big animals in city zoos...

19-12-2007

You did say that, sorry to misquote you...

19-12-2007

for a good idea of peoples expectations when they visit a zoo read this article.
The Sunday Herald - Scotland's award-winning independent newspaper
I've posted it on another thread.
The big animals, eg ungulates and lions are boring because they don't so much. The more interesting ones for kids especially are the nes that are very active. Strangly enough this is often small creatures such as otters, meerkats and primates.

19-12-2007

It's funny how cultural events such as movies influence the animals that children enjoy. Before "The Lion King" average zoogoers didn't know what the hell a meerkat was, and then they were everywhere! Penguins have also seen a resurgence, due to "March of the Penguins" and "Surfs Up".

But otters, meerkats and any species of primate are always fun to watch for kids.

19-12-2007

@Yassa: about bull elephants-no, not all of them are as social as Emmen's bull. Many of them spend their lives on their own or randomly with some other bulls (especially the younger ones) and visit the female groups very rarely-if ever. Not every elephant bull there has the chance to mate even once. Will a solitarily kept elephant bull need at least as much enrichment as the one kept close to females? Maybe. Could a second bull in an occasionally seperatable enclosure be useful considering socialisation ? Maybe.
Mentioned foot and joint problems are not just/mainly a product of the size of the enclosure (i.e. an elephant in a large exhibit can develop these, too), but of missing/deficient foot care by zoo staff and improper terrain. All in all, I'd like to know what realistic alternative to deal with the surplus bulls You suggest. After all, I don't think that most of the bull exhibits I have seen next to the females' enclosures aren't that large either...and the few elephant parks like the one in Spain don't have unlimited space and resources, too... And about improving living conditions: this is easily demanded, but much harder to be turned into practice. And interestingly, very few people complain about inadequate living conditions of animals beside the mentioned " crowd favourites".
About animal right groups: I appretiate a fair and pertinent comment-but these groups are just usually railing against everything and everyone not following their agenda-and quite often display a considerable & frightening lack of knowledge when it comes to animals and animal husbandry in particular - and a certain lack of morals, too.
@patrick: Maybe it's time to stop accusing one another of not reading each other's post-as You don't seem to have read mine Yourself. "Tiger" was mentioned as an example for a well-known animal name, "lions"(which I can't recall using before) as response to a remark by another user. And gorilla-? I hope that I don't have to quote myself now bit by bit, do I? Nunc?
@NZ Jeremy: How many are there of Your "kind" when it comes to the mentioned favoured animals (members of this and similar forums, including me, not counting)? Most likely not enough to keep a normal zoo running. And while some big animals have the tendency to rest a second or two (smart compared to increasingly nervous Homo sapiens), at least people can see them most of the time-which isn't the case of the small critters hiding and sleeping (yes, even meerkats, monkeys and especially otters like to do that). And if the big ones are moving-oh, You should see the crowds!

Popular media can do a lot to make animals "famous": I've seen kids pass elephants and lions to see Naked Mole Rats - thanks to Kim Possible. However, I heard the escorting adults suggest to go to said big mammals after looking at the mole rats (for 5s...), and the kids were eager to follow...

19-12-2007

As the concept "open-range zoo" has been mentioned various times again: like I said above, it's questionable whether this concept is really "the future" and can be used everywhere. Werribee wasn't the first one to come up with this idea-also see mentioned "Safari Parks", Animal Kingdom or the German term "Tierpark", which means "Animal PARK" and is synonymous to "zoo". It's just another version of the zoo concept which can be applied when enough free space is available and the weather is apt. I personally think that the future of zoos is that of a) "bioparks" within or close to the cities, combining zoo, botanical garden, aquarium and natural history museum into one institution (think of the Arizona Desert Museum, f.e.) with focus on the education & entertainment of the visitors, and b) large "conservation centers" not opened to the public, shared by all zoos, where breeding groups, surplus animals, confiscated exotic pets... can be adequately kept and scientific studies can be undertaken. These centers could also take advantage of the different climate they're in-with centers in warmer climates having the largest breeding groups of, say. Dama gazelles, Arabian leopards or Cuban crocodiles, while the ones "in the cold" keep larger breeding groups of Andean flamingo, European mink or Mountain tapirs. But even in this inner city "biopark" I could imagine large animals like giraffes, wisents or hippos-as "shop window" representatives of the "megavertebrates"-being kept adequately.

20-12-2007

Agreed that active animals are most interesting for public. But if they are active depends from enclosure design.

Example are lions in Basel vs. Arnhem. Medium-sized enclosure in Basel is richly structured, and lions are always active. Arnhem has lions in huge area of mature forest, but this is basically flat ground and tall trees. Lions sleep or stereotypically pace at the back fence waiting for food.

About animals in city zoos:
Yes, zoos need some big animals. They are most interesting for public. If zoo cares for education or fundraising, you can do it better with lions than ants.

Lots of city zoos have big, good enclosures and good breeding records. Many small city zoos in Europe have good and spacious enclosures because they have just a few.

Agreed that zoo doesn't need ALL big animals. If it has bears, apes and big cats it can go without elephants or giraffes. I naturally agree that many zoos need to get rid of their small outdated enclosures and some species of animals.

However, big animals need zoos. "Fewer animals in better conditions" is nice slogan, but breeding plans are scraped because zoo community lacks exhibit space. For example, no way all endangered subspecies of tiger or leopard or orangutan can have each self-sustaining population of 500 in zoos. WAZA said sadly, that zoos can exist without gorillas just as well as zoos exist without thylacines or wooly mammoths, but gorillas will not survive without zoos.

City zoos certainly will not be replaced by "open-range zoos" or "sanctuaries". People thought so 30 years ago. Most safari parks in Europe went bankrupt. They get no visitors in winter; land cost is huge and transport is tiresome. Most "sanctuaries" don't breed animals and have no secure funding.

20-12-2007

Geez, he wants real lemurs extinct, because public has CGI animations in "Madagascar" for entertainment?

20-12-2007

@Jurek7: I agree with pretty much most of what You write (no wonder, as it supports what I wrote before...), yet:
-the 500 is just a statistical number, thought to be enough to keep the zoo population vivid for the next 100 years. However, this differs even more from animal to animal (btw: Sumatran/Bornean Orang-utans are two different species, not subspecies) than TUDGE wrote back in the 90s and is partly contradicted by species with healthy populations ofless than 300-500 individuals and seemingly doing fine. Your point considering collisation between the "More space for less animals"-agenda and the question: Where to keep the offspring then? is nevertheless an extremely important subject. I would go as far as supporting the controlled sustainable commercial use of "surplus" animals, producing animal products like meat, fur, body parts for TCM etc. This could render blackmarket dealing with poached animals less profitable and maybe kill it off in the end (see situation with some crocodilian species) and part of the profit could directly be used for the conservation of the wild animals and their native habitats. The tiger, one of the "golden cows" of zoo fans and public alike, could be a great example for that. The ethical debate about that is another subject...
-"Lots of city zoos have big, good enclosures and good breeding records. Many small city zoos in Europe have good and spacious enclosures because they have just a few." Depends on the individual zoo and animals kept. I can think of quite a bunch of city zoo exhibits worldwide which are neither spacious (which, as You correctly remarked & by keeping Hediger's older observations in mind, isn't the only thing to account for the quality of an exhibit) nor "good" (depends on the point of view: that of the animal? Zoo staff? Visitors?).
-Though WAZA said otherwise, I dare to say that gorillas could do quite well without zoos if only apt in-situ projects and protection of them and their native habitat is ensured on a permanent term.
-Absolute agreement on the open-range zoo issue in consideration of the EU;
-I'm not talking about a "sanctuary", but about zoo-connected "conservation centers" fulfilling mentioned tasks and financed by the state or the political international community (like the EU).
And about Your last question: simplified-Yes, he does.

20-12-2007

About orangutans - I meant 4 forms recognized now - sumatran and three subspecies of bornean.

Agreed in principle - just remember that all wild deer in EU exist because hunters feed, resettle and manage them.

Not the tiger, though, because of finacial/practical issues. With current low law enforcement & low cost of poaching. All wild tigers can be easily sold under the guise of farmed tigers.

Yes, agreed. Good elephant breeding herds in city zoos are e.g. in Emmen and Cologne. Elephant paddock is substantial part of total zoo area in both. It is quality of enclosure which counts - not if zoo is in a city.

Agreed but - caveat is "if it is ensured". First issue is money. Zoo gorillas can and do raise Euros and USD for wild gorilla conservation. Second, many gorilla countries are unstable politically. You have rebellions, insurgencies and no national park or breeding station in native country can operate. Only these months staff of Virunga NP fled again from rebels. :/ Dian Fossey didn't appreciate this political problem, even if she herself had to flee rebellion once.

20-12-2007

@Jurek7: About the tiger: no, especially the tiger! If it is possible to seperate between farmed and poached crocodile goods, then proper labelling and a controlled "from stable to table" concept can also be possible for tigers. Of course no system is impeccable and tricksters will always find a way to sneek through; but You could f.e. detect whether the tiger product comes from a farmed or wild specimen if You conduct sample testing of the product (f.e. Ouchterlony, ELIAS or IE testing to detect the protein signature the tiger was fed on- domestic animals or game (deer f.e.) ).
-The role of a zoo specimen as ambassodor of its species to raise money isn't new-and I think I already mentioned it. However: is the ex-situ zoo program at the moment the only way to save gorillas in general? Certainly not, as there are still wild gorillas around-and only the Western Lowland subspecies is kept in a considerable number in zoos. And though most of Africa doesn't seem to stop on its downhill ride to disaster, there is still the hope and the possibility left to keep the gorillas alive in their native habitat. Relying solely on an ex-situ program is in the case of the gorillas the last grasp at straws. Let's hope that it will never come to that.
The main role of zoos concerning gorillas at the moment is the mentioned fundraising, scientific/veterinary support and especially the raising of public awareness (though I still think that most people visiting the zoo feel entertained by the gorillas and won't spend a second thought on their situation in the wild...); organisations like the WWF could do the same, but zoos (with cute baby gorillas and mighty silverbacks as living examples) could be more efficient in that.

20-12-2007

Gorillas are definitely a hot topic, due to the lack of conservation efforts by big-name zoos, and contradicted by the fact that they are certainly marquee mammals. The Seattle Zoo just recently (October) had its 12th baby gorilla born in captivity, and there was the obligatory photo in the local newspaper. Since then zoo attendance has increased at a time of the year when it is cold and rainy.

Perhaps the Bronx Zoo has the best idea, by forcing zoo patrons to give money towards gorilla conservation projects before they enter the Congo Gorilla Rainforest exhibit. That extra cash is on top of the main zoo entry fee, and therefore it all goes towards conservation efforts.

20-12-2007

id like to put an australian slant on this one.....the above is all debatable and there are valid points for all......but I think a zoo needs animals, and here in Australia the recent importation of elephants into our country has 'secured' (i use the word optimistically) the future of one of very few exotic species in this country.
if we are going to be realistic about it, here in Australia we were looking at zoos with the following viable populations. its still a very real possibility too. we all know that the situation for p hippos, peccary and golden cats is dire.
lions, cheetah, tiger, hunting dog, serval, red panda, meerkat and otter
giraffe, zebra, oryx, addax, white rhino
various primates
at least now we have elephants. so if were going to have zoos, we need animals. and with zoo populations all over the country crashing rapidly, there might just be a bit more space for eles soon

20-12-2007

Dont know the numbers but its doing well. We got Dartmoor , Paradise Park , Monkey world close by.

20-12-2007

Kiwi- I guess you work at or visit Newquay Zoo often. Do you know what's happening to the Diana Monkeys at present?

21-12-2007

Surely the main point of this thread is if you have a big enough zoo in a large city i.e tierpark Berlin you can keep big animals in big groups, small zoos like London and Antwerp should not. Enough said!