Minnesota Zoo Minnesota Zoo News 2020

lintworm said:
Every serious zoo professional should (and probably does) think about ethics. Ethics is about more then whether captivity is right/wrong. It is also about how you present, keep and treat animals and the relationship humans have with animals.
Click to expand...
I agree completely with what you say here. However the article simply stated many zoo professionals question the ethics of keeping animals in captivity (implying some think there should not be captive animals at all). It said nothing about them thinking about HOW animals should be kept in captivity.
 
The Minnesota Zoo was mentioned by Governor Tim Walz in a press conference today where he cited the zoo's immediate need for funds from a bonding bill or else the zoo may need to close permanently and send its animals to other facilities.

Minnesota Zoo director John Frawley stated: "Our anticipated losses are going to be $6.3 million ... plus we've used all of our reserves and any dollars we had on our books. As of the end of June, we'll have depleted all of the resources at the zoo."

Since the Minnesota Zoo is a state agency, they were not eligible for federal stimulus support such as the Payment Protection Program. It seems as though there needs to be support from the House minority which may make the bonding bill (and thus the fate of the Minnesota Zoo) contingent on the governor ending his emergency powers.

Summary of the following article:
Walz: Minnesota Zoo on the brink of closure without funding from legislature
 
Sotolo said:
The Minnesota Zoo was mentioned by Governor Tim Walz in a press conference today where he cited the zoo's immediate need for funds from a bonding bill or else the zoo may need to close permanently and send its animals to other facilities.

Minnesota Zoo director John Frawley stated: "Our anticipated losses are going to be $6.3 million ... plus we've used all of our reserves and any dollars we had on our books. As of the end of June, we'll have depleted all of the resources at the zoo."

Since the Minnesota Zoo is a state agency, they were not eligible for federal stimulus support such as the Payment Protection Program. It seems as though there needs to be support from the House minority which may make the bonding bill (and thus the fate of the Minnesota Zoo) contingent on the governor ending his emergency powers.

Summary of the following article:
Walz: Minnesota Zoo on the brink of closure without funding from legislature
Click to expand...
It demonstrates that the PPP program is a rather weak formula to foregoes many facilities' outside the "hard economy" either in the realm of non profits or not for profit establishments that require back up funding to be able to operate and provide their societal functions adequately. A failure by State and Federal Govt.
 
The Minnesota Zoo needs money, there is no doubt about that. But wouldn't they need less money if they were allowed to open. Many zoos across the world are reopening now, why not Minnesota?
 
birdsandbats said:
The Minnesota Zoo needs money, there is no doubt about that. But wouldn't they need less money if they were allowed to open. Many zoos across the world are reopening now, why not Minnesota?
Click to expand...

Individual state government's decide what can and cannot reopen and when.

Being open would not guarantee that the financial burden would be lightened, however, it all depends on visitation numbers. If a large number of people do not flock out to revisit the zoo within the initial weeks/months of its reopening, they may lose further money still due to having to increase their workforce and their hours in order to cater to the public. Currently most if not all workers who are not essential animal caregivers will have been furloughed or laid off entirely. For the zoo to reopen, most of these people will have to be brought back in preparation, which costs a lot of money.

~Thylo
 
birdsandbats said:
The Minnesota Zoo needs money, there is no doubt about that. But wouldn't they need less money if they were allowed to open. Many zoos across the world are reopening now, why not Minnesota?
Click to expand...
When you do ignore a public health issue.

But where you put life on lockdown then there is a societal requirement of duty of care and funding should be forthcoming for those institutions outside the traditional economy, ... if you wish for a healthy, inclusive and engaging society.

At the moment the State Minnesota has around 31,000 positive cases (works out around 550 per 100,000) and around 1,350 deaths ascribed directly to COVID-19. So, it ain't over till the fat lady sings.
Source: Tracking Covid-19 cases in the US

I was wondering how the issue is viewed locally in the case of zoos as public places deserving of public support?
 
birdsandbats said:
The Minnesota Zoo needs money, there is no doubt about that. But wouldn't they need less money if they were allowed to open.
Click to expand...

No, they would still need the same amount - the $6 million they've already lost. The director said they need that money *in order to* reopen, not instead of reopening. If the state doesn't recoup those losses they won't be able to themselves in enough time, open or not.
 
From the local/public perspective, I don't see this conversation being a very positive one, honestly. The Minnesota Zoo has consistently been in the news throughout the years for budget issues/needing funding for updates. Most famously/recently when they insured the public and government that the Dolphins would come back after they renovated their tanks and then announced they decided not to bring them back once they had secured the funding. From what I know this lack of funding is largely due to the state consistently cutting the amount of funding they give to the zoo, so it has created a cycle where the zoo needs more money and they are asking the state for it.

To compound this fact, as I have brought up previously in this thread, the Minnesota Zoo does not have nearly as much good will with the public as the other zoo in the Twin Cities, Como Zoo. The general public does not understand how Como can be free to enter, while the MN Zoo has what are viewed as high admission and $7 for parking. On top of that, many people view Como as the better zoo (as ridiculous as that sounds to us ZooChatters) because they have the big ABC animals that people want to see, while MN is noticeably lacking in that area.

Additionally, as I have said before in this thread, the other issue is the fact that the zoo is State funded instead of locally funded. It is really hard to get backing for bills to fund the zoo, because legislators from Greater Minnesota (outside the Metro) to agree to it. Many of them don't see the zoo as beneficial to the people they represent that often live 2+ hours away.

In summation, the fact they are asking for funding scares me and it could be a problem.

EDIT: For context, I live about 5 minutes from the MN Zoo, so I would be considered as local as it gets.
 
Sotolo said:
The Minnesota Zoo was mentioned by Governor Tim Walz in a press conference today where he cited the zoo's immediate need for funds from a bonding bill or else the zoo may need to close permanently and send its animals to other facilities.

Minnesota Zoo director John Frawley stated: "Our anticipated losses are going to be $6.3 million ... plus we've used all of our reserves and any dollars we had on our books. As of the end of June, we'll have depleted all of the resources at the zoo."

Since the Minnesota Zoo is a state agency, they were not eligible for federal stimulus support such as the Payment Protection Program. It seems as though there needs to be support from the House minority which may make the bonding bill (and thus the fate of the Minnesota Zoo) contingent on the governor ending his emergency powers.

Summary of the following article:
Walz: Minnesota Zoo on the brink of closure without funding from legislature
Click to expand...
I desperately hope the Minnesota Zoo does not close. They have many species I would like to see that are not often found in other zoos. If it closes, I will miss out on ever seeing this zoo.
 
NSU42 said:
From the local/public perspective, I don't see this conversation being a very positive one, honestly. The Minnesota Zoo has consistently been in the news throughout the years for budget issues/needing funding for updates. Most famously/recently when they insured the public and government that the Dolphins would come back after they renovated their tanks and then announced they decided not to bring them back once they had secured the funding. From what I know this lack of funding is largely due to the state consistently cutting the amount of funding they give to the zoo, so it has created a cycle where the zoo needs more money and they are asking the state for it.

To compound this fact, as I have brought up previously in this thread, the Minnesota Zoo does not have nearly as much good will with the public as the other zoo in the Twin Cities, Como Zoo. The general public does not understand how Como can be free to enter, while the MN Zoo has what are viewed as high admission and $7 for parking. On top of that, many people view Como as the better zoo (as ridiculous as that sounds to us ZooChatters) because they have the big ABC animals that people want to see, while MN is noticeably lacking in that area.

Additionally, as I have said before in this thread, the other issue is the fact that the zoo is State funded instead of locally funded. It is really hard to get backing for bills to fund the zoo, because legislators from Greater Minnesota (outside the Metro) to agree to it. Many of them don't see the zoo as beneficial to the people they represent that often live 2+ hours away.

In summation, the fact they are asking for funding scares me and it could be a problem.

EDIT: For context, I live about 5 minutes from the MN Zoo, so I would be considered as local as it gets.
Click to expand...

Also, the Minnesota Zoo is probably not seen as the most important matter since there has been a push for getting funds to rebuild areas in the Twin Cities that were damaged during the protests and COVID-19.

I'm not familiar with the protocols that the AZA has (or at least I assume they have) for members going under and ensuring that animals in SSPs are handled correctly. However, I'm wondering whether such procedures can be followed effectively at these times, and what effect it would have on other AZA members who may face increased costs with housing animals from the Minnesota Zoo should it go under when those members are facing their own budget problems. Thankfully for other members, the Minnesota Zoo doesn't have mega herbivores such as elephants or hippos, but I imagine that it wouldn't be easy to find the room necessary for the Minnesota Zoo's collection throughout the rest of the AZA's members. I'd be happy to know from those who knows more. (This bit of thought may be going a bit further down the COVID-19 affect on zoos and aquariums thread.)
 
Coelacanth18 said:
No, they would still need the same amount - the $6 million they've already lost. The director said they need that money *in order to* reopen, not instead of reopening. If the state doesn't recoup those losses they won't be able to themselves in enough time, open or not.
Click to expand...
Ah, that makes sense.
 
NSU42 said:
From the local/public perspective, I don't see this conversation being a very positive one, honestly. The Minnesota Zoo has consistently been in the news throughout the years for budget issues/needing funding for updates. Most famously/recently when they insured the public and government that the Dolphins would come back after they renovated their tanks and then announced they decided not to bring them back once they had secured the funding. From what I know this lack of funding is largely due to the state consistently cutting the amount of funding they give to the zoo, so it has created a cycle where the zoo needs more money and they are asking the state for it.

To compound this fact, as I have brought up previously in this thread, the Minnesota Zoo does not have nearly as much good will with the public as the other zoo in the Twin Cities, Como Zoo. The general public does not understand how Como can be free to enter, while the MN Zoo has what are viewed as high admission and $7 for parking. On top of that, many people view Como as the better zoo (as ridiculous as that sounds to us ZooChatters) because they have the big ABC animals that people want to see, while MN is noticeably lacking in that area.

Additionally, as I have said before in this thread, the other issue is the fact that the zoo is State funded instead of locally funded. It is really hard to get backing for bills to fund the zoo, because legislators from Greater Minnesota (outside the Metro) to agree to it. Many of them don't see the zoo as beneficial to the people they represent that often live 2+ hours away.

In summation, the fact they are asking for funding scares me and it could be a problem.

EDIT: For context, I live about 5 minutes from the MN Zoo, so I would be considered as local as it gets.
Click to expand...

Having read the article now, the one thing I'd say that makes me a little hopeful they will at least get this money is the fact that the money is burried in the middle of a $2.6 billion bonding bill. Obviously, the House could strike that part when its brought to the floor or the Senate, but I feel like it's a little less likely because it is part of a much larger bill. My prediction though is that the House will pass all of the bill, but it will then get tied up in the Senate because the parties differ in what they want. MN's House is controlled by the Democrats, while the Senate is controlled by the Republicans.
 
NSU42 said:
Having read the article now, the one thing I'd say that makes me a little hopeful they will at least get this money is the fact that the money is burried in the middle of a $2.6 billion bonding bill. Obviously, the House could strike that part when its brought to the floor or the Senate, but I feel like it's a little less likely because it is part of a much larger bill. My prediction though is that the House will pass all of the bill, but it will then get tied up in the Senate because the parties differ in what they want. MN's House is controlled by the Democrats, while the Senate is controlled by the Republicans.
Click to expand...

This would be a likely case case if we were not talking about a bonding bill. Instead of a majority in each chamber like typical legislation (34 of 67 seats in the senate and I assume double both numerator and denominator for the house), bonding bills require 3/5 of the vote (41 of the 67 seats in the senate). The DFL have 75 seats of the 134 possible in the house, so they do not have the 81 or 82 needed to pass a bonding bill unilaterally. The DFL are going to have to bargain with Republican Party in both chambers of the legislature. Although the governor wants around 2.2 to 2.6 billion, the Senate majority leader has stated that they're only willing to go up to 1.37 billion.

The bonding bill will need to be cut a lot if one can even passes, since their attempt in May stalled as well. The Minnesota Zoo may not be asking for much of that total feasible ceiling, but it may be one of the easier things to leave out (especially for senators in districts multiple hours away from the Twin Cities).

Sources:

https://mnsrt.com/resources/Pictures/How Bill becomes law flow chart.pdf (From the perspective of the senate, I had a better source, but I couldn't find it this evening. That's why my counts for the house are a bit uncertain.)

'The time to invest is now': Walz proposes $2.2B bonding bill as part of special session priority to build a stronger, more equitable economy
 
Sotolo said:
This would be a likely case case if we were not talking about a bonding bill. Instead of a majority in each chamber like typical legislation (34 of 67 seats in the senate and I assume double both numerator and denominator for the house), bonding bills require 3/5 of the vote (41 of the 67 seats in the senate). The DFL have 75 seats of the 134 possible in the house, so they do not have the 81 or 82 needed to pass a bonding bill unilaterally. The DFL are going to have to bargain with Republican Party in both chambers of the legislature. Although the governor wants around 2.2 to 2.6 billion, the Senate majority leader has stated that they're only willing to go up to 1.37 billion.

The bonding bill will need to be cut a lot if one can even passes, since their attempt in May stalled as well. The Minnesota Zoo may not be asking for much of that total feasible ceiling, but it may be one of the easier things to leave out (especially for senators in districts multiple hours away from the Twin Cities).

Sources:

https://mnsrt.com/resources/Pictures/How Bill becomes law flow chart.pdf (From the perspective of the senate, I had a better source, but I couldn't find it this evening. That's why my counts for the house are a bit uncertain.)

'The time to invest is now': Walz proposes $2.2B bonding bill as part of special session priority to build a stronger, more equitable economy
Click to expand...

100% agree. I didn't even think about the fact they needed 3/5 and not a simple majority for a bonding bill. That definitely does make things more difficult. The zoo funding is absolutely one of the easier things to cut. That and Education (sigh). I'm a teacher and most of us are preparing for what seems inevitable to us. The lack of tax revenue during the pandemic is going to lead to budget cuts in education.
 
It seems as though the Minnesota Zoo, while asking for funds from the legislature, revealed what they've been working on to get guests back to the zoo. The Beastly Boulevard will allow visitors to ride in their vehicles through a portion of the Northern Trail starting with the Takins and exiting through the Wells Fargo Family Farm. Those familiar with the layout will recognize that this is almost entirely ungulates excluding the dhole and prairie dog exhibits. The Zoo has set up a website with an extensive FAQ and videos about the tour (which lasts about 30 minutes). Tickets are bought online with a limit of 500 cars a day from 10 AM to 3 PM. This event will last from June 24th to July 5th. Their website does not currently list the price yet from what I can tell.

Drive Through Zoo - Minnesota Zoo

There was also an interview with state representative John Hunt talking about the possibility of the zoo closing. I have not been to get the radio segment to play on their website, but I've linked to it below.

Rep. John Huot: Minnesota Zoo Closing?
 
Sotolo said:
It seems as though the Minnesota Zoo, while asking for funds from the legislature, revealed what they've been working on to get guests back to the zoo. The Beastly Boulevard will allow visitors to ride in their vehicles through a portion of the Northern Trail starting with the Takins and exiting through the Wells Fargo Family Farm. Those familiar with the layout will recognize that this is almost entirely ungulates excluding the dhole and prairie dog exhibits. The Zoo has set up a website with an extensive FAQ and videos about the tour (which lasts about 30 minutes). Tickets are bought online with a limit of 500 cars a day from 10 AM to 3 PM. This event will last from June 24th to July 5th. Their website does not currently list the price yet from what I can tell.

Drive Through Zoo - Minnesota Zoo

There was also an interview with state representative John Hunt talking about the possibility of the zoo closing. I have not been to get the radio segment to play on their website, but I've linked to it below.

Rep. John Huot: Minnesota Zoo Closing?
Click to expand...

Not much is said in the radio interview, however, the representative they talked to said he is very worried that the zoo will close without getting that funding. He says in it that they don't know where it is going to come from though and that is a major hold up.

In terms of the drive-through, I'm very skeptical about the turn out for that. As you said, this section is largely inflates and many visitors do not like the Northern Trail to begin with because they see it as a lot of walking for not much reward. Obviously, this involves no walling, but I truly don't think this will be a huge revenue generator.
 
NSU42 said:
Not much is said in the radio interview, however, the representative they talked to said he is very worried that the zoo will close without getting that funding. He says in it that they don't know where it is going to come from though and that is a major hold up.

In terms of the drive-through, I'm very skeptical about the turn out for that. As you said, this section is largely inflates and many visitors do not like the Northern Trail to begin with because they see it as a lot of walking for not much reward. Obviously, this involves no walling, but I truly don't think this will be a huge revenue generator.
Click to expand...

Thanks on getting the interview to work. I figured that it wouldn't contain too much.

I'm pretty skeptical of the drive through zoo as a medium-term option given its low value for the high cost of $50 per car. Yes, they're charging $50 for takin, bison, prairie dogs, pronghorn, asian wild horses, Bactrian camels, dholes, and farm animals. I have a feeling that most of the people who bought tickets are members, since they only have to pay $25. For this twelve-day event, it seems as though they've done fairly well. They got each of the days having 31 or fewer open spots (with a total of 500 per day) with half having 20 or fewer spots remaining with four days before opening. I recorded the number of tickets remaining they listed before you buy them around 9:20PM central.
 
I'm glad its faring well so far and there seems to be some interest. I would guess you are right and its mostly members, but many could also just want to support the zoo given the recent news. I'm going to go for the second reason as I am not a memeber there. The price is howevee pretty steep for limited return as you said.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top