An extinct section of a zoo... perfect place to exhibit extinct species!
Dinosaur Walkthroughs
- Thread starter Leaf Productions
- Start date
While I have heard a few stories that sound excessive, on the whole I think they're a good thing. They should definitely not be an alternative to maintaining real animal exhibits, but they can add excitement to dead spaces and if a live animal exhibit isn't affordable they make a good placeholder until then. The opportunity to include extinct animals in some way can, in theory, easily be tied to a zoo's educational message, though the distance between dinosaurs doesn't underline it as well as more recent animals. I do think some zoos could work on improving the presentation for these exhibits. They certainly relate to nature better than some alternatives.
I remember as a kid seeing animatronic dinosaurs in the Tropics Trail at the Minnesota Zoo. I thought they were wierd and out of place. There were just random dinosaurs in the exhibit and I thought it took away from the experience. Maybe I was a nerd at a young age.
Funny story that relates, that is also the only time I ever got yelled at by a zoo employee. They had controls on one we could use and apparently the guy working thought I was being too rough. I apparently was a little mouthy to the guy and my parents also weren't too thrilled.
Funny story that relates, that is also the only time I ever got yelled at by a zoo employee. They had controls on one we could use and apparently the guy working thought I was being too rough. I apparently was a little mouthy to the guy and my parents also weren't too thrilled.
Thankfully no longer there, but this problem does still exist at Columbus.
I like them, as temp exhibits to draw people in or even as permanent parts of the zoo.
I have to disagree on Columbus, the boat ride certainly is well themed with the dinosaurs being the bigger part of the ride than the animals, overall. I rode that ride 4 times in a row, I think (with a son that LOVED it)
A lot of kids (and adults) absolutely love dinosaurs and it helps get them into the zoo and see the rest. Dinosaur walk throughs can help spark a child's love of nature, animals, and paleontology.
I have to disagree on Columbus, the boat ride certainly is well themed with the dinosaurs being the bigger part of the ride than the animals, overall. I rode that ride 4 times in a row, I think (with a son that LOVED it)
A lot of kids (and adults) absolutely love dinosaurs and it helps get them into the zoo and see the rest. Dinosaur walk throughs can help spark a child's love of nature, animals, and paleontology.
I have no problem with Columbus' dinosaur boat ride, the issue is that the animatronic dinosaurs (and their loud roaring noises) foul up the entire Islands area.
ah, I see. Yeah, I can understand that. I didn't really have a problem with it, but I can certainly see how that would be the case.
When I see dinosaur dummies, I immediately feel a ping of sadness. No money for real animals and exhibits, so zoos put plastic dinosaurs, Chinese lanterns and so on.
By the way, I doubt hat dinosaur sculptures educate visitors or raise interest in paleontology. Zoos check whether zoo exhibits really make visitors educated and willing to support conservation. But no similar check has been made about dinosaur dummies, toy figurines etc. Anyway, they are usually outdated and come with almost no information.
By the way, I doubt hat dinosaur sculptures educate visitors or raise interest in paleontology. Zoos check whether zoo exhibits really make visitors educated and willing to support conservation. But no similar check has been made about dinosaur dummies, toy figurines etc. Anyway, they are usually outdated and come with almost no information.
I find a strong 'weak-spot' in regards to the education argument is that these dinosaur exhibitions always tend to use outdated designs - Tyrannosaurus always has teeth sticking out, raptors still almost never have feathers, Dilophosaurus always has the frill like in Jurassic Park ...
I believe even the children's dinosaur books of today give more accurate, and perhaps even novel information. These exhibits tend to repeat what the dinosaur-enthusiastic kids have already heard many times before ...
I recall there was a bird-park I went to various times that in recent years expanded to include a permanent dinosaur exhibition - which makes sense giving that birds are the main attraction, but it still suffers from many of the same problems. The rest of the park was pretty fine, though a few areas were a bit run-down / dirty. The species list was fairly good.
I don't believe that dinosaur toys really teach much more about prehistoric life myself - children rarely ever get dinosaur toys because they want to learn more about prehistoric life, they typically get them because they see dinos in the movies which they enjoy, and they buy the products. I'd imagine if they did, the public would have a better understanding of what dinosaurs are believed by modern science to look like - where there seems to be an active effort of making the public know - but the toys play relatively little in this !
To be sure, science how dinosaurs looked in real life changes every few years, so the models quickly become obsolete. See e.g. Walking with... / Science Marches On - TV Tropes But many models produced today show things which are known to be inaccurate since decades.
I don't think zoos spend nearly as much money on these things on the whole as people think. A lot of them are coming from the same traveling shows/exhibitions and models being reused to save costs. They are probably paying a licensing free rather than a construction fee. For some zoos this is probably much less money than the cost of a new animal exhibit and upkeep and probably brings in a good number of visitors who wouldn't otherwise come who can contribute money towards the actual animal exhibits.
I can tell you the DINOSAURS ALIVE exhibits at Brookfield Zoo tended to lack frilled Dilophosaurs and not only included feathered dromaesaurs but even feathered ornithomimids which even ameteur paleontologists and paleonerds are prone to neglecting. I doubt anyone on zoochat would have felt much preferable to it, because it's still animatronic dinosaurs, but it was certainly better than scaly monsters. ICE AGE GIANTS was similarly fairly realistic and very charming.
Sometimes inaccurate depictions can still stimulate the imagination and education -- as a child I was perfectly capable of watching outdated films from the sixties with sluggish stop-motion dinosaurs and still reading modern books about the animals and understanding there was a difference between entertainment and education. A lot of times if I watch any movie that has a historical element, I immediately look up the real historical figures involved to find depth. I definitely don't think most people go to that last degree, but it's not as uncommon as I think some zoochatters are assuming here. I certainly don't know many kids whose interest in dinosaurs began with skeletals and reconstructions.
I don't think we need to drag toys into this, which is an entirely different question... the toy industry is not known for scientific accuracy with some of their depictions of living, breathing animals and even actual human beings. There's plenty of zoos that sell White tiger toys and some that sell dragons and unicorns. The money still goes towards the zoo.
I can tell you the DINOSAURS ALIVE exhibits at Brookfield Zoo tended to lack frilled Dilophosaurs and not only included feathered dromaesaurs but even feathered ornithomimids which even ameteur paleontologists and paleonerds are prone to neglecting. I doubt anyone on zoochat would have felt much preferable to it, because it's still animatronic dinosaurs, but it was certainly better than scaly monsters. ICE AGE GIANTS was similarly fairly realistic and very charming.
Sometimes inaccurate depictions can still stimulate the imagination and education -- as a child I was perfectly capable of watching outdated films from the sixties with sluggish stop-motion dinosaurs and still reading modern books about the animals and understanding there was a difference between entertainment and education. A lot of times if I watch any movie that has a historical element, I immediately look up the real historical figures involved to find depth. I definitely don't think most people go to that last degree, but it's not as uncommon as I think some zoochatters are assuming here. I certainly don't know many kids whose interest in dinosaurs began with skeletals and reconstructions.
I don't think we need to drag toys into this, which is an entirely different question... the toy industry is not known for scientific accuracy with some of their depictions of living, breathing animals and even actual human beings. There's plenty of zoos that sell White tiger toys and some that sell dragons and unicorns. The money still goes towards the zoo.
If you want to be treated like an adult, act like one. Which includes stating your requests clearly and intelligibly. I had the same issue as @birdsandbats to understand your intention.
Furthermore, the correct spelling is zoos, not "Zoo's"; especially among your "fellow ZooChattians". Yeah, I'm blunt, but I prefer to cut to the chase to save us any waste of time instead of beating around the bush.
As for the original question:
Dinosaur Exhibits
Not a great fan, but I understand the economic appeal. As for the outdated designs: given how long it can take to build a life-sized model (and hoe pricey even the crappy ones are), being outpaced by new scientific evidence is kinda a given. Especially with Spinosaurus...
Last edited:
