Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T09:14:30.650Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Wood-Pile Feeders on the Behaviour of Captive Bush Dogs (Speothos Venaticos)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

R Ings ,
N K Waran  and
R J Young
R Ings
Affiliation:
Institute of Ecology and Resource Management, University of Edinburgh, King's Buildings, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
N K Waran
Affiliation:
Institute of Ecology and Resource Management, University of Edinburgh, King's Buildings, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
R J Young*
Affiliation:
Animal Department, Edinburgh Zoo, Murrayfield, Edinburgh, EH12 6TS, UK
*
† Contact for all correspondence and request for reprints
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The influence of an environmental enrichment programme on the searching behaviour of separate groups of male and female bush dogs at Edinburgh Zoo was evaluated. The enrichment programme involved hiding food in specially constructed wood-piles and other appropriate places in the bush dogs’ enclosures. Behavioural data were recorded morning and afternoon for 20 consecutive experimental days and were compared to pre- and post-enrichment programme data, representing basal conditions. Data were collected over a 10-period for both pre and post enrichment phases. Activities were recorded under seven behavioural categories. There was no significant difference between sexes in the proportion of time spent performing searching behaviour so data were pooled. The enrichment programme appeared to cause an increase (P < 0.01) in searching behaviour from initial basal conditions of 2.7per cent to 6.1 per cent of total recorded data points. There was a subsequent decrease in searching behaviour (P < 0.01) to 2.5 per cent when basal conditions were reinstated. All dogs showed increases in searching behaviour when enrichment and basal data were compared. The effectiveness of the enrichment programme in terms of increasing the proportion of time spent in searching behaviour showed a significant decline (P <0.005) over time, probably relating to the dogs increasing proficiency at finding food. It is suggested that the enhanced levels of searching behaviour represent an improvement in welfare.

Keywords

animal welfarebush dogenvironmental enrichmentexplorationforaging
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , May 1997 , pp. 145 - 152
Copyright
© 1997 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Carlstead, K and Seidensticker, J 1991 Seasonal variation in stereotypic pacing in American black bear (Ursus americanus). Behavioural Processes 25: 155–161CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carlstead, K, Seidcnsticker, J and Baldwin, R 1991 Environmental enrichment for zoo bears. Zoo Biology 10: 3–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlstead, K and Shepherdson, D 1994 Effects of environmental enrichment on reproduction. Zoo Biology 13: 447–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chamove, A S and Anderson, J R 1989 Examining environmental enrichment. In: Segal, E F (ed) Housing, Care and Psychological Well Being of Captive and Laboratory Primates pp 183–202. Noyes Publications: New Jersey, USAGoogle Scholar
Druwa, P 1983 The social behaviour of the bush dog (Speothos venaticus). Carnivore VI: 45–75Google Scholar
Duncan, I J H and Poole, T B 1990 Promoting the welfare of farm and captive animals. In: Monaghan, P and Wood-Gush, D (eds) Managing the Behaviour of Animals pp 193–232. Chapman & Hall: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Forthman-Quick, D L 1984 An integrated approach to environmental enrichment in zoos. Zoo Biology 3: 65–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forthman, D L, Elder, S D, Bakeman, R, Kurkowski, T W, Noble, C C and Winslow, S W 1992 Effects of feeding enrichment on the behaviour of three species of captive bears. Zoo Biology 11: 187–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, M 1968 Abnormal Behaviour in Animals. W B Saunders Company: Philadelphia, USAGoogle Scholar
Ginsberg, J R and Macdonald, D W 1990 Foxes, Wolves, Jackals and Dogs: an Action Plan for the Conservation of Canids. IUCN Publication: Gland, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
Kleiman, D G 1994 Mammalian sociobiology and zoo breeding programmes. Zoo Biology 13: 423–432Google Scholar
Law, G, Boyle, H, Johnson, J and Macdonald, A 1990 Food presentation. Part 2: Cats. Ratel 17: 103–105Google Scholar
Markowitz, H 1982 Behavioral Engineering in the Zoo. Van Nostrand Reinhold: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Martin, P and Bateson, P 1993 Measuring Behaviour: an Introductory Guide. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, D 1964 The response of animals to a restricted environment. Symposium of the Zoological Society of London 13: 99–118Google Scholar
Rao, S 1994 The Social Behaviour of Captive Bush Dogs (Speothos venaticus). MSc Thesis, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UKGoogle Scholar
Shepherdson, D, Carlstead, K, Mellen, J and Seidensticker, J 1993 The influence of food presentation on the behavior of small cats in confined environments. Zoo Biology 12: 203–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar