They are in there not as part of the zoogeographic theming they are there in a display regarding primates. Comparing the smallest (pygmy marmosets) to the largest (gorillas)
They are in there not as part of the zoogeographic theming they are there in a display regarding primates. Comparing the smallest (pygmy marmosets) to the largest (gorillas)
Which I approve of entirely, in fact. This is one of the advantages of a taxonomic animal house. If you build a Primate House, you allow visitors to compare great apes to gibbons to Old World monkeys to callitrichids to lemurs and so forth and see the diversity of the group.
I guess I just get a little frustrated that so few places build non-geographic-themed exhibits any more. Or rather, that any non-geographic exhibit tends to get criticised for lack of educational value, as if zoogeography is the only thing worth teaching anyone.
From a welfare point of view, this cage is certainly adequate for the snake and is much better than what most Ball Python breeders would keep them in.
But from a display point of view it could certainly be larger. I'm surprised that a zoo with the reputation of the Bronx, while building fantastic exhibits for their gorillas etc, was happy to short-change the reptiles.
From a welfare point of view, this cage is certainly adequate for the snake and is much better than what most Ball Python breeders would keep them in.
But from a display point of view it could certainly be larger. I'm surprised that a zoo with the reputation of the Bronx, while building fantastic exhibits for their gorillas etc, was happy to short-change the reptiles.
Your right as a private reptile keeper that cage is certainly enough for one ball python, they dont need much more than that. But from as zoos point of view the cage could certainly be bigger and nicer, they should triple the size and just add another ball python.
