Aquarium of the Pacific Aquarium of the Pacific

[Northwest_FIsh_Keeping]

A temporary exhibit called “Stars of the Sea” featuring multiple species of Sea Star. The gallery will be open until April 30th.

The way they explained it in some news pieces, I don't believe its a new gallery. They describe it as an "aquarium wide exhibit", i think its just where there are Sea Star and alike species on exhibit in the aquarium, they put up extra signage and spotlight information on those species, since all these Sea Stars are found throughout the Aquarium. A little disappointing but I get it since it didn't seem like they had the existing space for a new gallery. Though the Crown of Thorn's might be new for the "exhibit", they weren't there back in December.

 

[Westcoastperson]

The way they explained it in some news pieces, I don't believe its a new gallery. They describe it as an "aquarium wide exhibit", i think its just where there are Sea Star and alike species on exhibit in the aquarium, they put up extra signage and spotlight information on those species, since all these Sea Stars are found throughout the Aquarium. A little disappointing but I get it since it didn't seem like they had the existing space for a new gallery. Though the Crown of Thorn's might be new for the "exhibit", they weren't there back in December.

No both the temporary exhibits for frogs and babies are still in use so this isn’t any new exhibit. Crown of thorns may have been in the coral predators tank before but I wouldn’t know if they had them recently.

 

[peruvianbirdie]

Visited the aquarium today, these are some things I noted:

-I spotted one white sea bass in the cavern exhibit not sure how long this individual been here for I don't recall seeing it from my last visit the past year.

-I did not see the Clipperton Angelfish (Holacanthus limbaughi). Spent about 15 minutes on my first visit to the tunnel around 11am focusing mostly on the left side and returned about 4:20pm, both with no luck. Admittedly dissapointed because I was looking forward to seeing it, I'm more worried if something happened and hoping it was just hiding or at a different spot in the exhibit.

-Noticed a fish (could not tell what species) being either acclimated or removed from above in the right side of the tropical tunnel.

-This might not be new but an educator told me the scaly-breasted lorikeet (Trichoglossus chlorolepidotus) were recent additions, I do not believe I seen the birds in my last visit last June, unsure if they are new species or new individuals.

-A Magellanic penguin (female IIRC) named Inca is a new addition (and on-exhibit/public with the rest of the penguins) at the Junes Keyes Penguin Habitat from an unknown facility. She is easily distinguishable by being the only penguin with a yellow ID tag (w/her name) whereas the other penguins have beads. To add to this, I asked an educator about breeding plans with the colony and he told me "depends if they want to" which makes me hope for new chicks in the future.

-The underwater penguin tunnel is closed alongside part of the shorebird sanctuary which is going through some renovations. The birds and fish were removed and I noticed some perhaps moved to the lower level aviary (which use to hold a yellow-crowned night-heron form my last visit) with the main cage holding one American avocet and the cage inside holding two killdeers and the white-faced ibis, and I am guessing the other birds are BTS. I also noticed a dish bowl in there labeled "Kingfisher", does the aquarium hold that species?

-Part of the new "Our Living Coastline" is blocked and I think going through renovations or acclimation? Tried posting photos here but failed so might add them to media.

-In the hospital tank, there is now an eagle ray alongside a olive ridley sea turtle, two zebra sharks, and a ray I couldn't identify. I did not see the green sea turtle in there but I believe the southern stingray is still in there (is it suppose to be a big and dark individual) as I mentioned last sentence.

-Sure not new but I did see some mountain yellow-legged frog tadpoles on display.

-Definitely not new but have not heard anyone here mentioned this but the occelaris/false purcula clownfish are no longer displayed which personally bums me out as I'm a fan of the species and their exhibit was a childhood favorite of mine.

 

[Northwest_FIsh_Keeping]

I did not see the Clipperton Angelfish (Holacanthus limbaughi). Spent about 15 minutes on my first visit to the tunnel around 11am focusing mostly on the left side and returned about 4:20pm, both with no luck. Admittedly dissapointed because I was looking forward to seeing it, I'm more worried if something happened and hoping it was just hiding or at a different spot in the exhibit.

Hopefully, it was just hiding, I noticed it tended to stay towards the back in the caves for long periods of time when I saw it. Someone from Monterey Bay Aquarium had visited before I did, and didn't see it at all on exhibit or behind the scenes but it turned out it just likes to hide at times. I know it's up there in age (at least 25 years old) and my friend who was a part time aquarist did say it's on it's way out due to age related issues, but hopefully he's still doing okay.

• Crown-of-thorns (Acanthaster planci)

I will have to double check with some at the Point Defiance Zoo & Aquarium since they got their Crown-of-thorns from the same source, but looking at the picture from the AOP site, I'm 90% sure that might actually be the Pacific Crown-of-thorns (Acanthaster cf. solaris), and not A. planci like they label. True A. planci are much more colorful, usually a dark purple and red color scheme, and have a different body shape. The solaris species got axed a long time ago, but new research is coming out that will hopefully revive that species taxonomically wise since both species have different distributions. The pictures they're using to make solaris a valid species again match up much more with the ones AOP seemingly have; they're very drab in color and much more "round". Just an interesting bit I thought I'd put out there, at least they're staying accurate with the Pacific sourcing. I'll have to wait until PDZA opens up their Crown-of-thorns tank to get an accurate look.

 

[Westcoastperson]

I spotted one white sea bass in the cavern exhibit not sure how long this individual been here for I don't recall seeing it from my last visit the past year.

There has consistently been one White Sea bass in blue cavern and was most-likely there in June.

I also noticed a dish bowl in there labeled "Kingfisher", does the aquarium hold that species?

No, that exhibit used to hold Guam Kingfisher up until a few years ago but they were sent to a different facility due to a lack of breeding.

and a ray I couldn't identify.

Thats either the Mangrove Ray or Southern Stingray. Best way to tell is Mangroves have white spots and a circular body, southerns are plain gray with a diamond shape. It seems like they swap those two individuals between the health center and the tropical reef tank, but they are nearly impossible to see in the tropical reef.
Also did you happen to see how the aquarium distributed the animals from the Ray pool? Does blue cavern have more than one or two bat rays now?

 

[peruvianbirdie]

Thats either the Mangrove Ray or Southern Stingray. Best way to tell is Mangroves have white spots and a circular body, southerns are plain gray with a diamond shape. It seems like they swap those two individuals between the health center and the tropical reef tank, but they are nearly impossible to see in the tropical reef.

Upon looking through online images, I opt. the mangrove species. Unfortunately wasn't able to get a good look because it was just resting under the platform at the corner of the tank the whole time I was there, the best I can describe it was big round black specimen.

Also did you happen to see how the aquarium distributed the animals from the Ray pool? Does blue cavern have more than one or two bat rays now?

I did see at least 3 or 4 bat rays in the Blue Cavern but no sturgeon fish anywhere exhibited.

 

[Northwest_FIsh_Keeping]

Also did you happen to see how the aquarium distributed the animals from the Ray pool?

I saw a post the other day from Facebook that shows at least 1 of the Round Rays was moved to the 30ft long Seagrass Tank in the Southern California gallery, thats actually a really nice Tank for them. Im highly considering making the drive from San Diego to Long Beach again for a quick day visit.

It also appears there are Giant Bell Jellies in the Jelly Gallery again (previously in that tank were the Beroe Comb Jellies), and Lion's Mane Jellies (previously in that tank were Warty Comb Jellies)

I also did see another post that showed off the Crown of Thorn's, and it definitely looks like a Pacific Crown-of-thorns (Acanthaster cf. solaris)

 

[Great Argus]

Apparently the aquarium has had an Australian Magpie for over a decade, has anyone ever seen it? I can't find any mention or photo of it on the site, and it's absent from ZTL as well. Supposedly it was on display for awhile near the entrance to Lorikeet Forest.

 

[Westcoastperson]

Apparently the aquarium has had an Australian Magpie for over a decade, has anyone ever seen it? I can't find any mention or photo of it on the site, and it's absent from ZTL as well. Supposedly it was on display for awhile near the entrance to Lorikeet Forest.

Yes I remember it well, it was in a small aviary next to lorikeet Forest, there is a food stand there now. The same area used to hold Arctic Foxes, when it held magpie I believe there were also Cockatoo. There were other bird species I can’t remember, ambassador animals they kept there instead of behind the scenes. But yes there were definitely Australian Magpie.
Arctic Fox Exhibit - ZooChat

 

[peruvianbirdie]

The aquarium officially announced they welcomed 1.1.0 Magellanic Penguins (including Inca who I noted on my last visit).
Log in or sign up to view

 

[Northwest_FIsh_Keeping]

Some new additions via someone I know who visited the other week and sent some pictures to me:
Tropical Pacific Gallery:

• There is at least 1 Cherry Anthias (Sacura margaritacea) in the Non-photosynthetic Reef Tank, I didn't see the pair of Bellus Angelfish (Genicanthus bellus) in the photos, but they still may be in there or moved.

North Pacific Gallery:

• Red Eye Medusas (Polyorchis sp.) are on exhibit and replaced the Beroe Comb Jellies, and Lion's Mane Jellies (Cyanea capillata) are on exhibit and replaced the Egg Yolk Jellies

 

[Local_Shark]

I just visited AOP for the first time since the “Stars of the Sea” special exhibit and Our Living Coastline remodel…and I have to say, as a lifelong LA resident and a pass holder at AOP for many years (and more connections besides that I won’t get into much here), this has to be the most disappointing this facility has been since Pacific Visions.

Our Living Coastline is truly one of the worst and most unnecessary “updates” to an exhibit I’ve ever seen. The Ray Pool, while certainly old, was iconic and beloved and could have been well served with a nice refresh that would expand the exhibit and give more space to the local elasmobranchs or potentially even bring new ones in for guests to learn about. In a time where shark and ray species are critically threatened worldwide this seems vital. Instead the aquarium decided to…essentially double down on tidepool exhibits, when they already had one inside that was popular, and in doing so not even create one that is truly unique among such exhibits. It is true that our tidepools also should be highlighted and the guests educated about them and the threats facing them, but the facility already does so in multiple locations, and every smaller aquarium in Southern California does as well (some even better than AOP). Large facilities are the only ones that really have room for sizable elasmobranch exhibits, while small ones can easily manage tidepool tanks. I expected when it was announced that it would possibly be an addition of tidepool space to the elasmos, but instead they have essentially removed all of them entirely save for the round stingrays, and brought in very little that’s actually unique in their place! They appear to have completely lost the pelagic stingrays (one of two facilities in North America that were holders) as I’m told they have likely been sent to another AZA facility. Their sturgeon and shovelnose guitarfish have also both gone behind the scenes or been removed entirely, two large and charismatic species that are both threatened and could use a spotlight. The thornback guitarfish that was once in the aviary waters and then moved to the Ray Pool also is completely missing as far as I can tell. All in all, I really don’t have anything to say about the exhibit other than that it’s a massive downgrade and a complete disappointment. “Stars of the Sea” is no better - it’s essentially just a handful of signs highlighting either already existing or a few newly added species of sea stars around the facility. It is probably their least expansive or detailed temporary exhibit ever, and that’s remarkable given that there was such an exhibit during COVID. They don’t even utilize the temporary space in the Pacific Visions gallery for it.

At this point I think Long Beach and even LA County residents in general need to start seriously questioning the leadership of this facility, and most importantly where all the money is going. Recently they saved hundreds of thousands of dollars by striking a deal with the city council to reduce their rent to a symbolic amount (possibly $1) per year. Their admission prices have gone up immensely since COVID, now nearing $40 per person, and the exhibitry and animal diversity has not at all correspondingly improved. All that’s happened are two facelifts to existing exhibits, the SoCal gallery (a genuine upgrade in a few facets, albeit to their smallest and oldest “main gallery”), and now Our Living Coastline (a downgrade as stated above). There have been rumors for a half decade-plus that the old, antiquated and inadequate Shark Lagoon will be completely restructured and expanded, but there have been no such plans presented whatsoever. I honestly have to wonder whether such a thing will ever occur. We as a community are being absolutely lapped by vastly smaller metropolitan areas nationwide despite being the second largest in the Union. It’s really a crying shame what’s happening here, and one that frankly needs to be addressed immediately.

One small postscript: @Westcoastperson had asked in this thread what would be done to the aviary/if there would be any improvements amid the renovations for Our Living Coastline. The answer appears to have been…absolutely nothing whatsoever.

 

[Northwest_FIsh_Keeping]

Our Living Coastline is truly one of the worst and most unnecessary “updates” to an exhibit I’ve ever seen. The Ray Pool, while certainly old, was iconic and beloved and could have been well served with a nice refresh that would expand the exhibit and give more space to the local elasmobranchs or potentially even bring new ones in for guests to learn about. In a time where shark and ray species are critically threatened worldwide this seems vital. Instead the aquarium decided to…essentially double down on tidepool exhibits, when they already had one inside that was popular, and in doing so not even create one that is truly unique among such exhibits. It is true that our tidepools also should be highlighted and the guests educated about them and the threats facing them, but the facility already does so in multiple locations, and every smaller aquarium in Southern California does as well (some even better than AOP). Large facilities are the only ones that really have room for sizable elasmobranch exhibits, while small ones can easily manage tidepool tanks. I expected when it was announced that it would possibly be an addition of tidepool space to the elasmos, but instead they have essentially removed all of them entirely save for the round stingrays, and brought in very little that’s actually unique in their place! They appear to have completely lost the pelagic stingrays (one of two facilities in North America that were holders) as I’m told they have likely been sent to another AZA facility. Their sturgeon and shovelnose guitarfish have also both gone behind the scenes or been removed entirely, two large and charismatic species that are both threatened and could use a spotlight. The thornback guitarfish that was once in the aviary waters and then moved to the Ray Pool also is completely missing as far as I can tell. All in all, I really don’t have anything to say about the exhibit other than that it’s a massive downgrade and a complete disappointment.

This sucks a lot to hear. One of AOP's biggest strong points IMO was their Elasmobranch collection, both Tropical and Local species, so to see them phase out a huge chunk of their local elasmobranchs is disheartening. Especially since it's local wildlife, I would've thought they would've been the main priority to keep but I guess not. I'd imagine maybe MBA or even Birch could've got some of them if they have been shipped out, but I remember you mentioned the Pelagic Stingrays are found in warmer water as well so that potentially expands the possible landing opportunities. Hopefully, we see some sort of announcement from whichever Aquarium received them soon.

They don’t even utilize the temporary space in the Pacific Visions gallery for it.

This as well, I think the "Babies" exhibit has kinda been going on too long. Seeing the juvenile species is cool sure, but considering how much space it takes up and what they could be using it for instead, it just seems like a huge wasted opportunity considering those species are already on exhibit throughout the aquarium.

I still think it's the 3rd best Aquarium in the state behind MBA and Steinhart / the Academy just because of it's size and rare species, but I definitely agree they haven't been the most innovative as of late. It seems like the SoCal Gallery renovation was the last "big thing" and that was over 2 years ago at this point, which doesn't seem like a lot of time but I just feel like they could've definitely done better than what they've done since then as you said. Especially considering what the other Aquariums in California have done within a similar time frame (ex. Birch's huge renovation they completed in less than a year, MBA getting ready for a complete overhaul of their Kid's Zone which is agreed to be the weakest part of the aquarium that sounds like will be completed in less than a year too, Steinhart's Twilight Zone gallery refresh that only took a few months, Seaworld SD's Jelly gallery + "Bayside Aquarium" exhibit debut + now the Shark Encounter renovation). It just makes you wonder what is going on for them to be on such a slow pace right now compared to their "neighbors"

 

[Local_Shark]

This sucks a lot to hear. One of AOP's biggest strong points IMO was their Elasmobranch collection, both Tropical and Local species, so to see them phase out a huge chunk of their local elasmobranchs is disheartening. Especially since it's local wildlife, I would've thought they would've been the main priority to keep but I guess not. I'd imagine maybe MBA or even Birch could've got some of them if they have been shipped out, but I remember you mentioned the Pelagic Stingrays are found in warmer water as well so that potentially expands the possible landing opportunities. Hopefully, we see some sort of announcement from whichever Aquarium received them soon.
This as well, I think the "Babies" exhibit has kinda been going on too long. Seeing the juvenile species is cool sure, but considering how much space it takes up and what they could be using it for instead, it just seems like a huge wasted opportunity considering those species are already on exhibit throughout the aquarium.

I still think it's the 3rd best Aquarium in the state behind MBA and Steinhart / the Academy just because of it's size and rare species, but I definitely agree they haven't been the most innovative as of late. It seems like the SoCal Gallery renovation was the last "big thing" and that was over 2 years ago at this point, which doesn't seem like a lot of time but I just feel like they could've definitely done better than what they've done since then as you said. Especially considering what the other Aquariums in California have done within a similar time frame (ex. Birch's huge renovation they completed in less than a year, MBA getting ready for a complete overhaul of their Kid's Zone which is agreed to be the weakest part of the aquarium that sounds like will be completed in less than a year too, Steinhart's Twilight Zone gallery refresh that only took a few months, Seaworld SD's Jelly gallery + "Bayside Aquarium" exhibit debut + now the Shark Encounter renovation). It just makes you wonder what is going on for them to be on such a slow pace right now compared to their "neighbors"

Yep, this is pretty much all exactly how I feel. And frankly, I think them being third on the list is conditional upon Birch’s shark exhibit not also receiving a remodel before Shark Lagoon, which I feel is absolutely not a foregone conclusion, and SeaWorld’s remodels not being spectacular. AOP has slumped down my full national list of aquariums to the point where they’re barely clinging to a top 20 or 25 spot.

Also, afaik one of their two pelagic rays had tragically passed, so my expectation is that the other has probably now made its way to either MBA or possibly Birch to replace the one that once lived in their Open Ocean tank, which is now much larger and more adequate for the species. I frankly hope that’s where it’s gone, we shall see I guess.

 

[Westcoastperson]

I just visited AOP for the first time since the “Stars of the Sea” special exhibit and Our Living Coastline remodel…and I have to say, as a lifelong LA resident and a pass holder at AOP for many years (and more connections besides that I won’t get into much here), this has to be the most disappointing this facility has been since Pacific Visions.

Our Living Coastline is truly one of the worst and most unnecessary “updates” to an exhibit I’ve ever seen. The Ray Pool, while certainly old, was iconic and beloved and could have been well served with a nice refresh that would expand the exhibit and give more space to the local elasmobranchs or potentially even bring new ones in for guests to learn about. In a time where shark and ray species are critically threatened worldwide this seems vital. Instead the aquarium decided to…essentially double down on tidepool exhibits, when they already had one inside that was popular, and in doing so not even create one that is truly unique among such exhibits. It is true that our tidepools also should be highlighted and the guests educated about them and the threats facing them, but the facility already does so in multiple locations, and every smaller aquarium in Southern California does as well (some even better than AOP). Large facilities are the only ones that really have room for sizable elasmobranch exhibits, while small ones can easily manage tidepool tanks. I expected when it was announced that it would possibly be an addition of tidepool space to the elasmos, but instead they have essentially removed all of them entirely save for the round stingrays, and brought in very little that’s actually unique in their place! They appear to have completely lost the pelagic stingrays (one of two facilities in North America that were holders) as I’m told they have likely been sent to another AZA facility. Their sturgeon and shovelnose guitarfish have also both gone behind the scenes or been removed entirely, two large and charismatic species that are both threatened and could use a spotlight. The thornback guitarfish that was once in the aviary waters and then moved to the Ray Pool also is completely missing as far as I can tell. All in all, I really don’t have anything to say about the exhibit other than that it’s a massive downgrade and a complete disappointment. “Stars of the Sea” is no better - it’s essentially just a handful of signs highlighting either already existing or a few newly added species of sea stars around the facility. It is probably their least expansive or detailed temporary exhibit ever, and that’s remarkable given that there was such an exhibit during COVID. They don’t even utilize the temporary space in the Pacific Visions gallery for it.

At this point I think Long Beach and even LA County residents in general need to start seriously questioning the leadership of this facility, and most importantly where all the money is going. Recently they saved hundreds of thousands of dollars by striking a deal with the city council to reduce their rent to a symbolic amount (possibly $1) per year. Their admission prices have gone up immensely since COVID, now nearing $40 per person, and the exhibitry and animal diversity has not at all correspondingly improved. All that’s happened are two facelifts to existing exhibits, the SoCal gallery (a genuine upgrade in a few facets, albeit to their smallest and oldest “main gallery”), and now Our Living Coastline (a downgrade as stated above). There have been rumors for a half decade-plus that the old, antiquated and inadequate Shark Lagoon will be completely restructured and expanded, but there have been no such plans presented whatsoever. I honestly have to wonder whether such a thing will ever occur. We as a community are being absolutely lapped by vastly smaller metropolitan areas nationwide despite being the second largest in the Union. It’s really a crying shame what’s happening here, and one that frankly needs to be addressed immediately.

One small postscript: @Westcoastperson had asked in this thread what would be done to the aviary/if there would be any improvements amid the renovations for Our Living Coastline. The answer appears to have been…absolutely nothing whatsoever.

As much as I would love to see a large capital expansion come to the Aquarium of the Pacific, to say Pacific Visions, Our Living Coastlines, and the updates to the Southern California gallery were “unnecessary” is simply not true. Pacific Visions upgraded a small temporary exhibits space and the two dilapidated theaters that barely were used. Babies might be lacking in rare species but an exhibit of that size wouldn’t have been possible in the old temporary exhibit space. The updates to the Southern California Gallery fixed small, outdated exhibits and made the gallery more cohesive and interesting. Finally the ray pool needed upgrades, and turning it into a tide pool exhibit makes sense. The pool has a history of water issues, was cracked, and was in poor condition. On top of that the sturgeon was growing too big for the exhibit, the round rays were barely ever out, people (especially young children) struggled to touch animals most of the time, and the pelagic rays were not doing well in the exhibit. In order to keep all five elasmobranchs and the sturgeon the exhibit would have needed a major retrofit and expansion that most likely wasn’t possible. Yes the aquarium already had a tide pool exhibit but that area is constantly congested and has a line. That’s because tide pool exhibits are one of the few things small kids can touch. Wether or not the aquarium needed another one is up for debate, but it definitely alleviates the pressure on the indoor touch pool. I will say Living Coastlines does have very poor diversity, but I thought the exhibit itself was done very well compared to similar exhibits at Cabrillo, Birch, and SWSD.
AoPs collection has been dwindling in the past few years, no question, but whether or not that’s the fault of the administrators dragging their feet isn’t completely clear. I think as we move forward it’s becoming obvious that the exhibits built when the Aquarium opened in the 90s are too small to support their old inhabitants. Now the Aquarium faces the choice of expansion or total refurbishment. It’s important to remember that there isn’t a lot of space for the aquarium to expand. I don’t even think they could follow Tennessee River Aquarium or Seattle Aquarium and open a new building. We will see what they choose to do in the next few years, hopefully they’re saving up for some large retrofit to expand the tropical and northern pacific galleries.

One small postscript: @Westcoastperson had asked in this thread what would be done to the aviary/if there would be any improvements amid the renovations for Our Living Coastline. The answer appears to have been…absolutely nothing whatsoever

I will also say I was at the Aquarium about a month ago and there definitely were changes to the aviary. New water features, expanded water area, new glass and mesh, and more plants.

 

[Local_Shark]

As much as I would love to see a large capital expansion come to the Aquarium of the Pacific, to say Pacific Visions, Our Living Coastlines, and the updates to the Southern California gallery were “unnecessary” is simply not true. Pacific Visions upgraded a small temporary exhibits space and the two dilapidated theaters that barely were used. Babies might be lacking in rare species but an exhibit of that size wouldn’t have been possible in the old temporary exhibit space. The updates to the Southern California Gallery fixed small, outdated exhibits and made the gallery more cohesive and interesting. Finally the ray pool needed upgrades, and turning it into a tide pool exhibit makes sense. The pool has a history of water issues, was cracked, and was in poor condition. On top of that the sturgeon was growing too big for the exhibit, the round rays were barely ever out, people (especially young children) struggled to touch animals most of the time, and the pelagic rays were not doing well in the exhibit. In order to keep all five elasmobranchs and the sturgeon the exhibit would have needed a major retrofit and expansion that most likely wasn’t possible. Yes the aquarium already had a tide pool exhibit but that area is constantly congested and has a line. That’s because tide pool exhibits are one of the few things small kids can touch. Wether or not the aquarium needed another one is up for debate, but it definitely alleviates the pressure on the indoor touch pool. I will say Living Coastlines does have very poor diversity, but I thought the exhibit itself was done very well compared to similar exhibits at Cabrillo, Birch, and SWSD.
AoPs collection has been dwindling in the past few years, no question, but whether or not that’s the fault of the administrators dragging their feet isn’t completely clear. I think as we move forward it’s becoming obvious that the exhibits built when the Aquarium opened in the 90s are too small to support their old inhabitants. Now the Aquarium faces the choice of expansion or total refurbishment. It’s important to remember that there isn’t a lot of space for the aquarium to expand. I don’t even think they could follow Tennessee River Aquarium or Seattle Aquarium and open a new building. We will see what they choose to do in the next few years, hopefully they’re saving up for some large retrofit to expand the tropical and northern pacific galleries.

I will also say I was at the Aquarium about a month ago and there definitely were changes to the aviary. New water features, expanded water area, new glass and mesh, and more plants.

Just to be clear I was not saying the SoCal gallery renovations or the new temporary exhibits were unnecessary at all. I’m intimately aware of the difficulties they’d previously had in doing temporary exhibits and of the age of SoCal given that it was the first one built. I was only implying that Our Living Coastlines is a severe downgrade over what it could have been, an upgrade and expansion to the Ray Pool that could have included a tidepool space. The pelagic stingrays could have been moved to another exhibit (they do well in essentially any large and spacious one) or ultimately sent to a better facility entirely, and the sturgeon would have done perfectly well in a larger pool. There’s really no good reason that they should have eliminated a good local elasmobranch display entirely in favor of another full tidepool, unless they intend on removing the other tidepool touch pool inside which seems vanishingly unlikely. My experience hasn’t been that people had problems touching the animals, but that could have easily been remedied with a redesigned poolside.

Additionally, with again some pretty intimate knowledge that I have, I’d be stunned if there’s any significant plans for an expansion to either of the other major galleries. The 2020 “special exhibit” included a retrofit and facelift of the entire Tropical Pacific Gallery except for the Frogs section, which was renovated last year of course. The Northern Pacific Gallery was last renovated in the mid-2010s but those retrofits are still holding up well. The exhibit most in need of assistance is Shark Lagoon, which hasn’t been altered to any significant degree since its inception in 2002. Its inhabitants are definitely the ones most outgrowing it and they already have had to reshuffle or even relocate many major residents multiple times. And as you rightfully pointed out there’s no real space for the aquarium to expand its major exhibits in the main building, the behind-the-scenes space is already cramped as it is. I would expect any kind of Shark Lagoon change would probably include an expansion there (or maybe even a small second wing or new building), as there is plenty of room in that back corner especially if they were to simultaneously replace or move the “steelhead” display.

As for the aviary, my apologies, I just didn’t notice those smaller changes I suppose - I assumed you were asking whether it would also get a significant renovation since it was closed too, which it doesn’t appear was the case. The water section did not seem to be larger to me, but that was never the section of the aquarium I frequented most so I could be wrong.

 

[Westcoastperson]

Just to be clear I was not saying the SoCal gallery renovations or the new temporary exhibits were unnecessary at all. I’m intimately aware of the difficulties they’d previously had in doing temporary exhibits and of the age of SoCal given that it was the first one built. I was only implying that Our Living Coastlines is a severe downgrade over what it could have been, an upgrade and expansion to the Ray Pool that could have included a tidepool space. The pelagic stingrays could have been moved to another exhibit (they do well in essentially any large and spacious one) or ultimately sent to a better facility entirely, and the sturgeon would have done perfectly well in a larger pool. There’s really no good reason that they should have eliminated a good local elasmobranch display entirely in favor of another full tidepool, unless they intend on removing the other tidepool touch pool inside which seems vanishingly unlikely. My experience hasn’t been that people had problems touching the animals, but that could have easily been remedied with a redesigned poolsid

Yes but you’re assuming retrofitting the ray pool to accommodate its inhabitants was an option, I don’t think that’s the case. Besides what I’ve already said about the ray pool, the new tidal pool seems to have a larger area dedicated to pumps/filters/coolers and less water than before. That tells me there was most likely an issue with the ray pools water systems before, and those systems have been upgraded a number of times since the aquarium opened. All I’m saying is the decision to get rid of the ray pool most likely wasn’t made because the aquarium doesn’t care about its elasmobranch collection, that doesn’t make sense. You said it earlier, it doesn’t make sense to axe the ray pool without proper cause.The way I see it is they had to replace the ray pool in some way, and a tide pool was their best option. Now, I don’t know why they haven’t moved the animals to other exhibits. I will say the only exhibit that could comfortably hold the sturgeon would be Blue Cavern. However, I know when they tried to add bat rays into that exhibit a few years ago they had issues mixing them with other animals that were being territorial. As for the pelagic ray I’d assume they kept it out of the larger cold water exhibits for the same reason, they already lost one pelagic ray a few years ago, I doubt they’re in any rush to loose this one now. Keep in mind that pelagic ray was still young, in the ray pool it didn’t have to worry about any territorial or provocative animals, that’s a whole different story in a different exhibit. If they were sent another facility that might be for the better.

Additionally, with again some pretty intimate knowledge that I have, I’d be stunned if there’s any significant plans for an expansion to either of the other major galleries. The 2020 “special exhibit” included a retrofit and facelift of the entire Tropical Pacific Gallery except for the Frogs section, which was renovated last year of course. The Northern Pacific Gallery was last renovated in the mid-2010s but those retrofits are still holding up well. The exhibit most in need of assistance is Shark Lagoon, which hasn’t been altered to any significant degree since its inception in 2002. Its inhabitants are definitely the ones most outgrowing it and they already have had to reshuffle or even relocate many major residents multiple times. And as you rightfully pointed out there’s no real space for the aquarium to expand its major exhibits in the main building, the behind-the-scenes space is already cramped as it is. I would expect any kind of Shark Lagoon change would probably include an expansion there (or maybe even a small second wing or new building), as there is plenty of room in that back corner especially if they were to simultaneously replace or move the “steelhead” display.

Look I’m not saying an expansion to those galleries is coming, in fact I doubt it. I’m just saying it’s one solution to the size issue the Aquarium is facing. But keep in mind, just because the physical changes to the aquarium are minimal doesn’t mean the Aquarium isn’t changing. From my own intimate knowledge of the aquarium’s administration they are more focused on expanding the aquariums outreach. That includes increasing research, breeding, and rescue efforts. From a technical perspective they seem far more poised to establish themselves as the MBA of the south right now. Jerry Schubel was CEO from 2002 to 2019 ushering in most of the larger projects which makes sense. He came into office when the Aquarium was in a desperate financial crisis, which he curbed by bringing additions like shark lagoon, lorikeet forest, and penguins. Those exhibits were designed to bring in guests quick and cheap (pacific visions was different, more of a pet project for Schubel before retirement). When the current CEO Peter Kareiva came in the attention shifted. Kareivas background is more marine conservation so it makes sense that in the past five years he’s been in charge most projects have reflected that. Babies and Frogs are both meant to bolster other conservation projects the Aquarium started like Sea Otter Surogacy, Yellow-legged frogs, Zebra Shark breeding, etc.. That doesn’t mean this current administration doesn’t care about updating the aquarium.
The aquarium is now in a position to make higher quality exhibits. The Southern California Gallery and upstairs exhibits are actually pretty nice. You may not like the tidal exhibit but it is nicer than the other ones inside. They did improve the aviary quite a bit and it shows. IMO this is the first steps towards AoP finally building new quality exhibits. Most of the expansions after the Aquarium opened (lorikeets, shark lagoon, penguins) were low quality, meant to get funds quick. Now the aquarium seems to be ramping up towards higher quality exhibits.

 

[Local_Shark]

I don’t know why they haven’t moved the animals to other exhibits. I will say the only exhibit that could comfortably hold the sturgeon would be Blue Cavern. However, I know when they tried to add bat rays into that exhibit a few years ago they had issues mixing them with other animals that were being territorial. As for the pelagic ray I’d assume they kept it out of the larger cold water exhibits for the same reason, they already lost one pelagic ray a few years ago, I doubt they’re in any rush to loose this one now. Keep in mind that pelagic ray was still young, in the ray pool it didn’t have to worry about any territorial or provocative animals, that’s a whole different story in a different exhibit. If they were sent another facility that might be for the better.

They have now seemingly added at least two of the bat rays to Blue Cavern permanently. I agree that the pelagic may not ultimately have been a good fit in the aquarium period, so I'm glad that it was visible and even touchable for some time...but ultimately I have to wonder why they were ever brought in if there was no long-term plan for them, as their full adult size and care needs are well-known given that they've been exhibited at Monterey for decades. To be clear, I don't think AOP truly "doesn't care" about local elasmobranchs...I just would question the notion that a retrofit to accommodate them, especially even just a smaller population of bat rays and a guitarfish/diamond stingray or two rather than all the previous inhabitants, was impossible.

The aquarium is now in a position to make higher quality exhibits. The Southern California Gallery and upstairs exhibits are actually pretty nice. You may not like the tidal exhibit but it is nicer than the other ones inside. They did improve the aviary quite a bit and it shows. IMO this is the first steps towards AoP finally building new quality exhibits. Most of the expansions after the Aquarium opened (lorikeets, shark lagoon, penguins) were low quality, meant to get funds quick. Now the aquarium seems to be ramping up towards higher quality exhibits.

I'm familiar with the administrations and their histories, and believe me, I very much want all that you say to be true. I have no issue with some shift in focus to outreach and conservation whatsoever. However, I would question the notion that AOP is doing right by the community in a broader sense. The massive increase in admission price is not commensurate with inflation - it's risen from below $30 for adults pre-COVID to now a truly eye-popping $44.95. For comparison, MBA is at $65 (the most expensive non-theme park aquarium in the nation, and at least somewhat rightfully so), Shedd has a rotating admission rate but averages right around the same as AOP amid its remodels, and Georgia Aquarium is somehow marginally cheaper at $44.49. I don't think it's deniable by any stretch of the imagination that AOP isn't even in the same stratosphere of value as any of these venerable institutions. Realistically they also shouldn't have the same stratosphere of operating costs to merit such an enormous spike in admission. My core issue is that it really doesn't seem like they're even trying to reach the point where that cost would be justified. They would need to either completely alter the entire structure of the facility (like we have discussed, probably impossible) or build a truly massive and innovative new version of Shark Lagoon for me to even consider paying that full price rate or ever re-upping my long-expired membership. Given the immense savings the change in their rent has brought, as well as the sudden windfall of massively increased admission (even if presumably, some guests are staying away or trying to find discounts), I certainly have to question why there hasn't even been any whiff of a true plan for major renovations or expansion in the last two years since the SoCal remodel. That's all I really mean to say on the subject, but I do appreciate all of the insight and opinions that you have shared.

 

[Great Argus]

The massive increase in admission price is not commensurate with inflation - it's risen from below $30 for adults pre-COVID to now a truly eye-popping $44.95. For comparison, MBA is at $65 (the most expensive non-theme park aquarium in the nation, and probably at least somewhat rightfully so), Shedd has a rotating admission rate but averages right around the same as AOP amid its remodels, and Georgia Aquarium is somehow marginally cheaper at $44.49. I don't think it's deniable by any stretch of the imagination that AOP isn't even in the same stratosphere of value as any of these venerable institutions, and my core issue is that it really doesn't seem like they're even trying to be

The high admission price is unfortunately typical of California zoos though - San Diego is now at $76, starting to rival even the theme parks. Tiny little Sequoia Park out in Eureka is $25 even though you can see everything in maybe half an hour tops. AotP isn't inherently out of step by comparison in state.

 

[DavidBrown]

The high admission price is unfortunately typical of California zoos though - San Diego is now at $76, starting to rival even the theme parks. Tiny little Sequoia Park out in Eureka is $25 even though you can see everything in maybe half an hour tops. AotP isn't inherently out of step by comparison in state.

The Sequoia Park Zoo price takes into account that you get to go up in their redwood canopy walk as part of the zoo tour.