But overall it is a bare minimum collection, As they sell themselves as an overseas destination for visitors what a wonder way to show case our own Queensland species of native Tree Kangaroo, Platypus, Quolls and other interesting species to international guests,perhaps a visit from some who have never been there might see how little there is to see for the money!
Australia Zoo australia zoo growing pains
- Thread starter Coquinguy
- Start date
I agree Australia Zoo's species list (especially in way of mega fauna) is nothing to write home about, but I think ultimately it comes down to what expectations people have of the facility prior to visiting.
I visited a few years ago (when they still had elephants) and was impressed by both their native animal collection (lots of the crocodiles I'd seen on the TV show, large reptile houses etc.) and the addition of a few exotics (tigers, elephants etc.) that enhanced the visit. Feeding the elephants was a highlight, as was the Crocoseum Show (birds of prey, crocodiles, tigers etc.). I think the reason I enjoyed my visit so much was partly because I got to see a lot of the animals I'd seen on the TV show, but also because I'd gone with the expectation of it being in the same league as a small Australian Zoo (and therefore it exceeded my expectations). Had I gone expecting to see a world class zoo (Auckland Zoo, Singapore Zoo etc.), I may have thought differently.
I 100% agree however that there seems to be a lack of direction, with little progress made in the last few years compared to the astronomical progress that was made with the zoo during Steve's time (1992-2006). This water park seems seriously average too btw, don't really see the point of it. Why compete with Wet and Wild etc.? They should just stick with what they're good at and expand on the animal collection, The African Savannah could do with lions and hunting dogs at a bare minimum and ideally a species of great ape. I believe orangutans and gorillas were once scheduled to be exhibited on an island, which was then scrapped and redesigned as 'Bindi's Island.'
I visited a few years ago (when they still had elephants) and was impressed by both their native animal collection (lots of the crocodiles I'd seen on the TV show, large reptile houses etc.) and the addition of a few exotics (tigers, elephants etc.) that enhanced the visit. Feeding the elephants was a highlight, as was the Crocoseum Show (birds of prey, crocodiles, tigers etc.). I think the reason I enjoyed my visit so much was partly because I got to see a lot of the animals I'd seen on the TV show, but also because I'd gone with the expectation of it being in the same league as a small Australian Zoo (and therefore it exceeded my expectations). Had I gone expecting to see a world class zoo (Auckland Zoo, Singapore Zoo etc.), I may have thought differently.
I 100% agree however that there seems to be a lack of direction, with little progress made in the last few years compared to the astronomical progress that was made with the zoo during Steve's time (1992-2006). This water park seems seriously average too btw, don't really see the point of it. Why compete with Wet and Wild etc.? They should just stick with what they're good at and expand on the animal collection, The African Savannah could do with lions and hunting dogs at a bare minimum and ideally a species of great ape. I believe orangutans and gorillas were once scheduled to be exhibited on an island, which was then scrapped and redesigned as 'Bindi's Island.'
Have to agree with your comments. I see they do sell themselves as a top zoo for overseas visitors to see which is I believe wrong with a bare minimum collection, Yes they use to have a statement on their website saying they were going to build the worlds largest Gorillas exhibit and yes their was lots of talk of how keen they were to add Orangs which appears to have been scrapped.I have seen public comments on their Facebook site of people asking where are the Lions or other animals which for the most get little response or none at all. So the "Ten year plan" which stated on their website started in 2006 is somewhat overdue with only stage one of the three stages being built so far but they still state they are going "Full steam ahead!
As an American who was very into Steve's show, I had always assumed it was one of the top, major zoos - why else would it have a show, especially with an owner who gets to travel the world doing all of these things with different species instead of always being at his zoo? The only US zoos that have had shows have been major players, mostly San Diego and Columbus before the Irwins came on tv, and now Tampa and Bronx as well. The show often talked about all of these grand plans and things they were building, and with something like the Crocoseum - which I've always found a bit awful - I'd expect similarly large, expensive things throughout.
With a name like "Australia Zoo" I would visit expecting to see all of the major Aussie species (koalas, tree kangaroos, wombats, platypus, echidnas, dingo, devils, etc) with a further emphasis on the more unique ones that aren't seen much outside of the country (platypus, bilbies, quolls, rarer kangaroos and wallabies, etc) over ones that are everywhere in the USA (red kangaroos, bennett's wallaby, kookaburra). While their base is crocs, crocs are common in the USA, and I wouldn't go there just to see them. An outside hope would be some australian pinnipeds. Since my assumption was that it was a major zoo, I'd expect some of the usual large, popular mammals, but I'd also assume more of an emphasis on southeast Asian animals, given the proximity; ex, Asian or even Borneo Elephants over African, some of the smaller Asian cats, etc since there are so many unique animals in that region of the world.
With a name like "Australia Zoo" I would visit expecting to see all of the major Aussie species (koalas, tree kangaroos, wombats, platypus, echidnas, dingo, devils, etc) with a further emphasis on the more unique ones that aren't seen much outside of the country (platypus, bilbies, quolls, rarer kangaroos and wallabies, etc) over ones that are everywhere in the USA (red kangaroos, bennett's wallaby, kookaburra). While their base is crocs, crocs are common in the USA, and I wouldn't go there just to see them. An outside hope would be some australian pinnipeds. Since my assumption was that it was a major zoo, I'd expect some of the usual large, popular mammals, but I'd also assume more of an emphasis on southeast Asian animals, given the proximity; ex, Asian or even Borneo Elephants over African, some of the smaller Asian cats, etc since there are so many unique animals in that region of the world.
This was my point ,Visitors from overseas would expect much more. On the plus side the zoo is kept very clean never seen any rubbish anywhere also the food and food court would be among the best that I have seen in any zoo. At the end of the day if one wants to see a big range of large mammals then some will not be to happy with what is on offer perhaps in time I would hope this can change I hope so!
Because of all of the recent talk on this thread, I've decided to post this for anyone interested. This is the link to the plans for the hotel that was to be built at the zoo nearly a decade ago. It would've included a multi-species savanna 35 acres in size (twice the size of the current one?), and would've included white rhino, zebra, giraffe, and meerkat (brought in), as well as lions, nile? crocodiles, and antelope(springbok according to the concept art), all animals that are not at the zoo at the moment.
Australia Zoo Hotel - PJA Architects
Reading through this thread, it really does give me annoyance at how this zoo brands it'self as world class. There hasn't been very much progression at all from the end of the 2000's and reading about it makes it even worse if you're a viewer of the old shows involving Steve; there was something new always being added at that point, animal-wise it seems. It seems like Australia zoo will join the list of zoos adding water-parks or roller coasters instead of actual animals. Reading this thread has actually given some ideas as to how the zoo can improve:
1. Add more species to Africa: lions, hippos, African wild dogs, and antelope species like oryx or eland that can be mixed on the savanna. Cheetahs should have an actual exhibit built for them that can be viewed by guests. Since they've mentioned about wanting great apes in the past, they could also open a rainforest area for gorillas and chimpanzees.
2. Bring back elephants to Elephantasia. Having 12 acres of land for elephants should be a no-brainer, and use the space to create a very prolific breeding herd, heck even a bachelor bull herd would be better than what it's used for now (camel rides). I know this might be difficult, but seeing as how Australia is actively keeping to a breeding program to Asian elephants, It's possible for them to return.
3. Add the following Australasian species to diversify the natives collection and make it even more appealing: platypus, qoull, bilby, kagu, tree-kangaroo, kea, rock-wallaby, and cuscus.
4. Add a marine life exhibit. I saw on the new series that the zoo keeps rehabilitation pools for sea turtles behind the scenes. How good would it be to build an exhibit focusing on australian ocean life? They could bring in Oceanic seals and sea lions, little penguins, the aforementioned sea turtles, and a large aquarium full of native fishes (sharks, barracuda, giant grouper, humphead wrasse, sawfish) and corals. That could be a fantastic and creative exhibit on the zoos part, and it would do great in educating visitors, especially since the Great Barrier Reef is a few miles north.
5. This is the most ambitious: since this zoo is essentially built around crocodiles, try to become the St. Augustine Zoo of Australia, and get as many crocodilian species as possible (Philippine, Siamese, New Guinea, even false gharials are all species that could be within reach). Steve's love for crocodiles was tremendous, and I could imagine that he and his family, being the reptile lovers they are, would have little problem with this.
Whew! Well that was a lot. I'm done for now.
Australia Zoo Hotel - PJA Architects
Reading through this thread, it really does give me annoyance at how this zoo brands it'self as world class. There hasn't been very much progression at all from the end of the 2000's and reading about it makes it even worse if you're a viewer of the old shows involving Steve; there was something new always being added at that point, animal-wise it seems. It seems like Australia zoo will join the list of zoos adding water-parks or roller coasters instead of actual animals. Reading this thread has actually given some ideas as to how the zoo can improve:
1. Add more species to Africa: lions, hippos, African wild dogs, and antelope species like oryx or eland that can be mixed on the savanna. Cheetahs should have an actual exhibit built for them that can be viewed by guests. Since they've mentioned about wanting great apes in the past, they could also open a rainforest area for gorillas and chimpanzees.
2. Bring back elephants to Elephantasia. Having 12 acres of land for elephants should be a no-brainer, and use the space to create a very prolific breeding herd, heck even a bachelor bull herd would be better than what it's used for now (camel rides). I know this might be difficult, but seeing as how Australia is actively keeping to a breeding program to Asian elephants, It's possible for them to return.
3. Add the following Australasian species to diversify the natives collection and make it even more appealing: platypus, qoull, bilby, kagu, tree-kangaroo, kea, rock-wallaby, and cuscus.
4. Add a marine life exhibit. I saw on the new series that the zoo keeps rehabilitation pools for sea turtles behind the scenes. How good would it be to build an exhibit focusing on australian ocean life? They could bring in Oceanic seals and sea lions, little penguins, the aforementioned sea turtles, and a large aquarium full of native fishes (sharks, barracuda, giant grouper, humphead wrasse, sawfish) and corals. That could be a fantastic and creative exhibit on the zoos part, and it would do great in educating visitors, especially since the Great Barrier Reef is a few miles north.
5. This is the most ambitious: since this zoo is essentially built around crocodiles, try to become the St. Augustine Zoo of Australia, and get as many crocodilian species as possible (Philippine, Siamese, New Guinea, even false gharials are all species that could be within reach). Steve's love for crocodiles was tremendous, and I could imagine that he and his family, being the reptile lovers they are, would have little problem with this.
Whew! Well that was a lot. I'm done for now.
All excellent ideas. The only thing I would add to these plans are Kiwis to the Australasia section (if able to be imported) and a decent South East Asian section - with species supported in the region: Sumatran orangutans etc.
If Melbourne Zoo move their Asian elephant herd to Werribbee (and import Perth Zoo's bull), then that would be their chance to really go to town with breeding. They now have four females of reproductive age and could retain all female calves, with male calves forming a bachelor herd at Australia Zoo. I agree that having what was previously the elephant paddock at Australia Zoo is now completely going to waste.
Does anyone know what Australia Zoo do with their zoo bred crocs? It seems all their crocs are the ones caught by Steve back in the day. As these die, are they restocked with zoo bred crocs or are they allowing the adult population to dwindle?
I could not agree more with what you have stated here, But it appears they lack the WILL and perhaps the MONEY??. It does seem really odd that so little has happened there over the past few years. I believe even Lemur Island/Bindi Island was only completed after the zoo got some type of Grant.I understand that an idea was put to them in regards to keeping/breeding the Phillippine Crocodile (one of the worlds most endangered Croc species) but due to lack of interest was not going to happen. If the zoo is going to sell itself as a "must see major zoo" well lets see some real work going on there not just the TALK saying they are "Going full steam ahead" less talk more action!. I was a big fan of Steve and the family appear really nice but lets cut the bull and as they say build Steves dream and keep his dream alive!
Last edited:
toothlessjaws
Well-Known Member
Australia zoo lost its star attraction and its primary source of income over a decade ago. Surely that answers all the questions being asked on this thread.
How can a zoo that brands and promotes itself constantly for its conservation be uninterested in even considering breeding endangered species? I mean seriously, that’s just stupid on their part.
That's like saying Disney was doomed from the moment Walt Disney died. There's no reason Australia Zoo can't carry on without Steve and I don't doubt the Irwins capability to do this.
In particular, don't underestimate Robert Irwin. While he is frequently compared to his father in his looks, I think the most striking resemblance is in his passion for conservation and drive to carry on Steve's work. In interviews, Terri and Bindi have made references to his interest in science. Not many people realised the depth of Steve's interest in science (he wrote papers and was interested in data) behind the charisma of his on screen persona. Robert has both these qualities and his appearances on US talk shows have proved immensely popular with viewer, engaging new generations with conservation and the zoo. In addition to finishing high school several years early, he is also taking TAFE courses in captive wild animals and buisness studies so he can work to improve the zoo. While I don't disagree that the progress of Australia Zoo has stagnated in recent years, I think it's too early to jump to the conclusion that it won't and can't get back to what it once was.
Their new show on Animal Planet should give them a bit of cash and help with
attendance at their park.
attendance at their park.
toothlessjaws
Well-Known Member
No mate, its like saying just what I meant. I didn't suggest they hypothetically couldn't continue "astronomical" growth without Steve Irwin, I just said its pretty obvious that's the answer to your questions why they aren't.
If you'd bothered to read the posts you claimed to have the 'answer' to, you'd know they predominantly concern the 'growth' of Australia Zoo i.e. the future (If you didn't, then there's also a clue in the title). Most people on this thread are concerned with the future direction Australia Zoo is heading in, and these are what the 'questions' relate to; not why it is where it's at.
I do understand your concern I struggle to understand myself what is happening here I cant follow the drift of the place it appears to me almost like a "hands off"/ eye off the ball problem, I guess I could well be wrong but it almost appears to me like it maybe perhaps due to lack of money but as I said I cant put my finger on the problem, as Toothless jaws pointed out all seemed well until Steve passed away but that was quite some time ago but we hear they want to carry on a complete Steve's dream, as stated on the website it was a ten year plan, to build the zoo starting in 2006 and now in 2018/19 still only the first stage 1 of 3 has been built so I am not going to guess. i do hope at some stage in the future perhaps when Robert becomes an adult he will pick up where Steve left off
Last edited:
You all seem very invested into the vision of Steve Irwin and his zoo. I suspect the vast majority of people that visit Australia Zoo go because its Steve Irwin's zoo, not because of its extensive animal collection or to see a particular species. There are heaps of zoos/aquariums in SE Queensland, and Australia Zoo doesn't seem to have difficulties competing with the other zoos/aquariums for visitors. The zoo prides itself in the quality of their facility and programmes, not quantity. They have a well known brand and its well marketed. Its probably a safe bet that the zoo's future will hinge on continuing to develop what they do well, rather than what they don't do yet.
That is extremely different from the image they project to the world, though. Yes, it's Steve's zoo, but that is *why* the place should be much better, and more diverse, than it is. Locals may know about all of those other places, but foreigners don't, and they're expecting to see something that matches what is on the shows. Just like going to Columbus Zoo in Ohio because of Jack Hanna.
Have you visited Australia Zoo?
I tend not to agree with you here, Yes some people do visit because it was Steve's zoo but many here go there to see animals which until recently could only be seen at this zoo in Queensland such as Rhino, Giraffe, Zebra, Cheetah ect. The many other zoos you point to only have very small and very limited animal collections. As Australia zoo kept saying they have the "Only multi species African exhibit in Queensland", As you may of read in the above thread they did indeed have many plans to exhibit many more animal species which all appear to have been delayed or scrapped.so they did indeed want to have a much broader/larger collection. As a local I have been there enough times to see whats going on there which you may well not be able to see being in the USA.
Have you been there at all?