Zookeepers’ Perception of Zoo Canid Welfare and its Effect on Job Satisfaction, Worldwide
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Data Collection
2.2. Respondent’s Demographics
2.3. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Demographics and Importance of Brambell’s Five Freedoms
3.2. Demographics and Fulfilment of Brambell’s Five Freedoms
3.3. Correlations between Importance and Fulfilment of the Brambell’s Five Freedoms
3.4. Zookeepers’ Satisfaction with Zoo Animal Welfare and with Their Job
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Ohl, F.; Staay, F.J. Van Der Animal welfare: At the interface between science and society. Vet. J. 2012, 192, 13–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Whitham, J.C.; Wielebnowski, N. New directions for zoo animal welfare science. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2013, 147, 247–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whitham, J.C.; Wielebnowski, N. Animal-Based Welfare Monitoring: Using Keeper Ratings as an Assessment Tool. Zoo Biol. 2009, 28, 545–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hewson, C.J. Can we assess welfare? Pouvons-nous évaluer le bien-être? Can. Vet. J. 2003, 44, 749–753. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Main, D.C.J.; Whay, H.R.; Leeb, C.; Webster, A.J.F. Formal animal-based welfare assessment in UK certification schemes. Anim. Welf. 2007, 16, 233–236. [Google Scholar]
- Barber, J.C.E. Programmatic Approaches to Assessing and Improving Animal Welfare in Zoos and Aquariums. Zoo Biol. 2009, 530, 519–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barrows, M. Welfare assessment in zoo animals. Vet. Rec. 2017, 181, 141–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tetley, C.L.; Hara, S.J.O. Ratings of animal personality as a tool for improving the breeding, management and welfare of zoo mammals. Anim. Welf. 2012, 21, 463–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weiss, A.; King, J.E.; Perkins, L. Personality and Subjective Well-Being in Orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus and Pongo abelii). J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2006, 90, 501–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wielebnowski, N.C. Behavioral Differences as Predictors of Breeding Status in Captive Cheetahs. Zoo Biol. 1999, 18, 335–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Powell, D.; Lin, H.; Carlstead, K.; Kleiman, D.G.; Zhang, H.M.; Zhang, G.Q.; Yu, J.Q.; Zhang, J.G.; Lu, Y.P.; Timothy, S.K.N.; et al. Relationships between temperament, husbandry, management and socio-sexual behavior in captive male and female giant pandas Ailuropoda melanoleuca. Acta Zool. Sin. 2008, 54, 169–175. [Google Scholar]
- Carlstead, K.; Mellen, J.; Kleiman, D.G. Black Rhinoceros (Diceros bicornis) in U.S. Zoos: I. Individual Behavior Profiles and Their Relationship to Breeding Success. Zoo Biol. 1999, 34, 17–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carlstead, K.; Brown, J.L. Relationships between Patterns of Fecal Corticoid Excretion and Behavior, Reproduction, and Environmental Factors in Captive Black Diceros bicornis) and White (Ceratotherium simum) Rhinoceros. Zoo Biol. 2005, 232, 215–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- King, J.E.; Landau, V.I. Can chimpanzee happiness be estimated by human raters? J. Res. Pers. 2003, 37, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Less, E.H.; Kuhar, C.W.; Dennis, P.M.; Lukas, K.E. Assessing inactivity in zoo gorillas using keeper ratings and behavioral data. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2012, 137, 74–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuhar, C.W.; Stoinski, T.S.; Lukas, K.E.; Maple, T.L. Gorilla Behavior Index revisited: Age, housing and behavior. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2006, 96, 315–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meagher, R.K. Observer ratings: Validity and value as a tool for animal welfare research. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2009, 119, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wielebnowski, N.C.; Fletchall, N.; Carlstead, K.; Busso, J.M.; Brown, J.L. Noninvasive Assessment of Adrenal Activity Associated with Husbandry and Behavioral Factors in the North American Clouded Leopard Population. Zoo Biol. 2002, 21, 77–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gosling, S.D. From Mice to Men: What Can We Learn About Personality From Animal Research? Psychol. Bull. 2001, 127, 45–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA). The Accreditation Standards & Related Policies; AZA: Silver Spring, MD, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Mellor, D.J.; Hunt, S.; Gusset, M. (Eds.) Caring for Wildlife: The World Zoo and Aquarium Animal Welfare Strategy; WAZA Executive Office: Gland, Switzerland, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Gazzano, A.; Giussani, S.; Gutiérrez, J.; Ogi, A.; Mariti, C. Attitude toward nonhuman animals and their welfare: Do behaviorists differ from other veterinarians ? J. Vet. Behav. 2018, 24, 56–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wolfensohn, S.; Shotton, J.; Bowley, H.; Thompson, S.; Justice, W.S.M. Assessment of Welfare in Zoo Animals: Towards Optimum Quality of Life. Animals 2018, 8, 110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Driscoll, J.W. Attitudes toward Animal Use. Anthrozoos 1992, 5, 32–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Robertson, J.C.; Gallivan, J.; Macintyre, P.D. Sex differences in the antecedents of animal use attitudes. Anthrozoos 2004, 17, 306–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Knight, S.; Vrij, A.; Cherryman, J.; Nunkoosing, K. Attitudes towards animals and beliefs in animal mind. Anthrozoos 2004, 17, 43–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Herzog, H.A.; Betchart, N.S.; Pittman, R.B. Gender, Sex Role Orientation, and Attitudes toward Animals. Anthrozoos 1991, 4, 184–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Herzog, H.A. Gender Differences in Human—Animal Interactions: A Review. Anthrozoos 2007, 20, 7–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Signal, T.D.; Taylor, N. Attitudes to Animals: Demographics within a Community Sample. Soc. Anim. 2006, 14, 148–157. [Google Scholar]
- Mariti, C.; Pirrone, F.; Albertini, M.; Gazzano, A.; Diverio, S. Familiarity and Interest in Working with Livestock Decreases the Odds of Having Positive Attitudes towards Non-Human Animals and Their Welfare among Veterinary Students in Italy. Animals 2018, 8, 150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Serpell, J.A. Factors Influencing Veterinary Students’ Career Choices and Attitudes to Animals. J. Vet. Med. Educ. 2005, 32, 491–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cornish, A.R.; Caspar, G.L.; Collins, T.; Degeling, C.; Fawcett, A.; Fisher, A.D.; Freire, R.; Hazel, S.J.; Hood, J.; Johnson, A.J.; et al. Career Preferences and Opinions on Animal Welfare and Ethics: A Survey of Veterinary Students in Australia and New Zealand. J. Vet. Med. Educ. 2016, 43, 310–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ostović, M.; Mesić, Ž.; Mikuš, T.; Matković, K.; Pavičić, Ž. Attitudes of veterinary students in Croatia toward farm animal welfare. Anim. Welf. 2016, 25, 21–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Colombo, E.S.; Crippa, F.; Calderari, T.; Prato-previde, E. Empathy toward animals and people: The role of gender and length of service in a sample of Italian veterinarians. J. Vet. Behav. 2017, 17, 32–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pirrone, F.; Mariti, C.; Gazzano, A.; Albertini, M.; Sighieri, C.; Diverio, S. Attitudes toward Animals and Their Welfare among Italian Veterinary Students. Vet. Sci. 2019, 6, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Phillips, C.J.C.; Mcculloch, S. Student attitudes on animal sentience and use of animals in society. J. Biol. Educ. 2005, 40, 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tuyttens, F.A.M.; Vanhonacker, F.; Van Poucke, E.; Verbeke, W. Quantitative verification of the correspondence between the Welfare Quality® operational definition of farm animal welfare and the opinion of Flemish farmers, citizens and vegetarians. Livest. Sci. 2010, 131, 108–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heleski, C.R.; Zanella, A.J. Animal science student attitudes to farm animal welfare. Anthrozoos 2006, 19, 3–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Broida, J.; Tingley, L.; Kimball, R.; Miele, J. Personality Differences between Pro- and Anti-vivisectionists. Soc. Anim. 1993, 1, 129–144. [Google Scholar]
- Furnham, A.; Mcmanus, C.; Scott, D. Personality, Empathy and Attitude to animal welfare. Anthrozoos 2003, 16, 135–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paul, E.S.; Serpell, J.A. Childhood Pet Keeping and Humane Attitudes in Young Adulthood. Anim. Welf. 1993, 2, 321–337. [Google Scholar]
- Paul, E.S. Empathy with Animals and with Humans: Are They Linked? Anthrozoos 2000, 13, 194–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hagelin, J.; Johansson, B.; Hau, J.; Carlsson, H. Influence of pet ownership on opinions towards the use of animals in biomedical research. Anthrozoos 2002, 15, 251–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McPhee, M.E.; Foster, J.S.; Sevenich, M.; Saunders, C.D. Public perceptions of behavioral enrichment: Assumptions gone awry. Zoo Biol. 1998, 17, 525–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taylor, N.; Signal, T.D. Empathy and attitudes to animals. Anthrozoos 2005, 18, 18–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Amiot, C.E.; Bastian, B. toward a Psychology of Human-Animal Relations. Psychol. Bull. 2014, 1–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Driscoll, J.W. Attitude towards Animal: Species Ratings. Soc. Anim. 1995, 3, 139–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De la Fuente, M.F.; Souto, A.; Caselli, C.B.; Schiel, N. People’s perception on animal welfare: Why does it matter? Ethnobiol. Conserv. 2017, 6, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aziri, B. Job satisfaction: A Literature review. Manag. Res. Pract. 2011, 3, 77–86. [Google Scholar]
- Nardoia, M.; Arena, L.; Berteselli, G.; Migliaccio, P.; Valerii, L.; Giustino, L.D.; Villa, P.D. Development of a questionnaire to evaluate occupational stress in dog’s shelter operators. Vet. Ital. 2019, 55, 5–14. [Google Scholar]
- Hosey, G.; Melfi, V. Human—Animal Bonds Between Zoo Professionals and the Animals in Their Care. Zoo Biol. 2012, 31, 13–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Birke, L.; Hosey, G.; Melfi, V. “You Can’t Really Hug a Tiger”: Zookeepers and Their Bonds with Animals. Anthrozoos 2019, 32, 597–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carlstead, K.; Paris, S.; Brown, J.L. Good keeper-elephant relationships in North American zoos are mutually bene fi cial to welfare. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2019, 211, 103–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carlstead, K. A Comparative approach to the study of Keeper-Animal Relationships in the zoo. Zoo Biol. 2009, 28, 589–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hosey, G.; Birke, L.; Shaw, W.S.; Melfi, V. Measuring the Strength of Human—Animal Bonds in Zoos. Anthrozoos 2018, 31, 273–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brambell Committee. Report of the Technical Committee to Enquire into the Welfare of Livestock Kept under Intensive Conditions; Her Majesty’s Stationary Office: London, UK, 1965. [Google Scholar]
- Cortina, J.M. What Is Coefficient Alpha? An Examination of Theory and Applications. J. Appl. Psychol. 1993, 78, 98–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, P.; Cohen, J.; Aiken, L.S.; West, S.G. The Problem of Units and the Circumstance for POMP. Multivariate Behav. Res. 1999, 34, 315–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Veasey, J.S. In pursuit of peak animal welfare; the need to prioritize the meaningful over the measurable. Zoo Biol. 2017, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Veasey, J.S. Assessing the Psychological Priorities for Optimising Captive Asian Elephant (Elephas maximus) Welfare. Animals 2020, 10, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Schiffmann, C.; Clauss, M.; Hoby, S.; Hatt, J. Visual body condition scoring in zoo animals—Composite, algorithm and overview approaches in captive Asian and African elephants. J. Zoo Aquarium Res. 2017, 5, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Crook, A. Introduction: Pain: An Issue of Animal Welfare. In Pain Management in Veterinary Practice; Egger, C.M., Love, L., Doherty, T., Eds.; John Wiley and Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2013; pp. 3–7. [Google Scholar]
- Tauson, R. Health and Production in Improved Cage Designs Complexity in Cage Design. Poult. Sci. 1998, 77, 1820–1827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mellen, J.D. Factors Influencing Reproductive Success in Small Captive Exotic Felids (Felis spp.): A Multiple Regression Analysis. Zoo Biol. 1991, 10, 95–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clubb, R.; Rowcliffe, M.; Lee, P.; Mar, K.U.; Moss, C.; Mason, G. Compromised survivorship, fecundity and population persistence in zoo elephants. Science 2008, 322, 1649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Andersen, I.L.; Tajet, G.M.; Haukvik, I.A.; Kongsrud, S.; Bøe, K.E. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A—Animal Science Relationship between postnatal piglet mortality, environmental factors and management around farrowing in herds with loose-housed, lactating sows. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. A-Anim. Sci. 2007, 57, 38–45. [Google Scholar]
- Clubb, R.; Mason, G.J. Captivity effects on wide-ranging carnivores. Nature 2003, 425, 473–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clubb, R.; Mason, G.J. Natural behavioural biology as a risk factor in carnivore welfare: How analysing species differences could help zoos improve enclosures. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2007, 102, 303–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Riggio, G.; Mariti, C.; Boncompagni, C.; Corosaniti, S.; Giovanni, M.D.; Ogi, A.; Gazzano, A.; Thomas, R. Feeding Enrichment in a Captive Pack of European Wolves (Canis Lupus Lupus): Assessing the Effects on Welfare and on a Zoo’s Recreational, Educational and Conservational Role. Animals 2019, 9, 331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Clubb, R.; Vickery, S.S. Locomotory stereotypies in carnivores: Does pacing stem from hunting, ranging or frustrated escape. In Stereotypic Animal Behaviour: Fundamentals and Applications to Welfare; Mason, G.J., Rushen, J., Eds.; CAB International: Wallingford, UK, 2006; pp. 58–85. [Google Scholar]
- Khadpekar, Y.; Whiteman, J.P.; Durrant, B.S.; Owen, M.A.; Prakash, S. Approaches to studying behavior in captive sloth bears through animal keeper feedback. Zoo Biol. 2018, 37, 408–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Phillips, C.; Izmirli, S.; Aldavood, J.; Alonso, M.; Choe, B.; Hanlon, A.; Handziska, A.; Illmann, G.; Keeling, L.; Kennedy, M.; et al. An International Comparison of Female and Male Students’ Attitudes to the Use of Animals. Animals 2011, 1, 7–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lensink, J.; Boissy, A.; Veissier, I. The relationship between farmers’ attitude and behaviour towards calves, and productivity of veal units. Ann. Zootech. 2000, 49, 313–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sedikides, C.; Alicke, M.D. Self-Enhancement and Self-Protection Motives. In Oxford Library of Psychology. The Oxford Handbook of Human motivation; Ryan, R.M., Ed.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2012; pp. 303–322. ISBN 9780195399820. [Google Scholar]
- Chang, F.T.; Hart, L.A. Human-Animal Bonds in the Laboratory: How Animal Behavior Affects the Perspective of Caregivers. ILAR J. 2002, 43, 10–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- AVMA. Statement from the committee on the human–animal bond. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 1998, 212, 1675. [Google Scholar]
- Payne, E.; Bennett, P.C.; Mcgreevy, P.D. Current perspectives on attachment and bonding in the dog—human dyad. Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag. 2015, 8, 71–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Webster, J. Animal Welfare: Freedoms, Dominions and “A Life Worth Living”. Animals 2016, 6, 35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Mellor, D.J. Moving beyond the “Five Freedoms” by Updating the “Five Provisions” and Introducing Aligned “Animal Welfare Aims”. Animals 2016, 6, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Parameter | B | SE | Hypothesis Test | OR | 95% Wald CI for OR | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Wald Chi-Square | Df | Sig. | Lower | Upper | ||||
[Gender = female] | 1.573 | 0.600 | 6.895 | 1 | 0.009 | 4.821 | 1.490 | 15.595 |
[Gender = male] | 0 a | 1 |
Parameter | B | SE | Hypothesis Test | OR | 95% Wald CI for OR | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Wald Chi-Square | df | Sig. | Lower | Upper | ||||
[Gender = female] | 1.380 | 0.512 | 7.247 | 1 | 0.007 | 3.974 | 1.455 | 10.851 |
[Gender = male] | 0a | 1 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Riggio, G.; Pirrone, F.; Lunghini, E.; Gazzano, A.; Mariti, C. Zookeepers’ Perception of Zoo Canid Welfare and its Effect on Job Satisfaction, Worldwide. Animals 2020, 10, 916. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10050916
Riggio G, Pirrone F, Lunghini E, Gazzano A, Mariti C. Zookeepers’ Perception of Zoo Canid Welfare and its Effect on Job Satisfaction, Worldwide. Animals. 2020; 10(5):916. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10050916
Chicago/Turabian StyleRiggio, Giacomo, Federica Pirrone, Elia Lunghini, Angelo Gazzano, and Chiara Mariti. 2020. "Zookeepers’ Perception of Zoo Canid Welfare and its Effect on Job Satisfaction, Worldwide" Animals 10, no. 5: 916. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10050916
APA StyleRiggio, G., Pirrone, F., Lunghini, E., Gazzano, A., & Mariti, C. (2020). Zookeepers’ Perception of Zoo Canid Welfare and its Effect on Job Satisfaction, Worldwide. Animals, 10(5), 916. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10050916