 3953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, B B, Kleinian, D G, Deitz, J M, Castro, I, Carvalho, C, Martins, A and Rettberg-Beck, B 1991 Losses and reproduction in reintroduced Golden Lion tamarins (Leontopithecus rosalia). Dodo 27: 50–61Google Scholar
Berlyne, D E 1960 Conflict, Arousal and Curiosity. McGraw Hill: New York, USACrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bronikowski, E J, Beck, B B and Power, M 1989 Innovation, exhibition and conservation: free-ranging tamarins at the National Zoological Park. AAZPA Annual Conference Proceedings pp 540–546. American Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums: Wheeling, West Virginia, USAGoogle Scholar
Carlstead, K 1996 Effects of Captivity on the Behavior of Wild Mammals In: Kleiman D G, Allen M E, Thompson K V, and Lumpkin S (eds) Wild Mammals in Captivity pp 317–333. University of Chicago Press: Chicago, USAGoogle Scholar
Carlstead, K, Brown, J L and Seidensticker, J 1993 Behavioral and Adrenocortical Responses to Environmental Changes in Leopard Cats. Zoo Biology 12: 333–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chamove, A S 1989 Environmental enrichment: A review. Animal Technology 40: 155–178Google Scholar
Chance, M R A 1962 An interpretation of some agonistic postures: The role of ‘cut-off’ acts and postures. Symposia of the Zoological Society of London 8: 71–89Google Scholar
Chapman, C R 1990 On the neurobiologicai basis of suffering. Behavioural and Brain Sciences 13: 16–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curio, E, Ernst, E and Vieth, W 1978 Cultural transmission of enemy recognition; one function of mobbing. Science 202: 899–901CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dantzer, R and Mittleman, G 1993 Functional consequences of behavioural stereotypy. In: Lawrence, A B and Rushen, J (eds) Stereotypic Animal Behaviour pp 147–172. CAB International: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, M S 1977 Do hens suffer in battery cages? Environmental preferences and welfare. Animal Behaviour 25: 1034–1046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, M S 1980 Animal Suffering, the Science of Animal Welfare. Chapman & Hall: London, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, M S 1983 The current state of preference tests in the assessment of animal welfare. In: Baxter, S H, Baxter, M R and MacCormack, D (eds) Farm Animal Housing and Welfare pp 20–26. Martinus Nijhoff: The Hague, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, M S 1988 Behavioural deprivation: A central problem in animal welfare. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 24: 200–225Google Scholar
Dawkins, M S 1990 From an animal's point of view: motivation, fitness and animal welfare. Behavioural and Brain Sciences 13: 1–9, 54–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delius, J D 1989 Of mind memes and brain bugs, a natural history of culture. In: Koch, W A (ed) The Nature Of Culture pp 26–79. Brockmeyer: Bochum, GermanyGoogle Scholar
Delius, J D 1991 The nature of culture. In: Dawkins, M S, Halliday, T R and Dawkins, R (eds) The Tinbergen Legacy pp 75–99. Chapman & Hall: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Dittrich, L 1990 Zoos and Behaviour. In: Scientific Proceedings of 45th Conference International Union of Directors of Zoological Gardens pp 3–16. International Union of Directors of Zoological Gardens: Apple Valley, Minnesota, USAGoogle Scholar
Dow, S M 1986 Behavioural enrichment for captive animals. In: Scott P W and Greenwood A G (eds). Exotic Animals in the Eighties: 25th Anniversary Symposium of the British Veterinary Zoological Society pp 67–75. British Veterinary Zoological Society: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I 1963 Angeborenes und Erworbenes im Verhalten einiger Sauger. Zeitschrift fur Tierpsychologie 19: 165–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenberg, J F and Kleiman, D G 1977 The Usefulness of Behaviour Studies in Captive Breeding. Programmes for Mammals. In: Olney P J J (ed) International Zoo Yearbook 17: pp 81-88. Zoological Society of London: London, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erwin, J, Maple, T L and Mitchell, G 1979 Captivity and Behavior. Van Nostrand Reinhold: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Fraser, A F 1988 Behavioural needs of livestock. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 19: 368–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, A F 1989 Animal welfare theory: the keyboard of the maintenance ethosystem. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 22: 177–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D 1995 Science, values and animal welfare: Exploring the ‘inextricable” connection. Animal Welfare 4: 103–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gewalt, W 1990 Behavioural enrichment for Giant Otters, Kodiak Bears, and Cape Hunting Dogs in Duisberg Zoo. In: Scientific Proceedings of 45th Conference International Union of Directors of Zoological Gardens pp 30–33. International Union of Directors of Zoological Gardens: Apple Valley, Minnesota, USAGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, R 1983 The role of neophobia in determining the degree of foraging specialization in some migrant warblers. American Naturalist 122: 111–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, R 1984 Neophobia in the foraging site selection of a neotropical migrant bird: An experimental study. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 81: 3778–3780CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hediger, H 1955 Studies of the Psychology and Behaviour of Captive Animals in Zoos and Circuses. Butterworths: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Hediger, H 1964 Wild Animals in Captivity. An Outline of the Biology of Zoological Gardens. Dover Publications: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Hediger, H 1969 Man and Animal in the Zoo. Delcorte Press: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Houpt, K A 1991 Animal behavior and animal welfare. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 198: 1355–1360Google ScholarPubMed
Hughes, B O and Duncan, I J H 1988 The notion of ethological ‘need’ models of motivation and animal welfare. Animal Behaviour 36: 1696–1707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchins, M, Hancocks, D and Calip, T 1978 Behavioral engineering in the zoo: a critique. International Zoo News 25(7): 16–23, 25 (8): 18–23Google Scholar
Hutchins, M, Hancocks, D and Calip, T 1979 Behavioral engineering in the zoo: a critique. International Zoo News 26(1): 20–27Google Scholar
Hutchins, M, Hancocks, D and Crockett, C 1984 Naturalistic solutions to the behavioral problems of captive animals. Zoologische Garten 1/2: 28–42Google Scholar
Inglis, I R and Ferguson, N J K 1986 Starlings search for food rather than eat freely-available, identical food. Animal Behaviour 34: 614–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inglis, I R and Shepherd, D S 1990 Communication. In: Monaghan, P and Wood-Gush, D (eds) Managing the Behaviour of Animals pp 72–122. Chapman and Hall: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Itani, J 1958 On the acquisition and propagation of a new habit in a natural group of the Japanese monkey at Takasaki-Yama. Primate 1: 84–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IUDZG/CBSG (IUCN/SSC) 1993 The World Zoo Conservation Strategy. Chicago Zoological Society: Chicago, USAGoogle Scholar
Kiley-Worthington, M 1990 Animals in Circuses and Zoos - Chirons World? Little Eco-Farms Publishing: Basildon, UKGoogle Scholar
Kiley-Worthington, M 1993 Handling and teaching zoo animals. International Zoo News 243: 14–23Google Scholar
Kleiman, D G 1974 Patterns of behaviour in hystricomorph rodents. In: Richards, I W and Weir, B (eds) The Biology of Hystricomorph Rodents pp 171–209. Zoological Society of London: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Kleiman, D G 1996 Reintroduction programs. In: Kleiman, D G, Allen, M E, Thompson, K V, and Lumpkin, S (eds) Wild Mammals in Captivity pp 297–305. University of Chicago Press: Chicago, USAGoogle Scholar
Kummer, H 1957 Soziales Verhalten einer Mantelpaviangruppe. Hans Huber: Bern, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
Kummer, H 1968 Social Organization of Hamadryas Baboons. University of Chicago Press: Chicago, USAGoogle Scholar
Kummer, H and Kurt, F 1965 A comparison of social behavior in captive and free-living hamadryas baboons. In: Vagtborg, H (ed) The Baboon in Medical Research pp 65–80. University of Texas Press: San Antonio, USAGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, A B and Rushen, J 1993 Stereotypic Animal Behaviour. CAB International: Wallingford UKGoogle Scholar
Lefebvre, L 1986 Cultural diffusion of a novel food-finding behaviour in urban pigeons: an experimental field test. Ethology 71: 295–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leyhausen, P 1961 Smaller cats in the zoo. In: Jarvis, C and Morris, D (eds) International Zoo Yearbook III pp 11–21. Zoological Society of London: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Leyhausen, P 1979 Cat Behaviour. Garland Press: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Lorenz, K 1952 King Solomon's Ring. Methuen: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Lorenz, K 1982 The Foundations of Ethology pp 325–333. Simon and Schuster: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Lyall-Watson, M 1967 A critical re-examination of food ‘washing’ behaviour in the raccoon (Procyon lotor Linn.). Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 141: 371–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markowitz, H 1975 Analysis and control of behavior in the zoo. In: Markowitz H Research in Zoos and Aquariums pp 77–90. National Academy of Sciences Press: Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
Markowitz, H 1982 Behavioral Enrichment in the Zoo. Von Nostrand Reinhold: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Meritt, D A 1985 The two-toed Hoffmann's sloth, (Choloepus hoffmani Peters). In: Montgomery, G G (ed) The Evolution and Ecology of Armadillos, Sloths, and Vermilinguas pp 333–342. Smithsonian Institution Press: Washington DC, USAGoogle Scholar
Monaghan, P and Wood-Gush, D 1990 Managing the Behaviour of Animals. Chapman and Hall: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Morris, D 1961a Active life for zoo animals. New Scientist 241: 773–776Google Scholar
Morris, D 1961b A new approach to the problem of exhibiting small mammals in zoos. In: Jarvis, C and Morris, D (eds) International Zoo Yearbook III pp 1–9. Zoological Society of London: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Morris, D 1962 The behaviour of the green acouchi (Myoprocta pratti) with special reference to scatter hoarding. Proceedings of the Zoological of London 139: 701–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, D 1965 Experimental nocturnal house at London Zoo. In: Jarvis M (ed) International Zoo Yearbook V pp 240-243. Zoological Society of London: London, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, D 1968 Must we have zoos? Life 65: 78–86Google Scholar
Moynihan, M 1979 Geographic variation in social behavior and in adaptations to competition among Andean birds. Publications of the Nuttall Ornithological Field Club 18: 1–162Google Scholar
Novak, M A and Meyer, J S 1990 Seeking the sources of simian suffering. Behavioural and Brain Sciences 13: 31–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PETA 1993 Be a Zoo Checker. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals: Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
Powell, D M 1995 Preliminary evaluation of environmental enrichment techniques for African lions. Animal Welfare 4: 361–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rasa, O A E 1971 Appetance for aggression in juvenile Damsel fish. Zeitschrift fur Tierpsychologie, Supplement 7: 70Google Scholar
Robinson, M H 1989 Homage to Niko Tinbergen and Konrad Lorenz: Is classical ethology relevant to zoos? Zoo Biology 8: 1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, M H 1990 Ethology: zoo studies versus field studies. In: Scientific Proceedings of 45th Conference of the International Union of Directors of Zoological Gardens pp 119–164. International Union of Directors of Zoological Gardens: Apple Valley, Minnesota, USAGoogle Scholar
Robinson, M H 1991 Animal rights, objections to zoos, and the evolution of bioparks. In: Scientific Proceedings of 46th Conference International Union of Directors of Zoological Gardens pp. 18-45. International Union of Directors of Zoological Gardens: Apple Valley, Minnesota, USAGoogle Scholar
Robinson, M H 1992a Classical Ethology and Zoo Exhibits: Homage to Niko Tinbergen and Konrad Lorenz. In: Fourth Symposium of Paignton Zoological & Botanical Gardens pp 169–178. Whitley Wildlife Conservation Trust: Paignton, UKGoogle Scholar
Robinson, M H 1992b Environmentalism and attacks on zoos, truth or fiction? Scientific Proceedings of 47th Conference International Union of Directors of Zoological Gardens pp 78–98. International Union of Directors of Zoological Gardens: Apple Valley, Minnesota, USAGoogle Scholar
Shepherdson, D J, Mellen, J D and Hutchins, M (eds) 1998 Second Nature: Environmental Enrichment for Captive Animals. Smithsonian Institution Press: Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
Singer, P 1990 The significance of animal suffering. Behavioural and Brain Sciences 13: 9–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, W J 1977 The Behavior of Communicating Harvard University Press: Cambridge USACrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, R 1977 Putting the wild back into the zoo. International Zoo News 144: 11–18Google Scholar
Spinelli, J S and Markowitz, H 1985 Prevention of cage-associated distress. Laboratory Animals 14: 19–28Google Scholar
Tannenbaum, J 1991 Ethics and animal welfare: the inextricable connection. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 198: 1360–1376Google ScholarPubMed
Tiger, L 1992 The Pursuit of Pleasure. Little Brown Company: Boston, USAGoogle Scholar
Tilson, R L 1980 Klipspringer (Oeotragus otragus) social structure and predator avoidance in a desert canyon. Madoqua 11: 303–314Google Scholar
Tinbergen, N 1951 The Study of Instinct. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
Tudge, C 1991 A wild time at the 7.00. New Scientist 1750: 26–30Google Scholar
Tudge, C 1992 Last Animals at the Zoo. Island Press: Washington DC, USAGoogle Scholar
Veasey, J S, Waran, N K and Young, R J 1996a On comparing the behaviour of zoo housed animals with wild conspecifics as a welfare indicator, using the giraffe (Giraffa camelopardus) as a model. Animal Welfare 4: 139–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veasey, J S, Waran, N K and Young, R J 1996b On comparing the behaviour of zoo housed animals with wild conspecifics as a welfare indicator. Animal Welfare 5: 13–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood-Gush, D G M and Vestergaard, K 1991 The seeking of novelty and its relation to play. Animal Behaviour 42: 599–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, S F 1982 Environmental influences on the activity of captive apes. Zoo Biology 1: 201–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zuckerman, S 1932 The Social Life of Monkeys and Apes. Kegan Paul: London, UKGoogle Scholar