An enclosure quality ranking framework for terrestrial animals in captivity

被引:0
|
作者
Flanagan, Alison M. [1 ]
Masuda, Bryce [1 ]
Grabar, Koa [1 ]
Barrett, Lisa P. [1 ]
Swaisgood, Ronald R. [1 ]
机构
[1] San Diego Zoo Wildlife Alliance, POB 39, Volcano, HI 92112 USA
关键词
Welfare; Zoo animals; Captivity; Evidence-based conservation; Framework; Environment; BEHAVIOR; ENRICHMENT; HUSBANDRY; WELFARE; STRESS; CHOICE;
D O I
10.1016/j.applanim.2024.106378
中图分类号
S8 [畜牧、 动物医学、狩猎、蚕、蜂];
学科分类号
0905 ;
摘要
There is a burgeoning interest in measuring and improving animal welfare in captive settings. Recent work has emphasized how enclosure design elements directly impact animal welfare (e.g., from health, behavioral, and reproductive standpoints). Yet, there is no published systematic way for practitioners to quantitatively rank enclosure quality. To address this critical need, we developed a flexible enclosure quality ranking framework for terrestrial animals in captivity. Our enclosure framework comprises 11 broadly applicable and measurable components of enclosure design that have relevance to animal welfare: Display, Size, Shelter, Materials, Environment, Climate, Viewshed, Social, People, Other, and Complexity. Each of these components relates to one or more of the "Five Freedoms" and "Opportunities to Thrive". In addition to developing the enclosure quality ranking framework, we provide an example of how to apply the framework, and offer suggestions on how to conduct empirical analyses with the ranking data derived from our framework. Once applied, our framework can be used to generate measurable outcomes that practitioners can use to make informed decisions, leading to optimal animal welfare.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Choice and control for animals in captivity
    Kurtycz, Laura M.
    PSYCHOLOGIST, 2015, 28 (11) : 892 - 894
  • [2] Effects of Enclosure Complexity and Design on Behaviour and Physiology in Captive Animals
    Smith, Andrew
    Rose, Paul
    Mettke-Hofmann, Claudia
    ANIMALS, 2024, 14 (14):
  • [3] Review of the Effects of Enclosure Complexity and Design on the Behaviour and Physiology of Zoo Animals
    de Azevedo, Cristiano Schetini
    Cipreste, Cynthia Fernandes
    Pizzutto, Cristiane Schilbach
    Young, Robert John
    ANIMALS, 2023, 13 (08):
  • [4] Plastic animals in cages: behavioural flexibility and responses to captivity
    Mason, Georgia
    Burn, Charlotte C.
    Dallaire, Jamie Ahloy
    Kroshko, Jeanette
    Kinkaid, Heather McDonald
    Jeschke, Jonathan M.
    ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR, 2013, 85 (05) : 1113 - 1126
  • [5] The Effects of Different Enclosure Enrichment on the Behaviour of Mice in Captivity
    Nadiah, Nur M. Y.
    Ain, Nurfarah L.
    Firdaus, Mohd A. L.
    2013 IEEE BUSINESS ENGINEERING AND INDUSTRIAL APPLICATIONS COLLOQUIUM (BEIAC 2013), 2013, : 229 - 233
  • [6] Assessment of Welfare in Zoo Animals: Towards Optimum Quality of Life
    Wolfensohn, Sarah
    Shotton, Justine
    Bowley, Hannah
    Davies, Sian
    Thompson, Sarah
    Justice, William S. M.
    ANIMALS, 2018, 8 (07):
  • [7] Freedom in Captivity: Managing Zoo Animals According to the 'Five Freedoms'
    Maekivi, Nelly
    BIOSEMIOTICS, 2018, 11 (01) : 7 - 25
  • [8] Does the social network structure of wild animal populations differ from that of animals in captivity?
    Pacheco, Xareni P.
    Madden, Joah R.
    BEHAVIOURAL PROCESSES, 2021, 190
  • [9] Considering What Animals "Need to Do" in Enclosure Design: Questions on Bird Flight and Aviaries
    Rose, Paul
    Freeman, Marianne
    Hickey, Ian
    Kelly, Robert
    Greenwell, Phillip
    BIRDS, 2024, 5 (03): : 586 - 603
  • [10] Using Farm Animal Welfare Protocols as a Base to Assess the Welfare of Wild Animals in Captivity-Case Study: Dorcas Gazelles (Gazella dorcas)
    Salas, Marina
    Manteca, Xavier
    Abaigar, Teresa
    Delclaux, Maria
    Ensenat, Conrad
    Martinez-Nevado, Eva
    Angel Quevedo, Miguel
    Fernandez-Bellon, Hugo
    ANIMALS, 2018, 8 (07):