Cincinnati Zoo and Botanical Garden Management and Direction of Cincinnati Zoo

[Kudu21]

Moderator note: topic split from the news thread - Cincinnati Zoo News 2022 [Cincinnati Zoo and Botanical Garden]


I will be the first to say that the direction the zoo has taken over the past decade has not been the most imaginative and many of the management and collection related decisions have been questionable from an animal welfare perspective (pretty much the entire African exhibit, how they have handled the hippo situation, etc.). All of which are perfectly valid critiques of the zoo's higher management, their priorities, and their ethics. That said, there is so much more that goes into running and operating a zoo than most of you will ever understand, and from someone who works on the inside of a zoological facility, it is sometimes really frustrating to see the same critiques hurled at facilities over and over again, when often times they just aren't realistic or they're entirely out of the zoo's control due to the grander scheme of things.

The Cincinnati Zoo of the 1990s is not one that would be possible in 2022. It's just not the reality of the way zoos operate today, for better and for worse. I think that we all wish that a better common ground could be found between continually improving welfare, maintaining visitor numbers and engagement, and investing in rare and unique species. Some facilities are trying, like Nashville with their small carnivore imports and Bronx, with its commitment to Asian ungulates amongst others, but there's always a cost and a compromise. Some facilities can afford it and others cannot. Can a lot of the lack of imagination and homogeny amongst collections be attributed to the lack of higher management coming up through the zoo world, but instead coming from backgrounds in business and education? Absolutely. At the same time, zoos today are big businesses and are facing pressures not faced by the zoos of the past, to which the experience of a person of business is a major asset... But that's a topic for another thread. It just gets a little old seeing the same old critique of Cincinnati not having the postage stamp collection of rarities it housed in the 1990s when any sort of news about the facility is released. It is just not realistic to expect that from a zoo in 2022, and it's honestly just not the biggest issue at hand. That collection meant having a decades old building stuffed to the brim with cats with no outdoor access, rows of tiny, dry, and dusty hoofstock yards that are barely big enough for a few animals, a shoebill enclosure with no proper indoor holding leading to animals getting frostbitten toes, glass boxes filled with stereotyping small mammals, etc. Unfortunately, we have seen the zoo fall into the exact opposite trap, with the overly themed African complex built over the last decade, with comparably poor welfare for fewer more popular species all in the name of promoting visitor experience. Balance is what the zoo needs moving forward.

For the particular examples cited recently, the former white lion enclosure that the ambassador wallabies are now occupying is due to be torn down for the construction of the new elephant complex. This is very much a temporary solution that both provides the wallabies with a better home than their behind-the-scenes accomodations in the children's zoo and ensures that the zoo does not have another empty enclosure. The "second giraffe" enclosure will also not be a "second giraffe enclosure", but rather a replacement of the current giraffe enclosure. It will be an entirely new and more spacious home for a larger herd of giraffe that will actually allow for proper and innovative modern husbandry, management, and breeding, as the current giraffe complex is an absolute nightmare from management, husbandry, and welfare perspectives. There is a relatively new welfare department at the zoo that has been working diligently to make the changes necessary to improve upon the situation of a lot of the animals in the zoo. A lot of the more minor renovations that have been happening across the zoo have been steps forward in those regards.

I am not going to defend the zoo's major flaws in how it is managed from the top down and what effect that has had on animal welfare. That said, I do want people to stop and take a second to look at the bigger picture when they go to hurl the same critique we've all heard a million times. The Cincinnati Zoo I grew up with is gone, and I have accepted that, and I think others need to too. Of course, that does not mean we cannot want better for the zoo and its animals. I am a big critic of a lot of what the zoo has produced over the past decade, but I am hopeful that these small positive changes we are seeing now might eventually lead to more major positive changes in the future. I'm just being realistic in knowing that it will never be what it once was, and that's okay.

 

[Great Argus]

A very good post indeed.

The Cincinnati Zoo of the 1990s is not one that would be possible in 2022. It's just not the reality of the way zoos operate today, for better and for worse. I think that we all wish that a better common ground could be found between continually improving welfare, maintaining visitor number and engagement, and investing in rare and unique species, and some facilities are trying, like Nashville with their small carnivore imports and Bronx, with its commitment to Asian ungulates amongst others, but there's always a cost and a compromise. Some facilities can afford it and others cannot. Can a lot of the lack of imagination and homogeny amongst collections be attributed to the lack of higher management coming up through the zoo world, but instead coming from backgrounds in business and education? Absolutely. At the same time, zoos today are big businesses and are facing pressures not faced by the zoos of the past, to which the experience of a person of business is a major asset... But that's a topic for another thread. It just gets a little old seeing the same old critique of Cincinnati not having the postage stamp collection of rarities it housed in the 1990s when any sort of news about the facility is released, when it is just not realistic to expect that from a zoo in 2022 and it's honestly just not the biggest issue at hand. That collection meant having a decades old building stuffed to the brim with cats with no outdoor access, rows of tiny, dry, and dusty hoofstock yards that are barely big enough for a few animals, a shoebill enclosure with no proper indoor holding leading to animals getting frostbitten toes, glass boxes filled with stereotyping small mammals, etc. Unfortunately, we saw the exact opposite swing with the overly themed African complex with comparably poor welfare for fewer species. Balance is what the zoo needs moving forward.

I think this section in particular we need to remember more, be it Cincinnati, San Diego, Bronx, or Miami. The era of postage stamp collections, routine wild imports, and bare exhibits is largely gone. Zoos have modernized with the times and on the whole it is for the better. There are instances of mismanagement of course, and species that aren't managed real well. Exhibitry and welfare have improved significantly however, and this is in the best interest of the current animal populations. It is always sad to see more species leaving our captive population, but the resulting space gives us more space to hold on to species that are doing well.

 

[TinoPup]

I will be the first to say that the direction the zoo has taken over the past decade has not been the most imaginative and many of the management and collection related decisions have been questionable from an animal welfare perspective (pretty much the entire African exhibit, how they have handled the hippo situation, etc.). All of which are perfectly valid critiques of the zoo's higher management, their priorities, and their ethics. That said, there is so much more that goes into running and operating a zoo than most of you will ever understand, and from someone who works on the inside of a zoological facility, it is sometimes really frustrating to see the same critiques hurled at facilities over and over again, when often times they just aren't realistic or they're entirely out of the zoo's control due to the grander scheme of things.

The Cincinnati Zoo of the 1990s is not one that would be possible in 2022. It's just not the reality of the way zoos operate today, for better and for worse. I think that we all wish that a better common ground could be found between continually improving welfare, maintaining visitor numbers and engagement, and investing in rare and unique species. Some facilities are trying, like Nashville with their small carnivore imports and Bronx, with its commitment to Asian ungulates amongst others, but there's always a cost and a compromise. Some facilities can afford it and others cannot. Can a lot of the lack of imagination and homogeny amongst collections be attributed to the lack of higher management coming up through the zoo world, but instead coming from backgrounds in business and education? Absolutely. At the same time, zoos today are big businesses and are facing pressures not faced by the zoos of the past, to which the experience of a person of business is a major asset... But that's a topic for another thread. It just gets a little old seeing the same old critique of Cincinnati not having the postage stamp collection of rarities it housed in the 1990s when any sort of news about the facility is released. It is just not realistic to expect that from a zoo in 2022, and it's honestly just not the biggest issue at hand. That collection meant having a decades old building stuffed to the brim with cats with no outdoor access, rows of tiny, dry, and dusty hoofstock yards that are barely big enough for a few animals, a shoebill enclosure with no proper indoor holding leading to animals getting frostbitten toes, glass boxes filled with stereotyping small mammals, etc. Unfortunately, we have seen the zoo fall into the exact opposite trap, with the overly themed African complex built over the last decade, with comparably poor welfare for fewer more popular species all in the name of promoting visitor experience. Balance is what the zoo needs moving forward.

For the particular examples cited recently, the former white lion enclosure that the ambassador wallabies are now occupying is due to be torn down for the construction of the new elephant complex. This is very much a temporary solution that both provides the wallabies with a better home than their behind-the-scenes accomodations in the children's zoo and ensures that the zoo does not have another empty enclosure. The "second giraffe" enclosure will also not be a "second giraffe enclosure", but rather a replacement of the current giraffe enclosure. It will be an entirely new and more spacious home for a larger herd of giraffe that will actually allow for proper and innovative modern husbandry, management, and breeding, as the current giraffe complex is an absolute nightmare from management, husbandry, and welfare perspectives. There is a relatively new welfare department at the zoo that has been working diligently to make the changes necessary to improve upon the situation of a lot of the animals in the zoo. A lot of the more minor renovations that have been happening across the zoo have been steps forward in those regards.

I am not going to defend the zoo's major flaws in how it is managed from the top down and what effect that has had on animal welfare. That said, I do want people to stop and take a second to look at the bigger picture when they go to hurl the same critique we've all heard a million times. The Cincinnati Zoo I grew up with is gone, and I have accepted that, and I think others need to too. Of course, that does not mean we cannot want better for the zoo and its animals. I am a big critic of a lot of what the zoo has produced over the past decade, but I am hopeful that these small positive changes we are seeing now might eventually lead to more major positive changes in the future. I'm just being realistic in knowing that it will never be what it once was, and that's okay.

Excellent post!! While I would love for those rarities to return, especially the carnivores, they were largely treated poorly in the past and there is little room for them in today's zoos. The general public doesn't care much for rarities, and it's the general public visiting these places and funding them, not us. Shoebills may be popular on social media but no one is going to a zoo just to see them, much less the ones people don't know exist (why bother with a margay or oncilla if everyone will just remember it as a baby leopard?) Cincinnati, especially, now has to really push those ABCs thanks to the popularity of Fiona driving up the attendance of people who are visiting just to see those species. At least the Fiona money is allowing them to build better homes for the animals they do have (and, hopefully, the hippos...)

 

[Persephone]

I’m kind of surprised people here seem to almost universally dislike Cinci’s PR team? For me they pulled off a really great feat, turning Cincinnati’s national public image from a meme about a dead gorilla into a story about a celebrity hippo. Things could’ve plausibly gone much differently for the zoo’s rep outside of the narrow community here if they hadn’t found a very effective PR angle and stuck with it.

And I quite like modern Cinci’s balance between having a few rarer species (manatees, aardwolf, blue penguins, the kea behind the scenes) and ABC species to draw in more regular crowds. We’ll see what happens in the future, but for now I’ll give the zoo benefit of the doubt.

As for my original post about the wallaby relocation, if the whole area is about to get replaced by the elephant expansion then giving some ambassador animals extra space feels reasonable.

 

[TinoPup]

I’m kind of surprised people here seem to almost universally dislike Cinci’s PR team? For me they pulled off a really great feat, turning Cincinnati’s national public image from a meme about a dead gorilla into a story about a celebrity hippo. Things could’ve plausibly gone much differently for the zoo’s rep outside of the narrow community here if they hadn’t found a very effective PR angle and stuck with it.

And I quite like modern Cinci’s balance between having a few rarer species (manatees, aardwolf, blue penguins, the kea behind the scenes) and ABC species to draw in more regular crowds. We’ll see what happens in the future, but for now I’ll give the zoo benefit of the doubt.

As for my original post about the wallaby relocation, if the whole area is about to get replaced by the elephant expansion then giving some ambassador animals extra space feels reasonable.

The PR team has chosen to anthropomorphize the hippos over taking better care of them. They don't have the room for the animals they have with a baby on the way. Absolutely everything is about Fiona now. Every single e-mail has stuff about her - usually the header video, even if the reason for the e-mail isn't related to her - and half their online store is Fiona stuff. They've set the course for her basically being unable to leave the zoo because of the revolt that would happen, but they're not making any plans to give her an exhibit. They are setting it up for some major aggression to happen, behavior that could result in injuries, even death to the future calf. Because after all, these are hippos, one of the most dangerous and deadly animals on the planet. I'm glad they're getting all of this incoming money, but they seem to be setting themselves up for something bad to happen.

Of the four species you mentioned, manatees are completely dependent on animals being rescued and they sometimes don't have any, the aardwolf are old and won't be replaced, the blue penguins are lovely but currently off exhibit, and the kea can't be seen by regular visitors.

 

[Moebelle]

kea can't be seen by regular visitors.

The Kea are publicly ehibited during colder months.

 

[groundskeeper24]

I will be the first to say that the direction the zoo has taken over the past decade has not been the most imaginative and many of the management and collection related decisions have been questionable from an animal welfare perspective (pretty much the entire African exhibit, how they have handled the hippo situation, etc.). All of which are perfectly valid critiques of the zoo's higher management, their priorities, and their ethics. That said, there is so much more that goes into running and operating a zoo than most of you will ever understand, and from someone who works on the inside of a zoological facility, it is sometimes really frustrating to see the same critiques hurled at facilities over and over again, when often times they just aren't realistic or they're entirely out of the zoo's control due to the grander scheme of things.

The Cincinnati Zoo of the 1990s is not one that would be possible in 2022. It's just not the reality of the way zoos operate today, for better and for worse. I think that we all wish that a better common ground could be found between continually improving welfare, maintaining visitor numbers and engagement, and investing in rare and unique species. Some facilities are trying, like Nashville with their small carnivore imports and Bronx, with its commitment to Asian ungulates amongst others, but there's always a cost and a compromise. Some facilities can afford it and others cannot. Can a lot of the lack of imagination and homogeny amongst collections be attributed to the lack of higher management coming up through the zoo world, but instead coming from backgrounds in business and education? Absolutely. At the same time, zoos today are big businesses and are facing pressures not faced by the zoos of the past, to which the experience of a person of business is a major asset... But that's a topic for another thread. It just gets a little old seeing the same old critique of Cincinnati not having the postage stamp collection of rarities it housed in the 1990s when any sort of news about the facility is released. It is just not realistic to expect that from a zoo in 2022, and it's honestly just not the biggest issue at hand. That collection meant having a decades old building stuffed to the brim with cats with no outdoor access, rows of tiny, dry, and dusty hoofstock yards that are barely big enough for a few animals, a shoebill enclosure with no proper indoor holding leading to animals getting frostbitten toes, glass boxes filled with stereotyping small mammals, etc. Unfortunately, we have seen the zoo fall into the exact opposite trap, with the overly themed African complex built over the last decade, with comparably poor welfare for fewer more popular species all in the name of promoting visitor experience. Balance is what the zoo needs moving forward.

For the particular examples cited recently, the former white lion enclosure that the ambassador wallabies are now occupying is due to be torn down for the construction of the new elephant complex. This is very much a temporary solution that both provides the wallabies with a better home than their behind-the-scenes accomodations in the children's zoo and ensures that the zoo does not have another empty enclosure. The "second giraffe" enclosure will also not be a "second giraffe enclosure", but rather a replacement of the current giraffe enclosure. It will be an entirely new and more spacious home for a larger herd of giraffe that will actually allow for proper and innovative modern husbandry, management, and breeding, as the current giraffe complex is an absolute nightmare from management, husbandry, and welfare perspectives. There is a relatively new welfare department at the zoo that has been working diligently to make the changes necessary to improve upon the situation of a lot of the animals in the zoo. A lot of the more minor renovations that have been happening across the zoo have been steps forward in those regards.

I am not going to defend the zoo's major flaws in how it is managed from the top down and what effect that has had on animal welfare. That said, I do want people to stop and take a second to look at the bigger picture when they go to hurl the same critique we've all heard a million times. The Cincinnati Zoo I grew up with is gone, and I have accepted that, and I think others need to too. Of course, that does not mean we cannot want better for the zoo and its animals. I am a big critic of a lot of what the zoo has produced over the past decade, but I am hopeful that these small positive changes we are seeing now might eventually lead to more major positive changes in the future. I'm just being realistic in knowing that it will never be what it once was, and that's okay.

I agree with a lot of what you say and have no problem if you want to directly address my post, as it was the one that incited the discussion.

First off, I did indeed understand that the new giraffe exhibit wasn't a second one, but a replacement, and hopefully an improvement. Agree there. Also, I did think that the old white lion exhibit was going to be a part of the new elephant complex, but was a bit confused about the permanence of the wallaby holding there. I appreciate the clarification.

I will fully own being one to hurl criticism, as I've been going to the zoo for 40 years. The care was always an issue, as was the physical plant, which was something that was addressed and not necessarily noticed by the general public or even the average zoo nerd. That aspect of the evolution of the zoo should be applauded.

Unfortunately, I can't overlook the trade-off that we've been handed as long term supporters of the zoo that have some rudimentary understanding of how other zoos have handled similar change points.

There are posters here that legitimately hate the Cincinnati Zoo. I guess it's like watching you're little brother that you pick on get beat up by the bully down the street. I've tried to defend them, but the criticisms they've made have been spot on all along. Unfortunately, the direction they've taken when given access to more usable space and an updated facility have been awful and almost equally as unethical as the concept of a postage stamp collection.

If you're a zoo that lacks space, why take the little space you have to die on the hill of keeping a larger group of elephants? You could do so much more. You could have built an incredible gorilla exhibit back there for a similar cost and replace a complex that might be even more outdated than the old Elephant House. Gorillas are every bit the flagship species as elephants.

The bear line debacle is pure embarrassment. They had an opportunity to repurpose one of the worst parts of the zoo and they absolutely botched it in almost every imaginable way. The species inclusion is as boring as it gets and the exhibits aren't much better than the previous bear grottos. Who's advising these people?

The Fiona thing has been the bell cow that got milked for every dime for years, and now her welfare is at stake if she remains in the coming years. I talked to a keeper about the imminent greatness of what was going to happen when they acquired the land to allow them to use the front lot for exhibit space. It seemed exciting. The major benefit was going to be the zoo being able to keep hippos again. Then the exhibit opens, and a tiny fraction of the space is allotted to the hippos. it makes zero sense. Bringing in Tucker was dishonest in it's marketing, and stupid in it's execution. These are facts. It's pure greed and disregard for the animal welfare improvement they claim to want to achieve.

It's not one decision. It's a series of them, and most are not good ones. An animal doesn't have to be one of the last 50 of it's species to be interesting or unique. You don't have to have a breeding group of Sumatran rhinos to remain interesting. You could do smaller things like actually build a real reptile building as opposed to continuing to house a meager collection in the oldest zoo building in the nation. They could build an actual clouded leopard exhibit instead of continuing to keep an elderly one in an aquarium-sized enclosure.

Bronx and San Diego global are admittedly better funded and positioned. Nashville has a solid vision and seems to be implementing it's masterplan beautifully. Cincinnati and Brookfield are 2 institutions that are basically roadkill in the modern zoo era. One day I might accept the reality of it, but it will take time. Certain things were going to change for the worse, ie species uniqueness, but all of that would have been easier to digest with a more coherent and consistent direction from current management. They want to seem more ethical, but their actions hardly indicate that that's the real goal. the goal is to appeal to the lowest common denominator to keep the cash flowing in.

 

[Great Argus]

Bringing in Tucker was dishonest in it's marketing, and stupid in it's execution. These are facts. It's pure greed and disregard for the animal welfare improvement they claim to want to achieve.

If they didn't want another calf right now (judging by the fact Bibi was on contraception when the current calf was conceived) I don't get the point of bringing in Tucker in the first place. By all accounts they ought to ship Tucker out again to free up space and avoid injuries; ship him back to San Francisco if nothing else! Both Bibi and Fiona are behaving aggressively towards him already, and if I understand Kudu correctly if Bibi and calf need to be separated there will be no option but to house Tucker and Fiona together. Which could lead to another whole host of problems depending on the behavior of both hippos. It's an absolute mess that may turn into a PR disaster if the zoo doesn't get their act together.

 

[TinoPup]

If they didn't want another calf right now (judging by the fact Bibi was on contraception when the current calf was conceived) I don't get the point of bringing in Tucker in the first place. By all accounts they ought to ship Tucker out again to free up space and avoid injuries; ship him back to San Francisco if nothing else! Both Bibi and Fiona are behaving aggressively towards him already, and if I understand Kudu correctly if Bibi and calf need to be separated there will be no option but to house Tucker and Fiona together. Which could lead to another whole host of problems depending on the behavior of both hippos. It's an absolute mess that may turn into a PR disaster if the zoo doesn't get their act together.

Agreed. There was no need for Tucker. Bibi was on birth control when she got pregnant with Fiona, and it doesn't have a great success rate for hippos in general.

 

[Echobeast]

If you're a zoo that lacks space, why take the little space you have to die on the hill of keeping a larger group of elephants? You could do so much more. You could have built an incredible gorilla exhibit back there for a similar cost and replace a complex that might be even more outdated than the old Elephant House. Gorillas are every bit the flagship species as elephants.

Moving the gorillas wouldn't have solved the issue of lack of space for elephants. Potentially becoming a large multigenerational breeding herd is essential for Asian elephants to have a future in zoos. Also this move allows the zoo to potentially solve an issue with another megafauna species held there, the giraffes. With the recent renovations to Gorilla World, the species has a functional, modern exhibit throughout the year and are able to keep multiple groups.

The bear line debacle is pure embarrassment. They had an opportunity to repurpose one of the worst parts of the zoo and they absolutely botched it in almost every imaginable way. The species inclusion is as boring as it gets and the exhibits aren't much better than the previous bear grottos. Who's advising these people?

I really do not get the hate that the new renovation of the bear exhibits are getting. Renovating an old space that was sorely outdated for the previous inhabitants, improving it so that it is a functional and modern space for a species that needs holders (rescue bears in the US always need holders), adding new spaces for species from a previously unrepresented region (North America), as well as adding a brand new species that I would consider pretty rare in the US (sea otter).

 

[groundskeeper24]

I just don't get the apparent AZA recommendation to bring Tucker to Cincinnati or the zoo's agreeing to it. The situation seems like it's at minimum not ideal due to space, and in a worst case scenario dangerous to the animals in relation to the change in social structure.

It's redundant to go on another Cincinnati-bashing rant, but imma do it anyway. When an institution is actively trying to send a message to the public that they are making major changes with respect to giving animals more room and better welfare, it rings fairly hollow when you are still willing to put your highest profile animal into a 100 percent preventable situation with a real likelihood of a bad outcome.

As zoo nerds tend to do, I try to imagine where the zoo could build a better hippo exhibit to accommodate a larger herd. It's tough and even tougher considering what the zoo's stated plans are for the near future. I guess my strategy would be to make rhino reserve into a hippo complex and move the rhinos to the current giraffe exhibit with reinforcements whenever the giraffes are moved to the elephant house. On top of that, they're pushing hard to wrap up funding on an extremely costly elephant exhibit, so sweeping changes and finances that would be required to build or retrofit another hippo complex seem all the more unlikely. They seem to want not only all 4 major megafauna on the grounds, but large numbers of them. When you're a zoo that's struggled with your restraints in terms of raw area basically forever, that's a horrendous strategy IMO. They're getting close to maxing out what they have as they expand with the elephant complex. Sooner or later, the usable space just runs out.

It makes the plans for the elephant house even more confounding, tbh. I don't get the powers that be opting to make an exhibit that's basically just going to house as many giraffes as possible because they think a giant herd of them is somehow a need. Why? The building and yards would be far better utilized as new hippo or rhino complexes, and both black rhinos and hippos are major ambassadors for the zoo. I love giraffes. They are probably my favorite of the large herbivores. I just don't see their situation being one of need in the same way as the other two as things stand now.

 

[Persephone]

Wait the elephant house is going to giraffes? Is that confirmed? Because I feel like the current giraffe barn is better for giraffes than the elephant one. Would make a much better hippo space and keep Fiona in a fairly central location.

As for space, about the best Cincinnati could do now is cannibalize a parking lot. It’s far from ideal, but if they don’t want to give up any more megafauna I guess it makes sense.

If they hadn’t already announced the bear ridge plans that could’ve been a decent hippo area. Shame that they seem to have boxed themselves in with their announced changes.

Agree that the Rhino Reservation area could make a decent hippo home. It’s probably the area most in need of an update anyway. Not that it’s outright bad, just feels like the zoo’s weak link in exhibit design.

 

[Kudu21]

Yes, @Persephone, it has been confirmed that the giraffe herd will eventually be moving to the current elephant house. I know it’s probably not outwardly obvious to those that have not worked with giraffe, but the current giraffe barn is really bad, truly. It is not at all conducive to modern giraffe management practices, and it’s design and location also make it incredibly difficult on the keepers from even a basic husbandry standpoint. Moving the herd to the current elephant house post-renovation will be an absolute game changer for the management and welfare of the animals. Yes, it will allow for the zoo to expand its herd, which will be extremely helpful in bolstering the Masai population, but most of all, it will be a major quality of life improvement for the animals and their keepers. To continue with giraffe, they would have to be moved eventually, and the current elephant area is the only place suitable.

The current hippopotamus habitat and holding are, indeed, both disasters — it’s undeniable. We do not know what the zoo has planned for the future of the the pod or the habitat, but with the giraffe moving, it does open up several options for them within the Africa exhibit at the zoo (moving the hippos to a new exhibit on the site of the current giraffe exhibit, building a new African painted dog habitat on that site and expanding the current hippo enclosure into that habitat, etc.). I also would not assume they’re keeping all of the current/future hippos long-term…

 

[groundskeeper24]

Yes, @Persephone, it has been confirmed that the giraffe herd will eventually be moving to the current elephant house. I know it’s probably not outwardly obvious to those that have not worked with giraffe, but the current giraffe barn is really bad, truly. It is not at all conducive to modern giraffe management practices, and it’s design and location also make it incredibly difficult on the keepers from even a basic husbandry standpoint. Moving the herd to the current elephant house post-renovation will be an absolute game changer for the management and welfare of the animals. Yes, it will allow for the zoo to expand its herd, which will be extremely helpful in bolstering the Masai population, but most of all, it will be a major quality of life improvement for the animals and their keepers. To continue with giraffe, they would have to be moved eventually, and the current elephant area is the only place suitable.

The current hippopotamus habitat and holding are, indeed, both disasters — it’s undeniable. We do not know what the zoo has planned for the future of the the pod or the habitat, but with the giraffe moving, it does open up several options for them within the Africa exhibit at the zoo (moving the hippos to a new exhibit on the site of the current giraffe exhibit, building a new African painted dog habitat on that site and expanding the current hippo enclosure into that habitat, etc.). I also would not assume they’re keeping all of the current/future hippos long-term…

It's all a bad deal and is the result of chronic mismanagement. The giraffe barn and hippo exhibit are both part of a very new Africa complex. I get that the bear line needs money and work to be viable. I understand financing the development of the parking lots and updating ancient buildings like the elephant house and the veldt.

This is different. They're throwing good money after bad money, theoretically anyway, if they have to go and mount capital campaigns to right wrongs that they made less than a decade ago. They're forced to update new structures rather than older ones that have been in need for much longer.

In their defense, I doubt that they foresaw the Fiona publicity becoming a thing. Her popularity is both a boon and a burden for them. Also, in a positive vein, they've done well updating the physical plant and parking situation. Credit where credit is due. While I'm at it, they are spectacular at maintaining what I think are the most tasteful and attractive grounds/landscaping in any moderate climate American zoo.

I think the other devil in the details with this megafauna obsession is the eventual loss of both bongo and okapi from this collection, thus making it even more run-of-the mill in time. If rhino reserve expands usable space for black rhinos with any significant amount of area, I don't see a place for those species in the zoo's future, and that's crap IMO. The current giraffe yard is going to be utilized for something, and it's likely in-house. My money is on zebras, as it's the most boring option, it's a thematic fit, and that's what the zoo does these days. The painted dog exhibit that people suggest as an expansion point or area to be vacated by it's occupants is one of the best exhibits in the zoo and one of the few new efforts that's they've managed not to botch in any way.

More constructively, I think one thing that could happen that would help immensely is the financing and implication of a multi story parking structure on the acquired property on the corner of Vine and Erkenbrecher. I can't recall with certainty, but I believe the zoo planned for this at some point. If a garage could be built that could make the current main lot obselete, then the main lot becomes a prime spot for animal exhibitry. Not sure what they'd want to use it for, and I think the solar panels and overall setup of the current lot are terrific, but need trumps aesthetics IMO.

 

[tigris115]

What if they move the wild dogs and meerkats to expand the hippo exhibit/barn in that direction?

Then, they can be in the former giraffe area. If there's extra space, you can add whatever you want.

 

[Kudu21]

It's all a bad deal and is the result of chronic mismanagement. The giraffe barn and hippo exhibit are both part of a very new Africa complex. I get that the bear line needs money and work to be viable. I understand financing the development of the parking lots and updating ancient buildings like the elephant house and the veldt.

This is different. They're throwing good money after bad money, theoretically anyway, if they have to go and mount capital campaigns to right wrongs that they made less than a decade ago. They're forced to update new structures rather than older ones that have been in need for much longer.

Oh, absolutely. Where the first decade of the 21st Century brought mostly stagnation, the second brought mismanaged project after project focused solely on the vistor perspective and experience, and now we're left with decade old projects nearly as behind in terms of animal welfare as the century old exhibits standing alongside them. It is an immense shame that the zoo's management has backed themselves into this corner where both are requiring renovation/replacement at the same time. At least they have Fiona's fame to help finance it all...

I think the other devil in the details with this megafauna obsession is the eventual loss of both bongo and okapi from this collection, thus making it even more run-of-the mill in time. If rhino reserve expands usable space for black rhinos with any significant amount of area, I don't see a place for those species in the zoo's future, and that's crap IMO. The current giraffe yard is going to be utilized for something, and it's likely in-house. My money is on zebras, as it's the most boring option, it's a thematic fit, and that's what the zoo does these days.

The zoo has such a long and storied history with okapi that I would like to think that they're a species they'd wish to continue with, but only time will tell... When the zoo announced the plans to renovate the elephant house for giraffe, they did make mention of including other species in the project. I think it would make the most sense to move the zebra with them, freeing more space in the Veldt. The entire giraffe area would require major renovations for any new occupants, so I'm not even sure it would save much money to "just" throw the zebra in there versus starting from mostly scratch.

As much as it pains me to say this, if the bongo have to leave for the okapi to be maintained, then so be it. That current space can really only maintain a pair of bongo, anyways, and losing the bongo would allow both okapi to be out at the same time. When the Visayan warty pigs are gone, that area combined with the current rhino and zebra yards would still allow for a fairly decent black rhinoceros complex. They've since pulled all of the plans for the Veldt renovation from their website, so it is uncertain what the plans for that area will be from here.

The painted dog exhibit that people suggest as an expansion point or area to be vacated by it's occupants is one of the best exhibits in the zoo and one of the few new efforts that's they've managed not to botch in any way.

It would, indeed, be very sad to lose what is, absolutely, one of the best habitats at the zoo, but if they are committed to genuinely providing "More Home to Roam", then that is probably their most cost effective answer to the travesty that is Hippo Cove....

More constructively, I think one thing that could happen that would help immensely is the financing and implication of a multi story parking structure on the acquired property on the corner of Vine and Erkenbrecher. I can't recall with certainty, but I believe the zoo planned for this at some point. If a garage could be built that could make the current main lot obselete, then the main lot becomes a prime spot for animal exhibitry. Not sure what they'd want to use it for, and I think the solar panels and overall setup of the current lot are terrific, but need trumps aesthetics IMO.

They did originally have plans for a parking garage; however, after the pandemic hit their priorities changed due to funding challenges and the decrease in attendance. They will now just be moving forward with a surface parking lot on that site. This parking lot/previously planned parking garage were never meant to replace their current main lot -- only the Safari Lot that Elephant Trek is replacing.

It was not my intention to fill this thread with any further speculation. I did, however, just want to comment on the bigger picture at hand with the corner Cincinnati has backed themselves into. There are many more factors at play here as to why the zoo is doing this or isn't doing that. People get so focused in on the "Hippo Cove is terrible" narrative that it is if many have blinders on and are quick to assume the worst. While this is undeniably true (it is terrible), the zoo is essentially working with one giant puzzle and other problems are going to have to be addressed and resolved in order to keep moving the parts around to, hopefully, one day address them all.

 

[groundskeeper24]

Good responses, Kudu.

As far as rhino reserve goes, it seems like it's not exactly the first priority for renovation anyway. It's nowhere to be found on the Room to Roam page on the main site anymore. For that matter, the giraffe move to the elephant house isn't either.

Oh, absolutely. Where the first decade of the 21st Century brought mostly stagnation, the second brought mismanaged project after project focused solely on the vistor perspective and experience, and now we're left with decade old projects nearly as behind in terms of animal welfare as the century old exhibits standing alongside them. It is an immense shame that the zoo's management has backed themselves into this corner where both are requiring renovation/replacement at the same time. At least they have Fiona's fame to help finance it all...



The zoo has such a long and storied history with okapi that I would like to think that they're a species they'd wish to continue with, but only time will tell... When the zoo announced the plans to renovate the elephant house for giraffe, they did make mention of including other species in the project. I think it would make the most sense to move the zebra with them, freeing more space in the Veldt. The entire giraffe area would require major renovations for any new occupants, so I'm not even sure it would save much money to "just" throw the zebra in there versus starting from mostly scratch.

As much as it pains me to say this, if the bongo have to leave for the okapi to be maintained, then so be it. That current space can really only maintain a pair of bongo, anyways, and losing the bongo would allow both okapi to be out at the same time. When the Visayan warty pigs are gone, that area combined with the current rhino and zebra yards would still allow for a fairly decent black rhinoceros complex. They've since pulled all of the plans for the Veldt renovation from their website, so it is uncertain what the plans for that area will be from here.


It would, indeed, be very sad to lose what is, absolutely, one of the best habitats at the zoo, but if they are committed to genuinely providing "More Home to Roam", then that is probably their most cost effective answer to the travesty that is Hippo Cove....


They did originally have plans for a parking garage; however, after the pandemic hit their priorities changed due to funding challenges and the decrease in attendance. They will now just be moving forward with a surface parking lot on that site. This parking lot/previously planned parking garage were never meant to replace their current main lot -- only the Safari Lot that Elephant Trek is replacing.

It was not my intention to fill this thread with any further speculation. I did, however, just want to comment on the bigger picture at hand with the corner Cincinnati has backed themselves into. There are many more factors at play here as to why the zoo is doing this or isn't doing that. People get so focused in on the "Hippo Cove is terrible" narrative that it is if many have blinders on and are quick to assume the worst. While this is undeniably true (it is terrible), the zoo is essentially working with one giant puzzle and other problems are going to have to be addressed and resolved in order to keep moving the parts around to, hopefully, one day address them all.

Great response, Kudu.

I agree with all you say here in a practical sense. I wasn't sure what happened with the garage concept, but the clarification changes things. It's a natural response for a longtime patron of Cincinnati to expect parking lots to become exhibit space because that's what the zoo has done since Jungle Trails in the early 90's. If the zoo ever manages to dig out of the hole they are in, I'd have to think that the thought of using the current lot will cross their minds at some point. It is a really nice parking lot in comparison with other zoos, FWIW.

The covid downturn as a factor for change in long terms plans is understandable. This hurts when the zoo is in the middle of trying to fund the biggest project in it's history with Elephant Trek. I know construction is well underway, but the funding goals on the site don't seem to be met. I hope that perception is just a timing issue and not an actual shortfall. I know the zoo received a lot of money from the Schott family and another estate that I can't remember, and when these things came to be, they were very bullish about new projects. I suppose they've had to apply the brakes a bit.

I think Bear Ridge was another unforeseen (sort of) expense. The zoo never seemed eager to get out of the polar bear business and then all of the sudden they were done. IIRC, a polar bear themed renovation to the bear line was in the plans when the Elephant Trek concept first came out. I'm fine with the zoo not having polar bears or any bears, really, but I suspect that they weren't wanting an entire exhibit complex sitting empty for a half-decade, so they threw something together with Bear Ridge, thus adding another expense. Perhaps they should have waited on this one and directed more money to finishing the elephants? It wouldn't be ideal for visitors, but they wouldn't be the first zoo to have empty exhibits for a period of time. Maybe I just dislike the Bear Ridge concept so much that I'd have been willing to wait on something more interesting. I digress.

As for talk of hippos, okapis, and botched recent projects, I wonder how far fetched it would be to just semi-scrap the current Africa complex in favor of better utilization of space. I'm not suggesting an actual teardown and rebuild, just a re-imagining with different allocations. The main hoofed stock yard is a whatever exhibit for animals that neither meet the zoo's megafauna obsession criteria or draw loads of visitors. Honestly, they aren't even the types of species that zoo nerds fawn over. It's a big piece of land relative to others in the exhibit. It might be the biggest, but I think the giraffe area is close. If someone wanted to go all-in with a hippo pod and give the room to roam, so to speak, then the most bang for the buck would be that big yard plus maybe even more to the left toward the current hippos. I know that they wanted a big mixed-species yard, but that seems like a luxury item at this point. Practically no one enters Africa with the thought of being excited about seeing a few small antelope species. They want to either turn right and see giraffes and lions or go left to see the zoo's main attraction. Just put the main attraction front and center and be done with it. If they could do that, then they could use the giraffe yard for okapis and probably even have space for bongos. I know I'd rather see them keep okapis and bongos than a few gazelles and birds. I agree with zebras going to the proposed giraffe exhibit in the current elephant house. It would be a good look, and they should have the space if they usurp the areas they intend to. I suppose they could even keep an antelope species in a renovated rhino reserve, even if they were to give the rhinos the majority of the space.

 

[groundskeeper24]

It's surprising to me how much it bothers me to watch this zoo and it's collection just dwindle into mismanagement and obscurity. This is the first year in my entire 45 year life that I didn't visit. It's depressing.

 

[Kudu21]

It's surprising to me how much it bothers me to watch this zoo and it's collection just dwindle into mismanagement and obscurity. This is the first year in my entire 45 year life that I didn't visit. It's depressing.

It is interesting — with the departure of the impala, the single male lesser kudu is now the last mammal left in the savanna habitat, which I find suspicious — even for a zoo whose mammal collection has seen a steady decline in recent years. I do not wish to incite wanton speculation, as the zoo has reliably shared updates on its development in the past and too many threads have been overrun with it as of late, but I do not think it is out of the realm of possibility for us to see either updates to the African Savanna or perhaps the beginnings of work on Rhino Reserve, with hoofstock from this area moving over (they have already shipped out their adult male rhino) this winter.

 

[wild boar]

What happened to the Thomson's gazelles and the second kudu?