Exhibits Zoos Are Lacking In

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

It can be, yes. And I say that from experience. Maybe 20-25% of the people at an exhibit read available signage. I would dare say less than 5% actually read the whole thing. Many times I've listened to an "expert" guest rattle off multiple incorrect facts to their companions while literally standing right next to an educational sign.

Yes, this is indeed the problem with facilitating education at zoos and from what I've observed the same is true with people not reading the signage.

What I find to be more frustrating is when there are actual educators attempting to give talks and get people interested in the animals in front of them and the visitors are not interested and don't want to hear what is being said.

I think that is the problem actually that for the majority of visitors a trip to the zoo is not about education it is primarily about recreation and this is something that does make me very cynical about zoos.

I don't think that educational programes and conservation education output / outreach should be stopped but just driven far harder into the organizational culture of zoos.

Megafauna draws people and pays the bills for many zoos. Most often Joe and Jane Public go to the zoo for the tigers, elephants, giraffes, bears, seals, and other large, "dangerous", well-loved species. Now there are plenty of exceptions to this; fish-oriented aquariums, bird parks, reptariums, and small local facilities. But as a whole megafauna carries the wow factor than finches and beetles do not. Given how many of the commonly kept megafauna species are endangered, they are just as deserving. Several megafauna owe their existence to zoos, and this should not be overlooked.
I am not saying zoos cannot/should not focus on small species; rather that by coming to see the megafauna, the public can be introduced to smaller and lesser known species as well. Animal ambassadors are often key in this regard, especially for reptiles since many people fear them.

I somewhat agree with that but of course my conclusion would be very different from what many zoochatters believe.

Yes, zoos need a couple of megafauna celebrities to get the public through the doors but like Jersey with its gorillas, orangutang and spectacled bears this can and should IMO be kept to a minimum.

The vast majority of taxa kept by zoos should IMO be the "little brown job" species that need to be there for ex-situ conservation.

 

[Westcoastperson]

Many of the places you listed have only a handful of representatives in most zoos. This contributes to their not becoming a full-fledged exhibit complex. In North American zoos we have next to none in terms of Middle Eastern species. We have Dromedary, an limited assortment of birds and reptiles (Veiled Chameleon for one), maybe a couple gazelles. We don't have Marbled Polecats, Persian Leopards, coursers, or many other species common throughout the region.

Antarctica? What would you exhibit besides penguins? Weddell, Ross, Crabeater, and Leopard Seals aren't available. Petrels don't fare well. Icefish aren't kept. Orcas aren't feasible for most places (and are stuck where they are anyway), and baleen whales are a no go. Even Emperor Penguin is only at one place in North America, with breeding becoming ever unlikely as the birds age.

Patagonia: Guanaco, Llama, Cougar, King Penguin, Gentoo Penguin, Pudu, Patagonian Mara, and Magellanic Penguin
Middle East (@Onychorhynchus coronatus already stated this): Syrian brown bear, fennec fox, Hamadryas baboon, aoudad, hyrax, and several oryx species
Asian Steppe: Prezwalskis Horse, Bactrian Camel, Onager, Great Bustard, and gray wolf.
Asian Savvanah: Greater One-Horned Rhino, Bengal Tiger Asian Elephant, Sloth Bear, Gharial, Barahsinga, Sambar, Saurus Crane, Axis Deer, Nilgai, and Gaur
Antarctica: Penguin species, Krill, Misc. bird species. You are correct here there aren't very many antarctic species but the point is that in most penguin exhibits they don't focus on Antarctica it's only about the penguins. So we need more exhibits that focus on Antarctica not just penguins and getting Antarctic Cod or Crabeater Seals from Antarctica isn't impossible as both are very common.
Sahara Desert: Addax, Fennec Fox, Ostrich, Dromedary Camel, African Wild dog, Scimitar Horned Oryx, Sandcat, and Barbary Sheep

Here in Europe there are Not Manny North American Exhibits. There are North American Species in european Zoos but Not so Manny North American Exhibits. The Most North American Animal Species in european Zoos have some Enclosures that are random placed in the Zoos. Animal Species that live in such random Enclosures include

American Bison
Wolverine
Bald eagle
Black Tailed Prarie Dog
American Alligator
North American racoon



Animals i woould Love to See in North American Exhibits are all mentioned Species and the following

Giant desert centipede
Alligator gar
Bowfin
Channel catfish
Mississippi Paddelfish
Hellbender
Amphibuma
American bullfrog
Alligator snapping turtle
Several Species of rattlesnake
American crocodile
Snail kite
Brown pelican
Californian helmeted quail
Greater roadrunner
Turkey vulture
Black vulture
Californian condor
Red Tailed hawk
Common ringtail
White Tailed deer
Rocky Mountain goat
Bighorn sheep
Pronghorn antelope
Wapiti
Collared peccari
Coyote
American black bear
Kodiak bear
Mountain lion

The only North American Exhibits i know about Here in Europe are these two.

Burgers desert at Burgers Zoo Arnheim Netherlands

The Last frontier at Pairi Daiza Bruglette Belgium

California Condor your gonna have to wait because right now every single California condor is part of a breeding project for the animal and I doubt any zoos will be sending them off soon
Pronghorn don't do well in places that don't exactly mimic their exhibit
California Quail and Kodiak Bear appear to be more prevalent in European Zoos than North American zoos but I could be wrong

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

Patagonia: Guanaco, Llama, Cougar, King Penguin, Gentoo Penguin, Pudu, Patagonian Mara, and Magellanic Penguin
Middle East (@Onychorhynchus coronatus already stated this): Syrian brown bear, fennec fox, Hamadryas baboon, aoudad, hyrax, and several oryx species
Asian Steppe: Prezwalskis Horse, Bactrian Camel, Onager, Great Bustard, and gray wolf.
Asian Savvanah: Greater One-Horned Rhino, Bengal Tiger Asian Elephant, Sloth Bear, Gharial, Barahsinga, Sambar, Saurus Crane, Axis Deer, Nilgai, and Gaur
Antarctica: Penguin species, Krill, Misc. bird species. You are correct here there aren't very many antarctic species but the point is that in most penguin exhibits they don't focus on Antarctica it's only about the penguins. So we need more exhibits that focus on Antarctica not just penguins and getting Antarctic Cod or Crabeater Seals from Antarctica isn't impossible as both are very common.
Sahara Desert: Addax, Fennec Fox, Ostrich, Dromedary Camel, African Wild dog, Scimitar Horned Oryx, Sandcat, and Barbary Sheep

California Condor your gonna have to wait because right now every single California condor is part of a breeding project for the animal and I doubt any zoos will be sending them off soon
Pronghorn don't do well in places that don't exactly mimic their exhibit
California Quail and Kodiak Bear appear to be more prevalent in European Zoos than North American zoos but I could be wrong

I don't think that the Californian condor will ever be kept in European zoos for the reason that you've stated in terms of their ex-situ captive breeding importance in North American zoos.

Personally, I think that even if it was possible what would be the point ?

Afterall Europe has it's own endangered vulture species that it needs to maintain ex-situ.

 

[Westcoastperson]

I don't think that the Californian condor will ever be kept in European zoos for the reason that you've stated in terms of their ex-situ captive breeding importance in North American zoos.

Personally, I think that even if it was possible what would be the point ?

Afterall Europe has it's own endangered vulture species that it needs to maintain ex-situ.

Which species is that?

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

Which species is that?

It is several species of vulture actually.

The lammergeier, the black vulture, the griffon vulture, the Egyptian vulture and the Rüppell's vulture.

 

[Great Argus]

What I find to be more frustrating is when there are actual educators attempting to give talks and get people interested in the animals in front of them and the visitors are not interested and don't want to hear what is being said

Talks usually work far better for education in my experience, especially when people can ask questions. There were several times I talked to guests for 20-30 minutes about an animal because they were genuinely interested in it.

I think that is the problem actually that for the majority of visitors a trip to the zoo is not about education it is primarily about recreation and this is something that does make me very cynical about zoos

You are generally right in that, however their admission costs help fund the zoo and therefore help fund conservation. Many zoos do "quarters for conservation", where guests are presented with a few different choices they can vote for. The zoo then donates to the most voted program. A good way of bringing conservation more forefront, although usually a more popular species is the winner.

Yes, zoos need a couple of megafauna celebrities to get the public through the doors but like Jersey with its gorillas, orangutang and spectacled bears this can and should IMO be kept to a minimum.

The vast majority of taxa kept by zoos should IMO be the "little brown job" species that need to be there for ex-situ conservation.

If you are suggesting doing away with megafauna, I disagree. Way to many species are endangered for that. Keeping more smaller species I feel could certainly be doable.

Antarctica: Penguin species, Krill, Misc. bird species. You are correct here there aren't very many antarctic species but the point is that in most penguin exhibits they don't focus on Antarctica it's only about the penguins. So we need more exhibits that focus on Antarctica not just penguins and getting Antarctic Cod or Crabeater Seals from Antarctica isn't impossible as both are very common

Only a couple species of penguin are found on the Antarctic continent, those being generally uncommon to rare in zoos. (Emperor, Adelie) Thus usually little focus on the Antarctic continent itself. I don't know whether Crabeater or other seals is realistic other than the rare rescue, I believe they're protected under a couple different legislations. I'd have to look further into that. @FBBird added skuas and sheathbills as a possibility, and I have heard of them being kept. I doubt many zoos would be interested in obtaining them though.

California Quail and Kodiak Bear appear to be more prevalent in European Zoos than North American zoos but I could be wrong

I think they may be. Most of our brown bears are Grizzlies, not Kodiaks. California Quail is more of a private trade species, though some zoos have them.

 

[Rayane]

I’ve noticed that no zoo or aquarium I have ever visited or heard of has had a good Galapagos exhibit. It seems that besides the giant tortoises, and species that are found also outside the archipelago, Galapagos fauna is poorly represented in captivity. I read somewhere that it’s because the Ecuadorian government is very strict about exporting native species. But still, it would be pretty cool to see a marine iguana or a flightless cormorant or Darwin’s finches without spending thousands of dollars to fly to some remote island.

The conservation work on the islands is good enough for it to be sufficient. Il would be a waste of space in captivity to import such species, that are very well protected in their habitat.
Of course it would be nice, but I think that nowadays, captivity should focus on species that need to be kept in zoos and not on species that someone would like to see in zoos.
But if there were a Galapagos area around in any zoo, I’d probably rush there to see the unique species.

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

Talks usually work far better for education in my experience, especially when people can ask questions. There were several times I talked to guests for 20-30 minutes about an animal because they were genuinely interested in it.



You are generally right in that, however their admission costs help fund the zoo and therefore help fund conservation. Many zoos do "quarters for conservation", where guests are presented with a few different choices they can vote for. The zoo then donates to the most voted program. A good way of bringing conservation more forefront, although usually a more popular species is the winner.



If you are suggesting doing away with megafauna, I disagree. Way to many species are endangered for that. Keeping more smaller species I feel could certainly be doable.

I think talks work better too and I've also been partly in the role of an environmental educator in the past and like you have given talks and had people genuinely interested and asking questions. However, it is also a challenging task and environmental education whether through talks or displays etc often goes undervalued by a good many zoos which is not good at all.

Yes, I agree that admission costs do help to fund in-situ conservation but there have been issues raised with this that zoos are not donating enough to these efforts and should be donating far more than they currently do. Again I like the idea of "quarters for conservation" and other means of giving a choice / agency to the visitor on how their money if spent in terms of conservation.


No, I'm definitely not suggesting doing away with megafauna though I think doing away with some megafauna like elephants would be a good idea as these animals are far better conserved in-situ. What I am suggesting as a viable option is a compromise in which zoos dramatically reduce the amount of megafauna kept to only a handful of species and the rest of their collection should be smaller taxa which definitively require ex-situ.

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

The conservation work on the islands is good enough for it to be sufficient. Il would be a waste of space in captivity to import such species, that are very well protected in their habitat.
Of course it would be nice, but I think that nowadays, captivity should focus on species that need to be kept in zoos and not on species that someone would like to see in zoos.
But if there were a Galapagos area around in any zoo, I’d probably rush there to see the unique species.

Yes, I agree and also I think it is worth mentioning that apart from the giant tortoises most of the fauna of the Galapagos are subject to restrictions and cannot be imported or held by zoos anyway.

A Galapagos exhibit would only really have one species which wouldn't give much of an impression of the biodiversity of the islands.

 

[CMP]

I also think that Madagascar 'complexes' should be more than just ring tailed lemurs, radiated tortoises, and possibly fossa if you are lucky. However, I understand there may be a few barriers preventing this.
Also, I believe Houston is making a Galapagos complex, and Izoo in Japan has Galapagos Iguanas. (Amblyrhynchus cristatus?)

One main area that I mentioned at the intro is India, why is there not more complexes focused on South Asia? There are many interesting and endangered animals from the region, yet they are rarely brought up.

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

I also think that Madagascar 'complexes' should be more than just ring tailed lemurs, radiated tortoises, and possibly fossa if you are lucky. However, I understand there may be a few barriers preventing this.
One main area that I mentioned at the intro is India, why is there not more complexes focused on South Asia? There are many interesting and endangered animals from the region, yet they are rarely brought up.

Also, I believe Houston is making a Galapagos complex, and Izoo in Japan has Galapagos Iguanas. (Amblyrhynchus cristatus?)

I agree that it should be much more than ring tailed or ruffed lemurs and I think that so much more could potentially be made of Madagascar complexes to highlight the mega biodiversity of the island.

In terms of mammals there are a number of Eulemur species which would do well in these and are in far greater need of ex-situ than ring tails and there are interesting rodents and tenrecs to showcase like the giant jumping rat and the highland tenrec. The Euplerids are interesting and there are a number of those which could be housed like the fossa, ring tailed mongoose and the boky boky.

In terms of reptiles too there are the ground boas, the tortoises and the chameleons and of course amphibians like the mantella frogs which are all emblematic of the Malagasy herpetofauna.

In terms of birds there are a number of waterfowl and small bird species that would also make for good displays in aviaries.

 

[Westcoastperson]

One main area that I mentioned at the intro is India, why is there not more complexes focused on South Asia? There are many interesting and endangered animals from the region, yet they are rarely brought up.

I tried to go over that kind of area when I said Asian Savannah but I think your right we need more exhibits about the Indian subcontinent

 

[Great Argus]

Yes, I agree that admission costs do help to fund in-situ conservation but there have been issues raised with this that zoos are not donating enough to these efforts and should be donating far more than they currently do.

Running a zoo is expensive. Wherever they can help cut costs they often do. Opening a new exhibit complex costs millions in most cases. Staff do not work for free in many cases; keepers often do if need be however. You have to be able to support yourself before you can donate elsewhere. Not everyone is as able to donate and be involved as Bronx, SD, or Jersey.

What I am suggesting as a viable option is a compromise in which zoos dramatically reduce the amount of megafauna kept to only a handful of species and the rest of their collection should be smaller taxa which definitively require ex-situ.

It is not a viable option for keeping megafauna. What you suggest would essentially remove all but a handful of megafauna species from ex-situ situations. Przewalski’s Horse, Arabian Oryx, Scimitar-horned Oryx, and Pere David's Deer were all saved because they had populations in zoos and captive situations. The Addax too has nearly reached that point. For many threatened megafauna species zoos are insurance populations. Their place in zoos is just as much deserved as the smaller species. Bringing a species into captivity at the last has not always worked, luckily in most cases it has.

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

I also think that Madagascar 'complexes' should be more than just ring tailed lemurs, radiated tortoises, and possibly fossa if you are lucky. However, I understand there may be a few barriers preventing this.
Also, I believe Houston is making a Galapagos complex, and Izoo in Japan has Galapagos Iguanas. (Amblyrhynchus cristatus?)

One main area that I mentioned at the intro is India, why is there not more complexes focused on South Asia? There are many interesting and endangered animals from the region, yet they are rarely brought up.

I don't think Indian themed exhibits are very common in the USA but I would say that they certainly are popular thematic exhibits in the UK probably because of both the historic connection to the subcontinent through colonialism and also the large Indian diaspora in the UK.

Historically many zoos in the early to mid 20th century across Europe had fake Hindu Indian temples for colonies of rhesus macaques and Hanuman langurs.

Today in the UK and Ireland you have:

ZSL London with their Gujarat themed Asiatic lion complex which also holds hanuman langur and vultures (personally I think it is a bit tacky really) and they used to have a sloth bear themed exhibit too.

Chester zoo, Chessington zoo and Dublin zoo also apparently have an Asiatic lion / Gir forest themed exhibit.

ZSL Whipsnade have their wilds of Asia area with one horned rhino and sambar deer etc.

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

Running a zoo is expensive. Wherever they can help cut costs they often do. Opening a new exhibit complex costs millions in most cases. Staff do not work for free in many cases; keepers often do if need be however. You have to be able to support yourself before you can donate elsewhere. Not everyone is as able to donate and be involved as Bronx, SD, or Jersey.



It is not a viable option for keeping megafauna. What you suggest would essentially remove all but a handful of megafauna species from ex-situ situations. Przewalski’s Horse, Arabian Oryx, Scimitar-horned Oryx, and Pere David's Deer were all saved because they had populations in zoos and captive situations. The Addax too has nearly reached that point. For many threatened megafauna species zoos are insurance populations. Their place in zoos is just as much deserved as the smaller species. Bringing a species into captivity at the last has not always worked, luckily in most cases it has.

Yes, of course and I actually think that staff should be paid a far better wage than what they currently recieve at most zoos. Just like with the comparable situation with vicechancellors, board of trustees, lecturers and bureaucrats at universities I do not believe in zoo directors, curators (no matter how specialized they are) or boards of trustees rolling around in money and giving themselves huge paychecks, that is total bull**** in my opinion.

I am referring more to statistical evidence that has been raised that suggests only a comparatively small sum of money from zoos reaches in-situ efforts. If zoos are to portray themselves as meaningfully contributing to conservation efforts then it stands to reason that their actions and output should be transparent and should ideally be up for debate, wouldn't you agree ?

I wasn't suggesting that the species you mentioned that are either extinct in the wild should be phased out of zoos but rather that the more common and least concern hoofstock that only have a very tenuous reason for being there in terms of "education" should.

I think there is actually a strong argument that could be made that far more endangered hoofstock could and should be kept at zoos like the Visayan warty pig, Sulawesi babirusa, Philippine spotted deer, Philippine mouse deer, lowland anoa etc.

 

[Great Argus]

Yes, of course and I actually think that staff should be paid a far better wage than what they currently recieve at most zoos. Just like with the comparable situation with vicechancellors, board of trustees, lecturers and bureaucrats at universities I do not believe in zoo directors, curators (no matter how specialized they are) or boards of trustees rolling around in money and giving themselves huge paychecks, that is total bull**** in my opinion

True, and I agree. However that hierarchy is something not likely to change.

I am referring more to statistical evidence that has been raised that suggests only a comparatively small sum of money from zoos reaches in-situ efforts. If zoos are to portray themselves as meaningfully contributing to conservation efforts then it stands to reason that their actions and output should be transparent and should ideally be up for debate, wouldn't you agree ?

Transparency would be good, although the zoos themselves may not be the ones at fault. Depending on countries and agencies involved, money is likely getting funneled off as it works towards its final destination. It's not an uncommon situation in many aspects, not just conservation unfortunately. I'm not saying the zoos themselves are innocent of it, but more to the effect of they may not be the ones typically responsible for how little gets through.

I wasn't suggesting that the species you mentioned that are either extinct in the wild should be phased out of zoos but rather that the more common and least concern hoofstock that only have a very tenuous reason for being there in terms of "education" should.

I think there is actually a strong argument that could be made that far more endangered hoofstock could and should be kept at zoos like the Visayan warty pig, Sulawesi babirusa, Philippine spotted deer, Philippine mouse deer, lowland anoa etc.

True, although much of the endangered hoofstock is cold sensitive. Same goes for a lot of other endangered species. I agree they could and should be kept more when possible. If the situation is how it was, there may be more Scimitar-horned Oryx on hunting ranches in the US than the whole worldwide zoo population. In several cases zoo location limits whether they can house some larger species.

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

True, and I agree. However that hierarchy is something not likely to change.



Transparency would be good, although the zoos themselves may not be the ones at fault. Depending on countries and agencies involved, money is likely getting funneled off as it works towards its final destination. It's not an uncommon situation in many aspects, not just conservation unfortunately. I'm not saying the zoos themselves are innocent of it, but more to the effect of they may not be the ones typically responsible for how little gets through.



True, although much of the endangered hoofstock is cold sensitive. Same goes for a lot of other endangered species. I agree they could and should be kept more when possible. If the situation is how it was, there may be more Scimitar-horned Oryx on hunting ranches in the US than the whole worldwide zoo population. In several cases zoo location limits whether they can house some larger species.

I would say that now is as good a time as any for the chronic limitations of this hierarchy of greed to become self evident and for the necessary changes to be implemented.

I agree it may not be likely but it certainly is something that would clean up institutions across the board and ensure a greater efficacy in terms of output.

For example, apparently at ZSL London £1 million per year is spent on 7 board of directors / heads of department which quite frankly is a bit disgusting to me.

 

[15399]

I also think that Madagascar 'complexes' should be more than just ring tailed lemurs, radiated tortoises, and possibly fossa if you are lucky. However, I understand there may be a few barriers preventing this.
Also, I believe Houston is making a Galapagos complex, and Izoo in Japan has Galapagos Iguanas. (Amblyrhynchus cristatus?)

One main area that I mentioned at the intro is India, why is there not more complexes focused on South Asia? There are many interesting and endangered animals from the region, yet they are rarely brought up.

There might not be South Asia- specific areas, but at least a fair number of South Asian species are kept in zoos. Plus, isn't Disney's Maharajah Jungle Trek South Asian themed?

 

[Great Argus]

I would say that now is as good a time as any for the chronic limitations of this hierarchy of greed to become self evident and for the necessary changes to be implemented.

I agree it may not be likely but it certainly is something that would clean up institutions across the board and ensure a greater efficacy in terms of output.

It's at its worst in governments, so good luck with that.
It would significantly improve things in numerous areas, though getting officials to accept less money may be rather difficult.

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

It's at its worst in governments, so good luck with that.
It would significantly improve things in numerous areas, though getting officials to accept less money may be rather difficult.

I agree, it is a top down societal problem and I don't actually think there is an easy solution but nevertheless I am not a fatalist and I do believe it has to be tackled even if ultimately it is a lost battle.