I went to Brisbane's Alma Park Zoo the other week. I'd read the thread on here from about three years ago http://www.zoobeat.com/24/alma-park-zoo-132/ and wondered how or if it had changed since then. Their website and pamphlets obviously give the impression they are a fantastic place ("Brisbane's best value family day out: A great wildlife experience with exotic animals in a lush tropical environment" says one pamphlet), so I thought I'd give it a go. On first arrival my immediate thoughts went along the lines of "wow, this place is awesome!". The setting is really quite fantastic, the grounds being planted out as a rainforest with palms and Moreton Bay figs and stranglers, and with climbers and creepers all over the place. There are wild brush-turkeys everywhere and lots of little birds all through the trees. The first few enclosures for native animals I came across also seemed fine, not large but not small either; however the further I went the worse things seemed to get. The paths are mostly covered in gravel chips but in many places these have been worn or washed away leaving large stretches of mud (to be honest however, Brisbane had just had four days of almost monsoon-style rains); and a great number of the animal enclosures and paddocks were extremely muddy. The red deer, donkey, fallow deer, and camel paddocks were all mud and little else (and calling the camel pen a "paddock" is being far too generous I may add). Almost all the cages were very dark and gloomy due to the canopy of trees, and there seemed a strange prediliction for very low roofs (the old parma wallaby pen --under renovation at the time -- was capped by a netting roof less than five feet off the ground, and the dingo enclosure couldn't have been much more than six feet high. Whoever looked after the animals must have spent a good portion of their time bent double whilst cleaning and performing other chores!). The enclosure for the lone sun bear was very small (one of the smallest I have seen for a sun bear in any zoo) although it was planted and on the earlier thread it is stated it is an elderly bear so maybe it wouldn't utilise a larger one. The fruit bat cage was far too small, with certainly no room for flight of any kind, and the marmoset cages were also small (but the six or so common marmosets in one of the cages were the most active marmosets I have ever seen, which has to be a good thing). A group of cockatoo "aviaries" were absolutely horrible, being small, low and dark. However the worst cages there were for the monkeys. Simply shockingly disgusting things, they looked like something from the 19th century. There were spider monkeys, rhesus macaques and hamadryas baboons imprisoned in there (and I'm certainly not the sort of person who usually uses the word "imprisoned" in connection with zoo animals). Those monkeys should be given new housing as soon as possible, or alternatively sent to another establishment which can provide them with proper enclosures. On the good side of things, some of the enclosures were perfectly acceptable. The ring-tailed lemur island was nice (still a bit small, but nice). There was a small room for "creepy crawlies" with olive and carpet pythons, blue-tongues, thick-tailed geckos, dainty tree frogs, giant burrowing cockroaches, land snails and giant millipedes. The Himalayan tahr all seemed content in their (mostly non-muddy) paddock. The staff were all very nice and friendly, which is always a bonus. The talk at the squirrel monkey feeding was good and basically informative. Of course everything written here is my own personal opinion of the zoo and may well be coloured by the atrocious weather conditions Brisbane had been experiencing in the previous few days, but all up the zoo has a wonderful setting and it could be an amazing place. It could have a lot of potential but it doesn't appear to be taking advantage of it. There are certainly much worse zoos around, but this one could really be so SO much better than it currently is. It gives the air of a somewhat-ramshackle private collection opened to the public to help out with costs. Most of the cages and enclosures are just "all right" (not too large but not tiny), however some are truly awful and a few are downright worthy of demolition. Many of the paddocks were nothing but mud (I will graciously attribute this to the recent rains and not to a normal state of affairs). The entry fee of $28 is probably too high although this feeling is anticipated on the zoo map where it says "Admission charges: the cost of caring for our animals and improving their conditions is enormous. We receive no government subsidy and prices are set as low as possible". My personal feeling is that almost all Australian zoos are priced too high, much more so than NZ zoos even when of similar size (the much larger Orana Park, for instance, is NZ$21, and has to feed lots of lions and tigers). The cafe is also overpriced, but I think this is probably a normal thing for zoo cafes. Full animal list (as far as I could ascertain) is as follows: Mammals: short-beaked echidna; eastern grey kangaroo; red kangaroo; swamp wallaby; brush-tailed possum; koala; common wombat; water buffalo; red deer; fallow deer; donkey; Himalayan tahr; dromedary; alpaca; sheep; cow; dingo; agouti; black and spectacled flying foxes; ring-tailed lemur; common marmoset; cotton-top tamarin; squirrel monkey; spider monkey; rhesus macaque; hamadryas baboon; sun bear Birds: ostrich; emu; southern cassowary; silver pheasant; blue peafowl; bush stone-curlew; alexandrine; greater sulphur-crested cockatoo; galah; common bronzewing; Torres Strait pigeon; tawny frogmouth; barn owl Reptiles, amphibians and invertebrates as listed for the "creepy crawly" house in the review above. There were also baby crocodiles in a tank in the cafe (I assume freshwater crocs rather than salties), and two outdoor enclosures for lace monitors and carpet python. there are photos in the Other Australian Zoos section of the gallery (more will be added when I have time)
I had never heard of Alma Park until i came to this site and even when we went on holidays to brisbane i didn't hear of it.
@Chlidonias: I loved your informative review, as it was honest, direct and well written. It seems that Alma Park Zoo is yet another ****** roadside zoo, similar to all of the others that can be found around the world. A handful of decent exhibits, and the rest appear to be band-aid cages that barely stick together. Disappointing.
Was there only the one species each of Tamarin and marmoset? Last time I went they had at least 4 species, including an Emperor and I'm pretty sure there were pygmies. I think that your review is pretty fair. I haven't been for a couple of years but it sounds like not much has changed. It is unfortunate that you visited Brisbane in a period when we had so much rain.
Wouldn't it be great if could be a State run zoo? Unfortunately it has been stated quite catagorically that Queensland would not have one. The setting is magnificant and the gardens are beautiful.
You're right jay. Some years ago the Queensland government undertook a feasability study - under the working title of Q Zoo - to determine whether or not we should have a government run zoo in this State. The verdict was a resounding - NO!
I only saw cotton-tops in one cage and common marmosets in two cages (there was a fourth cage next to the one with the common pair in which I couldn't see anything and I assumed it to also hold commons). The setting of the place is certainly magnificent and it could scrub up really well as a good zoo if (I suppose) it had more money. The animals themselves all looked well cared for, so it wasn't a roadside zoo in the same sense as is found in America (as in Guzoo!). I actually arrived in Brisbane on exactly the same day as the storm hit. It rained almost constantly for the five days I was in Brisbane but only for the first of the six days I spent at Lamington National Park so that was all right.
Alma Park About 5 years ago I went to visit Jay , and he took me to a few of the wildlife parks in SE Queensland , including this one . There were 2 sunbears at the time , but both were pretty old . Apart from that , this 2008 zoo review could have been written at my visit . This place has actually been discussed early on in the forum -- not long after Zoobeat was established . This place is where I personally draw the line between a roadside menagery and an actual zoo . The fact that it still charges like a wounded bull and yet does precious little for improving the lot for its animals , most of whom live in small enclosures , does not give me much joy . This place was similar to what Wellington Zoo was like about 20 years ago . The landscaping is magnificent -- it should be called the Alma Botanical Gardens . But the zoo part has very little to recommend . It appears to be a motley collection of numerous animals with very little emphasis on any sort of theme , education of conservation , or any sort of long range plan . Going from the photos/videos of Guzoo , I would still consider the conditions at Guzoo to be worse than Alma Park -- perhaps Edmonton Valley would be a more similar comparison ? The animals at Alma Park when I visited did not appear to be in poor physical health , but 90% of the enclosures were not designed for the inhabitants . My personal view after reading this latest report would be to be to promote closure and give the animals to better collections in the region ( if this is possible ) or give the place a serious makeover
@Nigel: it seems as if you and I are in perfect agreement when it comes to places like Alma Park Zoo and GuZoo in Canada. It's somewhat depressing to read about these abominable little roadside zoos that barely ever change from year to year. You mentioned that you went to Alma 5 years ago and how Chlidonias's current review is almost identical to what you would have said at the time. Judging by GuZoo's photos and reports, it seems as if that atrocity has actually become WORSE over the years. So why are these wildlife parks still in existence? It is frustrating for animal lovers to have to put up with such abysmal collections of captive wildlife, and yet as long as a handful of people visit them then they'll hang around forever. The sad thing is that there is barely any education put across to the public, and instead animals are forced to sometimes spend decades in substandard enclosures. If I had the power to do it I'd shut them all down.
I agree Snowleopard. And it is these **** 'zoos' that make it so easy for animal liberators to target zoos as cruel and demeaning.
Alma Park vs Guzoo from what I have seen about guzoo -- posts on this forum and etc , I would say that Guzoo is 10 times worse than Alma Park . Alma park has nothing to recommend it ( unless we have a botanist on the forum that would like to disagree with me ) but the animals are kept in minimum required conditions and generally were/are kept in reasonable health . having seen the recent videos of Guzoo that have recently been posted , it looks FILTHY , sounds like a real cacophony , and one could probably smell it all the way from Ft McMurray . Alma Park would be the BAREST minimum I would expect from a zoo , especially in a relatively wealthy place like SE Queensland ( it isnt Sudan ) but it is better than what I have been led about Guzoo . If Alma Park disposed of its animals ( as many as possible to other zoos )and then decided to concentrate on its very impressive gardening abilities , it could make itself into a botanical park that the region would be justifiably proud of -- they have already proved to every visitor that they can do this . But the longer it mucks about with barely adequate enclosures for its motley group of animals , it wont get any support from me
Once again I wholeheartedly agree with Nigel's opinion. Maybe one day someone out there will provide us all with different photos that make either Alma Park or GuZoo look more impressive...but I sadly doubt it.
i havent been to alma park zoo before and i certainly havent been to Guzoo but just based upon photos i do think Alma Park looks a little bit better with some of the newer enclosures for Squirrel Monkey and Lemur of a good standard. I think its location in Brisbane means it could grow to be a moderately sized zoo of a good standard. It just needs more money and time, though I reckon in the mean time they would be better off-loading some animals and keeping more of the exotic species in fewer, better enclosures until such a time as they can start rebuilding better enclosures for all species.
I'd agree with glyn I think. I'm actually in two minds over Alma Park Zoo. There's no denying the setting is superb and with money it could be a great little zoo. However it is equally undeniable that it hasn't apparently changed much at all in a number of years and that without the rainforesty surrounds the cages themselves would look even worse. There is a very lacklustre kind of air about the place. They do have a regrettable tendency to (it would appear) build enclosures that are only just big enough -- not too small but not exactly large either. Immediate improvements could be made simply by opening up the canopy over some of the cages to let in some light and sun, cutting down on the damp gloomy atmosphere that prevails. Better drainage and substrate in the paddocks would eliminate a lot of the mud. A number of the enclosures could be enlarged fairly cheaply. Some should be demolished entirely (the monkey and cockatoo cages) and the animals either (ideally) sent elsewhere, or else given proper housing. (I would go for the first option, cost-wise and for the sake of the animals themselves). However compared to photos of GuZoo that I have seen, Alma Park is a veritable paradise. The animals are cared for properly (healthwise, even if we can all agree the cages should be better and larger) and the staff are good. I think the main problems that Alma Park has are simply money and a rather complacent "that's good enough for now" attitude So, close it down or make it better? I like the latter option because it could be done relatively easily. GuZoo on the other hand I don't think anything can save.
Money and time ....... I am not convinced that these are applicable to Alma Park .... They charge a HUGE entrance fee for a very mediocre zoo , and they dont have elephants , big cats , hippos etc , that rake up a huge grocery bill for feeding costs .... in fact , the number of animals at this zoo is relatively small for a zoo of its size ... Alma Zoo has been in existance for many years now . From the recent zoo review which is very comprehensive , there has been NO improvements from my visit over 5 years ago .... and Alma Zoo was not a new zoo then . back then there was one new enclosure -- for the python . Again , barely adequate and certainly nothing special ( and too small for more than one python ) How many more years do the animals have to wait before they are given improved housing ? I am not convinced with the argument of " give them time and money , and it will improve " can be applied to Alma Park , which is a shame , because there is potential . Hamilton Zoo , New Zealand , originally started out as a wildlife and game park , with a motley group of animals . Very similar to Alma park . The monies recieved from visitors were invested into the park , and now it is a very good zoo , with extremely roomy enclosures -- many parts of the zoo the animals have alot more space than the visitors . I now rank Hamilton Zoo as being a better zoo overall than even Wellingtons Zoo ( and Wellington zoo has been in existance for 100 years ) But as for Guzoo , I think what they REALLY need there is a bulldozer , and a prison cell for the Management ?!
yeah I too wonder where the money goes from the entry fees. Perhaps there just isn't the patronage to total it all up. But it does seem to be a favourite family destination for locals (there were lots of cars in the car park the day I was there). Like I said, I'm in two minds over the place -- it could be good but it isn't and it doesn't appear to have the impetus to make it so.
i think you would find that although feeding animals is expensive its the labour, insurance and maintenance that would chew through alot of the funds. also, too, from the perspective of regional holding capacity for exotic species it would be nice to see this zoo redeveloped; even if it only created a few additional spaces for species like, I dunno, fishing cats,red panda, ruffed lemur and emporer tamarins then it would become an asset for the region. considering improving the enclosures, you do have to wonder how much it really would cost to build new aviaries for the species already kept??? you could probably replace the majority of the existing inadequate enclosures for less than $60K, but for a small private enterprise that money would be hard to come up with.
that's pretty much the thing that was going through my mind as to why it would be better to improve the place than just close it all down. As a small zoo it could be ideal for being a holder of the smaller species, especially if they went with a whole rainforest theme to the collection.
