Humble small zoo

[SealPup]

Nikola: if you are lucky you might not have to keep your own stock of AV (Batto can ofc tell you much more than me about AV itself.) It can be judged enough that there is a local, available supply in a nearby catchment area so it can be held in a hospital or somewhere. Luck will depend on locality. I don't pretend to be an expert on law but this is what I was informed about technicalities in the UK.

If I can train to use snake hooks and I am dyspraxic, you can learn to become the trained member of staff in case of emergencies yourself. Its not hard to use snake hooks for moving snakes it is rather safe techniques for more precise tasks, that I never mastered. The thing about handling snakes is stipulated in case of emergency, which you probably won't have.

 

[SealPup]

Batto: for inspiration as to the "vision" think of Hillside, late Southport, Grangewood. And the houses I mostly explained. The rainforest hall is envisioned as similar to Lakeland but more lush - think the lori landing at Avifauna maybe. I like the small bird garden feel for outdoors.

 

[Batto]

So the leitmotif is an ordinary 5 acre zoo

This isn't a thematic leitmotif, but a self-imposed parameter. What are your fictional zoo's USPs? What makes your zoo special and worth a visit?

on that not hot herps are a crowd puller.

That wasn't the question, as some species are indeed popular among zoo visitors (even not on the ABC golden cow level). The locally varying security requirements (insurance!) and last but not least the costs for electricity / heating can be quite a financial burden, especially with larger collections. And if your local area (such as my county) doesn't have specific safety requirements, you nevertheless should install at least the most important ones, for the sake of the public and your staff.
As for rays and jellyfish: in preparation for my exhibition, I've also looked into their husbandry for the purpose of making them part of my concept (and they might be in the future). While you can try to keep both on a shoestring budget, I can promise you that neither you nor most of the visitors would appreciate such a presentation. And it's not just the asset cost, but the upkeep expenses are anything but humble (filtration, nutrition etc.).
If well represented (moderated feeding sessions, keeper talks, nicely landscaped enclosures etc.), both nilghai and takins can be just as popular as barbary sheep...
It doesn't make a lot of sense to describe set pieces by referring to rather obscure local zoo exhibits I've never visited. If I described an exhibit by referring to, say, Güstrow's wolf exhibit or Poing's bear enclosure, most readers here would neither be able to follow me.

 

[animal_expert01]

Old World knifefishes are osteoglossiformes convergent upon the Neotripical counterparts. The species I was thinking of was the clown knifefish. Similarly Asian tigerfish are striped softwater perches often mis-sold as brackish. Snakeheads, Asian tigerfishes and Asian knifefishes are all ambush predators but size allowing unlikely to harm one another. All prefer different levels of the tank and Datnoides, the smallest of the three, is deep bodied. They will live together but I did not mean to imply Australian turtles in the same tank. Pignoses will coexist with certain pleurodires.

Flying gurnards called helmet gurnards are present in the indo-pacific. I have kept them before in a shallow aquarium. They are an easy and charming fish but take a lot of food.

Sorry for the misidentification, this is why I like to work in scientific names. I still wouldn't keep snakeheads with anything. If you are really set on getting a snakehead try Channa bleheri, but even then tankmates must be chosen carefully.

Will the tanks be on auto water change? As rays are very susceptible to water quality and require frequent water changes.

I would be very entrigued if you could post pictures of your helmet gurnards and their tank, hopefully that is not to much to ask?

I do wish you luck with this little Zoo of yours.

 

[SealPup]

Well there isn't really a unique selling point: most animal collections don't have one. The aim is to use a few ABC species I happen to like, to pull in punters and support a small zoo that is largely a bird garden and bird of prey center. (Though as I explained the flights are a bad idea because small animals are averse to the shadows.) The exhibits of large zoo collections are rarely appropriate comparisons: I mentioned the lorikeet's at Vogelpark Avifauna as an example of a tropical house.

I have sometimes seen Barbary sheep offered for sale privately but not nilghai or takins, the nilghai can be aggressive to other hoofstock (I was told) and the takin is an animal I don't know much about and were rare in Europe till recently which makes me skeptical they are available. That is why I thought of Barbary sheep: easy to find and care for.

Gemsbok are easy and I have a friend keeps them in Namibia but are they often available here? They would be nice in a themed enclosure with ostrich. Other cohabiters - giraffe, white rhino, warthog, and other placid antelope - seem rare to buy or out of the question for reasons of space or cost.

Do away with the water buffalo enclosure, keep the alpaca, keep the reindeer for Christmas and the camels for riding on, add Barbary sheep, keep capybara, and peccaries, and blackbuck and small deer?

 

[SealPup]

Sorry for the misidentification, this is why I like to work in scientific names. I still wouldn't keep snakeheads with anything. If you are really set on getting a snakehead try Channa bleheri, but even then tankmates must be chosen carefully.

Will the tanks be on auto water change? As rays are very susceptible to water quality and require frequent water changes.

I would be very entrigued if you could post pictures of your helmet gurnards and their tank, hopefully that is not to much to ask?

I do wish you luck with this little Zoo of yours.

The helmet gurnards were a long time ago, but no I never do much with automated equipment as it always fails. I couldn't even figure protein skimmers properly and Shimek says they just remove plankton. So it was just cannister filters, metal halides or T5s, heater and plankton friendly powerheads where sessile invertebrates were involved.

People are a bit paranoid of ambush predators like snakeheads forgetting they have low energy lifestyles and avoid confrontation with dissimilar fishes save with prey they can swallow. I have seen them with tigerfishes and knifefishes and the knifefishes have the foulest temper of the three. Caveats against mixing channids with other fishes also apply to many catfishes and even bichirs that are commonly mixed in aquaria. Though channids do require a lid! So maybe not the best fish for such a large aquarium.

 

[Batto]

Well there isn't really a unique selling point: most animal collections don't have one.

A modern good zoo is more than just an arbitrary animal collection. Among others (entertainment, education, conservation etc. etc.), it's also a business, and as such, also should have some USPs. That can be animals, but nowadays even more so activities, special events and experiences connected to the animals. So in your scenario, what could that be?

When you're afraid of interspecific aggression, gemsbok might not be the species you would like to have then. Yeah, male nilghais, like pretty much all male ungulates, can be "naughty", but mixed species exhibits with blackbucks, axis deer etc. usually work well.
Takins aren't harmless either, but due to good breeding, both Mishmi and even Golden takins have become more and more available for accredited zoos (especially bulls). In general, bachelor groups of surplus males (if their social behaviour allows for it) could be a good option to get animals from major zoos.
Reindeer actually aren't the easiest deer species to take care of.

 

[SealPup]

Reindeer aren't easy I know, but people are buying them as pets so they're available - and they are a winter draw for the public. I never heard of gemsbok turning nasty except to zebras which trample their young and look vaguely similar to themselves: if any animal is a potential risk, I draw the line with zebra, waterbuck and eland in mixed collections after reading horror stories. Otherwise dissimilar appearance and feeding preference will limit aggression - a ratite, a grazing antelope, a browser like the giraffe, the warthog for example.

OFC my knowledge of gemsbok is from Namibia and SA where people peport them kind natured to other animals and I would like to know counterexamples. I do wonder how much founder effect determines the behaviours of captive populations round the world, if after 5 generations the descendant is not the same as the ancestor.

Gazelles and impala survive poorly here: what about klipspringers, dik dik and steenboks? I heard of dik dik offered privately once but not the others. As a Iapanophile I would have liked a themed deer park with serow and sika, but serow and the right kind of sika are rare.

As this is a hobby zoo experieces would mostly be me, feeding animals such as penguins (how easy to find nowadays?), also big cat feeding as at South Lakes seems popular. Big gaboon and constrictor handling displays should be popular and people like to meet owls. Small carnivorous birds can do a show of sorts without flying overhead - seriemas, caracaras, kookaburras, NW vultures.

 

[Batto]

I would like to know counterexamples

Ask Salzburg Zoo, among others.

 

[SealPup]

Ask Salzburg Zoo, among others.

Can you remind me what had happened? Yes I heard there has been GBH perpetrated by oryx species, but always to other oryx or to zebra. Ever to ostriches?

Salzburg to my knowledge keep gemsbok with rhino, kob and zebras. All these species are grazers and the last two resemble gemsbok physically. And any species has behavioural outliers so one rogue scarcely proves a trend: whereas zebra or black rhino are consistently harmful to others.

 

[Batto]

Can you [guess what word of politeness is missing here] remind me what had happened?

Gemsbok mauling other inhabitants. But since you already have an explanation for that

so one rogue scarcely proves a trend

, there's no need to add any details.

 

[SealPup]

Gemsbok mauling of other inhabitants. But since you already have an explanation for that
, there's no need to ad any details.

So I predicted right - aggression among hoofstock is food + similarity? I had read this before.

And reading about problems in mixed exhibits stateside you .find bits about oryx males being a bit rambunctious to other antelopes. but despite their horns, nothing serious. Well, keep dissimilar species with female gemsbok perhaps? I never read of them bothering ostriches or other ground birds like kori bustards. Which was my idea - an antelope and a ratite.

 

[Mr. Zootycoon]

The problem with this zoo is the same problem many fantasy zoos on ZooChat have. It's practically a private collection, especially when it comes to things like husbandry, enclosure design and animal stock and. The following lines, among others, show a private collectors mentality:

I have sometimes seen Barbary sheep offered for sale privately but not nilghai or takins

The aim is to use a few ABC species I happen to like, to pull in punters and support a small zoo that is largely a bird garden and bird of prey center

Gemsbok are easy and I have a friend keeps them in Namibia but are they often available here?

All the same the aquarium would need to have depth front to back, not to be gigantic. 180cm X 180cm for rays and others, but 90cm tall at most?

I advice you to think like a zoo owner (who is a business owner too - Batto wrote and definately knows more about that part than me), and not like an animal keeper. Public animal husbandry should not just be adequate, it should be very good if not exceptional. Just buying animals you personally like, without a specific concept or plan behind it, is not something a modern zoo owner should do.

I also wouldn't call your planned zoo "humble" in any way.

 

[SealPup]

Well to be honest I happen to dislike the feel and hypocrisy of "modern" zoos and here I am not the only one. In a way a zoo that is just a zoo, is now a gimmick.

Chester as built by the private collector George Mottershead had a soul even if low building costs caused early decay to set into parts, but now despite enjoying the species on display I admit to finding Chester kitschy somehow. The best Chester building is the old tropical house with its own identity and architectural style, if it were demolished people would find it a loss but can that be said for the newer buildings i'm not dissing the newer buildings but they aren't memorable. Similarly London wrecked the iconic Clore Pavilion, and build crap like the Web of Life. Honestly I appreciate lots of old zoo buildings were unsatisfactory but I wish these "modern" trends could be reversed.

And there are signs the "modern zoo" fad is passing - see Jerseys reptile house which is based on how Japanese nature aquariums fit into buildings. There are elements of immersion there but its unashamed to be a building with heritage from earlier reptile houses. Jersey itself was disappointing as it hit home how many UK zoos now feel all the same with the same clichéd guiding philosophies.

I most ennjoy zoos that feel old and culturally important such as Artis in Amsterdam, and homely private collections like the defunct but amazing Grangewood in someone's back garden, for different reasons. The latter or even somewhere such as Southport is however do-able, whilst somewhere grand such as Artis is not. And whether it is architecturally grand zoos such as Artis or municipal collections such as Warsaw or seaside attractions such as Sandown, these pieces of our heritage still draw in visitors without gimmickry.

May I ask how is lowering construction or upkeep costs not being businesslike? And whilst I'm at it yes, private availability is of utmost importance unless you don't want to own most animals in "your" own zoo and are willing to throw money at animals that aren't yours. I don't see how realism about sourcing stock is unbusinesslike. Zoo visitors are drawn in mainly by the ABC animals and yes, including some is itself good practice. Then there are animals people find fun that get them to stay longer buying merchandise and snacks. And landscaping makes it a pleasant place to sit longer.

 

[Mr. Zootycoon]

I don't think we have the same definition of a "modern" zoo.

 

[SealPup]

What then is a modern zoo? All I know is I dislike the tendencies in modernish zoo design and management: especially in the UK the zoos became a cliche over years.

Do you mean education?

Often education seems wrongheaded in focus and approach: people sneer at ye olde taxonomic zoo buildings but education efforts today are suspect as anyone evaluated how much visitors recall from zoo visits?) and focused on inappropriate conservation messages that will have no effect: for example most English schoolchildren will never have the opportunity to buy tiger parts. Children and presumably adults will learn more when they have to find information by lifting flaps and such, it makes them more curious. Despite the origins of the zoo itself in higher education information is usually child friendly and untiered, as though all visitors will have the same knowledge base at the level of a child.

Or immersion?

Immersive exhibits are in denial about their location and surroundings. They are good for certain exhibits like a walk through rainforest display. But accommodating immersion has a price for animal houses such as aquaria. Like old museums that darkened the space to highlight dioramas that were lit, buildings such as Sea Life centres are darkened so as to draw attention to the displays - as if it were to shut out the fact the aquariums or vivariums are in a building. Whereas people will linger for longer in buildings that are light and feel airy as in modern museum design.

I am not sure as to why a zoo needs a leitmotif, and marketing can change if you aren't fixed to a certain theme by design. Batto seems to think a zoo needs a theme, but he didn't explain why.

 

[nicholas]

Either you are a millionaire SealPup, or you have very little experience in construction. Calling this fantasy zoo humble and having these plans as the start seems quite strange to me. For fun I made a VERY simple calculation on your project. Exhibits alone would be in the range of 100000 Euros, and that's counting low. Infrastructure would be in the same scale and land and permits too. If you plan on buying all the animals (I really don't understand why) add 100000 more. If these are serious plans in any way, I hate to break it to you, but your zoo is not something most people could start with, but more something like Michael Jackson had on his Neverland estate.

 

[SealPup]

The plan was to buy a farm or similar with outbuildings for conversion rather than construction.

 

[Mr. Zootycoon]

What then is a modern zoo?

To stay to the basics, a modern zoo is a zoo that can survive financially in our current world. It's a zoo that chooses, houses and aquires animals responsibly, with visitor enjoyment, safety, animal welfare, education and conservation in mind. It's not an empty collection of animals without context, as I fear your zoo will be.

 

[SealPup]

To stay to the basics, a modern zoo is a zoo that can survive financially in our current world. It's a zoo that chooses, houses and aquires animals responsibly, with visitor enjoyment, safety, animal welfare, education and conservation in mind. It's not an empty collection of animals without context, as I fear your zoo will be.

Well I made my view on education known in the post above. And I am cynical of zoo conservation w/o abandoning the concept altogether - same with zoo education. Your description of a modern zoo is honestly a series of positive buzz words as in marketing. Not a list of basics.

And what has it to do with financial survival?

And just as honestly, most of the zoos that call themselves such do not have a taxonomic or geographical theme as context - as much as I love specialisharks)ollections, they are not seen as zoos by the public and seem to have trouble staying afloat more often than the generalised zoos with ABC exhibits.

As far as animal welfare goes, I take it very seriously but 6 x 6 foot ponds are adequate to house and breed small rays without ethological signs of discomfort (someone criticised me for this but its supported by the German Aqualog volume about river rays, and Scott Michaels' book on aquarium shar