Join our zoo community

Worst waste of money by zoos

Discussion in 'General Zoo Discussion' started by pachyderm pro, 29 Sep 2016.

  1. Zooplantman

    Zooplantman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    23 Jan 2008
    Posts:
    4,144
    Location:
    New York, USA
    I think not. I don't like the concept but from all that I have heard (won't get to see it until next year) it delivers as promised. The monorail part, on the other hand, appears to be much like the one sold to Springfield on the Simpsons
     
  2. Zooplantman

    Zooplantman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    23 Jan 2008
    Posts:
    4,144
    Location:
    New York, USA
    I suspect that there is little correlation between amount a zoo spends on a fancy exhibit and number of species the zoo has to display. More exhibits=more staff time, more food prep time, more food purchase expenses, more maintenance time and expense. The two issues can be somewhat connected but they do not strongly influence each other, IMO
     
  3. Dassie rat

    Dassie rat Well-Known Member 10+ year member

    Joined:
    18 Jun 2011
    Posts:
    5,497
    Location:
    London, UK
    Hello Zooplantman

    There is an increased trend towards mixed-species exhibits, although staff members have to be careful about ensuring that each animal is fed. There is also an increased trend towards walk-through enclosures, which can involve more staff. A few visitors are irresponsible; I once told a visitor to take his finger out of a squirrel monkey's mouth.
     
    Zygodactyl likes this.
  4. NigeW

    NigeW Well-Known Member 10+ year member

    Joined:
    20 Jan 2011
    Posts:
    281
    Location:
    Chester
    I have to agree with you here AD. Its big, barren, doesn't really display an awful lot and feels different to and out of place with the rest of the zoo. The horse and donkey context, although I understand it, is lost on most visitors. I don't think anyone comes to San Diego to see domestic horses and donkeys.

    @TLDave I can see what Moebelle means about the size, only if talking about geographical area of the site. I hadn't looked it up before I went, but I expected San Diego Zoo to cover more real estate than it does. That said, it makes the most of space and having had only a day there myself, I could easily have filled two.
     
  5. Mr. Zootycoon

    Mr. Zootycoon Well-Known Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    3 Jun 2015
    Posts:
    1,193
    Location:
    probably in a zoo
    In case of lions I do agree, but in case of gorillas I don't.
    Apenheul Primate Park has one of the largest gorilla islands in Europe,
    and the gorillas make great use of it (personal experience).

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    I do think Wildlands Adventure Zoo Emmen is a waste of money.
    They could have done so much more. The way I see it, they
    just threw out almost all conservation and education (initially there
    weren't even signs!) and focussed solely on recreation.
     
  6. Pertinax

    Pertinax Well-Known Member 15+ year member

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2006
    Posts:
    20,708
    Location:
    england
    Apenheul's Gorilla island is unusual in be very well wooded, giving them far more overhead cover than is usual in most other similar exhibits.

    I think maybe Apenheul's Gorillas are also shut out of their indoor house during good summer weather when most visitors are present. They appeared to be on my only visit there. Can anyone confirm if that is so or not?
     
  7. jayjds2

    jayjds2 Well-Known Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    10 Nov 2015
    Posts:
    2,742
    Location:
    USA
    To be fair, it's not really a waste (except the Feng Shui part perhaps), as it's an amazing enclosure for the few species it holds. The only thing I would change is that there's only one viewing perspective.

    @GraysonDP (post 30 on this thread):
    I would be fairly confident in saying that the most popular animals at the zoos are the pandas, without a doubt. There are also koalas, another highly popular animal. While EO was an upgrade in terms of space for the elephants, the actual exhibit quality didn't go up too much.
     
  8. Batto

    Batto Well-Known Member 10+ year member

    Joined:
    3 Sep 2013
    Posts:
    3,459
    Location:
    Baltic Sea - no more
    @jayjds2: I disagree; it is a waste, as it will never fulfill its intended purpose (including the feng shui ;)).
     
  9. GraysonDP

    GraysonDP Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24 May 2015
    Posts:
    618
    Location:
    Washington DC
    I disagree. The pool in EO is huge and the new enclosure has significantly more enrichments. Would grass and naturalism have been desired? Yes. I'm not saying EO is amazing but it is a helluva lot better than Hoof and Horn Mesa or Elephant Mesa.
     
  10. DavidBrown

    DavidBrown Well-Known Member 15+ year member

    Joined:
    12 Aug 2008
    Posts:
    4,867
    Location:
    California, USA
    It isn't a waste. It is a very attractive primate exhibit and useful addition to the zoo. If zoological relations with China ever thaw and golden monkeys come over they will have a nice home. If it is a permanent langur exhibit then that is good too.
     
  11. Nikola Chavkosk

    Nikola Chavkosk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    17 Feb 2016
    Posts:
    1,322
    Location:
    Prilep, R. Macedonia
    This is important point of view, Dassie rat. I agree with you. Next such project would be lion exhibit at Beauval zoo in France - huge lion enclosure. Zoos often spend a lot of money for species over-represented in zoos. Also lion exhibit complex in Zagreb zoo in Croatia is such thing - overspending for lions.
     
  12. Batto

    Batto Well-Known Member 10+ year member

    Joined:
    3 Sep 2013
    Posts:
    3,459
    Location:
    Baltic Sea - no more
    Once again: I disagree. If you spend 7,4 million USD as well as several thousands on PR rubbish such as “Feng shui“ to promote this as a one-of-kind attraction and then can’t and (unless you’re hopelessly optimistic regarding Chinese business mentality) never will use it for its intended purpose, then it IS a waste of money. I’ve seen the exhibit in person and wasn’t too smitten by it, either, Francois’ langurs or not.
     
  13. DavidBrown

    DavidBrown Well-Known Member 15+ year member

    Joined:
    12 Aug 2008
    Posts:
    4,867
    Location:
    California, USA
    It was built as a primate exhibit, not just as a golden monkey exhibit as you are portraying it. So yes, it is being used for its intended purpose.
     
  14. Batto

    Batto Well-Known Member 10+ year member

    Joined:
    3 Sep 2013
    Posts:
    3,459
    Location:
    Baltic Sea - no more
    As far as I know, it was specifically built to house Golden snub-nosed monkeys - hence the Feng shui mumbo jambo (that even you cannot deny was a waste of money in itself). So no, it’s not.
    Our conversation starts to resemble a certain geometric form: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...gments.svg/2000px-Circle-withsegments.svg.png
     
  15. Zooplantman

    Zooplantman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    23 Jan 2008
    Posts:
    4,144
    Location:
    New York, USA
    Or........ were the golden monkeys cancelled because the zoo did not comply with the feng shui advice :D ?!?!?!?!?!?!

    http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/20...-furniture-for-a-trio-of-golden-monkeys/?_r=0
     
  16. DavidBrown

    DavidBrown Well-Known Member 15+ year member

    Joined:
    12 Aug 2008
    Posts:
    4,867
    Location:
    California, USA
    The golden monkeys were cancelled because the Chinese and American governments got into a diplomatic snit about the Dalai Lama visiting Washington is what was explained to me.

    It resulted in a very nice primate enclosure which is probably the best monkey exhibit at the zoo and not a waste of money.
     
  17. Dassie rat

    Dassie rat Well-Known Member 10+ year member

    Joined:
    18 Jun 2011
    Posts:
    5,497
    Location:
    London, UK
    Perhaps Donald Trump got the hump because the Dalai Lama wanted to get into the USA via Mexico.
     
  18. Batto

    Batto Well-Known Member 10+ year member

    Joined:
    3 Sep 2013
    Posts:
    3,459
    Location:
    Baltic Sea - no more
    How peculiar; I was told that mutual monetary disagreement was the main issue...:rolleyes::D
    And as previously explained, given the amount of money spent on “essential“ aspects such as Asian ornaments and a PR campaign for something that never became reality (you know how many great conservation projects could be financed with 7.4 million USD? Quite a few...) , it was a waste of money (on an at best decent exhibit), no matter how often you will negate it. So, shall we continue with this pointless conversation of mutual disagreement?
    And one last piece of advice:
    This is a Golden monkey
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_monkey#/media/File:Golden_monkey.JPG
    And this is a Golden snub-nosed monkey
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gol...-nosed_Monkeys,_Qinling_Mountains_-_China.jpg
    Both monkeys, yet different kinds of “gold“. ;) The latter was the bone of contention, btw.
    You’re welcome.^^
     
  19. DavidBrown

    DavidBrown Well-Known Member 15+ year member

    Joined:
    12 Aug 2008
    Posts:
    4,867
    Location:
    California, USA
    There was never really a PR campaign because the monkeys never arrived. The Asian ornamentation is because it is an Asian primate exhibit.
    The reason for the monkeys never arriving was never discussed in public. It may have involved money and/or it may have involved international politics; these are not mutually exclusive explanations.

    There is really no call for rudeness, Batto.
     
  20. Batto

    Batto Well-Known Member 10+ year member

    Joined:
    3 Sep 2013
    Posts:
    3,459
    Location:
    Baltic Sea - no more
    I was lucky to see what the PR department had prepared; lovely items among them. And from what I’ve heard, money was the key issue.
    Ornaments, Asian or not, can be subtle-and cost-effective (like Zlin zoo’s Chinese garden).
    And seriously: what was “rude“ about my previous replies to your stubbornness?