It’s Up To You....

[ThylacineAlive]

Surely it should? Are there not many NYC billionaires, itching to donate?

Not to the extent of San Diego or Omaha I don't think. I'm sure they do, though, but remember just that those donations are going to be split up a lot more than at other zoos.

~Thylo

 

[jayjds2]

It’d be great to read your thoughts on these places... Akron’s new developments in particular...

I’ve actually been planning on getting a travel thread together - not just on this trip, but on a lot of American zoos as a whole I’ve visited over the last few years, exploring the merits of zoos many glance over. The zoos a tier below your San Diegos and Bronxes. However, I tend to lack motivation for travel threads. Perhaps if I can find the time later this summer. I have time now, perhaps I’ll start drafting something...

As for today: Akron I had not visited before and I found to be very nice. A complaint I have is the layout was a tad confusing at first. I really enjoyed the zoo and wish it was bigger. The African area wasn’t too memorable, but by no means bad. I really enjoyed Komodo Kingdom and Curious Creatures. The zoo as a whole felt like a mini Columbus - same general atmosphere and style of exhibits, I felt. And good exhibits, too!

Cleveland I’ve visited once before, in 2011. Needless to say, much has changed. Definitely for the better! The collection’s a bit diminished (Potto a notable loss) but plenty of highlights: Persian onager, golden-bellied mangabey, and others. Lacking a bit in non-mammals, though. Seeing wild peregrine falcons on zoo grounds was great. Asian Highlands and the Tiger Passage were great. Primates, Cats, and Aquatics wasn’t as bad as I expected it to be. My main gripe is lack of outdoor space - but with two or three adjacent exhibits for most of the species to reside in, space is at least not the issue it once was.

The crocodile enclosure in particular surely is something... The Fossa enclosure on the other hand is roughly the same size as Omaha's, but also a little taller I believe. As for the sifaka and ruffed lemurs, the latter enclosure is pretty long and also very tall, with the animals being able to fully access the entire vertical space. The sifaka enclosure is also very tall, but it is pretty narrow. Conversely, the mouse lemur habitat is probably my least favorite, though I still do think it's fine for their animals.

What puts the nail in the coffin for these is the lack of outdoor space and not very well replicated climates (which the ring-tailed lemur exhibit does well imo). The mouse lemur exhibit I like only because it has mouse lemurs - but it’s my least favorite of the three exhibits I’ve seen for the species.

As for criticism, I reread what my friend was telling me about Night Hunters, and I think I misinterpreted them a bit. I think they were saying the larger mixed habitats are half-empty now as a lot of inhabitants have gone but the zoo has not actively been filling in those spaces. As for my other criticisms, unfortunately the state of the hoofstock enclosure-- specifically the spatial issues-- are accurate, as is the dwindling state of the bird department.* Then there's the reptile house.. Of course, the zoo does have its shining stars. Manatee Springs in particular is one of my personal favorite exhibits I've ever seen.

The aardvark exhibit is the main victim of this - no Indian fruit bats or greater bushbabies to be seen. The entire exhibit was empty apart from the aardvark itself, wedged of course in its den. Night Hunters as a whole isn’t great - only three exhibits even have substrate, and in two of those three (each home to potto) it won’t be used, as they are arboreal. The rest is mock rock and concrete, time and time again, with many exhibits simply being too small for their inhabitants. For reasons I can’t understand, the binturongs and clouded leopard switched exhibits, and for the latter its holding is barely appropriate.