Sun Wukong
Well-Known Member
Spot on-also in regard to the ADM.
The general public's view of a zoo
- Thread starter jbnbsn99
- Start date
Spot on-also in regard to the ADM.
mstickmanp
Well-Known Member
Why 140? They would actually be 120.
European Fauna
Well-Known Member
I genuinely believe that the average zoo visitor is becoming more sophisticated.I have previously stated that a city-dwelling European who has visited a good number of zoos will certainly have seen during the course of his lifetime , many many more lesser pandas than free-living red foxes.Some zoo visitors will have seen more giant pandas than european badgers in the wild.So I really think that now more than ever , the zoo visitor is thinking less about lists and numbers , and more about the quality of the zoo and of the visit experience itself.Indeed , I have never seen a zoo visitor say "Oh , it´s only an otter , come on let´s hurry on to the lions".This visitor may have seen 250 documentaries(low estimate)on African lions , but may prefer to spend extra time observing the fascinating otter that in happier times should have been living alongside a river 5km from the visitor´s home.I really want to emphasize that I am not talking about a visitor with a zoochatter profile, but rather a type of visitor who is developing discreetly and on the whole unobserved by the zoo community.This visitor is the product of thousands of wildlife documentaries , youtube , magazines , school science programs etc.This is a mass phenomenon, measured in millions, not thousands of individuals.A zoo with just lions/elephant/kangaroos/ etc is more and more likely to provoke the response "not much imagination went into this and I wonder what they are doing for conservation programs".It´s all part of the ecological consciousness so in vogue,luckily, and the sooner certain zoos take this message on board the better.
Marwell has a relativley poor mark of 50, lacking elephants, lions, bears and great apes, though they have kept sun bears and lions in the past, and it is likely they will keep the latter and gorillas in the future. My local Safari Park, Longleat, comes in at 70, but it was 80 till the elephants left in 2003.
i wouldn't worry mate, marwell has possibly the brightest and most exiting future of all our UK zoos
Interesting discussion!
Traditionally, there has been the "big 5". These are the animals, based on surveys, that people expect/anticipate to see when they visit a zoo and as such, demand serious consideration in all plans, present and future, that a zoo conceives of. They are:
Lion
Tiger
Elephant
Gorilla
Penguin
That said, plenty of zoos get away with exhibiting only 2 or 3 of the big 5. And sometimes, like the ASDM, none. But it's worth noting that the ASDM does not identify itself as a zoo in the traditional sense. They're a museum! They don't even mention the word "zoo", and quietly bypass such rules and public stigmas. They're happy allowing the nearby Reid Park Zoo to fill the more traditional zoo role.
Traditionally, there has been the "big 5". These are the animals, based on surveys, that people expect/anticipate to see when they visit a zoo and as such, demand serious consideration in all plans, present and future, that a zoo conceives of. They are:
Lion
Tiger
Elephant
Gorilla
Penguin
That said, plenty of zoos get away with exhibiting only 2 or 3 of the big 5. And sometimes, like the ASDM, none. But it's worth noting that the ASDM does not identify itself as a zoo in the traditional sense. They're a museum! They don't even mention the word "zoo", and quietly bypass such rules and public stigmas. They're happy allowing the nearby Reid Park Zoo to fill the more traditional zoo role.
Old Carl Hagenbeck, as sort of master of zoo-entertainment, believed that the public cares only about 7 animals. If I remember correctly, they were:
Elephant
Giraffe
Lion
Bear
Hippo*
Monkey (or ape of any species)
Camel (presumably two-humped)
Yes, camel. But no zoo kept dolphins, penguins or gorillas at his time. *maybe it was Zebra or Tiger.
But, visiting any zoo, you find that visitors crowd to any active animal and any keeper interacting with animals. So, in Berlin Zoo, playful Geoffroy's Cat kittens regularly topped sleeping Giant Panda.
Elephant
Giraffe
Lion
Bear
Hippo*
Monkey (or ape of any species)
Camel (presumably two-humped)
Yes, camel. But no zoo kept dolphins, penguins or gorillas at his time. *maybe it was Zebra or Tiger.
But, visiting any zoo, you find that visitors crowd to any active animal and any keeper interacting with animals. So, in Berlin Zoo, playful Geoffroy's Cat kittens regularly topped sleeping Giant Panda.
ZooLeopard
Well-Known Member
Colchester is 80-90 if pygmy hippo count with very cute baby!
In my opinion i feel the average zoo visitor wants a good day out to see interesting exhibits e.g walkthrough with lively animals such as squirrel monkeys, sealions and lemurs. Big cats are also a must.
In my opinion i feel the average zoo visitor wants a good day out to see interesting exhibits e.g walkthrough with lively animals such as squirrel monkeys, sealions and lemurs. Big cats are also a must.
I often talk to my girlfriend about the 'big 12' mammal species. In short, the three genera of great ape (orang-utans, gorillas and chimps), the other species listed in the opening post and seals.
My theory is that a zoo needs half or more of these species to pull in and sustain the crowds. Werribee Open Range Zoo, for instance, has only five of the big twelve mammal species. Werribee is actually struggling to maintain the boost in attendance that was achieved following the development of the Pula Reserve. The 2010-11 acquisition of gorillas, however, is expected to create a significant boost in appeal for the zoo. It's not a 'new' animal as such, since Victorian zoo-goers have been able to see gorillas at Melbourne Zoo for decades. But the addition of a great ape species will cause many casual zoo visitors to consider Werribee a better-value day out.
By the time you're getting to having three-quarters of the big twelve mammal species (as Melbourne Zoo does) you're starting to have what many zoo visitors would consider a world-class zoo experience. Melbourne has, only a month ago, gone from having 8/12 on display to once again having nine, with the recent re-opening of a seal exhibit (like others above, I don't really count pygmy hippos as having the same impact, although they fall into the "important smaller species" category mentioned below). I expect that 2010 will see a considerable boost in attendance over 2009 as a result... time will tell whether I am right.
There are other animals, as the thread starter correctly points out, that have an 'x-factor' appeal. Giant pandas are expected, I think I read, to double Adelaide Zoo's visitation in 2010. Dolphins are also in this category.
There's one warning I want to sound though. It isn't enough to have a collection made up almost exclusively of the superstars of the zoo world. I also think that having a good support cast of (mostly) smaller, often more active species - such as otters, meerkats, gibbons, monkeys, parrots and penguins - is critically important. I also think that a reptile house, walk-through bird aviary and even a small aquarium (ideally with sharks and rays) are important factors in creating the 'complete' zoo experience for casual visitors. Here in Australia, a zoo without the more familiar natives (kangaroos and koalas, and to a lesser extent wombats, platypi, echidnas and Tassie devils) will struggle to get international visitors interested.
Rarities that are obviously distinct from more commonly seen species will have an impact. Species or sub-species that might be unique to a zoo, but which aren't visually distinct, I doubt have any impact at all. We on Zoochat might get a thrill out of seeing 10 different antelope species, but they'll be ignored by most visitors.
I visited the National Zoo and Aquarium in Canberra yesterday. It's a small zoo with only about 100 mammals and maybe 200 animals, other than fish, all up. But it has a collection that ticks just enough boxes - lions, tigers, bears, giraffes and zebras, with the 'x-factor' taxon of sharks - along with a few charismatic smaller species (koalas, otters, monkeys, cheetahs and snow leopards) to get by. Having said that, if I was the owner I'd be itching to get some rhinos or chimpanzees, as the most obtainable 'superstar' species that could put me over the magical 6/12 figure.
My theory is that a zoo needs half or more of these species to pull in and sustain the crowds. Werribee Open Range Zoo, for instance, has only five of the big twelve mammal species. Werribee is actually struggling to maintain the boost in attendance that was achieved following the development of the Pula Reserve. The 2010-11 acquisition of gorillas, however, is expected to create a significant boost in appeal for the zoo. It's not a 'new' animal as such, since Victorian zoo-goers have been able to see gorillas at Melbourne Zoo for decades. But the addition of a great ape species will cause many casual zoo visitors to consider Werribee a better-value day out.
By the time you're getting to having three-quarters of the big twelve mammal species (as Melbourne Zoo does) you're starting to have what many zoo visitors would consider a world-class zoo experience. Melbourne has, only a month ago, gone from having 8/12 on display to once again having nine, with the recent re-opening of a seal exhibit (like others above, I don't really count pygmy hippos as having the same impact, although they fall into the "important smaller species" category mentioned below). I expect that 2010 will see a considerable boost in attendance over 2009 as a result... time will tell whether I am right.
There are other animals, as the thread starter correctly points out, that have an 'x-factor' appeal. Giant pandas are expected, I think I read, to double Adelaide Zoo's visitation in 2010. Dolphins are also in this category.
There's one warning I want to sound though. It isn't enough to have a collection made up almost exclusively of the superstars of the zoo world. I also think that having a good support cast of (mostly) smaller, often more active species - such as otters, meerkats, gibbons, monkeys, parrots and penguins - is critically important. I also think that a reptile house, walk-through bird aviary and even a small aquarium (ideally with sharks and rays) are important factors in creating the 'complete' zoo experience for casual visitors. Here in Australia, a zoo without the more familiar natives (kangaroos and koalas, and to a lesser extent wombats, platypi, echidnas and Tassie devils) will struggle to get international visitors interested.
Rarities that are obviously distinct from more commonly seen species will have an impact. Species or sub-species that might be unique to a zoo, but which aren't visually distinct, I doubt have any impact at all. We on Zoochat might get a thrill out of seeing 10 different antelope species, but they'll be ignored by most visitors.
I visited the National Zoo and Aquarium in Canberra yesterday. It's a small zoo with only about 100 mammals and maybe 200 animals, other than fish, all up. But it has a collection that ticks just enough boxes - lions, tigers, bears, giraffes and zebras, with the 'x-factor' taxon of sharks - along with a few charismatic smaller species (koalas, otters, monkeys, cheetahs and snow leopards) to get by. Having said that, if I was the owner I'd be itching to get some rhinos or chimpanzees, as the most obtainable 'superstar' species that could put me over the magical 6/12 figure.
I guess Cincinnati would be a 90. They have 3 rhino species, three great apes, giraffes, elephants, lions, bears, zebras and tigers. I doubt anyone who visits would give such high marks, though.
Let me guess then. Sedgwick County gets close to, if not more, as many visitors a year as there are people living in the Wichita metropolitan area?
By "close to" I mean upwards of 75%.
Of the major Danish zoos:
Copenhagen Zoo: 90 (asian elephants, giraffes, grevy's zebras, african lions, siberian tigers, brown bears, polar bears, white rhinos, common hippos and chimpanzees)
Aalborg Zoo: 90 (african bush elephants, giraffes, grevy zebra's, african lions, siberian tigers, brown bears, polar bears, pygmy hippos, chimpanzees and bornean orangutans)
Givskud Zoo: 80 (asian elephants, giraffes, grevy zebra's, african lions, white rhinos, pygmy hippos, chimpanzees and gorillas)
Odense Zoo: 50 (giraffes, grevy's zebras, african lions, siberian tigers and chimps)
Copenhagen Zoo and Aalborg Zoo both used to be 100, but Copenhagen departed with their gorillas and Aalborg with their rhinos.
Copenhagen Zoo: 90 (asian elephants, giraffes, grevy's zebras, african lions, siberian tigers, brown bears, polar bears, white rhinos, common hippos and chimpanzees)
Aalborg Zoo: 90 (african bush elephants, giraffes, grevy zebra's, african lions, siberian tigers, brown bears, polar bears, pygmy hippos, chimpanzees and bornean orangutans)
Givskud Zoo: 80 (asian elephants, giraffes, grevy zebra's, african lions, white rhinos, pygmy hippos, chimpanzees and gorillas)
Odense Zoo: 50 (giraffes, grevy's zebras, african lions, siberian tigers and chimps)
Copenhagen Zoo and Aalborg Zoo both used to be 100, but Copenhagen departed with their gorillas and Aalborg with their rhinos.
In my opinion people also like to see aquaria ( especially when they house sharks), and snake's and crocodiles also seem to be an integral part of a zoo for the public, allthough most people don't like these animals. And don't forget eagles an vultures, always good as crowdpleasers.
My home zoo specializes in large groups of animals which are very common in zoo's, the result is that people are complaining about the lack of rare species in the collection. Because there wasn't much room, my home zoo also doesn't house lion's anymore. Also there are no great apes in the collection because they are too close to us, and no birds of prey, because the zoo feels they cannot give them the space they need.
My home zoo specializes in large groups of animals which are very common in zoo's, the result is that people are complaining about the lack of rare species in the collection. Because there wasn't much room, my home zoo also doesn't house lion's anymore. Also there are no great apes in the collection because they are too close to us, and no birds of prey, because the zoo feels they cannot give them the space they need.
Absolutely, and all Snowy Owls are Hedgwig (sp?) and all Clown Fish are Nemo.