That's a fantastic selection for the zoo, as they are a rarity in American zoos, they are a threatened species, and they fit the Asian/N. American collection in that part of the zoos.
Bronx Zoo Bronx Zoo News 2019
- Thread starter ThylacineAlive
- Start date
That's a fantastic selection for the zoo, as they are a rarity in American zoos, they are a threatened species, and they fit the Asian/N. American collection in that part of the zoos.
Given the width of the moat, will we be able to get a good view of the dholes?
Maybe because the moat is probably about 20 feet wide and a dhole is only ~22-46 lbs., or about 1/25th as big a polar bear.
AmbikaFan
Well-Known Member
Something tells me that there are people who measure exactly what an animal's capabilities are to provide for exhibit safety. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if there was an AZA handbook citing the precautions necessary for any given species. Visitor safety is paramount for PR and liability, so if smaller moats would suffice, they could have easily shoveled some of the dirt used to fill in the old pool to fill in the moat while they were there. These are matters that can't be left up to chance or photographer preference.
FunkyGibbon
Well-Known Member
Not to mention the fact that keeping visitors safe is morally correct behaviour of course.
Bronx has 5 treeshrews, all of which are Belanger's. The sign listing them as Common in JungleWorld is very old and outdated. There are a few frustratingly outdated signs in JW such as the slow loris being signed as Sunda and giant softshell turtles being signed even though they never went on-exhibit and have since left the collection.
~Thylo
I agree entirely. The zoo has been slowly fixing its incorrect signage but it still has quite a ways to go. Part of the problem, especially in JungleWorld, is the signage was built in as more permanent fixtures, which I find rather silly of them especially considering the turtle was never going to be able to stay in the enclosure it's signed in longterm anyway.
~Thylo
Last edited by a moderator:
AmbikaFan
Well-Known Member
The episode of The Zoo San Diego showed the giant panda signage being removed within hours of the pandas' late-night departure for China.
This happy glut of zoo programs--The Zoo (Bronx), The Zoo SD, Secrets of the Zoo (following The Columbus Zoo and the Wilds), The Secret Life of the Zoo (featuring The Chester Zoo), and The Aquarium (following the Georgia Aquarium) have been great behind-the-scenes explorations into the husbandry and breeding of animals. I watched them all repeatedly from the couch all summer, where I was confined to rehab an injury, and I learned and enjoyed a lot.
The one thing that stands out very starkly is that nearly all of the other institutions are growing with new exhibits and actual buildings. The Bronx is not. Those budget cuts 8 years or so ago resulted in a huge layoff of staff and the closure of whole buildings and exhibits. I thought the zoo would rebound from this, but I suppose because the government cuts were essentially permanent, the zoo is not in a position to be building and growing in addition to the exemplary work they do with endangered species. I'm a fan and a member of WCS and am somewhat crestfallen to witness this. In isolation, our zoo is our zoo, and we know the good they do. But I was shocked to see how the Bronx's physical growth and development pale when placed alongside others that are expanding and growing.
I have a degree in the management of not-for-profit institutions, and I'm afraid we're witnessing another period of financial trouble for not-for-profits not seen since the 1960s. That was before there was a not-for-profit designation for institutions who were essentially public charities because their very mission prevented them from making a profit.. Yes, healthy not-for-profits get their income from a variety of sources like corporations, foundations, individuals, and ticket sales, but organizations long considered part of (and funded by) the government may be having great difficulty making up those lost government funds in other ways. The biggest movers and shakers on the TV shows are FOR-profit corporations that take no money from the government. There has also been success with for-profit hospitals and schools. The last time arts and culture were struggling like this was in the 1960s, and the government made contributions tax deductible and created the National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities to help organizations survive. But that's already been done, so what else can be done to shore up struggling organizations like the Bronx Zoo? At almost a decade from the recession and the subsequent hacksawing of budgets, there hasn't been much in the way of recovery possible. I wonder how much longer this model will enable the WCS Zoos (and others like the Smithsonian's NZP) to survive, let alone grow. I wonder if it can ever happen at zoos so entrenched in the limited resources of government. I find myself looking at the benefits of privatization differently these days.
This happy glut of zoo programs--The Zoo (Bronx), The Zoo SD, Secrets of the Zoo (following The Columbus Zoo and the Wilds), The Secret Life of the Zoo (featuring The Chester Zoo), and The Aquarium (following the Georgia Aquarium) have been great behind-the-scenes explorations into the husbandry and breeding of animals. I watched them all repeatedly from the couch all summer, where I was confined to rehab an injury, and I learned and enjoyed a lot.
The one thing that stands out very starkly is that nearly all of the other institutions are growing with new exhibits and actual buildings. The Bronx is not. Those budget cuts 8 years or so ago resulted in a huge layoff of staff and the closure of whole buildings and exhibits. I thought the zoo would rebound from this, but I suppose because the government cuts were essentially permanent, the zoo is not in a position to be building and growing in addition to the exemplary work they do with endangered species. I'm a fan and a member of WCS and am somewhat crestfallen to witness this. In isolation, our zoo is our zoo, and we know the good they do. But I was shocked to see how the Bronx's physical growth and development pale when placed alongside others that are expanding and growing.
I have a degree in the management of not-for-profit institutions, and I'm afraid we're witnessing another period of financial trouble for not-for-profits not seen since the 1960s. That was before there was a not-for-profit designation for institutions who were essentially public charities because their very mission prevented them from making a profit.. Yes, healthy not-for-profits get their income from a variety of sources like corporations, foundations, individuals, and ticket sales, but organizations long considered part of (and funded by) the government may be having great difficulty making up those lost government funds in other ways. The biggest movers and shakers on the TV shows are FOR-profit corporations that take no money from the government. There has also been success with for-profit hospitals and schools. The last time arts and culture were struggling like this was in the 1960s, and the government made contributions tax deductible and created the National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities to help organizations survive. But that's already been done, so what else can be done to shore up struggling organizations like the Bronx Zoo? At almost a decade from the recession and the subsequent hacksawing of budgets, there hasn't been much in the way of recovery possible. I wonder how much longer this model will enable the WCS Zoos (and others like the Smithsonian's NZP) to survive, let alone grow. I wonder if it can ever happen at zoos so entrenched in the limited resources of government. I find myself looking at the benefits of privatization differently these days.
Last edited:
The Children's Zoo, the Komodo Dragon/Aldabra Giant Tortoise complex, the zipline course, the children's obstacle course, and Slender-Horned Gazelle habitat have all been built since the budget cuts, as have a couple dozen new enclosures/renovated enclosures all across the zoo ranging from the sailfin lizard/snake-necked turtle in JW to the new Chinese Dhole yard. They've also added what has to be at least 100 new species of mammals, birds, herps, down to inverts over the years since the cuts. The zoo has not been static as people like to claim it has been. What it has not done is construct any massive new multi-million dollar projects, or even really announce any beyond vague plans.
One thing I do like to point out, though, is that Bronx is not in the same situation as many other major zoos in several ways. For one, the zoo does not need these massive projects done like the other zoos do. Bronx has a few areas in need of refurbishment, yes, but there isn't any part of the zoo that's horribly outdated, lacking in appropriate husbandry, and in desperate need of being razed and rebuilt. Whenever anyone talks about wanting new projects at Bronx, it's always in areas previously open to the public which have closed down. Nobody wants to see what already exists completely taken away. This is not the case for zoos like San Diego and Omaha, which had/still have horribly outdated sections of the zoo that really need to go. This is not to say that Bronx doesn't have anything that needs to go (ie the giraffe house, even if it's not anywhere near as bad as people claim), but as a whole they don't have entire sections of the zoo that are massive eyesores for the modern zoo world. Secondly, Bronx unfortunately does not receive the same love from private donors as zoos like San Diego and Chester do. I have no idea why, but all the other zoos named have a list of private donors seemingly ready and willing to shovel millions upon millions at the institutions to keep up the progress. Bronx just does not have that to the same degree. Finally, since Bronx is owned by the WCS, the zoo isn't always the #1 priority financially. Remember, this institution donates more money than any other by a long shot to conservation programs and has researching on the ground in most, if not all of the countries they operate in. Everyone relishes in these conservation efforts, but forget that more money for conservation = less money to spend on the collections.
And of course, friendly reminder that the WCS is still rebuilding and refurbishing the New York Aquarium, which needed it a lot more than Bronx does. They also built their award-winning multi-million dollar shark exhibit, so it's not like the WCS has done nothing. They also have to maintain three other smaller collections, one of which-- CPZ-- has no active director tmk as well as a ridiculously high cost of operation for such a small zoo. Bronx has plans for the future, everyone just needs to be patient. Unfortunately they just aren't in the same boat financially as most other collections.
Now, none of this is to say that the zoo can't fix their signage, or at least remove the blatantly incorrect ones. They should do that. Signs are expensive, but some of these signs are very old and some were just misprinted from the start. I feel as though the relatively simple but effective signage used in World of Birds and the ABH would suffice in the case of the treeshrews and slow lorises.
~Thylo
One thing I do like to point out, though, is that Bronx is not in the same situation as many other major zoos in several ways. For one, the zoo does not need these massive projects done like the other zoos do. Bronx has a few areas in need of refurbishment, yes, but there isn't any part of the zoo that's horribly outdated, lacking in appropriate husbandry, and in desperate need of being razed and rebuilt. Whenever anyone talks about wanting new projects at Bronx, it's always in areas previously open to the public which have closed down. Nobody wants to see what already exists completely taken away. This is not the case for zoos like San Diego and Omaha, which had/still have horribly outdated sections of the zoo that really need to go. This is not to say that Bronx doesn't have anything that needs to go (ie the giraffe house, even if it's not anywhere near as bad as people claim), but as a whole they don't have entire sections of the zoo that are massive eyesores for the modern zoo world. Secondly, Bronx unfortunately does not receive the same love from private donors as zoos like San Diego and Chester do. I have no idea why, but all the other zoos named have a list of private donors seemingly ready and willing to shovel millions upon millions at the institutions to keep up the progress. Bronx just does not have that to the same degree. Finally, since Bronx is owned by the WCS, the zoo isn't always the #1 priority financially. Remember, this institution donates more money than any other by a long shot to conservation programs and has researching on the ground in most, if not all of the countries they operate in. Everyone relishes in these conservation efforts, but forget that more money for conservation = less money to spend on the collections.
And of course, friendly reminder that the WCS is still rebuilding and refurbishing the New York Aquarium, which needed it a lot more than Bronx does. They also built their award-winning multi-million dollar shark exhibit, so it's not like the WCS has done nothing. They also have to maintain three other smaller collections, one of which-- CPZ-- has no active director tmk as well as a ridiculously high cost of operation for such a small zoo. Bronx has plans for the future, everyone just needs to be patient. Unfortunately they just aren't in the same boat financially as most other collections.
Now, none of this is to say that the zoo can't fix their signage, or at least remove the blatantly incorrect ones. They should do that. Signs are expensive, but some of these signs are very old and some were just misprinted from the start. I feel as though the relatively simple but effective signage used in World of Birds and the ABH would suffice in the case of the treeshrews and slow lorises.
~Thylo
AmbikaFan
Well-Known Member
I don't disagree with anything you say, Thylo. I see all the new exhibits, am aware of the massive in situ conservation effort, and of course have seen the NY Aquarium go from what looked like utter devastation after Sandy to the opening of the eye-opening shark exhibit.
I really just musing on your point above and what an odd position it is for a premiere zoo. I was just reading Confessions of an Accidental Zoo Curator, and author Annette Berkowitz recounted trips with big-dollar donors within the last two decades. But the big philanthropists have faded. Perhaps the zoo now faces naming restrictions that no longer allow exhibits to be called The Enid Haupt World of Birds or the Carter Giraffe Building or the Russell B. Aitken Sea Bird Aviary. Or Astor Court or the Rainey Gates. Other zoos have big donors that allow for much more large-scale development. WCS no longer seems to have those.
Why does that seem important to me? Because it's the only kind of support large enough to fund large-scale projects. While none may seem "necessary" now, the zoo's collection, expertise, breeding success and acreage almost obligate the Bronx Zoo to use its resources for projects not possible for other zoos. For example, I'll return to Asian elephants and how much breeding institutions are needed now. Then the buildings that have been closed--but can't be in utter disrepair because they were open within the last decade or, in the case of the Monkey Building, is still being used to house animals. It's a rare zoo that has the space luxury to let precious acreage and buildings lie empty without instant re-purposing. Because of its space and expertise, I feel Bronx has real advantages other zoos don't, and should be utilizing its acreage for precisely those large projects some zoos are aching to do but have no space.
The Bronx Zoo has reached the point in a not-for-profit's lifespan when earned income has become a priority because not-for-profit sources are drying up. While beautiful, the Children's Zoo also brings in an enormous number of people paying additional fees. The ziplines are a baldly money-making operation, not something that furthers animal awareness or conservation in any way; it brings in revenue. And the tiny CPZ may cost a fortune to run, but it is acre-for-acre the cash cow of the WCS, bringing in over a million entrance fees a year. The Zoo Center's exhibits are necessary--if there isn't some eye-catching exhibit in the zoo's premiere edifice and topographical center, visitors would know there's something wrong!, Right now, an eye is always open to what will be profitable. By definition, a not-for-profit receives support as a "public charity" because those public funds allow for emphasis on what is needed that wouldn't be popular enough to generate income.
I agree with Thylo on everything. We love and appreciate our zoo, but he too can't escape the subject of my riff:
This is absolutely a great conversation! I think @ThylacineAlive and @AmbikaFan both make excellent points!
Bronx Zoo is one of my favorite zoos. I have always enjoyed its large outdoor habitats and beautifully created indoor habitats. I went two years ago after not visiting for two decades. I loved it. Many of my old favorites, like Jungle World, Wild Asia, and World of Birds, were still there and held up very, very well. Congo Gorilla Forest had excellent habitats for Western lowland gorillas and red river hogs/mandrills. Even if it would be nice if the lemurs had outdoor access during the warmer months, I thought Madagascar was an overall excellent upgrade of an old building. Tiger Mountain was a very enjoyable tiger exhibit I thought. The collection was great; I loved the addition of rarely seen zoo species, like maleo and capercaillie in World of Birds.
Another pleasant surprise was the Mouse House, which I had been to a couple of decades earlier, but going there again really made me appreciate that building. The small animal collection in that building is simply fantastic; many species in there, like the galago, are some of the most fun animals to watch in the zoo. With that said, it was also one of my negatives, because I think I was the only one in there besides the keepers, which is great for myself, but it would be nice to see more people go there and appreciate these fascinating and entertaining small species. The pheasant/game bird row of aviaries also had some fantastic species, like a Cabot's tragopan, brush turkeys, Lord Derby's parakeets, and a blue whistling thrush in mostly adequate housing, but again, that area could also get a little more love from the zoo and visitors alike.
I also thought the Aquatic Bird House, while still enjoyable, could have used an upgrade, and the indoor red-legged seriema habitat was probably the worst habitat I saw in the whole zoo.
I do hope WCS continues to focus on conservation first, while also, sooner or later, making something new and exciting and preferably unique at the Bronx Zoo, while also maybe giving places like the pheasant section, ABH, and MH a little more love and care, and continuing to bring in new threatened species, like dholes, that show the commitment of WCS toward in situ and ex situ conservation that I greatly respect.
Bronx Zoo is one of my favorite zoos. I have always enjoyed its large outdoor habitats and beautifully created indoor habitats. I went two years ago after not visiting for two decades. I loved it. Many of my old favorites, like Jungle World, Wild Asia, and World of Birds, were still there and held up very, very well. Congo Gorilla Forest had excellent habitats for Western lowland gorillas and red river hogs/mandrills. Even if it would be nice if the lemurs had outdoor access during the warmer months, I thought Madagascar was an overall excellent upgrade of an old building. Tiger Mountain was a very enjoyable tiger exhibit I thought. The collection was great; I loved the addition of rarely seen zoo species, like maleo and capercaillie in World of Birds.
Another pleasant surprise was the Mouse House, which I had been to a couple of decades earlier, but going there again really made me appreciate that building. The small animal collection in that building is simply fantastic; many species in there, like the galago, are some of the most fun animals to watch in the zoo. With that said, it was also one of my negatives, because I think I was the only one in there besides the keepers, which is great for myself, but it would be nice to see more people go there and appreciate these fascinating and entertaining small species. The pheasant/game bird row of aviaries also had some fantastic species, like a Cabot's tragopan, brush turkeys, Lord Derby's parakeets, and a blue whistling thrush in mostly adequate housing, but again, that area could also get a little more love from the zoo and visitors alike.
I also thought the Aquatic Bird House, while still enjoyable, could have used an upgrade, and the indoor red-legged seriema habitat was probably the worst habitat I saw in the whole zoo.
I do hope WCS continues to focus on conservation first, while also, sooner or later, making something new and exciting and preferably unique at the Bronx Zoo, while also maybe giving places like the pheasant section, ABH, and MH a little more love and care, and continuing to bring in new threatened species, like dholes, that show the commitment of WCS toward in situ and ex situ conservation that I greatly respect.
I do want to say that I don't disagree with anything you said here. I just wanted to shed some light on possible reasons why things are the way that they are, as well as add my own perspective to it. My rant about the projects Bronx has done was no aimed at you specifically, it's just a subject that annoys me quite a lot of it is repeated relatively often on this site that Bronx has done nothing since 2008, and that's just simply not true. As for the stuff like the zipline, obstacle course, and dino safari, while they are clearly cash grabs don't have much to do with the animal collection, I don't mind that they have them. As you said, they bring in much needed cash flow to the zoo and are popular with Joe/Jane Public and their kids. One important point that I appreciate about them, though, is that they didn't displace any animal exhibits when they built them. The zipline course is built in a section of the zoo that never would have housed animal habitats due to the terrain and location compared to other exhibits. The obstacle course is build where yards used to be, but my understanding is that area is all slated for the African Plains renovation (which will include small animals) whenever that comes to pass. The dino safari is also in a section no longer used for exhibits. I'm not sure if the loosely discussed Latin America exhibit will displace the dino safari, but time will have to tell.
At the end of the day, I really would love Bronx to continue to expand.
You must have gotten a bit lucky with the MH then, usually when I visit it is pretty packed! The Pheasantry and ABH are sometimes a bit sparse for visitation, though. I would imagine that's mainly due to their out of the way locations within the zoo, while the MH is located on one of the main paths.
That indoor seriema display was (thankfully) short lived. It was quite awful.
~Thylo
Ironically, when I visited, the ABH was packed! I got to see the blue penguins, but I was bummed I didn't get to see the kiwis, which shared a habitat with tawny frogmouth. That means I have yet to see a live kiwi in person. Not that I would expect the kiwis to be easy to view, but they are one of the most fascinating animals to me for a myriad of reasons.
I'm glad the seriema exhibit was short-lived.
I'm also glad to hear they have some rumored additions, like additional parts to African Plains and a Latin American area.
A bit more than rumors but less than set plans. The director discussed these in an interview a couple years back as well as Pygmy Hippos and the Monkey House.
~Thylo