Researchers' ethical concerns regarding habituating wild‐nonhuman primates and perceived ethical duties to their subjects: Results of an online survey

Abstract

While the process of habituation is essential for researchers to observe primates in their natural habitats, ethical dilemmas may arise from its consequences. We collected data from 286 participants via an online survey to investigate: (a) how primatologists perceive their ethical duties toward their subjects; (b) the extent to which primatologists are concerned about the potential ethical consequences of habituation; and (c) the methods primatologists use to reduce potential harms caused by habituation. Overall, primatologists felt an extremely strong duty to mitigate harms that they may cause (e.g., to not stress individuals during observation, treat injuries, and reunite separated individuals) and expressed very high concern for habituation's potential to increase the vulnerability of their subjects to poaching and disease transfer. Ratings for those items were so high that they could not be included in subsequent exploratory factor analyses that were designed to reveal constructs underlying respondents’ ratings of their ethical duties and concerns. Factor analysis of ratings of ethical duties revealed that primatologists reported a strong duty to mitigate harms caused by other humans and a lower perceived duty to mitigate naturally occurring harmful events. Factor analysis on ethical concern ratings revealed that respondents were concerned about harms during the habituation process, the presence of unhabituated behavior after habituation had been established, and indirect harms of habituation. Concerns for unhabituated behavior and indirect harms were rated slightly higher than concern for harms during the habituation process. To mitigate potential harms, primatologists primarily reported engaging in strategies to reduce stress in their subjects. Our findings reveal a disconnect between primatologists' ratings of their ethical concerns and their reported mitigation practices that may, in part, stem from gaps in knowledge about the true impacts of habituation. We suggest areas of discussion and research in the field necessary to address those gaps.

Anthropogenic Influences on Distance Traveled and Vigilance Behavior and Stress-Related Endocrine Correlates in Free-Roaming Giraffes

“…Human presence can alter wildlife species’ movement patterns but also pose a risk to their survival and reproduction success [ 34 ]. In Kellerwald-Edersee National Park in Germany, off-trail hiking induced flight of the red deer ( Cervus elaphus ), and the animals avoided trails during the day but not at nighttime when hikers are absent [ 42 ].…”

“…To our knowledge, defining what is considered a habituated wild animal has only been published for primates [ 34 ]. With little to no literature or information available with specific reference to the hours needed to habituate giraffes, a scoring criterion on what is considered a habituated or unhabituated animal was created, using our own data as an example.…”

The Habituation Process in Two Groups of Wild Moor Macaques (Macaca maura)

“…Although habituation is a complex and partially subjective process (Allan et al, 2020;Ampumuza & Driessen, 2020;Green & Gabriel, 2020), some observational measures may allow an objective assessment of this process. For each encounter, we therefore noted the following information: 1) habituation day and number of the encounter (for each group, two sequential numbers starting from 1); 2) group ID (i.e., Scuba or Merah); 3) shift (i.e., morning or afternoon); 4) number of researchers (range: 1-3); 5) exact duration of the encounter (in minutes); 6) minimum distance between the researchers and the closest macaque reached during the encounter (in meters); 7) position of the macaques when the encounter started (i.e., whether the majority of visible macaques were on the ground or on trees/high rocks higher than 2 m); and 8) area of the encounter (i.e., where the group was met), categorized as forest area (i.e., tropical secondary forest mixed with patches of pines and acacias for the Merah group and savannah forest with volcanic stones covered by shrubs for the Scuba group), field area (i.e., with crops), beach area (i.e., the shore, excluding resort and hotel facilities), path area (including primary and secondary roads, ground paths, and any open area with a minimum of 1-m width), or human area (i.e., including any other human buildings).…”

“…In animal behavior research, habituation refers to the process by which repeated exposure to humans results in a gradual reduction in animals' fearful response, until animals no longer perceive humans as a direct threat (Allan et al, 2020;Cipolletta, 2003;Hanson & Riley, 2018;Knight, 2009;McDougall, 2011;Samuni et al, 2014) and/or they treat them as neutral elements of the environment (Magurran & Girling, 1986;Tutin & Fernandez, 1991;Williamson & Feistner, 2011). However, habituation is a multidimensional, mutual, and complex process in which humans and animals continuously and reciprocally adapt to each other (Alcayna-Stevens, 2016;Allan et al, 2020;Ampumuza & Driessen, 2020;Green & Gabriel, 2020;Hanson & Riley, 2018). Through habituation, researchers can spend more time with the study animals and approach them at the distance necessary for detailed behavioral observations.…”

Insights into short‐ and long‐term crop‐foraging strategies in a chacma baboon (Papio ursinus) from GPS and accelerometer data

“…This is largely because traditional methods of primate observation rely on habituation, which poses significant ethical and feasibility issues in this context. Habituation may not be possible with animals that are regularly chased and threatened by humans and is also unlikely to be ethical given the possible link between habituation and increased crop‐foraging (Fedigan, 2010; Green & Gabriel, 2020; Madden, 2006; Seiler & Robbins, 2016). Therefore, there is a need to find an alternative way to understand what primates do both in and out of crop fields and to understand their movement patterns in greater detail than is possible by direct observation.…”