Taronga Zoo Future of Taronga Zoo (Speculation / Fantasy)

[Tiger91]

And although educational dedicated areas are important, kids couldn't care less and would rather see all the animals themselves. Combined with the fact Sydney's easier to get around for families, it's obviously slowly becoming the better destination to visit (especially with young families).

When i did my undergrad degree, we had to study the impacts of different types of education for conservation. Seeing/interacting with an animal is by far the highest impact. People like nicely designed exhibits with information to read, but that comes secondary to actually seeing and interacting with the animals.

Sydney zoo does this quite well, they have a lot of visible animals, with enough info to get the message across. Taronga is wasting space on fake aeroplanes, villages etc that people walk past. At the expense of actually having animals.
The same with the camel exhibit, camels were a lazy use of the space and were a prime example of the animal management the zoo has. Now its become a non animal human area on part of the flattest part of the zoo, with the most application for any type of exhibit design.

 

[Jambo]

When i did my undergrad degree, we had to study the impacts of different types of education for conservation. Seeing/interacting with an animal is by far the highest impact. People like nicely designed exhibits with information to read, but that comes secondary to actually seeing and interacting with the animals.

Sydney zoo does this quite well, they have a lot of visible animals, with enough info to get the message across. Taronga is wasting space on fake aeroplanes, villages etc that people walk past. At the expense of actually having animals.
The same with the camel exhibit, camels were a lazy use of the space and were a prime example of the animal management the zoo has. Now its become a non animal human area on part of the flattest part of the zoo, with the most application for any type of exhibit design.

Once the Sky Safari precinct is completed, hopefully that area is the next area they will look at for refurbishment. It's good that they've went with a relatively easy replacement for the Elephants; being Indian Rhino and Water Buffalo which doesn't necessitate any major changes to that area.

 

[Tiger91]

ARC is fantastic. It really showcases a huge variety of species well, though I agree with comments that Philippine crocodile (or any crocodilian) and Komodo dragon will greatly enhance it.

Phase outs were inevitable and have been carried out across multiple main zoos in the region including Auckland, Melbourne and Perth.

In terms of wasted space, the Tiger Trek undoubtedly has the most wasted space via fake villages and supermarkets. It added nothing to my experience and like it appeared was the case for every other visitor, I just wanted to get to the tigers.

Taronga has to many phase outs for the amount of space the zoo has, its as simple as that.

ARC is great, the new nocturnal house is great, the new animal hopspital is great. But all take up extra space and don't add any new species. And we are yet to see if they have fully retained the species they once had, so may even signify a reduction in species. Which the selling point to the public was they would have extra space for the species they had. Not a reduction in them.

Add on to that, the taronga resort, with all the space it takes up with the exhibits that you can't access unless you pay to use it. All the high ropes space, There is a lot of money, a lot of concrete and not a lot of animals. Certainly now major expansion of species.

The excuss of less species with larger exhibits only works when you arnt wasting space on concrete structures, restaurants, event areas, children's play areas. The excuse works when species are phased out and species gain the space in there exhibits. Gaining space for humans doesnt count. Now the general public is starting to take note and i hope they start to add pressure to taronga over it. Even the new sky safari will take up extra space but add no real new species to the zoo but will cost over 70 million.

 

[Tiger91]

Once the Sky Safari precinct is completed, hopefully that area is the next area they will look at for refurbishment. It's good that they've went with a relatively easy replacement for the Elephants; being Indian Rhino and Water Buffalo which doesn't necessitate any major changes to that area.

Plus the rhino is a novelty to see.
The old bull exhibit if they didn't want to go crazy, would make a great bongo exhibit without much work. You could easily keep a few animals and breed as well. Bongo are easy keepers, are able to be imported and are always popular with the public.

 

[Zoofan15]

Taronga has to many phase outs for the amount of space the zoo has, its as simple as that.

ARC is great, the new nocturnal house is great, the new animal hopspital is great. But all take up extra space and don't add any new species. And we are yet to see if they have fully retained the species they once had, so may even signify a reduction in species. Which the selling point to the public was they would have extra space for the species they had. Not a reduction in them.

Add on to that, the taronga resort, with all the space it takes up with the exhibits that you can't access unless you pay to use it. All the high ropes space, There is a lot of money, a lot of concrete and not a lot of animals. Certainly now major expansion of species.

The excuss of less species with larger exhibits only works when you arnt wasting space on concrete structures, restaurants, event areas, children's play areas. The excuse works when species are phased out and species gain the space in there exhibits. Gaining space for humans doesnt count. Now the general public is starting to take note and i hope they start to add pressure to taronga over it. Even the new sky safari will take up extra space but add no real new species to the zoo but will cost over 70 million.

I agree the key issue here is the dedication of space to non-animal exhibits - whether it be lawns or supporting structure to complexes e.g. fake supermarkets and villages. Nobody stops to read the signage and even interaction with the interactive features is low.

Playgrounds are a moot point. I don’t like them; but they compliment cafes in providing a space for kids to play while the adults chill out and eat/drink.

 

[Zoofan15]

Plus the rhino is a novelty to see.
The old bull exhibit if they didn't want to go crazy, would make a great bongo exhibit without much work. You could easily keep a few animals and breed as well. Bongo are easy keepers, are able to be imported and are always popular with the public.

The acquisition of Hari the Indian rhinoceros will level the playing field between Taronga and Sydney in that Indian rhinoceros are a bigger draw card than Spurhern white rhinoceros. This will be at the expense of the elephants are Taronga though.

On top of that, Sydney Zoo will still have orangutans, hyena and wild dogs.

 

[Zorro]

Taronga has to many phase outs for the amount of space the zoo has, its as simple as that.

ARC is great, the new nocturnal house is great, the new animal hopspital is great. But all take up extra space and don't add any new species. And we are yet to see if they have fully retained the species they once had, so may even signify a reduction in species. Which the selling point to the public was they would have extra space for the species they had. Not a reduction in them.

Add on to that, the taronga resort, with all the space it takes up with the exhibits that you can't access unless you pay to use it. All the high ropes space, There is a lot of money, a lot of concrete and not a lot of animals. Certainly now major expansion of species.

The excuss of less species with larger exhibits only works when you arnt wasting space on concrete structures, restaurants, event areas, children's play areas. The excuse works when species are phased out and species gain the space in there exhibits. Gaining space for humans doesnt count. Now the general public is starting to take note and i hope they start to add pressure to taronga over it. Even the new sky safari will take up extra space but add no real new species to the zoo but will cost over 70 million.

I just wonder how much of the zoo decisions regarding non animal construction leads back to hiring consultants?, Back in the "good ole days" many zoo directors knew what they wanted and usually went with that but in more resent years the hiring of zoo managers with little to no animal savvy knowledge may feel more inclined to hire others to come up with some ideas!

 

[Tiger91]

The acquisition of Hari the Indian rhinoceros will level the playing field between Taronga and Sydney in that Indian rhinoceros are a bigger draw card than Spurhern white rhinoceros. This will be at the expense of the elephants are Taronga though.

On top of that, Sydney Zoo will still have orangutans, hyena and wild dogs.

Sydney zoo have developed a more traditional zoo for the general public. Taronga is very fastly loosing that.

 

[Tiger91]

I just wonder how much of the zoo decisions regarding non animal construction leads back to hiring consultants?, Back in the "good ole days" many zoo directors knew what they wanted and usually went with that but in more resent years the hiring of zoo managers with little to no animal savvy knowledge may feel more inclined to hire others to come up with some ideas!

Quite a lot!

You look at the underwhelming reaction the the waterhole precinct (5 species over a large area of land that the zoo had before) and ARC. Neither of which have had big public reactions to them, especially when you think back to when they opened the rainforest trail/elephants and the seals.

The zoo managers are great at making things that generate income but forget they are working for a zoo not a shopping center.

 

[Zorro]

Quite a lot!

You look at the underwhelming reaction the the waterhole precinct (5 species over a large area of land that the zoo had before) and ARC. Neither of which have had big public reactions to them, especially when you think back to when they opened the rainforest trail/elephants and the seals.

The zoo managers are great at making things that generate income but forget they are working for a zoo not a shopping center.

I agree, At the end of the day the public go to zoos to see animals something they sometimes lose sight off. As one ex zoo keeper stated on here a couple of years ago that he followed a group of people out of Taronga zoo toward the carpark area only to over hear them saying" there not much to see in there". This is not a good look for the zoo also how long before they visit again? if ever?. One can try to justify and make excuses for them but lets face it people want valve for money and if zoos want customers to come back again then they have to cater to them or lose them or perhaps some zoos have come accustomed to keep getting government handouts?

 

[Tiger91]

I know it’s frustrating, but it’s important that even government zoos aren’t running at a financial loss to the extent they require continuous bail outs. Funding is allocated following applications to undertake projects and there’s little justification for throwing good money after bad if the zoo isn’t a viable attraction bringing benefit to the region.

There’s a happy medium to be found; but it’s undoubtable that board members with financial or tourism backgrounds are just as important as the experience zoo people we like to see alongside them.

Im not against having cafes and play grounds in zoos, i to like to sit and eat etc. But it's a zoo, its not a shopping mall, if you were to treat tarongas kids play areas, lawn areas, acomodation and food areas like animal exhibits. You would spend more time walking around looking at them. At the end of the day they need to concentrate the human areas into functioning hubs then utlise the space being wasted into animal exhibits.

As for funding, Taronga falls under the same budget as all of Sydney's botanic gardens etc. All maintinace, food and keepers/workers are directly funded by the government. Theres also various trusts that feed money into them, and large companies etc that give donations (regularly as its a tax break and makes the company look good). Then there is admission prices, at over $50 per adult, when all expenses are paid for there does not and should not ever be considered a buisness that needs to generate profit. It completely contradicts the fact that it is completely paid for by the government and sponsors. The zoo receives X amount for the above mentioned whether the zoo generates income or not and the income it does generate goes back into NSW government coffers.

The last conservative government pushed the idea that all government owned land needed to raise revenue and it has ruined not just Taronga but large parts of Sydney.

 

[Tiger91]

I agree, At the end of the day the public go to zoos to see animals something they sometimes lose sight off. As one ex zoo keeper stated on here a couple of years ago that he followed a group of people out of Taronga zoo toward the carpark area only to over hear them saying" there not much to see in there". This is not a good look for the zoo also how long before they visit again? if ever?. One can try to justify and make excuses for them but lets face it people want valve for money and if zoos want customers to come back again then they have to cater to them or lose them or perhaps some zoos have come accustomed to keep getting government handouts?

Non of my extended family and a few of my friends have stated they will not visit taronga again now sydney zoo is opened. Unless something drastic happens. ARC and the new waterhole/african area didnt even make them want to go. There's to much walking and not enough animals for a very expensive admission price. I have heard that when i have been down there as well when exiting!.

 

[steveroberts]

@Tiger91

Taronga's current species list again, mammals alone, there are still a few species (55 species on public display still on my count, however a fair number are some domestic mammal species, some could say too very marsupial heavy, but Taronga will (likely) always prioritise marsupial numbers being high which agree with, if could be balanced out with a 10-15% re-increase in exotic mammal species too would be great of course). True that is a fraction of its former collection number (expanding chosen remaining species exhibits a factor in phasing out others; however there are other things that seem pointless like mock supermarkets, mock airplane and cringey replica of a Sumatran villages that would make actual Sumatran villagers kind of annoyed/feel are being 'tokenised' to see am sure as one example of wasted space in an area of the zoo grounds - a few nice educational billboards would do the trick almost equally as well at 1% of the same space taken up. If one wants the real Sumatran village experience, a great place to see real actual villages.. is Sumatra, largely doable for many Australians to visit considering close proximity, albeit cost of living crisis very serious thing; anyway digressing):

current mammals species at the zoo:
Alpaca
Asian elephant
Asian small-clawed otter
Australian sea lion
Binturong
Bolivian squirrel monkey
Brush-tailed rock wallaby
California sea lion
Capybara
Common chimpanzee
Cotton-top tamarin
Dingo
Domestic goat
Domestic rabbit
Domestic sheep
Eastern/Barton's long-beaked echidna
Eastern bongo
Fat tailed dunnart
Feathertail glider
Fennec fox
Fishing cat
Francois' langur
Ghost bat
Giraffe
Goodfellow's tree-kangaroo
Greater bilby
Guinea pig
House mouse
Kangaroo Island (western) grey kangaroo
Lion
Long-nosed potoroo
Meerkat
Nepalese red panda
New Zealand fur seal
Northern koala
Plains zebra
Platypus
Pygmy hippopotamus
Quokka
Red kangaroo
Red-necked pademelon
Red-necked wallaby
Ring-tailed lemur
Rufous bettong
Short-beaked echidna
Southern hairy-nosed wombat
Spinifex hopping mouse
Sumatran tiger
Sun bear
Swamp wallaby
Tammar wallaby
Tasmanian devil
Western lowland gorilla
Western quoll
Yellow-bellied glider


Then looking back c.2008 thanks to Osedax's post:

.....Mammals
Short-beaked Echidna (Tachyglossus aculeatus)

Barton’s Long-beaked Echidna (Zaglossus bartoni)

Platypus (Ornithorhynchus anatinus)


Spotted-tail Quoll (Dasyurus maculatus)

Tasmanian Devil (Sarcophilus harrisii)

Northern Quoll (Dasyurus hallucatus)

Red-tailed Phascogale (Phascogale calura)


Long-nosed Bandicoot (Parameles nasuta)

Greater Bilby (Macrotis lagotis sagitta)

Eastern Barred Bandicoot (Parameles gunnii)


Southern Hairy-nosed Wombat (Lasiorhinus latifrons)

Common Wombat (Vombatus ursinus hirsutus)

Koala (Phascalarctos cinereus cinereus)

Yellow-bellied Glider (Petaurus australis)

Squirrel Glider (Petaurus norfolcensis)

Common Brushtail Possum (Trichosurus vulpecula)

Common Ringtail Possum (Pseudocheirus peregrinus peregrinus)

Feathertail Glider (Acrobates sp.)

Long-nosed Potoroo (Potorous tridactylus)

Woylie (Bettongia penicillata)

Yellow-footed Rock Wallaby (Petrogale xanthopus)

Western Grey Kangaroo (Macropus fuliginosus melanops)

Swamp Wallaby (Wallabia bicolor)

Tammar Wallaby (Notamacropus eugenii)

Red-necked Wallaby (Notamacropus rufogriseus banksianus)

Quokka (Setonix brachyurus)

Red Kangaroo (Osphranter rufus)

Parma Wallaby (Notamacropus parma)

Eastern Grey Kangaroo (Macropus giganteus giganteus)

Agile Wallaby (Notamacropus agilis)

Brush-tailed Rock Wallaby (Petrogale penicillata)

Goodfellow’s Tree Kangaroo (Dendrolagus goodfellowi)


Asiatic Elephant (Elephas maximus indicus)


Common Tree Shrew (Tupaia glis)


Cotton-top Tamarin (Sanguinus oedipus)

Black-handed Spider Monkey (Ateles geoffreyi)

Black-capped Squirrel Monkey (Saimiri boliviensis)

Common Squirrel Monkey (Saimiri sciureus)

De Brazza Monkey (Cercopithecus neglectus)

Francois Langur (Trachypithecus francoisi)

Muller’s Gibbon (Hylobates muelleri)

Silvery Gibbon (Hylobates moloch)

Western Lowland Gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla)

Sumatran Orangutan (Pongo abelii) - not sure if this is correct

Hybrid Orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus X P. abelii)

Chimpanzee (Pan paniscus)


Five-striped Palm Squirrel (Funambulus pennantii)

Red-rumped Agouti (Dasyprocta leporina)

Guinea Pig (Cavia porcellus)

Indian Crested Porcupine (Hystrix indica)

Rakali (Hydromys chrysogaster)

Spinifex Hopping Mouse (Notomys alexis)

Black Rat (Rattus rattus)

Plains Rat (Pseudomys australis)

Black-footed Tree Rat (Mesembriomys gouldii)

Greater Stick-nest Rat (Leporillus conditor)


European Rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus f. domesticus)


Grey-headed Flying Fox (Pteropus poliocephalus)

Ghost Bat (Macroderma gigas)


Sumatran Tiger (Panthera tigris sumatrae)

Snow Leopard (Panthera uncia)

African Lion (Panthera leo senegalensis)

Temminck’s Golden Cat (Catopuma temminckii)

Fishing Cat (Prionailurus viverrinus)

Binturong (Arctictis binturong)

Slender-tailed Meerkat (Suricata suricatta)

Dhole (Cuon alpinus)

Dingo (Canis dingo)

Fennec Fox (Vulpes zerda)

Sun Bear (Helarctos malayanus)

Kodiak Bear (Ursus arctos middendorffii)

Tasmanian Fur Seal (Arctocephalus pusillus doriferus)

Long-nosed Fur Seal (Arctocephalus forsteri)

Australian Sea Lion (Neophoca cinerea)

California Sea Lion (Zalophus californiaensis)

Leopard Seal (Hydrurga leptonyx)

Asian Small-clawed Otter (Aonyx cinereus)

Himalayan Red Panda (Ailurus fulgens)


Burchell’s Zebra (Equus quagga burchelli)

Hybrid Plains Zebra (Equus quagga)

Indian Rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis)

Brazilian Tapir (Tapirus terrestris)

Malayan Tapir (Tapirus indicus)


Domestic Pig (Sus scrofa f. domestica)

Collared Peccary (Pecari tajacu)

Pygmy Hippopotamus (Hexaprotodon liberiensis)

Chital Deer (Axis axis)

Hybrid Giraffe (Giraffa sp.)

Rothschild's Giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis camelopardalis)

Eastern Bongo (Tragelaphus eurycerus isaaci)

Domestic Sheep (Ovis aries)

Domestic Goat (Capra hircus aegagrus)

Barbary Sheep (Ammotragus lervia)

Himalayan Tahr (Hemitragus jemlahicus)

 

[Tiger91]

@Tiger91

Taronga's current species list again, mammals alone, there are still a few species (55 species on public display still on my count, however a fair number are some domestic mammal species, some could say too very marsupial heavy, but Taronga will (likely) always prioritise marsupial numbers being high which agree with, if could be balanced out with a 10-15% re-increase in exotic mammal species too would be great of course). True that is a fraction of its former collection number (expanding chosen remaining species exhibits a factor in phasing out others; however there are other things that seem pointless like mock supermarkets, mock airplane and cringey replica of a Sumatran villages that would make actual Sumatran villagers kind of annoyed/feel are being 'tokenised' to see am sure as one example of wasted space in an area of the zoo grounds - a few nice educational billboards would do the trick almost equally as well at 1% of the same space taken up. If one wants the real Sumatran village experience, a great place to see real actual villages.. is Sumatra, largely doable for many Australians to visit considering close proximity, albeit cost of living crisis very serious thing; anyway digressing):

current mammals species at the zoo:
Alpaca
Asian elephant
Asian small-clawed otter
Australian sea lion
Binturong
Bolivian squirrel monkey
Brush-tailed rock wallaby
California sea lion
Capybara
Common chimpanzee
Cotton-top tamarin
Dingo
Domestic goat
Domestic rabbit
Domestic sheep
Eastern/Barton's long-beaked echidna
Eastern bongo
Fat tailed dunnart
Feathertail glider
Fennec fox
Fishing cat
Francois' langur
Ghost bat
Giraffe
Goodfellow's tree-kangaroo
Greater bilby
Guinea pig
House mouse
Kangaroo Island (western) grey kangaroo
Lion
Long-nosed potoroo
Meerkat
Nepalese red panda
New Zealand fur seal
Northern koala
Plains zebra
Platypus
Pygmy hippopotamus
Quokka
Red kangaroo
Red-necked pademelon
Red-necked wallaby
Ring-tailed lemur
Rufous bettong
Short-beaked echidna
Southern hairy-nosed wombat
Spinifex hopping mouse
Sumatran tiger
Sun bear
Swamp wallaby
Tammar wallaby
Tasmanian devil
Western lowland gorilla
Western quoll
Yellow-bellied glider


Then looking back c.2008 thanks to Osedax's post:

And that there proves a poignant point. Take of anything native and anything domestic (its a zoo go to a farm yard or a childrens petting zoo at a market if you want to see them. but i digress) its 22ish mammal species for one of australias not only publicly funded but premiere zoos. Compared to over 40 back in the 2008 list. Thats a rediculosly small number, when you compare that to zoos of a similar size and calibre overseas. We now can import more species again, a lot could still be imported. There is no reason that an exotic zoo of its calibre has lost so many exotics. Yet in that time we have gained, high ropes, a new kids play area, numerous new cafes, an updated and expanded education precinct which they run courses out of, and a hotel with its own private animals and exhibits. Thats a lot of land, concrete and space lost from species that could be kept. For things that the zoo doesnt actually need that many of.

When i was a kid, Taronga was an actual zoo. You went to see animals, with a few cafes etc there. Now its an expensive shopping mal with a few exotic animals and a huge childrens petting zoo.

Yet how much space has taronga lost to areas used for humans, even looking at the map that has been updated and the zoo looks sparse.

 

[Zorro]

And that there proves a poignant point. Take of anything native and anything domestic (its a zoo go to a farm yard or a childrens petting zoo at a market if you want to see them. but i digress) its 22ish mammal species for one of australias not only publicly funded but premiere zoos. Compared to over 40 back in the 2008 list. Thats a rediculosly small number, when you compare that to zoos of a similar size and calibre overseas. We now can import more species again, a lot could still be imported. There is no reason that an exotic zoo of its calibre has lost so many exotics. Yet in that time we have gained, high ropes, a new kids play area, numerous new cafes, an updated and expanded education precinct which they run courses out of, and a hotel with its own private animals and exhibits. Thats a lot of land, concrete and space lost from species that could be kept. For things that the zoo doesnt actually need that many of.

When i was a kid, Taronga was an actual zoo. You went to see animals, with a few cafes etc there. Now its an expensive shopping mal with a few exotic animals and a huge childrens petting zoo.

Yet how much space has taronga lost to areas used for humans, even looking at the map that has been updated and the zoo looks sparse.

I believe a lot of this stems from not hiring the right kind of "managers" many lack a real understanding of animals in general but are hired more as "bean counters" and because of the lack of real animal savvy hire consultants to come up with ideas that really anyone taking up this roll should have a good understanding themselves.

 

[Tiger91]

I believe a lot of this stems from not hiring the right kind of "managers" many lack a real understanding of animals in general but are hired more as "bean counters" and because of the lack of real animal savvy hire consultants to come up with ideas that really anyone taking up this roll should have a good understanding themselves.

I agree, it would be good to get some zoo management that is species and collection focused rather then business focused. I still think that the current director is a prime example of someone who is more worried about visitor experiences and would be better suited to a theme park. Then an actual zoo. All majour developments under his leadership have been very light on species and large on non zoo things for visitors.
The collection as whole seems to lack direction. It would be good to see them take that back again and start having a direction for the zoos collection on native and exotic animals, led by managers who are collection focused.

The zoo can't house gibbons but can expand the wild ropes course. Is backyard to bush actually still needed. The landscape of how we get food, how its produced and where it comes from as well as the general publics perception of this is drastically more advanced now then the 20odd years ago that it was built. Thats a lot of prime zoo land for a petting zoo and a few species of arachnid/insects that the general public see regularly. I have never seen this part of the zoo busy except for when there is baby farm animals or interaction with them.

 

[steveroberts]

@Tiger91


Since returning to the zoo last month have been contemplating what if the zoo ever considered to utilise this area at the zoo for animal housing:

*source: Google Maps

that although is a grass area with good view down to the harbour and has a gazebo, there is a neighbouring grass area for visitors which itself neighbours Bird Show ampitheatre. When you mentioned the phase out of the zoo's (WC) Gibbons last year had thought perhaps the site outlined here could be a suitable space for Gibbons to return to the zoo, or another species, perhaps several sharing a habitat. As far as can make out it is one of the few remaining sites at the zoo that wouldnt involve having to remove too many planted trees and plants in order to make it an animal habitat (well trees would naturally want to be part of the habitat anyway given importance of naturalistic settings).

There is also the area just south of the Elephant Temple + former exhibit area, Tamarin Island, former Crocodile exhibit and Concert Lawn/west of 'Backyard to Bush' area and east of the path down to the ferry via Moore Park Aviary and Old Aquarium building and the GSO and Seal Theatre area (this general area: Google Maps something in the 6,400 sq m area size). But the Concert Lawn concert lawn and few other small buildings seem to be what would complicate the idea of using + a lot of well planted trees and foliage which if could be transplanted without fatally harming any of with arborist/botanists/horticultural experts with which trees can remain and be part of hypothetical animal habitat exhibits and others could be replanted somewhere behind-the-scenes area of the grounds perhaps..unfortunately am personally inclined to think the answer would say a No to the idea pretty much. But thought maybe 'float; the idea here anyway.

*also if the zoo decides it was time to close down 'Backyard to Bush' some year in the near future: the rehousing of the SHN Wombats, SB Echidnas and Quokkas being the species believe they and we would advocate to keep at the zoo, that would give potential further space, possibly about 6,600 sq m more.

 

[Zoofan15]

@Tiger91


Since returning to the zoo last month have been contemplating what if the zoo ever considered to utilise this area at the zoo for animal housing:

*source: Google Maps

that although is a grass area with good view down to the harbour and has a gazebo, there is a neighbouring grass area for visitors which itself neighbours Bird Show ampitheatre. When you mentioned the phase out of the zoo's (WC) Gibbons last year had thought perhaps the site outlined here could be a suitable space for Gibbons to return to the zoo, or another species, perhaps several sharing a habitat. As far as can make out it is one of the few remaining sites at the zoo that wouldnt involve having to remove too many planted trees and plants in order to make it an animal habitat (well trees would naturally want to be part of the habitat anyway given importance of naturalistic settings).

There is also the area just south of the Elephant Temple + former exhibit area, Tamarin Island, former Crocodile exhibit and Concert Lawn/west of 'Backyard to Bush' area and east of the path down to the ferry via Moore Park Aviary and Old Aquarium building and the GSO and Seal Theatre area (this general area: Google Maps something in the 6,400 sq m area size). But the Concert Lawn concert lawn and few other small buildings seem to be what would complicate the idea of using + a lot of well planted trees and foliage which if could be transplanted without fatally harming any of with arborist/botanists/horticultural experts with which trees can remain and be part of hypothetical animal habitat exhibits and others could be replanted somewhere behind-the-scenes area of the grounds perhaps..unfortunately am personally inclined to think the answer would say a No to the idea pretty much. But thought maybe 'float; the idea here anyway.

*also if the zoo decides it was time to close down 'Backyard to Bush' some year in the near future: the rehousing of the SHN Wombats, SB Echidnas and Quokkas being the species believe they and we would advocate to keep at the zoo, that would give potential further space, possibly about 6,600 sq m more.

It would be great to see both those two vacant areas utilised. Like you say, the terrain and vegetation likely make it a non-starter; but if it were possible to clear it and work with the terrain, then certainly. Overseas, our imaginations could really run wild with cliff dwelling species like Gelada; but their Australasian zoo equivalent - the Hamadryas baboon, would surely feel at home on such terrain (the first area you identified being suitable for a small to medium troop). Gibbon, being mostly aboreal, would also be unphased like you mention, so great idea.

Backyard to Bush to Taronga is like Growing Wild to Melbourne. We all would like to see it scrapped (with the species you mention retained in the collection where possible). Like GW, engagement with BTB wasn’t on the level of the other exhibits (across all age brackets) on my visit.

 

[Tiger91]

@Tiger91


Since returning to the zoo last month have been contemplating what if the zoo ever considered to utilise this area at the zoo for animal housing:

*source: Google Maps

that although is a grass area with good view down to the harbour and has a gazebo, there is a neighbouring grass area for visitors which itself neighbours Bird Show ampitheatre. When you mentioned the phase out of the zoo's (WC) Gibbons last year had thought perhaps the site outlined here could be a suitable space for Gibbons to return to the zoo, or another species, perhaps several sharing a habitat. As far as can make out it is one of the few remaining sites at the zoo that wouldnt involve having to remove too many planted trees and plants in order to make it an animal habitat (well trees would naturally want to be part of the habitat anyway given importance of naturalistic settings).

There is also the area just south of the Elephant Temple + former exhibit area, Tamarin Island, former Crocodile exhibit and Concert Lawn/west of 'Backyard to Bush' area and east of the path down to the ferry via Moore Park Aviary and Old Aquarium building and the GSO and Seal Theatre area (this general area: Google Maps something in the 6,400 sq m area size). But the Concert Lawn concert lawn and few other small buildings seem to be what would complicate the idea of using + a lot of well planted trees and foliage which if could be transplanted without fatally harming any of with arborist/botanists/horticultural experts with which trees can remain and be part of hypothetical animal habitat exhibits and others could be replanted somewhere behind-the-scenes area of the grounds perhaps..unfortunately am personally inclined to think the answer would say a No to the idea pretty much. But thought maybe 'float; the idea here anyway.

*also if the zoo decides it was time to close down 'Backyard to Bush' some year in the near future: the rehousing of the SHN Wombats, SB Echidnas and Quokkas being the species believe they and we would advocate to keep at the zoo, that would give potential further space, possibly about 6,600 sq m more.

These are good ideas!.
Some of the lawns are of memory heritage listed, they havent changed since the zoo opened. Which is a good thing to keep. These are the places they should concentrate retaurants/food/beverages around and kids play areas. The views are fantastic, and it would free up other areas for development. If they were to move the tortoise up closer to ARC, i dont think they have any andean condor anymore, or if so are they still on display?. That would free up a quite large area of land as you stated. At one point it was slated to be developed into an elephant exhibit expansion. Now the zoo no longer houses elephants an expansion into orangutan/gibbons would be a fantastic use of the space.

However the current trend at Taronga i wouldn't expect them to be developed for anything animal related sadly. For the first time in a while the map actually has a fair amount of unused space between exhibits. Which is sad, when you think taronga has steep terrain something that would lend itself well to primates especially with mesh exhibits. Which is a theme they are using and looks quite good at the moment. They could easily incorporate the large trees without removing them.

 

[Tiger91]

Backyard to Bush to Taronga is like Growing Wild to Melbourne. We all would like to see it scrapped (with the species you mention retained in the collection where possible). Like GW, engagement with BTB wasn’t on the level of the other exhibits (across all age brackets) on my visit.

Originally it was built because to many people living in cities had lost a sense of where food comes from. I remeber in 2010 at uni listening to a keeper talk about how adults were surprised to see milk was coming from. So back in that time period it was deemed necessary. It did indeed have a much higher guest engagement. However times have changed very rapidly, people are far more aware of food, there are far more food intolerances and vegan people around. The general public is much, much more aware of these things. Which takes BTB main attraction out of it.

It is close to Nura Diya, it would be nice to see the aussie natives retained and exhibits added at the back of Nura Diya added to them. But then it leaves a large area of BTB that could be redeveloped. If you look at BTB and the surrounding area, you could easily build the new gorilla complex, and then new pygmy hippo enclosures in that area and the surrounding areas, including the area Steve outlined above. Bonus points the gorillas and hippo can stay put while its developed and the development is basically for the most part out of the way.

If the zoo wished to retain a petting zoo. There is space around the tree tops area or where they currently keep the sheep in the old aussie exhibit area to have small one. But is it really needed, are kids learning about conservation and getting engagment with exotic animals if they are playing with barnyard animals.