How do you think extinct animals would have done in zoos?

TeaLovingDave said:
I suspect that even Gorgosaurus, at 9 metres long, would have been far too large and dangerous to handle - Nanuqsaurus or Alioramus, each being about 4 or 5 metres long, would be much more feasible.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I figured as much. Even if they turned out not to be very aggressive, there would still be the matter of space and food.

d1am0ndback said:
I'd imagine the passenger pigeon would be kept similarly to how they were when they were alive, only in local collections. That is the only reason the Cincinnati zoo had passenger pigeons in the first place, and when realizing how they had some of the only captive specimens of the vanishing species, attempted to breed/find mates.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they'd be a "local wildlife exhibit" thing at most, (even that's pretty generous, if the species is very common to the point where wild ones hang out in zoos, the zoos might not feel a need to display them) and even then, a lot of them would probably be rescues. The passenger pigeon was so common that there probably wouldn't be a shortage of rescued birds.
 
I think Moa and Elephant Bird would do decent in captivity, similar to ostriches, emus and rhea. However I fought Haast's Eagle would do very well, considering their size and specialised diet of Moa.
 
animal_expert01 said:
I think Moa and Elephant Bird would do decent in captivity, similar to ostriches, emus and rhea. However I fought Haast's Eagle would do very well, considering their size and specialised diet of Moa.
Click to expand...

Moa and elephant birds could work. Shoot, maybe people would even farm them if they were still around, ha ha. You're probably right about the Haast's eagle. Even if they could eat other things, their size would make keeping them impractical. Maaaaaaybe one or two places would have rescued ones, but only if they could eat things other than moa.
 
animal_expert01 said:
I think Haast's Eagle would not do very well,
Click to expand...
That's how it's supposed to read, sorry for the mistake. I also believe that the Dodo (assuming it riding taste as bad as they said it did) may even be commercially farmed for their feathers and meat. I think they could have had a place in the pet trade, because after all the are very similar to pheasants (Not scientifically but in carerequriements), parrots and pigeons, all of which are read only common in the pet trade.
 
According to historical accounts, dodos weren't that tasty. So I wonder whether your business idea would, eh, take flight. Still, this reminds me of the great novelette "The Ugly Chickens" by the late Howard Waldrob. If you haven't read it yet: THE UGLY CHICKENS-PAGE 1
 
I'd imagine a lot of the smaller dinosaurs (Small ornithopods, dromaeosaurs, troodonts, etc etc) being exhibited easily, unless they're specialized. Small pterosaurs would do fine in an enclosed space. Highly doubt azhdarchids would do well if at all in captivity, especially Quetzalcoatlus and Hatzegopteryx. Large sauropods would probably be real iffy unless you got a lot of land space and even then the feeding costs would probably be large upkeep-wise (elephants are already quite expensive to have an upkeep). Ceratopsians as mentioned before would probably need some strong fencing, same with large theropods and basically any large dinosaur or the like (Hadrosaurs, Stegosaurs, etc).
I'd imagine many of the proboscideans to be almost downright similar to the modern elephants, though woolly mammoths would probably fare better in a temperate climate. American mastodons would probably do fine in warmer climates (fossils have found them even reaching down to Florida). I'd imagine a lot of the extinct hoofstock to be pretty similar to the living species (save for a few exceptions).
I'd imagine machairodonts (sabertooths) to be almost exactly similar to big cats housing-wise.
There's a lot more extinct animals would probably do fine, though obviously (like some modern species) there will be some species that won't fare well or even thrive in captivity at all.
 
As for the Haast's eagle: I'm not sure whether you're aware that they were about the size of modern Andean condors - which are kept in zoos all over the world. Given their relatively short and broad wings, the Haast's eagle might have coped well with the confined maneuverability of an aviary. Wouldn't be my top choice for flight shows, though, but quite an effective guard bird...
 
Batto said:
As for the Haast's eagle: I'm not sure whether you're aware that they were about the size of modern Andean condors - which are kept in zoos all over the world. Given their relatively short and broad wings, the Haast's eagle might have coped well with the confined maneuverability of an aviary. Wouldn't be my top choice for flight shows, though, but quite an effective guard bird...
Click to expand...
Considering they could be weaned on Moa. Also the largest Andean Condors reach around 15 kilograms while the largest Haast's Eagle reached around 16.5, which is a big difference when it comes to birds.
 
Last edited:
@animal_expert01 : could you please check your spelling before posting your replies? I have a hard time understanding you. Thanks.

Weight does play a role in animals when it comes to flight. In this context, however, it doesn't. A difference of 1,5kg between two maximum (sic) estimated (sic) weights doesn't indicate whether the potentially heavier avian species would do worse in captivity. Sorry, but that's not even hair-splitting, just common sense.
 
Batto said:
@animal_expert01 : could you please check your spelling before posting your replies? I have a hard time understanding you. Thanks.

Weight does play a role in animals when it comes to flight. In this context, however, it doesn't. A difference of 1,5kg between two maximum (sic) estimated (sic) weights doesn't indicate whether the potentially heavier avian species would do worse in captivity. Sorry, but that's not even hair-splitting, just common sense.
Click to expand...
But they still wouldn't do well in captivity, as they have a very specialised diet of Moa, as I said previously. Also Condors tend to feed on deceased carcasses, while Haast's Eagle prey on animal species that are still very much alive, because of this the Eagle could mistake one of its keeper for a prey item and scientists have found remains of people in Haast's Eagle nests. So if they where to be easily managed they would have to be hand reared by people, but even then they would still be a very dangerous animal.
 
Last edited:
animal_expert01 said:
But they still wouldn't do well in captivity, as they have a very specialised diet of Moa, as I said previously. Also Condors tend to feed on deceased carcasses, while Haast's Eagle prey on animal species that are still very much alive, because of this the Eagle could mistake one of its keeper for a prey item and scientists have found remains of people in Haast's Eagle nests. So if they where to be easily managed they would have to be hand reared by people, but even then they would still be a very dangerous animal.
Click to expand...

I'm not necessarily doubting you here, but do you have a source for this dietary knowledge? I was under the impression they were believed to have fed on other taxa as well (particularly Cnemiornis), down to birds the size of a kakapo. I'd certainly be surprised if their diet were quite so specialized.
 
The various moa species might have constituted a considerable part of the diet of the Haast's eagle. But like all other extant eagles, it probably was an opportunistic predator that hunted other adequate prey species, such as the large flightless South Island goose (Cnemiornis calicitrans) [ha, GP beat me to it! ^^]And like all extant eagles, it probably didn't spurn a carcass as an easy meal if given the chance. Therefore, I doubt that dietary specialisation would have been a problem in the husbandry of Haast's Eagles.
 
Eublepharis said:
I'd imagine a lot of the smaller dinosaurs (Small ornithopods, dromaeosaurs, troodonts, etc etc) being exhibited easily, unless they're specialized. Small pterosaurs would do fine in an enclosed space. Highly doubt azhdarchids would do well if at all in captivity, especially Quetzalcoatlus and Hatzegopteryx. Large sauropods would probably be real iffy unless you got a lot of land space and even then the feeding costs would probably be large upkeep-wise (elephants are already quite expensive to have an upkeep). Ceratopsians as mentioned before would probably need some strong fencing, same with large theropods and basically any large dinosaur or the like (Hadrosaurs, Stegosaurs, etc).
I'd imagine many of the proboscideans to be almost downright similar to the modern elephants, though woolly mammoths would probably fare better in a temperate climate. American mastodons would probably do fine in warmer climates (fossils have found them even reaching down to Florida). I'd imagine a lot of the extinct hoofstock to be pretty similar to the living species (save for a few exceptions).
I'd imagine machairodonts (sabertooths) to be almost exactly similar to big cats housing-wise.
There's a lot more extinct animals would probably do fine, though obviously (like some modern species) there will be some species that won't fare well or even thrive in captivity at all.
Click to expand...

Getting enough space for the biggest dinosaurs would be possible, depending on the country. Sure, it won't be feasible for the average zoo in a town or city, but in the US and some other places, you can go out into rural areas and get land very cheap. It's the feeding costs that would really get ya.
 
TheMightyOrca said:
Getting enough space for the biggest dinosaurs would be possible, depending on the country. Sure, it won't be feasible for the average zoo in a town or city, but in the US and some other places, you can go out into rural areas and get land very cheap. It's the feeding costs that would really get ya.
Click to expand...
Imagine the amount of feces too, considering a lot of hoofstock already produce a lot of food xD

Organic dinosaur compost would be a cool product gimmick :P
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top