MOG2012
Well-Known Member
Many reliable sources including Brittania, National Geographic, etc. list it australia as having the same range of Oceania, so does many encyclopedias, atlases, etc.
Reimagining Australian Exhibits in U.S. Zoos
- Thread starter CleZooMan
- Start date
In a lot of ways, I would argue they aren't to be honest. But those are all a lot closer to the continent itself and are part of the same continental shelf.
The Caribbean is pretty frequently excluded from definitions of North America, especially.
Bluey
Well-Known Member
Some think texas is south America so..
Van Beal
Well-Known Member
I think the lack of diversity stems from two major things. The first being what @DevinL described, but also the fact that there isn’t all that much diversity in the larger Australian animal population to make it diverse and interesting. The latter is due to Australia’s export laws regarding native wildlife, which are also seen in New Zealand.
Most zoos have the typical mammal species (ie, the same two/three macropods, perhaps even a wombat, koala or echidna) because they are present in sustainable numbers. Meanwhile the rarer species (Tasmanian devils and platypus, among others) are nearly non-existent and don’t have a population on the continent that is self-sustaining. I’d even argue species like the wombat or echidna don’t really have a self-sustaining population because zoos don’t seem to actively try to breed them.
As much as I do understand the laws Australia has in place, I really wish, given the conservation status of some of the species they don’t export (the bilby/bandicoot family and some quoll species), that they would at least consider bringing some of those species to the zoos they see fit to hold the species. This doesn’t mean I want them to hand out their quolls, bilbies, and bandicoots willy-nilly. I just want to see a stable population grow in North American facilities for a greater cause.
Most zoos have the typical mammal species (ie, the same two/three macropods, perhaps even a wombat, koala or echidna) because they are present in sustainable numbers. Meanwhile the rarer species (Tasmanian devils and platypus, among others) are nearly non-existent and don’t have a population on the continent that is self-sustaining. I’d even argue species like the wombat or echidna don’t really have a self-sustaining population because zoos don’t seem to actively try to breed them.
As much as I do understand the laws Australia has in place, I really wish, given the conservation status of some of the species they don’t export (the bilby/bandicoot family and some quoll species), that they would at least consider bringing some of those species to the zoos they see fit to hold the species. This doesn’t mean I want them to hand out their quolls, bilbies, and bandicoots willy-nilly. I just want to see a stable population grow in North American facilities for a greater cause.
What about them? What question are you asking?
There are more than three zoos in the USA with them, ZTL lists 9 holders and there very well may be more.
Brookfield's Australia House has already been brought up several times on this thread and while it's already a step-up from most U.S. zoos, it could become the premier Australian exhibit in a few years time. Construction should begin on a revitalized Australia complex within the next year or two which will involve adding a new outdoor trail (kangaroo, wallaby, koala, Tasmanian devil, birds) while the existing building will be renovated for smaller species (wombat, echidna, woylie, herps, insects). When completed, it will likely be the most holistic collection of Australian wildlife on this side of the pond.
AndyJ08
Well-Known Member
What about native Australian fish, namely freshwater ones? Despite being somewhat hard to come by, there are a few species of freshwater Aussie natives in the aquarium hobby, a few of which I’ve kept. Many species of gudgeons and the Melonataenia rainbowfish could serve in “supporting roles” with Australian lungfish or Jardine arowanas as the centerpiece. To further this idea, some turtle species such as long-necked turtles or Jardine river turtles could be used alongside the aforementioned fish species.
Bluey
Well-Known Member
Bro does anyone realise how almost all Red necked Wallabies in the US look like the tasmanian subspecies i wonder why there is so manny white ones overseas
but seriously look at a red neck wallaby in Sydney on inaturalist then compare it to what San diego Zoos wallaby something is off here i think zoos should say tasmanian Red necked Wallaby Heck Bruny island if it's white
but seriously look at a red neck wallaby in Sydney on inaturalist then compare it to what San diego Zoos wallaby something is off here i think zoos should say tasmanian Red necked Wallaby Heck Bruny island if it's whiteI would like to see North American zoos with good populations of bilbies and a few other interesting Australasian species, but North American zoos are struggling to manage the charismatic Matschie's tree kangaroo (from New Guinea) population. They are even less likely to devote the space and resources for bilbies and others. Before trying to acquire new species, AZA zoos should do much more with the amazing Australasian animals they already have. Until they show more commitment to those species, why should they be trusted with new species?
In addition to the Matschie's tree kangaroos there are a few other species already in North America that I would love to see more of that are barely hanging on now. Yellow-footed rock wallabies are a beautiful species that I really enjoyed seeing in Wild Life Sydney. Their numbers seem to be falling in AZA and in danger of disappearing in the near future. Brush-tailed bettong are a critically endangered species that could really use strong conservation help. I know many Zoochatters think koalas are over-rated, but I really enjoyed seeing them years ago when they visited the Calgary Zoo. Koalas can help sell the general public on an Australasian section. They are facing increasing threats in the wild too. Short-beaked echidna are so unusual and interesting and can help educate people about mammal biology. My local zoo (Calgary) actually once had a small flock of critically endangered swift parrots before they closed their Australia building. I wonder where those birds wound up. Palm cockatoos are stunning! There are a few kiwis and birds of paradise in AZA zoos too. Then there are all the great Australasian reptiles that AZA zoos already have or are probably available from reputable private breeders. There is a wealth of amazing Australasian species already in AZA facilities that could really use more focus and attention. If those species don't receive that attention, then they will likely disappear from AZA in the not too distant future. I doubt that they'll be able to get those species back easily, even if some of those species have captive populations outside of Australasia and North America.
Last edited:
The US facilities are generally less interested in small non-native Mammals than Europe, there are more than 20 holders of Brush-tailed Possums in Europe, but 0 in North America. Another issue is that several Australian species have poor reproductive rates in captivity, like Echidnas and probably Wombats
It might be difficult to maintain the captive population of Greater Bilby outside of Australia bc they are quite short-lived (only live for 5-7 years).
From what I understand, there is a long-term interest and intent for Greater bilby captive populations in Europe and the US, but Australia is still trying to perfect their husbandry before they want to allow for exports. I do not know any specifics but I have heard a few institutions have signaled an interest should exports take place. There's also been international interest in Quokka which recently reached Europe.
There's definitely interest in expanding on Australian species, but it's hard to tell if there is interest in expanding existing populations besides Tree Kangaroo, and which populations can even expand. Echidna will probably be around a long time at least as husbandry seems to be getting a little easier and unlike a lot of Australian species they are very long-lived.
There's definitely interest in expanding on Australian species, but it's hard to tell if there is interest in expanding existing populations besides Tree Kangaroo, and which populations can even expand. Echidna will probably be around a long time at least as husbandry seems to be getting a little easier and unlike a lot of Australian species they are very long-lived.
The National Aquarium in Baltimore has a great variety of species, some of which are even relatively uncommon by Australian standards. It shows that if a place has a large amount of money and motivation to create a diverse display of the smaller creatures of Australia, it can be done (albeit I’m not sure if the animals were all acquired legally, hopefully they were)
Also it is not advisable to keep Saratoga (‘Australian Arowana’) with small fish as they grow large and are very aggressive. They can, however be exhibited with large species such as Barramundi, large Grunter species, Lungfish etc.