Does Geographical Theming Threaten Certain Species?

[Pertinax]

Traditionally Geladas in European Zoos seem to have often been kept successfully when mixed with either Ibex or Barbary sheep.

The UK zoos keeping them at present seem not to have attempted any such mixings, but so far there are only four zoos with them; Edinburgh, Colchester, Dudley and Howletts. At Howletts the small group(2.2) are mixed with a larger group of Colobus in the very large grass paddock.

Although essentially vegetarian( they are primarily grass 'pluckers') I am not sure I would trust them with birds smaller than e.g. Geese.

 

[Brum]

I quite like zoo-geographic theming but I also like a decent taxonomic display as well, why can't a decent zoo incorporate both? And stand-alone exhibits should also be welcome too, they are a lot easier to adapt and don't get zoo critics worked up. In snowleopards 2012 road trip he comments about a certain zoos Florida section which contains Asian, African and South American species in it. Can't remember which zoo it was but it really appears to be a mish mash of species. If they had stand-alone exhibits and a themed area then the problem would be moot.

 

[elefante]

I quite like zoo-geographic theming but I also like a decent taxonomic display as well, why can't a decent zoo incorporate both? And stand-alone exhibits should also be welcome too, they are a lot easier to adapt and don't get zoo critics worked up. In snowleopards 2012 road trip he comments about a certain zoos Florida section which contains Asian, African and South American species in it. Can't remember which zoo it was but it really appears to be a mish mash of species. If they had stand-alone exhibits and a themed area then the problem would be moot.

For some reason exhibits like reptile houses and aviaries are taxononic exhibits that I do like, however, mixes like cats and a mish mash of ungulates from different parts of the world aren't as appealing to me. I'm not sure why I think that, but I've always had that opinion. To me the ideal is an area themed after a certain part of the world and then having several different exhibits, taxonomic or standalone in the same area. For example, an African-themed area could have a paddock of giraffes, ostriches, wildebeest, and gazelles and surrounded by an area with felines, a free-standing African penguin exhibit, an aviary, and a reptile house all featuring African species.

Maybe I need to design another zoo in the Design a Zoo thread.

 

[Brum]

For some reason exhibits like reptile houses and aviaries are taxononic exhibits that I do like, however, mixes like cats and a mish mash of ungulates from different parts of the world aren't as appealing to me. I'm not sure why I think that, but I've always had that opinion. To me the ideal is an area themed after a certain part of the world and then having several different exhibits, taxonomic or standalone in the same area. For example, an African-themed area could have a paddock of giraffes, ostriches, wildebeest, and gazelles and surrounded by an area with felines, a free-standing African penguin exhibit, an aviary, and a reptile house all featuring African species.

Maybe I need to design another zoo in the Design a Zoo thread.

That's my ideal as well, it allows for flexibility and you get a taxonomic display featured in a zoo-geographic setting. I have this great idea for an Asian carnivores idea, you may have seen it in the "design a zoo..." thread. You could have Asian elephants and/or Indian rhino's in the main exhibit, a few paddocks and aviaries around the sides and then Asian primates as one off shoot and carnivores as another.
In the real world though, most zoos try and encompass as much as possible in as few different sections, hence Madagascar getting lumped with Africa, various different North American species that end up lumped in South American exhibits, etc, etc.
On that basis though, and in line with the poll, zoos may lose certain species over time but I'm beginning to think it may not be as bad as I originally thought it would be. As has been stated before, zoos are quite loose with their definition of geography sp geladas etc won't be on their way out just yet!

 

[ungulate nerd]

Sorry to say but I have never really been a fan of geographic zoning and organization in zoos and wildlife parks, I prefer taxonomic because, if a zoo is zoned taxonomically, It just seems more oranized and there is more potential for diversity in various groups of animals, I think geographic zoning may threaten european species eg. European bison, Alpine chamois, European brown bear etc. because you never really see a european section in zoos, and if zoos cant obtain or exhibit those species they are more likey to die out and be threatened by obstacles the wild eg poachers, disease, hunters etc., this is going to com across as slighty off topic but i think InSitu conservation also threatens wildlife

 

[tschandler71]

Sorry to say but I have never really been a fan of geographic zoning and organization in zoos and wildlife parks, I prefer taxonomic because, if a zoo is zoned taxonomically, It just seems more oranized and there is more potential for diversity in various groups of animals, I think geographic zoning may threaten european species eg. European bison, Alpine chamois, European brown bear etc. because you never really see a european section in zoos, and if zoos cant obtain or exhibit those species they are more likey to die out and be threatened by obstacles the wild eg poachers, disease, hunters etc., this is going to com across as slighty off topic but i think InSitu conservation also threatens wildlife

From one hoofstock fan to another

Zoo-Geography may be the only way we see an ungulate if the trends continue. And I prefer it because it mimics real ecosystems as best as possible.

Taxonomic Exhibits are a relic of the "stamp collector" Zoo Directors.

 

[elefante]

From one hoofstock fan to another

Zoo-Geography may be the only way we see an ungulate if the trends continue. And I prefer it because it mimics real ecosystems as best as possible.

Taxonomic Exhibits are a relic of the "stamp collector" Zoo Directors.

I'm with you in that I like the ecosystem approach more than the stamp collector approach. I'm also with Ungulate Nerd in that it would be nice if they would have European sections of zoos. Have a combination of wildlife like European bison, roe deer, red deer, fallow deer, (lots of deer, I know), Pyrenean chamois, Pyrenean ibex, and wild boar, for example. Plus wolves, brown bears, and red foxes can fit in there.

I think I may have an exhibit idea for another fantasy zoo.

 

[tschandler71]

Going to need to get Ingen to get Pyrenean Ibex they've been extinct about a decade haha.

 

[elefante]

Going to need to get Ingen to get Pyrenean Ibex they've been extinct about a decade haha.

I meant to say Alpine.

 

[JVM]

The problems are not rooted in the geographic zoning itself - however, the more modern understanding of animals' needs and demands for greater space and more realistic habitats generally results in a situation where fewer and fewer species need bigger and more expensive exhibits, requiring a focus on charismatic megafauna. Why allocate some space for a small mammal guests don't find interesting when you could add that to the existing space for a state-of-the-art exhibit for polar bears, which guests love and are an endangered species? It would be much easier to raise money for polar bears than an arctic fox paddock anyway.

This is why species like hoofstock disappear - the space for three additional hoofstock species could just be one big elephant exhibit. See Lincoln Park Zoo ditching the tigers in the future to make a larger home for lions, for example, ditching orangutans to create the Center for African Apes, or consider the loss of Andean and Sun bears in favor of expanding the new Polar bear habitat. Hoofstock are not 'star' species, don't raise money, and don't rely on ex-situ conservation like some species. Or consider how Brookfield Zoo has not had jaguars in probably two decades, because there isn't a well-defined South America biogeography area right now. (There are two SA exhibits, but my emphasis on 'well-defined'.)

I find it worth noting though that Europe is still very poorly represented in zoos when it comes to biogeography, and NA and SA are hit-and-miss. Focus is usually on a handful of recurring locations.

tl;dr biogeography plays a role but isn't the sole defining factor

 

[HyakkoShachi]

When it comes to European representation, I think the main issue is that there's not much in Europe that you couldn't find in Northern Asia and besides wild boars there's nothing you couldn't find an analogue for in North American species. Why waste money on pigs, spotted deer and theming when you could build a larger habitat for bears and mark it as a generalised boreal area?