Page 201 - Zoo Animal Learning and Training

9.3 Unfamiliar People 173

VetBooks.ir a possible reason. Burrell and Altman (2006) cotton‐top tamarins, for example, Glatston
et al. (1984) found that animals that had
reported that the cotton‐top tamarins
(Saguinus oedipus) they were observing were
heightened adverse responses to the public a
moved by the zoo from a naturalistic walk‐ previously been off‐show still displayed
through exhibit to smaller enclosures pre­ year after being transferred to an on‐show
cisely because they were becoming habituated enclosure. The other is that unfamiliar
to the public. And several studies have shown humans actually represent an array of stimuli
no change in the activity of felids when visi­ to which animals habituate at different rates.
tors are present compared to when there are This might help explain why some animals
no visitors (e.g. O’Donovan et al. 1993; respond more to visitors who, for example,
Margulis et al. 2003). So it does appear to be are noisy than those who are quiet (Quadros
the case that some animals in zoos disregard et al. 2014), if we postulate that habituation
visitors; or at least do not show a change in to mere presence of people occurs more
behaviour when visitors are present. Is this quickly than habituation to visitor noise. We
due to habituation? also sometimes see what appears to be disha­
Habituation is usually defined as ‘the rela­ bituation: adverse responses to the public in
tively persistent waning of a response as a an unusual situation in animals, which other­
result of repeated stimulation which is not wise largely ignore visitors. For example,
followed by any kind of reinforcement’ cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) at Fota Wildlife
(Hinde 1970). Of course, outside of the labo­ Park only showed responses on the few occa­
ratory it is often difficult to know exactly sions when visitors came within the bound­
which stimuli the animal is habituating to, so ary rail (O’Donovan et al. 1993).
in these situations we sometimes find a Habituation in zoo‐housed animals has
somewhat different definition. For example, been studied with respect to responses to
in the context of habituating wild primates environmental enrichment (e.g. Anderson
for research purposes, Tutin and Fernandez et al. 2010) and husbandry and veterinary
(1991) define habituation as ‘the acceptance procedures (e.g. Calle and Bornmann 1988;
by wild animals of a human observer as a Phillips et al. 1998), but not apparently as a
natural element in their environment’, and response to zoo visitors. An analogous situa­
this kind of definition by outcome rather tion to zoo animals repeatedly encountering
than by process is probably more like the sort visitors is wild‐living animals encountering
of thing we mean when we consider that zoo researchers and tourists, which has appar­
animals might habituate to members of the ently led to habituation in species as diverse
public. The general idea, though, is that as brown bears (Ursus arctos) (Herrero et al.
through repeated unreinforced exposure to 2005) and Tibetan macaques (Macaca thi-
zoo visitors the animals eventually lose betana) (Matheson et al. 2006) at tourist
behaviours such as fear responses to people, sites. Indeed, wild populations are often
visual monitoring, avoidance, or startle deliberately habituated by researchers as an
behaviours. Some of the evidence, then, sup­ aid to performing the research (Williamson
ports this suggestion, but there are a number and Feistner 2011), as it increases the visibil­
of studies which nevertheless show that zoo ity of the subjects, permits better identifica­
animals do indeed respond (often adversely) tion of individuals and their relationships
to unfamiliar people (Hosey 2000, 2013). with each other, and reduces any effects
There are at least two explanations that we observers might have on natural behaviour
can put forward to account for this apparent (Goldsmith 2005). We might consider that
inconsistency. One is that habituation has habituation of zoo‐housed animals should be
occurred, but incompletely, so the response encouraged for much the same reasons, but
to the stimulus of unfamiliar humans is still before making any such recommendations
there, but at a lower intensity. In a study of we need more information about the costs of