Impacts of visitor number on Kangaroos housed in free-range exhibits: Kangaroo Welfare in Free-Range Exhibits
Open accessAbstract
Free range exhibits are becoming increasingly popular in zoos as a means to enhance interaction between visitors and animals. However very little research exists on the impacts of visitors on animal behaviour and stress in free range exhibits. We investigated the effects of visitor number on the behaviour and stress physiology of Kangaroo Island (KI) Kangaroos, Macropus fuliginosus fuliginosus, and Red Kangaroos, Macropus rufus, housed in two free range exhibits in Australian zoos. Behavioural observations were conducted on individual kangaroos at each site using instantaneous scan sampling to record activity (e.g., vigilance, foraging, resting) and distance from the visitor pathway. Individually identifiable faecal samples were collected at the end of each study day and analysed for faecal glucocorticoid metabolite (FGM) concentration. When visitor number increased, both KI Kangaroos and Red Kangaroos increased the time spent engaged in visitor-directed vigilance and KI Kangaroos also increased the time spent engaged in locomotion and decreased the time spent resting. There was no effect of visitor number on the distance kangaroos positioned themselves from the visitor pathway or FGM concentration in either species. While there are limitations in interpreting these results in terms of fear of visitors, there was no evidence of adverse effects animal welfare in these study groups based on avoidance behaviour or stress physiology under the range of visitor numbers that we stud…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Red kangaroos spent a considerable proportion of their time engaged in visitor-directed vigilance (15-50%) compared to Kangaroo Island kangaroos (less than 2%) and consistently positioned themselves an average of 4 m further away from the visitor pathway.
“The study found that red kangaroos (the species exposed to natural predation) spent a considerable proportion of their time engaged in visitor-directed vigilance (15–50%) compared to Kangaroo Island kangaroos (less than 2%) and consistently positioned themselves an average of 4 m further away from the visitor pathway compared to the island kangaroos.”
From The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare (2019) · cites this paper as [86]
An increase in the time spent alert to visitors was detected in gorillas, kangaroos, sika deer, koalas and Soemmerring's gazelle in response to higher numbers of visitors.
“An increase in the time spent alert to visitors was detected in various species including gorillas [61], kangaroos [86], sika deer [87], koalas [78] and Soemmerring’s gazelle [88] in response to higher numbers of visitors.”
From The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare (2019) · cites this paper as [86]
Both studies on free range enclosures found behavioural differences in response to different visitor conditions, with increasing visitor numbers resulting in increased time spent vigilant towards visitors in red kangaroos and Kangaroo Island kangaroos, and the presence of visitors resulting in fewer quokkas visible in their enclosure.
“Both these studies found behavioural differences in response to different visitor conditions, with increasing visitor numbers, resulting in increased time spent vigilant towards visitors in red kangaroos and Kangaroo Island kangaroos [86], and the presence of visitors resulted in fewer quokkas visible in their enclosure [76].”
From The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare (2019) · cites this paper as [86]
Only a handful of studies exist that have studied welfare outcomes for animals in free range enclosures.
“Currently, only a handful of studies exist that have studied welfare outcomes for animals in these settings [76,86].”
From The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare (2019) · cites this paper as [86]
Cites
Touma, C., Sachser, N., Möstl, E., & Palme, R. (2003) · General and Comparative Endocrinology · doi:10.1016/s0016-6480(02)00620-2 · Cited by 581 · see citing works
Animal–visitor interactions in the modern zoo: Conflicts and interventions
Fernandez, E. J., Tamborski, M. A., Pickens, S. R., & Timberlake, W. (2009) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2009.06.002 · Cited by 311 · see citing works
Evidence that zoo visitors influence HPA activity in spider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyii rufiventris)
Davis, N., Schaffner, C. M., & Smith, T. E. (2005) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2004.08.020 · Cited by 128 · see citing works
The Effects of Visitor Density and Intensity on the Behavior of Two Captive Jaguars (Panthera onca)
Sellinger, R. L., & Ha, J. C. (2005) · Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science · doi:10.1207/s15327604jaws0804_1 · Cited by 108 · see citing works
Visitor effects on anxiety in two captive groups of western lowland gorillas
Carder, G., & Semple, S. (2008) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2008.06.001 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
Group differences in captive gorillas’ reaction to large crowds
Kuhar, C. W. (2008) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2007.04.011 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Visitor effects on zoo orangutans in two novel, naturalistic enclosures
Choo, Y., Todd, P. A., & Li, D. (2011) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2011.05.007 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Smith, K. N., & Kuhar, C. W. (2010) · Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science · doi:10.1080/10888700903579895 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare
Sherwen, S. L., & Hemsworth, P. H. (2019) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani9060366 · Cited by 267 · see citing works
“An increase in the time spent alert to visitors was detected in various species including gorillas [61], kangaroos [86], sika deer [87], koalas [78] and Soemmerring’s gazelle [88] in response to higher numbers of visitors.”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationKosaruk, W., Brown, J. L., Plangsangmas, T., Towiboon, P., Punyapornwithaya, V., Silva-Fletcher, A., Thitaram, C., Khonmee, J., Edwards, K. L., & Somgird, C. (2020) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani10101928 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
- Authors
- Sherwen, S. L., Hemsworth, P. H., Butler, K. L., Fanson, K. V., & Magrath, M. J. L.
- Affiliations
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- Deakin University (AU)
- Zoos Victoria (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Sherwen, Sally L.
- Venue
- Zoo Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-06-02
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 287-295
- ISSN
- 0733-3188 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1601772810
- Cited by
- 47
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 3.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- figshare.com
- Locations
- Zoo Biology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Deakin Research Online (Deakin University) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Keywords
- zoo animal welfare, kangaroos, Macropus rufus, fecal glucocorticoid metabolites, stress physiology, animal behavior
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Animal Welfare, Animals, Zoo, Australia, Behavior, Animal, Feces, Glucocorticoids, Humans, Macropodidae, Motor Activity, Stress, Physiological
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
