Roger Williams Park Zoo Roger Williams Park Zoo News 2021

@Neil chace I thought that too and would like that just as much. I do find it more unlikely because of the cost of a filtration, pool expansion and under water viewing (which hopefully they would incorporate). Cheaper to fill in the pool for rhinos.
I grew up in New England for 20+ years and left for "richer" speciation in southern states, Florida mainly. Especially pachyderms, which is what I wanted to work with. I only know of two facilities(Southwicks and FPZ) that held common hippos and it was decades ago. I only know of white rhino being held in New England and as stated elephants will be around for maybe two decades at the most.
 
PSO said:
@Neil chace I thought that too and would like that just as much. I do find it more unlikely because of the cost of a filtration, pool expansion and under water viewing (which hopefully they would incorporate). Cheaper to fill in the pool for rhinos.
I grew up in New England for 20+ years and left for "richer" speciation in southern states, Florida mainly. Especially pachyderms, which is what I wanted to work with. I only know of two facilities(Southwicks and FPZ) that held common hippos and it was decades ago. I only know of white rhino being held in New England and as stated elephants will be around for maybe two decades at the most.
Click to expand...
I agree rhino are more likely than hippos, I just said hippos would be good if they wanted to put in the extra effort. To be honest, I like the pool they have and wouldn't mind them keeping it even if the residents don't use it- there's plenty of room without it anyways. I do think that we could be surprised with the use of that space though. I'd love to see Okapi be added, although I don't expect it.
 
Total agreement about hippos. Okapi is interesting as well. I could see the giraffes being moved over to the elephant side and okapi moving into giraffe side. Plus having the two related species side by side would make it interesting from a publics perspective
 
PSO said:
Total agreement about hippos. Okapi is interesting as well. I could see the giraffes being moved over to the elephant side and okapi moving into giraffe side. Plus having the two related species side by side would make it interesting from a publics perspective
Click to expand...
Does the Giraffe Exhibit have two Holdings? Splitting the Exhibit in half would be a necessity if they want a pair of Okapi (although I see nothing wrong with getting a single individual if its possible).
 
They could split the yard, however, the indoor quarters are already set up nicely for the giraffes, so that shouldn't have to change. The elephants have a lot of indoor area and if necessary (regarding okapi) an indoor/outdoor rotation would work just as well, including split indoor areas for the cold months
 
PSO said:
They could split the yard, however, the indoor quarters are already set up nicely for the giraffes, so that shouldn't have to change. The elephants have a lot of indoor area and if necessary (regarding okapi) an indoor/outdoor rotation would work just as well, including split indoor areas for the cold months
Click to expand...
Nice. Personally, I am very critical of their masterplan for a few reasons- both what species they plan to get rid of (zebra, seal), acquire (kangaroos), and keep (elephant, giraffe, moon bear). My biggest criticism of it, however, is that it gets rid of too many exhibits. Roger Williams doesn't have any bad Exhibits, and the masterplan replaces many good Exhibits with new Exhibits that I can't see being any better. Ideally, I feel that instead of a masterplan the zoo should be working on a collection plan, as there aren't really any bad Exhibits. If I was in charge I'd like something similar to-
Africa:
1. Hartmann's Mountain Zebra and Slender-horned Gazelle in current savanna
2. Nubian Ibex as aoudad replacement as they are more cold tolerant, also add gelada if possible.
3. Replace cheetahs with African lion.
4. Replace river hogs with Klipspringer as they are cold tolerant
5. Masai Giraffe, Soemmerring's Gazelle, and Nyala in current elephant yard.
6. Okapi and a Duiker species in current giraffe yard.
7. African Penguins in area currently home to seals.
8. Keep the Colobus Monkey plan.

Keep the Farmyard and Faces of Rainforest as is, even though they aren't my favorite areas I don't see a problem with them. If its possible, I'd like to see one or two new Exhibits outside Faces to mitigate the "it wastes space" criticism.

Australasia:
1. I highly dislike the change in this area to World of Adaptations and would keep it as Australasian animals. This is also the area I'd change the most.
2. Indoors, I would look into the possibility of replacing Tree kangaroo with koalas, everything else is mostly fine. Replace the radiated tortoises with a geographically appropriate animal.
3. I'd make the Outdoor habitats be Clouded leopard, lowland anoa, tasmanian devil, and an aviary.

Marco Polo-
1. Place Persian Onager in the old camel habitat.
2. I don't like the plan for a tiger habitat as they could very easily renovate the current Bear habitat to house tigers.
3. Everything else would be kept the same, except for potential changes for similar species (i.e. Goral instead of takin)
North America-
1. Keep the Grizzly bear and moose plan intact. Bald eagles and red wolves would stay.
2. Put Arctic Fox in the Muntjac habitat.
3. Bring back the plan for native species in the childrens zoo.
 
@Neil chace -- I'll give my two cents based on my knowledge/involvement with ungulate populations:

Nubian Ibex as aoudad replacement as they are more cold tolerant,
Highly unlikely-- The San Diego Zoo Safari Park was the only facility still breeding the species, and they have since moved out their breeding males. Baton Rouge is the only other holder with a mixed sex group.

Replace river hogs with Klipspringer as they are cold tolerant
The klipspringer population is just starting to build up, and it would not be wise to move animals now-- the population needs to remain localized for this species to take off. Smaller antelope species, like klipspringer and duiker, do better with consortiums, where a few facilities hold multiple breeding pairs, and offspring are dispersed from there once the population is more stable, otherwise you stand to lose several years of a relatively short-lived animal's life waiting on breeding and transfer plans and actually moving the animal.

Masai Giraffe, Soemmerring's Gazelle, and Nyala in current elephant yard.
Nyala are a good option. Their population is doing really well and has been increasing quite a bit over the past couple of years. They are always looking for holders for surplus males. Soemmerring's gazelles on the other hand... Soemmerring's are incredibly fragile. They are descended from a very small founder base, and they have a very high infant mortality rate. I don't see them spreading beyond the facilities that already have them, as facilities that have tried to take them on have failed.

Okapi and a Duiker species in current giraffe yard.
The Okapi SSP has seen a lot of males born over the past couple of years, and so they are always in need of new holders for surplus males.

I'd make the Outdoor habitats be Clouded leopard, lowland anoa, tasmanian devil, and an aviary.
Anoa were a priority species for the AZA/Ungulate TAG a few years back, but they have pretty much given up on them at this point. Zoo Miami is the only AZA facility that holds the species in a breeding situation, and they're doing extremely well in the private sector, so they would be a very unlikely choice.

Place Persian Onager in the old camel habitat
Other than a single female left at Cleveland, the only onagers left in the US are the herds at SCBI and The Wilds. If this population is to survive, then they need to continue to be managed in these large, natural herds. That said, there have been no births in the last year, and being the aggressive and destructive animals they are, I can't quite see many zoos being interested in taking them on. I don't know how bright their future is in North America.

Everything else would be kept the same, except for potential changes for similar species (i.e. Goral instead of takin)
It would not make sense to switch takin for goral. The Sichuan takin program has been very successful, and they desperately new holders and these holder have to be in cooler climates. Roger Williams is playing an extremely important role for the future of this program by holding these animals. That said, the goral population is very small, and it should be treated like the klipspringer and duiker populations I mentioned previously, with a few holders holding multiple breeding pairs. Los Angeles and St. Louis were the only facilities to breed the species within the last year out of eight capable holders.
 
Last edited:
Kudu21 said:
@Neil chace -- I'll give my two cents based on my knowledge/involvement with ungulate populations:

Nubian Ibex as aoudad replacement as they are more cold tolerant,
Highly unlikely-- The San Diego Zoo Safari Park was the only facility still breeding the species, and they have since moved out their breeding males. Baton Rouge is the only other holder with a mixed sex group.

Replace river hogs with Klipspringer as they are cold tolerant
The klipspringer population is just starting to build up, and it would not be wise to move animals now-- the population needs to remain localized for this species to take off. Smaller antelope species, like klipspringer and duiker, do better with consortiums, where a few facilities hold multiple breeding pairs, and offspring are dispersed from there once the population is more stable, otherwise you stand to lose several years of a relatively short-lived animal's life waiting on breeding and transfer plans and actually moving the animal.

Masai Giraffe, Soemmerring's Gazelle, and Nyala in current elephant yard.
Nyala are a good option. Their population is doing really well and has been increasing quite a bit over the past couple of years. They are always looking for holders for surplus males. Soemmerring's gazelles on the other hand... Soemmerring's are incredibly fragile. They are descended from a very small founder base, and they have a very high infant mortality rate. I don't see them spreading beyond the facilities that already have them, as facilities that have tried to take them on have failed.

Okapi and a Duiker species in current giraffe yard.
The Okapi SSP has seen a lot of males born over the past couple of years, and so they are always in need of new holders for surplus males.

I'd make the Outdoor habitats be Clouded leopard, lowland anoa, tasmanian devil, and an aviary.
Anoa were a priority species for the AZA/Ungulate TAG a few years back, but they have pretty much given up on them at this point. Zoo Miami is the only AZA facility that holds the species in a breeding situation, and they're doing extremely well in the private sector, so they would be a very unlikely choice.

Place Persian Onager in the old camel habitat
Other than a single female left at Cleveland, the only onagers left in the US are the herds at SCBI and The Wilds. If this population is to survive, then they need to continue to be managed in these large, natural herds. That said, there have been no births in the last year, and being the aggressive and destructive animals they are, I can't quite see many zoos being interested in taking them on. I don't know how bright their future is in North America.

Everything else would be kept the same, except for potential changes for similar species (i.e. Goral instead of takin)
It would not make sense to switch takin for goral. The Sichuan takin program has been very successful, and they desperately new holders and these holder have to be in cooler climates. Roger Williams is playing an extremely important role for the future of this program by holding these animals. That said, the goral population is very small, and it should be treated like the klipspringer and duiker populations I mentioned previously, with a few holders holding multiple breeding pairs. Los Angeles and St. Louis were the only facilities to breed the species within the last year out of eight capable holders.
Click to expand...
I was aware of some of these challenges, and this was my reasoning.
Ibex- AZA wants more breeding facilities for Nubian ibex and as recently as 2019 was a priority species.
Klipspringer- I wasn't aware that they would require a consortium, but other than that would be a nice addition to New England.
Soemmerring's Gazelle- the AZA Ungulate TAG is actually encouraging them be mixed into existing Giraffe exhibits as apparently they do well in these mixes. If another gazelle species would be a better fit, I'd be open to it.
Anoa- I thought Point Defiance had a breeding situation as well? Couldn't they also be recieved through collaboration with the private sector?
Onager- I thought the AZA was looking for new holders. I could just as easily put prezwalskis Horse in that Exhibit though.
Goral- this was just a possibility, and more of a "after the current Takin die, it might be nice to get either Goral or Urial instead". I think Goral, Takin, and Urial are all incredible species, and do not necessarily care which one is held. I could have just as easily said i.e. White-naped crane instead of Red-crowned Crane though- it's just I'm a big advocate of replacing species with something new when they die, especially for zoos with smaller collections.
 
Ibex- AZA wants more breeding facilities for Nubian ibex and as recently as 2019 was a priority species
Things change quickly, and just because a species is a "priority" doesn't really mean that it is going to take off. How many of the past "priority" species have? There were hopes that additional founders could be imported from the Middle East, but that appears to have fallen through, and the species is losing holders, not gaining them. A lot of animals bred over the past several years have entered the private sector because there aren't enough interested holders.

Soemmerring's Gazelle- the AZA Ungulate TAG is actually encouraging them be mixed into existing Giraffe exhibits as apparently they do well in these mixes. If another gazelle species would be a better fit, I'd be open to it.
Again, the TAG recommendations don't mean anything if there is no interest. Facilities that have taken on this species in the past have failed due to the reasons stated above. That level of risk is not very appetizing to potential new holders. The three breeding facilities already lose most of the calves produced in a year. To splinter the existing groups at this point would risk losing valuable animals.

Anoa- I thought Point Defiance had a breeding situation as well? Couldn't they also be recieved through collaboration with the private sector?
They do not. They house a single elderly female. Most of the individuals in the AZA are all older animals. The idea when they were a priority species was that the AZA could take in animals from the private sector, but anoa are a hard ticket to sell. They are notoriously aggressive, solitary, and difficult to introduce, meaning you need space to house every animal individually and know that not every pair is going to get along. They are another species where consortiums would work best, and this is what exists already in the private sector.

Onager- I thought the AZA was looking for new holders. I could just as easily put prezwalskis Horse in that Exhibit though.
As with most hoofstock programs, what would be useful for both species is surplus male holding. Unfortunately, male equids are notoriously difficult to manage. Either would be possible in that sense, but is it likely?

Goral- this was just a possibility, and more of a "after the current Takin die, it might be nice to get either Goral or Urial instead". I think Goral, Takin, and Urial are all incredible species, and do not necessarily care which one is held. I could have just as easily said i.e. White-naped crane instead of Red-crowned Crane though- it's just I'm a big advocate of replacing species with something new when they die, especially for zoos with smaller collections.
Roger Williams has already moved on from holding a bachelor group of takin to holding 1.2. While their male is older, their females are quite young, so I would imagine that they would intend to breed the species moving forward. This would make it very unlikely that they'd just hold the animals until they die.
 
Kudu21 said:
Ibex- AZA wants more breeding facilities for Nubian ibex and as recently as 2019 was a priority species
Things change quickly, and just because a species is a "priority" doesn't really mean that it is going to take off. How many of the past "priority" species have? There were hopes that additional founders could be imported from the Middle East, but that appears to have fallen through, and the species is losing holders, not gaining them. A lot of animals bred over the past several years have entered the private sector because there aren't enough interested holders.

Soemmerring's Gazelle- the AZA Ungulate TAG is actually encouraging them be mixed into existing Giraffe exhibits as apparently they do well in these mixes. If another gazelle species would be a better fit, I'd be open to it.
Again, the TAG recommendations don't mean anything if there is no interest. Facilities that have taken on this species in the past have failed due to the reasons stated above. That level of risk is not very appetizing to potential new holders. The three breeding facilities already lose most of the calves produced in a year. To splinter the existing groups at this point would risk losing valuable animals.

Anoa- I thought Point Defiance had a breeding situation as well? Couldn't they also be recieved through collaboration with the private sector?
They do not. They house a single elderly female. Most of the individuals in the AZA are all older animals. The idea when they were a priority species was that the AZA could take in animals from the private sector, but anoa are a hard ticket to sell. They are notoriously aggressive, solitary, and difficult to introduce, meaning you need space to house every animal individually and know that not every pair is going to get along. They are another species where consortiums would work best, and this is what exists already in the private sector.

Onager- I thought the AZA was looking for new holders. I could just as easily put prezwalskis Horse in that Exhibit though.
As with most hoofstock programs, what would be useful for both species is surplus male holding. Unfortunately, male equids are notoriously difficult to manage. Either would be possible in that sense, but is it likely?

Goral- this was just a possibility, and more of a "after the current Takin die, it might be nice to get either Goral or Urial instead". I think Goral, Takin, and Urial are all incredible species, and do not necessarily care which one is held. I could have just as easily said i.e. White-naped crane instead of Red-crowned Crane though- it's just I'm a big advocate of replacing species with something new when they die, especially for zoos with smaller collections.
Roger Williams has already moved on from holding a bachelor group of takin to holding 1.2. While their male is older, their females are quite young, so I would imagine that they would intend to breed the species moving forward. This would make it very unlikely that they'd just hold the animals until they die.
Click to expand...
I didn't know they got female takin- if it's a breeding group it would make sense to keep them. As for the horse species, the old camel exhibit is spacious enough that I could easily see three bachelors fitting it.
 
Neil chace said:
Nice. Personally, I am very critical of their masterplan for a few reasons- both what species they plan to get rid of (zebra, seal), acquire (kangaroos), and keep (elephant, giraffe, moon bear). My biggest criticism of it, however, is that it gets rid of too many exhibits. Roger Williams doesn't have any bad Exhibits, and the masterplan replaces many good Exhibits with new Exhibits that I can't see being any better. Ideally, I feel that instead of a masterplan the zoo should be working on a collection plan, as there aren't really any bad Exhibits. If I was in charge I'd like something similar to-
Africa:
1. Hartmann's Mountain Zebra and Slender-horned Gazelle in current savanna
2. Nubian Ibex as aoudad replacement as they are more cold tolerant, also add gelada if possible.
3. Replace cheetahs with African lion.
4. Replace river hogs with Klipspringer as they are cold tolerant
5. Masai Giraffe, Soemmerring's Gazelle, and Nyala in current elephant yard.
6. Okapi and a Duiker species in current giraffe yard.
7. African Penguins in area currently home to seals.
8. Keep the Colobus Monkey plan.

Keep the Farmyard and Faces of Rainforest as is, even though they aren't my favorite areas I don't see a problem with them. If its possible, I'd like to see one or two new Exhibits outside Faces to mitigate the "it wastes space" criticism.

Australasia:
1. I highly dislike the change in this area to World of Adaptations and would keep it as Australasian animals. This is also the area I'd change the most.
2. Indoors, I would look into the possibility of replacing Tree kangaroo with koalas, everything else is mostly fine. Replace the radiated tortoises with a geographically appropriate animal.
3. I'd make the Outdoor habitats be Clouded leopard, lowland anoa, tasmanian devil, and an aviary.

Marco Polo-
1. Place Persian Onager in the old camel habitat.
2. I don't like the plan for a tiger habitat as they could very easily renovate the current Bear habitat to house tigers.
3. Everything else would be kept the same, except for potential changes for similar species (i.e. Goral instead of takin)
North America-
1. Keep the Grizzly bear and moose plan intact. Bald eagles and red wolves would stay.
2. Put Arctic Fox in the Muntjac habitat.
3. Bring back the plan for native species in the childrens zoo.
Click to expand...

In addition to @Kudu21's comments, which I largely agree with even though some make me sad, I'll add my own two cents:
-I agree with moving on from Plains Zebra to Hartmann's, they're the least represented zebra in the AZA and the population has been growing steadily it seems. FPZ just picked up a new pair of this species, but I think the SSP needs new bachelor holders (this is a VERY common need for hoofstock populations). A few bachelor zebra would be a great addition and very helpful to the SSP. While Slender-Horned Gazelles do need more holders, they're a fairly fragile species and not very cold tolerant. I don't think they'd breed successfully in a mixed set-up, especially not with zebras who are notorious for killing other species' offspring. Giving RWPZ's limited indoor holding, I'd suggest they stick to more cold-tolerant animals (which tbf seems to be their plan as far as I can tell). The best move imo would be as I suggested before, using the old Bongo barn as additional indoor housing connecting to a savanna in the current elephant yard. Use the elephant house to keep giraffes only, then mix in bachelor mountain zebras and nyala (or another more cold-tolerant species) in and house them in the Bongo barn. Unless they can figure out how to use the pool for penguins, fill it in to add more space. The giraffe yard can be added to the main savanna or be used for a medium-sized solo species.
-Replacing Cheetahs with Lions doesn't make much sense. Cheetahs fit the space better and are equally popular with guests, as well as being more active.
-The current seal habitat is very outdated, although I agree penguins could be a good use for it.
-Faces of the Rainforest has major problems, most of all the idiotic motion sensor doors which have been running the risk of allowing birds to escape outdoors since the day it opened (I was there and watched their now-sent-off curassows try and walk right out the front door and only a keeper stationed at the door stopped them). My other issue is how much wasted space the project brought with it. They took over the only very recently opened kangaroo walkthrough (why they built a very nicely designed walkthrough with bird aviaries only to tear it all down a couple years and then immediately plan to phase-out a multitude of other species to built another walkthrough I'll never know) and added honestly fairly poor and small outdoor enclosures to compliment the single-room new building. Meanwhile, the old building, exhibits, and all the space around it now sits completely empty and unused.
-Australasia has never exhibited Australasian animals, it's always been a mishmash of tropical Asian, Australian, and for a time Polynesian animals, which is why the name changed. I look forward to the Komodo Dragon moving out of this exhibit, but I definitely support keeping tree-kangaroos. The Koala program is nice but it isn't a very useful one in all honesty, meanwhile tree-kangaroos are highly endangered. The US is the only place breeding Matschie's and our population isn't very large, but there's great potential. RWPZ has already had breeding success in the new exhibit and I very much support them continuing with these animals.
-There's no way any New England zoos are getting Tasmanian Devil sadly. Clouded leopards and a revival of the walkthrough aviary would be nice, as would keeping the babirusa (the population is doing fairly well but still needs all the help it can get!) and reobtaining Chinese Alligators for their old habitat.
-The black bear habitat is not suitable for keeping and breeding tigers, and the current plan has good potential and will add a popular species to the zoo.
-I 100% agree with bringing back the native species' exhibit.

Smaggledagle said:
Ok to clear this up as I went to the zoo last August:

The red river hogs were moved into the enclosure that formerly housed crowned cranes, however, afaik there is not an "old hog enclosure". Since the last time I remember going to the zoo back in 2015 and 2020, they replaced the front-viewing glass and the exhibit looks cleaner. The new crane exhibit is right next to the elephants.
Click to expand...

I'm confused, on every visit I remember taking to the zoo (going back to 2012) the cranes were always in the enclosure by the elephants. The hogs have a newly built habitat by the cafe.

~Thylo
 
ThylacineAlive said:
In addition to @Kudu21's comments, which I largely agree with even though some make me sad, I'll add my own two cents:
-I agree with moving on from Plains Zebra to Hartmann's, they're the least represented zebra in the AZA and the population has been growing steadily it seems. FPZ just picked up a new pair of this species, but I think the SSP needs new bachelor holders (this is a VERY common need for hoofstock populations). A few bachelor zebra would be a great addition and very helpful to the SSP. While Slender-Horned Gazelles do need more holders, they're a fairly fragile species and not very cold tolerant. I don't think they'd breed successfully in a mixed set-up, especially not with zebras who are notorious for killing other species' offspring. Giving RWPZ's limited indoor holding, I'd suggest they stick to more cold-tolerant animals (which tbf seems to be their plan as far as I can tell). The best move imo would be as I suggested before, using the old Bongo barn as additional indoor housing connecting to a savanna in the current elephant yard. Use the elephant house to keep giraffes only, then mix in bachelor mountain zebras and nyala (or another more cold-tolerant species) in and house them in the Bongo barn. Unless they can figure out how to use the pool for penguins, fill it in to add more space. The giraffe yard can be added to the main savanna or be used for a medium-sized solo species.
-Replacing Cheetahs with Lions doesn't make much sense. Cheetahs fit the space better and are equally popular with guests, as well as being more active.
-The current seal habitat is very outdated, although I agree penguins could be a good use for it.
-Faces of the Rainforest has major problems, most of all the idiotic motion sensor doors which have been running the risk of allowing birds to escape outdoors since the day it opened (I was there and watched their now-sent-off curassows try and walk right out the front door and only a keeper stationed at the door stopped them). My other issue is how much wasted space the project brought with it. They took over the only very recently opened kangaroo walkthrough (why they built a very nicely designed walkthrough with bird aviaries only to tear it all down a couple years and then immediately plan to phase-out a multitude of other species to built another walkthrough I'll never know) and added honestly fairly poor and small outdoor enclosures to compliment the single-room new building. Meanwhile, the old building, exhibits, and all the space around it now sits completely empty and unused.
-Australasia has never exhibited Australasian animals, it's always been a mishmash of tropical Asian, Australian, and for a time Polynesian animals, which is why the name changed. I look forward to the Komodo Dragon moving out of this exhibit, but I definitely support keeping tree-kangaroos. The Koala program is nice but it isn't a very useful one in all honesty, meanwhile tree-kangaroos are highly endangered. The US is the only place breeding Matschie's and our population isn't very large, but there's great potential. RWPZ has already had breeding success in the new exhibit and I very much support them continuing with these animals.
-There's no way any New England zoos are getting Tasmanian Devil sadly. Clouded leopards and a revival of the walkthrough aviary would be nice, as would keeping the babirusa (the population is doing fairly well but still needs all the help it can get!) and reobtaining Chinese Alligators for their old habitat.
-The black bear habitat is not suitable for keeping and breeding tigers, and the current plan has good potential and will add a popular species to the zoo.
-I 100% agree with bringing back the native species' exhibit.



I'm confused, on every visit I remember taking to the zoo (going back to 2012) the cranes were always in the enclosure by the elephants. The hogs have a newly built habitat by the cafe.

~Thylo
Click to expand...
- The cranes were located in the red river Hog habitat before the zoo got hogs. That's when the cranes moved to the current habitat.
- If tigers wouldn't work in the bear habitat (which I'll take your word for), what do you think would be a good use of that exhibit? Are dhole a possibility?
- I agree with wasted space around Faces of Rainforest, and that's why I said I want Outdoor habitats surrounding it. Not sure what species would work- possibly Maned wolf? Jaguar? Bush Dog? Capybara? Andean Bear?
 
Neil chace said:
The cranes were located in the red river Hog habitat before the zoo got hogs. That's when the cranes moved to the current habitat. If tigers wouldn't work in the bear habitat (which I'll take your word for), what do you think would be a good use of that exhibit? Are dhole a possibility?
Click to expand...

I'm still confused as the map shows both species in the enclosures they have always been in on every visit I've had to the zoo, the cranes from before the hogs arrived as well. Unless you're saying the situation is reversed and the map is outdated?

I'm not sure for the bears tbh, it's an oddly furnished habitat. Sloth Bears are the immediate candidate which pops to mind, but with proper renovations a macaque species could work maybe. That really only leaves Japanese which idt fits the theming. Dhole are possible I suppose but there doesn't seem to be much interest.

~Thylo
 
ThylacineAlive said:
I'm still confused as the map shows both species in the enclosures they have always been in on every visit I've had to the zoo, the cranes from before the hogs arrived as well. Unless you're saying the situation is reversed and the map is outdated?

I'm not sure for the bears tbh, it's an oddly furnished habitat. Sloth Bears are the immediate candidate which pops to mind, but with proper renovations a macaque species could work maybe. That really only leaves Japanese which idt fits the theming. Dhole are possible I suppose but there doesn't seem to be much interest.

~Thylo
Click to expand...
The current river hog habitat contained the cranes before the hogs were acquired- which might have been before 2012. The cranes have been in that Exhibit since the hogs were acquired. I really can't see Sloth bears working in the black Bear exhibit- as they are much more terrestrial than the black bears and wouldn't appreciate the extensive rock work. I agree japanese macaques don't fit the theming. If only there was a way to keep moon bears...
 
Neil chace said:
The current river hog habitat contained the cranes before the hogs were acquired- which might have been before 2012. The cranes have been in that Exhibit since the hogs were acquired. I really can't see Sloth bears working in the black Bear exhibit- as they are much more terrestrial than the black bears and wouldn't appreciate the extensive rock work. I agree japanese macaques don't fit the theming. If only there was a way to keep moon bears...
Click to expand...

The RRH arrived in 2012 according to Google. My visit was a few months beforehand while the enclosure was under construction and the cranes were already in the current enclosure. This may explain why I don't remember them anywhere else; I also misremembered the hogs as having arrived a year or two later and for some reason I thought the enclosure was newly built for them. Thanks for the correction.

~Thylo
 
Thought I'd throw my two cents in on the master plan talk.

Africa:
I do agree, the savannah habitat should not be destroyed entirely in favor of sea lions/penguins. Zebras are too big of a draw for the zoo to just give them up for stuff we've had in the past. Cheetahs I think are fine, Aoudad I think is where there is potential options. I personally think the Aoudad enclosure would be the best option for a Lion Habitat if we were to ever have one (which I personally doubt). The more likely options to me would frankly be some form of baboon to fill that space. I think the red river hogs are fine but should have some form of larger indoor space for the Winter months. The African Elephants should never be planned to be removed. They are far too important for the zoo's sustainability and after losing the Polar Bears in the past, losing elephants would mean outrage from the public. The colobus monkey plan is nice and I think works fine.

Faces of the Rainforest:
In an ideal world I think this would have never been built. I think it was far too costly and in the end not worth it. The flamingo enclosure is worse than the old one, the monkeys have less space, and the "naturalistic building" promised is more of an extremely industrial looking distraction. Plus we lost bats in the process. They could have easily just spent half the money upgrading the old building (which is still operational) and used the same where Faces is for more useful additions or keep the Kangaroo walkabout idea to prevent the need to destroy all of World of Adaptations in the process. The only real new additions to the zoo were in the form of the Tamandua, Howler Monkeys and Giant Otters which obviously weren't going to draw in the crowds they predicted.

World of Adaptations:
Frankly have no issue with the current building setup. I think moving the River Otters over by the North America section (where the Muntjac is now) is a totally reasonable option and would free up that space for another Australasian species. I understand that the Binturong, Babirusa and Wallabies don't draw in the crowds like their larger animals but I think replacing the whole area with another Kangaroo walkabout is uninspired, lame, and frankly just redundant. Just add kangaroos to the current wallaby habitat (it's plenty large enough). I'd love to get Kangaroos back as much as the next guy but I don't think wiping out a whole section to do so is the most logical thing.

Marco Polo Trail:
I definitely agree, the moon bears still being in the future of the zoo is a weird option. They are a phase out species, so its unlikely we'll get more, and George and Gracie are pretty old now. I do think that habitat is much more suitable for tigers than the current proposal. It has a pool with an underwater viewing, climbing space, a trench, and plenty of foliage already, as well as a building that is built for large carnivores. Plus it'd be a shared holding building with the snow leopards, so easier than building a second maintenance building for the big cat care team. Which leaves the Camel habitat and surrounding area open for new habitat potential. I have no real strong ideas for animals to go in this location but any other form of asian ungulate would be fine. I will say that if they intend on removing the binturongs from their current location in WoA, a mirrored version of the red panda enclosure built on the right side of the crane habitat could work as a nice relocation area. The area has been cleared out recently with the only plans to use the area as another maintenance shed. Easily could be converted to a habitat in an ideal situation. Takin, Snow Leopard, Red Panda, and the new gibbon enclosure is all fine by me.

North America:
As much as I'd love Polar Bears back, I am actually fine with the current North American plans with the exception of the Bighorn sheep. It seems odd the zoo is acknowledging the public "doesn't" want ungulates (and hence the removal of the Aoudad and savannah as well as the pronghorn/bison) and then add in bighorn sheep. This new habitat proposal seems like a bad viewing of the sheep to begin with, awkward construction wise (since its tearing up an entire seal habitat) and for not a huge payoff reception wise. If people didn't like Aoudads as their polls say, why invest so heavily into another mountain goat species? Moose are cool if they can get them but I am curious what their plan is since we have the deer ban in place. So best case scenario is we get them from the wild in Maine, and then somehow kept off exhibit in RI for the mandatory 2 year quarantine. Not super ideal. I think bringing back bears is a great call even if its not polar bears.

Summary:
The official master plan just feels like a big "undo" button for the zoo that is costing the zoo some of its current biggest mascots. Losing things like zebra, aoudad, seals, bison, camels, the old tropical america building, etc. to only get back minor animals we've had in the past and removed due to past "master plans" like penguins, sea lions, kangaroos, etc. seems like a mess. The zoo just seems to not really grasp what the public wants and mismanages their master plans a lot. The ideal version of RWPZ is frankly just 2005. Kangaroos, Penguins, Zebra, Camels, Giraffe, Elephant, Moon Bear, Polar Bear, Lemurs tropical america, etc. We really haven't gained much since then outside anteaters and takin, simply shifted animals around in multi million dollar master plans. We've been promised tigers for decades to no avail. The logical solution is take public polls at face value and put money towards the stuff that actually would bring in crowds like bears/tigers. Faces of the Rainforest should not have been phase 1. And the sea lions should not be phase 2. The basically did the priorities of the master plan completely backwards if the goal was to bring in new visitors and bring back old ones who miss the "glory days". The people who take polls in 2008, 2012, 2016 and 2020 want "carnivores now" not in 2032. They want penguins/sea lions/kangaroos back cause they didn't want them removed in the first place. The best thing the zoo can do is if they are very firm on the master plan. Prioritize what makes sense logically first. Sasha and Gina are dead. Start adding the tigers soon. We can wait on the sea lions and education center.
 
Nicholas LionRider said:
Thought I'd throw my two cents in on the master plan talk.

Africa:
I do agree, the savannah habitat should not be destroyed entirely in favor of sea lions/penguins. Zebras are too big of a draw for the zoo to just give them up for stuff we've had in the past. Cheetahs I think are fine, Aoudad I think is where there is potential options. I personally think the Aoudad enclosure would be the best option for a Lion Habitat if we were to ever have one (which I personally doubt). The more likely options to me would frankly be some form of baboon to fill that space. I think the red river hogs are fine but should have some form of larger indoor space for the Winter months. The African Elephants should never be planned to be removed. They are far too important for the zoo's sustainability and after losing the Polar Bears in the past, losing elephants would mean outrage from the public. The colobus monkey plan is nice and I think works fine.

Faces of the Rainforest:
In an ideal world I think this would have never been built. I think it was far too costly and in the end not worth it. The flamingo enclosure is worse than the old one, the monkeys have less space, and the "naturalistic building" promised is more of an extremely industrial looking distraction. Plus we lost bats in the process. They could have easily just spent half the money upgrading the old building (which is still operational) and used the same where Faces is for more useful additions or keep the Kangaroo walkabout idea to prevent the need to destroy all of World of Adaptations in the process. The only real new additions to the zoo were in the form of the Tamandua, Howler Monkeys and Giant Otters which obviously weren't going to draw in the crowds they predicted.

World of Adaptations:
Frankly have no issue with the current building setup. I think moving the River Otters over by the North America section (where the Muntjac is now) is a totally reasonable option and would free up that space for another Australasian species. I understand that the Binturong, Babirusa and Wallabies don't draw in the crowds like their larger animals but I think replacing the whole area with another Kangaroo walkabout is uninspired, lame, and frankly just redundant. Just add kangaroos to the current wallaby habitat (it's plenty large enough). I'd love to get Kangaroos back as much as the next guy but I don't think wiping out a whole section to do so is the most logical thing.

Marco Polo Trail:
I definitely agree, the moon bears still being in the future of the zoo is a weird option. They are a phase out species, so its unlikely we'll get more, and George and Gracie are pretty old now. I do think that habitat is much more suitable for tigers than the current proposal. It has a pool with an underwater viewing, climbing space, a trench, and plenty of foliage already, as well as a building that is built for large carnivores. Plus it'd be a shared holding building with the snow leopards, so easier than building a second maintenance building for the big cat care team. Which leaves the Camel habitat and surrounding area open for new habitat potential. I have no real strong ideas for animals to go in this location but any other form of asian ungulate would be fine. I will say that if they intend on removing the binturongs from their current location in WoA, a mirrored version of the red panda enclosure built on the right side of the crane habitat could work as a nice relocation area. The area has been cleared out recently with the only plans to use the area as another maintenance shed. Easily could be converted to a habitat in an ideal situation. Takin, Snow Leopard, Red Panda, and the new gibbon enclosure is all fine by me.

North America:
As much as I'd love Polar Bears back, I am actually fine with the current North American plans with the exception of the Bighorn sheep. It seems odd the zoo is acknowledging the public "doesn't" want ungulates (and hence the removal of the Aoudad and savannah as well as the pronghorn/bison) and then add in bighorn sheep. This new habitat proposal seems like a bad viewing of the sheep to begin with, awkward construction wise (since its tearing up an entire seal habitat) and for not a huge payoff reception wise. If people didn't like Aoudads as their polls say, why invest so heavily into another mountain goat species? Moose are cool if they can get them but I am curious what their plan is since we have the deer ban in place. So best case scenario is we get them from the wild in Maine, and then somehow kept off exhibit in RI for the mandatory 2 year quarantine. Not super ideal. I think bringing back bears is a great call even if its not polar bears.

Summary:
The official master plan just feels like a big "undo" button for the zoo that is costing the zoo some of its current biggest mascots. Losing things like zebra, aoudad, seals, bison, camels, the old tropical america building, etc. to only get back minor animals we've had in the past and removed due to past "master plans" like penguins, sea lions, kangaroos, etc. seems like a mess. The zoo just seems to not really grasp what the public wants and mismanages their master plans a lot. The ideal version of RWPZ is frankly just 2005. Kangaroos, Penguins, Zebra, Camels, Giraffe, Elephant, Moon Bear, Polar Bear, Lemurs tropical america, etc. We really haven't gained much since then outside anteaters and takin, simply shifted animals around in multi million dollar master plans. We've been promised tigers for decades to no avail. The logical solution is take public polls at face value and put money towards the stuff that actually would bring in crowds like bears/tigers. Faces of the Rainforest should not have been phase 1. And the sea lions should not be phase 2. The basically did the priorities of the master plan completely backwards if the goal was to bring in new visitors and bring back old ones who miss the "glory days". The people who take polls in 2008, 2012, 2016 and 2020 want "carnivores now" not in 2032. They want penguins/sea lions/kangaroos back cause they didn't want them removed in the first place. The best thing the zoo can do is if they are very firm on the master plan. Prioritize what makes sense logically first. Sasha and Gina are dead. Start adding the tigers soon. We can wait on the sea lions and education center.
Click to expand...
Couldn't the moose be "quarantined" on Exhibit? CWD can't be spread airborne from moose to human, so as long as they don't get multiple moose from different sources, they could keep them on Exhibit for the two years. Quarantine doesn't necessarily always mean completely behind the scenes- and I've seen zoos place a "quarantining" animal on Exhibit solitarily where it can't harm anyone. And yes, ideally it would be wild from either Maine or New Hamphsire, doesn't really matter which. I totally agree on Faces as well, really I see it as the worst area in the zoo. Ideally, a few outdoor exhibits should be built around it even if the building is kept. I'd love to get the Maned wolves promised by the masterplan.
 
The zoo needs a new habitat for tigers because they can't breed the species without multiple yards connected to one another and a shared house. A new tiger exhibit at the cost of mainly unused space and camels isn't a big loss in my opinion, especially if we're saying the zoo needs some form of big crowd pleasure fast.

I think the addition of active and entertaining monkeys and Giant Otters is being a little undervalued, though as mentioned I agree that Faces of the Rainforest didn't turn out very well at all.

~Thylo
 
ThylacineAlive said:
The zoo needs a new habitat for tigers because they can't breed the species without multiple yards connected to one another and a shared house. A new tiger exhibit at the cost of mainly unused space and camels isn't a big loss in my opinion, especially if we're saying the zoo needs some form of big crowd pleasure fast.

I think the addition of active and entertaining monkeys and Giant Otters is being a little undervalued, though as mentioned I agree that Faces of the Rainforest didn't turn out very well at all.

~Thylo
Click to expand...
Does the zoo have to breed tigers? Can't they keep surplus/geriatric individuals and not breed them?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top