Animal welfare assessment protocols as a management tool for zoos:
the African elephant (Loxodonta africana)
as an example
Zoovet Conference
Bussolengo 16th-20th of May, 2012
Manteca X , Almagro V, Enseñat C and Fernández-Bellón H
Plan of the talk
•
Welfare assessment protocols: background
•
Developing a welfare assessment protocols for
African elephants (Loxodonta africana)
Why welfare assessment protocols?
 To identify problem areas
 To monitor progress when improvement strategies have been
implemented
 Not to obtain an overall welfare score
Animal welfare: elements to be considered
 Biological functioning – health / nutrition
 Emotions
Absence of negative emotions (pain, fear)
 Presence of positive emotions

 Behaviour – possibility to express “important” behaviours
(Duncan and Fraser, 1997)
How to develop a welfare assessment protocol?
 Several indicators
 Valid, reliable and feasible – avoid subjectivity as much as
possible, but be practical!
 Balance between animal-based and resource-based indicators
Animal-based measures
 More relevant (at least in principle)
 Applicable to all types of facilities
 Avoid the problem of interaction between environmental factors
Resource-based measures
 May be needed for some criteria
 May be more feasible
 Needed to design improvement strategies
Welfare Quality® asessment protocols
Four principles and 12 criteria
Absence of prolonged hunger
Hunger
Thirst
Absence
of
prolonged thirst
Expressing social
behaviour
Expressing other
behaviour
d
o
g
Go din
e
fe
Thermal
comfort
Comfort around resting
ho Goo
us d
in
g
Ap
be pro
ha pr
vi iat
ou e
r
d
o
o h
G alt
he
Ease of movement
No painful management
procedures
No disease
Good human-animal relationship
Positive emotional state
No injuries
(Botreau et al., 2007)
Absence of prolonged
hunger
Hunger
Thirst
Absence
of
prolonged thirst
d
o
g
Go din
e
fe
Thermal
comfort
Comfort around resting
G
ho oo
us d
in
g
Ease of movement
Body condition – scale according to breed, age etc
Expressing social
behaviour
Expressing other
behaviour
Ap
be pro
ha pr
vi iat
ou e
r
d
o
o h
G alt
he
No painful management
procedures
No disease
Good human-animal relationship
Positive emotional state
Photos: Brinkmann BOKU
No injuries
Plan of the talk
•
Welfare assessment protocols: background
•
Developing a welfare assessment protocols for
African elephants (Loxodonta africana)
Indicator
Principle
Animal or
resource?
Body condition
Feeding
Animal-based
Appearence of faeces
Feeding
Animal-based
Quantity and quality of water
Feeding
Resource-based
Enclosure size
Housing
Resource-based
Climatic conditions
Housing
Resource-based
Lameness
Health
Animal-based
Skin condition
Health
Animal-based
Affiliative behaviours
Behaviour (social)
Animal-based
Intraspecific aggression
Behaviour (social)
Animal-based
Group size and composition
Behaviour (social)
Resource-based
Stereotypies
Behaviour (other)
Animal-based
Time spent foraging
Behaviour (other)
Animal-based
Environmental enrichment
Behaviour (other)
Resource-based
Medical training
Behaviour (other)
Resource-based
Indicator
Principle
Animal or
resource?
Body condition
Feeding
Animal-based
Appearence of faeces
Feeding
Animal-based
Quantity and quality of water
Feeding
Resource-based
Enclosure size
Housing
Resource-based
Climatic conditions
Housing
Resource-based
Lameness
Health
Animal-based
Skin condition
Health
Animal-based
Affiliative behaviours
Behaviour (social)
Animal-based
Intraspecific aggression
Behaviour (social)
Animal-based
Group size and composition
Behaviour (social)
Stereotypies
Time spent foraging
Resource-based
Rationale
Problems
limitationsAnimal-based
Behaviourand
(other)
Methodological
considerations
Behaviour (other)
Animal-based
Conclusion
Environmental enrichment
Behaviour (other)
Resource-based
Medical training
Behaviour (other)
Resource-based
Enclosure size

Perceived as being very important

Wild elephants roam over very large areas

Experimental evidence in other species show that low space
allowance may lead to stress and behavioural problems

Easy to measure and objective

However...
(Douglas-Hamilton, 1998; Turner et al., 2000)
Enclosure size

Recommendations are very diverse

Their rationale is not clear

Quality of space is likely to be just as important
(Clubb and Mason, 2003)
Group size and composition

Elephants have a very complex
social behaviour and develop strong social bonds with other
individuals

Disruption of social bonds has very negative effects on welfare

However, recommendations on the minimum acceptable group size
vary from 3 to 6 and their rationale is not very clear.
Additionally, group composition is likely to be equally important
(Moss and Pole, 1983; Clubb and Mason, 2003)
Stereotypies

Well accepted as indicators of poor
welfare in a variety of species

However, their relationship with the welfare state of a given
individual is not always straightforward and they may persist
when conditions have been improved

Therefore, stereotypies should not be taken as a definitive sign
that current conditions are sub-optimal
(Rushen and Mason, 2006)
Affiliative behaviours

Evidence in other species show
that they are self-rewarding

They may have a buffering effect on stress

However, studies in other species suggest that affiliative
behaviours may increase in stressful environments
(Waiblinger et al., 2002; Seyfarth and Cheney, 2011)
Problems and further research

Some indicators (including some that are widely cited) clearly
need further evidence

Are we missing something if only “objective” indicators are used?

“Qualitative behavioural assessment” in domestic animals

Is it applicable to zoo animals?
Concluding remarks
•
Assessment protocols are potentially useful and we may build on experience
gained in farm animals
•
The protocols should include several indicators addressing the different aspects
of welfare; the WQ® principles are applicable to a wide range of species
•
The indicators should be valid, reliable and feasible
•
Some indicators widely cited may need further validation
xavier.manteca@uab.es