Human–Animal Bonds Between Zoo Professionals and the Animals in Their Care

Abstract

Some human-animal relationships can be so positive that they confer emotional well-being to both partners and can thus be viewed as bonds. In this study, 130 delegates at zoo research and training events completed questionnaires in which they were asked about their professional work in the zoo and whether they believed they had established bonds with any animals. They were also asked to indicate agreement or disagreement with several statements about human-animal bonds. Results showed that many zoo professionals consider that they have established bonds with some of their animals; 103 respondents believed that they had a bond with at least one animal, and 78 of these identified that the bond was with a zoo animal. The most frequent bonds reported were with primates (n = 24) and carnivores (n = 28). Perceived benefits of these bonds to the respondents included both operational (animal easier to handle, easier to administer treatments to) and affective (sense of well-being, enjoyment at being with the animal). Identifying benefits to the animals was more difficult. Most respondents identified similar benefits for their animals as for themselves, i.e. operational (animal responded more calmly, appeared less stressed) and affective (animal appeared to enjoy contact with respondent, seemed more content). This suggests that bonding between zoo professionals and their animals could have profound consequences for the management and welfare of the animals, not to mention the job satisfaction of the people involved.

Comparative analyses of longevity and senescence reveal variable survival benefits of living in zoos across mammals

“…When assessing the justification of holding nondomestic species in zoos, the welfare of the individual animals housed in captivity is a critical ethical issue that has to be weighed against these aims5. There is no single proxy to measure the welfare of animals.…”

“…There is no single proxy to measure the welfare of animals. Indicators typically employed include measures of survival (such as longevity, annual survival, or ageing rate), reproduction (such as fertility or litter size), physiology (such as stress hormones or the occurrence of specific diseases) and behavior (such as stereotypies)56. It is typically believed that zoo animals live longer than their free-ranging conspecifics due to the consistent provision of food, water, and shelter from harsh climates, the absence of predation and management to minimize violent intraspecific encounters and accidents, as well as veterinary prophylactic and therapeutic intervention.…”

Elephant-Initiated Interactions with Humans: Individual Differences and Specific Preferences in Captive African Elephants (Loxodonta africana)

“…Considering that HABs have been most often reported in large mammals (8), and that there is evidence for HABs between Asian elephants and mahouts (17), the potential for HABs between African elephants and guides is a relevant issue. Physical contact is considered to be important in the development of bonds (1), and these elephants have regular physical contact with the guides through the elephant-initiated interactions studied, as well as through guide-initiated interactions, training, and general care.…”

“…HABs have been defined as “reciprocal and persistent” relationships that benefit both parties involved (8, 9). The potential for animals to develop HABs has been evidenced in multiple species, including dogs and horses (1), farm animals (10), and various zoo animals (5, 8). A positive relationship has been shown between the frequency of HAIs and the subsequent development of a HAB (1).…”

“…A positive relationship has been shown between the frequency of HAIs and the subsequent development of a HAB (1). The implications of the HAB in a captive facility include increased ease of management and potential increase in quality of life for the animals (8). …”