Little penguins, Eudyptula minor, show increased avoidance, aggression and vigilance in response to zoo visitors

Self Cite

Studies on the effects of visitors on zoo animals have shown mixed findings and as a result, the manner in which visitors affect zoo animals remains unclear for many species, including a rarely studied taxa such as penguins. Penguins are a common zoo-housed species and have been shown to display huddling, vigilance and avoidance towards zoo visitors which can be indicative of fear. Here, we examined the effects of covering one visitor viewing area window, out of four, on little penguin (Eudyptula minor) behaviours that may be indicative of fear. Two treatments were randomly imposed on different days: 1) The main visitor viewing area window, where most visitor-penguin interactions occurred, was uncovered (‘Main window uncovered’) and 2) The main visitor viewing area window was covered (‘Main window covered’). Penguin numbers and behaviour were recorded near the main visitor viewing area window and the three other visitor viewing area windows, as well as one area not visible to visitors (‘Corner’ area). Furthermore, visitor numbers and visitor behaviour were recorded at all four visitor viewing area windows. Covering the main visitor viewing area window reduced the proportion of visitors present at this window by about 85% (p < 0.001) and reduced potentially threatening visitor behaviours at this window such as tactile contact with the window, loud vocalisations and sudden movement (p < 0.05). When the main visitor viewing area window was covered, the proportion of penguins present increased by about 25% (p < 0.05), the proportion of visible penguins preening in the water increased by about 180% (p < 0.05) and the proportion of visible penguins vigilant decreased by about 70% (p < 0.05) in the area near this main window. A preference for the Corner area was also found whereby 59% and 49% of penguins were present in this area when the main window was uncovered and covered, respectively. These results provide limited evidence that the little penguins in this exhibit showed an aversion to the area near the main visitor viewing area window when it was uncovered based on the increased avoidance and vigilance and decreased preening in the water in this area. This suggests visitors may be fear-provoking for these little penguins. However, it is unclear whether visual contact with visitors per se or other aspects of visitor contact, such as visitor-induced sounds and vibrations, were responsible for this apparent aversion when this window was uncovered.

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Covering a Visitor Viewing Area Window on the Behaviour of Zoo-Housed Little Penguins (Eudyptula minor)

Chiew

Butler

Sherwen

et al. 2020

Self Cite

“…These indicators/measures were categorised across an adapted version of the four physical/functional domains of the Five Domains Model [ 35 ], reconfigured as (1) “Environment (physical/social)”; (2) “Behaviour”; (3) “Physical Health/Nutrition”; and (4) “Husbandry”. Husbandry was included as the last domain to recognise the potentially profound impact human presence, e.g., as keepers and/or visitors, can have on zoo animals [ 23 , 24 , 50 ].…”

Section: Materials and Methods—description Of Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Applied research should be used to inform these policy documents. There is a growing body of published work on applied animal welfare science in the zoo sector which explores the welfare consequences of various factors such as enrichment provision [ 14 , 15 , 16 ], enclosure design [ 17 , 18 , 19 ], social groupings [ 20 ], and human impacts [ 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 ]. This type of research is valuable in informing housing and husbandry standards for zoos, and clearly further study is needed to address the wide taxonomic spread of species housed in these settings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Animal Welfare Risk Assessment Process for Zoos

Sherwen

Hemsworth

Beausoleil

et al. 2018

Simple SummaryTo retain social license to operate, achieving and maintaining high standards of animal welfare need to be institutional priorities for zoos. In order to be confident in the delivery of high standards of animal welfare, a holistic evidence-based approach to welfare assessment is required. This should include a combination of institutional-level assessments, individual animal monitoring tools, and applied research targeted at advancing our understanding of species needs and preferences in zoos. Progress has certainly been made in the zoo sector in development of research programs and individual animal welfare monitoring tools. Comparatively less focus has been applied to institutional-level assessment processes. This paper aims to fill this gap and presents an outline of a welfare risk assessment process developed and trialed at three zoos over a three year period and discussion of the potential value it offers, as well as the limitations of its use.AbstractThere is a growing interest and need for zoos to develop and implement welfare assessment tools that are practical to use and provide meaningful results that can inform management decisions. This paper presents a process that was developed to support this type of evidence-based management in zoo animal welfare. The process is configured to facilitate institutional risk assessment, using an adapted version of the Five Domains Model for animal welfare assessment. It is designed to systematically analyse information gathered from zoo personnel in order to highlight areas of welfare risk, as well as areas that are performing well and areas requiring further investigation. A trial was conducted on three zoos over three years. Results of the trial suggest the process developed is practical and effective in identifying areas of welfare risk in a wide range of species in a zoo setting. It represents a further step towards achieving high-level animal welfare in zoos by integrating animal welfare as an institutional priority. The more zoos that employ such strategies, the greater the ability of the sector to advance the welfare of the animals in their care.

“…In relation to animal welfare, the European Food and Safety Agency (EFSA) [ 23 ] developed an innovative and standardised methodology for its evaluation with a gradual approach, designed to be applied to all animal species and all factors affecting animals. EFSA has defined the risk as “a function of the probability of negative welfare consequences and the magnitude of those consequences, following exposure to a particular factor or exposure scenario, in a given population.” In recent years the number of published works on applied animal welfare in zoo animals is constantly increasing, and particularly on the welfare consequence of factors like human impacts [ 10 , 30 , 31 , 32 ]. The environmental conditions of zoos where educational and entertainment activity with an animal-visitor interaction occur, with the consequent exposure to different hazards during accomplishment of single activities, justify the need of a specific evaluation of the risk.…”

Section: Animals Materials and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Animal Welfare in Animal-Visitor Interactions in Zoos and Other Facilities. A Pilot Study Involving Giraffes

Normando

Pollastri

Florio

et al. 2018

Simple SummaryA pilot test of a six-step protocol to evaluate animal-visitor interactions was developed on a “giraffe feeding” program in a zoo. The steps devoted to animal welfare’s assessment are presented in this paper. We observed the giraffes’ behaviour, evaluated the suitability of the area in which the interactions took place, and assessed the intensity of various hazards for animal welfare. The long-term goal of this research project is to test a protocol for the overall evaluation of the quality of animal-visitor interactions in zoos and other facilities. Giraffes could choose whether to participate or not to the feeding interactions with visitors, and did not show any behaviour that suggested they did find the interaction to be a negative experience, so their welfare level was assessed as not to be adversely affected by the interaction with the visitors.AbstractIn recent years, awareness of the controversial aspects connected with wild animal-visitor interactions (AVIs) in zoos and other facilities has increased due to cultural changes. Therefore, the need to apply transparent procedures to evaluate AVIs programs in zoos and similar facilities has also increased. This study presents results of animal welfare’s assessment of a pilot test of a protocol based on six steps that aim to explore and assess the overall value of AVIs considering the impact both on animals and visitors. In the present paper, we discuss the multifaceted approach to animal welfare assessment during animal-visitor interactions, combining quantitative behavioural observations/analysis and a welfare risk-assessment procedure, which forms the basis of the six-step protocol. Pilot testing of said approach to animal welfare assessment involved giraffes (Giraffa camelopardalis) in an Italian zoo. No change in behaviour, suggestive of an increased welfare risk to the animals, was found. The risk analysis reported overall low risks for welfare, whereas enclosure analysis highlighted that the enclosure was suitable for allowing interactions without jeopardising animal welfare, mainly because it allowed animals to choose whether to interact or withdraw from interactions without decreasing the space available to them.