An Animal’s Side of the Fence: What Makes a Good Zoo Habitat?

Creating animal-friendly zoo habitats requires understanding their needs for choice, control, and privacy, while ensuring visitor experiences also promote welfare.

A habitat is more than a view. For the animal living there, it is home, workplace, refuge and the setting for every ordinary day.

A visitor may spend a few minutes at an enclosure. The animal experiences it hour after hour, day after day. That difference matters.

We often talk about habitats in terms of what people can see: the planting, the rockwork, the size of the viewing window, or whether an animal is active when visitors arrive. Those details shape the visitor experience, but they don’t tell the whole story of how a habitat works for its residents.

A useful question is not only, “What does this habitat look like?” It is also, “What choices does it give the animal?”

Research on visitor effects offers a useful caution: visitor presence has been associated with negative, neutral and positive responses, varying with the species, the individual animal, the nature of the interaction and the enclosure. There is no sound basis for assuming that every animal experiences visitors in the same way. Sherwen and Hemsworth, 2019

A good view is not the same as a good habitat

A naturalistic setting can be beautiful and still fall short if it offers few opportunities for the animal to make choices, move away, rest undisturbed or engage in meaningful activity. The reverse is also true: a habitat does not have to look like a postcard to support good care. Appearance alone is a poor welfare measure.

Design matters because it can support the animal’s daily life. Space, shelter, temperature, lighting, substrate, feeding arrangements, social access and the ability to move between areas can all influence how an animal uses its environment. The right details depend on the species and the individual animals, so there is no single design feature that proves a habitat is successful.

The stronger test is how the animal can use the space over time.

Choice and control are practical welfare questions

Choice does not mean an animal can do anything it wants, or that every preference can be met at every moment. It means the environment offers appropriate options: places to rest, explore, feed, hide, observe, interact or disengage, where those options suit the species and the animal’s circumstances.

Can the animal move away from a noisy or busy area? Is there somewhere to rest without being constantly on view? Can it choose between different conditions, such as sun and shade or more exposed and more sheltered spaces? Are there opportunities to forage, investigate, climb, swim, perch or otherwise use its abilities?

These questions are not a checklist to apply identically to every species. They are prompts for looking closely at whether the habitat supports the animal’s needs and whether its design works in practice.

This focus on individual choice is reflected in the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums’ approach to animal welfare, which describes welfare as specific to each animal and identifies species-specific choice and individual control as important contributors to positive welfare.

When an animal chooses not to be seen

For visitors, an animal out of sight can feel like a missed moment. For the animal, being able to retreat may be an important part of having a usable space.

That creates a real tension for zoos, wildlife parks and bird parks. They have responsibilities to provide engaging visitor experiences and meaningful education. They also need to respect the fact that animals are not performers on demand.

The answer is not to make every animal permanently visible. It is to help visitors understand what they are seeing, including when they are not seeing an animal. Interpretation, keeper talks, cameras used thoughtfully, habitat views and clear explanations can all help people connect with animals without removing their ability to withdraw.

A hidden animal is not automatically a sign of a problem. Equally, retreat should not be used to dismiss questions about care. The important thing is to understand the individual situation, observe patterns and consider the full context.

There is some direct, but limited, evidence for providing retreat. In a study of five pygmy goats and two sheep in a petting-zoo setting, undesirable behaviours were lowest when animals had a full retreat space, compared with partial or no retreat. The small sample and specific setting matter: this supports considering retreat, not assuming the same result for every species or facility. Anderson et al., 2002

A 2023 case study followed two zoo-housed American black bears with access to multiple habitat areas, including spaces off guest view. Full access was associated with a 13% lower likelihood of pacing and a 5% higher likelihood of foraging; visibility fell for one bear but not the other. It is a useful example of why animal access and visitor visibility should both be considered, but two bears at one zoo cannot establish a universal effect. Bruno, Hubbard and Lynch, 2023

Look beyond a single moment

A snapshot can be misleading. An animal resting, pacing, hiding or interacting with another animal needs to be understood in context. What is typical for that individual? What time of day is it? What has changed in the environment or routine? What do staff observations and records show across days and weeks?

Good animal care draws on multiple kinds of evidence: careful observation, knowledge of the species and individual, health information, husbandry records and the experience of the people who work with the animals. No single behaviour or visitor impression tells the whole story.

This is where keepers’ day-to-day knowledge is especially valuable. They can notice subtle changes, identify patterns and ask whether an animal is using the habitat in the ways the team expected. That knowledge is strongest when it is shared, recorded and considered alongside other evidence.

A review of zoo welfare-assessment tools recommends combining resource-based information about an animal’s environment with animal-focused observations, while recognising the need for species- or taxon-specific approaches. In practice, that means checking both what has been provided and how the individual animal is responding over time. Jones et al., 2022

Understanding Animal Behavior: Integrating Context, Evidence, and Patterns for Improved Care and Welfare.

The visitor experience can support welfare

Animal welfare and visitor experience do not have to compete. Thoughtful habitat design can give visitors a better understanding of animal behaviour while preserving appropriate places for animals to retreat. Good interpretation can explain why choice, privacy and natural behaviours matter. Well-planned viewing areas can reduce disturbance and make encounters more rewarding without relying on constant visibility.

Sometimes the most useful visitor experience is not the closest or clearest view. It is leaving with a better understanding of the animal and the choices its environment provides.

Ask a better question

The next time you visit a zoo, wildlife park or bird park, look beyond the view from the path. Notice the spaces an animal can choose to use, the places it can move away to, and how the team explains its behaviour and care.

For organisations, the same perspective can sharpen habitat reviews. Instead of asking only whether a space looks impressive or meets a minimum footprint, ask what it enables the animal to do, how the animal uses it, and what staff observations tell you over time.

A habitat should be judged not only from the visitor side of the fence, but from the animal’s side too. That shift in perspective can lead to better questions, better design decisions and a more thoughtful experience for everyone.

Expert Guidance for Creating Animal Habitats: With over 35 years of experience, Animal Insights Consultancy offers support in habitat design, animal welfare, and collection management to enhance wildlife environments.

Planning a new habitat, or reviewing an existing one?

For more than 35 years, I have worked with zoos, wildlife parks, educational institutions and animal collections across a wide range of species. I provide practical support with habitat design, animal welfare, husbandry, collection management and staff development.

Arrange a relaxed, no-obligation conversation: email contact@animalinsightsconsultancy.com or call 07971 550 320.

Carl Groombridge

Director, Animal Insights Consultancy

Fulfilling the niche in the animal sector.

Research cited

• Anderson, U. S., Benne, M. R., Bloomsmith, M. A. and Maple, T. L. (2002). “Retreat Space and Human Visitor Density Moderate Undesirable Behavior in Petting Zoo Animals.” Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327604jaws0502_03

• Bruno, K., Hubbard, C. and Lynch, E. C. (2023). “Access to Multiple Habitats Improves Welfare: A Case Study of Two Zoo-Housed Black Bears (Ursus americanus).” Journal of Zoological and Botanical Gardens. https://doi.org/10.3390/jzbg4010010

• Jones, N., Sherwen, S. L., Robbins, R., McLelland, D. J. and Whittaker, A. L. (2022). “Welfare Assessment Tools in Zoos: From Theory to Practice.” Veterinary Sciences, 9(4), 170. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci9040170

• Sherwen, S. L. and Hemsworth, P. H. (2019). “The Visitor Effect on Zoo Animals: Implications and Opportunities for Zoo Animal Welfare.” Animals, 9(6), 366. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9060366

• World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA). “Our Approach to Animal Welfare.” https://www.waza.org/priorities/waza-code-of-ethics/our-approach-to-animal-welfare