Melbourne Zoo Future of Melbourne Zoo 2022 (Speculation / Fantasy)

[Jambo]

There are 3 meerkat exhibits at Melbourne zoo, saw a meerkat in every exhibit but that really dont need the two at the max i only saw one in the smaller exhibit.

I was told last time they moved one of the groups to the Royal Childrens Hospital as the group there had all died. They used to have a group of four, and two of six (they sent the group of four to the Hospital), so it appears they've split up some of the other Meerkat groups just to occupy all enclosures.

The kookaburra exhibit may as well not be there nobody looks at it should be taken of the map and it is small kookaburras shouldn’t be kept in an exhibit that’s small

I agree. It used to be a walk through aviary with Brush Turkeys, but has been closed for many years now, and is almost overgrown.

It doesn’t show it on the map but there are squrriral monkeys living in a small enclosure on the way to the carousel and the red pandas.

A pair live here, they're part of the Keeper Kids building.

 

[austrlain zoo gower]

Oh ok so that isn the little inside area i all ways see

 

[Jambo]

According to a keeper dokkon will give birth first at the earliest December but could happen anytime in January nom oi and Mali are expected to give birth at around the same time late January to late febuarty
Is kulab a viable breeding female she has one calf could she have another

That's interesting. All three females did conceive around the same time (I think the keeper said within three or four months of each other?) so should be due between December and April next year.

Kulab is viable, she has something wrong with her reproductive tract due to the abnormally large birth of her first son. Melbourne have chosen to not breed her as a pregnancy will potentially put her health at risk.

 

[Jambo]

Oh ok so that isn the little inside area i all ways see

The little inside area is Keeper kids. Inside there's an indoor viewing area for their Squirrel Monkeys. I also believe they have some Macaws and Eclectus Parrots in there as well.

 

[austrlain zoo gower]

I only asked the person running the keeper talk weirdly he was also in the Australian area so what you are saying is probalry true he was probalry just giving me a quick answer to my question

 

[Jambo]

I only asked the person running the keeper talk weirdly he was also in the Australian area so what you are saying is probalry true he was probalry just giving me a quick answer to my question

Are you referring to the elephants? Yes, there's normally a keeper that runs around the zoo and does all the keeper talks. I asked a guy last time about the pregnancies before the elephant keeper talk and he told me he was aware Dokkoon was due first around christmas, but then forgot Man Jai's name, and referred to him as 'Mali's little brother' for the rest of the talk.

 

[Zoofan15]

That's interesting. All three females did conceive around the same time (I think the keeper said within three or four months of each other?) so should be due between December and April next year.

Kulab is viable, she has something wrong with her reproductive tract due to the abnormally large birth of her first son. Melbourne have chosen to not breed her as a pregnancy will potentially put her health at risk.

That seems likely given the estrus cycle is three to four months in length and the three cows all apparently conceived on the first cycle. They were similarly fortunate with AI on Dokkoon and Num Oi, with pregnancy achieved on the first attempt each time but having a bull on site is advantageous as a contingency when it doesn’t. Luk Chai has certainly proved himself!

Kulab suffered a prolapsed uterus. At 10 years of age, she was the youngest cow to give birth in the region and the combination of her age and Bong Su’s genes for size were a poor combination. Had a different bull been able to be used e.g. Gung, I suspect the outcome may have been different. It’s a great shame Kulab’s line will now go unrepresented in the region through the absence of future calves and the export of her only son.

 

[austrlain zoo gower]

Yes i am probalry the same keeper not noting one of the elephants names is not very good

 

[Jambo]

That seems likely given the estrus cycle is three to four months in length and the three cows all apparently conceived on the first cycle. They were similarly fortunate with AI on Dokkoon and Num Oi, with pregnancy achieved on the first attempt each time but having a bull on site is advantageous as a contingency when it doesn’t. Luk Chai has certainly proved himself!

Kulab suffered a prolapsed uterus. At 10 years of age, she was the youngest cow to give birth in the region and the combination of her age and Bong Su’s genes for size were a poor combination. Had a different bull been able to be used e.g. Gung, I suspect the outcome may have been different. It’s a great shame Kulab’s line will now go unrepresented in the region through the absence of future calves and the export of her only son.

That's correct. Dokkoon apparently conceived late February only two months following Luk Chai's arrival! Num Oi and Mali followed very soon after. The three females were at least six months pregnant when their pregnancies were announced in November 2021. Mali and Num Oi likely conceived between March and May 2021. So would be due around January to March 2023. Luk Chai did incredibly well, impregnating all three girls within less than six months after his arrival! He's closest to Kulab though, which is a shame as she may have been the first female pregnant! They apparently mated more than once the day he was first introduced to the cows!

 

[Abbey]

As @Jambo mentioned in the Zoos SA equivalent thread, Melbourne Zoo, unlike other government zoos (and indeed unlike Werribee) does not have a publicly-available masterplan, and has not done so since the 1980s.

However, there is some discussion from late 2007 in the Melbourne Zoo Developments thread (in some ways, a precursor to this one but from 15 years ago) outlined a document released by the zoo forecasting the development of future precincts, which have broadly come to pass since then (unfortunately, the link to the document itself is broken, so we only have the quote posted on the forum at the time).

I suppose that Melbourne, having been developing modern precincts and immersion-style habitats since the 1980s, has developed more gradually than the rapid speed of construction from the early 00s onwards at Taronga, or what is forecast for Adelaide Zoo in coming years. This might go some way towards why there haven't been regular plans released in the same way as the other public zoos.

 

[Zoofan15]

As @Jambo mentioned in the Zoos SA equivalent thread, Melbourne Zoo, unlike other government zoos (and indeed unlike Werribee) does not have a publicly-available masterplan, and has not done so since the 1980s.

However, there is some discussion from late 2007 in the Melbourne Zoo Developments thread (in some ways, a precursor to this one but from 15 years ago) outlined a document released by the zoo forecasting the development of future precincts, which have broadly come to pass since then (unfortunately, the link to the document itself is broken, so we only have the quote posted on the forum at the time).

I suppose that Melbourne, having been developing modern precincts and immersion-style habitats since the 1980s, has developed more gradually than the rapid speed of construction from the early 00s onwards at Taronga, or what is forecast for Adelaide Zoo in coming years. This might go some way towards why there haven't been regular plans released in the same way as the other public zoos.

Melbourne have always seems to have designed their precincts around an ethos of giving the public what it wants. The point of contention here is whether what they think the public wants is actually what they want.

An early example of this is the gorilla rainforest. Gorillas were a extremely high profile species with births attracting international attention. Showcasing them in a world class precinct was a logical move that capitalised on their popularity and brought in the crowds. This precinct remains one of their best developments to their day.

Growing Wild is a recent example based on their assessment of the need to cater to the younger visitors. Zoos by their very definition cater to younger visitors who are as excited to see a giraffe or a big slide as they would be to see any of the species housed in this precinct. Given the space it takes up and it’s lack of appeal to adults (including even the parents), I would write this up as failed assessment of what the public wanted.

The Carnivores precinct is debatable. It features high profile species that the general public may well forgive being mashed together in the geographical atrocity that this precinct otherwise is. Overall, the exhibits are nothing outstanding and it’s replaced popular exhibits like the lion park that visitors to this day refer to as a preferred alternative.

 

[Jambo]

As @Jambo mentioned in the Zoos SA equivalent thread, Melbourne Zoo, unlike other government zoos (and indeed unlike Werribee) does not have a publicly-available masterplan, and has not done so since the 1980s.

However, there is some discussion from late 2007 in the Melbourne Zoo Developments thread (in some ways, a precursor to this one but from 15 years ago) outlined a document released by the zoo forecasting the development of future precincts, which have broadly come to pass since then (unfortunately, the link to the document itself is broken, so we only have the quote posted on the forum at the time).

I suppose that Melbourne, having been developing modern precincts and immersion-style habitats since the 1980s, has developed more gradually than the rapid speed of construction from the early 00s onwards at Taronga, or what is forecast for Adelaide Zoo in coming years. This might go some way towards why there haven't been regular plans released in the same way as the other public zoos.

Unlike Taronga and Adelaide, which have only been redeveloping their zoo which has mainly remained the same since the early 1900's, Melbourne was one of the first zoos to create a masterplan back in the 1980's, which saw the building of most of the zoo as we know it now.

 

[Jambo]

Growing Wild is a recent example based on their assessment of the need to cater to the younger visitors. Zoos by their very definition cater to younger visitors who are as excited to see a giraffe or a big slide as they would be to see any of the species housed in this precinct. Given the space it takes up and it’s lack of appeal to adults (including even the parents), I would write this up as failed assessment of what the public wanted.

Here's my opinion.

Growing Wild has definitely has not aged well. At the start, yes, Growing Wild was very popular among kids and their parents. It had a new Keeper Kids building, Meerkat enclosures with crawl through tunnels, Giant Tortoises, a walk through Brush Turkey aviary and even a walk through Mara enclosure. One thing it really lacks though is a playground, which the one in the centre of the zoo makes up for. And this is why Growing Wild has dropped in interest over the years. Kids (and parents alike) have gotten bored of crawling through the meerkat tunnels and seeing Giant Tortoises. They want to play on the playground. Especially due to the fact that the former Mara and Brush Turkey enclosures are now closed off, Growing Wild is now just Meerkats and Giant Tortoises. The precinct also takes up a lot of space which annoys me. Behind Growing Wild there's a heap of space (including the former elephant enclosure) which could be put to use for something better. Growing Wild is not a childrens zoo. It's something in between; intending to impress both children and adults. Has it worked? No. I think Melbourne should consider putting this area to better use. There's no need for a 'kids area' when there already is a playground and carousel near the centre of the zoo.

The Carnivores precinct is debatable. It features high profile species that the general public may well forgive being mashed together in the geographical atrocity that this precinct otherwise is. Overall, the exhibits are nothing outstanding and it’s replaced popular exhibits like the lion park that visitors to this day refer to as a preferred alternative.

Carnivores, in my opinion, is pretty decent at best. The only criticism for it is the fact they went back to taxonomic displays instead of geographic. But I guess it was Melbourne's only option. The area they demolished for it was the former Lion Park, Big Cat cages and Small Cat cages. They had cats that needed a new home. A carnivores precinct fitted the best. Although they could've easily gone for two smaller precincts: an African one with Lions, Meerkats, Crested Porcupine extra; and a Himalayan one with Snow Leopard and Red Panda. The Carnivores precinct isn't the best yes, but it does have some great enclosures; the Tasmanian Devil, Coati and Snow Leopard enclosures. The Snow Leopard enclosure, of which, is a great redesign of the former bear enclosure.

 

[Zoofan15]

Carnivores, in my opinion, is pretty decent at best. The only criticism for it is the fact they went back to taxonomic displays instead of geographic. But I guess it was Melbourne's only option. The area they demolished for it was the former Lion Park, Big Cat cages and Small Cat cages. They had cats that needed a new home. A carnivores precinct fitted the best. Although they could've easily gone for two smaller precincts: an African one with Lions, Meerkats, Crested Porcupine extra; and a Himalayan one with Snow Leopard and Red Panda. The Carnivores precinct isn't the best yes, but it does have some great enclosures; the Tasmanian Devil, Coati and Snow Leopard enclosures. The Snow Leopard enclosure, of which, is a great redesign of the former bear enclosure.

The general public’s main complaint here is the reduction in species held. Countless people have complained via social media about the lack of felid species compared to when they visited decades ago and the Carnivores precinct is the substitute for the rows of cats they previously enjoyed.

This highlights the double-edged sword zoos like Melbourne are dealing with. People expect high quality spacious exhibits, but complain when the species are reduced or the expansive exhibits mean they can’t see what they’re looking for. It’s a juggling act for sure and it’s great when zoos achieve both through innovative designs and initiative in importing.

 

[Jambo]

The general public’s main complaint here is the reduction in species held. Countless people have complained via social media about the lack of felid species compared to when they visited decades ago and the Carnivores precinct is the substitute for the rows of cats they previously enjoyed.

This highlights the double-edged sword zoos like Melbourne are dealing with. People expect high quality spacious exhibits, but complain when the species are reduced or the expansive exhibits mean they can’t see what they’re looking for. It’s a juggling act for sure and it’s great when zoos achieve both through innovative designs and initiative in importing.

Definitely. That area once had Lions, Wild Dogs, Syrian Brown Bears, Snow Leopards, Jaguars, Persion Leopards, Servals, Caracals, Maned Wolfs, Binturongs, Leopard Cats, Ocelet, Fishing Cat and many more just fifteen years ago. It's been a stark contrast to see how it's changed. Only three of those species remain at Melbourne, and alongside them, they've thrown in some Coatis, Tasmanian Devils and a Sumatran Tiger into the trail as a replacement, so I can see why people are so annoyed.

Tasmanian Devils and Suamtran Tigers are double ups, and are not needed. Most of the former area too is being used as off housing for Lions and Snow Leopards alike. I don't see the need of having an extensive off display row of cages, which are rarely ever used, and especially as they already have enough cages behind the Sumatran Tiger enclosure in the Trail of the elephants. Just wasting space that Melbourne needs, being a small city zoo.

 

[Zoofan15]

Definitely. That area once had Lions, Wild Dogs, Syrian Brown Bears, Snow Leopards, Jaguars, Persion Leopards, Servals, Caracals, Maned Wolfs, Binturongs, Leopard Cats, Ocelet, Fishing Cat and many more just fifteen years ago. It's been a stark contrast to see how it's changed. Only three of those species remain at Melbourne, and alongside them, they've thrown in some Coatis, Tasmanian Devils and a Sumatran Tiger into the trail as a replacement, so I can see why people are so annoyed.

Tasmanian Devils and Suamtran Tigers are double ups, and are not needed. Most of the former area too is being used as off housing for Lions and Snow Leopards alike. I don't see the need of having an extensive off display row of cages, which are rarely ever used, and especially as they already have enough cages behind the Sumatran Tiger enclosure in the Trail of the elephants. Just wasting space that Melbourne needs, being a small city zoo.

In addition to the multiple felid species they had on display in the cat rows, they also had extensive off display facilities for breeding them. The Temminck’s golden cat alone had five off display exhibits which greatly contributed to their breeding success with this species. Aside from privacy from the guests, most small felids breed poorly when housed in close proximity to other felids.

I can understand the extensive off display housing for Snow leopard. It’s temperature controlled and it’s essential to give them this option throughout the hotter parts of the year. It also allows them to house a larger number of the cats. The zoo has held four breeding pairs of Snow leopard to date and some have overlapped with the retired breeding pair they replaced.

Allocating off display housing to the African lions makes no sense though considering they intend to house non breeding lions (currently two males).

 

[Jambo]

In addition to the multiple felid species they had on display in the cat rows, they also had extensive off display facilities for breeding them. The Temminck’s golden cat alone had five off display exhibits which greatly contributed to their breeding success with this species. Aside from privacy from the guests, most small felids breed poorly when housed in close proximity to other felids.

I can understand the extensive off display housing for Snow leopard. It’s temperature controlled and it’s essential to give them this option throughout the hotter parts of the year. It also allows them to house a larger number of the cats. The zoo has held four breeding pairs of Snow leopard to date and some have overlapped with the retired breeding pair they replaced.

Allocating off display housing to the African lions makes no sense though considering they intend to house non breeding lions (currently two males).

The off housing cages couldn't have been behind or next to the small cat cages. These cages your referring to must be the cages behind the Tiger enclosures. They've been around there for quite some time and were recently upgraded. I'm not sure of anywhere else around the zoo were they had five off display exhibits.

Yes, I believe the cages behind Snow Leopards can hold around six to eight leopards. It allows them to hold and breed their Snow Leopards off display. But considering they have cages already elsewhere in the zoo, which have sat empty since Leon and Meo's deaths a few years ago, I don't see the point in having so many. Maybe if they were also attempting to breed other cat species, it would make sense, but Snow Leopards are the only ones.

There's a single off display cage for their lions, alongside their dens ect. This cage is meant to be used for seperations and introductions, which dosen't make much sense considering they hold bachelor males. Introductions won't be needed and so wouldn't seperations, due to them only holding a pair.

 

[Zoofan15]

The off housing cages couldn't have been behind or next to the small cat cages. These cages your referring to must be the cages behind the Tiger enclosures. They've been around there for quite some time and were recently upgraded. I'm not sure of anywhere else around the zoo were they had five off display exhibits.

The off display exhibits have long been demolished. These were in place throughout the 1980’s when the golden cat breeding programme was at its height and they needed to hold multiple adult cats in seperate exhibits.

The zoo similarly experienced breeding success with Leopard cats (producing close to 100 kittens), though I don’t believe they had the same off display set up. The mortality rate for this species was extremely high and the majority of the kittens died.

 

[Jambo]

The off display exhibits have long been demolished. These were in place throughout the 1980’s when the golden cat breeding programme was at its height and they needed to hold multiple adult cats in seperate exhibits.

The zoo similarly experienced breeding success with Leopard cats (producing close to 100 kittens), though I don’t believe they had the same off display set up. The mortality rate for this species was extremely high and the majority of the kittens died.

Oh okay, it makes sense if they were demolished a while ago. Obviously Melbourne have learnt from past success and constructed a vast array of off display cages to help their Snow Leopards breed, which has proved very successful thus far.

 

[Zoofan15]

Oh okay, it makes sense if they were demolished a while ago. Obviously Melbourne have learnt from past success and constructed a vast array of off display cages to help their Snow Leopards breed, which has proved very successful thus far.

Melbourne are the most successful breeders of Snow leopard in the history of the region. They’ve bred five litters since their first pair arrived in 1983 totalling eleven cubs (seven of which have survived to adulthood).

The second most successful facility was Mogo Zoo, who bred two litters; followed by Wellington Zoo and Taronga Zoo, who have each bred one litter.

While much of this success came down to luck (Melbourne received breeding recommendations; and the female of Taronga’s first pair was infertile), the off display facilities have been invaluable in helping them to managed more than one pair at a time. This was useful when their second pair (Gregor and Shimbu) failed to breed and they were subsequently able to import a second female to pair with a male transferred from Taronga.