Towards Positive Animal Welfare .. Vol. 162015 II WAZA 16 (2015) Contents Markus Gusset & Gerald Dick Editorial ................................................................. 1 Georgia J. Mason Using Species Differences in Health and Well-being to Identify Intrinsic Risk and Protective Factors ..........................................2 David Shepherdson & Nadja Wielebnowski The Power of Multi-institutional and Longitudinal Studies for Zoo Animal Welfare Research ......................................6 Kathy Carlstead & Janine Brown Using Science to Understand Zoo Elephant Welfare: Evaluation of Ovarian Cyclicity and Keeper–Elephant Relationships .......................... 10 Lance J. Miller, Randall S. Wells, Rita Stacey, F. William Zeigler, Jessica C. Whitham & Michael Adkesson Animal Welfare Management of Bottlenose Dolphins at the Chicago Zoological Society’s Brookfield Zoo ..................................... 14 David Orban, Hani Freeman, Catharine Wheaton, Jill Mellen, Joseph Soltis & Katherine Leighty Use of Science to Enhance Animal Welfare at Disney’s Animal Kingdom ............................... 18 Zjef Pereboom & Jeroen Stevens Applied Animal Welfare Research in Zoos: The More the Better ............................................ 22 Ron Kagan, Stephanie Allard & Scott Carter Exotic Animal Welfare – A Path Forward .............26 Imprint Christopher W. Kuhar, Andi M. Kornak Editors: Markus Gusset & Gerald Dick & Kristen E. Lukas WAZA Executive Office Beyond Animal Welfare Science .......................... 30 IUCN Conservation Centre Rue Mauverney 28 Vicky Melfi & Geoff Hosey CH-1196 Gland Evidence-based Zoo Animal Welfare: Switzerland From Principles to Practice ................................. 34 Phone: +41 22 999 07 90 Fax: +41 22 999 07 91 Jason Watters, Kate Sulzner, Debbie Marrin, Sandy Huang, Corinne MacDonald, Layout and typesetting: [email protected] Susan Ostapak, Andrew Poole & Heather Hayle Drawings: Kimio Honda (WAZA thanks for his generous donation!) Assessing Quality of Life in Print: Agentura NP, Staré Město, Czech Republic Geriatric Zoo Animals .......................................... 37 Edition: 600 copies | © WAZA 2015 Terry L. Maple Four Decades of Psychological Research This edition of WAZA Magazine is also available on on Zoo Animal Welfare ........................................ 41 www.waza.org. Printed on FSC paper. ISSN: 2074-4528 WAZA 16 (2015) 1 Markus Gusset1 & Gerald Dick2 Editorial Whilst conservation of wildlife is the core purpose of modern zoos and aquariums, animal welfare is our core activity. This year, WAZA is going to release strategic guidance docu- ments for both animal conservation and welfare: the third iteration of the World Zoo and Aquarium Conserva‑ tion Strategy and the first‑ever World Zoo and Aquarium Animal Welfare Strategy. This gives testimony to the equal value and emphasis that WAZA places on wildlife conservation and animal welfare. Animal welfare is understood to vary on a continuum from very poor to very good. The promotion of positive The Five Domains model for understanding animal welfare, divided into physical/functional and mental components, provides examples of how internal and external conditions give rise animal welfare states requires differ- to negative (aversive) and positive (pleasant) subjective experiences, the integrated effects ent approaches to minimising nega- of which give rise to an animal’s welfare status (modified from Mellor & Beausoleil 2015; tive welfare states. Modern zoos and Anim. Welf. 24: 241–253). aquariums should work to minimise the occurrence of negative states As welfare is a state within an Reference to the first four domains in their animals and, concurrently, animal and is understood in terms enables systematic consideration should make efforts to promote posi- of what the animal experiences of a wide range of conditions that tive states. subjectively, this model identifies the may give rise to a range of subjective two main sources of those mental experiences found within the fifth The “Five Domains” model presents experiences. The first is the feelings “mental” domain. The net impact of a useful framework for undertaking and sensations (collectively known as all of these experiences is assessed systematic and structured assess- “affects”) that motivate animals to un- as representing the animal’s welfare ments of animal welfare in these dertake behaviours considered to status. Modern zoos and aquariums terms. This model outlines four physi- be essential for their survival. These should provide opportunities for the cal/functional domains of “nutrition”, include thirst motivating an animal to animals in their care to experience “environment”, “physical health” and drink, hunger motivating it to eat and positive welfare states. “behaviour”, and the fifth domain, pain indicating things to avoid. These which is the animal’s “mental” state and other survival-related factors are In this edition of the WAZA Magazine, (see figure). The Five Domains model typically covered within the domains we have compiled various conceptual forms the basis of the World Zoo and of “nutrition”, “environment” and and practical approaches to how Aquarium Animal Welfare Strategy. “physical health”. progress towards positive animal welfare can be achieved by zoos and The fourth domain of “behaviour” aquariums. This includes articles on captures the second source of sub- taxa that are challenging and contro- jective experiences, which can be versial to keep in human care, such negative or positive, and relates to as elephants, dolphins, polar bears animals’ perception of their external and great apes. Collectively, these circumstances. Negative examples articles demonstrate the value of sci- include: threat eliciting fear, isola- entific research, often multi‑institu- tion leading to loneliness and low tional and longitudinal, to provide an stimulation to boredom; and positive evidence base for ensuring that the examples include: security engender- animals kept in our care experience ing confidence and pleasure giving positive welfare states – in accord- rise to a sense of reward. ance with the Five Domains model. We hope that this edition of the WAZA Magazine will substantially strengthen our community’s efforts to make caring about animals in zoos 1 WAZA Chief Conservation Officer and aquariums continuous with car- 2 WAZA Executive Director ing for them in the wild. 2 WAZA 16 (2015) Georgia J. Mason1,* Using Species Differences in Health and Well‑being to Identify Intrinsic Risk and Protective Factors Summary Species Differences Using Species in Animal Welfare Differences to Test The diverse species living in zoos vary Hypotheses about Intrinsic in their propensities for good captive The 10,000+ species kept in zoos Risk and Protective Factors health and welfare. This variation are not all managed in fully evi- yields opportunities to answer ap- dence-based, optimised ways. Con- What biological characteristics plied and fundamental research ques- sequently, although zoo animals are predict how well different species tions via comparative methods. These typically healthier, longer-lived and adjust to captive life? These can be methods can harness this variation to more fecund than their free-living identified empirically via comparative statistically identify intrinsic risk and conspecifics, in some species captive methods, in which statistical rela- protective factors influencing how individuals often survive and breed tionships between species-typical well species of different niches adjust less well than might be expected, and traits and outcomes of interest are to captivity. Known or potential risk display physiological and behavioural investigated using data from mul- factors include certain foraging styles, signs of stress. Even taxonomically tiple species (each being one unit and being wide-ranging or migratory, close species can vary. Ring-tailed le- of replication). Such techniques are timid and/or vulnerable to extinction. murs, for example, typically show few common in evolutionary and eco- Empirically identifying which specific veterinary, breeding or behavioural logical research (Mason 2010; Mason traits help predict captive welfare problems, while gentle and black et al. 2013). However, only recently provides an objective way to specify lemurs are harder to breed success- have they been used to investigate behavioural needs; suggests how to fully and more prone to stereotypic animal welfare, perhaps because improve husbandry; and could help behaviour (Mason 2010). Similar while their logic is simple, the need to decide which species to prioritise for contrasts exist within many genera control for three potential confounds conservation in zoos. Such data could (Clubb & Mason 2007; Müller et al. can make implementation complex also be used to test certain funda- 2012; Pomerantz et al. 2013). (Clubb & Mason 2007; Mason 2010; mental evolutionary hypotheses. Müller et al. 2012; Pomerantz et al. Differences between captive and an- 2013). One of these potential con- cestral environments help explain such founds is inherent similarity between variation: in captivity, the forms of closely related species, making them food and shelter provided may be statistically non-independent (Fig. 1). evolutionarily new; climates may be The second is that intrinsic differ- different; there is close contact with ences in pace of life and reproductive humans; and abilities to range, explore strategy must be factored in, when and make choices are