Page 302 - Zoo Animal Learning and Training

274 11 Welfare Implications of Zoo Animal Training

Animal bodies
VetBooks.ir growth, disease, reproduction Figure 11.2 Mind, body, and nature
Functioning: health,
are the three most commonly used
directions to study animal welfare.

Animal minds Animal natures
Feelings: pleasure, Natural conditions
suffering, and consciousness and behaviours

biology be considered when evaluating ani- behavioural assessment (Wemelsfelder and
mal welfare, to provide parameters of what Lawrence 2001; Wemelsfelder et al. 2001).
animals might have evolved to tolerate and This is an overview, and by no means con-
the mechanisms they use in doing so (e.g. sidered an exhaustive review of animal wel-
Barnard and Hurst 1996). Alternatively, we fare science. It is provided to help identify
can consider welfare by allostasis (Korte how animal welfare can be approached, which
et al. 2007); a concept whereby we consider is essential when we move forwards in this
biological and psychological structure and chapter to explore how training and/or learn-
function. Following an allostatic approach, ing might impact on zoo animal welfare.
we might venture that given many animals
possess similar biological structures as
ourselves, that the function of these is also 11.4 Choice and Control
similar. A logical endpoint is that if we have
consciousness and other animals possess the Embedded within zoo animal welfare science
same biological apparatus as us, that they is the precept that providing control to ani-
too will likely have consciousness too mals is essential for them to experience a
(Griffin 2013). As you can imagine depend- good welfare state (Hill and Broom 2009) and
ing on the approach taken, different data that control in the environment can be
need to be collected and evaluated, and achieved by offering choice in that environ-
importantly different questions about wel- ment. Consequently, offering choice and
fare are likely to be addressed. That we all control within captive animal management
come to the study and issue of animal wel- has become a generic goal and studies have
fare with ‘baggage’, due to different cultural demonstrated welfare benefits when animals
views, personal experiences, societal values, are afforded some degree of control over
and many other influencing factors, needs to their environment (reviewed Whitham and
be remembered, given the questions we ask Wielebnowski 2013). Providing zoo animals
about animal welfare will determine how we with opportunities to gain some control
measure animal welfare and how we inter- within their environment, can be achieved
pret an animal’s welfare state (Fraser 2008). in one of two main ways: through minor
Furthermore, though objective indices of changes or additions to the enclosure itself
welfare have, and are, considered to be the i.e. the provision of enrichment which ani-
most reliable and robust tools for assessing mals choose to use or not (e.g. Carlstead and
animal welfare, studies using validated sub- Shepherdson 2000), and through changes to
jective ratings are proving to be incredibly husbandry, i.e. providing animals with the choice
sensitive and informative i.e. qualitative of where to spend their time (e.g. Ross 2006).