You see, I wouldn't call the ASDM a museum or a zoo, because it doesn't have exotics only natives. A fauna park, or wild animal park maybe, but not a zoo. A Zoological Facility? Yes.
I think you must be right on the regional thing - it seems to me that of the responses so far, overall, European posters are happy to call them all 'zoos' and North American/Antipodean posters tend to split. Which is interesting in itself, although we're only a small sample so far. Interestingly, 'fauna park' is, I think, an exclusively Australian 'flavour' of zoo - I've never heard of that anywhere else*.
In Europe a place with native species may be called a 'wildlife park' in English, but most 'wildlife parks' have a good number (or even a majority) of exotics as well. The language with the closest equivalent to 'fauna park' is German, with 'Wildpark', which definitely implies an emphasis on European wildlife (though even then not necessarily exclusively).
*fully expecting a whole list of counterexamples now!
I think I also dislike the political implications (as discussed elsewhere) of somewhere being able to say 'we're not a zoo' as they often seem to think this gives them the moral highground.
That is exactly what I found troubling about Port Lympne, 'We're not like zoos' as if British zoos were just a collection of roadside menageries with wire cages full of polar bears and gorillas hardly able to move.
@Hix: Does ASDM display wild animals in confined exhibits within a continual institution to the (paying) public? Yes? Then it's a zoo-just like a fauna/ wild animal park/zoological facility is a zoo.
And like I said previously, to me a zoo needs to have exotics. That's not to belittle ASDM - it's a fantastic place. It's just my definition is a little different to yours.
Nor am I saying my definition is right. Just different.
"Exotic" is a rather dubious term in this regard, @Hix. Highland or Hinterwald cattle might be "exotic" to an, say, Indian audience. That doesn't mean that a facility displaying them in India would automatically qualify as a zoo for you, wouldn't it? Or would it, if it also displayed native Indian species that are "exotic" to "us"?
"Exotic" is a rather dubious term in this regard, @Hix. Highland or Hinterwald cattle might be "exotic" to an, say, Indian audience. That doesn't mean that a facility displaying them in India would automatically qualify as a zoo for you, wouldn't it? Or would it, if it also displayed native Indian species that are "exotic" to "us"?
I am well aware that there are grey areas with my definitions.
For instance if the facility in India displayed only native Indian species including Bengal tiger, Gir Forest Lions, Sloth bears, Pangolins, Asian Elephants, Indian Rhino, Gaur, Dhole, Blackbuck, Lion-tailed Macaque, Hanuman Langurs and Slow Loris, my definition would categorise it as a fauna park, when something like that would be obviously a zoo (unless it was a safari park).
As I said before, I'm not saying I'm right, it's just this is what I have grown up with and it is obviously different to what people in Europe and Nth America believe.
