New York Aquarium New York Aquarium News

On July 2nd, the aquarium announced they acquired a (1.0.1+) epaulette sharks (one of which is named Ajax) which are on display in the coral tunnel tank in Ocean Wonders: Sharks! area.

Ajax the epaulette shark | Meet Ajax, one of our new male epaulette sharks! He lives in the coral tunnel exhibit in Ocean Wonders: Sharks! and is one of our new additions to the... | By New York AquariumFacebook

On July 9th, it was reported that the aquarium acquired 5 American (orange) lobsters from fishermen in Maine.

 
Smaggledagle said:
On July 2nd, the aquarium announced they acquired a (1.0.1+) epaulette sharks (one of which is named Ajax) which are on display in the coral tunnel tank in Ocean Wonders: Sharks! area.

Ajax the epaulette shark | Meet Ajax, one of our new male epaulette sharks! He lives in the coral tunnel exhibit in Ocean Wonders: Sharks! and is one of our new additions to the... | By New York AquariumFacebook

On July 9th, it was reported that the aquarium acquired 5 American (orange) lobsters from fishermen in Maine.

Click to expand...
And the return of walrus - a signature species (1957) of the aquarium?
I can see lobster at the supermarket
Sea Cliffs was supposed have been built with Walrus as the predominant specie
 
Don Majeski said:
And the return of walrus - a signature species (1957) of the aquarium?
I can see lobster at the supermarket
Sea Cliffs was supposed have been built with Walrus as the predominant specie
Click to expand...
And why does it have to be an "either or" thing? Can't an aquarium have both lobsters and walruses. Surely you understand that economically and logistically it is a lot easier to acquire lobsters and build an exhibit for them than for walruses. And even if you're not a fan of lobsters, others may want to see them in the aquarium. Having a diverse collection is important, and that means not having just marine mammals but also plenty of fish and invertebrates.

I'd love it if the New York Aquarium opted to house a larger marine mammal species again, but that would be an expensive endeavor that requires a brand new exhibit complex- whereas lobsters are a relatively easy species to acquire. Plus, given that New York Aquarium recently received a lot of new capital improvements, including their impressive Sharks exhibit, I'm sure WCS would rather prioritize another facility for whatever their next big project will be.
 
Neil chace said:
And why does it have to be an "either or" thing? Can't an aquarium have both lobsters and walruses. Surely you understand that economically and logistically it is a lot easier to acquire lobsters and build an exhibit for them than for walruses. And even if you're not a fan of lobsters, others may want to see them in the aquarium. Having a diverse collection is important, and that means not having just marine mammals but also plenty of fish and invertebrates.

I'd love it if the New York Aquarium opted to house a larger marine mammal species again, but that would be an expensive endeavor that requires a brand new exhibit complex- whereas lobsters are a relatively easy species to acquire. Plus, given that New York Aquarium recently received a lot of new capital improvements, including their impressive Sharks exhibit, I'm sure WCS would rather prioritize another facility for whatever their next big project will be.
Click to expand...
I totally agree that they can -and should - house both.
Since its inception the aquarium has been grossly underfunded.
The original location - on the site of Castle Clinton in Manhattan - held, what was then , the largest aquarium in the world .
Coney Island pales in comparison to Shedd in Chicago, the Georgia in Atlanta and Monterrey Bay in California
Why? Because it is not prioritized
In recent years they have deacquistioned Beluga whales, fur seals and walrus (A species that has been exhibited since 1957)
I understand the difficulty in acquiring marine mammals but walrus were a signature species for the aquarium.
Whatever exhibits or species they add enhances the collection so, by all means, add lobsters-far less costly to house than a potential breeding heard of walrus.
The city has always underfunded its cultural institutions -the living ones in particular.
 
Ebirah766 said:
I hope to never be as narrow-minded as you
Click to expand...
I am glad you have something to aspire.
I am happy they are getting a new species of lobster. It can only enhance the collection.
I would - eventually - they can require walrus. That’s all.
I might have been too facetious in my remark . Not intended to give offense to you , anyone - or the lobsters - which, I’m certain ,the walruses would enjoy as well
 
Don Majeski said:
Deacquisition is the operative word for New York aquarium exhibition policy: Belugas, walrus , fur seals .
Bring in the smelts !
Click to expand...

That's a little unfair. The aquarium doesn't have the footprint to house Belugas properly without getting rid of all their other marine mammals and penguins. Both fur seals and Walruses are in short supply in the US with no options to import additional stock. The aquarium wasn't in a position to breed Walrus so the most sensible move was to send their animals to collections who might.

The aquarium still houses Harbor Seal, California Sea Lion, and Sea Otter as far as marine mammals go.

~Thylo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top