Retreat Space and Human Visitor Density Moderate Undesirable Behavior in Petting Zoo Animals

Abstract

This study focused on the relationship between nonhuman animal behavior and envi-ronment- specifically, between the undesirable behavior exhibited by domestic pet-ting zoo animals in the presence of humans and the spatial design of the petting zoo environment. A spatial feature of a petting zoo referred to as a retreat space was ma-nipulated so that it affected the animals' opportunity for individual control over inter-action with humans. Three conditions were tested: no retreat space, semi-retreat space, and a full-retreat space. The subjects of this study were 5 African pygmy goats (Capra hircus) and 2 Romanov sheep (Ovis aries). Investigators used a focal sam-pling technique to analyze approximately 27 hr of behavioral data collected. The data were analyzed using multiple linear regression methods. The findings suggest that the full-retreat design beneficially moderated both sheep and goat behavior: Undesirable behaviors were lowest in the full-retreat condition. This study provides information that may improve human-animal interactions in a petting zoo setting and may in-crease animal well-being through exhibit design and management techniques.

The visitor effect in petting zoo-housed animals: Aversive or enriching?

“…Furthermore, this later study identified higher rates of undesirable behaviour in association with increased levels of visitors touching the animals, whereas no relationship was found between these variables in the earlier study (Anderson et al, 2002).…”

“…An exception is research which suggests visitors negatively influence the behaviour of goats and sheep in a petting zoo (Anderson et al, 2002(Anderson et al, , 2004. In an agricultural context, however, human contact and handling appear to be beneficial to these animals, resulting in less fearful behaviour and positive physiological changes (Jackson and Hackett, 2007, Markowitz et al, 1998, Rushen et al, 1999, and the possibility exists that similar changes could be brought about in petting zoos, which often contain domesticated farm animals.…”

“…were significantly more likely to display "undesirable behaviour," such as head tossing, head butting, foot stamping, rearing, nose-blowing, and moving away, when the number of people within their enclosure was higher (Anderson et al, 2002), but this effect was not significant in a later study at the same petting 6 zoo (Anderson et al, 2004). Furthermore, this later study identified higher rates of undesirable behaviour in association with increased levels of visitors touching the animals, whereas no relationship was found between these variables in the earlier study (Anderson et al, 2002).…”

“…Zoo visitor effects on behaviour which have been interpreted as possibly enriching have usually involved feeding by the public, even in circumstances where this was not permitted by the zoo (Cook andHosey, 1995, Fa, 1989). However, although there are reports of individual animals, such as parrots (Nimon and Dalziell, 1992), gorillas (Vrancken et al, 1990) and gibbons (Lukas et al, 2002), who actively solicited contact with the public, there appear to be no empirical studies, other than that of Anderson et al (2002), of whether contact with zoo visitors in itself could be enriching for captive terrestrial mammals.…”

“…Study 1 was an investigation to determine if the presence and density of visitors has an effect on the behaviour of these animals. It was predicted on the basis of the two studies by Anderson et al (2002Anderson et al ( , 2004 that the presence and density of visitors would have a negative effect on the animals' behaviour. Study 2 was an experiment to test whether physical contact with zoo visitors results in behavioural changes in these animals which are consistent with the hypothesis that the contact is enriching for them.…”