AgileGibbon
Well-Known Member
I'm #15, and the least visible person I think 
Chester Zoo EAZA Ape Campaign Special Event - Saturday 19th February 2011
- Thread starter SMR
- Start date
I could name everyone, but won't. Please let those who want to be identified make their own choice.
Shucks! My cunning disguise of not hiding a big camera didn't work - I am indeed between Zoogiraffe & Javan Rhino. I don't want to refer to myself by number because 'I am not a number, I am a free man!'
The photo also reminds me of the Duke of Wellington's remark about his troops - 'I don't know what they do the enemy, but by God they frighten me!'
Alan
Last edited:
karoocheetah
Well-Known Member
I am 20 {oh yes I am honest!!!!)
and I didn't realise how much my ears stick out when I tie my hair back!!
Number 25 is actually now a Zoo Chat member as she joined last week just hasn't introduced herself yet (slacker!) and 21 is her sister!
and I didn't realise how much my ears stick out when I tie my hair back!!
Number 25 is actually now a Zoo Chat member as she joined last week just hasn't introduced herself yet (slacker!) and 21 is her sister!
GillP
Well-Known Member
I had my big reply ready about being middle row, 2nd from left, red hair, stripey jumper etc., then saw SMR had kindly made it much easier to identify everyone .... so, I'm no. 6.
Have to say the photo came out pretty well - I usually detest having my picture taken but somehow managed to end up in at least 2 that day .... guess it was a small price to pay though !
I don't know their names but 18 and 24 are a nice couple who live literally just behind the zoo (lucky them !) who moved up to Chester from down south to be near the orangs. I've met them in RORA at least twice. They gave me all the orang names and explained the family relationships when I very first visited (really wish there was more family tree type info at Chester - my one small criticism) and apparently visit most days.
Have to say the photo came out pretty well - I usually detest having my picture taken but somehow managed to end up in at least 2 that day .... guess it was a small price to pay though !
I don't know their names but 18 and 24 are a nice couple who live literally just behind the zoo (lucky them !) who moved up to Chester from down south to be near the orangs. I've met them in RORA at least twice. They gave me all the orang names and explained the family relationships when I very first visited (really wish there was more family tree type info at Chester - my one small criticism) and apparently visit most days.
'Family tree' information can reap great benefits if its displayed. Even relatively casual visitors seem to get interested in this sort of thing- perhaps because they can identify/relate it to their own families. Many times I have seen people read this type of information and then tell their friends all about it too.
GillP
Well-Known Member
This is a real bug bear of mine Pertinax. I know there's a school of thought which considers family trees to anthropomorphise animals, but I think the advantages outweigh that particular criticism personally. As you say, casual visitors can relate to family relationships but there's so much more information which can also be gleaned. Dates of birth of offspring can indicate the ages at which animals become - and remain - fertile, and once you know how old an individual animal is, and providing you can identify it in a group, you can then also see what that species typically looks like at a given age and make interesting comparisms. Places of birth can sometimes illustrate the exchange of animals between zoos, and therefore also inform about the type of species held at another zoo (perhaps prompting a visit there for example ?).
I know Chester has ID pictures of the chimps and elephants, with names and dates of birth, but this still doesn't show how they're related to one another. With RORA being such a high profile exhibit it also feels as if they're missing a trick by not having any (unless it's very well hidden) individual information about any of the orangs ..... seems crazy when they are related not to make this clear. I'm sure there must be some casual visitors who, if they think about it at all, imagine it's a random assortment of animals. I'd like to see family trees for all family groups ..... on the day for example, Nick said that Mary (was it ?), one of the spider monkeys, had had a baby last year when she was 40 which I was quite surprised about not realising that a) spider monkeys lived that long, or b) that if they did, a female would still be fertile. I'd still be ignorant of that fact if I was a regular visitor yet would have been able to learn that from a family tree.
I do ought to say that when 'cornered' the keepers at Chester are brilliant at talking about this sort of thing but obviously they haven't always got the time to answer the same questions over and over again so providing info like this upfront would help them too.
I know Chester has ID pictures of the chimps and elephants, with names and dates of birth, but this still doesn't show how they're related to one another. With RORA being such a high profile exhibit it also feels as if they're missing a trick by not having any (unless it's very well hidden) individual information about any of the orangs ..... seems crazy when they are related not to make this clear. I'm sure there must be some casual visitors who, if they think about it at all, imagine it's a random assortment of animals. I'd like to see family trees for all family groups ..... on the day for example, Nick said that Mary (was it ?), one of the spider monkeys, had had a baby last year when she was 40 which I was quite surprised about not realising that a) spider monkeys lived that long, or b) that if they did, a female would still be fertile. I'd still be ignorant of that fact if I was a regular visitor yet would have been able to learn that from a family tree.
I do ought to say that when 'cornered' the keepers at Chester are brilliant at talking about this sort of thing but obviously they haven't always got the time to answer the same questions over and over again so providing info like this upfront would help them too.
Family Trees
Of course I'm biased as I find them fascinating anyway, but I don't think they anthropomorphise the animals really. What they do is reflect a successful captive breeding programme, or management technique, and so indirectly they also advertise or enhance the zoos' success with a particular species.
I think they are most effective with High Profile species- at Chester the Sumatran Orangutans and Elephants- or at least Thi's family-definately lend themselves to this treatment. I think too many in one zoo, or 'trees' that are very complicated, might weaken their effect rather, but in reality not that many species in a single zoo usually make good subjects anyway.
They seem quite popular in some European Zoos. The first one I ever came across was at Basel Zoo in Switzerland- Goma the Gorilla's Family tree- they published it as a Zoo poster. Jersey Zoo also have(?)/had one on the back wall in their Gorilla House for the famous Gorilla 'Jambo' (one of Goma's two brothers incidentally) and this one is pretty complicated but that just made it more fascinating reading for visitors.
Of course I'm biased as I find them fascinating anyway, but I don't think they anthropomorphise the animals really. What they do is reflect a successful captive breeding programme, or management technique, and so indirectly they also advertise or enhance the zoos' success with a particular species.
I think they are most effective with High Profile species- at Chester the Sumatran Orangutans and Elephants- or at least Thi's family-definately lend themselves to this treatment. I think too many in one zoo, or 'trees' that are very complicated, might weaken their effect rather, but in reality not that many species in a single zoo usually make good subjects anyway.
They seem quite popular in some European Zoos. The first one I ever came across was at Basel Zoo in Switzerland- Goma the Gorilla's Family tree- they published it as a Zoo poster. Jersey Zoo also have(?)/had one on the back wall in their Gorilla House for the famous Gorilla 'Jambo' (one of Goma's two brothers incidentally) and this one is pretty complicated but that just made it more fascinating reading for visitors.
In the old orang utan house they had plenty of material giving personal information about the individual animals. The problem is I suppose that expensively produced signs and posters can go out of date quickly. What I find particularly poor in RORA is that there aren't even signs to tell the public which species of orang utan they are looking at.
Many of those signs are still there.
The churn rate for the orangs is relatively low and the youngsters don't grow up overnight like a lot of other species, therefore I think better signage would be a good investment and it's something I've mentioned to the zoo more than once. I'm not sure many people even realise there are two species in the exhibit, an orang is an orang, right?
How are we supposed to think non-human animals get there if having a family tree is anthropomorphising! They all have parents (or, exceptionally a parent!)
I remember the big signboards in the old House, either hanging above, or behind(or both?) the public viewing area. Seems they have gone almost to the other extreme in RORA.
I was going to say the same thing about breeding rates- for Elephants, Orangutan, Gorilla etc they are so slow that family trees don't quickly become outdated. If carefully done, room can be left at the bottom of the chart to add additional births/incomers to keep the thing up dated. Similarly departures/transfers can be added if a little space is left for the purpose.
I much prefer to see at least some signs that give information about the collection's own animals, rather than just impersonal ones.
Possibly the thinking here is that an 'extended family' isn't really a natural concept for most animals. But as created by a Zoo's breeding success I think there's no harm at all in explaining it either.
That never occurred to me.... I would understand Chester not wishing to feature that particular family tree.
But they could do the Sumatran Orangutans- and including Puluh's parents and Emma & Subis' grandparents too!
And in the context of captive breeding 'family tree' by another name is very important!
GillP
Well-Known Member
So most people think family trees are a good idea then ?!
It's certainly not MY opinion that family trees 'humanise' animals .... it's just something I've heard suggested to explain the lack of them.
Agree it seems such a huge oversight in RORA not to make clear that there are two species of orangutan on display. Once you know it's clear there are physical differences between the two but I bet that doesn't occur to many visitors.
Mind you ...... at Colchester, there's very clear info on display about Rajang and Tiga showing they are both males, and their dates of birth. This still goes over the heads of some who persist in describing Tiga as either the 'baby one' or the 'girl one'.
It's certainly not MY opinion that family trees 'humanise' animals .... it's just something I've heard suggested to explain the lack of them.
Agree it seems such a huge oversight in RORA not to make clear that there are two species of orangutan on display. Once you know it's clear there are physical differences between the two but I bet that doesn't occur to many visitors.
Mind you ...... at Colchester, there's very clear info on display about Rajang and Tiga showing they are both males, and their dates of birth. This still goes over the heads of some who persist in describing Tiga as either the 'baby one' or the 'girl one'.
The differences between the two orangutan species(as they are nowadays classed) are subtle but there are many. I'm sure at least the more discerning visitors would be interested to know about (some of) them. I am surprised to hear Chester have only limited signage in RORA- maybe they think the display speaks for itself without it.