ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2026
Taking Stock: Assessing Animal Welfare in South African Captive Lion Tourism Venues.
Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
South Africa maintains thousands of captive lions and other felids in commercial captive wildlife facilities. Despite ongoing debate regarding the welfare implications of this industry, empirical assessments of welfare conditions remain limited. This study conducted a baseline assessment of welfare and husbandry conditions in public-facing captive lion venues in South Africa. A welfare assessment framework was applied across 34 tourism venues in Gauteng, Free State, Limpopo and North West provinces. Ten welfare indices were evaluated: mobility, environmental noise quality, shelter, hygiene, naturalness, social interaction, enrichment, diet quality, entertainment intensity, and animal management. Assessments were conducted using covert participant observation. Relationships between welfare scores, entry price and the provision of animal-visitor interactions (AVIs) were subsequently examined. A total of 627 lions were recorded across the 34 venues. No venue achieved high welfare scores across all indices, and welfare conditions were predominantly intermediate. Hygiene and environmental noise quality received the highest welfare scores, whereas animal management, enrichment, entertainment intensity and naturalness received the lowest. Recurring welfare concerns included restricted enclosure sizes, limited environmental complexity, inadequate shelter and retreat opportunities, inconsistent feeding practices, poor water quality, premature cub separation and intensive AVIs. Welfare scores were significantly higher at venues that prohibit AVIs than at venues offering such experiences. This study provides a standardised assessment of welfare conditions in South Africa's captive lion tourism sector and contributes empirical evidence to the ongoing discussions regarding the regulation and future management of the industry.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.