Staff perceptions of COVID-19 impacts on wildlife conservation at a zoological institution.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has impacted virtually all aspects of a global society. By using a transdisciplinary team and methodology, our study highlights the importance of utilizing a One Health approach to address global health and conservation challenges in tandem. We examined how conservation conducted by an accredited zoological institution was altered by the pandemic. In July 2020, we surveyed a select subset of Saint Louis Zoo employees to understand how these staff members perceived their conservation work to be affected during this time. Additionally, in November and December 2020, seven survey respondents were interviewed virtually for qualitative data. Our hypothesis was that lack of funding, reduced ability to travel, and shifting priorities among conservation professionals, as well as their respective institutions, would be significant barriers to conservation efforts. Our survey results revealed that the top three perceived challenges to conservation projects at the Saint Louis Zoo due to the COVID-19 pandemic were lack of funding (83.9%), reductions in Zoo visitors (56.3%), and inability/lack of ability to access field sites and laboratories (55.2%). Respondents also indicated that the top three most important Zoo conservation activities before the COVID-19 pandemic were (1) local/national/global wildlife management and recovery programs, (tie 2) caring for animals in the Zoo's collection, and (tie 2) genetic breeding programs. At least half of respondents indicated that the pandemic had significantly or slightly decreased the ability of staff to perform all three activities. Results supported our hypothesis that reduced funding, limited travel, and shifting priorities were challenges to zoological conservation at this institution. Although travel restrictions will likely persist, continual funding will be critical for maintaining conservation. Our results also indicate that reductions in Zoo visitors were another perceived barrier to conservation and that staff needed to find novel ways to connect with the public. Results from this study may help zoos and aquariums better understand the unique pandemic-associated challenges that threaten conservation at their institutions and may be helpful in designing programs and projects in a post-pandemic world.

Changes in human health parameters associated with an immersive exhibit experience at a zoological institution.

Zoological institutions often use immersive, naturalistic exhibits to create an inclusive atmosphere that is inviting for visitors while providing for the welfare of animals in their collections. In this study, we investigated physiological changes in salivary cortisol and blood pressure, as well as psychological changes among visitors before and after a walk through the River's Edge, an immersive, naturalistic exhibit at the Saint Louis Zoo. Study participants had a significant reduction in salivary cortisol and blood pressure after walking through the exhibit. Psychological assessments of mood found that most visitors felt happier, more energized, and less tense after the visit. Additionally, participants who spent more time in River's Edge, had visited River's Edge prior to the study, and had seen more exhibits at the Zoo prior to entering River's Edge experienced greater psychological and/or physiological benefits. We conclude that immersive, naturalistic exhibits in zoos can elicit positive changes in physiological and psychological measures of health and well-being and argue for a greater scientific focus on the role of zoos and other green spaces in human health.

Member Perceptions of the One Health Initiative at a Zoological Institution.

Zoological institutions play an important role in promoting the goals of the One Health movement. We launched the Institute for Conservation Medicine (ICM) at the Saint Louis Zoo in 2011 to advance the goals of One Health. In 2016, we distributed a survey to Zoo members to evaluate member awareness and understanding of One Health and to provide direction for future communication and actions from the ICM. We hypothesized that Zoo members would be aware of One Health and care about infectious disease issues. Survey results showed Zoo members primarily cared about chronic, non-infectious diseases and their associated economic costs, with participants ranking their top three health issues of concern for humans as nutrition/obesity/diet (49%), costs of health care (48%), and cancer (37%). Zoo members were interested in the roles of zoos in One Health and found them important, but were less aware of the Saint Louis Zoo's actions that did not directly relate to animal welfare. Only 6% of members had awareness of the term "One Health" and 16% were aware of the term "Conservation Medicine." These results suggest that zoos may do better to tailor One Health messaging to align with member interests. Messaging and programming from the Saint Louis Zoo will now include the direct benefits to human health that zoos offer, in addition to the ICM's more ecologically focused activities. This study offered valuable insight into how Zoo members view One Health and may serve as a template to help zoological institutions develop and promote One Health.

Changes in human health parameters associated with a touch tank experience at a zoological institution.

Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) institutions provide a variety of benefits to visitors. However, one area that has received little study is the direct human health benefits from zoo and aquarium visits. With the increase in stress related non-infectious diseases in industrialized countries, understanding the extent of these benefits is important. We studied the effects on visitor stress of an experience at a touch tank exhibit featuring stingrays, sharks, and horseshoe crabs. Stress was measured by physiological and psychological parameters. Heart rate was recorded before, during, and after interacting with the animals, and mood was assessed before and after the experience using a psychological instrument. Multilevel models of heart rate show a quadratic trend, with heart rate elevated (b = -3.01, t = 26.4, P < 0.001) and less variable (b = 3.60, t = 15.9, P < 0.001) while touching the animals compared to before or after. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests on mood data suggest that most visitors felt happier (V = 174.5, P < 0.001), more energized (V = 743.5, P < 0.001), and less tense (V = 5618, P < 0.001) after the experience. This suggests that interacting with animals led to a physiological response during interactions reminiscent of a theme park experience along with a decrease in mental stress. The effects of confounding variables such as crowd size are also discussed. Further studies should be conducted to help deepen our understanding of the health benefits of experiences at AZA institutions.