L 162b - 2008-09 - Bilag 6: Henvendelse af 28/4-09 fra Anima om fremvisning af ikke-domesticerede dyr i cirkus

AbstractA comprehensive synopsis of the welfare of captive, wild (ie non-domesticated) animals in travelling circuses is missing. Weexamined circus animal welfare and, specifically, behaviour, health, living and travelling conditions. We compared the conditions ofnon-domesticated animals in circuses with their counterparts kept in zoos. Data on circus animals were very scarce; where datawere absent, we inferred likely welfare implications based on zoo data. Circus animals spent the majority of the day confined, about1–9% of the day performing/training and the remaining time in exercise pens. Exercise pens were significantly smaller thanminimum zoo standards for outdoor enclosures. Behavioural budgets were restricted, with circus animals spending a great amountof time performing stereotypies, especially when shackled or confined in beast wagons. A higher degree of stereotyping in circusesmay be indicative of poorer welfare. Inadequate diet and housing conditions, and the effects of repeated performances, can leadto significant health problems. Circus animals travel frequently and the associated forced movement, human handling, noise, trailermovement and confinement are important stressors. Although there is no conclusive evidence as to whether animals habituate totravel, confinement in beast wagons for long timeperiods is a definite welfare concern. Circuses have a limited ability to makeimprovements, such as increased space, environmental enrichment and appropriate social housing. Consequently, we argue thatnon-domesticated animals, suitable for circus life, should exhibit low space requirements, simple social structures, low cognitivefunction, non-specialist ecological requirements and an ability to be transported without adverse welfare effects. None of thecommonest species exhibited by circuses, such as elephants and large felids, currently meet these criteria. We conclude that thespecies of non-domesticated animals commonly kept in circuses appear the least suited to a circus life.

130 Iossaet alshould not be used in circuses” (Amboseli ElephantResearch Project 2007). Moreover, in addition to animalwelfare considerations, several species widely kept incircuses pose serious concerns in terms of risk to the public.The number of keepers and visitors injured or killedworldwide (1–11 per year during 1982–2004) by African(Loxodontaafricana)and Asian (Elephasmaximus)elephants in zoos (Goreet al2006) and captive tiger(Pantheratigris)attacks on people in USA circuses andtheme parks (1.75 fatal, 9 non-fatal attacks per year [Nyhuset al2003]) seem to represent a disproportionate threat inproportion to their number (360–720 times greater risk of afatal attack than a domestic dog [Nyhuset al2003]).Elephants and tigers are the main causes of occupationalfatalities for circus workers and zoo keepers in the USA(Langley & Hunter 2001).In this context, we examine the welfare of non-domesticatedanimals in circuses and the extent to which their lives differfrom other captive animals’ lives. We focus on European,and especially UK circuses as worldwide data are sparse andmainly available from non peer-reviewed literature. Weattempt to review all animals commonly kept in circusesworldwide but, inevitably, research has focused on a fewspecies which are best represented in our examples. Wheredata were lacking for some measures, we have reviewed theevidence available from studies of animals in other captivesituations, such as zoos and, secondarily, laboratories andfarms. Out of necessity, some of this literature includesdomestic animals. We believe this comparison to be valid fortwo reasons. Firstly, zoos keep all of the species commonlyused in circuses and, in both cases, the history of the animals(captive-bred or wild-caught, owned by one or several insti-tutions) is comparable. Secondly, despite being domesticatedand adapted to living with humans, domestic species are stillliable to experience negative welfare whenever the ability toperform highly-motivated behaviours, inherited from theirwild ancestors, is thwarted (eg Goodwin 1999; Schrøder-Petersen & Simonsen 2001; Cooper & Albentosa 2005). Forthese reasons, we think it reasonable to assume that anyshortfalls in the level of welfare of zoo, laboratory or farmanimals is equally, or more likely, to apply to other captivewild animals in similar situations. In this paper, we firstreview the number and origin of animals involved in thecircus industry. Following a framework initially developedto assess the suitability of exotic species as pets (Schuppli &Fraser 2000), we then examine whether non-domesticatedanimals are suited to living in circuses. In particular, wereview: (i) the welfare of non-domesticated animals incircuses (living and travelling conditions, behaviour, healthand performance) and, (ii) following this, drawing on theevidence collated, we assess whether non-domesticatedanimals are suited to a circus life.www.scholar.google.com), and the bibliography of signifi-cant reports (Cox 1998; Clubb & Mason 2002) followingthe methodology proposed by Pullin and Stewart (2006).We used the search terms (‘circus AND animal’, ‘PantheratigrisAND circus’, ‘tiger AND circus’, ‘primate ANDcircus’, ‘Elephas AND circus’, ‘Loxodonta AND circus’,‘elephant AND circus’). In addition, we searched theWorldwide Web to investigate travel habits of European andNorth American circuses using ‘circus AND touringschedule’, and ‘circus AND transport’ as search terms.

The numbers and origin of non-domesticatedanimals in circusesThere are two types of circuses: static and travelling. In thisreview, ‘circus’ refers to a travelling group of entertainersand animals. The animals are confined in ‘beast wagons’when travelling and for a certain period of time afterarriving at a location. Beast wagons are transport containersthat are typically small enough to be carried on a longtrailer. Alternatively, animals are held in exercise pens onsite (larger cages, connected to the beast wagon) when theyare not performing. When not on tour they are held at onelocation, such as winter quarters, but very little informationon these facilities is readily available, so we did not includethem in this review.The total number of animals kept in captivity in circusesworldwide is unknown; estimates (including domesticanimals) range from a minimum of 2,400 to a maximum of5,900 individuals in Europe (Galhardo 2005). In Britishcircuses, there were approximately 513 wild and domesticanimals in 1990 (Kiley-Worthington 1990); since then, thenumber of non-domesticated animals has declined from92 individuals recorded in 1997 to 33 in 2005 (Born FreeFoundation & RSPCA 2006) and to 47 in 2007 (Radford2007), perhaps partially due to the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in 2000–2001. In the period 1975–2005, thetotal number of animals officially exported globally forcircus and travelling exhibition purposes was about 25,500(Table 1). Of these, carnivores (31%), birds (27%) andreptiles (22%) represent about 80% of the trade, whilst themost traded species are tigers with 3,003 individuals, brownbears (Ursusarctos)with 1,866, pythons (Python spp) with1,808, macaques (Macaca spp) with 1,547, lions (Pantheraleo)with 1,473, lovebirds (Agapornis spp) with 1,283 andAsian elephants with 1,168. For some species, a consider-able number of non-domesticated individuals are housed incircuses. For instance, worldwide, about 31% of all captiveAfrican and Asian elephants are kept in circuses (althoughthis figure is based on a total that underestimates thenumber of working elephants in Asia, see Clubb & Mason[2002]). Some 800 captive tigers are involved in globalconservation strategies, whilst estimates of privately-ownedindividuals (including exotic pets and those in non-accred-ited zoos, circuses, and safari parks) vary between5,000 and 12,000 (Nyhuset al2003). This number is greaterthan the number of breeding individuals in the wild (CatSpecialist Group 2002) and is outside management forbreeding and reintroduction purposes.

A review of wild animals in travelling circuses 131Similarly, data on the origin of animals in circuses are veryscarce. Kiley-Worthington (1990) reported that 40% ofcarnivores and 14% of ungulates in 15 British circuses wereunwanted zoo animals, whereas approximately 94% ofelephants were wild-caught. However, it must be noted that,although the remaining animals were classified as bred incircuses, the category ‘circus’ actually included ‘privateowners, market, etc’ (Kiley-Worthington 1989a). Thisimplies that an unknown percentage of animals classified ascaptive-bred in circuses were actually bred in other privatefacilities.The International Tiger Studbook(Müller 2004)has no record of the numbers of tigers bred in zoos andsubsequently released to circuses, safari parks and privateowners before the age of three. Consequently, an unknownproportion of captive-born tigers pass into private hands(Müller 2004). The origin and lineage of the majority ofthese animals is unknown but, as some zoo associations donot allow member establishments to pass its animals tocircuses (eg BIAZA 2005), this source may be reduced insome countries. Thus, the contribution of circuses to captivebreeding conservation programmes is, at best, negligible.Table 1Convention on International Trade inEndangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES)trade statistics on net export of all animal species official-ly traded worldwide for circus and travelling exhibitionpurposes in the period 1975–2005.TaxonCarnivoresFelidaeUrsidaeCanidaeReptiles and amphibiansSnakesLizards and geckosChameleonsCrocodilesTortoisesFrogsCetaceans and sealsPrimatesBirdsParrotsBirds of preyOtherHerbivoresElephantsOthersTotal1,64019825,5791,3413095,1191,8382,8271,1175168172811295082,8896,7695,4122,3481285,687Number of animals Sub-total7,888

ment), may enhance health and reproductive potential ofcaptive animals, and is recognised by zoo managers as auseful tool to improve captive species management(Desmond & Laule 1994). Training by means of negativereinforcement and/or punishment may be the cause of poorwelfare for the captive animal and can also establish a poorrelationship between trainer and animal (Siemoneit-Barum1995; Hemsworth & Barnett 2000). Kiley-Worthington(1990), during 200 h observation in British circuses,witnessed no signs of prolonged or acute distress. Some ofthe animals initially showed fear and anxiety beforebecoming accustomed to trainers; others showed frustrationand avoidance behaviours and refusal to perform certainacts (Kiley-Worthington 1990). The training observedincluded reducing levels of fear, positive reinforcement,infrequent negative reinforcement (the use of body postureand sticks or whips for controlling the animal’s movement)but no evidence of cruelty. However, not enough trainingwas practised, it lacked innovation and it was not alwaysappropriate for the species; overall, there were not enoughgood trainers (Kiley-Worthington 1989b, 1990).Performance acts in the presence of spectators may causesevere stress to non-domesticated animals. Loud noise is awell-known stressor in captive animals; acoustical stresswithin and outside the human hearing range can cause criticalalteration in physiological parameters (Stoskopf 1983; Bowles& Thompson 1996). Tigers may develop gastroenteritis as aconsequence of persistent, loud noise (Cociuet al1974). It has

cated animals and/or animals completely naïve to travel,show signs of behavioural and physiological distress whentravelling (eg Trunkfield & Broom 1990; Monteset al2004), even more than would be expected from physicalrestraint alone (López-Olveraet al2006). In contrast,domesticated animals accustomed to handling are generallyless stressed by being restrained and transported (review inGrandin 1997). To date, some studies suggest that circuselephants and tigers habituate to travel but, other than bodytemperature (Toscanoet al2001), only behaviouralmeasures are available (Nevill & Friend 2003; Williams &Friend 2003; Nevillet al2004). In a study on the transportenvironment in six USA circuses, only two circuses usedinsulated walls and high capacity ventilation fans tomaintain internal temperatures within a safe range (Toscanoet al2001). The elephants transported did not experiencetemperatures outside their normal range, butdrivers/handlers may be unaware of any critical temperatureincrease in the trailers as monitoring systems were absent.For elephants, movement in trailers is constrained becausethey are transported chained (Toscanoet al2001). In zootigers, pacing varies individually but altered cortisol levelspersist for 3–6 days after transport in animals with experi-ence of travelling (transported on at least two previousoccasions) and 9–12 days in naïve tigers, suggesting thattravelling is a stressful experience (Dembiecet al2004).Kiley-Worthington (1990) stated that British circus animalsappeared habituated to travel but that there was concern onwelfare grounds because the animals were confined in thebeast wagons for long periods. Domestic horses (Equuscaballus)are frequently transported for sport and recre-ational purposes; those that have positive travel experiences(ie loading, transport density, careful driving) seem tohabituate readily to travel but they are also likely to developproblems associated with frequent travel, such as fatigue,weight loss, restricted movement and disrupted feedingpatterns (Waran & Cuddeford 1995; Waranet al2002). Onthe other hand, many horses are transported throughout theirlives with few problems (Waranet al2002). Overall, thereis limited evidence on the effect of transport-related stress incircus animals (Anonymous 2004) but confinement inAnimal Welfare 2009, 18: 129-140

Time budgetsIn the wild, elephants (both species) spend anywherebetween 40 and 75% of their time feeding (Sukumar 2003).Asian elephants may consume between 33.6–44.4 kg ofgrass (1.5–1.9% of their bodyweight) in 12 h (Sukumar1992). African elephants can cover 30–50 km in a single day(Leuthold 1977) and African elephants spend 57% ofdaylight hours moving and feeding in the Okavango Delta(Evans 2006). In contrast, physical activity is limited in zoosand grazing is unavailable in 90% (18 out of 20) of Europeanzoos keeping Asian elephants (Taylor & Poole 1998).Circus animals, especially elephants, may be kept chained(shackled individually or picketed in lines) continuously for12–23 hours per day when not performing (Schmid 1995;Friend & Parker 1999). In four circuses, elephants spent12.6–22.7 hours per day shackled in an area 7–12 m2,although they could only move as far as the length of thechain, ie 1–2 m, 0.3–8.2 hours per day in a paddockmeasuring 22.7–72.0 m2and 0.3–2.1 hours per day trainingor performing (Schmid 1995). Thus, performing or trainingtypically occupy 1–9% of the day in circus animals (Schmid1995; Nevill & Friend 2006). Both shackling and picketingseverely restrict the degree of social contact amongst indi-viduals, basically reducing it to adjacent elephants (Schmid1995). However, many handlers claim that chaining isneeded, not only for safety reasons, but also because manytrainers regard it as a means of establishing and maintainingdominance (Schmid 1995; Friend & Parker 1999). Evenwhen not chained, circus elephants are housed in barrenpens surrounded by an electric fence which is viewed as a‘revolutionary’ improvement to the lives of circus elephants(Cimino 1994). In her study of 15 British circuses, Kiley-Worthington (1990) reported that half of the elephants wereallowed to move freely for one hour a day and that somespent the majority of the day in the electric-fenced pens. Ina study of elephant behaviour, trainers acknowledged thatpenned elephants were more relaxed and showed reducedstereotypic behaviour (Friend & Parker 1999). Whilst somedegree of socialisation is possible in penned elephants,uninhibited social interactions are not (Gruberet al2000).When animals are unsupervised, objects that might be usedby zoos as environmental enrichment (eg logs) are generallynot provided by circuses as they may be used to break thebarriers (Cimino 1994; Gruberet al2000).Kiley-Worthington (1990) noted that being shackled orconfined semi-permanently in beast wagons or stallsseverely restricted the behaviour of circus animals. Forinstance, there were times when carnivores did not haveaccess to exercise areas and would be kept in the beastwagons (which lacked furniture) all day except for perform-ances, or for periods of 10–12 h between arrival at a site inthe evening and the following day. Similarly, the ungulateswere often not taken out of their indoor enclosures for long� 2009 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

StereotypiesIt has long been recognised that captivity may have delete-rious effects on an animal’s behavioural patterns. Normalbehaviour gives way to a higher percentage of inactivityand/or increased abnormal behaviour (self-directedbehaviour or self-injury) and stereotypies (Mason 1991a).Stereotypies are repetitive behaviours with no apparent aimthat develop when a captive animal is prevented fromexecuting a highly-motivated behaviour (Mason 1991a).For instance, stereotypic pacing in captive carnivoresgenerally increases during crepuscular hours (Weller &Bennett 2001) when wild carnivores are more active or,seasonally, when mate-seeking behaviour would beperformed in the wild (Carlstead & Seidensticker 1991).Although it is difficult to make generalisations about stereo-typies, they are commonly associated with a sub-optimalenvironment and poor or compromised welfare (Mason1991b). That is probably why primates confiscated fromtouring zoos and circuses exhibit undesirable behaviourmore than primates reared in recognised zoos (Mallapur &Choudhury 2003). Two studies examining transport in largefelids found very similar levels of stereotypic behaviour inboth zoo (22%) and circus (21.4%) animals (Nevill &Friend 2003; Dembiecet al2004), possibly indicating thatboth are sub-optimal environments. In addition, gatheringevidence suggests that stereotypies may also represent acaptivity-induced dysfunction of the central nervous system(Garner & Mason 2002; Masonet al2007).Stereotypic pacing varies widely amongst zoo carnivores,from an average of 0.16% of observations in red foxes(Vulpesvulpes)to 30% in lions (Pantheraleo)and 60% intigers (Bashawet al2003; Clubb & Mason 2007). A signif-icant proportion of this variation is explained by homerange and daily distance travelled: species that travel overlarge distances in the wild show higher levels of stereotypicpacing in captivity (Clubb & Mason 2003, 2007). Hand-rearing also negatively influences the development ofstereotypies. For instance, captive-bred, hand-reared bears,primates and African grey parrots (Psittacuserithacus)exhibit significantly more stereotypies than captive-bred,mother-reared individuals (Forthman & Bakeman 1992;Marriner & Drickamer 1994; Schmidet al2006) and thedevelopment of feather plucking and chewing in psittacinebirds has been linked to hand-rearing (Chitty 2003).Stereotypies tend to increase in frequency with increasingrestraint of movement and with more barren environments.For instance, circus elephants kept shackled or picketed,weave and head-nod more than in paddocks (Schmid 1995;Friend & Parker 1999), zoo bears and leopards (Pantherapardus)pace more in the smaller, off-exhibit enclosures thanin the larger, on-exhibit enclosures (Mallapur & Chellam2002; Montaudouin & Le Pape 2005), and captive parrotsperform more oral and locomotory stereotypies in barren

A review of wild animals in travelling circuses 135cages than in enriched cages (Meehanet al2004). Nevill andFriend (2006) found that access to an exercise pen for20–40 min had no effect on pacing in six circus tigers.However, tiger activity in the pen was inversely related topacing in the home cage, leading Nevill and Friend (2006) toconclude that access to an exercise pen is an importantenrichment and that it should be considered for longerperiods than 40 min. Some elephant handlers believe thatstereotypic behaviour has some beneficial effects. Forinstance, weaving stereotypies are said to aid circulation inthe same way that walking does in wild elephants (Friend1999). The frequency (percentage of all observations) ofstereotypic behaviour, however, is significantly greater(about 30%) in chained, circus elephants when compared toelephants in zoo or circus enclosures (about 4 and 10%,respectively [Clubb & Mason 2002]). There has been littlework on stereotypies in circuses, but evidence from Britainsuggests that all species of circus animal stereotype (Kiley-Worthington 1990). In both zoos and circuses, there wasevidence of prolonged distress and abnormal behaviour butthese were not any greater in circus animals than in zoo orother animal husbandry systems (Kiley-Worthington 1990).However, Kiley-Worthington (1990) did not consider pacing,bar chewing and pawing as stereotypies, although they arewidely regarded as such (eg Mason & Rushen 2006). Forfelids in circuses and zoos, larger crowds are related togreater frequency of pacing (Mallapur & Chellam 2002;Krawczelet al2005). As stereotypies normally indicate sub-optimal environments, a higher degree of stereotyping incircuses may be considered indicative of poorer welfare.common in circus as well as zoo elephants (Lindau 1970;West 2001), and more common in zoo than wild elephants(Schmidt 1986). Joint and hernia problems are thought toresult from circus elephants repeatedly assuming unnaturalpositions during performance (Lindau 1970; Kuntze 1989).In circuses, the lack of mud baths, which wild elephantstypically use for skin care, commonly causes severe skinproblems (Reitschel 2002). Other common health problemsin circus animals in Germany are tuberculosis, protein defi-ciency in primates and mange in camelids (Wiesner 1986).Cross-species transmission may be faster and morecommon in captivity than in the wild. For instance, Africanelephants may transmit the lethal elephant endotheliotropicherpes virus (EEHV) to Asian elephants in European zoos(Fickelet al2001). The two species do not meet in the wild.This virus is found in very young or stillborn calves, andrepresents a further threat (in addition to offspring infanti-cide and abandonment) to elephant reproductive success incaptivity (Fickelet al2001).Many non-domesticated animals are kept outside theirnatural geographic distribution and this may have negativeconsequences for their health. For instance, veterinarianstreating circus polar bears (Ursusmaritimus)performing inSpain, linked signs of depression and inappetance toextremely hot weather conditions (Bankset al1999) and, incolder and wetter climates, there is a greater incidence offoot infections in livestock (Vaarstet al1998).

Captivity-related stressRestricted physical activity and social interaction, incorrectfeeding practices or a forced reduction in the time spentforaging and in other highly-motivated behaviours, canrepresent stressors to non-domesticated animals. Stress canhave short-term behavioural and physiological effects, aswell as chronic, long-term, behavioural and physiologicaleffects (Hemsworth & Barnett 2000; Moberg 2000;Morgan & Tromborg 2007). It has been suggested that thegreatest stressor of captivity is the inability of captiveanimals to control the captive environment, ie the inabilityof confined individuals to escape or otherwise avoid thestressor (Sambrook & Buchanan-Smith 1997; Morgan &Tromborg 2007). The effects of even minor stressescombine to suppress immune function, reproduction,metabolism and behaviour (Moberg 2000).The circus environment seems likely to induce behaviouralproblems of the sort noted in other impoverished environ-ments with confined spaces, barren enclosures and socialisolation. Such effects vary from reduced reproductivebehaviour, exploratory behaviour and behaviouralcomplexity to increased abnormal, vigilance and hidingbehaviours, behavioural inhibition, aggression, fearfulnessand freezing behaviour (review in Morgan & Tromborg2007). Captivity-related stress is linked to the developmentof unusual diseases which affect captive-born and wild-caught but not wild, free-ranging cheetahs (Acinonyxjubatus;Terioet al2004). Given that social isolation,reduced space allowance and inappropriate housing condi-tions cause profound stress in domestic species (review inAnimal Welfare 2009, 18: 129-140

Diet and healthData on the diets of circus animals are scarce. Wiesner(1986) reported that protein deficiency is common in circusprimates. When zoo elephants are kept on a sand surface,they may eat sand and stones to the detriment of their health(Schulze 1986). Occasionally, circus keepers, ignorant ofplant toxicity, have fed inappropriate plants to elephants(Anderson 1968; Schaller 1983). Teeth problems (ie toothabnormalities) occur as a consequence of incorrect feedingpractices in captive elephants (Kurt & Hartl 1995) and wildungulates (Boyd 1986); Kurt (1995) has never observedteeth abnormalities in wild Asian elephants, although it isdifficult to examine wild elephants’ teeth. Some diseasesrarely encountered in the wild are present in captivity as aresult of bad feeding practices (Bankset al1999). Forinstance, circus lions developed botulism after consumingbroiler chickens (Greenwood 1985).The physical restrictions of the captive environment haveadverse effects on captive animals’ health. Elephantslacking physical exercise in zoos and circuses can becomeobese which, in turn, leads to joint defects and damaged feetand leg ligaments (Kurt & Hartl 1995). In a survey of62 Asian and 5 African elephants from three circuses andfive zoos, veterinarians found a high incidence of rheuma-toid disorders and one of the authors observed chronicarthritis and lameness in captive elephants (Clarket al1980). The development of lameness and foot problems is

136 Iossaet alMorgan & Tromborg 2007) and, given that there is partialevidence of their effect on non-domesticated species aswell, the housing conditions of circus animals are likely tocause severe stress to non-domesticated animals, althoughno data are available to test this hypothesis. On the otherhand, as we show in the next section, captivity-inducedstress impairs reproduction in many species.reason for the low or absent reproductive performance ofelephants in circuses is the lack of bulls. The keeping ofbulls is normally avoided in circuses for fear of aggression(Kurt & Hartl 1995). Aggressive behaviour is mostpronounced in the period ofmusth;some handlers try tocontrol aggressive bulls by beating them in sensitive areassuch as the ears, eyes and penis, which is thought to causecircus bulls to refuse to breed (Kurt 1995; Kurt & Hartl1995). For instance, of eight bull elephants kept in westernEuropean zoos, but formerly living in circuses, two weremoved to zoos before the age of 15 (prior to sexualmaturity) and successfully bred whilst five of the remainingsix, which lived in circuses until after 15 years of age,refused to breed (Kurt 1995). Husbandry practices seem tobe responsible for the lower reproductive success ofelephants in European zoos and circuses when compared toAsian extensive keeping systems (Kurt 1995; Taylor &Poole 1998; Clubb & Mason 2002).In the wild, environmental factors, such as resource avail-ability, predation and climate, limit animal populationreproduction, growth and mortality. In captivity, these envi-ronmental effects are limited. Consequently, reduced ornon-existent reproductive lifespan (Mellen 1991; Kurt &Khyne U Mar 1996; Wielebnowskiet al2002), dysfunc-tional copulatory behaviour (ie failure to copulate), infanti-cide or abandonment of offspring due to social disruption orhand-rearing (King & Mellen 1994; Kurt & Khyne U Mar1996), high infant mortality (Clubb & Mason 2007) and/orreduced life expectancy, all represent the deleterious effectsof husbandry-related stress.

The effects of captivity-related stress on reproductionReproduction is not normally included in welfare assess-ments (but see Crane 2007). However, we discussbreeding in captivity because it shows that captivity-related stress in circus animals is sufficient to have animpact on reproductive success.Many species are very difficult to breed in captivity as aconsequence of the detrimental effects of the captive envi-ronment on an individual’s development, modulation ofstress and arousal, and on the modification of social inter-actions (Carlstead & Shepherdson 1994). Breeding failureof captive animals is common and its origin can almostinvariably be linked to certain unnatural aspects ofcaptivity (Lindburg & Fitch-Snyder 1994). Even if viableoffspring are produced, the abandonment of the offspringby the mother is common. As a consequence, hand-rearingwas a widespread practice in captive environments (Young2003). However, hand-reared individuals may fail todevelop normal social and reproductive behaviours anddevelop abnormal behaviours (King & Mellen 1994; Chitty2003; Young 2003), which is the reason BIAZA-accreditedzoos only recommend hand-rearing for pre-determinedpopulation management purposes, eg according to TaxonAdvisory Group or European Endangered SpeciesProgramme recommendations (BIAZA 2005). It has beenrecommended that if hand-rearing is necessary in circuses,it should be accompanied by integration with conspecifics(Kiley-Worthington 1990). Hand-rearing and a lack ofsocial interactions are the main cause of breeding failure incaptive primates (King & Mellen 1994).Elephants are very difficult to breed in captivity for severalreasons, all of which are linked to environmental effects thatare more acute in circuses than in zoos. Elephants are highlysocial and, in the wild, live in matriarchal societies wheremothering skills are learnt through social experience (Kurt1995; Kurt & Hartl 1995). In captivity, in contrast,elephants are moved between establishments, therebydisrupting existing social bonds amongst group members(Datheet al1992; Lawset al2007) and thwarting the acqui-sition of mothering skills. Such treatment of females isthought to lead to the death of infants (Kurt 1995), and to bethe cause of higher percentages of stillbirths and infantmortality, due to infanticide, in European zoos and circusescompared to the wild (Kurt & Khyne U Mar 1996; Taylor &Poole 1998). To prevent infanticide, females giving birthmay be chained separately from the group (Schmid 1998).Stillbirths seem to have a correlation with an overweightmother and/or calf, and allowing female elephants moremovement or changing feeding practices would decreasefemale obesity (Kurt & Khyne U Mar 1996). Another� 2009 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Conclusions and animal welfare implicationsThis is the first study to review the welfare of non-domesti-cated animals in circuses and their suitability to a circus life.Information on circus animals is scarce, even to the extentthat the origin of most circus animals and precise numberskept, are unknown. In the UK, most animals appear to havebeen bred in captivity (Kiley-Worthington 1990) as opposedto being wild-caught, but this does not mean such animalsare fundamentally different from free-living animals. Weargue that there is no evidence to suggest that the naturalneeds of non-domesticated animals can be met through theliving conditions and husbandry offered by circuses.Neither natural environment nor much natural behaviourcan be recreated in circuses. Complex captive environments(naturalistic displays with plants, objects, perches, etc),such as those set up in good zoos can, in part, alleviatebehavioural problems stemming from captivity and providethe animal with a diverse array of stimuli (Carlstead &Shepherdson 2000; Masonet al2007). However, due totheir mobile life, circuses have a limited ability to set upcomplex environments and a non-domesticated animal’s lifeis consequently impoverished.Captivity can induce poor welfare in non-domesticatedanimals but circuses, in particular, fail to provide some oftheir most basic social, spatial and feeding requirements.The ability to execute many natural behaviours is severelyreduced, with partial evidence of a concomitant reduction in

A review of wild animals in travelling circuses 137welfare, health and reproduction, at least in the most well-studied species, such as African and Asian elephants. Inmany respects, and despite the lack of predation, foodshortage and adverse environmental conditions, animalskept in captivity experience poorer welfare than animals ofthe same species living free (eg cheetahs, Terioet al2004).Whilst it may be argued that hand-rearing, training andperformance in circuses may be suitable compensation for amore natural habitat and lifestyle (Hediger 1955), such asare found in the wild and in good zoos, this hypothesis hasnot been tested. Given that circus animals spent only 1–9%of the day performing or in training, we do not think thiswould be the case. We found no data to suggest that trainingor performance of circus acts is enriching or harmful. Incontrast, we found that human crowds are likely to causestress to non-domesticated animals.In Europe, the financial difficulties seen in the majority ofsmall circuses (Fleming 1994; Galhardo 2005) enhance therisk of poor husbandry, veterinary care and feeding for theanimals (Goldhorn & Kraft 1985). It must also be noted thatmost research on circus animals is conducted in the largestand better-financed circuses (eg Friend & Parker 1999;Gruberet al2000; Nevill & Friend 2003) and, therefore, islikely to represent the best husbandry and welfare incircuses rather than representing a cross-section of condi-tions found in circuses with a range of finances. Thus, thedata presented here are likely to be biased towards the bestcircuses, and are not representative of the norm.Price (1984, 1999) argued that species differ in their degreeof pre-adaptation to domestication and, for those speciesthat have not been domesticated, the captive environmentdoes not allow the expression of species-specific behav-iours compatible with husbandry techniques. Circuses maybe suitable environments for animals with low spacerequirements, simple social structures, low cognitivefunction, non-specialist ecological requirements and whichare capable of being transported without adverse welfareeffects, or animals habituated to human presence, such asdomesticated animals. In contrast, highly social, non-domesticated animals, such as elephants and wide-rangingcarnivores, which are amongst the most popular specieskept in circuses (Galhardo 2005), appear to be the leastsuitable to captive environments such as zoos (Rees 2003;Clubb & Mason 2007) and even less so to circuses(Amboseli Elephant Research Project 2007). This hasalready been recognised in many countries across the worldwhere all animals, or wild-caught animals, or some or allspecies of non-domesticated animals, are prohibited incircuses (eg Austria, Belgium, Costa Rica, Croatia, CzechRepublic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, India, Israel, Poland,Singapore and Sweden). In the period from 1990–2005, thenumber of non-domesticated animals in British circuseshas been declining, possibly as an effect of the outbreak offoot and mouth disease in 2000–2001. We could not findreliable trend data on the number of circuses usingperforming animals but circuses with only humanperformers have grown in popularity in recent years. Thedeleterious effects that circus life has on individual animalsare of primary welfare concern. Circus animals spend themajority of the day confined, a small amount of timeperforming/training, and the remaining time in exercisepens. Circus cages/exercise pens and beast wagons were,on average, only 26 and 27%, respectively of the recom-mended size of zoo outdoor and indoor enclosures.Circuses, by their very nature, have a limited ability toimprove these conditions. Concerns have been raised aboutkeeping non-domesticated animals in circuses and thisreview has found that, although data are scarce, suchassumptions are, in part, supported. This warrants, at thevery least, further physiological and behavioural studies onthe effects of captivity and transportation, reproductivesuccess and the effects of training and performance, toimprove our welfare assessment of circus animals. Datacollated from other studies suggest that species commonlykept in circuses appear the least suited to a circus life.

ReferencesAmboseli Elephant Research Project2007Circus positionstatement.http://www.elephanttrust.org/circus.htm (Accessed on12 March 2008)Anderson IL1968 Tutu poisoning in two circus elephants.NewZealand Veterinary Journal 16:146-147Anonymous2004 Opinion of the Scientific Panel on AnimalHealth and Welfare on a request from the Commission related tothe welfare of animals during transport.EFSA Journal 44:1-36Association of Circus Proprietors of Great Britain2001Standards for the Care and Welfare of Circus Animals on Tour.Association of Circus Proprietors of Great Britain: UKBanks M, Monsalve Torraca LS, Greenwood AG andTaylor DC1999 Aujeszky’s disease in captive bears.VeterinaryRecord 145:362-365Barnard CJ and Hurst JL1996 Welfare by design: the naturalselection of welfare criteria.Animal Welfare 5:405-433Bashaw MJ, Bloomsmith MA, Marr MJ and Maple TL2003To hunt or not to hunt? A feeding enrichment with captive largefelids.Zoo Biology 22:189-198Birke L2002 Effects of browse, human visitors and noise on thebehaviour of captive orangutans.Animal Welfare 11:189-202Born Free Foundation and RSPCA2006It’s time parliamentchanged its Act.Born Free Foundation/RSPCA: Horsham, UKBowles AE and Thompson SJ1996 A review of non-auditoryphysiological effects of noise on animals.Journal of the AcousticalSociety of America 100:2708Boyd L1986 Behavior problems of equids in zoos.VeterinaryClinics of North America-Equine Practice 2:653-664British and Irish Association of Zoos and Aquariums2005Animal Transaction Policy.BIAZA: London, UKBrown JL, Olson D, Keele M and Freeman EW2004 Surveyof the reproductive cyclicity status of Asian and African elephantsin North America.Zoo Biology 23:309-321Carlstead K and Seidensticker J1991 Seasonal variation instereotypic pacing in an American black bear,Ursus americanus.Behavioural Processes 25:155-161

138 Iossaet alCarlstead K and Shepherdson D1994 Effects of environmen-tal enrichment on reproduction.Zoo Biology 13:447-458Carlstead K and Shepherdson D2000 Alleviating stress inzoo animals with environmental enrichment. In: Moberg GP andMench JA (eds)The Biology of Animal Stresspp 337-354. CABIPublishing: Oxon, UKCat Specialist Group2002Panthera tigris. 2006 IUCN Red Listof Threatened Species.http://www.iucnredlist.org (accessed 26March 2007)Chitty J2003 Feather plucking in psittacine birds 2. Social, envi-ronmental and behavioural considerations.In Practice 25:550-555Cimino R1994 Cooperative elephant breeding between zoosand circuses: a realistic proposal?International Zoo News 41:29-35Clark HW, Laughlin DC, Bailey JS and Brown T1980Mycoplasma species and arthritis in captive elephants.Journal ofZoo Animal Medicine 11:3-15Clubb R and Mason G2002A Review of the Welfare of ZooElephants in Europe.RSPCA: Horsham, UKClubb R and Mason G2003 Captivity effects on wide-rangingcarnivores.Nature 425:473-474Clubb R and Mason G2007 Natural behavioural biology as arisk factor in carnivore welfare: How analysing species differencescould help zoos improve enclosures.Applied Animal BehaviourScience 102:303-328Cociu M, Wagner G, Micu NE and Mihaescu G1974Adaptational gastro-enteritis in Siberian tigers,Panthera tigrisaltaicaat Bucharest Zoo.International Zoo Yearbook 14:171-174Cooper JJ and Albentosa MJ2005 Behavioural adaptation inthe domestic horse: potential role of apparently abnormalresponses including stereotypic behaviour.Livestock ProductionScience 92:177-182Cox R1998The Welfare of Animals in Circuses.WildlifeConservation Research Unit. University of Oxford: Oxford, UKCrane M2007 Without the wisdom of Solomon or his ring: set-ting standards for exhibited animals in New South Wales.Journalof Veterinary Behavior 2:223-229Dathe HH, Kuckelkorn B and Minnemann D1992 Salivarycortisol assessment for stress detection in the Asian elephant(Elephasmaximus):a pilot study.Zoo Biology 11:285-289Dembiec DP, Snider RJ and Zanella AJ2004 The effects of trans-port stress on tiger physiology and behavior.Zoo Biology 23:335-346Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry 2007Displayhousing.http://www.daff.gov.au/animal-plant-health/welfare/nccaw/guidelines/display/circus/display (accessed 17March 2008)Desmond T and Laule G1994 Use of positive reinforcementtraining in the management of species for reproduction.ZooBiology 13:471-477Evans KE2006The behavioural ecology and movements of adoles-cent male African elephant (Loxodontaafricana)in the OkavangoDelta, Botswana.PhD Thesis, University of Bristol, UKFarm Animal Welfare Council1992 FAWC updates the fivefreedoms.Veterinary Record 131:357Fickel J, Richman LK, Montali R, Schaftenaar W, GöritzF, Hildebrandt TB and Pitra C2001 A variant of the endothe-liotropic herpesvirus in Asian elephants (Elephasmaximus)inEuropean zoos.Veterinary Microbiology 82:103-109Fleming EH1994CITES and the regulation of wildlife trade forEuropean circuses.TRAFFIC Europe: Brussels, BelgiumForthman DL and Bakeman R1992 Environmental and socialinfluences on enclosure use and activity patterns of captive slothbears (Ursusursinus). Zoo Biology 11:405-415Forthman-Quick DL1984 An integrative approach to environ-mental enrichment.Zoo Biology 3:65-77Friend TH1999 Behavior of picketed circus elephants.AppliedAnimal Behaviour Science 62:73-88Friend TH and Parker ML1999 The effect of penning versuspicketing on stereotypic behavior of circus elephants.AppliedAnimal Behaviour Science 64:213-225Galhardo L2005Animals in circuses: legislation and controls in theEuropean Union.Eurogroup for Wildlife and Laboratory Animals,unpublished reportGarner JP and Mason GJ2002 Evidence for a relationshipbetween cage stereotypies and behavioural disinhibition in labora-tory rodents.Behavioural Brain Research 136:83-92Goldhorn W and Kraft H1985 Die tiergerechte Haltung vonZirkustieren.Tieraerztliche Umschau 40:809-814. [Title transla-tion: The proper care of circus animals]Goodwin D1999 The importance of ethology in understandingthe behaviour of the horse.Equine Veterinary Journal Supplement28:15-19Gore M, Hutchins M and Ray J2006 A review of injuriescaused by elephants in captivity: an examination of the predomi-nant factors.International Zoo Yearbook 40:51-62Grandin T1997 Assessment of stress during handling and trans-port.Journal of Animal Science 75:249-257Greenwood AG1985 Diagnosis and treatment of botulism inlions.Veterinary Record 117:58-60Gruber TM, Friend TH, Gardner JM, Packard JM, BeaverB and Bushong D2000 Variation in stereotypic behavior relat-ed to restraint in circus elephants.Zoo Biology 19:209-211Gsandtner H, Pechlaner H and Schwammer HM1997Guidelines for the Keeping of Wild Animals in Circuses.Office ofthe Environmental Commissioner of the City of Vienna:Vienna, AustriaHartung J2003 Effects of transport on health of farm animals.Veterinary Research Communications 27 (S1):525-527Hediger H1955Studies of the Psychology and Behaviour of Animals inZoos and Circuses.Butterworths Scientific Publications: London, UKHemsworth PH and Barnett JL2000 Human-animal interac-tions and animal stress. In: Moberg GP and Mench JA (eds)TheBiology of Animal Stresspp 309-335. CABI Publishing: Oxon, UKHosey GR2000 Zoo animals and their human audiences: what isthe visitor effect?Animal Welfare 9:343-357Jegstrup IM, Vestergaard R, Vach W and Ritskes-Hoitinga M2005 Nest-building behaviour in male rats fromthree inbred strains: BN/HsdCpb, BDIX/Or1Ico and LEW/Mol.Animal Welfare 14:149-156Kiley-Worthington M1989aAnimals in Circuses.RSPCA:Horsham, UKKiley-Worthington M1989b The training of circus animals.Animal Training Symposium.26-27 September 1989, Cambridge.UFAW: Wheathampstead, Herts, UKKiley-Worthington M1990Animals in Zoos and Circuses:Chiron’s World?Little Eco-Farms Publishing: Essex, UKKing NE and Mellen JD1994 The effects of early experienceon adult copulatory behavior in zoo-born chimpanzees (Pantroglodytes). Zoo Biology 13:51-59Knight J2001 Animal data jeopardized by life behind bars.Nature412:669Krawczel PD, Friend TH and Windom A2005 Stereotypicbehavior of circus tigers: effects of performance.Applied AnimalBehaviour Science 95:189-198Kuntze A1989 Work-related illness: Hernia perinealis, Bursitispraepatellaris and Tyloma olecrani in female circus elephants(Elephasmaximus). Erkrankungen der Zootiere 31:185-187Kurt F1995 The preservation of Asian elephants in human care:a comparison between the different keeping systems in South Asiaand Europe.Animal Research and Development 41:38-60Kurt F and Hartl GB1995 Asian elephants (Elephasmaximus)in captivity: a challenge for zoo biological research. In: GansloßerU, Hodges JK and Kaumanns W (eds)Research and CaptivePropagationpp 310-326. Finlander: Furth, Germany

A review of wild animals in travelling circuses 139Kurt F and Khyne U Mar1996 Neonate mortality in captive Asianelephant (Elephasmaximus). Zeitschrift für Säugetierkunde 61:155-164Langley RL and Hunter JL2001 Occupational fatalities due to ani-mal-related eventsWilderness and Environmental Medicine 12:168-174Laws N, Ganswindt A, Heistermann M, Harris MJ, HarrisS and Sherwin CM2007 A case study: fecal corticosteroid andbehavior as indicators of welfare during relocation of an Asian ele-phant.Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 10:349-358Lee A1991Management Guidelines for the Welfare of Zoo Animals− Giraffe.The Federation of Zoological Gardens of Great Britainand Ireland: London, UKLeuthold W1977 Spatial organization and strategy of habitatutilization of elephants in Tsavo National Park, Kenia.Zeitschriftfür Säugetierkunde 42:358-379Lindau K-H1970 Lameness in circus elephants: a result of train-ing?Erkrankungen der Zootiere 12:129-131Lindburg DG and Fitch-Snyder H1994 Use of behavior toevaluate reproductive problems in captive mammals.Zoo Biology13:433-445López-Olvera JR, Marco I, Montané J and Lavín S2006Transport stress in southern chamois (Rupicaprapyrenaica)and itsmodulation by acepromazine.Veterinary Journal 172:347-355Mallapur A and Chellam R2002 Environmental influences onstereotypy and the activity budget of Indian leopards (Pantherapardus)in four zoos of southern India.Zoo Biology 21:585-595Mallapur A and Choudhury BC2003 Behavioral abnormali-ties in captive nonhuman primates.Journal of Applied AnimalWelfare Science 6:275-284Marriner LM and Drickamer LC1994 Factors influenc-ing stereotyped behavior of primates in a zoo.Zoo Biology13:267-275Martínez J, Segura P, García D, Aduriz G, Ibabe JC, PerisB and Corpa JM2006 Septicaemia secondary to infection byCorynebacterium macginleyiin an Indian python (Pythonmolurus).Veterinary Journal 172:382-385Mason GJ1991a Stereotypies: a critical review.Animal Behaviour41:1015-1037Mason GJ1991b Stereotypies and suffering.Behavioural Processes25:103-115Mason GJ, Cooper J and Clarebrough C2001 Frustrations offur-farmed mink.Nature 410:35-36Mason G and Rushen J2006Stereotypic Animal Behaviour:Fundamentals and Applications to Welfare, 2nd Edition.CABIPublishing: Oxon, UKMason G, Clubb R, Latham N and Vickery S2007 Why andhow should we use environmental enrichment to tackle stereo-typic behaviour?Applied Animal Behaviour Science 102:163-188Meehan CL, Garner JP and Mench JA2004 Environmentalenrichment and development of cage stereotypy in orange-wingedAmazon parrots (Amazonaamazonica). DevelopmentalPsychobiology 44:209-218Mellen JD1991 Factors influencing reproductive success in smallcaptive exotic felids (Felis spp): a multiple-regression analysis.ZooBiology 10:95-110Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry2005Animal Welfare(Circuses) Code of Welfare 2005.www.biosecurity.govt.nz/animal-welfare/codesMoberg GP2000 Biological response to stress: implications foranimal welfare. In: Moberg GP and Mench JA (eds)The Biology ofAnimal Stresspp 1-21. CABI Publishing: Oxon, UKMontaudouin S and Le Pape G2005 Comparison between 28zoological parks: stereotypic and social behaviours of captive brownbears (Ursusarctos). Applied Animal Behaviour Science 92:129-141Montes I, McLaren GW, Macdonald DW and Mian R2004The effect of transport stress on neutrophil activation in wildbadgers (Melesmeles). Animal Welfare 13:355-359Morgan KN and Tromborg CT2007 Sources of stress in cap-tivity.Applied Animal Behaviour Science 102:262-302Müller P2004 30 Jahre Internationales Tigerzuchtbuch in Leipzig.Zoologische Garten 74:65-76. [Title translation: Thirty yearsInternational Tiger Studbook in Leipzig]Nevill CH and Friend TH2003 The behavior of circus tigersduring transport.Applied Animal Behaviour Science 82:329-337Nevill CH and Friend TH2006 A preliminary study onthe effects of limited access to an exercise pen on stereotyp-ic pacing in circus tigers.Applied Animal Behaviour Science101:355-361Nevill CH, Friend TH and Toscano MJ2004 Survey of trans-port environments of circus tigers (Pantheratigris). Journal of Zooand Wildlife Medicine 35:164-174Nyhus PJ, Tilson RL and Tomlinson JL2003 Dangerous ani-mals in captivity:ex situtiger conflict and implications for privateownership of exotic animals.Zoo Biology 22:573-586Owen MA, Swaisgood RR, Czekala NM, Steinman K andLindburg DG2004 Monitoring stress in captive giant pandas(Ailuropodamelanoleuca):behavioral and hormonal responses toambient noise.Zoo Biology 23:147-164Price EO1984 Behavioral aspects of animal domestication.Quarterly Review of Biology 59:1-32Price EO1999 Behavioral development in animals undergoingdomestication.Applied Animal Behaviour Science 65:245-271Price EE and Stoinski TS2007 Group size: determinants inthe wild and implications for the captive housing of wild mammalsin zoos.Applied Animal Behaviour Science 103:255-264Pullin AS and Stewart GB2006 Guidelines for systematicreview in conservation and environmental management.Conservation Biology 20:1647-1656Radford M2007Wild Animals in Travelling Circuses: the Report oftheChairmanoftheCircusWorkingGroup.http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/welfare/pdf/circus-report.pdf(Accessed on 12 March 2008)Rees PA2003 Asian elephants in zoos face global extinction:should zoos accept the inevitable?Oryx 37:20-22Reitschel W2002 Haltung von Elefanten im Zoo und Zirkus.Deutsche Tieräztliche Wochenschrift 109:123-126. [Title transla-tion: Keeping of elephants in zoo and circus]Sambrook TD and Buchanan-Smith HM1997 Control andcomplexity in novel object enrichment.Animal Welfare 6:207-216Schaller VK1983 A case of rhododendron poisoning in circuselephants.Kleintier-Praxis 28:53-56Schmid J1995 Keeping circus elephants temporarily in pad-docks: the effects on their behaviourAnimal Welfare 4:87-101Schmid J1998 Status and reproductive capacity of the Asianelephant in zoos and circuses in Europe.International Zoo News45/6:341-351Schmidt M1986 Elephants (Proboscidea). In: Fowler ME (ed)Zoo and Wild Animal Medicinepp 883-923. WB SaundersCompany: Philadelphia, PA, USASchmid R, Doherr MG and Steiger A2006 The influence ofthe breeding method on the behaviour of adult African grey parrots(Psittacuserithacus). Applied Animal Behaviour Science 98:293-307Schrøder-Petersen DL and Simonsen HB2001 Tail biting inpigs.Veterinary Journal 162:196-210Schulze W1986 Zur Haltung von Elefanten im Zirkus mitBeruecksichtigung ihrer Minimalbeduerfnisse.Praktische Tierarzt67:809-811. [Title translation: On the keeping of elephants in acircus with regard to their minimal requirements]Schuppli CA and Fraser D2000 A framework for assessingthe suitability of different species as companion animals.AnimalWelfare 9:359-372

140 Iossaet alSiemoneit-Barum G1995 Zur Praxis von Dressur undTierhaltung im Zirkus.Deutsche Tieräztliche Wochenschrift 95:77-79. [Title translation: The practice of training and animal hus-bandry in the circus]Stoskopf MK1983 The physiological effects of psychologicalstress.Zoo Biology 2:179-190Sukumar R1992The Asian Elephant: Ecology and Management.Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UKSukumar R2003The Living Elephants – Evolutionary Ecology, Behavior,and Conservation.Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USATaylor VJ and Poole TB1998 Captive breeding and infant mor-tality in Asian elephants: a comparison between twenty westernzoos and three eastern elephant centers.Zoo Biology 17:311-332Terio KA, Marker L and Munson L2004 Evidence for chron-ic stress in captive but not free-ranging cheetahs (Acinonyxjubatus)based on adrenal morphology and function.Journal of WildlifeDiseases 40:259-266Thompson VD1989 Behavioral response of 12 ungulate speciesin captivity to the presence of humans.Zoo Biology 8:275-297Toscano MJ, Friend TH and Nevill CH2001 Environmentalconditions and body temperature of circus elephants transportedduring relatively high and low temperature conditions.Journal ofElephant Managers Association 12:115-149Trunkfield HR and Broom DM1990 The welfare of calves duringhandling and transport.Applied Animal Behaviour Science 28:135-152Vaarst M, Hindhede J and Enevoldsen C1998 Sole disordersin conventionally managed and organic dairy herds using differenthousing systems.Journal of Dairy Research 6:175-186Waran NK and Cuddeford D1995 Effects of loading andtransport on the heart rate and behaviour of horses.AppliedAnimal Behaviour Science 43:71-81Waran N, Leadon D and Friend T2002 The effects of trans-portation on the welfare of horses. In: Waran N (ed)The Welfareof Horsespp 125-150. Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht,The NetherlandsWAZA2006Understanding Animals and Protecting them – Aboutthe World Zoo and Aquarium Conservation Strategy.WorldAssociation of Zoos and Aquariums: Bern, SwitzerlandWeller SH and Bennett CL2001 Twenty-four hour activitybudget and patterns of behavior in captive ocelots (Leoparduspardalis). Applied Animal Behaviour Science 71:67-79West G2001 Occurrence and treatment of nail/foot abscessesnail cracks, and sole abscesses in captive elephants. In: Csuti B,Sargent EL and Bechert US (eds)The Elephant’s Footpp 93-97.Iowa State University Press: Ames, Iowa, USAWielebnowski NC, Fletchall N, Carlstead K, Busso JMand Brown JL2002 Noninvasive assessment of adrenal activityassociated with husbandry and behavioral factors in the NorthAmerican clouded leopard population.Zoo Biology 21:77-98Wiesner H1986 Probleme bei der Haltung von Zirkustieren.Tieraerztliche Umschau 41:753-755. [Title translation: Problems ofcircus animals]Williams JL and Friend TH2003 Behavior of circus elephantsduring transport.Journal of Elephant Managers Association 14:8-11Würbel H2001 Ideal homes? Housing effects on rodent brainand behaviour.Trends Neuroscience 24:207-211Young RJ2003Environmental Enrichment for Captive Animals.UFAW Animal Welfare Series, Blackwell Science Ltd: Oxon, UKZimmermann A, Hatchwell M, Dickie L and West C2007Zoos in the 21st Century. Catalysts for Conservation?CambridgeUniversity Press: Cambridge, UK