Houston Zoo Houston Zoo News 2020

Whereas I do understand the rationale for AZA and its target species conservation breeding programs, I am no supporter of any phase out where almost over night the species of which individuals are still living in captivity become worthless and are (then) neglected to the point their biological needs (of which reproduction is one) are ignored forthwith.

Why in these instances does the policy phase out fail where individual of any such species on target phase out are then not transferred to other regional zoo associations where the species would be of benefit as well as a possible desired target species. You are effectively condemning these to functional extinction (which happens in nature only when only individuals of one sex remain and no options are available in the wilds to find mates of the opposite sex and fulfilling the biological life path to reproduce and care for the next generation(s).

While I will absolutely not deny that many phase-outs and general handling of populations within AZA facilities have not always historically been handled in best practice. Some major, shameful mistakes have been made and many facilities and programs are still dealing with those consequences. That said, I think that it is a rather harsh and unfair blanket statement to say that the animals in a phase-out population are considered worthless overnight or that they are suddenly forgotten about or neglected-- I think you would find that that statement would not fall well on the ears of any staff member caring for any of these animals. I can assure you that those animals are still receiving the same level of care as any other animals in the collection, even if they are no longer "valuable" to the collection's future. Many of the animals that find themselves in these situations are older individuals that are past breeding age anyways (whether or not they were kept out of breeding situations historically is another question, but unfortunately, what is done, is done--- see mismanagement referenced above). If the animals are still of breeding age, most facilities will try to place them in breeding situations outside of the AZA. For example, a large number of ungulates that have and are being phased out of the AZA are sent out to breeding situations in the private sector. Lowland tapir are rather common and are breeding in the private sector. The very few left in the AZA, with the exception of Brookfield's pair, are all well advanced in age.The facility at which I work is currently home to a small herd of common eland, that while they are not a phase-out species in the AZA, they are a phase-out species at our facility. These animals, including two elderly individuals, are still receiving the same level of care as the rest of our animals, even though we are not breeding them any longer and are looking to phase-out the species. We are still as vigilant with their health and well-being as we are with our "extremely valuable" animals. We have been slowly but surely placing our breeding age animals at other facilities where they will be able to continue breeding-- eland just aren't the easiest animals to place, so it has been a few at a time.
 
@Kudu21, we might disagree here. I have seen a few too many fine ex situ conservation breeding programs collapse when goal posts and focus were changed to different species and the species designated on "phase out" were consequently put off breeding recommendations and the captive populations suffered over time in terms of sex/age structures to the point where repair was almost impossible to achieve or never came to pass again (e.g. kulan, lion-tailed macaque, Javan langur, mountain tapir, pygmy hippo, sun bear, Amur leopard et cetera).

While I can see an organisation like AZA TAG (or any other regional zoo organisation for that matter) cannot take on 5 tapir species all at once when several species are vying for the restricted space positions. However, it is quite another issue how to dispose of the now no longer wanted captive stock. Transferring animals out (Tapirus terrestris) to the private sector is in my view not the best method for disposal. It is clear that the few elderly individuals left should never be subjected to any transfer out for quality of life issues with transport.

I am just observing that even now too often than not, - and this is not restricted to North American region per se - when the regional organisations loose interest in a given species the old stock just gets neglected in terms of population and is disposed off via the private sector or even in worse for wear collections or the slaughterhouse/knack (e.g. in US itself the sell off of f.e. kulan onto the commercial market).

South American tapir Tapirus terrestris may or may not have had a South American regional studbook, yet the captive population in US/Canada might have been of much interest to zoos in the ALPZA region. That would require an in-depth analysis of the AZA stock prior to disposal to third parties. I wonder if that exercise did come to pass (I am afraid the answer will be a familiar one here).
 
Last edited:
@Kifaru Bwana — I do not think we fully disagree, I just don’t think we’re on the same page. I will be the first to admit that historically many populations and programs have been terribly mismanaged, absolutely. Believe you me. We have lost numerous species (especially ungulates) for terrible excuses of reasons, and yes, many of these animals did not end up in good situations. And of course, there are absolutely still programs being horribly mismanaged. My point, however, was that I believe that current phase-outs are being handled much more professionally as management styles change and views evolve than a lot of previous ones were. For example, there is one species that is currently slated for phase-out after continued ill success that’s population is currently being consolidated to continue breeding, if possible, and to prepare for eventual export to Europe to join the program for the species there. I also do not think you could claim that these hold-over animals are being neglected or forgotten about. As a keeper, that claim just doesn’t sit well with me.
As for the lowland tapir, I do not know how many existed in the AZA population before animals began to shift into the private sector, but the current private sector population is quite large (a certain facility known for its large groups of tropical ungulates has upwards of 20), and a lot of these private sector facilities are non-AZA zoos that are still open to the public and hopefully, possibly, inspiring guests to be interested in tapirs. While, in an ideal world, perhaps, shipping off dozens, let’s say, of tapirs to facilities in South America might have been a better option, but logistically, I’m not sure how feasible that would have been. How much would that have cost for facilities with already low operating budgets? How much stress would that have placed on the animals? How many would have survived? Unfortunately the business and science of keeping animals in human care does not often allow for the ideal outcome.
 
While Baird's tapirs are not, lowland tapirs are and are an important part of the ecosystem. Lowland tapirs are of a lesser conservation concern and are a phase-out species within the AZA, so it makes sense to use the more endangered species with a growing populations and SSP as a stand-in. You can still tell the same story even if the species is not 100% accurate. Would you rather there not been a tapir species at all than the wrong one? This is very similar to how Amur leopards are used as stand-ins for (most often) African leopards in African exhibits, or how the Cervid TAG was pushing for non-subspecific wapiti to be replaced with Bactrian deer in North American exhibits (unfortunately, this did not catch on. It would have been nice to see this species spread).

I'm not sure I see the justification for your touchy tone or the point of your question (the one I bolded), since I had already said it would be fine to have the of-range Bairds tapir species in the exhibit, I just find the manner in which they highlighted it given the specific geographical focus of the exhibit to be incongruous.
 
I'm not sure I see the justification for your touchy tone or the point of your question (the one I bolded), since I had already said it would be fine to have the of-range Bairds tapir species in the exhibit, I just find the manner in which they highlighted it given the specific geographical focus of the exhibit to be incongruous.
My apologies if that is how my response read to you, but I can assure you that it was never my attention to come off as touchy or condescending. It was only my intention to provide explanation and encourage people to take a step back from minute details and look at the broader picture of the situation. This is not specifically directed towards you by any means, but many people on this site are quick to get hung up on "Why didn't they do X, Y, or Z" without taking into consideration that there is so much more that goes into zoos, exhibitry, and keeping animals in human care than is initially apparent at face value. To respond to the latter part of your post, why wouldn't they highlight them though? We've covered why they're there and how they're serving as stand-ins, but at the end of the day, tapirs are large and charismatic creatures that are undoubtedly highlights of the exhibit. Visitors are going to love them. Why not highlight them? Why not draw in that attention and build that excitement?
 
Had seen on Twitter that they recently completed renovations for their Orangutan exhibit as seen in the tweet here https://twitter.com/houstonzoo/status/1329526224423702529?s=21

and they tagged a blog from the Houston Zoo about adding a moat as well as some turtle species as well :)
Home Makeover: Orangutan Edition, The Houston Zoo

The renovation has added tall shade structures and there are man-made tree branches and vines that have improved the aesthetic of the habitat. The overhauled exhibit looks far more natural now, which is terrific, but I'm surprised at the lack of opportunities for the orangutans to gain some height in the enclosure. Only one of the zoo's four orangutans is of a young age, which makes me wonder if the exhibit is going to contain orangutans in the long-term. On a side note, the large turtle species in the moat are sometimes just as entertaining for visitors as the apes!

Here is what the orangutan exhibit looked like in 2015:

full


full
 
Oh wow that’s definitely different compared to the renovation. Perhaps they kept in mind for their larger orangutans which tend to stay closer to the floor per the video in the tweet or just a miscalculation on their behalf :oops:
 
Had seen on Twitter that they recently completed renovations for their Orangutan exhibit as seen in the tweet here https://twitter.com/houstonzoo/status/1329526224423702529?s=21

and they tagged a blog from the Houston Zoo about adding a moat as well as some turtle species as well :)
Home Makeover: Orangutan Edition, The Houston Zoo
Creative way for exhibiting turtle species: Yellow-headed temple turtles, Malaysian giant pond turtles, Fly River turtles, and painted turtles!
 
huh, the exhibit he moved into was originally a pygmy hippo habitat 20 years ago when the zoo had a pair for a few years. They left a long time ago and it was re-adapted into the tapir exhibit, and now it's full circle.

Hippos and the Houston Zoo have been a long fraught history. Where the Okapi exhibit it now used to be a hippo house, kind of an indoor pit or a pool that had a ramp where they could walk outside to eat (barely visible). This was demolished in the mid-90s or so; then the pygmy hippos arrived in the early 2000s. African Forest phase 3 was supposed to be hippos and crocodiles but it appears that may be scrapped at this time as the master plan is re-evaluated and changing.
 
Yesterday they unveiled their newest member, a 450-pound male pygmy hippopotamus named Silas who moved there from Omaha, NE. His paddock is across from the Ankole cattle.
It has been said a few times that the AZA pygmy hippo conservation breeding would expand significantly over the next few years. It seems that Houston Zoo has come full circle: I would say okapi, pygmy hippo, gorilla ... Central Africa theme (possible future)?
 
A recap of some of the births at Houston Zoo this year:

Meet all the adorable babies born at the Houston Zoo in 2020

0.1 Giant anteater (March 31)
1.0 Schmidt’s red-tailed monkey (April 10)
1.0 Asian elephant (May 12)
Three Madagascar lesser hedgehog tenrecs (June 16)
0.1 Okapi (July 19)
2.1 Bongos (July 21, July 29 and August 15)
Two Santa Catalina Island rattlesnakes (Fall)
40 Bornean eared frogs (Fall)
Howler monkey (November 17)
 
Back
Top