Join our zoo community

razor-billed curassow aviary

photo taken 1992. There are no longer any curassows in NZ and I believe only one (or two?) left in Australia

razor-billed curassow aviary
Chlidonias, 9 Jun 2010
    • driftaguy
      Where is this enclosure?
      Does anyone know what species it now contains?
    • zooboy28
      I'm pretty sure this is the Red-tailed black cockatoo aviary (opposite the Japanese Garden), which until recently also held Himalayan Monal (now gone from the zoo sadly). I am basing this on the size of the aviary, and its domed roof. If it is not this aviary, then it has been demolished sometime pre-2000, as there has not been a similar aviary in recent times.

      I think it may have held hybrid macaws at the same time (listed in the 1992 census) and then Scarlet Macaws (or possibly the same hybrids) in 1995 (

      You (driftaguy) recently posted photos of the aviary here and here
    • Chlidonias
      you guys know the zoo way better than myself, but I'm not sure this is the same aviary as the former scarlet macaw one. I can't see a domed roof in this photo (to me it looks like a high-ish but flat roof with a smaller holding aviary at the rear). I think it might actually be an aviary in the row that included the kookaburra aviary photographed here on that same visit:

      I don't know if bringing up the kookaburra aviary helps at all (!), and also bear in mind the photo was taken by my sister so I don't have first-hand knowledge of it.

      EDIT: actually, looking at this photo and the kookaburra one side-by-side I'm no longer sure of that!!
    • zooboy28
      Yea, I think the Kookaburra aviary was part of the row of aviaries that were heavily renovated a few years ago, but still fo hold Kookaburra, as well as a few other, mostly Australian, species.

      I think you can't see the peak of the roof in this photo, but if you compare the physical structure to that in both Chlidonias' macaw photo and driftaguy's bird aviary photos I think you can see the same framing. Also, the current aviary also has the smaller aviary part at the back, although its not so easy to see in these photos.
    • Chlidonias
      I will take your opinion as the correct one, especially with that added point about the macaw aviary having the smaller holding aviary off the back.

      The more I looked at the kookaburra photo the less likely it seemed they were related aviaries!!
    • zooboy28
      So, not being totally obsessed with this or anything :rolleyes:, but I have had a look on google maps and couldn't see any signs of the holding aviary at the back (although there was a lot of tree cover in that area), but I also had a look at the map from the 1980s ( and it only shows birds (excluding natives and waterfowl) as being on the left edge of the zoo, where all such birds are still kept today. To me, this suggests that, as the aviary in question was unlikely built after this map was created, and there being no other area on this left hand edge where another aviary could have been situated (given that it is still today full of aviaries and a few exhibits that are almost certainly no younger than the aviary in question - with the exception of the japanese garden, not sure what this replaced but it opened in 1990, two years prior to the photo being taken of the aviary in question), it is likely the same aviary as that which now holds the black cockatoos.
    • Chlidonias
      I had a look at the maps in the gallery earlier too, to see if I could work it out. The annoying thing was the map I'd included from the 1979 guidebook (this one: didn't have curassow on the legend but they definitely had them then because they are included in the text part of the guide (along with a photograph, taken at Los Angeles Zoo as many of the photos in that guide were).
    • Chlidonias
      not wanting to complicate things further, but I've just been directly comparing this photo with the other three photos (of the macaw/cockatoo aviary), and the framing in the aviaries actually isn't the same at all. The mesh on this aviary is supported by several horizontal pipes the same diameter as the vertical pipes - the macaw/cockatoo aviary has no similar horizontal pipes except up near the roof, far higher than in the curassow aviary.

      The macaw/cockatoo aviary is only shown from the front in all three photos so perhaps the end has the pipes as shown in this photo, but otherwise I can't see them being the same aviary.
    • zooboy28
      In that 1979 map, the aviary we are discussing is labelled 10, or is in the same location as that aviary, which then housed "birds of prey". A map I have (1958) indicates that crested curassow and peafowl were housed at what in both your 1979 (#7) and 1980s map show as housing peafowl (and could potentially also be holding curassows), which I believe is a fenced pen.
    • zooboy28
      OK, I can see that, and now think you are right. There are a couple of other reasons why this might not be the same aviary too.

      1). There are no tall trees behind this aviary, which are definitely behind the macaw/cockatoo aviary. These are also present in this late 1970s aerial photo of the zoo (

      2). The aviary at the back of this aviary is quite extensive, and appears to hold a seperate species (I think I can see two rainbow lorikeets at the back?), which is not what the macaw/cockatoo aviary has.

      The aerial photo, as well as all the maps, would suggest that this curassow aviary is actually visible in the photo, and is the one at the upper-right of the block of aviaries (#8 on 1979 map) that are partly cut-off in the bottom left corner of the photo. Here can also be seen the aviary at the back, and the wooden shelter in the middle. This aviary block is now demolished, and has been replaced, with the last aviary in the new block (which either holds African grey or eclectus parrots) in the same place as the curassow aviary.

      Thanks for the complication Chlidonias :).
    There are no comments to display.
  • Category:
    Auckland Zoo
    Uploaded By:
    9 Jun 2010
    View Count:
    Comment Count: