Only if TWPZ and Monarto were willing to give up their giraffe.
Australia Zoo Australia Zoo Updates
- Thread starter MARK
- Start date
Only if TWPZ and Monarto were willing to give up their giraffe.
and both of the bulls are closely related to Mapenzi
I wouldn't underestimate the number of Queenslanders going because it's the 'local zoo', and either not realising or accepting how much of a rip-off it is.
Hopefully in 5 years time there's otters, snow leopards, red pandas, zebras, rhinos, giraffes and tapirs (or whatever - I don't really know) attracting people to Darling Downs for less than half the price of that beautiful, but ridiculously expensive theme park on the Sunshine Coast.
Haha. What do you reckon?
I don't have an issue with revenue raising practices but I don't agree with advertising that you have something then saying, BUT IT'S NOT ON PUBLIC DISPLAY! They are not shy about advertising that they have the only giraffe in the state. But if you want to see them you can pay $95. I think it is important for a zoo to have points of interest be it white lions, animal encounters, etc. But they should be given the opportunity to see them.
The need to get into developing their projects faster. The hotel, if it happens will raise huge amounts of revenue for the zoo. They said they expected to have a number of huge developments completed by 2012. I can't see this happening.
The need to get into developing their projects faster. The hotel, if it happens will raise huge amounts of revenue for the zoo. They said they expected to have a number of huge developments completed by 2012. I can't see this happening.
I think the condor is used on the free flight display in the crocosaurium. If it is the irony is that the huge numbers of US visitors that the zoo gets could just have visited one of the US West coast zoos to see something even more special, a californian condor!
My criticism is not the Australia Zoo business model itself (though I don't like it). My criticism is that state-funded zoos in other states (and I believe Australia Zoo has animals off-display that they have received from each of the four public zoo bodies in Australia) are sending animals to Australia Zoo that are being used *solely* to generate profits from the high-spending end of the zoo-going public.
I don't have a problem at all with animals from public institutions going to private ones. But I think that the only justification for essentially propping up private enterprises in this way is the conservation and, in particular, education work done by those enterprises. I fail to see how charging nearly $100 to see a giraffe or rhino constitutes "education".
Further, I currently see no incentive to Australia Zoo to make their animals more accessible to the general public. Why should they? Species keep pouring in anyway. Why put them on display for no increase in revenue when they can keep them out the back and make windfall gains? I'll believe all these plans for expansion of the 'public' part of the zoo when I see it. The fact is, there have been only token developments since Steve died.
I feel that this was very well stated. I wonder if the Australia Zoo model only works because Queensland lacks a State funded zoo as an alternative. Queensland doesn't have a single zoo campus that covers the general broad spectrum of zoo animals found in Australia as NSW, VIC, SA and WA have. Rather we have polar bears at one place, tigers here and there. Lions (of any colour) at a third, a few native fauna places, a small spectrum of small exotics at another, all crowded in the SE corner. within an hour or two drive from the population center. Almost all of these are privately owned and the most successful ones actually draw there money from sources other than the animal exhibits. Australia Zoo is changing this with it exhorbitant 'extra' events. But this can only be done because SE Queenslanders don't have a state funded alternative. Would you pay $90 to feed a giraffe, on top of a $50 odd doller entry fee if you could go to Brisbane zoo and pay 20-30 bucks for a free keeper talk with a number of different animals. Certainly Australia Zoo is to be commended for an excellent business model, though I prefer not to be part of it by visiting the place. At least until it is actually worth the money by providing much greater exposure to a wide range of exotics as part of its entry fee.
Electus Parrot
Well-Known Member
Most open range zoos have a giraffe feeding setion anyway. You can turn up at Adelaide Zoo on the day and as long there is a spot open you can half a photo, feed them and spend half an hour with them for $30. You have to understand they have to charge something but just to feed them $30 sounds alright and it is much the same for the lemurs at Aelaide for $30. As is with many other zoos around Australia while the lemur encounter at Australia Zoo might have a bit more to it but is a fortune.
at Orana Park (in NZ) it doesn't cost anything extra for the public to feed the giraffesElectus Parrot said:
The new female came from Monarto last year and is currently nameless.
Australia Zoo's giraffe nameless | Sunshine Coast News | Local News in Sunshine Coast | The Sunshine Coast Daily
I don't see it will increase their popularity if visitors have to pay in the region of AUD 60 each to get into the grounds first and then 50-200 per person to see main attractions.
I cannot recall visiting a zoo that charges for anything once you have paid the entry fee (can't remember though if I paid extra to see SeaWorld San Diego's Killer Whale show) although I'm aware of that the Bronx Zoo charges a few bucks for entry to the Congo and the Asia Monorail. I have never considered paying for behind-the-scenes tours, all I've been on have been arranged by zoo friends, and plus I try to do my zoo visiting as cheap as possible.
In September it will be 4 years since Steve died. He had an amazing way of educating and making people interested in animals, sort of Attenborough on steroids. Nevertheless, his name may not forever hold the same attraction as it did when he was alive and to an extend still does. Australia Zoo has started using the Irwin kids and Terri more and more (when I was there in 2007 Steve's face was everywhere) but with all due respect for them, they're not Steve. Something tells me that Australia Zoo's future may be at risk now that the unique selling point is no longer there.
I cannot recall visiting a zoo that charges for anything once you have paid the entry fee (can't remember though if I paid extra to see SeaWorld San Diego's Killer Whale show) although I'm aware of that the Bronx Zoo charges a few bucks for entry to the Congo and the Asia Monorail. I have never considered paying for behind-the-scenes tours, all I've been on have been arranged by zoo friends, and plus I try to do my zoo visiting as cheap as possible.
In September it will be 4 years since Steve died. He had an amazing way of educating and making people interested in animals, sort of Attenborough on steroids. Nevertheless, his name may not forever hold the same attraction as it did when he was alive and to an extend still does. Australia Zoo has started using the Irwin kids and Terri more and more (when I was there in 2007 Steve's face was everywhere) but with all due respect for them, they're not Steve. Something tells me that Australia Zoo's future may be at risk now that the unique selling point is no longer there.
MARK
Well-Known Member
I agree with you I do feel the entry fee is quite high with so many species not on exhibit unless you pay extra.
Progress looks to be very slow at this time I hope the expansion plans still go ahead, I have been looking at the the zoos website site for a few years now and noted on the "zoo overview" in the past that they wanted to build the worlds largest Gorilla exhibit and also wanted to hold Orangs but now looking at the website I can not see this stated anywhere unless I have missed it or its been moved to another part of the site or have the plans changed??
Progress looks to be very slow at this time I hope the expansion plans still go ahead, I have been looking at the the zoos website site for a few years now and noted on the "zoo overview" in the past that they wanted to build the worlds largest Gorilla exhibit and also wanted to hold Orangs but now looking at the website I can not see this stated anywhere unless I have missed it or its been moved to another part of the site or have the plans changed??
Hmm. Some quotes from that "Zoo Overview":
Really?
What? You call building red panda and binturong enclosures over the past five years "full steam ahead"?
Really? I think Melbourne and Taronga would be interested to learn that they're competing for second place.
