Omaha's Henry Doorly Zoo $10.6 Million Madagascar Exhibit

@grizzlyman: thanks for posting the cool interactive map! I visited the Bronx Zoo shortly after its Madagascar building opened to the public, but I'm rather excited about Omaha's similarly-themed complex as it is larger and also contains outdoor habitats.

@reduakari and mweb08: you guys might both be correct as it does appear that the polar bear/arctic complex has been either put on the backburner or scrapped altogether.
 
This is the article regarding the future of the Zoo that mweb08 was mentioning:

Pandas? Zoo has other plans - Omaha.com

For those who don't feel like reading it here is the breakdown and my thoughts:

No pandas in the plans, but won't entirely rule them out - Not very surprising.

Expanded elephant area - This was in Simmons master plan and was planed to be built on zoo grounds at the back of the zoo where there are currently neighborhoods.

New homes for their cats - Pate mentions moving them to to homes though out the zoo to be near other animals that share a common habitat (finally in my opinion)

Renovate the Scott Aquarium - This probably surprised me the most as I feel it has aged quite well and goes far beyond what most zoos have.

No mention of the previously planned arctic exhibit - While this may have been dropped, I think this is still in the works for several reasons. First, in the article, Pate mentions he isn't reveling everything until the board approves the master plan. Second, Simmons is still on the board and is involved in Pates master plan and his past speeches indicated he was really set on developing the arctic exhibit. Third, even in Simmons plan, the stadium property was always going to be used for parking with a little overlap of the new exhibits (originally the arctic exhibit) in the space that is currently the "zoo" parking lot. The updated article even mentions this overlap, however nothing mentioned seems to fit this area. Unless its the school, which would seem oddly placed at the front of the zoo and I would think the zoo would want to utilize that space sooner rather than latter. Of course this is all purely speculation on my part.
 
reduakari said:
Please spare me this oft-repeated twisted "logic." The donors who gave Omaha Zoo $10 million would almost certainly never consider giving that money to the government of Madagascar, or even to non-profit conservation groups working in that country (most of whom, by the way, have stopped sending money and people to that collapsed nation). Omaha does sponsor important research/conservation work in Masdagascar--this high-profile new exhibit will be hugely helpful in maintaining a more modest funding stream to continue the work, and expose millions of people to a place and its issues that they otherwise would never know or care about.
Click to expand...

It is rather nice to divide the world in non-failed and failed nations is it not? The reality is that after a political coup and the political chaos that ensued most foreign conservation donors withdrew all support to wildlife conservation in Madagascar on which the country was more or less dependent. The conservation investment achieved over 10-20 years in Madagascar was sent down the drain and what ensued in an already very poor nation is the complete ransacking of former well protected areas, illegal poaching and a huge bushmeat market (which did not previously exist to that extreme level) and wholesale logging of valuable timbers. What logic or rationale is that?

Now, I can respect that you withdrew your political support to a given government, but I cannot and will not understand nor condone that the inegral conservation support to local conservation interests that have worked for several decades with their foreign donors, including ANGAP, have been left out in the cold.

That said, I do think the exhibit at Omaha is long-awaited and testament to the work the Henry Doorly Zoo has had with Madagascar. At the same time I can see and partially agree with the criticism at the major costs involved in said exhibit and the lack of comparable support for in situ conservation (as expunged by the WAZA ethics and rationale).
 
Kifaru Bwana said:
It is rather nice to divide the world in non-failed and failed nations is it not? The reality is that after a political coup and the political chaos that ensued most foreign conservation donors withdrew all support to wildlife conservation in Madagascar on which the country was more or less dependent. The conservation investment achieved over 10-20 years in Madagascar was sent down the drain and what ensued in an already very poor nation is the complete ransacking of former well protected areas, illegal poaching and a huge bushmeat market (which did not previously exist to that extreme level) and wholesale logging of valuable timbers. What logic or rationale is that?

Now, I can respect that you withdrew your political support to a given government, but I cannot and will not understand nor condone that the inegral conservation support to local conservation interests that have worked for several decades with their foreign donors, including ANGAP, have been left out in the cold.

That said, I do think the exhibit at Omaha is long-awaited and testament to the work the Henry Doorly Zoo has had with Madagascar. At the same time I can see and partially agree with the criticism at the major costs involved in said exhibit and the lack of comparable support for in situ conservation (as expunged by the WAZA ethics and rationale).
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more. It's a shame that aid from many sources to Madagascan conservation has been suspended, but what were the options with no real legitimate government existing?

But a reality check is needed for all: donations to build zoo exhibits--at least in the US--tend to come from individuals and corporations who want to look like good stewards of their local cultural institutions. Nothing wrong with that, but it does not follow that they would give to conservation activities half way around the world, especially in countires wiht no clear commitment to using the resources wisely.
 
pinkback said:
Does anyone really need a 10 million dollar Madagascan exhibit.
You could build a pretty decent lemur walk-through for 2 million and give 8 million to conservation in Madagascar where it is really needed.
Why are so many zoos now indulging in a p...ing contest of who can build the most lavish exhibits which will never generate the same amounts for in-situ conservation where it is really needed
Click to expand...

Because that is how they keep visitors returning and get new ones.

Because the R.O.I. of fundraising in gate receipts makes it worthwhile.

Because the donors who will fund a notable monument with their name on it in their city will not donate similar funds to a distant obscure park or research program.

Because the question "does anybody really need.....?" has never changed anyone's actions or plans.

Because, of course, nothing gets people...especially men...more excited then a good p...ing contest.

(adding to reduakari's post)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top