Wellspring

Transcription

Wellspring

Wellspring
Volume 14, Issue 2
Fall 2014
Committee Chairs
Board of Directors
President
Margaret Rousser
Oakland Zoo
Past President
Heather Leeson
Moody Gardens
Table of Contents
2nd Vice President
Scott Trauger
Lowry Park Zoo
Chief Financial Officer
Susie Ekard
San Diego Zoo Safari Park
Secretary
Cinnamon Williams
Kansas City Zoo
Conference
Kirstin Anderson
Hansen
President’s Corner – Margaret Rousser
Page 2-9
Joint Care – Working with 1.2 Dhole to Allow
Stick Feeding – Nicola Williscroft, Kris Hern
Page 10-11
Monmouth University and Six Flags Great
Adventure and Safari Announce Exclusive
Partnership
Conference
Proceedings
Jennifer Hickman
Samantha Smith
Page 12-18
Stress Triangle – The Four Questions for Which
Animals Need an Answer - František Šusta,
Gabrielle Harris, Tim Sullivan
Education
Missy Lamar
Page 19-20
Oral Hygiene for Insectivorous Bats –
Jennifer Y’Deen, Thomas O’Toole
Page 21
Keeper Corner – How to Train Your (Komodo)
Dragon – Karyn Wheatley
Page 22-35
Directors
Christa Gaus
National Aviary
Jennifer Hickman
Denver Zoo
Page 2-4
Page 1
President-Elect
Nicki Boyd
San Diego Zoo
1st Vice President
Annette Pederson
Copenhagen Zoo
Behavior
Management Fund
Michelle Farmerie
Genevieve Warner
Back Cover
Conference Content
Advisory
Christine McKnight
Government Affairs
Justin Garner
Honors & Awards
Scott Trauger
Membership
Amy Schilz
Merchandise
Susie Ekard
Weight Management in Animal Training:
Pitfalls, Ethical Considerations and Alternative
Options – Barbara Heidenreich
Nominations &
Elections
Heather Leeson
2013 ABMA Conference Award Winners
Public Affairs
Margaret Rousser
Page 18-19
Missy Lamar
SeaWorld San Antonio
Publications
Heidi Hellmuth
Research
&Evaluation
Darren Minier
Jay Tacey
Busch Gardens
Williamsburg
Site Selection
Kelly Elkins
Sponsorship
Cathy Schlott
Website
Heather Leeson
Page 2-9
Page 12-18
Page 19-20
ABMA Wellspring - Volume 14, Issue 2 – Fall 2014
Page 21
Wellspring
The Source of
Behavioral Management Information
Volume 14, Issue 2 – Fall 2014
President’s Column
Hello ABMA Members,
I am honored to be serving as your president in 2014-2015. We have had some amazing leaders in this
organization and I have some pretty big shoes to fill!
One of those leaders was Sue Hunter who sadly passed away from cancer on September 1st of this
year. Sue was a charter member of ABMA and served on the Board of Directors for six years as
President and Vice President. She was soft spoken, but a fountain of knowledge and a dedicated
advocate for animal welfare. In addition to her day job as Mammal Curator at the National Aquarium
in Baltimore, in recent years, she and her husband opened a sanctuary for abandoned and abused pets!
Sue was an inspiration to all of us and she will be dearly missed by both humans and animals alike.
We carry on Sue’s inspiration of knowledge and advocacy through ABMA’s annual conferences. This
year we will be hosting our very first European conference in Denmark! We will be staying at the
beautiful Nyborg Strand Hotel which is right on the water. Our hosts for this conference include
Copenhagen Zoo and Odense Zoo. In keeping with the European tradition, the registration costs will
include all but one meal for the entire week!
ABMA began and continues with the intention of being the platform for sharing information on a
global level and this conference will allow sharing in way that we haven’t had previously. Along the
same vein, have you checked out ABMA Collabornation recently? This benefit has continued to grow
and mature and we are adding material frequently. Need a Wellspring article from 2010? It’s on there!
Need to access a paper from the 2006 conference? Conference Proceedings are all on ABMA
Collabornation as well. One of the primary benefits of the ABMA Collabornation site is the ability to
access archived information. It is also a great way to connect with your fellow ABMA members.
Remember, ABMA is a member-directed organization – we function to support you! Have an idea for
course content that you would like to see on Collabornation? Do you have any other ideas that might
improve your membership experience?
Please feel free to contact me anytime at
Margaret@oaklandzoo.org.
ABMA Wellspring – Volume 14, Issue 2 – Fall 2014- Page 1
Joint Care - Working with 1.2 Dhole (Cuon alpinus) to Allow Stick Feeding
Nicola Williscroft BSc (Hons), Hooves and Carnivore Keeper, Twycross Zoo
Kris Hern, Animal Training Manager, Twycross Zoo
Nikki.williscroft@twycrosszoo.org; Kris.hern@twycrosszoo.org
ABSTRACT
As ex situ conservation efforts within zoological collections continue to improve animal husbandry
and welfare standards through advances in research, education, and veterinary care; many zoological
collections have seen an increasing number of species living longer in captivity. With an increasing
population of elderly animals comes an increasing amount of elderly related health issues. Twycross
Zoo, Warwickshire (UK) is just one of these institutions which has an increasing number of elderly
animals, and as it continually strives to become one of the leading institutions in husbandry and
welfare, along with its expanding veterinary expertise, the care of its elderly animals is paramount.
One such species the zoo holds is its aging pack of three (1.2) dhole (Cuon alpinus). One particular
individual, ‘Yoko’, started showing signs of possible hind leg/hip problems in spring 2012. The
decision was taken to try and train the dholes using positive reinforcement to individually take meat
from a feeding stick from keepers, with particular focus on ‘Yoko’; with an end goal of enabling
keepers to administer daily joint supplement and/or medication if required. The training plan was
successful with a daily joint supplement, Glucosamine, and an anti-inflammatory non-steroid
medication, Rimadyl, being prescribed and administered thirty two days after the training plan started.
Key words: Dhole, Cuon alpinus, positive reinforcement, joint care, medical training
INTRODUCTION
Dholes are a member of Canidae and are one of the least studied members of the canid family,
classified as endangered on the IUCN Red List (Durbin et al., 2008). Their current status and
distribution within their native range is very vague and poorly understood (Venkataraman &
Johnsingh, 2010) due to a lack of research resulting from their shy nature and habitat choice. Numbers
are estimated around 2,500 mature individuals (Durbin et al., 2008), spanning across their native range
consisting of Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Lao
People's Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, Russian Federation, Tajikistan,
Thailand, and Vietnam (Durbin et al., 2008). This highly social and cooperative canid has decreased
dramatically throughout its native range within the past 50 years (Kamler; Wildlife Conservation
Research Unit) and now the dhole is recognised as more endangered than the tiger (Panthera tigris)
and snow leopard (Panthera uncia) within Asia, and their numbers are expected to continue to decline
(Kamler, 2012). Their main threats include habitat loss, prey depletion, persecution, interspecific
competition, and potential disease transfer from domestic/feral dogs (Durbin et al., 2004; Durbin et
al., 2008). Therefore it is paramount that conservation efforts are made to safeguard this species and
ex situ conservation breeding is one of these methods.
Within captivity there are to date 100.103 dhole with 27 births worldwide in the last 12 months (ISIS,
2012). Twycross Zoo has bred dhole successfully for a number of years and currently holds a stable
sibling group of 1.2. When one of the females ‘Yoko’, appeared to be showing signs of potential
joint/hip problems, the zoo’s veterinarians were consulted to discuss the course of action. ‘Yoko’ was
prescribed a daily liquid pain relief and anti-inflammatory tablet which we were unable to successfully
medicate her with. It was decided to try and train the dhole to individually stick feed to take food
which could potentially be used to administer medication. This would enable keepers to administer
required medication to ‘Yoko’ without separating her from the pack, which could also be used if the
other dhole were to require medication at any point in the future. This group of individuals had never
been trained previously. A training plan was submitted and training commenced on May 27 2012
under the supervision of the animal training manager, with an end goal of successfully individually
stick feeding ‘Yoko’ on a daily basis.
ABMA Wellspring – Volume 14, Issue 2 – Fall 2014 – Page 2
METHODOLOGY
Study subject
The dholes are a related sibling pack (D.O.B. February 4 2001) captive born at Twycross Zoo, figure 1
shows ‘Yoko’ the studies focus.
Figure 1: ‘Yoko’
Source: Williscroft, N. (2012)
Training plan and feeding methods
The dholes were trained using positive reinforcement: bridge (clicker) through protected contact, using
meat chunks taken from their allocated diet. Training took place twice a day, am and pm, for ten
minutes per session. Three keepers trained, one per animal, with the outside enclosure being split into
two. The dhole were shut into the same side each time and keepers entered the other side, spreading
out evenly across the fence line. To initially get the dhole interested in approaching keepers any
positive move, e.g. approach/look towards a keeper, would be reinforced by throwing a small chunk of
meat towards them through the mesh and pairing the meat throwing with the bridge. If a dhole picked
up the meat the keepers would also reinforce this action. This process continued and over a period of
time keepers shortened the distance between the meat landing on the floor and the fence line until the
dhole started to approach the fence and become more confident. Once an individual approached the
fence line for a few sessions in a row, meat throwing ceased and the feeding stick was introduced to
encourage them to take meat off the stick (figure 2), which was also paired with the bridge. This
process continued until animals were stick feeding daily, enabling keepers to medicate if required.
Training equipment
Disposable gloves, feeding stick (clicker attached when training advanced) and a meat tub.
Data collection
To keep a record of potential animal preference to a keeper or area at the fence line, a temporary
recording sheet was designed and implemented to allow keepers to record all details and observations
of each training session. An example of the recording sheet can be seen in figure 3. Information of
interest included trainer and location on the fence line, location of each animal, total amount of chunks
taken in each visit to trainers, time and duration of training session, and other comments e.g.
distractions, weather, visitors surrounding enclosure, etc. Training sessions were recorded on ZIMS
(ZIMS, 2012) from May 27 2012 (figure 4; first week of recordable training) 14 days after the pilot
training period began (May 14 2012) once the dhole were approaching the fence line and taking meat
chunks from the feeding stick.
Figure 2: Animal keeper Nicola Williscroft training ‘Yoko’ at enclosure fence line
Source: Hudman, L. (2012)
Figure 3: Training session recording sheet
Animal Name: Yoko
Date:
Start time:
End time:
Train Number of chunks taken each
er
visit
(Initia 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
ls)
+
and
positi
on
First
approa
ched
(Tick)
Training Behaviour: Stick Feeding
Other comments e.g. time taken
to approach first trainer,
distractions, weather etc.
L MR
L MR
L MR
Figure 4: ZIMS record of training sessions
Source:
ZIMS.
(2012)
PROBLE
MS
ENCOUNTERED
Initial animal interest and drive
The initial problem with the training plan was the dholes’ normal feeding routine, they were fed every
other day, and this resulted in them being offered training meat chunks on non-feeding days. Keepers
attempted this routine initially for one week but the dhole were not interested in approaching keepers.
This was likely a combination of the training plan being new to the animals and them not actually
appearing ‘hungry’ to investigate and interact with keepers. After discussion it was agreed to decrease
their food allowance on feed days to a stripped bone with the stripped meat being used for training
sessions to get them interested to approach keepers. Food gradually decreased from a normal 2.25kg
muscle meat or 3.2 kg meat on the bone per animal to 0.5 - 1.2 kg muscle meat or 1.3 - 2.0 kg meat on
the bone (table 1). If animals did not take meat off the stick during the training session the remainder
of the meat was scattered in the enclosure to ensure animals were getting their daily food allowance.
When the dhole picked meat chunks up off the ground keepers bridged this behaviour. During the
training programme the zoo changed meat suppliers to one who offered both beef and horse meat, the
dhole had previously only been fed horse. This had a noticeable effect on the dhole as they were eager
to take meat off the feeding stick, eating horse meat chunks but initially dropping beef chunks.
Table 1: Training meat per animal over time
Date
Training
Feeding day meat weight (kg)
muscle
meat
weight (g) per
session
14/05/12 150
2.25 muscle meat or 3.2 meat on the
(approx.
15 bone
chunks)
04/06/12 150
0.9 muscle meat (2 sessions), 1.05
(approx.
15 muscle meat (1 session) or; 1.7 meat on
chunks)
bone (2 sessions), 1.85 meat on the
bone (1 session)
08/06/12 300
(approx.
chunks)
bone (2 sessions), 1.7 meat on the bone
(1 session)
10/08/12 350
(approx.
chunks)
bone (2 sessions) or 1.65 meat on the
bone (1 session)
Comments
N/A
Food cut down to
try and encourage
animals to approach
trainers
N/A
N/A
Keeper training position
Training initially started within the divided outside enclosure, with the dhole shut in one area and
keepers within another. The dhole had not previously received any training from keepers and therefore
they were unsure and nervous to come forward to investigate the keepers. As soon as keepers ended
the session and exited the enclosure animals would come straight to the fence line where keepers had
been standing. After observing this behaviour on several occasions it was decided to try and train with
keepers standing on the outside of their enclosure to try and gain a more positive result, this started on
June 15 2012.
Environmental factors
Environmental factors have to be considered within the analysis as they may have influence on each
animal’s overall performance for each training session. Environmental factors included time of the
day, season and weather, distractions such as public and events around the enclosure, etc.
RESULTS
‘Yoko’ was the first to approach keepers at the fence line and take food off the feeding stick. The pilot
training period started on May 14 2012 and by May 27 2012 ‘Yoko’ was starting to take one meat
chunk off the feeding stick before walking off. On June 4 2012, after approaching keepers ‘Yoko’
turned around and walked off; a keeper bridged as she was walking off and she turned back around
towards the keeper. This was a significant breakthrough in the training programme as it showed
‘Yoko’ was responding to the bridge. In the afternoon session she approached the fence line within 30
seconds of keepers positioning themselves and took two meat chunks off the feeding stick. Between
June 6-15 2012 ‘Yoko’ made the most noticeable progress throughout the training programme when
she began approaching keepers at the start of training sessions and taking an increasing amount of
meat chunks off the feeding stick (figure 5). ‘Yoko’ made an average of 2.67 visits to keepers and
took an average of 20 chunks each session. ‘Yoko’s’ consistency improved and on the June 11 2012
she finished all chunks in less than two minutes. June 15 2012 saw ‘Yoko’ waiting at the right hand
side station whilst keepers entered the enclosure, and the next day she was confident enough with the
bridge to have it attached to the feeding stick to make training easier.
From June 17 2012 onwards ‘Yoko’ was regularly taking all meat chunks in several visits, it was
noted by this date ‘Yoko’ also responded to her name being called, walking over to the keeper, so this
behaviour was reinforced. Due to ‘Yoko’s consistency of stick feeding each training session the
veterinary team started her on a joint supplement on June 27 2012, 32 days after the training
programme started. She initially refused the medication for one week and then started taking it daily
from July 3 2012. From July 17 2012 onwards ‘Yoko’ would regularly take all meat chunks in one
visit and from August 2 2012 onwards she would regularly be waiting at the fence line and would stay
engaged for the duration of the training session. After the success of daily stick feeding the joint
supplement the veterinary department started ‘Yoko’ on a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory, on August
7 2012. ‘Yoko’ took this successfully from the date dispensed and keepers noticed a notable
improvement in ‘Yoko’s’ hind legs and movement early September 2012. Figure 6 shows ‘Yoko’s’
overall progress over time throughout the training programme showing approximate numbers of meat
chunks taken per week. Figure 7 shows this in more details showing the approximate total number of
meat chunks offered per week along with the approximate number of meat chunks taken by ‘Yoko’
per week.
Figure 5: Number of chunks taken over time by 'Yoko'
4
32
06/06/2012
15
07/06/2012
23
08/06/2012
09/06/2012
22
9
19
36
10/06/2012
11/06/2012
12/06/2012
15/06/2012
Approximate number of meat chunks
taken
Figure 6: 'Yoko's' progress overtime throughout training
programme
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Weeks
7
8
9
10
Approximate number of meat chunks
Figure 7: Approximate numbers of chunks offered to 'Yoko'
with approximate numbers she took off the stick
350
300
250
200
150
Chunks offered
100
Chunks taken
50
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Weeks
DISCUSSION
As predicted ‘Yoko’ was the first to approach keepers at the fence line and take meat from the feeding.
During week one of the training ‘Yoko’ reacted positively to the bridge when she was walking away,
turning back around towards the keeper, who reinforced again. This was excellent progress but the
dhole still did not appear very motivated or hungry to approach keepers. In decreasing the dholes’ feed
allowance it enabled trainers to get the dhole closer to the fence line to begin positive interactions with
them for training sessions, as the dhole were increasingly food motivated and willing to interact to
obtain food. Within four days of the new feeding regime being implemented ‘Yoko’ approached
keepers within 30 seconds of them getting into training positions, which was the best training session
to date. Weeks 2-3 were the ‘breakthrough’ weeks with ‘Yoko’ showing the most improvement.
‘Yoko’ continued to improve throughout the training programme and 32 days after the training
programme started the veterinary team was able to dispense a daily joint supplement tablet due to
‘Yoko’ consistently stick feeding on a daily basis. She refused this supplement for one week, this may
have been due to keeper trial and error as keepers initially crushed up the tablet and attempted to hide
it within a pocket cut in the meat. This method did not work so keepers then tried placing the tablet
whole in a pocket cut in the meat, but ‘Yoko’ would chew the meat chunk finding the tablet, resulting
in her spitting the meat out. This was probably due to the tablet being quite large and keepers cutting
the meat chunks too big so she had to chew them. They varied the sizes of the meat chunks cut until
they found one which was large enough to disguise the tablet but small enough for her to swallow
usually without chewing so she would not notice the tablet inside.
PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED
Initial animal interest and drive
Within four days of implementing the decreased amount of food offered to the dhole, keepers noticed
a change in their behaviour during training sessions, with them becoming increasingly motivated
towards interacting with keepers to gain food. Meat chunks not taken during the training session were
scattered within the enclosure at the end of sessions. Keepers observed animals becoming increasingly
active in searching for the meat chunks as the training programme progressed. It is advised that
caution should be taken that the animals do not get complacent to this and wait for the training
sessions to end to scavenge scattered meat rather than interact with keepers during the training session.
As the dhole became increasingly willing to train on a daily basis their food intake was gradually
increased over a period of six weeks to their normal recommended diet weights.
Keeper training position
Keepers initially started training within the enclosure but this soon became apparent by the dholes’
behaviour that this was not the best position for the keepers as the dhole were still quite shy and
nervous to approach keepers. When keepers repositioned outside the enclosure the dhole appear more
confident and interested to approach keepers. Consideration should also be taken as to what the
animals are normally used to in their daily husbandry routines, and the individual behaviours of the
animals.
Environmental factors
This pack had a clear dislike to high winds, either not coming over for training sessions at all or
showing interest but becoming easily distracted, resulting in the sessions ending. They seemed to like
the rain (not heavy), coming straight over to train. They were not very responsive in warm/humid
temperatures and would often not move even when called, this was most apparent throughout the
summer months between 12:00-15:30. Keepers found the dhole were most responsive early morning,
around 08:30, and late afternoon, after 15:30. In the winter as day lengths were shorter, keepers had to
administer medication earlier in the day and ‘Yoko’ would not approach keepers in the dark. Visitors
affected their behaviour, especially in the early stages of the training programme with them becoming
easily distracted with visitors approaching or visitor numbers above 15. Other distractions around the
enclosure e.g. maintenance work, gardening, etc. also affected the animals’ focus. Keepers found that
as animal focus increased throughout the training programme, the dholes’ reaction to external
distractions reduced.
SUCCESS OF TRAINING PROGRAMME
The training programme goal was completed successfully with ‘Yoko’ starting on a joint supplement
32 days after the training plan records started. Although she refused medication for one week she now
successfully takes medication daily and an overall improvement has been noted.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thank you to the hooves and carnivore team at Twycross Zoo for their hard work and dedication to
train these animals. Thank you to Kris Hern for providing support and advice in the training
programme, as well as standing in to help training when there has been staff shortages.
REFERENCES
Durbin, L. S., Venkataraman, A., Hedges, S & Duckworth, W. (2004) Dhole Cuon alpinus. In SilleroZubiri, C., Hoffmann, M & Macdonald, D. W. (eds.) Canids: Foxes, Wolves, Jackals and dogs. Status
Survey and Conservation Action Plan. Switzerland and Cambridge: IUCN/SSC Canid Specialist
Group. Ch. 8.
Mech, L. David. 1999. Alpha status, dominance, and division of labor in wolf packs. Canadian Journal
of Zoology 77: pp. 1196-1203.
Venkataraman, A. B & Johnsingh, A. J. T. (2010) Dholes. The behavioural ecology of dholes in India.
In Macdonald, D. W and Sillero-Zubiri, C. (eds.) The Biology and Conservation of Wild Canids.
Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ch. 21.
Electronic
Durbin, L. S., Hedges, S., Duckworth, J. W., Tyson, M., Lyenga, A. & Venkataraman, A. (IUCN SSC
Canid Specialist Group - Dhole Working Group) 2008. Cuon alpinus. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List
of Threatened Species. Version 2012.1. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 29 August 2012.
ISIS. (2012) ZIMS Species Holding; Cuon alpinus [online] Available at:
< https://zims.isis.org/Main.aspx> [accessed 11 November 2012].
Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, (n.d.) Ecology and Conservation of Dholes in Southeast Asia.
[online] Available at: < http://www.wildcru.org/research/research-detail/?theme=&project_id=68 >
[accessed 18 November 2012].
ZIMS. (2012) ZIMS Homepage [online] Available at: <https://zims.isis.org/> [accessed 14 November
2012].
Other
Kamler, J. (2012) Ecology and Conservation of the dhole in Cambodia. [word document] University
of Oxford: Wildlife Conservation Research Unit.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
ABMA Disclaimer
One of the core values of the ABMA states that the sharing of knowledge and new ideas is fundamental to advancing animal
behavior management. We do this in many ways, such as through our conferences, publications, and social media.
Our written publications feature many fascinating and thought-provoking papers and articles. Some you may agree with, others
may challenge your perceptions and ideas. And while the content that you read reflects the views of the author and does not
necessarily represent the feelings of the ABMA or the board of directors, we think that the diversity of subjects and viewpoints
represented by our members, at our conferences, in our publications, and via our social media outlets is one of the strengths of
this organization. We encourage you to take in all that you read with an open mind, because you might be surprised by what
you learn. Thank you and enjoy the publication!
Monmouth University and Six Flags Great Adventure and Safari
Announce Exclusive Partnership
Exclusive Higher Education Collaboration Offers Students Unique Learning Experience
Course is the only one of its kind in the nation and features students interacting with
elephants, rhinoceroses and sea lions
West Long Branch, NJ -- Monmouth University and Six Flags Great Adventure and Safari, the world’s
largest theme park, have formed an exclusive partnership that provides a unique learning experience for
students. The idea came to fruition when Monmouth University Assistant Psychology Professor Lisa
Dinella, Ph.D. took her children to Six Flags Great Adventure and realized that the trainer’s discussion on
how they train the marine mammals was the same lecture she had given the day before to her students …
only the trainers used cooler props. That’s when she had her “aha” moment.
The principles that animal trainers use to produce animal behavior, and their similarity to the principles
applied to human behavior, gave Dr. Dinella the idea for a unique educational collaboration between
Monmouth University and Six Flags Great Adventure and Safari. Field Experience: Six Flags Wild
Safari is an upper level course that was offered to 15 psychology students for the first time in 2012. The
class is being offered again this year and is an exclusive affiliation between Six Flags and Monmouth
University. Monmouth students were so enthusiastic about taking this class that within minutes of
receiving an email about it, hundreds replied and there was a line out the door to attend the interest
meeting.
The rigorous course load was designed to introduce
students to the psychological theories and principles used
to shape animal behaviors and to identify how these
principles can be applied to their own careers and lives.
The course involves a combination of class meetings,
library research, journaling, presentations, and on-site
supervised exposure to animals. Six Flags Safari Off Road
Adventure, an interactive animal adventure including a
guided off-road truck expedition, debuted last spring and
features 1,200 animals from six continents.
The
neighboring Six Flags Great Adventure theme park is
home to both aquatic and land animals including otters,
sea lions, exotic birds, and reptiles.
Students meet on-site with the animal trainers at Six Flags
in Jackson, NJ once a week for a three-hour session which
includes instructional time and field work with the
animals. As part of their field work, students watch
trainers employ the psychological principles they have
learned with the animals at Six Flags, including
rhinoceroses, elephants, and sea lions. After watching these demonstrations, students have supervised
access to the animals and unique opportunities to work closely with them with the goal of gaining a
deeper understanding of the psychological concepts they have learned.
About Monmouth University
Monmouth University is a leading private institution that offers a
comprehensive array of undergraduate and graduate degree
programs. The University provides students with a highly
personalized education that builds the knowledge and confidence of
tomorrow’s leaders. Located in West Long Branch, New Jersey,
Monmouth University’s magnificent and historic campus is
approximately one hour from both New York City and Philadelphia
and is within walking distance of the beaches of the Atlantic Ocean.
Monmouth University is listed in U.S. News & World Report’s “Best
Colleges,” and the Princeton Review’s The Best 378 Colleges, and
is recognized by the latter as one of the country’s top “green”
colleges. To learn more, visit us at www.monmouth.edu.
About Six Flags Entertainment Corporation
Six Flags Entertainment Corporation is the
world’s largest regional theme park company
with $1.1 billion in revenue and 18 parks
across the United States, Mexico, and Canada.
For 53 years, Six Flags has entertained
millions of families with world-class coasters,
themed rides, thrilling water parks, and unique
attractions
including
up-close
animal
encounters, Fright Fest® and Holiday in the
Park®.
For
more
information,
visit
www.sixflags.com.
Stress Triangle - The Four Questions for Which Animals Need an Answer
František Šusta – Prague Zoo
Gabrielle Harris – South African Association for Marine Biological Research
Tim Sullivan – Chicago Zoological Society, Brookfield Zoo
Stress is a complex body reaction that affects all living creatures including humans. It is commonly
believed that stress is connected with fearful situations where the organism may be “in trouble”. This
is not the case. According to Yerkes-Dodson´s law (1908), which was created to look at the effects of
learning, the stress reaction of an organism is divided into two phases ranging from a state of boredom
to engagement - the eustress phase; to the distressed phase - where the subject has impaired
performance as a result of too much stress, this can potentially lead to the subject’s death. In 2007,
Lupien, et al’s research of stress hormones showed that the hormone levels in the body of an organism
that were generated in learning scenarios mirrored the Yerkes-Dodson performance graph.
We all know the term “adrenaline junkie” and many of us do like to “increase our adrenaline”. The
adrenaline hormone is one of the first stress reactions within the body and at this point it is connected
with the eustress phase, when the performance is increasing. But the reaction is much more complex
than that. The stress reaction within the body begins in the hypothalamus – hypophysis – suprarenal,
where the hormone noradrenalin is the most important neurotransmitter activating the suprarenal
cortex, which produces adrenaline. The adrenaline and noradrenalin is transported by the circulatory
system and activates most of the body’s cells. The final impact increases both blood pressure and
respiratory rate and causes other physiological responses. The final part of the stress reaction is
connected with production of cortisol (the main stress hormone) and glucocorticoids. Although the
brief influence of glucocorticoids is helpful for the organism, the extended presence of these
substances leads to degeneration of muscles, permanent high blood pressure, sugar metabolism
disorders, and other diseases. The organism is then more susceptible to infections and cancer. The
final part of chronic stress is total exhaustion where the organism can finally succumb. This is a result
of the distress phases, where sustained and increased concentrations of stress hormones decreases
performance as explained above.
The stress reaction, if over stimulated, is automatic - and not a conscious choice. It is our goal to
ensure that the response of the organism remains willful and choice-based. This is difficult to measure
objectively as the behavioral response is highly influenced by the internal state of the organism and
where it is in the eustress-distress phase.
When using positive reinforcement, trainers assume that they do not put the animal in any distress.
Presumably, the method is free of abuse and traditional punishments, and the organism can only “win
or nothing”. However, experiments on cortisol concentrations in saliva during different training styles
may indicate otherwise. A study done in the cynology department of Czech University of Life
Sciences (Hamšíková 2013) compared the stress hormone cortisol in the saliva of five dogs (breed
type Beagle) after trainers used two different methods of training:
-
traditional “coercive” method
typical positive free-shaping
Results showed a significant increase in the cortisol levels of two dogs trained using coercive training
methods. However, for two other dogs the cortisol level increased more during clean, positive freeshaping. For the fifth dog, the cortisol increase was the same when using both methods.
You see, the positive way of training is not automatically free from distress. When animals or people
anticipate the availability of a rewarding event (food, attention, etc.) but have no control over the
timing of its delivery, anxiety and distress can result. Punishment is not present but the experience is
very undesirable for the animal or person (just remember yourself as a child and how stressful it can
be when waiting for Santa).
To summarise, stress is present in learning scenarios. When we train animals, they are learning. To
be ethical and to use positive reinforcement
successfully, we need to ensure that our animals stay in
the optimal eustress phase. But how can we ensure we
remain in this phase when stress is an internal state of
the animal? Reading and interpreting the animals’ body
language is helpful but remains subjective and thus not
foolproof. This limitation leads us to the creation of
our model which we have called the “stress triangle”.
The “stress triangle” is based on Lupien’s graph,
which evolved from the Yerkes- Dodsonś curve. We
have adjusted this illustration to include the level at
which the autonomic nervous system takes over. At
this point, the body is in flight, freeze, or fight mode,
and there is no conscious choice - survival instinct
has taken over. In the green zone, the animal (or
person) is consciously choosing.
We have included the autonomic stress phase as
it is relevant to choice-based learning. This is a
survival instinct and “thinking to choose” no
longer occurs. We can relate to the fact that the
stress hormones generated when we get a fright
do have a longer lasting effect. We feel them –
perhaps feeling tired. The midline is where
stress hormones are at the point where they are
debilitating or even fatal for an animal or
person. The recovery phase, where one is able
to get rid of residual hormones, is no longer
normal or immediate. Choice-based learning is
therefore in the green quadrant. If an animal is learning in this quadrant, any stress hormones in the
learning process immediately goes back to normal when the animal succeeds.
The “stress triangle” holds the key to maintaining choice-based learning and keeping the animal in
eustress. It ensures at all times that the animal has the answer to the following four questions:
1.
“WHY do I participate in the training?” The animal needs to know that there is a reinforcer
available. The animal’s motivation to participate must already be in place. This could be due
to our presence (secondary reinforcer) indicating the possibility of food, etc. So, if we were to
ask the animal ‘why are you training?’ they would have an answer.
2.
“How can I START the training?” The animal must be able to show that they are ready to
participate. In this phase they are showing us that their stress hormones are on the low level
and their body and mind are relaxed enough to make behavioral choices and decisions.
Providing an animal with a cue when they are not focused on us is a typical mistake made by
trainers where the animal is not showing us they are ready.
3.
“How can I STOP the stressing process that is increasing the stress hormones? The animal
must always be in control of ‘stopping’ the aversive stimulus. For example, if we introduce a
new object too quickly and the animal takes flight, it has not made a conscious choice to stay
calm. It has taken flight as it is not able to ‘stop’ the stimulus. If our approximations are slow
and clear enough, then we are able to stop advancing the stimulus at the point where the animal
shows signs of being at its stress threshold that would lead to an escape response. By
recognizing this threshold and staying below it we give the animal control of stopping the
stimulus and thereby prevent the need to escape from it (in this case, the new foreign object).
4.
“Where can I relax? Where is my SAFE PLACE away from the stressor?” There must be a
‘safe place’ already trained. For many marine mammal trainers, the animal’s focus in front of
us (AKA- “station”) could be this safe place. For some others the safe place is in their
transport box, the exit to the backstage area and, for a dog in field training, the safe place
should be the trainer.
Giving the animal answers for these four questions will ensure that we stay in the optimal learning
phase of eustress, under the Fight, Flight, Freeze (FFF) line. So, let’s look at some practical examples
to demonstrate the use of these concepts:
Example 1: Skunk training for a children’s
program at the Prague Zoo. Imagine a skunk that is
trained to show his natural behavior on a table in
front of 200 hundred screaming children. This
situation could bring the animal’s stress near the
FFF line. If the skunk did not have an answer for
STOP and SAFE PLACE, his own version of stop
would be really smelly! We connect the table with
his transport box which is his private place and is
always left open. The answer for WHY is the
opportunity for food. The answer for START is
looking out from the box. When the skunk shows
us his willingness to START, we call him to a target and he follows. But if the noise becomes too loud
or if the skunk becomes “confused” during training, he can turn back to the box (which is the answer
for STOP) and where he finds his SAFE PLACE for relaxing.
Example 2: Blood draw training on a sea lion male in
protective contact at the Prague zoo. During the
desensitization process the sea lion stays in his private
corner over the grate near the backstage salt pool. His
reason WHY to engage in the training is the fish he
expects. His START is when he offers his hind
flipper to the trainers who are behind the grate. The
trainer starts to desensitize and increases the pressure
on the flipper (increase the potential stressor). If the
arousal is too high and this pushes the internal stress
of the sea lion close to the FFF threshold, the sea lion can STOP the training process just by pulling
his flipper back. At this moment the trainer stops the activity and does not ask him for anything. His
private area behind the grate is his SAFE PLACE where he can relax. Then, when he is relaxed, he
gives his hind flipper back to the trainers without any cue. So, he communicates that it’s time to
START and we can go on with the desensitization process.
Example 3 - Imagine a dog that is aggressive towards other dogs when he is
on-leash but calm when he is off-leash. Other dogs are stressors for him so
decreasing distance between them increases the stress response. Once the
stress hormone level reaches the critical FFF line, the dog needs to stop the
stressor. If he is off-leash, his answer for STOP is to escape. This response
increases distance and leads to his SAFE PLACE. But what if our dog is onleash and not allowed to move away from the approaching dogs? Our dog’s
stress level can then go above the critical FFF line. In this scenario our dog’s
answer for STOP may only be to attack. After this attack, he will find the
SAFE PLACE with the increased distance as the other dogs flee from him.
How can we change this situation? We can give him another more
acceptable answer for STOP and for SAFE PLACE. We will also introduce
the REASON WHY and also carefully look for his signal for START. The
lesson will look like this:
Our dog stays on-leash and he is bridged and reinforced just for sitting and
looking at his trainer (without any verbal cue). This relaxed “sit and look” is
an indicator of low stress and indicates to us the answer for START. The
rewards the trainer provides are the answer for WHY. Next, another dog
on-leash begins to approach our dog. Our dog looks at him and at the same
moment the other dog stops.
The action of looking at the other dog is the answer for STOP. After our
dog stops this approaching stressor in this way, he then looks back to the
trainer who immediately bridges and reinforces with a food reward.
Additionally and at the same moment, the other dog decides to move
further away. This action of decreasing proximity leads to decreased stress
in our dog. This adds not only to our reward but also provides an answer
for the final question SAFE PLACE (near trainer, far from other dogs).
After relaxing in this SAFE PLACE, our dog looks at the trainer (START)
and the process can begin again. Through this experience and with a few
repetitions, our dog learns that he does not need to use aggression to stop
the approaching dog (stressor). Likewise, we do not need to decrease the
proximity of both dogs as a part of the reward.
When the trainer notices that her dog is looking at the other animal she
stops approaching. Finally, there is no need to stop at all because the dog
has become desensitized to other dogs. We can then simply go on with
counter-conditioning because our dog’s stress does not go above the FFF
line in the presence of the other dogs which then removes the need to use the inappropriate “answers”
our dog used previously to reduce stress.
Example 4: These four questions are not only important during
desensitization training, but during any training. When simply shaping
the behavior of an animal, there will always be some potentially
stressful situations. These situations include when the animal was not
successful enough or it did not receive a reward it expected. The
animal might perceive these outcomes as negative punishment. Some
animals can become stressed with just a single mistake. While animals
predominately experience success during the shaping process, some
failure is always part of the equation. So, even in simple shaping, it is
important and useful to have answers to our four questions. Imagine
target training a laboratory rat. There is a table with an opened crate
on top that contains our subject rat. The crate is the rat’s private place
during training. It’s reason for WHY is the food, the START is
leaving the crate by stepping onto the table. The STOP is when the rat goes back to the crate (SAFE
PLACE). The rat steps on the table (START) and the trainer offers the target. The rat touches the
target and is bridged and reinforced. The training goes on and increases the distance of the target from
the crate. At this moment, the distance is too far for the rat and it does not touch the target. At this time
the rat is unsuccessful and becomes stressed. The rat’s common reaction is to go back to the crate
(STOP, SAFE PLACE), turn around and immediately come back out onto the table (new START). At
this moment the mind of the rat is relaxed enough to get another chance. The target is presented but
not as far as the previous trial. The rat touches the target and the training can go on.
Example 5: There is a common side effect of
positive reinforcement training when working
with dogs of “workaholic” breeds (for example
Border collie). These types of dogs will offer
behavior during periods of downtime when the
trainer is not cueing the animal to do
something. This is logical, because the cue in
positive reinforcement training is understood as
a “chance to do a behavior to achieve a
reward”. The period between cues can be
perceived by the animal as lost opportunities to
earn reinforcement. The Border collie may start to offer behavior to fill these voids to gain
reinforcement. When these unrequested responses go unreinforced, the dog can act out and show
evidence of heightened stress.
The training solution for this dog is to establish a specific behavior that will be successful in the
absence of any cue from the trainer. The dog can offer this “default” response (“Zero Variant” in
Czech) to continue to earn reinforcement when it does not otherwise know what to do. So first the
trainer has to choose one very simple behavior that can be used as this default response – commonly
this is to sit in front of the trainer or on his left side. The trainer first begins the training session by
asking the dog for established behaviors. The dog is successful and receives reinforcement. At the
moment following the last reinforcement, the trainer stops and does not give any cues. The dog will
begin offering behaviors and the trainer should begin looking for the desired default response (sit). So
if the dog spontaneously sits, the trainer clicks and reinforces. The trainer continues on with a short
bout of normal training followed again with a “time without cues”. The dog offers the sit default
response and the trainer clicks and reinforces. In a short time the dog stops offering other behaviors
when not under cue and simply offers just the default sit response that was then captured. This default
response was conditioned using Differential Reinforcement of Incompatible behavior (DRI). The sit
behavior is incompatible with the other offered behaviors in the “no-cue” context and is differentially
reinforced which strengthens this particular response.
It is important to lengthen the duration of the default response over time to eventually replicate the
normal delays that may occur during training sessions. Once this default behavior approaches fluency,
the trainer must begin removing food reinforcement and replace it by delivering cues for strongly
established behaviors. This teaches the animal that waiting by offering the default response leads to
future reinforcement opportunity. Once this aspect is conditioned, the trainer looks for the animal to
start with this default response. When the animal is completely fluent in this, the trainer can begin to
condition new behaviors where success is not always guaranteed.
In this training procedure the answer for WHY is evident from beginning – the delivery of a very
strong reinforcer (strong from dog´s viewpoint) using DRI. If the dog becomes stressed from not
having reinforcement opportunities between cues, the default behavior (sit) is the answer for STOP
and also SAFE PLACE. This process has become something like an LRS in the dog training
community. The answer for START comes during the final phase of the process when we have the
dog start from this default position when teaching new behaviors. This default response allows the dog
to communicate to the trainer that it is relaxed and ready to learn.
We are sure that there are several different scenarios that can demonstrate the successful use of this
Stress Triangle concept. This process is not only for desensitization procedures, but also for many
shaping projects and can be utilized for training a variety of different species. This concept can help
us to understand and solve many behavioral problems – aggression when animals do not have an
answer for STOP, continually stressed animals that do not have a SAFE PLACE to reduce their
anxiety, the pseudo-aggressive dog whose trainers just do not give them time to relax and control of
when to START. Likewise, this can be helpful for animals that attack others just because they do not
have a reason for WHY to accept their presence.
In our opinion, the stress triangle concept is essential to create healthy motivation. Positive
reinforcement training works best when animals are comfortable and in control. This occurs when the
answers for START, STOP, and SAFE are satisfied. Some trainers mistakenly focus on just
increasing hunger (the WHY). This can unfortunately lead to redirected behaviors including
aggression and stereotypies.
We hope that you can see the many benefits of this concept as well as its broad application in the
training community. We look forward to hearing trainers’ thoughts and comments about this and
discussing them in the future.
CONCLUSION
Using the stress triangle ensures that our training provides a choice for the animals. This provides
opportunity for true positive relationship building between ourselves and the animals.
In her book “Made for Each Other”, Meg Olmert recounts research that details how the hormone
oxytocin has been noted as the ‘caring’ hormone. It is the hormone that is released when mothers
suckle their young. In research done on dogs, Professor Odendaal noted how during interactions with
dogs, there was entrainment of this hormone between humans and the dogs with which they were
interacting.
Olmert alludes to research that maintains that “oxytocin is central to the mininervious system that can
shut down the body’s most powerful defensive system, fight/flight, and replace it with a chemical state
that makes us more curious and gregarious.” From this information we can postulate that clear positive
‘relationship’ between us and the animals can assist to reduce stress. Using clear operant conditioning
in conjunction with answering the four stress triangle questions can increase the potential to ensure
that we as trainers maintain ourselves as a ‘secondary reinforcer’, and thus the potential for the caring
hormone to counter stress also increases.
In relation to the stress graph, we see that if we are in a mutually satisfying ‘relationship’ with animals,
we have a greater window of opportunity to ensure they remain in a choice-based state of mind while
they are in training.
REFERENCES:
Meg D. Olmert; 2008; “Made for Each Other”; Da Capo Press; Cambridge, MA, 02142;
Lupien SJ, Maheu F, Tu M, Fiocco A, Schramek TE; 2007; The effects of stress and stress hormones
on human cognition: Implications for the field of brain and cognition;
Brain and Cognition 65: 209–237.doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2007.02.007. PMID 17466428;
Hamšikova. 2013: Comparison of stress in two different training methods on dogs. Master Study;
Czech University of Life Sciences, Prague.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Toyota Elephant Passage Demonstration at the Denver Zoo
Oral Hygiene for Insectivorous Bats
Jennifer Y’Deen, Keeper, California Science Center
Thomas O’Toole, Zoology Supervisor, Springs Preserve
Insectivorous bats are not common choices for zoo exhibits compared to more “exotic” fruit bats. As of
2006, there were 29 bat species on display at AZA accredited institutions and only five of these were
insectivorous. In addition to being a less common choice for exhibition, colonies of insectivorous bats in
captivity tend to be much smaller than fruit bat colonies. In the same survey, there were over 10,000
holding spots at AZA institutions for bats and only 22 of these spots were allotted to insectivorous bats
(Wing 2007). As a result, care guidelines for insectivorous bats are not as well-established in the zoo
community as they are for fruit bats.
One of the challenges of keeping insectivorous bats is that many
species naturally eat tiny flying insects, which are hard to keep as
feeders and difficult to contain in most bat enclosures. Mealworms
are a popular choice for feeding bats in captivity (Lollar 1998), but
some resources recommend more diverse diets (Bernard 2011). At
the California Science Center we successfully fed our colony of
pallid bats (Antrozous pallidus) mealworms, superworms, wax
worms, and crickets. The Springs Preserve also kept pallid bats, and
fed them crickets, mealworms, and wax worms.
Though these diets are diverse and nutritious, these insects have
softer exoskeletons than the pallid bat’s natural diet, which includes
beetles, Jerusalem crickets, centipedes, and scorpions (Johnston 2001, Lenhart 2010). The Science Center
attempted to raise Jerusalem crickets but they were not a practical solution, and larger insects like
grasshoppers were not available live. Harder bodied arthropods like these have more chitin, which acts as
a natural brush against the bats’ teeth. Without us managing the plaque from these soft insects, the bats
would be at risk of tartar buildup (Lollar 1998), which could lead to gum disease or infections that could
cause a loss of teeth (Lollar 2006). Therefore to manage our bats’ long-term dental health, both
institutions began manually brushing their teeth and gingiva. This idea came from a book on bat
rehabilitation, which lists it as a treatment for dental infections (Lollar 1998).
Both institutions used a dental proxabrush (GUM Brand Go-Betweens Cleaners) and very diluted
Chlorhexidine. We started with a 3% Chlorhexidine solution and put a couple of sprays in a small cup
that we then filled with water. We dipped the brush in the Chlorhexidine mixture, then offered it to the
bat perpendicular to the jawline. The brush was then pulled, pushed and spun along the teeth for a few
seconds. The brush would then be rinsed in a cup of water and offered again in the same manner. The
process took about 15 seconds. Alternatively, a cotton swab dipped in the Chlorhexidine solution could be
used in the same manner for more sensitive gumlines.
At the Science Center, we brushed the teeth and gingiva once a week
during the bats’ routine health evaluations. These evaluations also
included weighing and visual examinations, with a focus on skin
condition and overall strength. We brushed the bats’ teeth weekly
from spring 2011, approximately one year after they came into
captivity, until their transfer to the Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum
in January 2014. We did not attempt to reduce the frequency, as it
added only a few seconds to their handling and it did not appear
stressful. Annual exams of the bats under anesthesia and with a dissecting microscope showed no
concerning plaque build-up.
At the Science Center, during these exams the vet did minor scraping to remove plaque closer to the
gums. At Springs Preserve, there was a noticeable reduction of overall plaque buildup on the teeth after
brushing had been done. Ultrasonic cleanings were done under anesthesia by the veterinary team at the
Preserve to remove heavier plaque buildup as needed. It is also interesting to note that during these
annual exams both institutions were able to see considerable difference in tooth wear between the bats,
which helped us determine which bats might be older or younger than others.
In order to perform dental procedures
and other health evaluations, routine
handling of the bats was required.
Leather gloves were worn by staff
during these handling sessions to
prevent injuries to the hands from
potential bites and scratches. Although
this added protective layer reduced the
level of dexterity somewhat for the
handler, it was not enough to impair the
work being performed. Deerskin leather
was found to be more flexible and
dexterous than traditional cowhide.
Coincidentally, the gloved hands
provided a surface that the bats were
able to grip, which seemed to offer them
a sense of security. Roosting pouches
and small hand towels were also used
during examinations. The bats adjusted
to these regular handling sessions
relatively quickly with minimal signs of stress observed as long as the duration and frequency were not
excessive. Over time, some of the animals would even transfer willingly onto a gloved hand or roosting
pouch when offered.
The minimally invasive addition of oral hygiene practices to the routine handling of our bats resulted in
better preventative care. The long-term keeping of small insectivorous bats has not been well studied
since they are rarely exhibited in North American zoos. Being very small animals, they create unique
challenges to providing optimal care; however we hope to inspire other institutions that also recognize the
importance of displaying native species.
References:
Bernard S, Griffiths MA, Dierenfeld E. (2011). Insectivorous Bats. In S. Bernard (Ed.), Bats in Captivity Volume 3: Diet and Feeding – Environment and
Housing (pp 47-70). Washington, DC: Logos Press.
Johnston DB, Fenton MB. (2001). Individual and population-level variability in diets of pallid bats (Antrozous pallidus). Journal of Mammalogy, 82(2):362373.
Lenhart PA, Mata-Silva V, Johnson JD. (2010). Foods of the pallid bat, Antrozous pallidus (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae), in the Chihuahuan Desert of western
Texas. The Southwestern Naturalist 55(1):110-115.
Lollar A, Schmidt-French B. (1998). Captive care and medical reference for the rehabilitation of insectivorous bats. Bat World Publication, Mineral Wells, TX.
Lollar A. (2006). Diagnostic and Treatment Update for the Rehabilitation of Insectivorous Bats. Bat World Sanctuary Publication, Mineral Wells, TX.
Wing S. (2007). Regional Collection Plan for Bats, August 2007. American Zoo and Aquarium Association Bat Advisory Group.
Keeper Corner - How to Train a (Komodo) Dragon
Karyn Wheatley, Herpetology Keeper
Riverbanks Zoo is home to two Komodo dragons (Varanus komodoensis), siblings Dutch and Anna, who
turned two years old in August 2013. Dutch, the male, and Anna, the female, have already outgrown one
exhibit and are well on their way to packing their suitcases for a third, larger house here at the Zoo.
The purpose of training an animal at the Zoo is
not to perform “tricks,” but instead to give the
animals the best care that keepers and
veterinary staff can provide. In this case, care is
defined as, but not limited to, giving routine
medical exams, teaching boundaries, and
providing great enrichment for the animals.
Even though the dragons look small enough
now, they can reach lengths up to ten feet long
and weigh over 200 pounds. Like other monitor
lizards, Komodos are highly intelligent reptiles
and can be taught behaviors that help keepers
work alongside them.
To begin training a dragon, we first need tools.
We created a “target pole” with two different color ends, one for each dragon. This allows them to get
accustomed to their specific color and not become confused with two of the same object. Next, we need a
reward item. For our training sessions we use small mice as rewards when the dragons positively respond
to keeper commands. They are currently learning to “target” (touch their nose to their specific target pole)
and “hold” (remain still). This allows keepers to move the dragons, give visual physical exams, or get
them on a scale. Lastly, the dragons need to know when training or feeding time is over, so they receive a
light shower with a hose to help turn off their feeding response.
Both Dutch and Anna are learning very quickly, which will help ensure success in their future exhibit. For
now, you can see the Komodo dragons in their current digs: the Tropical Rainforest Gallery inside the
Aquarium-Reptile Complex.
Photos by Karyn Wheatley and Casey Lown
Weight Management in Animal Training:
Pitfalls, Ethical Considerations and Alternative Options
By Barbara Heidenreich
Barbara’s Force Free Animal Training
(www.BarbarasFFAT.com)
Abstract: Weight management is a practice that has been used in training birds for many years.
This strategy involves determining a weight range in which a bird may be more likely to respond
to food as a reinforcer for training or maintaining behaviors. This is a strategy which is rarely
used to train in other taxonomic groups. This paper will explore the pitfalls of relying on weight
as a measure of motivation. This includes trainers becoming desensitized to bird body language
indicative of excessive motivation for food reinforcers. It will also explore ways to measure
motivation for food that are not related to the number on the scale. It will also question the
ethics of using weight management in animal training and provide alternative options which are
commonly used to train other species of animals.
Background
The International Association of Avian Trainers and Educators defines weight management as
follows:
Weight Management
Because the weight and appetite of an animal are valuable indicators of its general health,
monitoring a bird’s weight can be a valuable tool in understanding its motivation to present a
desired behavior as it relates to various weight ranges. Once a weight range that corresponds to
acceptable behavioral responses to food is established, a diet is prepared to maintain the bird in
that weight range. The weight range may be adjusted depending on response during training
sessions. Various conditions may influence behavior, such as weather, age, food items, etc. and
should be taken into consideration when evaluating weights and diets. These weight ranges may
also vary between individuals of the same species. The goal is to maintain the highest weight
possible and provide the greatest amount of food while maintaining the desired behavioral
response. This practice is referred to as “weight management.” (1)
Weighing an animal to monitor for changes that may indicate health issues and also to maintain
what is deemed a healthy weight for an animal (avoiding obesity, monitoring growth of young
animals, etc.) are separate topics from weight management for creating motivation for food.
While these are important tools in general health care, the focus of this paper is the use of weight
management to facilitate animal training.
The weight management approach requires utilizing specific quantities of a diet to maintain the
desired weight range. While this quantity may not represent a deficiency in food, in research
settings it is generally termed a quantitative restrictive diet as opposed to an ad libitum diet in
which the animal has free access to food at all times. It is also important to note that restrictive
diets are not available to the animal at all times and therefore result in periods of deprivation.
Deprivation is the term used to describe when something (in this case food) is not available; this
does not necessarily mean that the diet is of insufficient quantity for the animal in training. These
intervals in which food is not available are important to note as they can play a significant role in
ABMA Wellspring - Volume 14, Issue 2 - Fall 2014 - Page 22
motivation for food reinforcers. Additionally note-worthy is that chronic deprivation has been
shown to have a much greater influence on feeding motivation than acute sudden deprivation (2)
which will be discussed more later.
Hunger and Motivation
In animal training words like hunger and motivation are easily interchanged. However in reality
hunger and motivation are two different discussion items. Hunger is not well defined in
literature. It is generally agreed to be a negative subjective state. One from which animals will
work to obtain relief. Inspired by the Brambell report, the first of The Five Freedoms by The
Farm Animal Welfare Council states that animals should have Freedom from Hunger and Thirst
- by ready access to fresh water and a diet to maintain full health and vigor. (3)
In the lab setting hunger can be measured as a metabolic state. This requires sampling not
practical in the real world of animal training. Hunger is also sometimes measured by a change in
“normal” expression of non-feeding oral activities such as redirected pecking in chickens and
stereotypy. Also measured in chickens is drinker use (pecking at water and water consumption).
Other behavioral measures include how quickly the animal eats, presentation of compensatory
feeding behaviors, and activity levels. Operant responding is also used as a measure, usually
comparing how the animal responds to a task soon after a meal and then again at various
intervals later. (4) This can include measuring the force of the response, response latency and
relative frequency of responses. (5)
Animal trainers who look at behavioral response as a means of measure of hunger typically rely
on the operant response strategy, looking at an animal’s body language and species-typical
behavior with food. For example, when a pine nut is offered to a macaw in a training scenario in
which the bird is relaxed and comfortable and being asked to do nothing but accept food or
perhaps present an easy to accomplish behavior that has been trained to fluency, the following
observations could be used to rate hunger. See Table 1. (6)
Table 1. Assessing interest in reinforcers. Example: Macaw is offered a pine nut.
Observed Behaviors
Holds pine nut in foot
Bites tiny pieces off of pine nut slowly
Drops half of the nut
Wipes beak on perch (feaking observed)
Proceeds to preen after drops nut
Holds pine nut in foot and brings to mouth
quickly
Quickly breaks nut into 2-3 pieces and
swallow pieces
Directs attention back to trainer once nut is
consumed
Swallows nut immediately without
breaking into pieces
Quickly directs attention to trainer once nut
Level of motivation
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Medium
Medium
Medium
High
High
is consumed
Offers trained behaviors in rapid
succession
Presents behaviors equated with frustration
or anxiety about food: may redirect
aggressive behavior on nearby objects,
birds, or people, stereotypic pacing, etc.
Aggressive behavior presented towards
other birds if competing for the same food
resource
High
Excessive
Excessive
In other words, there are observable behaviors that animal trainers can use to rate hunger. These
observable behaviors will vary with species, for example a hawk may show behavioral responses
that are different from a parrot. Although a potentially daunting task, animal training would
benefit from clear definitions of measures of hunger, especially since food is a commonly used
as a reinforcer for behavior. The five freedoms state that animal should have freedom from
hunger. In the animal training world this leads to questions such as “at all times?” and is “any
level of hunger acceptable?” Having measures of hunger and identifying ranges that are
acceptable and not acceptable by the animal training industry, and why, gives animal trainers a
guideline or at least a starting point to better evaluate hunger based on behavioral observations.
This may in the future help address the questions raised by the first of The Five Freedoms. But
more importantly it can potentially lead to improved welfare in animal training by helping
trainers recognize when hunger is exceeding acceptable standards. It can also help provide an
honest interpretation if assumptions are being made that an animal is hungry or must be hungry
for example due to a late feed.
Motivation to present behavior is much broader than hunger. Animals present behaviors for
many different types of reinforcers. Extinction procedures can cause vigorous presentation of
behavior. Different schedules of reinforcement can allow numerous or extended presentations of
behavior before reinforcers are delivered. Some humans present food acquisition behavior in the
absence of hunger and it is also observed in animals as well, particularly those that cache food.
This is a just a short list of items to consider when evaluating motivation. This distinction
between hunger and motivation is important because it allows trainers other options for acquiring
behavior that do not rely solely upon hunger.
Pit Falls & Ethical Considerations
In the definition for weight management, a weight range is identified that corresponds to an
acceptable response for food. This may appear to be another means to measure hunger. However
in practical application what is often observed is a fixation on maintaining the bird’s weight in
the identified range as opposed to evaluating hunger based on behavioral response. This results
in other observable behavior or physical manifestations that could be indicative of an inadequate
quantitative restrictive diet. The following are observations that may signal the weight
management strategy is poor and is not adequately addressing the needs of the animal.
Frantic or Anxious Behavior
Animals may show frantic behavior in the presence of food, when eating or when a stimulus is
presented that is a potential indicator of food. Trainers may become desensitized to this response
and consider it a “normal” hunger response or level of motivation for food. For example pigeons
used in a behavioral analysis lab were weighed daily and fed a quantitative restricted diet by the
lab students. The students were instructed to feed specific amounts based on the weights of the
animals. The pigeons thrust themselves against the front of the cage when students were
preparing to deliver food. When offered food, it was consumed very rapidly. Once fed, the
animals sat calmly. However if the students reached or walked towards the food bin the pigeons
would immediately throw themselves against the front of the cage again. On a side note, bright
green fecal matter was also observed which is typically indicative of compromised
health/welfare in pigeons due to lack of food. Behavioral and physical data were not being
properly evaluated and considered in this weight management situation.
It has been demonstrated that appetitive food cues presented to organisms in a high drive state
when actual consumption is not possible promote a state of frustrative nonreward. Researchers
have emphasized the aversive nature of nonreward in deprived animals. Furthermore when food
is withheld, food cues potentiate the probe startle response. The enhanced startle response for
food-deprived subjects suggests that, to some extent, food cues elicited an aversive motivational
reaction. Frustration generally involves heightened anxious arousal; hence, negative affect. The
reports of greater arousal and loss of control from food-deprived subjects are consistent with this
interpretation. There is also evidence that food-deprived rats, given food cues separately from
feeding, also show decreased pleasure as a function of hunger. (7)
Water gorging/ Food related stereotypies
Studies show that rats drink more water when food deprived (8) There is also evidence that
overdrinking can be a stress related behavior. (9) Birds that are food deprived may show
increased drinking of water. (10) Broiler hens that are food restricted and allowed access to ad
lib water can overdrink water. Because of this water can be provided for a few hours per day, but
it can exacerbate the frustration caused by food restriction. (11) Rushen suggests that the
occurrence of adjunctive drinking by sows results from the persistence of feeding motivation,
perhaps because concentrated food does not provide sufficient stomach distension, combined
with the knowledge that food will definitely not be forthcoming. Stereotyped sequences of
behavior may be a means of reducing the arousal generated by the expectation of food. (12)
Birds, especially those known to eat several times a day or throughout day have been observed
water gorging in show settings. Water gorging should be considered an indicator that the feeding
strategies are either inadequate in quantity and/or frequency. This can also result from long term
chronic quantitative restricted feeding.
Stunted growth
In the poultry industry breeder broiler chickens are selectively bred to grow quickly. When these
birds are fed ad libitum this results in extremely overweight birds with a myriad of physical
problems. To address this many breeder broiler hens are intentionally placed on quantitative
restrictive diets to stunt growth. (13) Stunted growth has been observed in macaques on
restrictive diets when young. Researchers are advised to ensure sufficient food is provided to
maintain normal growth rates whilst continuing to perform the behavioral tasks effectively in
research settings.(14) Stunted growth is also used as a measure of poverty and malnutrition as a
result of inadequate feeding in humans. (15) Unfortunately stunted growth has also been
observed in birds in bird shows, especially those that have been placed on quantitative restrictive
diets during their first year.
Persistent juvenile behaviors
A phenomenon that has been observed in some species of birds that are entered into a
quantitative restricted diet during development is the persistence of juvenile behaviors into
adulthood. In pscittacines this results in the observation of head bobbing behaviors, vocalizations
associated with food begging and head feather erection similar to what is seen in fledgling aged
and younger parrots. In parrots that remain on a quantitative restricted diet, as is done in weight
management, these behaviors persist for many years into adulthood. It is possible these behaviors
also remain due to reinforcement history, and/or imprinting on humans, however they have also
been observed to go away if the bird is allowed access to an ad libitum diet for an extended
period of time. This persistent presentation of juvenile behaviors when on quantitative restrictive
diets has been also observed in ground hornbills, vulture species, ibis species, crows and ravens.
A reverting to juvenile behavior has also been observed in parent raised hawks when placed on a
very restricted diet.
Other possible health issues
It is difficult to thoroughly ascertain all the possible impacts short term and long term
quantitative restrictive diets can have on animals being trained via this approach. Adequate
nutrition and caloric intake affects numerous functions including feather production, bone
density and brain chemistry. Some speculations have arisen in regard to a correlation between
quantitative restrictive diets and feather damaging behavior observed in hawks that is initiated
when placed on restrictive diets. Noting the behavior was absent on an ad libitum diet. Dr van
Krimpen also found that increasing behavior related to feeding and satiety by dietary changes
successfully reduced feather pecking behavior in chickens. (16) It is possible future exploration
into the topic will reveal more correlations between health issues and long term restrictive diets.
Other fallout
An unfortunate observation is that weight management has been presented to the companion
parrot community several times as a solution to creating motivation in pet parrots. Most trainers
would agree that the application of weight management strategies is something that should be
learned under the guidance of an experienced professional. This cautionary approach is to avoid
many of the examples of poor application previously mentioned. It is also to help determine if
indeed weight management would facilitate creating motivation for food. This leads to the
question is weight management appropriate or even necessary in the companion bird world? The
species of birds most commonly kept as companion animals typically include species whose
natural history allows for a large diversity of potential reinforcers (social interactions,
allopreening, enrichment, etc.) Additionally many include feeding and foraging strategies that
respond extremely well to food management to create motivation for food. Food management is
defined by The International Association of Avian Trainers and Educators as managing when
and how food is delivered, what food items are offered, and the ratio of food items offered to
create desire to present behaviors for food reinforcers. (17) Micromanaging weights and diets for
these species is typically not necessary and can put companion animals at risk due to improper
guidance.
Psychological Appetite
The previous examples illustrated what can happen when focus is primarily on keeping a bird
within a certain weight range. Often the recommended objective is to work the bird at the highest
weight possible. An example often used to suggest successful application of weight management
is when the animal’s working weight is higher than what it would be if fed ad libitum. This
motivation to present behavior in this situation has gone by several names, including
psychological appetite, psychological hunger, and most recently food paradox in certain bird
training circles.
Malina states psychological appetite is the creation of a perceived feeling that there is a food
shortage. The result is that the bird is more likely to be motivated to take advantage of the
opportunity to obtain a food item. Psychological appetite is produced through creating a
perceived food shortage based on how the food is presented. And, when combined with variable
reinforcers and small windows of opportunity, psychological appetite provides increased
motivation without having to reduce an animal’s body weight. As the bird’s weight continues to
increase, the bird is working on habit and psychological appetite. If something causes the bird to
fly off and sit in a tree, it may stay out longer if it feels there is no real drive to satiate its
appetite. As you can see, while weight management is a factor in creating psychological appetite,
once created, that psychological appetite can allow you to successfully work your birds at or
above their ad-lib weights (18)
There are several challenges with this interpretation. Psychological appetite suggests an animal is
not experiencing hunger. It also suggests that weight is linearly related to hunger, and that an
animal is not experiencing hunger at a higher weight, all implying good animal welfare.
However as has been demonstrated hunger is not the same as motivation and different measures
need to be applied to ascertain if the animal is experiencing hunger. Additionally animals can
and do experience hunger despite higher weights. A fact certainly not lost on an overweight
person attempting to lose weight, or overweight animal that didn’t receive its anticipated meal. In
addition other factors can influence hunger that are not related to weight, such as time elapsed
since the last meal was consumed. So while an animal may have a higher weight, it may very
well be experiencing hunger.
Another aspect of this training strategy that poses welfare questions is the perceived shortage of
food. Psychological appetite is comparable to food hoarding/food maintenance behavior seen in
humans and also rats. When humans are deprived of food, they have a very predictable response:
they become obsessed with seeking food. This has been shown in studies of people deprived of
food throughout history, for example, children adopted from food insecure areas, survivors of
concentration camps, prisoners of war, or people lost in the wilderness after accidents. Mildly or
moderately food deprived children will exhibit this behavior problem as a response to a time or
times in their life when they didn't have enough to eat, and could never be sure when their next
meal would occur. The inconsistent availability of food can lead to behaviors like overeating and
secretly hoarding food when it does become available. While this may make sense in a foodinsecure situation, many children continue this behavior even when they are in a safe
environment with plenty to eat. They will binge eat when food is available and store food for
later, often making themselves sick because their bodies are not used to so much food. (19, 20)
Rats also hoard food or eat too much after starved for long periods of time. Rodents are not
gastro intestinally suited to true binge eating comparable to that of humans but those on calorie
restriction pack in as much as they can when food is available. If experimental protocols permit,
they also stash whatever they can carry. In rats perhaps the most basic indicator of the
proposition that calorie restricted animals ‘feel hungry’ is that—given the opportunity—they all
eat substantially more than they are allocated on other feeding regimens. (21)
Some parallels we observe is that even birds working above ad libitum weight and perceived to
be responding due to psychological hunger are often obsessed with food acquisition, anxiety
before feeding times, gorging when food is available, and overeating until sick when put on feed
up or free feed. These are especially prevalent on animals that have been exposed to restricted
diets for long periods of time. The Society for Neuroscience has adopted the US Public Health
Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (2002), which recommends that
unless the contrary is established researchers should consider that procedures that cause pain or
distress in humans may cause pain or distress in other animals. (22)
While a perceived food shortage may allow a bird to have motivation at a higher weight, it raises
the question is this an acceptable psychological state for birds in an animal training program?
A frequently presented argument is that psychological appetite replicates a natural occurrence in
the wild. Animals don’t always have food available and must seize opportunities when they
arise. The crucial difference is that animals in the wild have the opportunity to seek food.
Animals that do not have food seeking opportunities and are on restricted diets have been shown
to have an increase in presentation of food/oral related behaviors such as repeated pecking at
water in chickens that can develop into stereotypies. (23) Stereotypy is highly prevalent in
captive domestic pigs. In large commercial production systems, pigs have minimal complexity in
their housing systems. The combination of a frustrated feeding motivation combined with a lack
of foraging opportunities highly impacts this problem. (24)
Animal trainers often speak of choice in animal training, but are weight managed animals really
at liberty to choose when to seek/acquire food? Having no control of the opportunity to acquire
food except under very limited conditions is not analogous to an animal that may be food
deprived but has the opportunity to behave to potentially acquire food. Also in the wild food can
be abundant for prolonged periods of times. It is usually not chronically restricted to limited
quantities creating long term deprivation as opposed to acute deprivation. Although still
diminished compared to the wild, it is possible that some birds such as those flown in falconry,
or presentations that allows more unstructured flying, with a large variety of generalized
behaviors may be experiencing better opportunity to express seeking behavior than a bird flying
consistently patterned A to B’s .
Another explanation sometimes presented for the response of a weight managed bird presenting
behavior at a high weight is contrafreeloading. Contrafreeloading says that animals will expend
energy to forage even when food is readily available. Some trainers and researchers interpret this
as the animal wants to use its adaptations to acquire food. A key factor in contrafreeloading is
that the animal is exploring other opportunities to acquire food while at the same time
comparable food is available and easily accessed. Additionally some researchers believe
contrafreeloading may not be about the reinforcing qualities of doing behavior, but about the
information that is acquired by doing the behavior. Information that leads to future resources is
reinforcing. It has also been observed that contrafreeloading is relatively decreased when animals
are hungry. (25) Instead they go directly to the known food source.
Relief Response Vs Behavioral Bliss
Observant animal trainers have noticed a difference in the way birds behave when presenting an
action for food reinforcers in which motivation is created with different approaches. A
behavioral bliss point occurs when an animal is given free access to alternative activities and will
behave in a way to maximize its reinforcement (26) Birds that are trained with a behavioral bliss
approach tend to show relaxed behavior in the presence of food. It appears they understand
reinforcers are forth-coming. They do not experience deprivation to the point that they are either
physically or psychologically concerned about food. They will take food when offered, but do
not appear anxious or concerned about food. In contrast, those trained with a weight
management approach exhibit much more focus on food acquisition. This may be because the
animal is either hungry or not sure when the next meal is coming, and is therefore eager to eat
when food is available. Animals in both conditions will perform behavior for food. But the body
language of those birds will look quite different. This is because the motivating operations are
different. The weight managed animal is seeking relief from hunger or a perceived food shortage,
while the other is seeking the pleasure of the desired consequence. It is important to recognize
there is a difference in these motivating operations and the difference has welfare implications.
Discussion
In research settings utilizing primates the primary animal welfare concerns associated with the
use of food control protocols are: (i) the risk of nutritional imbalances, depending on the reward
type and diet used; (ii) the potential for weight loss (or poor growth, in the case of growing
animals) from programmed or non-programmed restriction; and (iii) the aversive experience of
hunger. (27)
As discussed, weight management in bird training can impact animal welfare when applied
poorly. This can include excessive hunger, stunted growth, water gorging/food seeking
stereotypies, persistent juvenile behaviors and possibly other potential health problems. Weight
management when applied properly may create a psychological state that also has poor welfare
implications. While weight management can create the desired motivation for animals to present
behavior (when applied well or poorly) the question becomes is it an ethically appropriate tool in
animal training?
In the bird training world weight management has a long history of use; unfortunately this long
term use doesn’t necessarily equal best practices. The animal training industry has made
tremendous changes in its approach to influencing behavior in the last 50 years. Many trainers
have embraced force free science based training technology. Bird shows are removing equipment
from raptors and free lofting birds as much as possible. And birds are being trained to do
behaviors once thought impossible such as allowing blood draws and injections without restraint.
Approaches in animal training are evolving and traditional practices are being questioned.
Exploring alternatives to the use of weight management as a primary means of
creating/measuring motivation for food needs to be a part of this evolution.
Many trainers already incorporate strategies that reduce or eliminate the need for weight
management to create motivation for food. For example animals can be trained immediately
preceding normal meal times, meal times can be staggered throughout the day to increase
training opportunities, base diets can be provided at all times while preferred foods are saved for
reinforcers to be offered during training, reinforcement schemes in which less preferred
reinforcers are offered first and most preferred last, small pieces of food can be offered to allow
for more repetitions before satiation, and/or the animals regular diet can be offered during
training only. If any reduction in food provided is considered at all, the period is short lived.
Once the learning has occurred, diets are quickly returned to levels considered typical for the
animal. There are many examples in which the listed strategies for managing the delivery of food
have proven to be successful in creating motivation for food reinforcers without compromising
the health and welfare of the animal. (28) These strategies have been used for birds in both free
flighted/free roaming situations and/or more controlled environments. It is also interesting to
note that weight management as a means of creating motivation for food is predominantly seen
in bird training (primarily bird shows and falconry) and in some research settings. It is rarely
used to train other taxonomic groups.
Bird training also needs to consider the role of nonfood reinforcers in animal training. This also
leads to the opportunity to include a variety of reinforcers as a means of increasing motivation.
Atlantic bottlenose dolphin trainers at the Aquarium of Niagara Falls documented a significant
increase in consistent performance of behavior when they introduced a variety of nonfood
reinforcers into their repertoire. (29) Many species in bird shows are social, engage with
enrichment readily, respond favorably to touch, forage frequently, cache, respond to sights,
sounds, movement, etc. For example a male satin bower bird on exhibit was easily reinforced for
behavior by offering blue items that could be used to decorate his bower. (See video clip here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaziP8mtqO4&list=PL535EQukKq4rAOTuHXvtp7CXkQHl6TGK&feature=share&index=10) Pscittacines in particular can easily be
successfully trained without the use of weight management due the long list of nonfood
reinforcers to which they often respond.
In addition many marine mammal presentations consider the use of other schedules of
reinforcement (besides an FR1) much more in their training strategy in comparison to bird
shows. The typical marine mammal presentation typically has a limited number of animals to
present a 20 to 30 minute show. This means a single animal may be required to present a variety
of behaviors over a longer duration than most birds in bird shows. Different schedules of
reinforcement can add unpredictability, and when applied properly can increase motivation. The
combination of a variety of food and nonfood reinforcers and different schedules of
reinforcement can contribute to an animal that is engaged in training for a longer duration.
The animals also typically know a variety of behaviors and may not know which behavior will
be asked next. This approach is different from many bird shows in which animals are presenting
the same behavior or repeated flight patterns each show, with a predictable reinforcer waiting at
the end. Malina states in her description of psychological appetite. As the bird’s weight continues
to increase, the bird is working on habit and psychological appetite. If something causes the bird
to fly off and sit in a tree, it may stay out longer if it feels there is no real drive to satiate its
appetite. (30) It is easy to see if a bird is trained to present a patterned behavior with a
predictable reinforcer, that if it were to stray from its consistent path it might be difficult to
regain its attention and focus without the use of elevated hunger. However with training
strategies that include generalized behaviors, a variety of reinforcers, different schedules of
reinforcement, and a variety of trained behaviors that are requested unpredictably, it is possible
that bird training for shows could reconsider the need for weight management as a means of
creating motivation.
It is interesting to note that most bird training begins without the scale. If a bird has no training
history and no identifiable nonfood reinforcers, many trainers begin by offering food and
evaluating motivation for food by observing behavioral response. Some trainers advocate getting
a bird trained to stand on a scale as soon as possible and focus on a weight management
approach. However this can cause focusing on weight to become the priority. While acquiring
the weight might be helpful for monitoring health, encouraging trainers to continue to place
emphasis on behavioral response and incorporating food management strategies can support a
move away from weight management. This is also when having industry guidelines of
observable measures of hunger and acceptable parameters would be helpful. It is in the best
interest of the animals and the industry to teach trainers how to better evaluate and rate hunger
using observational skills as opposed to the number on the scale.
Examples
The following are examples of bird training that have been successfully implemented that do not
use weight management as a means of creating or determining motivation.
Free Flighted Flock of Cockatoos
Chris Shank of Cockatoo Downs maintains a flock of small cockatoos. Some of the flock
members are parent raised and some are hand raised. The birds live in large outdoor aviaries
attached to a barn. Chris has had many training sessions with some individuals in the flock and
the birds have history of receiving sunflower seeds or pine nuts from her if cued for behavior.
The birds have access to food in their cages at all times. The birds are also released almost daily
and free fly on the property throughout the day. The birds forage on grass shoots and fruiting
trees. The ones with training history will recall to Chris reliably when cued and participate in
training sessions. In the afternoon they return to the aviaries where a fresh diet is waiting. There
is an important difference in this training setting compared to bird shows that involve very short,
predictable patterned flights or behaviors. The birds have and do spend considerable amounts of
time in the environment and their behavior, in particular recall, is extremely generalized with a
long history of reinforcement under many conditions. This strategy combined with management
of preferred reinforcers allows these birds to feed ad libitum and still have motivation to present
behavior. See video example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGF_KDV1kpY
Wild Pigeons
Wild pigeons are fed on a daily basis around 2 PM in a park. The pigeons receive preferred food
items from several individuals in the park. Individual pigeons are recognizable by the people
who feed the birds. The author visited the park and was able to train several birds to present a
variety of behaviors in a short time using preferred reinforcers. Two of the pigeons were hand
raised and released by one of the individuals who visits the park. Although usually associated
with the flock, these pigeons often fly directly to him upon sight and will follow him back to his
apartment. Being wild pigeons they are free to leave or forage elsewhere. However the easily
acquired preferred food items keep them returning on a daily basis.
See video example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5gGBI6OhkY
Ravens and Keas in Research Setting
Ravens and keas utilized in cognition studies at the University of Vienna in Austria are fed
preferred food items when participating in experiments. The keas are fed a base diet of items
which include fruits, vegetables and proteins (varying daily e.g. yogurt and topfen, corn, eggs or
mashed meat) three times a day. Training for research projects is conducted in between
mealtimes in the morning and the afternoon. The ravens are fed a base diet in the morning prior
to training for research projects. They receive nuts cheese and dog food throughout the day for
participating in the research study. They are then fed the rest of their base diet at the end of the
day. Birds are weighed occasionally to monitor health as opposed to measuring weight for
motivation for training. (31)
Free Flying Parrots, Cranes and Hornbill
Pscittacines, crowned cranes, and a ground hornbill are free flown successfully without the use
of weight management at Avian Behavior International. Animals receive portions of their diet
throughout the day, and are reinforced with preferred food items, and nonfood reinforcers.
Similar to the example at Cockatoo Downs, the birds are trained to generalize behaviors under a
variety of conditions and environments. Animals are free to explore the environment, but are
motivated to respond to cued behavior when the opportunity presents itself. Motivation for
training is based on behavioral responses and weights are only measured to monitor health. (32)
See video examples http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUhloUa6VT0 and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49pF_LXpenI
Free Flying Caracara in Zoo
A striated caracara at ZSL London zoo was trained during the non-show season when on feed up.
Trainers found the bird would present behavior even though it was 200g over its target weight.
They utilized strategies such as only having the bird participate in educational presentations three
days a week, managing food, and using nonfood reinforcers such as novel enrichment and
caching opportunities. (33)
Macaw Flock in Zoo
A flock of eight scarlet macaws at the Dallas World Aquarium was trained by the author to
present a flock flight several times a day without the use of weight management. The birds
received a portion of their base diet which included pellets and fruits and vegetables in the
morning. Approximately 1 to 2 hours later they participated in a training session in which flight
behaviors were reinforced with seeds and nuts. They were then offered free access to their base
diet and allowed to feed until satiated. Leftovers were removed and a second training session
occurred later in the day. At the end of the day they were again allowed free access to their base
diet for several hours. When the birds had gone to roost any left-over food was removed. Birds
were weighed periodically to monitor health but were not weighed to identify a target weight for
training or measure motivation.
Free Roaming Parrot in Conservation Project
Sirocco the kakapo is an imprinted endangered parrot that lives freely on a 310 ha island in New
Zealand. Sirocco is free to consume normal vegetation available on the island at all times.
Training Sirocco required rangers to track him using a telemetry device as he could be anywhere
on the island. Once roughly located rangers would wait on the pathway for Sirocco to approach.
Sirocco's affinity for people and their history of being associated with desired consequences
resulted in Sirocco seeking out the rangers once he heard their voices. Sirocco would participate
in training sessions for as long as two hours working primarily for small preferred food items not
available in the environment and social interaction. (34) See video example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rgs72JIdx4
Exhibit Harpy Eagle in Zoo
A harpy eagle at the Dallas Zoo was trained without the use of weight management. Initial
training began from outside of the enclosure. The bird was trained to target, and fly from point A
to point B for keeper presentations inside the exhibit. The bird was also trained to shift into its
cold weather holding area and also to enter a crate. The bird was trained to get on a scale
although this was used to monitor health not motivation. Interest in food was evaluated by
looking at behavioral response. The bird was also trained to allow touch to the chest and legs, the
application of removable anklets and jesses, and to hop to a glove. (35) See video example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeP1CBrkJtc
There is much more to explore and discuss about the ways people are successfully training birds
in free flight/free roaming and enclosed settings without the use of weight management. Of
particular interest would be to explore the application of different strategies with a wide range of
species. Bird collections often present a great diversity in avian natural history and some
strategies may prove to more successful with some species than others. Only a few examples
have been shared here, however it is hoped that more trainers will document and share their
strategies to facilitate continued advances in bird training.
Conclusion
Training birds involves the use of many different strategies to influence motivation. Skilled
trainers are drawing upon all those tools (reinforcement history, schedules of reinforcement,
variety in reinforcers, awareness of environment and its effect on behavior, food management,
etc.) Weight management for many has been a part of this toolbox. In some cases it has been the
primary tool. However when scrutinized, weight management presents questions about welfare.
More and more people are demonstrating birds can be trained without micromanaging diets and
weights. Their successes open the door to strategies that allow reaching behavior goals and at the
same time attending to high standards of animal welfare. These revelations suggest perhaps it is
time to stop putting so much weight on the scale.
References
1. IAATE Position Statement on Food Management and Weight Management
http://www.iaate.org/pdfs/PositionStatement_FoodWeightManagement.pdf Accessed
12/27/2013
2. D'Eath R.B., Tolkamp B.J., Kyriazakis I., Lawrence A.B., 2009 Freedom from hunger
and preventing obesity: the animal welfare implications of reducing food quantity or
quality. Animal Behaviour, 77, 275-278
3. The Five Freedoms. The Farm Animal Welfare Council
http://www.fawc.org.uk/freedoms.htm Accessed 12/29/2013
5. Cooper, J.O., Heron T.E., Heward W.L., Applied Behavior Analysis: Second Edition.
Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall. 2007
6. Heidenreich B. An introduction to the application of science based training technology.
In Heidenreich BE ed. Veterinary Clinics of North America Exotic Animal Practice.
Philadelphia, PA: W.B Saunders Company; 2012:371-385.
7. Drobes, D. J., Miller, E. J., & Lang, P. J. (1993). Effects of food deprivation and eating
patterns on psychophysiological responses to slides Psychophysiology, 30 (Suppl. 1),
S23.
8. Morrison, S.D., Regulation of water intake by rats deprived of food. Physiology &
Behavior, Volume 3, Issue 1, Pages 75-81
10. Savory, C. J., Seawright, E. & Watson, A. 1992. Stereotyped behavior in broiler breeders
in relation to husbandry and opioid receptor blockade. Applied Animal Behaviour
Science, 32, 349–360
11. Mench, J. A. 2002. Broiler breeders: feed restriction and welfare. World’s Poultry
Science Journal, 58, 23–29.
12. Rushen, J. 1984. Stereotyped behavior, adjunctive drinking and the feeding periods of
tethered sows. Animal Behaviour, 32, 1059–1067
13. Vakali R., Akbarogli F., The effects of food restriction method on rearing during growth
and blood indices of stress in broiler breeder.
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/25960465/Effect-of-feed-restriction-method-duringrearing-on-growth Accessed 12/27/2013. Accessed 12/29/2013.
14. Mark J. Prescott, Verity J. Brown, Paul A. Flecknell, David Gaffan, Kate Garrod, Roger
N. Lemon, Andrew J. Parker, Kathy Ryder, Wolfram Schultz, Leah Scott, Jayne Watson,
Lucy Whitfield, Refinement of the use of food and fluid control as motivational tools for
macaques used in behavioural neuroscience research: Report of a Working Group of the
NC3Rs, Journal of Neuroscience Methods, Volume 193, Issue 2, 30 November 2010,
Pages 167-188
15. The Use of Stunting and Wasting as Indicators for Food Insecurity and Poverty
http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~dludden/stunting-wasting.pdf Accessed 12/27/2013.
16. Dietary Changes Can Reduce Feather Pecking in Laying Hens
http://www.thepoultrysite.com/articles/1201/dietary-changes-can-reduce-feather-peckingin-laying-hens Accessed 12/29/2013
17. IAATE Position Statement on Food Management and Weight Management
http://www.iaate.org/pdfs/PositionStatement_FoodWeightManagement.pdf Accessed
12/27/2013
18. Malina, C. The mouse went down the hole. Proceedings IAATE Conference Portland,
OR 2003
19. Behavior of Malnourished or Hungry Children.
http://everydaylife.globalpost.com/behavior-malnourished-hungry-children-3967.html
Accessed 12/29/2013
20. Hoarding of Food. http://www.livingwithanxiety.com/articles/ocd/hoarding-of-food
Accessed 12/29/2013
21. Caloric Restriction for Longevity: II—The Systematic Neglect of Behavioural and
Psychological Outcomes in Animal Research Kelly M. Vitousek1*,y, Frederic P.
Manke1,Jennifer A. Gray1and Maren N. Vitousek21University of Hawaii,
USA2Princeton University, USA
N. Lemon, Andrew J. Parker, Kathy Ryder, Wolfram Schultz, Leah Scott, Jayne Watson, Lucy
Whitfield, Refinement of the use of food and fluid control as motivational tools for macaques
used in behavioural neuroscience research: Report of a Working Group of the NC3Rs, Journal of
Neuroscience Methods, Volume 193, Issue 2, 30 November 2010, Pages 167-188
23. Lawrence, A. B., Terlouw, E. M. C. & Kyriazakis, I. 1993. The behavioral effects of
under nutrition in confined farm animals. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 52, 219–
229.
24. Is Boredom Driving Pigs Crazy?
http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/range556/appl_behave/projects/pigs_ster.html
Accessed 12/29/13
Bean,
D., Mason, G. J. & Bateson, M. 1999. Contrafreeloading in starlings: testing the
25.
information hypothesis. Behaviour, 136, 1267–1282.
26. Allison J.W. Behavioral economics. New York: Praeger; 1983
N. Lemon, Andrew J. Parker, Kathy Ryder, Wolfram Schultz, Leah Scott, Jayne Watson, Lucy
Whitfield, Refinement of the use of food and fluid control as motivational tools for macaques
used in behavioural neuroscience research: Report of a Working Group of the NC3Rs, Journal of
Neuroscience Methods, Volume 193, Issue 2, 30 November 2010, Pages 167-188
28. Heidenreich B. An introduction to the application of science based training technology.
In Heidenreich BE ed. Veterinary Clinics of North America Exotic Animal Practice.
Philadelphia, PA: W.B Saunders Company; 2012:371-385.
29. Ramirez K. Husbandry. In: Animal training: successful animal management through
positive reinforcement. Chicago, IL: Shedd Aquarium Press; 1999. p. 330-334
30. Malina, C. The mouse went down the hole. Proceedings IAATE Conference Portland,
OR 2003
31. Schiestl M., Bugnyar T., Training birds for research. Proceedings IAATE Conference
Dallas, TX 2014
32. Avian Behavior International, Hilary Hankey, Personal communication 12/24/2013
33. Habben M., Enrichment and conditioning during non-show periods for scavenging birds,
specifically black vultures Coragyps atratus and striated caracaras Phalcobeonus
australis. Proceedings IAATE Conference, Netherlands 2008
Heidenreich
B.E., Training for Conservation: Kakapo Recovery. Proceedings IAATE
34.
Conference Tampa, FL 2012
35 Heidenreich, B. Corredor, E., Compton, N. Harpy Eagle Training: Exploring the Potential of
. Positive Reinforcement Proceedings IAATE Conference Albuquerque, NM 2010
2013 Honors and Awards
++++++++++++++++++-+633333333
Behavior
Management Welfare Award: Recognizes achievements that enhance animal welfare through specific environmental
enrichment/conditioning techniques or programs – Fancy Footwork: Cheyenne Mountain Zoo’s Giraffe Herd Trains for Voluntary Farrier Work and
X-rays. Amy Schilz – Cheyenne Mountain Zoo
Behavioral Management Achievement Award: Recognizes an outstanding achievement in the application of behavior management techniques –
Never Too Old: Voluntary Injection Training with a Geriatric Amur Tiger. Vicki Hardstaff – Toronto Zoo
Behavioral Management Innovation Award: Recognizes an outstanding application of novel, unusual, or original behavior management
techniques – Training Voluntary Reproductive Assessments and Artificial Insemination with African Elephants (Loxodonta Africana) in a Protected
Contact Environment. Maura Middleton And Michael Burns – Tampa’s Lowry Park Zoo
Impact Award: This award is chosen by all delegates at the end of the last formal presentation. Delegates may cast a vote for any paper, poster, or
activity that they feel deserves special recognition – Training Voluntary Reproductive Assessments and Artificial Insemination with African Elephants
(Loxodonta Africana) in a Protected Contact Environment. Maura Middleton And Michael Burns – Tampa’s Lowry Park Zoo
Poster Presentation: Recognizes the best poster that represents an achievement in any of the award categories – “Stress Triangle” - The Four
Questions for Which Animal Needs to Have an Answer. František Šusta – Prague Zoo, Gabrielle Harris – South African Association for Marine
Biological Research, Tim Sullivan – Chicago Zoological Society – Brookfield Zoo
Sharing the Knowledge: Recognizes achievements in behavioral management education to enhance the knowledge of professionals and/or the
public to the benefit of animals in human care – Successful Reintroduction of a Beluga Whale and Calf Based on Observational Learning, Surrogate
Rearing and Husbandry Training Techniques. Steven M. Aibel, Mark Galan – SeaWorld San Antonio
Travel Scholarship Winner: A Tall List in Short Order: Developing a Positive Reinforcement Based Cheetah Training Program to Meet
Programming and Collection Management Goals. Justin Garner – Busch Gardens Tampa

Wellspring

Transcription

Similar documents

Case Study

Garden bird guide - Landcare Research

Cyclura lewisi - San Diego Zoo Global Library

The Inkwinks

opportunities for NZ meat exports

Wellspring

dirty bird in use.pub

101 Things To Do Outside

student promo - Small Business Centre

16-0221 CUs Care Pineywoods Chapter.pub