San Antonio Zoo How long does this zoo have left?

Sad, sad, sad.

San Antonio's Zoo smells. Literally, it smells poor. It is in the red from Africa Live Phase 1 and 2, has been attacked (rightfully, IMO) for their elephant exhibit, and this year have suffered a string of animal deaths.

Africa Life 3 is on hold until they can find more cash and this zoo is short on it for now.

San Antonio currently has 2 asian elephants in a small rocky quarry. When pressed about the quality of the exhibit, the zoo's official response was that the elephants are cared for because they meet the AZA requirements. I meet the national requirements to run for congress, doesn't mean I should. (Official response is found here: San Antonio Zoo and Aquarium - Animals & Exhibits)

Then today I did a Google News story on SA's zoo, first hit was about a black rhino unexpectedly dying. The damning part though was

Lots of deaths in one year, many high profile and these are not from age ala Dallas.

This zoo still has monkeys in cages made of bars, bears in grottos of cement, and tigers on cement grottos. So, here's my question to you all: How long does San Antonio have left OR how would you work to turn it around?

 

Recently two elephants were transferred to Nashville Zoo from Jackson Zoo. The following reason was given.

"The Jackson Zoo Board of Directors' decision comes after the Association of Zoos and Aquariums issued a requirement stating that at least three elephants need to be housed at a zoo's exhibit."

There are only two elephants at San Antonio, Boo and Lucky. What does the zoo and the AZA have to say about this?

 

If someone really wants AZA's official position, all they need do is call [301-562-0777] or email [Contact AZA]. In fact, the San Antonio Zoo apparently invites the public to contact the AZA with such questions [http://www.sazoo-aq.org/animalexhibits/lucky_aza_facts.html]
Or else they can post rhetorical questions here... which makes me doubt they want the information at all

I have no opinion about this zoo, as I've never been there, worked there, or know anyone who does work there, but I have reason to believe that:

1
Moving elephants that are around 50 years old and older across the country has proven to be risky for the animals

2
Obtaining additional compatible elephants is not easy. Some zoos have spent several years working to obtain additional animals. They cannot be found at Wal-Mart

3
Many zoos have gone through periods of weak finance, even approaching collapse, only to rebound, re-invent themselves and grow into leaders and models in the zoo world

4
A number of zoos have had to face up to their questionable husbandry and keeper training records. They responded by improving training, vet care, etc. That an organization has problems does not mean the organization must close. It does mean it must change.

And so, I recommend more thought, real inquiry and taking many deep breaths before posting anything on-line. Shaking fingers is easy. Solving problems takes thought and dedication. Zoos that have languished take time and dedication to rebuild. But it has been done often.

 

The zoo needs a lot of work. Unfortunately, unless they go broke that means that animals and exhibits will stay the way they are, its not going to be closed. I heard of the presidents statements reguarding their elephant enclosure a while ago and it struck a nerve. How one can say that the minimum is enough to maintain an exhibit is beyond me. What I also do not understand is the building of a state of the art african elephant exhibit while maintaining and bringing in more asian elephants for their poor, outdated asian elephant bear grotto exhibit. Send those elephants to a sanctuary, or to another zoo, but their past breeding age so they might as well get to live out their remaining years roaming semi-free on a few thousand acres. Or send them the AZA's national elephant center, if that thing ever got off the ground.

If a zoo wants to bring in more elephants and create a state of the art exhibit, then thats great and they can only be applauded for it. However, it says something about ones integrity when you build a new exhibit for animals not currently at the zoo yet neglect the animals you are currently in charge of managing. Take care of what you got first before bringing in more. Its a totally unethical thing to do.

 

And there's the fun part. Boo was acquired 1-2 years ago and was moved into San Antonio. So how can you say it is so risky to move elephants, when one of these old ones was just moved into this zoo.

 

That it is risky is not to say all efforts result in death. Only that the record is very very poor. Moving her a second time at an older age is not likely to improve the odds.

 

I missed this bit.
The therapy for the short run might be Staff Training (its not all that clear that the zoo has any issue with animal care though)

There is only one real cure. Money.
Whether from local donors (and what are the successful industries or mega-millionaires in San Antonio?) or governments (in 2011? What are you nuts?) or a very lucky lottery ticket

Most zoos that "turned around" started with a new eye-catching exhibit along with new marketing and some new look to the facility (window dressing).

 

Tacos and The Alamo. North Side is rich, the city itself is dirt poor.

 

Just a word on Boo. Yes she is 50 and it is widely acknowledged that moving an elephant at that age is detrimental. But, this had to be weighed against being held be an abusive owner. Tina and Jewel who just got moved from SD to LA also were from this same owner. These two elephants spent the better part of a year recovering at SD. The guy who owned all 3 elephants was/is located very near to San Antonio so this was probably the absolute best solution for Boo and the Zoo. Boo desperately needed a new home and the SAZ needed to find a companion for Lucky. It may not be the most ideal situation, but it is one that from all that I can tell works well for all parties involved.

 

So, question. While San Antonio has no obvious future plans to enhance their Asian elephant facilities, but Houston, which is 3 hours away by car, should begin the final stage of their elephant expansion sometime soon. Would it be a good idea to move these elephants to Houston once the McNair facility is finished assuming they can handle the additional creatures?

It would remove a black eye from San Antonio, free up some funding, and the elephants would be in better living conditions.

 

You're looking at a breeding herd versus a retirement herd. Hugely different things. Houston has all their energy and efforts put into breeding and as such it would not be in their best interest to take on 1 or 2 elderly females that for all intents and purposes would just be taking up valuable room. I seriously doubt that Houston even has the capability of housing two more female elephants. They already have 3.4 going to 3.6 would be way more than their barn can hold (at least from what I've seen of it).

What it boils down to is that San Antonio has an elephant holding facility and well qualified animal staff. There is a financial need for the to still house elephants. It is something that will keep the guests coming in (the zoo's bottom line).

 

I get your part about mixing breeding vs. retirement herds, fair point.

However, regarding the bottom line, I think Philadelphia or Detroit (and maybe Cleveland) would say they are coping fine without. San Antonio currently has no great apes, the land they have is too small for elephants, but it COULD be used for chimps or gorillas for an expansion of Africa Live. Why not consider that?

Yes, I am aware the zoo wants African Elephants for Africa Live 3.

 

Who says what they have is too small for elephants? Have you seen the design for AL3? If so, can I see it too

 

Touche, salesman.

I was actually referring only to the current land occupied by elephants, however.

 

True enough, existing exhibit is too small. I will grant you that. What you may not know is, SA has a huge off exhibit breeding/quarantine/holding area for hoofstock that is located behind the few remaining terraced hoofstock exhibits. I am sure that this are is be part of what will be incorporated into AL3. SAZ also has the rights to expand into the neighboring Brackenridge Park and from what I read has plans for gorillas in this expansion.

 

It's true, I didn't know that. Sounds like they need $50 million, wait for their Asian elephants to pass on and begin bulldozing the existing elephant and rhino yards and start expanding.

Any clue how much the combined cost for AL 1 and 2 were (or how much each expansion was individually?)

 

And it cannot be assumed that either Philadelphia or Detroit are doing well. "Coping" isn't a great position to be in for an organization. San Antonio is coping and you apparently predict they are dying.
Cleveland, on the other hand, has elephants coming back so a temporary elephant-less zoo with a major new exhibit in the works for them is not a fair comparison. Besides, Cleveland was more successful before the elephants were shipped out then either Philadelphia or Detroit were before they shipped theirs out. (I'm thinking of financial stability and "market share.")

 

These are AZA recommendations not requirements. Currently I know of 23 AZA zoos which house only two elephants. The recommendations become a handy media tool when convenient for institutions to mask the real reasons behind their decisions.

 

It has been over ten years since I was at San Antonio, so my memory is a bit sketchy. Although it was not one of the best zoos I have seen, I also did not think it was awful. There were a few bad exhibits, but not enough to suggest the whole zoo needs to go. The worst thing I remember was a solitary camel in a small sloping yard, but I believe I read somewhere on here that he/she is now gone and replaced with some kind of goats or antelope.

The cheetahs had a nice large grassy yard with large plants on one side. The tiger enclosure is a bit barren, but decent sized and could easily be made good by adding a tree and some foliage. From what I have seen on ZooChat, the Africa Live addition is very good and makes this a very respectable zoo. It may never be world class, and I don't know about the elephants (that is one exhibit I actually do not remember), but overall it is not awful. And certainly a major city like San Antonio needs a zoo. They have a Seaworld and an exotic animal orphanage, but those are not the same things (and are on the outskirts, whereas the zoo is in a prime central location).

 

Any clue how much the combined cost for AL 1 and 2 were (or how much each expansion was individually?)

The first phase of Africa Live has been paid for. Much of the infrastructure work for Phase 2 was done during P1. The cost for P2 was around $10 million or so. They have been a bit short in collections. They are confident it will be paid in full before the start of P3. As for the deaths, Daisy the giraffe was in her mid 30s. That made her the oldest giraffe in zoo captivity. The loss of the two leopards was the result of longterm health issues before they came to the zoo. Both were about 10. The death of the rhino is still a mystery.