San Francisco Zoo San Francisco Zoo News 2024

[Chimpangeek]

The Zoo has gradually depleted its collection over the past few years, especially during and since the pandemic. In the last 6ish years they've gone from:

1. 8 monkey species to 2
2. 5 marsupial species to 2
3. 6 species/subspecies of cat to 4 (no more tigers)
4. No more wild camelids
5. No savannah antelope species
6. 3 species of large flightless bird down to 2
7. No more otters
8. No more pinnipeds
9. No more lesser apes
10. They just sent away their pygmy hippo- stupid move since Moo Deng has made Pygmy hippos really popular.

The Zoo just acquired a male Bactrian camel, so I take back the 4th thing I mentioned.
But seriously, the zoo is almost Monkeyless. If they send the Francois Langurs away then all they have are the Mandrills. Monkeys are hugely popular zoo animals. Otters as well.

 

[DavidBrown]

The Zoo just acquired a male Bactrian camel, so I take back the 4th thing I mentioned.
But seriously, the zoo is almost Monkeyless. If they send the Francois Langurs away then all they have are the Mandrills. Monkeys are hugely popular zoo animals. Otters as well.

They used to have one of the best-monkeyed primate complexes in North America. What the heck did they do to it?

What has become of the nocturnal gallery? Did they rip it out after they booted the aye-ayes?

 

[Great Argus]

But seriously, the zoo is almost Monkeyless. If they send the Francois Langurs away then all they have are the Mandrills.

I just realized they don't even have the colobus anymore. Wow they have seriously let that area decline.

What the heck did they do to it?

Emptied a lot of it for the relative failure called Madagascar I believe was the case. One Fossa exhibit as a renovated part of the structure is it I think. Their Bald eagle is/was in the old Patas exhibit. Sifaka in there somewhere.

 

[Nile Hippo Expert]

The Zoo has gradually depleted its collection over the past few years, especially during and since the pandemic. In the last 6ish years they've gone from:

1. 8 monkey species to 2
2. 5 marsupial species to 2
3. 6 species/subspecies of cat to 4 (no more tigers)
4. No more wild camelids
5. No savannah antelope species
6. 3 species of large flightless bird down to 2
7. No more otters
8. No more pinnipeds
9. No more lesser apes
10. They just sent away their pygmy hippo- stupid move since Moo Deng has made Pygmy hippos really popular.

Also two more popular zoo animals have been phased out in the past seven years are Polar Bears, the last of which died in 2017 and Nile Hippo, as their lone individual (which they only got in 2011) moved to Cincinnati in 2021, though both of them didn't have the greatest of exhibits.

The Zoo just acquired a male Bactrian camel, so I take back the 4th thing I mentioned.
But seriously, the zoo is almost Monkeyless. If they send the Francois Langurs away then all they have are the Mandrills. Monkeys are hugely popular zoo animals. Otters as well.

For a San Francisco to be nearly monkeyless sounds so bizarre!

 

[Great Argus]

Checking USDA, I count 52 species of mammal in mid September of this year compared to 72 species of mammal in December 2017. Net drop of twenty species there, technically 21 since the Pygmy Hippo is now gone.
Removing 9 domestics on both lists give you 43(42) mammals for 2024 and 63 for 2017.

No idea how that stacks up against other zoos in terms of drops, but that seems on the high side.

 

[Chimpangeek]

They used to have one of the best-monkeyed primate complexes in North America. What the heck did they do to it?

What has become of the nocturnal gallery? Did they rip it out after they booted the aye-ayes?

They knocked part of it down- really just the vertical enclosures that were home to Francois Langurs, Howler Monkeys, Squirrel Monkeys, Colobus Monkey and Siamang. There were some serious structural as well as logistical problems with them and they'd long been slated to be torn down. In place of those enclosures would be the Madagascar Center- the plans for which are ever evolving (devolving technically).
The Zoo sent away all of those 5 species, as well as its Emperor Tamarins, Pied Tamarins and Patas Monkeys. The exhibits for the last 3 are all still standing in other parts of the complex and have had a rotating host of not primate species occupying them. Part of the Madagascar project opened up earlier in the year for the Fossa s well as a few invertebrates that live inside a massive artificial Baobab Tree, just outside and above where the Nocturnal Gallery is. The Nocturnal Gallery has been closed to the public since the zoo sent its Aye Ayes away more than a decade ago. It's a tragedy it's not used for other nocturnal primate species or bats. It's a fairly large space, with 4 separate enclosures. It might also be possible to be turned into a Herpetarium to showcase Madagascar reptiles and Amphibian species.
The Sifaka exhibit was added on a few years before the pandemic in a unused area of the primate center across from the Patas yard. The Mandrills and the Sifaka are the only primates holding court at the Primate Center.

 

[DavidBrown]

They knocked part of it down- really just the vertical enclosures that were home to Francois Langurs, Howler Monkeys, Squirrel Monkeys, Colobus Monkey and Siamang. There were some serious structural as well as logistical problems with them and they'd long been slated to be torn down. In place of those enclosures would be the Madagascar Center- the plans for which are ever evolving (devolving technically).
.

Thank you for the rundown on what has happened to the complex. The last time I was there was 2012 and the aye-ayes were still present, and it was awesome, really the best experience at the zoo. You would think that if their former space is still intact and usable in the nocturnal gallery, and the whole point of the complex now is Madagascar that maybe they would return.

 

[Great Argus]

You would think that if their former space is still intact and usable in the nocturnal gallery, and the whole point of the complex now is Madagascar that maybe they would return.

Wasn't there a mention of the current director deliberately getting rid of them? At which point I doubt they would.

Unrelated, I noticed this when rummaging the thread re the Aye-ayes, anyone know if this ever happened?

Autocorrect of bontebok, I’m assuming. The document linked shows that they are due to receive 1.0 bontebok from Cleveland.

Because there's no Bontebok on the Sep USDA at least and no mention thus far in thread. Not listed on their website either.

 

[Coelacanth18]

I didn't reply when it was posted earlier, but is anyone else equally unimpressed/skeptical about that proposed jaguar exhibit? I thought maybe those renderings @Julio C Castro shared weren't doing the space justice, but I looked at the enclosure area on Google Street View and it's just as small IRL as it looks in the drawing. Not that it would be out of step with existing Jaguar exhibits in other zoos, but for a new one built at a major zoo in 2025 it feels just as slapdash as that Lion plan does... and it will suffer even more by comparison, given that Oakland is just across the bay and they have a 31,000 sq ft Jaguar exhibit with big, live oak trees:

 

[Chimpangeek]

I didn't reply when it was posted earlier, but is anyone else equally unimpressed/skeptical about that proposed jaguar exhibit? I thought maybe those renderings @Julio C Castro shared weren't doing the space justice, but I looked at the enclosure area on Google Street View and it's just as small IRL as it looks in the drawing. Not that it would be out of step with existing Jaguar exhibits in other zoos, but for a new one built at a major zoo in 2025 it feels just as slapdash as that Lion plan does... and it will suffer even more by comparison, given that Oakland is just across the bay and they have a 31,000 sq ft Jaguar exhibit with big, live oak trees:

The graphics for the proposed Jaguar exhibit are not accurately reflective of the size of the space. It's just under 5,000 square feet. The current exhibit is only around 2,800 square feet.
In contrast, the 2 open air yards at the Lion house are each around 11,000 square feet (including the moat area).

 

[nczoofan]

And where is the money for the Jaguar coming from? Is it coming out of the budget for the partially complete Madagascar or the orangutan habitat that was never built? Or the exhibit for the langurs who have languished in a cage for years? Or the permanent exhibit for the wild horse and camel that currently have run down plywood barns?

The critical report of the zoo by the city this year stated “There is no plan for Zoo infrastructure updates, new habitat construction, renovations, or short- and long-term planning.” This seems especially true with these acquisitions and quickly planned cat exhibits.

 

[Great Argus]

I didn't reply when it was posted earlier, but is anyone else equally unimpressed/skeptical about that proposed jaguar exhibit? I thought maybe those renderings @Julio C Castro shared weren't doing the space justice, but I looked at the enclosure area on Google Street View and it's just as small IRL as it looks in the drawing. Not that it would be out of step with existing Jaguar exhibits in other zoos, but for a new one built at a major zoo in 2025 it feels just as slapdash as that Lion plan does... and it will suffer even more by comparison, given that Oakland is just across the bay and they have a 31,000 sq ft Jaguar exhibit with big, live oak trees:

I'm not particularly impressed either. The size is average but the overall concept seems a bit underwhelming. It's also not the first time they've talked about putting something on that location.

And where is the money for the Jaguar coming from? Is it coming out of the budget for the partially complete Madagascar or the orangutan habitat that was never built? Or the exhibit for the langurs who have languished in a cage for years? Or the permanent exhibit for the wild horse and camel that currently have run down plywood barns?

It's stated to run them about a million dollars on the plans, and yeah where they're getting that I don't know. Their public financials aren't great. The Lion exhibit is stated to be 1.6 million, so they're attempting to shovel at least 2.6 million into new exhibits for the cats they're kicking out of the complex. Their general financials seem pretty equivalent to Oakland interestingly enough, and yet Oakland's exhibits are way better.

The critical report of the zoo by the city this year stated “There is no plan for Zoo infrastructure updates, new habitat construction, renovations, or short- and long-term planning.” This seems especially true with these acquisitions and quickly planned cat exhibits.

I believe i read somewhere recently the zoo has not had a masterplan since before the turn of the century, hence the continued haphazard developments that seem to have a coin toss of going through.

 

[nczoofan]

I'm not particularly impressed either. The size is average but the overall concept seems a bit underwhelming. It's also not the first time they've talked about putting something on that location.



It's stated to run them about a million dollars on the plans, and yeah where they're getting that I don't know. Their public financials aren't great. The Lion exhibit is stated to be 1.6 million, so they're attempting to shovel at least 2.6 million into new exhibits for the cats they're kicking out of the complex. Their general financials seem pretty equivalent to Oakland interestingly enough, and yet Oakland's exhibits are way better.



I believe i read somewhere recently the zoo has not had a masterplan since before the turn of the century, hence the continued haphazard developments that seem to have a coin toss of going through.

That estimate seems wildly low for the bay area. I wouldn’t be surprised if both come in far over those budget. If they can keep it in budget it will be good, but then again this is the same zoo that has refused to be audited by the city despite trying to get more money from the city…

 

[tigris115]

How has the AZA not stepped in?

 

[Coelacanth18]

How has the AZA not stepped in?

I don't see what they can do besides revoke the zoo's accreditation, which... we'll see. The zoo is accredited through 2027 and it's rare for accreditation to get revoked mid-cycle, but it does happen. Ironically enough, it happened to another San Francisco facility earlier this year:

The Association of Zoos and Aquariums Rescinds Accreditation of the Aquarium of the Bay

I haven't been following all of this recent turmoil and controversy closely enough to know how much of a case there is for the zoo currently failing to meet AZA standards; would be an interesting question, though.

 

[Great Argus]

That estimate seems wildly low for the bay area. I wouldn’t be surprised if both come in far over those budget. If they can keep it in budget it will be good, but then again this is the same zoo that has refused to be audited by the city despite trying to get more money from the city…

I had the same thought. Just seems way too low for the bay area when they're building basically from scratch.

I haven't been following all of this recent turmoil and controversy closely enough to know how much of a case there is for the zoo currently failing to meet AZA standards; would be an interesting question, though.

Equally the AZA hasn't put out anything in San Francisco's defense either afaik - it's almost like they're staying neutral until their hand is forced one way or another. It is a bit of a surprise to me the zoo has remained accredited when other zoos have recently lost it for outdated facilities - SF has had numerous incidents related to poor or outdated facilities and yet they get to retain accreditation? There's also been rumors they haven't been reporting things to the AZA and SSP's like they're supposed to, the truth of which I'm not sure. They've also had a bit of a rough time with the USDA over the last decade, with more than half their reports being focused inspections for some incident or other. Just feels like things don't completely add up.

 

[reduakari]

They knocked part of it down- really just the vertical enclosures that were home to Francois Langurs, Howler Monkeys, Squirrel Monkeys, Colobus Monkey and Siamang. There were some serious structural as well as logistical problems with them and they'd long been slated to be torn down. In place of those enclosures would be the Madagascar Center- the plans for which are ever evolving (devolving technically).
The Zoo sent away all of those 5 species, as well as its Emperor Tamarins, Pied Tamarins and Patas Monkeys. The exhibits for the last 3 are all still standing in other parts of the complex and have had a rotating host of not primate species occupying them. Part of the Madagascar project opened up earlier in the year for the Fossa s well as a few invertebrates that live inside a massive artificial Baobab Tree, just outside and above where the Nocturnal Gallery is.

“Devolving” is the most accurate term for what has happened to the Primate Center and to the zoo overall. The artificial “baobabs” perched on the concrete slabs of the original structure and plunked into an otherwise barren sifaka cage (itself constructed over the remains of the former centerpiece colobus exhibit) are hideously unrealistic and completely incongruous. The plans for pandas, lions and jaguars are amateurish (at best), but even as bereft of detail and richness as depicted are likely to cost 3-4 times more than the stated “estimates.” What a sad, sad tale continues to unfold in San Francisco.

 

[Chimpangeek]

“Devolving” is the most accurate term for what has happened to the Primate Center and to the zoo overall. The artificial “baobabs” perched on the concrete slabs of the original structure and plunked into an otherwise barren sifaka cage (itself constructed over the remains of the former centerpiece colobus exhibit) are hideously unrealistic and completely incongruous. The plans for pandas, lions and jaguars are amateurish (at best), but even as bereft of detail and richness as depicted are likely to cost 3-4 times more than the stated “estimates.” What a sad, sad tale continues to unfold in San Francisco.

Agreed. The new exhibits the Zoo has built/renovated in recent years have been consistently badly designed. The Sifaka exhibit isn't the worse, but it could definitely use more climbing structures and better use of vertical space.
Other poorly designed new exhibits:

- The new Snow Leopard Exhibit. It's too narrow, is actually physically smaller than the Jaguar exhibit that previously housed snow leopards and the support structures for the netting are an eyesore.
- The Prezwalski Horse yard. It's a small, boring empty dirt paddock that used to be part of a much larger field exhibit for Blackbuck and Muntjac. Now most of the yard is being unused.
- Fossa Exhibit. 2 relatively small enclosures on different levels but they only have one Fossa.
- The Orangutan triple grotto- the zoo marketed it as a new exhibit but it was basically a renovation of the grottos indoor holding area, and building a mobile walkway to make it easier for keepers to access each of the grottos. The Orangutans arguably have the worst most outdated exhibit in the zoo.
-The Chimp passage exhibit. Definitely an improvement from the triple grottos, but ugly to look at and lots of underutilized vertical space.
-Black Bear Grotto. The zoo created 1 larger grotto by knocking down the wall between two of them. Before they got the black bears, they could've added in more interesting features especially climbing structures.
The only decent newer exhibits were the ones for the Wolves, Pygmy hippo, spotted owls and Komodo dragon.

 

[Chimpangeek]

I had the same thought. Just seems way too low for the bay area when they're building basically from scratch.



Equally the AZA hasn't put out anything in San Francisco's defense either afaik - it's almost like they're staying neutral until their hand is forced one way or another. It is a bit of a surprise to me the zoo has remained accredited when other zoos have recently lost it for outdated facilities - SF has had numerous incidents related to poor or outdated facilities and yet they get to retain accreditation? There's also been rumors they haven't been reporting things to the AZA and SSP's like they're supposed to, the truth of which I'm not sure. They've also had a bit of a rough time with the USDA over the last decade, with more than half their reports being focused inspections for some incident or other. Just feels like things don't completely add up.

The Zoo is great at deception.
I'm sure they've been able to keep the langurs in the awful cage exhibits they're in because they told the AZA its temporary and when they came to inspect they had gone to great lengths to temporarily eradicate the rodents.

Likewise, I bet they told the AZA that they regularly rotate the Orangutans in the Outdoor Chimp enclosure.

 

[Great Argus]

when they came to inspect they had gone to great lengths to temporarily eradicate the rodents.

Temporary indeed, they were cited by USDA for rodent infestation back in September.