Annotated Bibliography
Name
Institution
Annotated Bibliography
Topic: Are Zoos Good or Bad for Animals?
Research questions
- How do zoos influence animal-human relationships?
- How do zoos support the wellbeing of animals?
- What are the negative effects of zoos on animals?
Annotated Bibliography
Clayton, S., Fraser, J., & Saunders, C. D. (2009). Zoo experiences: Conversations, connections, and concern for animals. Zoo Biology: Published in affiliation with the American Zoo and Aquarium Association, 28(5), 377-397. DOI: 10.1002/zoo.20186
Susan Clayton, John Fraser, and Carol D. Saunders considered the conservation fulfillment of zoos, and they write that educating people about animals helps to protect wildlife. The researchers investigated the experience of visitors in relation to showing concern for animals. They conducted observations and a survey of the zoo visitors. Their results indicate that providing education to visitors enhances the role of zoos in wildlife conservation and protection. The researchers also found that zoos enhance positive animal-people connections. They conclude creating positive connections and perceptions about animals is an important part of zoos in conservation. Therefore, zoos are good at protecting animals by ensuring visitors experience positive connections and support conservation initiatives. A strength of this source is that it includes a combination of qualitative and quantitative research, which increases the validity of the study. The large sample of participants also helps to strengthen the representation of the sample to the whole population, which means that the results can reflect those of a larger population. I find this source useful in discussing the benefits of zoos in supporting positive animal-human relationships and conservation initiatives for wildlife, which means that zoos are good for animals because they promote their protection through the education of visitors.
Hosey, G., & Melfi, V. (2015). Are we ignoring neutral and negative human-animal relationships in zoos?. Zoo Biology, 34(1), 1-8.
Geoff Hosey and Vicky Melfi argue that the interaction between human beings and animals in the zoo can create negative, neutral, or positive human-animal relationships. The researchers highlight that human activities in the zoo can be enriching for animals, have no effect on animals, or stress the animals. The authors studied the negative human-animal relationships to support recommendations that would enable zoos to implement better strategies that benefit zoo animals. They found that attacks by animals on human beings were a result of an inability of the animals to recognize their relationship to human visitors. The researchers explain that exposure of zoo animals to too many keepers reduces their ability to form enriching relationships with human beings, which predisposes them to stressful relationships. The recommendation of the authors is that keepers who spend more time with the animals can create engaging, positive relationships that support enriching interactions with animals. They explain that such relationships would reduce stress for the animals. This source is strong in the use of rare data to explain the human-animal relationships that occur in the zoo. However, the use of opportunistic or nonprobability data means that it is limited in generalization. I will use this source to explain the negative outcomes for animals coming from negative relationships with human beings in the zoo.
Pierce, J., & Bekoff, M. (2018). A postzoo future: Why welfare fails animals in zoos. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 21(sup1), 43-48. DOI: 10.1080/10888705.2018.1513838
Jessica Pierce and Marc Bekoff write in their article that discourse on zoo animal welfare forgets to consider problems with captivity for these animals while only concentrating on improvements. The researchers argue that zoos confine animals, limit their freedom, and are unethical for animals. They explain that most discussions of zoos focus on improvements like reducing stressors and improving enrichment in their environments. They also highlight the significance of zoos in protecting animals and ensuring their survival for endangered animals. However, the authors express the need to achieve total reform for zoos to support animal welfare by providing freedom. The reforms recommended in the article include not exhibiting animals not meant for captivity, shutting down bad zoos, not killing healthy animals, not breeding animals in captivity, and not relocating animals between zoos. The strength of this article is that the authors present both sides of the argument on the situation of animals in zoos. However, they dwell mainly on the negative aspect of captivity in reducing freedom for zoo animals. I will use this source in presenting the argument that zoos can help promote the survival of endangered animals. On the other hand, I find this source very useful in the counterargument on the unethical practice of placing animals in captivity in zoos.
Sherwen, S. L., & Hemsworth, P. H. (2019). The visitor effect on zoo animals: Implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare. Animals, 9(6), 366. DOI: 10.3390/ani9060366
Sally L. Sherwen and Paul H. Hemsworth investigate the potential of zoos in enhancing the welfare of animals and their behavior through their interaction with humans. They explain that maintaining high animal welfare standards in zoos is essential in determining the behavior of animals. The researchers found that positive interactions between humans and animals result in positive emotional responses in animals. The negative effects of increased visitor interaction with animals include behavioral changes like less eating, inactivity, and aggression in animals. Despite these effects, the authors argue that interactions between humans and animals in zoos can support positive behavior and attitudes towards the conservation of these animals. They conclude that it is important to understand the effects of visitors to zoo animals so that the interventions put in place can foster positive relationships and reduce negative responses in behavior in animals. This source is strong in its use of a variety of research sources in the review of zoo environment effects on animals. However, it is limited in the bias of the reported results being on primates in the literature with little consideration of other types of zoo animals. Nevertheless, I will use this source in discussing the positive behavioral and attitudinal effects of visitors to zoo animals. I also find it useful in discussing the negative effects zoo environments can have on zoo animal behavior.
Sherwen, S. L., Hemsworth, L. M., Beausoleil, N. J., Embury, A., & Mellor, D. J. (2018). An animal welfare risk assessment process for zoos. Animals, 8(8), 130. DOI: 10.3390/ani8080130
This article by Sherwen, Hemsworth, Beausoleil, Embury, and Mellor outlines the process for risk assessment of zoos to ensure that they support the welfare of animals. The authors argue that there is a need for assessment tools that are useful and practical in informing the management of zoos. The researchers carried out a trial of an assessment process to establish effective areas of animal welfare at risk in zoos. They found that an effective risk assessment tool could support the environment of zoos. Consequently, properly maintained zoos can ensure that animals meet their preferences and are motivated. A strength of this article is that it includes results from experimental trials that show that improved risk assessment can enhance animal welfare in zoos. The article is also recent, and the credibility of the source is supported by the authority of the authors, who are established researchers in the area of animal welfare in zoos. A limitation of the source is that it does not strongly explain the constitution of animal welfare. Nevertheless, I will use this article when explaining the benefits of an effective zoo to meeting animal preferences and encouraging motivation in these animals. I will also use it in providing background information on zoos as habitats for animals.
Tidière, M., Gaillard, J. M., Berger, V., Müller, D. W., Lackey, L. B., Gimenez, O., … & Lemaître, J. F. (2016). Comparative analyses of longevity and senescence reveal variable survival benefits of living in zoos across mammals. Scientific Reports, 6, 36361. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/srep36361
Tidière et al. investigated the effects of zoos on senescence ad longevity in zoo animals to establish whether animals in zoos benefit in terms of survival. The researchers carried out a comparative analysis between animals in the wild and those in the zoo to fill a gap in such understanding. Their study included over 50 species of mammals living in the wild and in zoos. The researchers found that zoo mammal species lived longer than their counterparts in the wild. This effect was significant in faster-paced species that had a high mortality rate in the wild, high reproduction, and shorter life span. Therefore, zoos protect these animals from predators, disease, and competition. A negative finding of the research was that animals with longer lifespan are less protected from mortality in the zoo compared to their counterparts in the wild. Therefore, zoos can help prevent the extinction of species with a short life span and high mortality in the wild. This article is strong in objectivity and reliability. The authors are authoritative researchers, and they use a quantitative approach to show the benefit of zoos to animal species. This source is very helpful in my research because it shows that zoos play a significant role in enhancing survival and longevity for some species of animals threatened by extinction.