Effects of guest feeding programs on captive giraffe behavior: Guest Feeding Impacts on Giraffe Behavior
Abstract
Zoological institutions develop human-animal interaction opportunities for visitors to advance missions of conservation, education, and recreation; however, the animal welfare implications largely have yet to be evaluated. This behavioral study was the first to quantify impacts of guest feeding programs on captive giraffe behavior and welfare, by documenting giraffe time budgets that included both normal and stereotypic behaviors. Thirty giraffes from nine zoos (six zoos with varying guest feeding programs and three without) were observed using both instantaneous scan sampling and continuous behavioral sampling techniques. All data were collected during summer 2012 and analyzed using linear mixed models. The degree of individual giraffe participation in guest feeding programs was positively associated with increased time spent idle and marginally associated with reduced time spent ruminating. Time spent participating in guest feeding programs had no effect on performance of stereotypic behaviors. When time spent eating routine diets was combined with time spent participating in guest feeding programs, individuals that spent more time engaged in total feeding behaviors tended to perform less oral stereotypic behavior such as object-licking and tongue-rolling. By extending foraging time and complexity, guest feeding programs have the potential to act as environmental enrichment and alleviate unfulfilled foraging motivations that may underlie oral stereotypic behaviors observed…
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?
A study on giraffes found that time spent engaged in visitor feeding programs had no effect on the performance of stereotypic behaviour.
“A study on giraffes found that time spent engaged in visitor feeding programs had no effect on the performance of stereotypic behaviour [150].”
From The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare (2019) · cites this paper as [150]
Cites
Wielebnowski, N. C., Fletchall, N., Carlstead, K., Busso, J. M., & Brown, J. L. (2002) · Zoo Biology · doi:10.1002/zoo.10005 · Cited by 344 · 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
Conservation and Education: Prominent Themes in Zoo Mission Statements
Patrick, P. G., Matthews, C. E., Ayers, D. F., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2007) · The Journal of Environmental Education · doi:10.3200/joee.38.3.53-60 · Cited by 225 · see citing works
A preliminary model of human-animal relationships in the zoo
Hosey, G. (2008) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2007.04.013 · Cited by 197 · see citing works
The welfare of calves during handling and transport
Trunkfield, H. R., & Broom, D. M. (1990) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/0168-1591(90)90050-n · Cited by 118 · 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
“A study on giraffes found that time spent engaged in visitor feeding programs had no effect on the performance of stereotypic behaviour [150].”
Background
- Authors
- Orban, D. A., Siegford, J. M., & Snider, R. J.
- Affiliations
- Michigan State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Orban, David A.
- ORCID
- Siegford, Janice M.
- Venue
- Zoo Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-02-22
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 157-166
- ISSN
- 0733-3188 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2284563787
- Cited by
- 48
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 4.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Zoo Biology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Michigan State University Department of Zoology
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Human-Animal Interaction Studies
- Keywords
- zoo animal welfare, stereotypy, time budget, environmental enrichment, human-animal interaction, foraging behavior, ruminating, idleness, zoo management
- MeSH terms
- Giraffes, Animals, Animal Welfare, Animals, Zoo, Behavior, Animal, Feeding Behavior, Female, Humans, Male, Stereotyped Behavior, Linear Models
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