Sydney’s Ring-tailed lemurs are:
1.0 Garth (2021)
1.0 Bruce (2021)
0.1 Mimi (2016)
0.1 Anja (2016)
0.1 Zarah (2017)
Like @Abbey says, the males were imported from Hamilton Zoo; the females from Monarto Safari Park.
Taronga Zoo Future of Taronga Zoo (Speculation / Fantasy)
- Thread starter Zoofan15
- Start date
Sydney’s Ring-tailed lemurs are:
1.0 Garth (2021)
1.0 Bruce (2021)
0.1 Mimi (2016)
0.1 Anja (2016)
0.1 Zarah (2017)
Like @Abbey says, the males were imported from Hamilton Zoo; the females from Monarto Safari Park.
If we use Ekundu's enclosure and the current lower half of the elephant enclosure that would theoretically give them two additional exhibits. With that in mind, I'd imagine the two current exhibits would (and should) be combined. Considering the close proximity the off display yards could very well be at the upper half of that said elephant paddock as it's a fair amount of land space as seen in this photo:
It would be good to see the two current hippo exhibits scrapped and redone for something else, as they are currently the old tapir exhibits. The lower elephant exhibit has a large water area and plenty of space to build two new exhibits and required back of house facilities. Especially if they remove the gardens etc and redo the area. The current exhibits are decently sized of memory for pygmy hippo but lack the proper pool set up they require.
The current size of the top elephant paddock, moats and back of house area has a fair amount of space. If they use up the current pygmy hippo exhibits directly behind the elephants BOH areas. They could build a couple of exhibits. and have the aerial pathways going out over the restaurant complex and walkways around the current elephant paddock. Effectively giving them a large chunk of space added on to the orang exhibit. Orangs/gibbons using the aerial pathways over people and the food area, would be a close match for the what the elephants bring in terms of visitor engagement.
The elpant exhibit is 1.5 hectares, with the top paddock and BOH areas being 1 or a bit over 1 hectare of memory.
Last edited:
The current size of the top elephant paddock, moats and back of house area has a fair amount of space. If they use up the current pygmy hippo exhibits directly behind the elephants BOH areas. They could build a couple of exhibits. and have the aerial pathways going out over the restaurant complex and walkways around the current elephant paddock. Effectively giving them a large chunk of space added on to the orang exhibit. Orangs/gibbons using the aerial pathways over people and the food area, would be a close match for the what the elephants bring in terms of visitor engagement.
The elpant exhibit is 1.5 hectares, with the top paddock and BOH areas being 1 or a bit over 1 hectare of memory.
I agree aerial pathways with orangutans and gibbons would rival the existing pair of elephants in terms of visitor engagement. Auckland Zoo has a lone cow and the extent of visitor engagement appears to be visitors initially excited to see New Zealand’s only elephant, but then losing interest within less than a minute of watching Burma eating hay. Compare this to Melbourne Zoo, where visitors will spend a significant amount of time watching the interactions of the large herd. Taronga (with two female elephants) are between these two extremes; but in any case, I doubt a pair of cows is currently making for a dynamic/engaging exhibit.
Dimensions are as follows:
Wild Asia is a themed exhibit precinct of approximately 1.04 ha. While the Wild Asia elephant main exhibit was opened in 2005 covering an area of 4500 m², the bull outdoor facility, including a a 2000 m² paddock and a 500 m² exercise yard, was added in 2008.
Source: ZooLex
How big are orang habitats usually that im unsure of and will have to look at. However the elephants sit directly across from the food market. It is the central part of the zoo, the surrounding land area for the food market eating spaces, viewing spaces for the elpahants and general walkways. Which are perfect for aerial pathways. Aerial pathways can also be used out over the top of the rainforest walk as that winds down behind the current elephant exhibit. They could have a set going out over that as well (where the old sky safari went). Leaving the current elephant complex to be used as exhibit space for orangs gibbons.
I can see why orangs and gibbons were thought of, as there is plenty of space there over existing walkways for aerial pathways. And the previnct would tie in nicely in this part of the zoo with sun bears and tigers/ That are across and down from the elephants.
If they move/loose the exhisting condor aviary. There is a decently sized patch of flat earth there that could be converted as well into exhibits.
Space is rarely an issue for orangutan exhibits in zoos these days as any exhibit perceived as an adequate size for a modern zoo is limited by social cohesion of its inhabitants. The aerial pathways could expand the exhibit significantly by adding up to 2km of pathway (as Auckland’s does), as well as enabling the apes the space to get away from each other. Ideally, this would promote cohesion to a greater extent than where they all cooped up in an exhibit.
Taronga doesn’t have a huge amount of space to work with, so I’d suggest two adequate sized exhibits (with an aerial pathway) housing multiple adult orangutans would be preferable to a pair or trio of adults housed in a large (terrestrial exhibit).
I agree if they build two main exhibits with aerial pathways. That would be preferable to one large exhibit. I feel like there would be enough land to do that.
Same with the gorillas, if they utilised the gardens/land around the exhibit. It could easily be redeveloped into a decent exhibit with a smaller one of to the side. Bonus points if they were to incorporate a colobus exhibit.
Which i think would be preferable to a congo precinct. Redevelopment of the gorilla site, development of the lowere elephant exhibit in to pygmy hippo exhibits and an redevelopment of the elephant exhibit into orang and gibbons would fill out that part of the zoo very well.
The gorilla exhibit is a nice location for a second orangutan/gibbon enclosure if the gorillas were to be phased out.I agree if they build two main exhibits with aerial pathways. That would be preferable to one large exhibit. I feel like there would be enough land to do that.
Same with the gorillas, if they utilised the gardens/land around the exhibit. It could easily be redeveloped into a decent exhibit with a smaller one of to the side. Bonus points if they were to incorporate a colobus exhibit.
Which i think would be preferable to a congo precinct. Redevelopment of the gorilla site, development of the lowere elephant exhibit in to pygmy hippo exhibits and a redevelopment of the elephant exhibit into orang and gibbons would fill out that part of the zoo very well.
Otherwise the only other suitable location at the zoo is the current camel enclosure. The old elephant temple would be a nice compliment to such an enclosure.
I agree if they build two main exhibits with aerial pathways. That would be preferable to one large exhibit. I feel like there would be enough land to do that.
Same with the gorillas, if they utilised the gardens/land around the exhibit. It could easily be redeveloped into a decent exhibit with a smaller one of to the side. Bonus points if they were to incorporate a colobus exhibit.
Which i think would be preferable to a congo precinct. Redevelopment of the gorilla site, development of the lowere elephant exhibit in to pygmy hippo exhibits and an redevelopment of the elephant exhibit into orang and gibbons would fill out that part of the zoo very well.
That all sounds good. While I would have loved to have seen Okapi (and I know many of you would too), their scarcity in Australasian zoos would likely go over the heads of the general public. Believe it or not, some would even perceive them as a lesser version of the giraffe.
From day one, gorillas were identified as the headlining act of the Congo precinct and if the outcome is to retain them (with a new exhibit), then I have no doubt that would be a positive move for the zoo. Their current exhibit was never built with them in mind and is outdated.
Gorillas down at the old elephant house would be a great idea. They would be better then camels which no one cares about in a zoo. The old elephant building is heritage but could be fitted out and extended to be turned into gorilla BOH areas. The same way they did the old giraffe house.
The condors could be moved to a hilly part of the zoo with a new aviary made for them. They are a species where they could utilize the steep terrain for. There current exhibit is on a big grassed flat area with a decent amount of space around it.
That sounds like a win-win with the condors getting a naturalistic exhibit. They’re such a unique species and Taronga is the only public facility in the region where you can view these birds.
The bull elephant exhibit include a 2000 m² paddock and a 500 m² excercise yard, allowing ample room to accomodate a large troop of gorillas. Melbourne’s outdoor area is 1,600 m² (not including the moat).
I was more so orangutans down there with an aerial pathway connecting the two exhibits. The theming with the old elephant house would fit nicely.
That would obviously mean the gorillas stay where they are, but I don't see why the current complex can't be renovated and expanded if anything. It would require the gorillas moving and this could potentially be done six or seven years down the line when the orangutan enclosures are completed, so the gorillas could inhabit one temporarily.
loganjmuir
Well-Known Member
I would love to see some of the gardens and unused portions of the zoo, for instance Helmore Lawns, transformed into exhibits because it is such a waste of space, no one uses them and they are some of the only flat areas of the zoo. We have animals in the zoo with inadequate and frankly terrible exhibits. We have lost so many species over the years like Tapir, Agouti and Elephant and yet we continue to renovate portions of the zoo for ‘recreation’. People are not going to the zoo for a picnic or to enjoy the carefully kept lawns. People go to see animals, as they have done for the last 120 years, but the developers seem to have forgotten this minor detail.
It’s a wonder there are even locals going, seeing as half the zoo is Native animals and the other half are unused, useless gardens. They created these areas in order to hold events like VIVID, but they aren’t even doing it this year. It makes no sense and the zoo continues to spiral downwards.
As for housing gorillas in the ex-Bull enclosure, I feel as if it would go to waste. Gorillas are a partly arboreal species and would find a steeper terrain more suitable in my opinion. The exhibit could be easily redeveloped for an Ungulate species, it would also mean the backstage building would not need much redevelopment.
As for the talk of two exhibits in the current Cow exhibit, I would love to see the space utilised like this, but rather place another species in the second exhibit. Either Gibbons(the popular choice) or a large reptilian. Either Gharials/False Gharials or a Cuban/Saltwater Crocodile. The bigger the better, the public often only care about these factors.
Also do we have a second Condor? Only I read some thing about a second.
It’s a wonder there are even locals going, seeing as half the zoo is Native animals and the other half are unused, useless gardens. They created these areas in order to hold events like VIVID, but they aren’t even doing it this year. It makes no sense and the zoo continues to spiral downwards.
As for housing gorillas in the ex-Bull enclosure, I feel as if it would go to waste. Gorillas are a partly arboreal species and would find a steeper terrain more suitable in my opinion. The exhibit could be easily redeveloped for an Ungulate species, it would also mean the backstage building would not need much redevelopment.
As for the talk of two exhibits in the current Cow exhibit, I would love to see the space utilised like this, but rather place another species in the second exhibit. Either Gibbons(the popular choice) or a large reptilian. Either Gharials/False Gharials or a Cuban/Saltwater Crocodile. The bigger the better, the public often only care about these factors.
Also do we have a second Condor? Only I read some thing about a second.
I’m really sick of zoos phasing out species, with that space repurposed for visitor amenities. It looks like Taronga have already taken this to the extreme. As you, nobody goes to the zoo with this in mind and can undertake comparable activities in other locations where an admission fee is not required.
It’s possible Taronga would only have one orangutan exhibit in that scenario, but I’d prefer to see to do that they can establish a colony. Due to the limits of space, many zoos hold pairs or trios, which are either non-breeding or sporadically receive a breeding recommendation. Auckland have dedicated two exhibits and an aerial pathway 2km long to this species and have three adults, an infant and another breeding recommendation to follow. The complex is a hive of activity (ape and visitor) compared to what you’d see if they held a non-breeding pair.
Australia has 2.3 condors (two elderly parents and their 1.2 offspring) between two facilities. I forget which one (Taronga or the private one) holds the breeding pair and which holds the parents. It’d make sense to retire the parents off-show, but privacy would better encourage breeding, so unsure who has which. If there’s one condor on display, perhaps that’s one of the daughters; with the breeding pair at the private facility; and the parents BOH at Taronga??
Taronga only have a single female - Leslie (offspring of the previous pair). Afaik Taronga's original pair are deceased or may be the ones at the private facility. Australia Zoo has a pair as well (brother and sister of Leslie) who were intended for breeding.
Osedax
Well-Known Member
I thought Konira was the female at Taronga, and the only others in Australia are Bruce and Connie at the private facility.
I’ve looked through old posts on here and found the following:
The five condors in question are:
1.0 Bruce (September 1979) Wild x Wild
0.1 Connie (September 1979) Wild x Wild
0.1 Leslie (November 2003) Bruce x Connie
1.0 Inti (November 2006) Bruce x Connie
0.1 Kondira (November 2011) Bruce x Connie
Bruce and Connie were siblings hatched September 1979 to two wild caught birds imported from South America in 1947. This pair were transferred to Adelaide Zoo in 1988, where they’ve since died.
Bruce and Connie are the parents of Leslie, Inti and Kondira.
Bruce and Connie were retired to Feathered Friends. I don’t know whether or not they’re still alive.
Inti was transferred first to Australia Zoo; and then to Feathered Friends, where he was paired with a female (either Leslie or Kondira). The female he was not paired with (Leslie or Kondira) remains at Taronga Zoo.
loganjmuir
Well-Known Member
I'm assuming Inti will not be breeding, will this mean the Australian Condor line will die out with these 3? It wouldn't be the easiest task importing more from America, presumably. If this does mean the end of Condors in Australia I wonder what the gameplan is from here. The current aviary at Taronga could hold a Vulture but I'm not sure there are even any in the region. The aviary in question is pretty small and in a bit of a random spot, I feel the tortoises could benefit from a small expansion when the time comes.
Sadly there’s no vultures in Australasia, besides these condors (which are New World vultures).
I believe the plan is for Inti to breed with his sister at Feathered Friends. Their parents are full siblings, but we can’t import more, so that’s the only option for breeding. I’ve found a note online that Inti was parent reared; while Konira was hand reared. I can’t find confirmation either way of Leslie’s rearing status, but obviously it makes sense to pair him with a parent reared female if available.
The last condor chick hatched at Taronga Zoo in December 2013. She was named Zuleta and exported to the US in 2016. Given their scarcity in the region, it’s a shame this was the action taken; but as her parents (siblings) were born to wild founders, I guess she was a valuable addition to the North American breeding programme.
Zuleta was noted to be the sixth successful/surviving chick of Bruce and Connie. I’ve found an earlier chick, which was Megan (hatched December 2001); so so far we have:
0.1 Megan (December 2001) Bruce x Connie
0.1 Leslie (November 2003) Bruce x Connie
1.0 Inti (November 2006) Bruce x Connie
0.1 Kondira (November 2011) Bruce x Connie
0.1 Zuleta (December 2013) Bruce x Connie
The breeding of Andean condors at Taronga was mentioned in Postcards at the Zoo, but only mentioned Bruce and Connie. This implies Megan (hatched shortly before publication) was the first, with the sixth chick hatched sometime between Megan and Zuleta (probably between Inti and Kondira).
The original pair of condor died years ago, of memory. They are a good species. The bird show when the condor flys over is spectacular.
However they are a species where an aviary on sloping terrain instead of gardens would be beneficial. It would enable more movement then the current aviary does.
I would expect that when the new parrot IRA goes through it will open the doors for further import of non parrot species. As i have heard it mentioned among private breeders as bird importing opening up with the hopes finches would be enabled. So whether taronga import more will
However they are a species where an aviary on sloping terrain instead of gardens would be beneficial. It would enable more movement then the current aviary does.
I would expect that when the new parrot IRA goes through it will open the doors for further import of non parrot species. As i have heard it mentioned among private breeders as bird importing opening up with the hopes finches would be enabled. So whether taronga import more will