International Giant Otter Studbook Husbandry and Management

Following are excerpts from an unpublished long-term study and some examples on which these
conclusions are partly based. Reports and observations of giant otters held in numerous
institutions world-wide and historically were gathered and analyzed for comparison (Sykes-Gatz
& Gatz, unpublished study 1996-2004). The information was gathered from publications,
unpublished reports, survey results (Sykes 1997-99 and follow-up surveys), pers.
communications, and pers. observations. The activities that giant otters carried out on a daily
basis and their corresponding mental/behavioral health and enclosure conditions were used to
make comparisons and draw conclusions. The following additional factors were also
considered: group social structure, husbandry and management practices, particular/non-typical
life events, natural environmental conditions (i.e. weather conditions: at least general estimates
and sometimes more specific estimates were able to be made), and how much exposure the otters
had in their past to inappropriate and/or appropriate enclosure conditions and physical health (in
some cases full histories were not known about the last two factors). The land activities
considered included playing with each other, playing with objects (overhanging/standing
bamboo, toys etc.), investigating, moving about the land area to exercise (e.g. walking, running,
etc.), eating, elimination, territorial marking, deep and shallow digging, and grooming (which
includes rubbing, rolling, scratching and digging on/into the surface of substrates and this can
also include drying). Aquatic activities, i.e. swimming, diving, wading, playing, exercising,
investigating, eating, and chasing fish or other otters, and sleeping/resting (which was not
considered an “activity”) were also considered. Grooming, digging, playing, and exercising on
land, the extent of land use vs. water use, and general aquatic activities were primarily focused
on to make general categorical comparisons. The type and a general approximation of the
frequency, duration and intensity of each category of daily behavior/activity and the
location of where the otter performed each activity/behavior within the enclosure were
evaluated. Usually this information was gathered by casual daily visual observations over
varying time periods (i.e. from many years to days). Qualifications were only specified by use
of the terms, “high, moderate, low or minimal, none, long, and short” or/and by percentages.
The mental and behavioral health status/abnormalities were qualified by the terms “healthy,
normal, not healthy or normal, abnormal, unhealthy, or mildly, moderately, or severely
unhealthy, or fully, partially, or significantly recovered/rehabilitated to a healthy state, or
abnormally elevated or excessive levels of negative responses.” Abilities to successfully rear
cubs and adjust to new/unusual situations were qualified as “successful, adversely affected, or
seriously compromised”. The evaluation of the quality of enclosure conditions offered was
based on the extent that the recommended land to water ratios, substrate furnishings, and deep
digging areas were satisfied.
The conclusions revealed that when indoor or/and outdoor enclosure land to water ratios offered
smaller land proportions than recommended or/and land/floor surfaces were not covered with
soft natural loose substrates or sufficient size deep digging areas as recommended, that the otters
housed in these conditions carried out their terrestrial behaviors in an abnormal and unhealthy
way. They did not therefore exhibit normal and healthy behavior. Other behavioral/mental
health problems, from mild to severe, were also obviously evident (reported/observed) in a
significant number of cases. Of the aforementioned unhealthy individuals that encountered
new/unusual situations or reared cubs and whose behaviors, mental/behavioral health, and
enclosure conditions were observed or reported during those situations, these animals exhibited
abnormally elevated or excessive levels of negative responses during those situations. Their
ability to successfully rear cubs and/or adjust to new/unusual situations was therefore seriously
compromised or adversely affected. These animals were housed in enclosure conditions that
were not appropriate (i.e. as described above) during these atypical circumstances. The more
120