Wellspring - The ABMA Management Information ABMA Wellspring – Volume 14, Issue 2 – Fall 2014- Page 1 Volume 14, Issue 2 – Fall 2014 Wellspring The Source of President’s Column

Wellspring Volume 12, Issues 1&2

Winter/Spring 2011

Wellspring Volume 14, Issue 2

Fall 2014

Board of Directors

President

Margaret Rousser

Oakland Zoo

Past President

Heather Leeson

Moody Gardens

President-Elect

Nicki Boyd

San Diego Zoo

1st Vice President

Annette Pederson

Copenhagen Zoo

2nd Vice President

Scott Trauger

Lowry Park Zoo

Chief Financial Officer

Susie Ekard

San Diego Zoo Safari Park

Secretary

Cinnamon Williams

Kansas City Zoo

Directors

Christa Gaus

National Aviary

Jennifer Hickman

Denver Zoo

Missy Lamar

SeaWorld San Antonio

Jay Tacey

Busch Gardens

Williamsburg

Committee Chairs

Behavior

Management Fund

Michelle Farmerie

Genevieve Warner

Conference

Kirstin Anderson

Hansen

Conference Content

Advisory

Christine McKnight

Conference

Proceedings

Jennifer Hickman

Samantha Smith

Education

Missy Lamar

Government Affairs

Justin Garner

Honors & Awards

Scott Trauger

Membership

Amy Schilz

Merchandise

Susie Ekard

Nominations &

Elections

Heather Leeson

Public Affairs

Margaret Rousser

Publications

Heidi Hellmuth

Research

&Evaluation

Darren Minier

Site Selection

Kelly Elkins

Sponsorship

Cathy Schlott

Website

Heather Leeson

ABMA Wellspring - Volume 14, Issue 2 – Fall 2014

Table of Contents

Page 1 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

Page 12-18 Stress Triangle – The Four Questions for Which

Animals Need an Answer - František Šusta,

Gabrielle Harris, Tim Sullivan

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 Weight Management in Animal Training:

Pitfalls, Ethical Considerations and Alternative

Options – Barbara Heidenreich

Back Cover 2013 ABMA Conference Award Winners

Page 2-4

Page 18-19

Page 19-20 Page 2-9 Page 21

Page 12-18

ABMA Wellspring – Volume 14, Issue 2 – Fall 2014- Page 1

Volume 14, Issue 2 – Fall 2014

Wellspring The Source of

Behavioral Management Information

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

[email protected].

mailto:[email protected]

ABMA Wellspring – Volume 14, Issue 2 – Fall 2014 – Page 2

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

[email protected]; [email protected]

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.


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 Training Behaviour: Stick Feeding

Date:

Start time: End time:

Train

er

(Initia

ls)

and

positi

on

Number of chunks taken each

visit

First

approa

ched

(Tick)

Other comments e.g. time taken

to approach first trainer,

distractions, weather etc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

+

L M R

L M R

L M R

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

muscle meat

weight (g) per

session

Feeding day meat weight (kg) Comments

14/05/12 150

(approx. 15

chunks)

2.25 muscle meat or 3.2 meat on the

bone

N/A

04/06/12 150

(approx. 15

chunks)

0.9 muscle meat (2 sessions), 1.05

muscle meat (1 session) or; 1.7 meat on

bone (2 sessions), 1.85 meat on the

bone (1 session)

Food cut down to

try and encourage

animals to approach

trainers

08/06/12 300

(approx. 30

chunks)



bone (2 sessions), 1.7 meat on the bone

(1 session)

N/A

10/08/12 350

(approx. 35

chunks)



bone (2 sessions) or 1.65 meat on the

bone (1 session)

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.

4 15

23

9

19

36

22

32

Figure 5: Number of chunks taken over time by 'Yoko'

06/06/2012

07/06/2012

08/06/2012

09/06/2012

10/06/2012

11/06/2012

12/06/2012

15/06/2012


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

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Ap

pro

xim

ate

nu

mb

er

of

me

at c

hu

nks

Weeks

Figure 7: Approximate numbers of chunks offered to 'Yoko' with approximate numbers she took off the stick

Chunks offered

Chunks taken

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Ap

pro

xim

ate

nu

mb

er

of

me

at c

hu

nks

ta

ken

Weeks

Figure 6: 'Yoko's' progress overtime throughout training programme


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 Sillero-

Zubiri, 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!

http://www.iucnredlist.org/


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.

https://bl2prd0510.outlook.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=gPoznQMhYESVxKCF8zRDwwie-mLRZ9AIJAmLrfMYQSRKZ2JoP2qmkhzmpImOq7KnvLeEmjxV4Qk.&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.monmouth.edu

http://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 free-

shaping. 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 on-

leash 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):362-

373.

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 HeidenreichBarbara’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 respondto food as a reinforcer for training or maintaining behaviors. This is a strategy which is rarelyused to train in other taxonomic groups. This paper will explore the pitfalls of relying on weightas a measure of motivation. This includes trainers becoming desensitized to bird body languageindicative of excessive motivation for food reinforcers. It will also explore ways to measuremotivation for food that are not related to the number on the scale. It will also question theethics of using weight management in animal training and provide alternative options which arecommonly used to train other species of animals.

BackgroundThe International Association of Avian Trainers and Educators defines weight management asfollows:

Weight ManagementBecause 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 adesired behavior as it relates to various weight ranges. Once a weight range that corresponds toacceptable behavioral responses to food is established, a diet is prepared to maintain the bird inthat weight range. The weight range may be adjusted depending on response during trainingsessions. Various conditions may influence behavior, such as weather, age, food items, etc. andshould be taken into consideration when evaluating weights and diets. These weight ranges mayalso vary between individuals of the same species. The goal is to maintain the highest weightpossible and provide the greatest amount of food while maintaining the desired behavioralresponse. This practice is referred to as “weight management.” (1)

Weighing an animal to monitor for changes that may indicate health issues and also to maintainwhat is deemed a healthy weight for an animal (avoiding obesity, monitoring growth of younganimals, 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 weightmanagement to facilitate animal training.

The weight management approach requires utilizing specific quantities of a diet to maintain thedesired weight range. While this quantity may not represent a deficiency in food, in researchsettings it is generally termed a quantitative restrictive diet as opposed to an ad libitum diet inwhich the animal has free access to food at all times. It is also important to note that restrictivediets 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; thisdoes not necessarily mean that the diet is of insufficient quantity for the animal in training. Theseintervals 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

http://www.barbarasffat.com/

motivation for food reinforcers. Additionally note-worthy is that chronic deprivation has beenshown to have a much greater influence on feeding motivation than acute sudden deprivation (2)which will be discussed more later.

Hunger and MotivationIn animal training words like hunger and motivation are easily interchanged. However in realityhunger and motivation are two different discussion items. Hunger is not well defined inliterature. It is generally agreed to be a negative subjective state. One from which animals willwork to obtain relief. Inspired by the Brambell report, the first of The Five Freedoms by TheFarm 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 notpractical 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 andstereotypy. Also measured in chickens is drinker use (pecking at water and water consumption).Other behavioral measures include how quickly the animal eats, presentation of compensatoryfeeding behaviors, and activity levels. Operant responding is also used as a measure, usuallycomparing how the animal responds to a task soon after a meal and then again at variousintervals later. (4) This can include measuring the force of the response, response latency andrelative frequency of responses. (5)

Animal trainers who look at behavioral response as a means of measure of hunger typically relyon the operant response strategy, looking at an animal’s body language and species-typicalbehavior with food. For example, when a pine nut is offered to a macaw in a training scenario inwhich the bird is relaxed and comfortable and being asked to do nothing but accept food orperhaps present an easy to accomplish behavior that has been trained to fluency, the followingobservations 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 Level of motivationHolds pine nut in foot LowBites tiny pieces off of pine nut slowly LowDrops half of the nut LowWipes beak on perch (feaking observed) LowProceeds to preen after drops nut LowHolds pine nut in foot and brings to mouthquickly

Medium

Quickly breaks nut into 2-3 pieces andswallow pieces

Medium

Directs attention back to trainer once nut isconsumed

Medium

Swallows nut immediately withoutbreaking into pieces

High

Quickly directs attention to trainer once nut High


is consumedOffers trained behaviors in rapidsuccession

High

Presents behaviors equated with frustrationor anxiety about food: may redirectaggressive behavior on nearby objects,birds, or people, stereotypic pacing, etc.

Excessive

Aggressive behavior presented towardsother birds if competing for the same foodresource

Excessive

In other words, there are observable behaviors that animal trainers can use to rate hunger. Theseobservable behaviors will vary with species, for example a hawk may show behavioral responsesthat are different from a parrot. Although a potentially daunting task, animal training wouldbenefit from clear definitions of measures of hunger, especially since food is a commonly usedas a reinforcer for behavior. The five freedoms state that animal should have freedom fromhunger. In the animal training world this leads to questions such as “at all times?” and is “anylevel of hunger acceptable?” Having measures of hunger and identifying ranges that areacceptable and not acceptable by the animal training industry, and why, gives animal trainers aguideline 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. Butmore importantly it can potentially lead to improved welfare in animal training by helpingtrainers recognize when hunger is exceeding acceptable standards. It can also help provide anhonest interpretation if assumptions are being made that an animal is hungry or must be hungryfor example due to a late feed.

Motivation to present behavior is much broader than hunger. Animals present behaviors formany different types of reinforcers. Extinction procedures can cause vigorous presentation ofbehavior. Different schedules of reinforcement can allow numerous or extended presentations ofbehavior before reinforcers are delivered. Some humans present food acquisition behavior in theabsence 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 distinctionbetween hunger and motivation is important because it allows trainers other options for acquiringbehavior that do not rely solely upon hunger.

Pit Falls & Ethical ConsiderationsIn the definition for weight management, a weight range is identified that corresponds to anacceptable response for food. This may appear to be another means to measure hunger. Howeverin practical application what is often observed is a fixation on maintaining the bird’s weight inthe identified range as opposed to evaluating hunger based on behavioral response. This resultsin other observable behavior or physical manifestations that could be indicative of an inadequatequantitative restrictive diet. The following are observations that may signal the weightmanagement 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 ispresented that is a potential indicator of food. Trainers may become desensitized to this responseand consider it a “normal” hunger response or level of motivation for food. For example pigeonsused in a behavioral analysis lab were weighed daily and fed a quantitative restricted diet by thelab students. The students were instructed to feed specific amounts based on the weights of theanimals. The pigeons thrust themselves against the front of the cage when students werepreparing to deliver food. When offered food, it was consumed very rapidly. Once fed, theanimals sat calmly. However if the students reached or walked towards the food bin the pigeonswould immediately throw themselves against the front of the cage again. On a side note, brightgreen fecal matter was also observed which is typically indicative of compromisedhealth/welfare in pigeons due to lack of food. Behavioral and physical data were not beingproperly evaluated and considered in this weight management situation.

It has been demonstrated that appetitive food cues presented to organisms in a high drive statewhen actual consumption is not possible promote a state of frustrative nonreward. Researchershave emphasized the aversive nature of nonreward in deprived animals. Furthermore when foodis withheld, food cues potentiate the probe startle response. The enhanced startle response forfood-deprived subjects suggests that, to some extent, food cues elicited an aversive motivationalreaction. Frustration generally involves heightened anxious arousal; hence, negative affect. Thereports of greater arousal and loss of control from food-deprived subjects are consistent with thisinterpretation. There is also evidence that food-deprived rats, given food cues separately fromfeeding, also show decreased pleasure as a function of hunger. (7)

Water gorging/ Food related stereotypiesStudies show that rats drink more water when food deprived (8) There is also evidence thatoverdrinking can be a stress related behavior. (9) Birds that are food deprived may showincreased drinking of water. (10) Broiler hens that are food restricted and allowed access to adlib water can overdrink water. Because of this water can be provided for a few hours per day, butit can exacerbate the frustration caused by food restriction. (11) Rushen suggests that theoccurrence of adjunctive drinking by sows results from the persistence of feeding motivation,perhaps because concentrated food does not provide sufficient stomach distension, combinedwith the knowledge that food will definitely not be forthcoming. Stereotyped sequences ofbehavior 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 observedwater gorging in show settings. Water gorging should be considered an indicator that the feedingstrategies are either inadequate in quantity and/or frequency. This can also result from long termchronic quantitative restricted feeding.

Stunted growthIn the poultry industry breeder broiler chickens are selectively bred to grow quickly. When thesebirds are fed ad libitum this results in extremely overweight birds with a myriad of physicalproblems. To address this many breeder broiler hens are intentionally placed on quantitativerestrictive diets to stunt growth. (13) Stunted growth has been observed in macaques onrestrictive diets when young. Researchers are advised to ensure sufficient food is provided tomaintain normal growth rates whilst continuing to perform the behavioral tasks effectively inresearch 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 beenobserved in birds in bird shows, especially those that have been placed on quantitative restrictivediets during their first year.

Persistent juvenile behaviorsA phenomenon that has been observed in some species of birds that are entered into aquantitative restricted diet during development is the persistence of juvenile behaviors intoadulthood. In pscittacines this results in the observation of head bobbing behaviors, vocalizationsassociated with food begging and head feather erection similar to what is seen in fledgling agedand younger parrots. In parrots that remain on a quantitative restricted diet, as is done in weightmanagement, these behaviors persist for many years into adulthood. It is possible these behaviorsalso remain due to reinforcement history, and/or imprinting on humans, however they have alsobeen observed to go away if the bird is allowed access to an ad libitum diet for an extendedperiod of time. This persistent presentation of juvenile behaviors when on quantitative restrictivediets 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 avery restricted diet.

Other possible health issuesIt is difficult to thoroughly ascertain all the possible impacts short term and long termquantitative restrictive diets can have on animals being trained via this approach. Adequatenutrition and caloric intake affects numerous functions including feather production, bonedensity and brain chemistry. Some speculations have arisen in regard to a correlation betweenquantitative restrictive diets and feather damaging behavior observed in hawks that is initiatedwhen placed on restrictive diets. Noting the behavior was absent on an ad libitum diet. Dr vanKrimpen also found that increasing behavior related to feeding and satiety by dietary changessuccessfully reduced feather pecking behavior in chickens. (16) It is possible future explorationinto the topic will reveal more correlations between health issues and long term restrictive diets.

Other falloutAn unfortunate observation is that weight management has been presented to the companionparrot community several times as a solution to creating motivation in pet parrots. Most trainerswould agree that the application of weight management strategies is something that should belearned under the guidance of an experienced professional. This cautionary approach is to avoidmany of the examples of poor application previously mentioned. It is also to help determine ifindeed weight management would facilitate creating motivation for food. This leads to thequestion is weight management appropriate or even necessary in the companion bird world? Thespecies of birds most commonly kept as companion animals typically include species whosenatural history allows for a large diversity of potential reinforcers (social interactions,allopreening, enrichment, etc.) Additionally many include feeding and foraging strategies thatrespond extremely well to food management to create motivation for food. Food management isdefined by The International Association of Avian Trainers and Educators as managing whenand how food is delivered, what food items are offered, and the ratio of food items offered tocreate desire to present behaviors for food reinforcers. (17) Micromanaging weights and diets forthese species is typically not necessary and can put companion animals at risk due to improperguidance.


Psychological AppetiteThe previous examples illustrated what can happen when focus is primarily on keeping a birdwithin a certain weight range. Often the recommended objective is to work the bird at the highestweight possible. An example often used to suggest successful application of weight managementis when the animal’s working weight is higher than what it would be if fed ad libitum. Thismotivation to present behavior in this situation has gone by several names, includingpsychological appetite, psychological hunger, and most recently food paradox in certain birdtraining circles.

Malina states psychological appetite is the creation of a perceived feeling that there is a foodshortage. The result is that the bird is more likely to be motivated to take advantage of theopportunity to obtain a food item. Psychological appetite is produced through creating aperceived food shortage based on how the food is presented. And, when combined with variablereinforcers and small windows of opportunity, psychological appetite provides increasedmotivation without having to reduce an animal’s body weight. As the bird’s weight continues toincrease, the bird is working on habit and psychological appetite. If something causes the bird tofly off and sit in a tree, it may stay out longer if it feels there is no real drive to satiate itsappetite. 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 orabove their ad-lib weights (18)

There are several challenges with this interpretation. Psychological appetite suggests an animal isnot experiencing hunger. It also suggests that weight is linearly related to hunger, and that ananimal 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 measuresneed to be applied to ascertain if the animal is experiencing hunger. Additionally animals canand do experience hunger despite higher weights. A fact certainly not lost on an overweightperson attempting to lose weight, or overweight animal that didn’t receive its anticipated meal. Inaddition other factors can influence hunger that are not related to weight, such as time elapsedsince the last meal was consumed. So while an animal may have a higher weight, it may verywell be experiencing hunger.

Another aspect of this training strategy that poses welfare questions is the perceived shortage offood. Psychological appetite is comparable to food hoarding/food maintenance behavior seen inhumans 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 offood throughout history, for example, children adopted from food insecure areas, survivors ofconcentration camps, prisoners of war, or people lost in the wilderness after accidents. Mildly ormoderately food deprived children will exhibit this behavior problem as a response to a time ortimes in their life when they didn't have enough to eat, and could never be sure when their nextmeal would occur. The inconsistent availability of food can lead to behaviors like overeating andsecretly hoarding food when it does become available. While this may make sense in a food-insecure situation, many children continue this behavior even when they are in a safeenvironment with plenty to eat. They will binge eat when food is available and store food forlater, 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 notgastro intestinally suited to true binge eating comparable to that of humans but those on calorierestriction 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 theproposition that calorie restricted animals ‘feel hungry’ is that—given the opportunity—they alleat 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 tobe responding due to psychological hunger are often obsessed with food acquisition, anxietybefore feeding times, gorging when food is available, and overeating until sick when put on feedup or free feed. These are especially prevalent on animals that have been exposed to restricteddiets for long periods of time. The Society for Neuroscience has adopted the US Public HealthService Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (2002), which recommends thatunless the contrary is established researchers should consider that procedures that cause pain ordistress 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 raisesthe 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 inthe wild. Animals don’t always have food available and must seize opportunities when theyarise. 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 shownto have an increase in presentation of food/oral related behaviors such as repeated pecking atwater in chickens that can develop into stereotypies. (23) Stereotypy is highly prevalent incaptive domestic pigs. In large commercial production systems, pigs have minimal complexity intheir housing systems. The combination of a frustrated feeding motivation combined with a lackof foraging opportunities highly impacts this problem. (24)

Animal trainers often speak of choice in animal training, but are weight managed animals reallyat liberty to choose when to seek/acquire food? Having no control of the opportunity to acquirefood except under very limited conditions is not analogous to an animal that may be fooddeprived but has the opportunity to behave to potentially acquire food. Also in the wild food canbe abundant for prolonged periods of times. It is usually not chronically restricted to limitedquantities creating long term deprivation as opposed to acute deprivation. Although stilldiminished 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 generalizedbehaviors may be experiencing better opportunity to express seeking behavior than a bird flyingconsistently patterned A to B’s .

Another explanation sometimes presented for the response of a weight managed bird presentingbehavior at a high weight is contrafreeloading. Contrafreeloading says that animals will expendenergy to forage even when food is readily available. Some trainers and researchers interpret thisas the animal wants to use its adaptations to acquire food. A key factor in contrafreeloading isthat the animal is exploring other opportunities to acquire food while at the same timecomparable food is available and easily accessed. Additionally some researchers believecontrafreeloading 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 isreinforcing. It has also been observed that contrafreeloading is relatively decreased when animalsare hungry. (25) Instead they go directly to the known food source.

Relief Response Vs Behavioral BlissObservant animal trainers have noticed a difference in the way birds behave when presenting anaction for food reinforcers in which motivation is created with different approaches. Abehavioral bliss point occurs when an animal is given free access to alternative activities and willbehave in a way to maximize its reinforcement (26) Birds that are trained with a behavioral blissapproach tend to show relaxed behavior in the presence of food. It appears they understandreinforcers are forth-coming. They do not experience deprivation to the point that they are eitherphysically or psychologically concerned about food. They will take food when offered, but donot appear anxious or concerned about food. In contrast, those trained with a weightmanagement approach exhibit much more focus on food acquisition. This may be because theanimal is either hungry or not sure when the next meal is coming, and is therefore eager to eatwhen food is available. Animals in both conditions will perform behavior for food. But the bodylanguage of those birds will look quite different. This is because the motivating operations aredifferent. 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 recognizethere is a difference in these motivating operations and the difference has welfare implications.

DiscussionIn research settings utilizing primates the primary animal welfare concerns associated with theuse of food control protocols are: (i) the risk of nutritional imbalances, depending on the rewardtype and diet used; (ii) the potential for weight loss (or poor growth, in the case of growinganimals) from programmed or non-programmed restriction; and (iii) the aversive experience ofhunger. (27)

As discussed, weight management in bird training can impact animal welfare when appliedpoorly. This can include excessive hunger, stunted growth, water gorging/food seekingstereotypies, persistent juvenile behaviors and possibly other potential health problems. Weightmanagement when applied properly may create a psychological state that also has poor welfareimplications. While weight management can create the desired motivation for animals to presentbehavior (when applied well or poorly) the question becomes is it an ethically appropriate tool inanimal training?

In the bird training world weight management has a long history of use; unfortunately this longterm use doesn’t necessarily equal best practices. The animal training industry has madetremendous changes in its approach to influencing behavior in the last 50 years. Many trainershave embraced force free science based training technology. Bird shows are removing equipmentfrom raptors and free lofting birds as much as possible. And birds are being trained to dobehaviors 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 ofcreating/measuring motivation for food needs to be a part of this evolution.


Many trainers already incorporate strategies that reduce or eliminate the need for weightmanagement to create motivation for food. For example animals can be trained immediatelypreceding normal meal times, meal times can be staggered throughout the day to increasetraining opportunities, base diets can be provided at all times while preferred foods are saved forreinforcers to be offered during training, reinforcement schemes in which less preferredreinforcers are offered first and most preferred last, small pieces of food can be offered to allowfor more repetitions before satiation, and/or the animals regular diet can be offered duringtraining 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 theanimal. There are many examples in which the listed strategies for managing the delivery of foodhave proven to be successful in creating motivation for food reinforcers without compromisingthe health and welfare of the animal. (28) These strategies have been used for birds in both freeflighted/free roaming situations and/or more controlled environments. It is also interesting tonote that weight management as a means of creating motivation for food is predominantly seenin bird training (primarily bird shows and falconry) and in some research settings. It is rarelyused to train other taxonomic groups.

Bird training also needs to consider the role of nonfood reinforcers in animal training. This alsoleads 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 significantincrease in consistent performance of behavior when they introduced a variety of nonfoodreinforcers into their repertoire. (29) Many species in bird shows are social, engage withenrichment 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 forbehavior by offering blue items that could be used to decorate his bower. (See video clip herehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaziP8mtqO4&list=PL535EQukKq4r-AOTuHXvtp7CXkQHl6TGK&feature=share&index=10) Pscittacines in particular can easily besuccessfully trained without the use of weight management due the long list of nonfoodreinforcers to which they often respond.

In addition many marine mammal presentations consider the use of other schedules ofreinforcement (besides an FR1) much more in their training strategy in comparison to birdshows. The typical marine mammal presentation typically has a limited number of animals topresent a 20 to 30 minute show. This means a single animal may be required to present a varietyof behaviors over a longer duration than most birds in bird shows. Different schedules ofreinforcement can add unpredictability, and when applied properly can increase motivation. Thecombination of a variety of food and nonfood reinforcers and different schedules ofreinforcement 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 willbe asked next. This approach is different from many bird shows in which animals are presentingthe same behavior or repeated flight patterns each show, with a predictable reinforcer waiting atthe end. Malina states in her description of psychological appetite. As the bird’s weight continuesto increase, the bird is working on habit and psychological appetite. If something causes the birdto fly off and sit in a tree, it may stay out longer if it feels there is no real drive to satiate itsappetite. (30) It is easy to see if a bird is trained to present a patterned behavior with a


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaziP8mtqO4&list=PL535EQukKq4r-AOTuHXvtp7CXkQHl6TGK&feature=share&index=10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaziP8mtqO4&list=PL535EQukKq4r-AOTuHXvtp7CXkQHl6TGK&feature=share&index=10

predictable reinforcer, that if it were to stray from its consistent path it might be difficult toregain its attention and focus without the use of elevated hunger. However with trainingstrategies that include generalized behaviors, a variety of reinforcers, different schedules ofreinforcement, and a variety of trained behaviors that are requested unpredictably, it is possiblethat bird training for shows could reconsider the need for weight management as a means ofcreating motivation.

It is interesting to note that most bird training begins without the scale. If a bird has no traininghistory and no identifiable nonfood reinforcers, many trainers begin by offering food andevaluating motivation for food by observing behavioral response. Some trainers advocate gettinga bird trained to stand on a scale as soon as possible and focus on a weight managementapproach. However this can cause focusing on weight to become the priority. While acquiringthe weight might be helpful for monitoring health, encouraging trainers to continue to placeemphasis on behavioral response and incorporating food management strategies can support amove away from weight management. This is also when having industry guidelines ofobservable measures of hunger and acceptable parameters would be helpful. It is in the bestinterest of the animals and the industry to teach trainers how to better evaluate and rate hungerusing observational skills as opposed to the number on the scale.

ExamplesThe following are examples of bird training that have been successfully implemented that do notuse weight management as a means of creating or determining motivation.

Free Flighted Flock of CockatoosChris Shank of Cockatoo Downs maintains a flock of small cockatoos. Some of the flockmembers are parent raised and some are hand raised. The birds live in large outdoor aviariesattached to a barn. Chris has had many training sessions with some individuals in the flock andthe 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 dailyand free fly on the property throughout the day. The birds forage on grass shoots and fruitingtrees. The ones with training history will recall to Chris reliably when cued and participate intraining sessions. In the afternoon they return to the aviaries where a fresh diet is waiting. Thereis 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 oftime in the environment and their behavior, in particular recall, is extremely generalized with along history of reinforcement under many conditions. This strategy combined with managementof preferred reinforcers allows these birds to feed ad libitum and still have motivation to presentbehavior. See video example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGF_KDV1kpY

Wild PigeonsWild pigeons are fed on a daily basis around 2 PM in a park. The pigeons receive preferred fooditems from several individuals in the park. Individual pigeons are recognizable by the peoplewho feed the birds. The author visited the park and was able to train several birds to present avariety of behaviors in a short time using preferred reinforcers. Two of the pigeons were handraised and released by one of the individuals who visits the park. Although usually associatedwith the flock, these pigeons often fly directly to him upon sight and will follow him back to his


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGF_KDV1kpY

apartment. Being wild pigeons they are free to leave or forage elsewhere. However the easilyacquired 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 SettingRavens and keas utilized in cognition studies at the University of Vienna in Austria are fedpreferred food items when participating in experiments. The keas are fed a base diet of itemswhich include fruits, vegetables and proteins (varying daily e.g. yogurt and topfen, corn, eggs ormashed meat) three times a day. Training for research projects is conducted in betweenmealtimes in the morning and the afternoon. The ravens are fed a base diet in the morning priorto training for research projects. They receive nuts cheese and dog food throughout the day forparticipating in the research study. They are then fed the rest of their base diet at the end of theday. Birds are weighed occasionally to monitor health as opposed to measuring weight formotivation for training. (31)

Free Flying Parrots, Cranes and HornbillPscittacines, crowned cranes, and a ground hornbill are free flown successfully without the useof weight management at Avian Behavior International. Animals receive portions of their dietthroughout 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 avariety of conditions and environments. Animals are free to explore the environment, but aremotivated to respond to cued behavior when the opportunity presents itself. Motivation fortraining is based on behavioral responses and weights are only measured to monitor health. (32)See video examples http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUhloUa6VT0 andhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49pF_LXpenI

Free Flying Caracara in ZooA 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 threedays a week, managing food, and using nonfood reinforcers such as novel enrichment andcaching opportunities. (33)

Macaw Flock in ZooA flock of eight scarlet macaws at the Dallas World Aquarium was trained by the author topresent a flock flight several times a day without the use of weight management. The birdsreceived a portion of their base diet which included pellets and fruits and vegetables in themorning. Approximately 1 to 2 hours later they participated in a training session in which flightbehaviors were reinforced with seeds and nuts. They were then offered free access to their basediet and allowed to feed until satiated. Leftovers were removed and a second training sessionoccurred later in the day. At the end of the day they were again allowed free access to their basediet for several hours. When the birds had gone to roost any left-over food was removed. Birdswere weighed periodically to monitor health but were not weighed to identify a target weight fortraining or measure motivation.

Free Roaming Parrot in Conservation Project


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5gGBI6OhkY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUhloUa6VT0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49pF_LXpenI

Sirocco the kakapo is an imprinted endangered parrot that lives freely on a 310 ha island in NewZealand. 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 anywhereon 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 consequencesresulted in Sirocco seeking out the rangers once he heard their voices. Sirocco would participatein training sessions for as long as two hours working primarily for small preferred food items notavailable in the environment and social interaction. (34) See video example:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rgs72JIdx4

Exhibit Harpy Eagle in ZooA harpy eagle at the Dallas Zoo was trained without the use of weight management. Initialtraining began from outside of the enclosure. The bird was trained to target, and fly from point Ato point B for keeper presentations inside the exhibit. The bird was also trained to shift into itscold weather holding area and also to enter a crate. The bird was trained to get on a scalealthough this was used to monitor health not motivation. Interest in food was evaluated bylooking at behavioral response. The bird was also trained to allow touch to the chest and legs, theapplication 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 birdsin free flight/free roaming and enclosed settings without the use of weight management. Ofparticular interest would be to explore the application of different strategies with a wide range ofspecies. Bird collections often present a great diversity in avian natural history and somestrategies may prove to more successful with some species than others. Only a few exampleshave been shared here, however it is hoped that more trainers will document and share theirstrategies to facilitate continued advances in bird training.

ConclusionTraining birds involves the use of many different strategies to influence motivation. Skilledtrainers 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 theprimary tool. However when scrutinized, weight management presents questions about welfare.More and more people are demonstrating birds can be trained without micromanaging diets andweights. Their successes open the door to strategies that allow reaching behavior goals and at thesame time attending to high standards of animal welfare. These revelations suggest perhaps it istime to stop putting so much weight on the scale.

References1. IAATE Position Statement on Food Management and Weight Management

http://www.iaate.org/pdfs/PositionStatement_FoodWeightManagement.pdf Accessed12/27/2013

2. D'Eath R.B., Tolkamp B.J., Kyriazakis I., Lawrence A.B., 2009 Freedom from hungerand preventing obesity: the animal welfare implications of reducing food quantity orquality. Animal Behaviour, 77, 275-278


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rgs72JIdx4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeP1CBrkJtc

http://www.iaate.org/pdfs/PositionStatement_FoodWeightManagement.pdf

3. The Five Freedoms. The Farm Animal Welfare Councilhttp://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 eatingpatterns 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 breedersin relation to husbandry and opioid receptor blockade. Applied Animal BehaviourScience, 32, 349–360

11. Mench, J. A. 2002. Broiler breeders: feed restriction and welfare. World’s PoultryScience Journal, 58, 23–29.

12. Rushen, J. 1984. Stereotyped behavior, adjunctive drinking and the feeding periods oftethered sows. Animal Behaviour, 32, 1059–1067

13. Vakali R., Akbarogli F., The effects of food restriction method on rearing during growthand blood indices of stress in broiler breeder.http://www.docstoc.com/docs/25960465/Effect-of-feed-restriction-method-during-rearing-on-growth Accessed 12/27/2013. Accessed 12/29/2013.

14. Mark J. Prescott, Verity J. Brown, Paul A. Flecknell, David Gaffan, Kate Garrod, RogerN. 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 formacaques used in behavioural neuroscience research: Report of a Working Group of theNC3Rs, 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 Povertyhttp://www.sas.upenn.edu/~dludden/stunting-wasting.pdf Accessed 12/27/2013.

16. Dietary Changes Can Reduce Feather Pecking in Laying Henshttp://www.thepoultrysite.com/articles/1201/dietary-changes-can-reduce-feather-pecking-in-laying-hens Accessed 12/29/2013

17. IAATE Position Statement on Food Management and Weight Managementhttp://www.iaate.org/pdfs/PositionStatement_FoodWeightManagement.pdf Accessed12/27/2013

18. Malina, C. The mouse went down the hole. Proceedings IAATE Conference Portland,OR 2003


http://www.fawc.org.uk/freedoms.htm

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/25960465/Effect-of-feed-restriction-method-during-rearing-on-growth Accessed 12/27/2013

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/25960465/Effect-of-feed-restriction-method-during-rearing-on-growth Accessed 12/27/2013

http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~dludden/stunting-wasting.pdf

http://www.thepoultrysite.com/articles/1201/dietary-changes-can-reduce-feather-pecking-in-laying-hens

http://www.thepoultrysite.com/articles/1201/dietary-changes-can-reduce-feather-pecking-in-laying-hens

http://www.iaate.org/pdfs/PositionStatement_FoodWeightManagement.pdf

19. Behavior of Malnourished or Hungry Children.http://everydaylife.globalpost.com/behavior-malnourished-hungry-children-3967.htmlAccessed 12/29/2013

20. Hoarding of Food. http://www.livingwithanxiety.com/articles/ocd/hoarding-of-foodAccessed 12/29/2013

21. Caloric Restriction for Longevity: II—The Systematic Neglect of Behavioural andPsychological Outcomes in Animal Research Kelly M. Vitousek1*,y, Frederic P.Manke1,Jennifer A. Gray1and Maren N. Vitousek21University of Hawaii,USA2Princeton University, USA

22. Mark J. Prescott, Verity J. Brown, Paul A. Flecknell, David Gaffan, Kate Garrod, RogerN. Lemon, Andrew J. Parker, Kathy Ryder, Wolfram Schultz, Leah Scott, Jayne Watson, LucyWhitfield, Refinement of the use of food and fluid control as motivational tools for macaquesused in behavioural neuroscience research: Report of a Working Group of the NC3Rs, Journal ofNeuroscience 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 ofunder 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

25. Bean, D., Mason, G. J. & Bateson, M. 1999. Contrafreeloading in starlings: testing theinformation hypothesis. Behaviour, 136, 1267–1282.

26. Allison J.W. Behavioral economics. New York: Praeger; 198327. 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, LucyWhitfield, Refinement of the use of food and fluid control as motivational tools for macaquesused in behavioural neuroscience research: Report of a Working Group of the NC3Rs, Journal ofNeuroscience 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 throughpositive 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 ConferenceDallas, TX 2014

32. Avian Behavior International, Hilary Hankey, Personal communication 12/24/201333. Habben M., Enrichment and conditioning during non-show periods for scavenging birds,

specifically black vultures Coragyps atratus and striated caracaras Phalcobeonusaustralis. Proceedings IAATE Conference, Netherlands 2008

34. Heidenreich B.E., Training for Conservation: Kakapo Recovery. Proceedings IAATEConference Tampa, FL 2012

Heidenreich, B. Corredor, E., Compton, N. Harpy Eagle Training: Exploring the Potential ofPositive Reinforcement Proceedings IAATE Conference Albuquerque, NM 2010

35.


http://everydaylife.globalpost.com/behavior-malnourished-hungry-children-3967.html

http://www.livingwithanxiety.com/articles/ocd/hoarding-of-food

http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/range556/appl_behave/projects/pigs_ster.html

++++++++++++++++++-+633333333

2013 Honors and Awards

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

Documents

Wellspring - The ABMA Management Information ABMA Wellspring – Volume 14, Issue 2 – Fall 2014- Page 1 Volume 14, Issue 2 – Fall 2014 Wellspring The Source of President’s Column