Things people do that irritate you when you go to the zoo? #2

Regarding the mixed exhibit at Bristol that you mentioned , out of curiosity what was the species that shared the enclosure with the tamarin and killed it ?

 

The incident at Bristol zoo involved an escaped tamarin being eaten by otters.
Shock at Bristol Zoo tragedies

 

What a shame , an endangered species being killed and eaten by a least concern one, still not really the otters fault for following its natural instincts though, and these things can happen even in the best of zoos.

Also , have to say that I find the typo / spelling mistake in the article quite amusing / endearing, the photo of the golden headed lion tamarin is mislabeled as showing a "golden hearted" lion tamarin , what a wonderful name ! (even if it is wrong).

 

With all due respect: the "whistleblower" in the article sounds like an idiot.
"If a breeding pair [of rainbow lorikeets] had escaped then Bristol may have been infested with birds." Despite the threat of global warming, I somehow doubt that Bristol's gardens and parks can offer enough tropical fruits and flowers all year long to sustain an infestation by rainbow lorikeets. And I also doubt that the Bristol Zoo staff deliberately supports porcine cannibalism or the escape and death of its animals.

 

From the little that I know about rainbow lorikeets I totally agree , these are nectar specialists so how would lorikeets even be able to obtain the amount needed from parks in the northern hemisphere to survive ?

I think these birds would only narrowly be able to make it through a year in the wild in the UK by being provisioned regularly with the necessary food by humans and particularly during the winter months where survival chances would already be bleak.

It seems like whoever made that comment just thought of the way that the invasive ringnecked parakeet managed to establish itself in the wild in the UK and extrapolated from this that the same scenario could be possible with the rainbow lorikeet , which is highly unlikely to say the least.

 

Yes, but if theoretically that kid were to be walking up to an orangutan enclosure and say to his parents that in fact these were monkeys, only to be immediately contradicted by the sign saying 'These are apes, not monkeys' (which many ape enclosure signs do say to eliminate confusion), then they would still look a bit silly...

 

I think that you give that person way too much credit; I rather assume that the "whistleblower" was a disgruntled (ex-)employee with only a smattering of true zoological knowledge, who wanted to inflict damage to the public image of the zoo for whatever petty reason (revenge?).

 

Would they really though? Sure, they would be wrong, but that's okay. There's no need to feel ashamed or silly because you are wrong about something. We might say he was a bit silly if he subsequently made the same mistake; then again, who among us hasn't forgotten learned information?

 

Yes, I see your point. And if he were to see that he was wrong and feel slightly embarrassed about it, he would remember it for next time...

 

Silly? Perhaps. But it is also likely that the family might read that sign with new curiosity and be interested to learn the differences between apes and monkeys. They could spend the rest of their visit trying to identify apes vs. monkeys. That is what the signs are for. A lot depends on the quality of the signage.
The important thing is not how ignorant a visitor is when they arrive at the zoo but how ignorant they are when they leave.

 

Yes , could be , but as the ringnecked parakeet is such a well established and known invasive in the UK , I would be more inclined to think that the escape of the lorikeets was used by whoever the whistleblower was in order to damage the public image of the zoo.

 

Has anyone mentioned the time when a keeper was bit at the National Zoo by *Blank*. It was annoying since it gave *Blank* a really bad reputation and it was the keeper’s fault, since he didn’t close the *Blank* enclosure’s gate, and *Blank* can be really aggressive.
Blank equals what? Great job to you for figuring out what the blank is.

 

One trip to the Toledo Zoo I heard a mom say to her kid the sloth in the aviary was fake because it wasn't moving.

 

If it were a kid saying it to their mother, than that is pure innocence . But then I reread your post and saw it was the other way around....

 

Let's not be hasty to judge people and parenting, it's a sensitive topic for many, and without more context you definitely cannot assume this .

 

Ok. Sorry, just got mad.

 

Don't worry, what you said has a possibility that it is correct and I do think that the mother saying that to her child is not the most educational thing to say ! Though beyond that, I wouldn't comment on.

 

I mean, maybe let's not assume things and blame a keeper for an accident that resulted in their injury? Pretty sure no one has been left with a bad outlook on zebras as a result.

~Thylo

 

At the Shanghai Aquarium there really is a fake crocodile in the Australian brackish water tank.

 

It's sort of annoying when people say 'hey look at this (animal)!', and it's not what they said it was. Happens a lot with people who dont know the difference between squid, octopus and cuttlefish. also heard a seadragon called a seahorse (not technically wrong but annoying nonetheless) and people calling eels 'sea snakes' and vice-versa.