Aardwolf
Well-Known Member
I’ve seen saltwater crocs at several US zoos. Freshwater I’ve seen at fewer, but still a handful (I used to work with one)
Reimagining Australian Exhibits in U.S. Zoos
- Thread starter CleZooMan
- Start date
Corangurilla
Well-Known Member
I think the reason why a lot of zoos don't keep Saltwater Crocodiles is because of what Saltwater Crocodiles are: the largest living reptile. I believe Baru was the last saltie imported to the US, and his entire selling point is that he's BIG. Yes, he was brought in for Wild Walkabout, but now he's the crown jewel of the Toledo Zoo's reptile house.
The same goes for Jaws at Wildlife World or Salty (real original) at Fort Worth. They're both the headliners of Dragon World & the MOLA, respectively. And both zoos have dedicated Australian areas, too. I would love to see more zoos put salties in their Australian exhibits, but I guess zoos would rather emphasize the "reptile" over the "Australian" in "Australian reptile."
The same goes for Jaws at Wildlife World or Salty (real original) at Fort Worth. They're both the headliners of Dragon World & the MOLA, respectively. And both zoos have dedicated Australian areas, too. I would love to see more zoos put salties in their Australian exhibits, but I guess zoos would rather emphasize the "reptile" over the "Australian" in "Australian reptile."
As Corangurilla said below, Toledo Zoo has saltwater crocs.
Which zoo was this?
Corangurilla
Well-Known Member
One. One saltwater crocodile. Although, Baru is so god damn big that his presence is equivalent to 2 or 3 smaller salties
.I think it's worth mentioning that many facilities keep Australian reptiles or birds in their dedicated reptile or bird exhibits, as opposed to including them in a dedicated Australia area. There are frilled lizard, kookaburra, little penguins, frogmouth, and even cassowary that have been held at zoos in areas without any biogeographic link to these species. Marsupials are usually not entitled to this kind of benefit besides isolated walkabouts, large macropods in hoofstock yards, and in the past some small mammal houses, although that entire breed of building seems on the way out.
Van Beal
Well-Known Member
Toronto. Australasia is represented through an indoor section and a literal Walkaroo Kangabout (not what it’s actually called but you get the idea)
I know that the Great Plains Zoo in South Dakota also had camels in their Australia exhibit (they were bactrian, but in reference to the feral camel population) as well as a "sheep station" themed exhibit to talk about the Australian wool industry. Have komodo dragons ever been included in Australian-type exhibits?
Corangurilla
Well-Known Member
LA, kind of sort of? Their Komodo is kept near their Australian nocturnal house, but I’m not sure if it’s actually part of the Australian area.
Van Beal
Well-Known Member
Not American, but the Toronto Zoo has the Komodo featured in the Australian section.
ContraryPython
Active Member
Something I’ve noticed with Australian exhibits is that the majority always focus on the desert/arid environments of Australia. I don’t think I’ve seen an Australia exhibit focus on the tropical environments of the continent. Would be a nice change of pace to create a tropical Australia section in Australia areas. Can include cassowaries, crocodiles, lorikeets, flying foxes, and other birds and reptiles from that area.
If AZA zoos were more interested in representing ecoregions than in displaying charismatic animals then you would see a greater diversity of Australian species. The Living Desert Zoo's Australian Adventures exhibit feels different and has a more interesting and unique animal collection because they were interested in showcasing the biodiversity and beauty of the Australian desert. Zoos that just want to engage their guests aren't usually going to do more than create a Walkaroo Kangabout (to borrow that catchy phrase) and/or an interactive budgie/rainbow lorikeet aviary.
Personally, I actually like Walkaroo Kangabouts and interactive budgie/rainbow lorikeet aviaries. I should duck for cover after saying that here! It is just a shame that they are not used more often to support other Australian/Australasian exhibits with species of greater conservation significance and to convey compelling educational themes. I think it is a huge missed opportunity.
Personally, I actually like Walkaroo Kangabouts and interactive budgie/rainbow lorikeet aviaries. I should duck for cover after saying that here! It is just a shame that they are not used more often to support other Australian/Australasian exhibits with species of greater conservation significance and to convey compelling educational themes. I think it is a huge missed opportunity.
"Australia" as a continent is much more than just the country of Australia. I'd love to see some exhibits focussed on Papua, New Zealand, and the Pacific Islands. Philadelphia's bird house has a few exhibits dedicated to Guam and Hawaii
McNeil Avian Center - Built In 1916 - ZooChat
(Credit: @snowleopard )
I believe it has since been renovated, but Point Defiance had an aquarium that revolved around the wildlife of the South Pacific, what made it unique was the fact it was a walkthrough beach. I'm unsure if birds were ever displayed here, but it would be a unique idea that differs from the usual walkthrough tropical rainforest!
South Pacific Aquarium - ZooChat
(Credit @snowleopard)
I think the problem with representing Oceania as a whole is the lack of animal species other than fish that are native to the islands. Papua would be pretty easy for a major zoo to do (tree kangaroos, cassowaries, and a bunch of reptiles. Maybe even birds of paradise depending on the zoo), but the rest of the islands don't have much room for a full fledged exhibit. There are some creatures here and there which can be find in non-Australia Oceania that are held in quite a few places (Solomon Island tree skink, Fiji banded iguana, Guam kingfisher, Guam rail, Marianas fruit dove, kiwi, kea). I think a "South Pacific" house would be a cool idea for a zoo to explore. It could check off the box for an aquarium and a walkthrough jungle if the facility were to get their hands on enough animals (Some like kiwis, birds of paradise, tuataras, and keas would be difficult to get, but they exist in the US).
McNeil Avian Center - Built In 1916 - ZooChat
(Credit: @snowleopard )
I believe it has since been renovated, but Point Defiance had an aquarium that revolved around the wildlife of the South Pacific, what made it unique was the fact it was a walkthrough beach. I'm unsure if birds were ever displayed here, but it would be a unique idea that differs from the usual walkthrough tropical rainforest!
(Credit @snowleopard)
I think the problem with representing Oceania as a whole is the lack of animal species other than fish that are native to the islands. Papua would be pretty easy for a major zoo to do (tree kangaroos, cassowaries, and a bunch of reptiles. Maybe even birds of paradise depending on the zoo), but the rest of the islands don't have much room for a full fledged exhibit. There are some creatures here and there which can be find in non-Australia Oceania that are held in quite a few places (Solomon Island tree skink, Fiji banded iguana, Guam kingfisher, Guam rail, Marianas fruit dove, kiwi, kea). I think a "South Pacific" house would be a cool idea for a zoo to explore. It could check off the box for an aquarium and a walkthrough jungle if the facility were to get their hands on enough animals (Some like kiwis, birds of paradise, tuataras, and keas would be difficult to get, but they exist in the US).
No, Australia as a continent is only the country of Australia. Oceania as a region is wider than Australia.
MOG2012
Well-Known Member
Australia is both depending on who you ask. Australia is typically interchangeable with Oceania continent-wise but it’s also used for the island and country. If Australia only applied to Australia, then there wouldn’t be any continent for most of the pacific islands (except Zealandia I guess)
Islands aren't really a part of a continent. Oceania isn't a continent either, it's just a region we kind of pretend is a continent in order to make sorting countries into geographic groups easier.
MOG2012
Well-Known Member
Would that mean the Caribbean, the uk, Cyprus, Madagascar, Sri Lanka, Japan, etc. wouldn’t count as being part of a continent? Though I feel at least the uk would be as they used to be connected to Europe
Like @MOG2012 said, what do those count as? If Japan and the Philippines are part of Asia, wouldn’t New Zealand belong to the “continent” of Australia? I mean most websites, including ZooChat, clump the Pacific Islands under the region of Oceania