"Boring" animals

What the public cannot possibly realize is that, yeah those giraffe's are just always standing over there munching on browse, but when you take care of these animals you see so much more than that. So from a visitor perspective they may seem boring. But as a keeper I'd never tire of them. So it's important to educate the public, point out interesting facts about the animal and explain about their natural habitat, predators, and so on.
 
I read an interesting report from Aalborg Zoo in Denmark. They equipped some voluntary visitors with GPS receivers that traced how much time they used at each area in the zoo.

They made this list which actually should say very well which animals (and other zoo amenities) the average Dane find interesting. The number in the bracket is the total hours that the visitors with GPS receivers used that day. All exhibits in the zoo except for a few small ones are on the list.

1. The playground (15,8)
2. Elephant exhibit (10)
3. Giraffe exhibit (9,3)
4. Picnic area (8,9)
5. Polar bears (8,3)
6. Entrance building (6,9)
7. African pygmy goats (6,7)
8. Orangutan house (4,9)
8. Rabbit exhibit (4,9)
9. Boer goats (4,8)
10. Chimpanzees (4,7)
10. The exhibition building Panthera (4,7)
11. Pygmy hippo house (3,8)
12. Kangaroo exhibit (3,4)
13. Capuchins (3,3)
14. The biggest ice cream shop (2,9)
15. Free-flight aviary (2,8)
16. Brown bears (2,4)
17. Llama exhibit (2,3)
18. Fossas (not in the zoo anymore) (2,1)
19. Camel exhibit (2)
20. African wild dog exhibit (1,7)
21. Baboon exhibit (1,2)
21. The medium-sized ice cream shop (1,2)
22. Capybara exhibit (1)
23. African exhibition in an artificial baobab (0,6)
23. The small ice cream shop (0,6)
24. Flamingo exhibit (0,3)
 
Thanks for that - that's fascinating!

Even if the playground being top and three domestic animal exhibits in the top ten is depressingly predictable...

Odd that Polar Bears and Brown Bears are so different - is there a difference in the quality of exhibit/number of bears at Aalborg that might account for this or is this just Joe Public's preference, I wonder?
 
Maguari said:
Thanks for that - that's fascinating!

Even if the playground being top and three domestic animal exhibits in the top ten is depressingly predictable...

Odd that Polar Bears and Brown Bears are so different - is there a difference in the quality of exhibit/number of bears at Aalborg that might account for this or is this just Joe Public's preference, I wonder?
Click to expand...

The polar bear exhibit is much better and more modern with underwater view and around it lots of factual signs, a copy of a Greenlandic hunter's house and other types of education.

The brown bear exhibit is fine, but a bit on the small side. And then it's located at the edge in the zoo in a wooded area. You won't find it unless you stray from the main path so I think several people don't even know it exists.

AND Aalborg Zoo seems to have been much more proud and advertising of their polar bears since the opening of their new exhibit in 2000 where it was the best polar bear exhibit in Denmark and probably one of the best in Europe. The polar bears also are known for breeding very well for the species, and I think the GPS test might have been when they had the cub Milak.

By the way, I forgot an entry in the list. The savanna exhibit is number 5 with 8,8 hours being spent in total. So that at least puts the domestic animals a bit further down :p
 
Hvedekorn said:
The polar bear exhibit is much better and more modern with underwater view and around it lots of factual signs, a copy of a Greenlandic hunter's house and other types of education.

The brown bear exhibit is fine, but a bit on the small side. And then it's located at the edge in the zoo in a wooded area. You won't find it unless you stray from the main path so I think several people don't even know it exists.

AND Aalborg Zoo seems to have been much more proud and advertising of their polar bears since the opening of their new exhibit in 2000 where it was the best polar bear exhibit in Denmark and probably one of the best in Europe. The polar bears also are known for breeding very well for the species, and I think the GPS test might have been when they had the cub Milak.
Click to expand...

Ah - thanks for that. Definitely sounds like the Polars were always likely to get more attention.


Hvedekorn said:
By the way, I forgot an entry in the list. The savanna exhibit is number 5 with 8,8 hours being spent in total. So that at least puts the domestic animals a bit further down :p
Click to expand...

Excellent! :D
 
lazookat said:
A Takin is a goat-antelope from the Himilayas. (Bhutan) It is not even related to the tapir. The Tapir is an odd-toed ungulate related to the rhinoceros and the horse.
Click to expand...

It was just a (not very funny) joke( from 3 years ago!), I was just takin the mickey :)
 
lazookat said:
A Takin is a goat-antelope from the Himilayas. (Bhutan) It is not even related to the tapir. The Tapir is an odd-toed ungulate related to the rhinoceros and the horse.
Click to expand...

So a cross bred Rhino with a Horse would produce a Tapir, a Rhino cross bred with Tapir produces a Horse and Finally can anyone guess where Rhino's come from ? Evolution is really quite simple, dont know what all this fuss about evolution is myself :confused:

Back to boring Zoo animals, Flamingo's are the epitome of it for me.
 
PAT said:
Someone said that giraffe make a good display no matter where you are but sometimes i just glance and think "OK, I'll just keep walking 'cos they aren't doing anything." What i mean is, If you've seen them once then that's enough. Same goes for lions. I've only ever seen them move once in a zoo.
Click to expand...

In regards to Lions, I was at Melbourne Zoo a few weeks back and 3 of the 4 big males were up and moving... first time I've seen that it many, many visits to various zoos... it was awesome. :D

Generally i agree with you though...
 
Everyone seem so focussed on whether the Giraffes or Lions [insert whatever] moves....I get too excited when I see an Owstons Palm Civet lick itself thats enough movement for me...oh dear what an exciting life I must lead :o

I dont find any animal boring as such but i do come stuck when im presented with the same information at every zoo I go to e.g. "Giraffes are really tal" (somethign along those lines). I would find an animal more interesting if zoos provided more interesting stuff to learn about them.
 
I laughed aloud when I was at the Toronto Zoo last summer and saw that they had a racoon exhibit in the Canadian area. If I want to see a racoon I can just step outside of my house at night

Other than that I don't find any animals particularly boring, but I might not spend much time at the giraffe, or wolf, or any other exhibit if the animals are too far to really be seen- which is great itself in a way, though, as it means they've got a great big exhibit to run around in.
 
It's sad to say that many typical zoo visitors, and maybe even some zoo enthusiasts, may find some very common zoo animals somewhat "boring", just due to their behavior.

Big cats, especially lions and tigers, are definitely one of the most commonly-found animals in zoos. We all know that. Despite how beautiful, regal and majestic these creatures are, the cats are among the laziest animals on Earth. I know I do, and I'm sure most people do too, only see these marvelous but dangerous apex predators just laying there in their exhibits, barely showing any signs of movement or activity whatsoever, causing visitors to just catch a quick glimpse at them and then just walk away, without really stopping to appreciate how amazing these animals really are though. The great news about this, despite of course how inactive lions, tigers and most big cats are, is that they are still so popular and people still love to see them in captivity, even if they are just sleeping there, showing no fun activity. It still kind of surprises me though, in a good way, as I'd normally expect a normal zoo visitor just to simply look at a big cat for like ten seconds, than just walk away without a thought. It's wonderful that so many people still appreciate the big cats even though they rarely pretty much tend to amuse people at the zoo with their activities.

The same kind of goes to reptiles in zoos, particularly snakes, as most of the time, they're just coiled up under a log or a rock or something in their exhibit, fast asleep, almost out of view from the visitors. In fact, I'd say that snakes show far less activity than lions and tigers, yet still people love to go to their local zoo and see them, not minding what they're doing as the visitor is seeing them.

I personally think that it's so great that some of the most inactive zoo animals are still some of the most popular. I also don't think that any zoo animal is really "boring" to see. I love watching lions tigers, snakes, lizards, crocodilians, owls etc., like many other people here, even if the animals are just sleeping and showing no activity, you can still watch and appreciate and like these animals for what they are, even if they aren't giving you a show.
 
foz said:
I would find an animal more interesting if zoos provided more interesting stuff to learn about them.
Click to expand...

EXACTLY!!!! I wish more zoos would do this. How often have you visited giraffe houses and there is only a small sign about them? You could fill a giraffe house with all kinds of interesting exhibits and interactives about these cool animals.... yet I've never seen that happen.
 
I see it as a great zoo has to have the "franchises" or pillars of the Zoo world ie the charismatic megafauna. And then you build bio-geographic exhibits areas around them.
 
Any animal that I can see in the wild such as prairie dogs, bison. pronghorn, elk, and many other North American species I don't spend much time looking at since I can see them in the wild. However, I would not want to have zoos stop keeping some of these species since there are plenty of people in cities who don't get to see these in the wild. As far as "pet shop" reptiles and birds I don't mind them if they are part of a geographic display.

The only animals I give a pass to are domestic species. The only boring displays are nocturnal species like raccoons and owls kept in an enclosure in broad daylight where they will just sleep all day.
 
I realize I am years late to this party, but I'd like to offer a different perspective. I'll admit that I didn't read all ten pages of posts, but on the 2-3 pages I did read, I didn't see anything similar.

I have visited 66 zoos and 16 aquariums, and these days I don't even photograph the common animals if there is not a good chance of it coming out well. Tiger sleeping with his butt towards me? Keep walking.

But I (like most people on this forum) am not the typical zoo visitor. My (unscientific) observation is that the vast majority of people visiting a zoo will never go to more than two different zoos in their lives -- the one they go to as a kid and the one they take their kids to years later. So the fact that "everyone has meerkats" is not relevant to them; they are excited to see meerkats for the first time.

Then there is the Nemo factor. I only saw clownfish at a few aquariums before Finding Nemo came out, and now every aquarium and many zoos (in the U.S. at least) have clownfish. Why? Because kids want to see them. And when they find Nemo, they want to find Dori and all of the others, too. The same is true for meerkats and warthogs due to The Lion King.

So for me, yeah, I'd rather see something less common than a meerkat, but I still enjoy them. And if that's what it takes to bring people to the zoo, then I see nothing wrong with it. In fact, I think it's great! More people visiting zoos means more people developing a love for animals, being exposed to conservation issues, and generating revenue for the zoos.
 
I've never seen the appeal of meerkats, they just seem dull to me.

And while I would like to see a Giant Panda, I don't understand why they are so incredibly popular. It's a small weird bear. That's cool, 50% increase in visitor numbers cool?

Mind you, I think its a good idea never to disregard your "boring" animals. I'm not that interested in primates, but while I was a Dudley I saw one of the Orang-utans was sitting near the glass. Nobody was around to give me funny looks, so I sat down on opposite him and he shuffled over to have a look. Really intense couple of minutes I could have easily missed.
 
The ultimate zoo experience? Two Words: Guinea Pigs.
Picture a herd of guinea pigs on a grassy savannah, say a couple of acres in the center of the zoo. Maybe make it a mixed species exhibit with some lop eared rabbits. Make it a complete experience (and money generator!) by allowing guests to feed the herd carrots, from behind the safety of a guard rail of course!
 
lamna said:
And while I would like to see a Giant Panda, I don't understand why they are so incredibly popular. It's a small weird bear. That's cool, 50% increase in visitor numbers cool?
Click to expand...

I think it's the hype surrounding them. Not many zoos have them and they are endangered. So who knows how long people will be able to see them? As for actually viewing them, there's not much to see. They're either sleeping or eating bamboo. Well, those are common characteristics, but sometimes they may climb up trees or slide down snowy hills. What captivates me as a photographer is capturing their eyes. Having black spots around their dark eyes, it's hard to sometimes get the light in them. Not to mention they are closed a lot when they are eating. If I can get a shot where they are looking up in the light, it's all worth it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top