Validating methods to determine walking rates of elephants within a zoological institution
Abstract
Much controversy surrounds the welfare of elephants within zoological institutions. Among the many concerns are lack of exercise and the prevention of sedentary health and welfare issues due to smaller exhibits in comparison to the home-range sizes for elephants in Africa and Asia. While many scientists have used GPS to examine distances travelled by wild elephants, there is currently little information on distance travelled by elephants within zoological institutions. In the wild, it is necessary to chemically immobilise elephants using a dart gun in order to put on or take off collars which are used to acquire GPS data. Within a zoological institution, elephants can be trained to wear a collar with a GPS device but this training can be time consuming and also dangerous depending on the level of expertise of animal care staff. However, training an elephant within a zoological institution to wear an anklet outfitted with a GPS device can be much safer and less time consuming. The purpose of the current research was to validate methods for examining the walking rates of elephants in a zoological facility. This included testing GPS units, examining walking rates of eight elephants at the San Diego Zoo Safari Park using collars and conducting trials on a subset of elephants wearing both a collar and anklet outfitted with GPS devices to determine reliability. The average distance travelled by eight African elephants(Loxodonta africana)within a 24-h period was 8.65 (± 0.64) km whi…
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?
At the San Diego Zoo Safari Park, average walking distance for African elephants was estimated at 8.65-9.82 km/day.
“At the San Diego Zoo Safari Park, Miller, Andrews & Anderson (2012) and Miller, Hogan & Meehan (2016) estimated an average walking distance of 8.65-9.82km/day for African elephants.”
From Continuing challenges of elephant captivity: the captive environment, health issues, and welfare implications (2024) · cites this paper as Miller, Andrews & Anderson, 2012
The natural, sociobiological characteristics of elephants predict the welfare challenges summarized above.
“Moreover, the natural, sociobiological characteristics of elephants (e.g., the need for space, cognitive and social complexity, and dietary practices) predict the welfare challenges summarized above (Clubb & Mason, 2007;Miller, Andrews & Anderson, 2012;Pomerantz, Meir & Terkel, 2013;Hosey, Melfi & Ward, 2020;Mellor et al., 2021”
From Continuing challenges of elephant captivity: the captive environment, health issues, and welfare implications (2024) · cites this paper as Miller, Andrews & Anderson, 2012
Cites
Going to the heart of the matter
Kubzansky, L. D., & Kawachi, I. (2000) · Journal of Psychosomatic Research · doi:10.1016/s0022-3999(99)00091-4 · Cited by 442 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Using technology to monitor and improve zoo animal welfare
Whitham, J., & Miller, L. (2016) · Animal Welfare · doi:10.7120/09627286.25.4.395 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
Self-citationHoldgate, M. R., Meehan, C. L., Hogan, J. N., Miller, L. J., Soltis, J., Andrews, J., & Shepherdson, D. J. (2016) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0150331 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Self-citationDoyle, C., Rally, H., O’Brien, L., Tennison, M., Marino, L., & Jacobs, B. (2024) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.18161 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
- Authors
- Miller, L., Andrews, J., & Anderson, M.
- Affiliations
- Zoological Society of San Diego (US)
- Venue
- Animal Welfare
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2012-11
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 577-582
- ISSN
- 0962-7286 (ISSN-L)
- 2054-1538
- OpenAlex
- W2333292366
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 2.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Animal Welfare (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
- Keywords
- elephants, GPS tracking, Loxodonta africana, zoo animal welfare, physical activity, distance travelled, method validation
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