being need to be documented. Important to research and zoological institutions alike is how federal and private inspectors can best be trained to make accurate appraisals of well-being.
Research procedures should not be sustained merely because they have been used in the past. Research procedures that entail a demonstrated negative effect on well-being should be subject to review and should be modified or supplanted with other methods that are less disruptive to well-being. That consideration is of particular importance where, by tradition, very young animals might be housed or chaired singly for long periods. Such procedures might solely compromise normal development because they occur during the formative, hence sensitive, years of early development.
How can biological samples be collected so as to minimize restraint, isolation, loss of social support, the stress of isolation, pain, and other factors that can disrupt well-being?
In sum, whereas a great deal is known about the natural history and behavior of nonhuman primates held in captivity, much more information is required. Even with substantially greater information, the development of prescriptive recipes for primate well-being would not be desirable. A variety of solutions might achieve the same general goal—animals that are maintained under conditions that promote their physical and psychological well-being. The aim of research in this regard should be to find means by which to assess psychological and physical well-being and to provide the knowledge necessary to develop programs to achieve the general goal—animals maintained for research, exhibition or education can all be maintained under conditions that are consistent with the goal and will provide for their well-being. It is the responsibility of all who keep nonhuman primates to ensure that personnel are appropriately trained to develop procedures consistent with the goals of the institution and with the psychological and physical well-being of the animals in their charge.