Monday, June 18, 2007

Chimpanzee Enculturation

Whatever one's ethical/political position about using chimpanzees in cognitive studies, it is undeniable that the former OSU chimpanzees have shed light onto the chimpanzee mind. The recent publication “Raking it in: the impact of enculturation on chimpanzee tool use” shows how living in a highly enriching, socially stimulating environment can enhance the mental capabilities of our closest living relatives.

The paper (which appeared in Animal Cognition and was based on data collected before it was submitted in June 2005) establishes that the “enculturated” OSU chimpanzees outperform both sanctuary raised chimps and typical lab chimps on a tool-use task, while the sanctuary-raised chimps only outperform the lab chimps.

This research supports the view that the former OSU individuals are quite different from other chimpanzees, a view that is shared by most people familiar with the range of chimpanzee behaviors and personalities and who have the pleasure of meeting Darrell, Sarah, Sheba, Keeli, Ivy, Harper and Emma.

While housed at OSU, the chimps were immersed in human culture and encouraged to actively engage with their captive environment. Their caregivers treated them as intentional beings. The chimps lived in mini fission-fusion groups to promote social interactions, received enrichment as often as three times a day, and had a diet full of fruits and vegetables. Their needs were carefully monitored and attended to, and they were given the respect that they deserve as unique thinking and feeling individuals.

The quality of life the chimps had at OSU was on an altogether different order than that of a typical lab chimp and far superior to the care given to chimps at “pseudo sanctuaries” such as PPI, where ideologies, rather than chimpanzee needs and interests, set the standards of care.

PPI did not believe in enrichment, did not provide the chimps with fruits and vegetables and believed the animals should be left alone. Their failure to attend to the differences between chimpanzees -- differences that result from various experiences in assorted environments and can generate unique sensitivities -- is a form of negligence that ultimately led to Bobby’s death and the death of others.

Excellent captive chimpanzee care begins with understanding chimpanzees as individuals who have different personalities, different responses to their experiences and very different kinds of experiences. It requires an ability to see each chimp for who he or she is, not as some projection of an idea of what chimpanzees should be. Excellent care requires adopting a flexible approach to caring for these unique animals. It requires time, it requires patience, it requires openness to the expertise of others, and it requires a set of commitments that has yet to emerge from the new PPI.

Building a new enclosure does not constitute excellent, not even minimally appropriate, care for the OSU chimpanzees. Indeed, that the new PPI is threatening to sue to move them back to a place where they were traumatized for 8 months suggests that the current board at PPI, much like the old PPI, does not appreciate what caring for individual chimpanzees means.

Thankfully the former OSU chimps are safe and well cared for at Chimp Haven, a facility that understands chimpanzees and truly strives for excellence in chimpanzee care.

Happy Birthday Keeli (11) and Emma (7)


Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is amazing that the very people at Friends of Animals who are so opposed to treating animals like slaves are now treating them like prisoners -- both literally in cages that are inadequate, as well as prisoners of the FoA ideology.

Lee Hall, a spokesperson for FoA, said in a Satya article that: "Our actions and our dedication will speak louder than any words I can give you.”

And their first set of actions involve threatening to sue all the organizations that rescued and are caring for the animals that were neglected at PPI (without a cent from them) and to create a slick, expensive ad to try to raise money. Raising money would be fine if there was any reason to believe they would actually spend it helping the animals at PPI. But why should we think they would do that?

There are over 400 animals that are now imprisoned at PPI, the entire infrastructure needs to be overhauled, an enrichment plan needs to be put in place, experienced caregivers need to be hired, habitats without bars and concrete floors need to be constructed. These are important actions that will help animals. Lawsuits and advertising may be good strategies for political work and shaping people's views, but it doesn't immediately help animals in need of care. FoA is in a new business now and until they show some indication that they understand that, either in words or in deeds, there is little reason to believe that PPI will change.

Some actions do speak louder than words, and greed does too.

9:01 PM  
Anonymous Rodrigo said...

Oi, achei teu blog pelo google tá bem interessante gostei desse post. Quando der dá uma passada pelo meu blog, é sobre camisetas personalizadas, mostra passo a passo como criar uma camiseta personalizada bem maneira. Até mais.

7:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey there! I know this is kinda off topic
but I was wondering which blog platform are you using for this
site? I'm getting sick and tired of Wordpress because I've had issues with hackers and I'm looking at alternatives for another platform. I would be awesome if you could point me in the direction of a good platform.
Here is my page - most youtube views

4:06 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home