A COMPARISON OF POSITIVE WELFARE INDICATORS BETWEEN WILD AND CAPTIVE GIRAFFES

Abstract

To prevent the giraffe species from declining from the vulnerable state to endangered on the IUCN Red List (International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species), it is important to gain knowledge about their current state of welfare. The behaviour of animals gives information about their wellbeing and when this is understood well, it is a first step towards a better animal welfare, enhancing conservation efforts or population growth of the species. The goal of this study is to get the necessary information for better understanding of giraffe behaviour and serve to improve the welfare of giraffes on two locations. The main question that had been used to reach this goal is: For wild giraffes that live in fission-fusion dynamics at Mogalakwena River Reserve (MRR), how does the percentage of time spent on behaviours that suggest a positive state compare to that of male giraffes kept in bachelor groups at Safaripark Beekse Bergen (SBB)? To answer this question, behavioural data of giraffes at MRR were collected for ten weeks and at SBB for two years. A focal observing method of 15 minutes has been used with interval time of 30 seconds. After that, the gained data of both locations were compared by a Wilcoxon rank sum test in Rstudio . The analysis of the findings resulted in more stereotypical behaviour and more social proximity at SBB, a higher rumratio (which shows the ratio between time spend on ruminating and feeding and can suggest a higher welfare when it is higher) for giraffes at SBB, and no significant differences between the wild and captive giraffes in the observing-ruminating ratio as well as the cumulative positive welfare behaviours (feeding, exploring, allogrooming and lying). It is not easy to conclude at which location the animals experience a better welfare, since different welfare indicators aim on better welfare at different locations and most of the indicators should be interpreted carefully due to the difference between captive and wild giraffes, possibly negative causes of a positive welfare indicator and the way of keeping the animals. In general, it can be concluded that no clear difference in welfare for the animals at both locations is found. To better understand these results, more data collection is advised. Ideally, the same giraffes should be placed in conditions of both locations, with the different circumstances, like climate and vegetation type, to make the best comparison between captive and wild giraffes. In addition to this, more research on giraffe behaviour in the future is recommended and the so-called behavioural pitfalls that are described, which make the interpretation of behaviour harder, should be taken into account during the observation period.