Environmental Factors Of Zoos

Environmental Factors

Can zoo facilities make zoo environments more “wild” since zoos carry mostly “wild-caught” animals? Melfi (2009) addresses how this topic is both good and bad. The good is that the animal may feel more comfortable therefore enhancing their welfare. However, the bad is that the animals may get out of hand because they feel as though they are in the wild. Zoo management should come to an agreement between a wild-based environment and an environment in captivity. Another was to not just make the environment a survival, but a luxurious life. Animal welfare has five freedoms that should meet minimal standards; hunger/thirst, discomfort, pain/injury/disease, fear and distress, and how the animal should express animal behavior. (FAWC, 1979). Zoos should base the welfare of animals on if these factors exceed standards because they should be thriving and not just surviving. Zoos rely on the tradition and practices that have already taken place and not on the new evidence. Melfi suggests that these traditions have not been recently tested and they could have changed. Without empirical study, you cannot have a good impact from housing and husbandry (H&H). The solution to this problem was to find studies that have had an impact on other zoos’ H&H. ARTICLE TWO

Whitman and Wielebnowski (2013) observe choice and control. Zoos are increasing efforts to provide complex and challenging environments which will benefit by giving animals opportunities and make them build skills and strategies. Making modifications to the environment and routines in zoos can promote behaviors. The enrichment could possibly improve fewer behaviors, increase in activity, and greater behavioral diversity. The authors suggest that the zoos push th...

... middle of paper ...

...mortality rates, dispersal of animals, lost animals, disease, and human conflict. In Captive-Bred Versus Wild-Caught Animals, mortality rates were similar for both animals. The main causes of the mortality was because of starvation and disease. 79% of the projects collected supportive measures to reintroduction. However, only 11% of those were tested to see if they actually were effective. The most commonly reported supportive measures were the use of on-site pens, planning of supplementary food or water, and planning of shelter. Also, some supportive measures were providing vaccines before the release of the animals and scattering food around postrelease of the animals. Pre-release training was present in 26% of the projects. Many management actions were taken, including habitat improvement and the removal of predators or other direct threats prerelease. ARTICLE ONE