We have observed earlier that farmed blue foxes (Alopex lagopus) and silver foxes (Vulpes vulpes) tend to avoid resting at those sites in their cages from which the view to the surroundings is obstmeted. In the present study this hypothesis wastested in a preference test in Which the foxes could choose between a cage with an unobstructed view and a cage with a partially obstructed view. Both blue foxes and silver foxes spent a smaller percentage of their daily active time in the cage with the obstructed view than in the cage with the unobstructed view. They almost exclusively preferred the cage with the unobstructed view as a resting site. Obstructed/unobstrueted View is a key feature of the cage environment that should be taken into consideration when designing housing systems for farmed foxes

Harri, M

Mononen, J

Rekilä, T

English

Journals from University of Tartu

Seand.J.1.nh Anim. SCI No. 1. [996. Vol. 23Farmed foxes prefer a cage with an unobstructed Viewby I Mmmnen, M. Harri & T. Rekild.University of Kuopio. Department of Applied Zoology and Veterinary MedicineP.O.Box 1627, FIN—70‘211 Kuopio, Finland.Correspondence: Mr Jaakko MononenUniversity of Kuopio, Department of Applied Zoology and Veterinary MedicineR0.Box 1627, FIN—70211 Kuopio, Finland.IntroductionTraditionally, farmed blue foxes (Alupex Zagopus)and silver foxes (Vulpes vulpex) have been housedin cages without any furnishing. Recently, thismethod of housing has been questioned (Commis-sion of the European Communities 1990). Euro-pean Convention (1991) recommends that foxcages shmfld be furnished to improve the welfareof farmed foxes. In response to this recommenda-tion, various furnishing solutions have been stud-ied (see a review by Bakken et al. 1994). In thesestudies, preference tests have been widely used.The cages have usually been fumished with nestboxes or resting platforms (or both) and the amountof time using these structures has been recorded toevaluate their importance for foxes and their wel-fare. However, it has been observed that the prefer—ences of foxes may be strongly affected by featuresof the structures and other environmental factorsthat seem unimportant to man (Mononen et a1.1995),European Convention (1991 ) states that if foxes areprovided with no furnishing other than a restingplatform, the platform should have solid walls.However, blue foxes Clearly prefer resting plat-forms without walls to ones with walls (Harri et al.19913 Mononen at al. 1993a). Silver foxes use rest-ing platforms with two walls more if the platformsare situated in the cage in a way that [here is anunobstructed view towards the entrance fromwhich humans enter most frequently (Monunen eral. 1993b). Furthermore, silver foxes seldom reston the cage floor if the cage is provided with a nestbox on the floor. If they rest on the floor theychoose a site from which the view of the surround-ings is least obstructed by the nest box in their owncage and the nest boxes in the neighbouring cages.They do not rest inside the nest box, but rather onthe roof of it from which the view to the surround-ings is least obstructed (menen et al. 1995)‘Thus, it seems that the obsmlcted/unobstructedview may be 21 key feature (Nicol 1994) that affectsfarmed foxes“ preferences (especially the choice ofthe resting site),In the present study, the effect of an obstructedview on fanned blue foxes” and silver foxes’ be-haviour was assessed in a preference test in whichthe animals had to make choices between cageswith and without the unobstructed view;Materials and MethodsThe experiments were carried out at the Fur Ani-mal Research Station of the University of Kuopioin Iuankoski in eastern Finland in March (bluefoxes) and May (silver foxes). The experimentalanimals were adult female blue foxes (N=4) andsilver foxes (N=4). Before the experiments theanimais had lived singly in an unheated animalbarn in standard wire mesh cages (115 cm x 105cm x 70 cm, WxLxH). The experiments were car-ried out in the same barn.On the first day of the experiment the foxes weretransported from their home cages t0 the experi—mental cages (one animal per cage) consisting ofa combination of two standard cages. The foxeswere able to go from one cage to the other throughan opening (20 cm x 20 cm) in the wire mesh wallbetween the cages. The opening was 50 cm fromthe cage floor and could be reached with the aid ofa wooden ladder (Figure 1)‘The experiment lasted for 12 days in blue foxes andfor 15 days in silver foxes. For the Days 1-6 of theexperiment, the cages had wire-mesh walls, i.e.transparent walls. During the seventh and eighthday hardboard walls, i.e. opaque walls, weremounted on three wire mesh wails of the left43Seand. J. Lab. AninL SCI. No. 1, 1996. Vol. 23Nontransparent wall   L ddView3 er from aboveWater trayEF1L de' FrontviewNontransparem wall Wm" trayFigure l. A schematic drawing of the experimenttal cage design during the days 7—8 of the experi—ment i.e. when the opaque (nontransparant) wallswere in the left cage. The cage itself was made ofwire—mesh and thus it was transparent.cage. The wall between the cages was without ahardboard wall. As the hardboard walls were only45 cm high the foxes could see over the wallswhile standing. walking or sitting but not whilelying (Figure l). During the ninth and tenth daythe hardboard walls were transferred to the rightcage in a similar way. From Day 11 both cageshad transparent walls. The experimental cageswere in one cage row and both adjacent cageswere unfurnished standard fox cages with non-experimental animals of the same species.The daily fresh feed porti on was delivered once aday (in the morning) on the roof of the left cage onDays 1-8 and on the roof of the right cage fromDay 9. Water was served twice a day (in the morn—ing and afternoon) to a water tray in both cages.The artificial lighting in the barn was turned on atsunrise and off at sunset. During dark hours a dimred light was used (one 60 W red bulb per eachdouble cage) to enable video-reeording.The behaviour of the blue foxes and silver foxeswas video-recorded for the whole experimentalperiods. The video system has been described indetail in Mononen et al. (1996). The data from four48—hour periods were used for general presentationof the foxes’ behaviour. The periods were:Days 3—4. both cages with transparent walls;Days 7-8, the opaque walls in the left cage;Days 9—10, the opaque walls in the right cage;Days 11712. both cages with transparent walls.44These periods were chosen to use equally long pe-riods that represented days during which there wasa similar amount of human activity on the farm.Data from the other days is included in the presen—tation of inter— and intraindividua] vari ation.The behaviour of the animals was analysed fromthe video tapes using instantaneous samplingmethod with 5 min sampling interval (Martin &Baleson 1986). Four behavioural categories wereused: active/resting in left/right cage. Rest in—cluded lying still (awake 0r asleep) and activityincluded all other behaviours.If the opaque walls do not affect the behaviour ofthe foxes, the animals should allocate both theiractive and resting time evenly between bothcages. Thus, the percentage of time engaged ineach behaviour (active/resting) in each of the twocages was compared to the expected 50 % bypaired t-test. Friedman two-way analysis of vari—ance was used for analysing the differences in thebehaviour between the four 48—hour periods.Mann—Whitney U-test was used for analysing thebehavioural differences between the two fox spe—cies (Makinen 1978)ResultsWhen the cages had transparent walls, both silverfoxes and blue foxes allocated their active timeequally between the two cage sections. Providingone cage with the opaque walls decreased activebehaviours in that cage (Figure 2). Note that thefoxes were always fed in the cage with the opaquewalls, and, thus. they were forced to go there ifthey wanted to eat, During Days 11—12 (both ea;Les with transparent walls) the animals spent lesstime in active behaviours than during the otherthree periods (Figure 3). The silver foxes spentmore time on active behaviours than the blue fox?es during the periods with the opaque walls in oneor the other of the cages (Figure 3). This was theonly statistically significant difference in behav-iour between the species (Figure 2 and Figure 3).Both fox species avoided using the cage with theopaque walls as a resting site (Figure 2).The onlyexception was one blue fox, which spent 62 % ofits total resting time in the left. cage even in theSituation when the left cage had the opaque walls.However, the opaque walls also influenced itsbehaviour, because during the periods with the%oftotalactive/restingtimeinleftcage      No wallsDays (3-4)Scand. J. Lab. Amm. SCI. No. 1. 1996. Vol. 231:] Blue fox: rest ua Blue fox: activeI Silver fox:ratI Silver fox:activeuu ,l *u3I:lit    Walls in left cageDays (7-8)Walls in right cageDays (9-10)No wallsDays (11-12)Figure 2. Percentages of the total active and resting time spent in the left cage (mean:SD) by blue foxes(N=4) and silver foxes (N=4). Each column includes data from a 48-hour period. Difference from 50 %:*P<0.05, **P<0.01 (paired t—test). Differences between species are not significant: P>().05 (Mann-Whit—ney U-test) for all eight comparisons. Walls=opaque walls.Active(%of48hours)     P=0.08 D Blue fox50 - P<0-05 I Silver foxNS40 - NS3°‘ :E.920 1 §581D ' 2O ‘ W “5 ' W lls ' ' 'No walls a “' . a “1 No walls No walls_ left cage right cage _ _(days 3 4) (days 7-8) (days 9_10) (days 11 12) (days 14 15)Figure 3. Percentage of active time of 48-hours (meaniSD) in blue foxes (N=4) and silver foxes (N=4).Differences between species (Maanhitney U-test) are indicated above each pair of columns. There aredifferences in the activity between the 48-h periods within each species: P=0.050 for blue foxes andP<0.05 for silver foxes (Friedman two-way analysis of variance). Wa11s=opaque walls.Scand, J. Lab. Anim. SCI. No. 1. 1996, Vol. 23transparent walls in both cages, it preferred theleft cage exclusively as a resting site.During Days 3-4 (transparent walls in both cages)both cages were used equally for resting but dur-ing Days 11-12 (i.e. following the period when theopaque walls were in the right cage) the foxesrested almost exclusively in the left cage althoughboth cages then had transparent walls (Figure 2).There were both inter~ and intraindividual varia-tion in the use of the two cages for resting whenboth cages lacked the opaque walls. However,during the periods with the opaque walls in one orthe other of the cages these variations were considerably reduced (an example in Figure 4).DiscussionThe opaque walls clearly affected silver foxes’and blue t‘oxes‘ behaviour. The foxes rested al—most exclusively in the cage with the unob-structed view. During active behaviours they alsoused the cage with the opaque walls less than thecage with the transparent walls. These findingsNo walls5 51A 82100- I 83E S4 - f %ofdailyrestintheleftcage        §Walls in l Walls in. left cage Iright cage support earlier observations that foxes preferthose cage parts from which the view is least ob-strueted. They use resting platforms placed highup in the cage more if the platforms lack walls(Harri et al. 1991, Manonen et al, 19933) or if theopen view from a platform with two walls is to-wards human activities (Mononen er al. 1993b).The obstructed View at the cage floor level maymake si1ver foxes seek a resting site with an unob—structed view (Monanen et a1. 1995). Farmedfoxes also generally prefer higher sites to lowersites independently of the material and dimen-sions of these sites (Korhonen & Niemclii 1994a,b, Mononen er al. 1996). Usually, the highestplace in the cage environment also means theplace with the least obstructed View.The foxes rested less frequently in cages that pre—viously (Days 9—10) contained opaque walls, de-spite the fact that these were removed duringDays 11—12. This might be caused by prolongedaversion towards the cage which previously hadsolid walls (the right cage). However, it may alsoNo walls       75IIIIIIIfl5a5 .IIIgggI\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\k\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\‘r\\\'\'\\\\\\\'\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\.\\.\.\.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\.\.\\\\\\\‘\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\V7ggI"5IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII44,. 8 9101112131415DayFigure 4. Percentage of total daily rest spent in the left cage by the four individual silver foxes (Sl , 52,SS and S4). Walls = Opaques walls.46be due to the fact that the foxes’ preferences forcages seem not to change very quickly once estab—lished, unless there is a major structural change(e.g. the opaque walls). The silver foxes recom-meneed using the right cage on Days 13-15 (Fig—ure 4).Removal of the opaque walls decreased the foxes’activity (Days 11-12) below that recorded whenwalls were present (Days 7-10) for both species(Figure 3). The silver foxes tended also to be moreactive in the situation with the walls (days 7710)than before the wall periods (Days 3-4, Figure 3).These findings may indicate a novelty effect: thenew and changed environment needed to be ex—plored more, and after having been more activefor some days the foxes needed more rest.Traditionally farmed foxes are housed in opensided shed houses in unfurnished Wire—meshcages that are lifted 60—100 cm above the groundlevel (Commission ofthe European Communities1990). In these systems the view from the cage islargely unobstructed to any direction. Unfortu—nately, several suggestions to provide the ani—nials with environmental enrichment includestructures that obstruct the animals View of sur-roundings (e.g Mononen et a1. 1995). Foxes’preference for the unobstructed view may cutweigh the possible enrichment value of theadded furniture. On the other hand, the lack of ahiding place has been claimed to be one majordeficiency in barren fox cages (Commission ofthe European Communities 1990, EuropeanConvention 1991, Bakken at al. 1994). Thepresent results indicate that partial visual isola-tion does not necessarily satisfy the foxes” possi-ble need of a hiding place.It has been suggested that visual and spatial isola—tion of silver fox Vixens during the breeding sea-son should be provided to reduce social competi—tion between the Vixens in neighbouring cages. Inone study, the isolation has been shown to im-prove the reproductive performance of the subor-dinate Vixens (Bakken 1993). However, Jeppesen& Pedersen (1988) report that visual isolation bycardboard partitions between the cages in the cagerows did not have any positive effects on the re-production of silver fox Vixens. The present re,sults indicate that visual isolation by means ofsolid walls may even be a threat to foxes’ welfare.Scand. J. Lab. Anim. SCI. Not 1. 1996. Vol. 23In the present study the preference of the farmedblue and silver foxes for the cage with unob—structed View was almost exclusive and the unob—structed view may be of importance to foxcs‘welfare. The obstructed/unobstructed view is akey feature of the environment that should betaken into consideration when designing housingsystems for farmed foxes and when interpretingresults from preference studies and other studiesdealing with foxes’ welfare.AcknowledgementsWe thank Mr Matti Tengvall for taking care of theanimals and for technical assistance. Thanks arealso due to Mr Juhani Sepponen and Mr AskoV'ahiirautio for analysing the Video tapes. We alsothank Dr Chris Sherwin for helping us with theEnglish. The study was financed by the ResearchCouncil for Agriculture and Forestry (Academy ofFinland) and Finnish Fur Breeders Association.SummaryWe have observed earlier that farmed blue foxes(Alopex lagopus) and silver foxes (Vulpes vulpes)tend to avoid resting at those sites in their cagesfrom which the view to the surroundings is ob»stmeted. In the present study this hypothesis wastested in a preference test in Which the foxes couldchoose between a cage with an unobstructed viewand a cage with a partially obstructed view. Bothblue foxes and silver foxes spent a smaller per-centage of their daily active time in the cage withthe obstructed view than in the cage with the un-obstructed view. They almost exclusively pre»ferred the cage with the unobstructed view as aresting site. Obstructed/unobstrueted View is akey feature of the cage environment that shouldbe taken into consideration when designing hous—ing systems for farmed foxes.ReferencesBakken M: The relationship between competitioncapacity and reproduction in farmed silver foxVixens. Vulpes vulpes. J. Anim. Breed. Genet.1993, 110, 147-155.Bakken M BO Braasmdt, M Harri, LL Jeppesen& V Pedersen: Production conditions, behav-iour and welfare of farm foxes. Scientifur1994. 18, 233-248.47Scand. J Lab. Anim SCI N0 1. 19961V01123Commission of the European Communities: Con-tract no. 3814/12, Study into legal, technicaland animal welfare aspects of fur farming. C& T Services. Sussex 1990, 111 pp.European Convention: European Convention forthe protection of animals kept for farming pur-poses, Strasbourg 1976, Hrs 87, Recommen—dation Concerning Fur Animals, 25 June,1991, 19 pp.Harri M, J Mnnonen, H Korhonen & K Haap-anen: A study of the use of resting platformsby farmbred blue foxes. Appl. Anim. Behav.Sci. 1991, 30, 1257139.Jeppesen LL & V Pedersen: Effect of visual isola—tion during pregnancy and lactation on repro—ductive success in silver fox Vixens. Scientifur.1988, 12, 257-259.Korhonen H & P Niemeld: Use of various plat—forms and nest box by farmed blue and silverfoxes. Nordiske Jordbrugsforskeres Forening,Seminar nr. 253, 28th-30th September, 1994,Skiirping, Denmark,Korhonen H & P Niemelii: Preferences of silverand blue foxes for farm cage and pen. Nerd—iske Jordbrugsforskercs Forening, Seminar nr.253, 28th730th September, 1994, Skérping,Denmark.Martin P & P Bateson: Measuring behaviour, Anintroductory guide. Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge 1986, 200 pp.Monomer: J, M Harri. & T Rekilt‘i: Young bluefoxes {Alopex lagopus) prefer resting plat—forms with an unobstructed view. In:Niehelman M, HK Wierenga & S Braun (Eds)Proceedings 01 International Congress on Apeplied Ethology, 26th-30th July 1993, Berlin.Humboldt Universitat, Berlin, pp, 532-534.Mononen J, M Harri, K Rouvinen & P Niemeld:The use of resting platfmms by young silverfoxes (Vulpes vulpes).App1.Anim Behav. Sci.1993, 38, 301-310.Mananen J , M Harri, T Rekilt’i, H Knrhonen & PNiemela': Use of nestboxes by young farmedsilver foxes (Vulpes vulpes) in autumn. Appl.Anim. Behav. Scii 1995, 43, 213-221.Monunen J, M Harri. & TRekild: Comparison ofpreferences of [armed silver and blue foxes forcages With and without a nest box. Acta Agric.Scand. 1996, in printMiikinen Y: Tilastotiedett'a biologeille. Tilastotiet-een ja tietojenkéisittclyn alkeet. Synapsi r.y.,Turku 1978, 306 pp.Nicol CJ: Behaviour and welfare. In: Livestockhousing. CM Wathes & DR Charles (Eds). CABInternational, Cambridge, 1994, pp. 69-93. La Gomera (Kanariske eer) er vundet af: SCANBURS JULEKONKURRENCE: I uges ophold i Scanburs sommerhus p51SCANBUR 'S CHRISTMAS COMPETITION; 1 week’s holiday in Scanbur’ssummer house on La Gomera (Canary Islands) was won by:Prof. Ulf Rapp, Uni. Wiirzburg - Tyskland/Germany.  48

Farmed foxes prefer a cage with an unobstructed View

https://ojs.utlib.ee/index.php/SJLAS/article/download/21822/16550

Farmed foxes prefer a cage with an unobstructed View

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Journals from University of Tartu