Page 55 - Zoo Animal Learning and Training

2.7 Limitations of Wild Animal Studies 27

VetBooks.ir mimicking their use of the tool in the same where ecotourism and supplemental feedings
were not occurring. The human‐influenced
way as the demonstrator did. As you might
have suspected based on your reading from
natural activity patterns and habitat use
the prior section, these findings suggest that stingrays’ had significant alterations to their
these particular orangutans were displaying relative to stingrays at wild control sites (i.e.
an excellent example of emulation learning, non‐tourism sites). In contrast to nocturnal
but not imitation learning. Nonetheless, it stingrays at control sites, supplemented
is a clear demonstration of how tool use can stingrays were constantly active during the
at least be facilitated by observing another day with little movement at night, stayed in
social being engaging with the tool. close proximity to the ecotourism site, and
Another example is that different types of exhibited differently distributed social
tool use are transmitted and practiced by behaviour. Although these behavioural
individual free‐ranging animals of different changes may be adaptive to this population
communities. However, individuals within of stingrays in the short‐term (i.e. direct
the same community often demonstrate access to food with relatively few costs
similar if not identical types of tool use. incurred), supplemental feeding has strik-
Although chimpanzees are perhaps the most ingly altered movement behaviour and spa-
well recognised species to exhibit commu- tial distribution of the stingrays, and
nity effects of tool use, cultural transmission generated an atypically high density of ani-
of tool use has also been reported in wild mals at SCS, which could have downstream
bottlenose dolphins, specifically the trans- fitness costs for individuals and potentially
mission of sponging from mother to female broader ecosystem effects (Corcoran et al.
offspring (Krutzen et al. 2005). Sponging, as 2013). Given the popularity of stingray inter-
discussed previously, is significantly sex action exhibits at many zoos and aquariums,
biased to females, making it comparable these may be viable alternatives to ecotour-
with sex differences in learning tool use in ism interactions without the risk of influenc-
chimpanzees. ing endemic populations of species and
their ecosystems. Zoos and aquariums can
also be useful in sending conservation mes-
2.6 Learning in Response sages about the impact of human‐induced
to Human‐induced Changes changes in native habitats, as well as what
animals can learn as a result of changing
Individuals may also learn how to behave in environmental conditions (see Figure 2.5).
response to anthropogenic changes in their
natural environments. Many species may
alter their behaviour to avoid human‐dense
or human‐disturbed areas. However, in some 2.7 Limitations of Wild
cases, species may change their dispersal or Animal Studies
foraging patterns if a plentiful source of food
is available in human‐changed landscapes. Although this chapter covered a great deal of
For example, southern stingrays (Dasyatis in situ examples of learning and cognitive
americana) at Stingray City Sandbar (SCS) in abilities in wild animals, it should be noted
the Grand Cayman Islands have been receiv- that these studies are difficult to carry out
ing supplemental feedings as a result of eco- compared to studies involving captive coun-
tourism for nearly 30 years. Scientists, using terparts. Relative to research in artificial set-
tag‐recapture data and acoustic telemetry tings, cognitive research on wild animals is
field methods, were able to collect data on still lacking in some areas. This discrepancy
activity patterns of stingrays at this site and between findings of cognitive abilities in wild
compare to stingrays at other control sites and captive animals is due to a number of