San Antonio Zoo San Antonio Zoo News 2015

I thought the rhino Kutu was candidate for transfer?

I really would like to see the return of black rhinos. They seem more suited to the SAZ than their wide mouth cousins ....
 
Long time lurker with some inside information about the San Antonio Zoo (Employee). Some of this could be rumor or fact, it is just what I have heard around the zoo, so take it for all it's worth.

As everyone knows, the new director Tim recently started as the new director started last year replacing McCusker. He came from SeaWorld, specifically Aquatica, so when he came he brought over many of his staff from SeaWorld to be vice presidents. It seems they are trying to turn the zoo into SeaWorld as most of the changes Tim is making are aesthetic in nature.

Attendance and per capita are way down, so many of his staff believe raising prices is the way to offset cost. Many believe he is still in his SeaWorld mindset, but the zoo attracts a different demographic than SeaWorld, as most of the guests are looking for a cheap day. The zoo also sees less attendance. Admission went up, now is close to 15, and novelty and concession items went up as well.

The strollers stand was renovated, now named Safari Gear. In order to encourage purchases, photo staff were brought in (think from SeaWorld as well) and picture packages can now be purchased (expensive). Rumor has it that pictures will no longer be allowed on the lion statue in the front, you must pay to have it taken.

Before Tim came in, plans for the giraffe exhibit were already in place, but he threw those out and what you see now is what he designed. The plan was to redo and rename Baraza Cafe to Longnecks Bar and Grill. It will be an extra fee to eat in the picnic area on the boardwalk. The zoo is looking to serve alcohol, and city council votes Dec. 3 whether or not to give the zoo a permit (we are a city park and within 300 feet of a school). This is obviously causing frustrations as the family atmosphere of the zoo may diminish with alcohol present. Once the giraffes are comfortable, lettuce can be purchased and fed, $5 for 3 pieces.

Another one of Tim's ideas, from SeaWorld, is to do holiday lights, known as ZooLights. He spent well over $700,000 to have professionals install lights for the holiday season and they budgeted for close to 100,000 people to attend in 36 days. It's been open 5 days, and I hear attendance has not gotten above 1,500 total. The money could have been spent elsewhere, such as a new exhibit or updating older exhibits. It's 12.25 for nonmembers, 10.25 for members and everything is an extra fee.

Because of this, this is the first time the zoo has finished in the red in 25 years. There is talk of bringing gorillas back, yet as I stated, the zoo is in debt, so it may be awhile, but I heard they will be in a group, not a single individual as last time.

I went to this zoo as a kid and have fond memories and now working here it is sad to see how different it is with a team of SeaWorld people leading it.
 
Interesting information, it'll be interesting to see what happens in the future. I think that the best thing the zoo could do for attendance is to upgrade their exhibit quality, but that's just me.
 
Regarding the giraffe exhibit, I believe the house is brand new. They planned on the three new giraffe sharing Daisy's (zoo's old giraffe) shelter, but the contractor damaged the shelter, forcing them to build a new one. We haven't heard any word of what animals will be sharing the exhibit, but I'm going to guess the same species as before, such as zebra, ostrich, red river hog, antelope, stork.

In the zoo's defense, it is very hard to improve some of the enclosures as the zoo is monitored by the HDRC, which regulates what can be destroyed. All of the stone used in some of the exhibits is close to 100 years old and therefore deemed historic and cannot be torn down. The zoo planned on redoing the monkey house, which is very outdated, yet because it is comprised of that stone, it cannot be torn down. I'm sure the same rule applies to the areas in Africa Rift Valley. The logical thing when Lucky passes, is to combine her exhibit with the new giraffes and make one large African plain, but because her shelter and wall are made of the stone that may not be possible.

For those who haven't been to the zoo in awhile, the map is different, looks like the Kiddie Park map and full of typos. Can be found here San Antonio Zoo - Zoo map
People have been complaining it is confusing compared to the old map

Another rumor before was the land where San Antonio Pets Alive is at now was going to be purchased by the zoo in order for a new enclosure such as apes and/or orangutans. Obviously that never came to fruition and was bought up and turned into the pet shelter it is today, but it was a large swath of land that could have been a high-end exhibit.

The zoo is still deciding what to do regarding the butterfly house. The zoo spends roughly 250-350 a week on butterflies to replenish the garden when it is open, and admissions to the butterfly garden ($1.50 a person) can barely keep up with the overhead so do not be surprised if it eventually goes away. As of November, it is still slated to reopen in March.
 
A new director from outside that brings along a senior staff from outside is per definition not a strong leader …. I really do wonder now how long this Mr. Tim will hold out. I think he is seriously out of sync of what locals would want from their local zoo.
 
Thanks for the update, TexasZoo123. Sounds like my worries were somewhat warranted, but I'm still sorry for sounding so alarmist. Sorry to hear about the zoo being Sea-World-ified.

I remember some of the keepers telling me a few years ago how hard it is to get the HDRC to okay remodeling. I should have remembered that. Is there anything you can (or are allowed to) tell us about how they got the demolition of Monkey Island okayed so they could build Africa Live? That seems like something the HDRC might not have been entirely comfortable with (though I'm certainly glad it worked out).
 
@TexasZoo123 - Of course a lot of ZooChatters appreciate getting inside information. However I will give you a friendly word of caution. If the senior staff at your zoo find out who you are and that you are posting this, it could cost you your job. Just my two cents.
 
Arizona Docent said:
@TexasZoo123 - Of course a lot of ZooChatters appreciate getting inside information. However I will give you a friendly word of caution. If the senior staff at your zoo find out who you are and that you are posting this, it could cost you your job. Just my two cents.
Click to expand...

Guess I should say former employee, no longer work at the zoo, but still keep in contact with colleagues who give me this information. Like I said all water cooler talk and rumor/speculation, so not guaranteeing any accuracy, just restating what is heard.

As for the Monkey Island, this was before my time so I do not have accurate info on that. Same could be said for the new Zootennial plaza. This old area used to be the boardwalk and old sea lion exhibit, which was also made up of the stone, so my best guess was that they applied for an exception and was granted. But the HDRC is very powerful and can be complicated when it comes to change or demolition of historic sites, as downtown SA has the same restrictions.
 
When I heard the new zoo director was coming from SeaWorld, I was afraid this would happen. (even putting aside my criticisms about SeaWorld, it's a theme park, not a zoo. It has a totally different demographic and SAZ doesn't exactly have the financial resources that SeaWorld does) I don't really like the new direction it's going in. What disappoints me is that I liked where things were going for a while, before the new guy came. Oh well.

Interesting to here that some of the structures there are considered historical.
 
TheMightyOrca said:
When I heard the new zoo director was coming from SeaWorld, I was afraid this would happen. (even putting aside my criticisms about SeaWorld, it's a theme park, not a zoo. It has a totally different demographic and SAZ doesn't exactly have the financial resources that SeaWorld does) I don't really like the new direction it's going in. What disappoints me is that I liked where things were going for a while, before the new guy came. Oh well.

Interesting to here that some of the structures there are considered historical.
Click to expand...

I enjoy Seaworld (not getting into cetaceans here). I absolutely love the atmosphere that it tends to give off, as I love both amusement parks and zoos, and this is both. That being said, that atmosphere should stay at Seaworld.
 
jayjds2 said:
I enjoy Seaworld (not getting into cetaceans here). I absolutely love the atmosphere that it tends to give off, as I love both amusement parks and zoos, and this is both. That being said, that atmosphere should stay at Seaworld.
Click to expand...

Personally I found SeaWorld San Antonio underwhelming, (the other parks look a lot better, exhibit wise, I guess the SA park is the loser SeaWorld) though they have changed some stuff since I last went 3-4 years ago. I was pretty disappointed with it. Granted, I was mainly going for the animals, I suppose if I was going for the theme park atmosphere, maybe I would've liked it better.

But, yeah, we can agree on keeping different atmospheres. I go to the zoo, I want a zoo experience, ha ha. I think a lot of people feel the same way. I also question whether it's a wise decision from a finance point of view. Like I said, SAZ doesn't have as many resources as a theme park, so can it fund theme park style attractions? Not to mention that San Antonio is home to two major theme parks, anyone who wants a theme park can go to one of those instead.

I can't help but wonder if some of the new changes might be an attempt to appeal to tourists, since San Antonio is a pretty popular tourist destination. What do you think?

Side note, have you ever been to Moody Gardens in Galveston? It's mostly zoo, but it has a few theme park elements, but it does a pretty good job of integrating both. I bet you'd like it. (I know I do, ha ha) Admittedly, it probably helps that the place doesn't really paint itself as a traditional zoo.
 
Couple of updates heard from a few sources.

For you bird fans, the small bird exhibit near the rhino is gone. Cannot remember what was in there, but it was the small enclosed area with the "Rift Valley" sign on it. This was one of the few areas providing shade in the entire Africa Rift Valley before the Treetop area and I personally thought it was a nice exhibit, but it was torn down this past week, no reason why.

Zoo was also approved to serve alcohol. No guest has ever fallen into an exhibit in the zoo's history (from what I can remember), but some of those exhibits past Rift Valley, such as the dama gazelle and warthog have low walls, and inebriated people can certainly fall in.

Kind of find it strange that when interviewed, Tim states that the zoo should "really be falling in line with the other family attractions in town, such as Six Flags, Sea World, Top Golf and our beloved River Walk" meaning he wants to make a profit off alcohol, yet states later in the article that "extra revenue from alcohol sales would go toward the zoo's conservation mission." Conservation money is not touched by the zoo but goes directly to the missions the zoo supports. Doesn't really add up IMO

Article found here S.A. Zoo seeking to sell alcohol during regular hours

Also notice whenever an article about Morrow comes out, he is now CEO of the zoo, not zoo director (changed his title). CEO sounds like running a business, not directing a zoo. Interesting tidbits to keep an eye on.
 
TheMightyOrca said:
Personally I found SeaWorld San Antonio underwhelming, (the other parks look a lot better, exhibit wise, I guess the SA park is the loser SeaWorld) though they have changed some stuff since I last went 3-4 years ago. I was pretty disappointed with it. Granted, I was mainly going for the animals, I suppose if I was going for the theme park atmosphere, maybe I would've liked it better.

But, yeah, we can agree on keeping different atmospheres. I go to the zoo, I want a zoo experience, ha ha. I think a lot of people feel the same way. I also question whether it's a wise decision from a finance point of view. Like I said, SAZ doesn't have as many resources as a theme park, so can it fund theme park style attractions? Not to mention that San Antonio is home to two major theme parks, anyone who wants a theme park can go to one of those instead.

I can't help but wonder if some of the new changes might be an attempt to appeal to tourists, since San Antonio is a pretty popular tourist destination. What do you think?

Side note, have you ever been to Moody Gardens in Galveston? It's mostly zoo, but it has a few theme park elements, but it does a pretty good job of integrating both. I bet you'd like it. (I know I do, ha ha) Admittedly, it probably helps that the place doesn't really paint itself as a traditional zoo.
Click to expand...

Sorry for late response. Seaworld San Antonio is indeed underwhelming. No Wild Arctic, no underwater viewing for exhibit animals, etc. I enjoyed the shows, but they were a bit short. I also had a great time on the roller coasters (I rode Steel Eel about 5 or 6 times while waiting for a show). I definitely enjoyed Orlando much more, even though they've gotten the penguin attraction since I was there last. I will go there again within the next few years. As for drawing tourists, personally, I think their website could use some improvement. I know that whenever I go somewhere, and I see a smaller zoo, the website is usually the deciding factor for me, although now this website is much more helpful. That's the main reason that I took so long to go over to San Antonio. Now I plan to go there one more time, because a) they have a Mastchie's tree kangaroo Joey and b) topi antelope. I think that some of the changes have helped, although they went a bit overboard on the lights. I'm not sure what they can do, given the limited space they have. As for Moody Gardens, it is on the list, along with Houston Zoo, Ellen Trout Zoo, The Texas Zoo (I know this place is horrid), and the space center. I will not be visiting the downtown aquarium, because a) the Tigers and b) my friend who isn't even someone who goes to zoos, aquariums, or theme parks a lot told me it was bad. By any chance, do you know if Moody Gardens still has Northern Fur Seal? It's the only place even remotely close that has(had) one.

As for the bird near the rhino, it was a pair of Lady Ross's Turaco. They were probably either moved to the African Aviary, or sent to the Dallas Zoo because on my recent visit, I saw Lady Ross's turaco that were not there before. There already was an unsigned pair in the aviary at San Antonio. I liked their previous location, but most visitors took the other path and didn't see them.

As for the actual news: As mentioned earlier, the first Mastchie's Tree Kangaroo since the zoo joined the Species Survival Plan about a year ago was announced. Who knows when it was born, but it just popped its head out of the pouch. Speaking of which, I wondered why the individual I saw was exhibiting such odd behavior. There's a picture in the gallery of her apparently checking on her new baby. :)
 
TexasZoo123 said:
Couple of updates heard from a few sources.

For you bird fans, the small bird exhibit near the rhino is gone. Cannot remember what was in there, but it was the small enclosed area with the "Rift Valley" sign on it. This was one of the few areas providing shade in the entire Africa Rift Valley before the Treetop area and I personally thought it was a nice exhibit, but it was torn down this past week, no reason why.

Zoo was also approved to serve alcohol. No guest has ever fallen into an exhibit in the zoo's history (from what I can remember), but some of those exhibits past Rift Valley, such as the dama gazelle and warthog have low walls, and inebriated people can certainly fall in.

Kind of find it strange that when interviewed, Tim states that the zoo should "really be falling in line with the other family attractions in town, such as Six Flags, Sea World, Top Golf and our beloved River Walk" meaning he wants to make a profit off alcohol, yet states later in the article that "extra revenue from alcohol sales would go toward the zoo's conservation mission." Conservation money is not touched by the zoo but goes directly to the missions the zoo supports. Doesn't really add up IMO

Article found here S.A. Zoo seeking to sell alcohol during regular hours

Also notice whenever an article about Morrow comes out, he is now CEO of the zoo, not zoo director (changed his title). CEO sounds like running a business, not directing a zoo. Interesting tidbits to keep an eye on.
Click to expand...

If you're talking about the aviary in the Rift Valley, that's been gone for a few years. That whole area was not up to ADA code and had to be reworked for legal reasons.

Serving alcohol at the zoo isn't that bad of a thing. Houston does it and has had no ill effects to my knowledge. It's another source of income for a zoo that is cash strapped. The director is right, the zoo does have to compete with those other tourist attractions. That's the reality of the business. From a few hours away, the zoo has stepped up its PR game since Tim took over.

There was a time maybe 20 years ago, it was considered the best, or one of the best, in Texas. That time is long gone though. Now, it's almost considered an eyesore. The revitalization of the zoo is key to it's future.
 
I was referring to the one viewed from the bridge, when I said turaco. If you mean up by the cheetahs, that'd be marabou stork and bateleur eagle. Anything else was already gone.
 
jbnbsn99 said:
If you're talking about the aviary in the Rift Valley, that's been gone for a few years. That whole area was not up to ADA code and had to be reworked for legal reasons.

Serving alcohol at the zoo isn't that bad of a thing. Houston does it and has had no ill effects to my knowledge. It's another source of income for a zoo that is cash strapped. The director is right, the zoo does have to compete with those other tourist attractions. That's the reality of the business. From a few hours away, the zoo has stepped up its PR game since Tim took over.

There was a time maybe 20 years ago, it was considered the best, or one of the best, in Texas. That time is long gone though. Now, it's almost considered an eyesore. The revitalization of the zoo is key to it's future.
Click to expand...

jayjds2 sounds right about the bird I was referring too. The exhibit was between the rhino and new giraffe area.

Although they will start serving alcohol, it will not increase net cash for the zoo, because according to Tim, it goes directly to the zoo's conservation work, which is strictly used outside of zoo projects.

Every employee of the zoo and resident of San Antonio would love to see a revitalized updated zoo, but the decisions being made are not helping the cause. Finishing in the red for the first time in nearly 3 decades makes the zoo even more cash strapped. 700-800K was spent on zoo lights alone, which so far is a bust. They got rid of the snow cone and corn trailers, which were guest favorites. Nanyuki Market, which was the gift shop inside of Africa Live and made close to $10k a week, was closed to build Santa's workshop for zoo lights. A smaller gift shop was recently opened, still called the same, yet the zoo lost all sales from July to November when it was closed. And the items purchased there were unique to Africa Live, so other gift shops could not pick up the slack for lost sales.

So if the zoo will be working out of debt, it may be years before they see a new exhibit, unless donors step up.
 
Several zoos have CEO's - a title I am not crazy about either. Makes it sound too corporate.

An increasing number of zoos run ZooLights during the Christmas season and it is a major money maker I assume (or they would not do it). I know at my local Reid Park Zoo it is hugely successful and I think (not 100% positive) it is their biggest single revenue generating activity of the year.

So you cannot blame SAZ for trying it. If it did not make a profit in its first year there are a couple possible explanations. One is that it is too new and not enough people know about it yet. If this is the case, it should continue to grow and become profitable in a couple years. The other possibility is that the lights at the Riverwalk are so popular that no other venue in the city can compete. If this is the case, then SAZ may not be able to make a profitable ZooLights experience which is not their fault but merely a unique situation based on the city in which they are located.
 
Arizona Docent said:
Several zoos have CEO's - a title I am not crazy about either. Makes it sound too corporate.

An increasing number of zoos run ZooLights during the Christmas season and it is a major money maker I assume (or they would not do it). I know at my local Reid Park Zoo it is hugely successful and I think (not 100% positive) it is their biggest single revenue generating activity of the year.

So you cannot blame SAZ for trying it. If it did not make a profit in its first year there are a couple possible explanations. One is that it is too new and not enough people know about it yet. If this is the case, it should continue to grow and become profitable in a couple years. The other possibility is that the lights at the Riverwalk are so popular that no other venue in the city can compete. If this is the case, then SAZ may not be able to make a profitable ZooLights experience which is not their fault but merely a unique situation based on the city in which they are located.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. I once made the mistake of going to the Riverwalk to see the lights turn on. Super crowded, and my bus was soooooo late, ha ha.

It seems there's definitely more focus on turning the zoo into a bigger attraction. I'm certainly not against that, though I wonder what the best way to go about it would be. San Antonio is a big tourist spot, but at the same time it's not a wealthy city so a non-profit zoo that relies heavily on donations isn't gonna be a big, world-class facility. It makes me wonder, what makes a zoo into a major attraction? Most of the big zoos, they have a lot of money and SAZ isn't gonna have that kind of cash any time soon, if ever.

If SAZ wants some of that sweet, sweet tourist money, I think it's gonna have to offer something that most zoos don't. Is there any way they could do that without tons of money? SAZ is decent but in the zoo world, it doesn't really stand out. People who are in the city for a few days aren't gonna want to go out of their way to visit SAZ when it probably doesn't offer anything much different from their own local zoo. I wonder what they could do?

My (former) roommate (I just moved out of SA...) will probably be happy to hear that they're serving alcohol, ha ha. I've got no problem with it, and I bet it'll make some decent money.
 
TexasZoo123 said:
jayjds2 sounds right about the bird I was referring too. The exhibit was between the rhino and new giraffe area.

Although they will start serving alcohol, it will not increase net cash for the zoo, because according to Tim, it goes directly to the zoo's conservation work, which is strictly used outside of zoo projects.

Every employee of the zoo and resident of San Antonio would love to see a revitalized updated zoo, but the decisions being made are not helping the cause. Finishing in the red for the first time in nearly 3 decades makes the zoo even more cash strapped. 700-800K was spent on zoo lights alone, which so far is a bust. They got rid of the snow cone and corn trailers, which were guest favorites. Nanyuki Market, which was the gift shop inside of Africa Live and made close to $10k a week, was closed to build Santa's workshop for zoo lights. A smaller gift shop was recently opened, still called the same, yet the zoo lost all sales from July to November when it was closed. And the items purchased there were unique to Africa Live, so other gift shops could not pick up the slack for lost sales.

So if the zoo will be working out of debt, it may be years before they see a new exhibit, unless donors step up.
Click to expand...

That's disappointing to hear. I do agree that the zoo needs to be revitalized, but it sounds like they aren't making the best decisions. Oh well, it's not like I have any better ideas. (though I probably wouldn't have closed the corn trailer, at least. People love corn.)

What do you guys think the zoo could do to improve things, within their resources?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top