I am hoping to revisit Denver this year and this is all convincing me to beg the buddy I'll be there with to drive us out an hour to Cheyene Mountain Zoo on top of revisiting Denver. It probably won't work out because our schedule is already packed but it looks like such a unique way to do an African savannah.
For all of the American facilities that hold North American black bears, how many emphasize the species as an exhibit centrepiece?
I think this is the million dollar question. I am probably the least traveled of active zoochatters, but while I've heard of many zoos keeping them in part of larger complexes, they often sound to be more of a secondary focus. They are easily the largest mammal in Lincoln Park Zoo's Children's Zoo, but they aren't the most promoted animal in that exhibit, which is more often the wolves or the otters, and the presence of polar bears is obviously a bigger deal to people than the more mundane black bears.
Setting aside the specifies of North American black bears, you notice Andean bears, sun bears, sloth bears, and Asiatic black bears have always been more like 'add-on' species than stars, and they all have darker fur, whereas grizzly bears are stars and polar bears are one of relatively fewer 'superstar' species that just inherently capture the hearts of guests. I suspect it's because grizzlies and polar bears are associated as larger, more imposing and more dangerous, in the same way that lions and tigers command more presence than leopards, cheetah or cougar. Yes, everyone loves big cats, but the 'scariest' ones command the most attention.
How many AZA zoos have native continental USA species as their main attraction? Black bears aren't rare, aren't exotic, don't have the size or reputation that grizzlies have (any they barely inhabit the lower 48). Mountain lions are rarely given star status and they have more of a reputation than black bears do.
I was originally going to refute this, but after thinking it over, I think you're very much correct. I do think certain zoos have used grizzlies as a major attraction (Brookfield advertised Great Bear Wilderness on local television entirely by itself for many years, and Russia's Grizzly Coast is a big point of interest for Minnesota) and they should count to some degree, but I do think that is more exception than rule. Moreover in regards to you're comment about them not being exotic enough -- it is common for not only exotic bears to suffer this effect, but also exotic deer and bovids, so I think that completely validates your statement. (Not that you need my validation out of anyone here, but still.)
But yeah, it isn't uncommon for Gray Wolves especially to reach main attraction status. I feel like bison and Jaguars qualify, too.
I'd be curious to hear about which zoos promote wolves as major attractions, but only because I realized recently that two of the major institutions I've visited completely lack wolves right now -- Milwaukee and Denver -- and neither seems to have suffered for it in the way a zoo might suffer for lacking a lot of major abc animals. Denver may be lacking in canids entirely as I've heard their African painted dogs may be gone. Brookfield does promote Wolf Woods somewhat often, especially in regards to conservation work, but I'm genuinely unsure how unusual that is.
Might be an unpopular opinion, but lions have got to be the most boring cat to display. All they do is sleep. They don't need many(if any) climbing opportunities or a pool. All lions need are a large savanna with some rocks. Boring.
I half-agree. I've been to Brookfield and Lincoln Park many times and the lions were usually not active, although seeing the males roar was always a treat. Pepper Family Wildlife Center and Benson Predator Ridge at Denver both drew much more attention to their lions mostly by luxury of numbers -- having a larger prides seemed to ensure more interactivity between the animals, more opportunity to see behavior, more chance at least one of them is awake.