Tasmania Zoo Tasmania Zoo review

[Grant Rhino]

TASMANIA ZOO REVIEW:

I visited Tasmania Zoo last week and here is my review:

I have visited this zoo once before - back in around 2013 (so 11 years ago) and I was extremely unimpressed back then - I found it messy, disorganized and full of awful cages. The primate cages were particularly disgraceful. However, I'd heard about a lot of the progress made over the past decade and I wanted to see how much it had improved.

I think the place has improved enormously in the past decade, but there are still some fundamental problems.

The positives:

The zoo is a lot tidier now and feels more organized in a lot of ways. The front section with the numerous species of marmoset and tamarin (as well as meerkats, red pandas, squirrel monkeys etc) is very nice. The enclosures for these small monkeys are high quality and have a lot of room. I like how they surround the cafe area. It was particularly nice to see golden handed tamarins - a species I don't think I've ever seen before.

The giraffe enclosure at the back of the zoo is also nice - it has enough space and a pretty backdrop of rolling hills. I'm surprised that they haven't endeavoured to include zebra or an antelope species in with the giraffes though - but maybe something like that is in the pipelines and we just don't know about it yet.

The capuchin island is very pretty too - and I even recognised a few of the individual capuchins that I'd remembered from Melbourne Zoo a decade ago.

The Australian native collection is a good size and I think they have the proportions of natives and exotics about right.

I like the Tasmanian devil section - nice big enclosures with lots of space and good viewing for the public.

I also really like the fact that there are wild wallabies and small marsupials hopping around the zoo grounds - as well as native birds.

There are more species in the zoo now than 10 years ago, and they have obviously put in the effort to get as many exotics as possible - though I don't like how some are housed.

The effort that has been put into improving this zoo is very, very noticeable - and it should be mentioned.

The negatives:

In a nutshell, the main problem with this zoo is that there are far too many cages: They are large cages, with enough space in most - but they are cages nonetheless. There is far too much wire in the place and not enough moats or glass areas. The whole place feels like a gaol or detention centre. It's not a nice feel when looking at animals.

The lions and tigers have large enough areas, and they are planted out fairly well - but if they could include some glass viewing areas it would greatly improve both exhibits.

The leopard enclosure if awful - as it's simply a large cage. It's also not planted out well with foliage. These are the types of enclosures that zoos like Melbourne Zoo demolished 10 years ago, and now we have a zoo actually building them in this day and age??? I realise that leopards need to be kept in enclosures with a caged roof (legally) but surely planting the enclosure out with greenery would make it a lot nicer.

The snow leopard enclosure is better though - as the rocky terrain in it looks like snow leopard habitat. It's not as good as the snow leopard enclosure at Melbourne, but it is acceptable...

The biggest disappointment to my mind though was the housing of the various species of gibbon. Gibbons simply should NOT be housed in cages in my opinion. The cages for the silvery gibbon and white handed gibbon are both large, but they look awful - and are very bare with almost no foliage. I understand that a number of zoos still have these types of cage enclosures, but I can't understand why any zoo would build these new in this day and age. They are simply outdated.

Surely gibbons should be housed on islands planted with trees - where they can see the sky without wire in the way. The gibbon islands at Mogo, Adelaide, Melbourne and Dubbo are all great examples of beautiful homes for gibbons.

The frustrating thing here is that the zoo has gone to the trouble to get more gibbon species but instead of building an island enclosure they have decided on the cage option. In my view it would've been far better to display one species of gibbon and do it properly on an island rather than 3 in these awful, barren cages.

The zoo has a lovely island enclosure for the capuchin monkeys, so I can't really understand why they couldn't build something similar for the gibbons....

Everything I've just said about the gibbons also applies to the de Brazza monkeys. Why bring them in if you house them like that??? In fact, the de Brazza acquisition is an epic fail in my view. We (myself and my fiance) couldn't even look at them housed like that. The gibbons at least have space - the de brazzas don't. Build them an island or send them somewhere else that can accomodate them better!

Some of the other small cages for primates are still there too. The mandrill, siamang, macaques and ring-tailed lemurs are housed in blatantly unacceptable conditions - these are the type of cages that give all zoos a bad name. These are old though and hopefully will be demolished soon enough - or renovated and used for smaller, more appropriate species.

Suggestions and improvements:

Firstly, get rid of the cages: They are tacky and unsightly.

1. Spend the money to build some primate islands - the zoo has an extensive primate collection but the way most of it is displayed actually makes it a negative thing rather than a positive thing.

2. Include some glass areas in the big cat enclosues - or better still, use moats where possible (though I do understand that would cost more).

3. If zebra or antelope (or even white rhino) could be sourced, then the zoo has ample space to display them. I'm not a fan of bringing in every species under the sun just for the sake of it, but I think these could enhance the giraffe area.

Conclusions:

All in all, the zoo has improved enormously in the past decade - but then it was starting from a long way back too. Huge effort has clearly been put in and the improvements are noticeable and numerous.

However, the cages and excessive use of wire are a really big issue in my opinion. It feels like this zoo has decided to bring in as many different species as it can possibly lay its hands on and display them as cheaply as possible - rather than build a beautiful environment and house what would look good in that environment. This is always going to be a challenge for private zoos (which don't have the funding of government run zoos) - but then maybe private zoos should just be smaller if they can't afford nicer enclosures. Smaller zoos which are beautiful can have the same appeal as larger zoos. Mogo's primate islands are a good example of this.

Going forward I'd like to see the primate collection decrease. I think a quality rather than quantity approach would be far better for this zoo. Focusing on a few more ungulates would also be worthwhile in my view - as you don't need cage type enclosures for these animals. Fences don't cost that much.

All in all I think a good next step for this place would be to hire an architect or planner who could design some more interesting and creative ways of displaying the animals. The collection is big enough now - so now it should be about housing them better.

The zoo has improved a lot but still has a long way to go.

 

[Zoofan15]

TASMANIA ZOO REVIEW:

I visited Tasmania Zoo last week and here is my review:

I have visited this zoo once before - back in around 2013 (so 11 years ago) and I was extremely unimpressed back then - I found it messy, disorganized and full of awful cages. The primate cages were particularly disgraceful. However, I'd heard about a lot of the progress made over the past decade and I wanted to see how much it had improved.

I think the place has improved enormously in the past decade, but there are still some fundamental problems.

The positives:

The zoo is a lot tidier now and feels more organized in a lot of ways. The front section with the numerous species of marmoset and tamarin (as well as meerkats, red pandas, squirrel monkeys etc) is very nice. The enclosures for these small monkeys are high quality and have a lot of room. I like how they surround the cafe area. It was particularly nice to see golden handed tamarins - a species I don't think I've ever seen before.

The giraffe enclosure at the back of the zoo is also nice - it has enough space and a pretty backdrop of rolling hills. I'm surprised that they haven't endeavoured to include zebra or an antelope species in with the giraffes though - but maybe something like that is in the pipelines and we just don't know about it yet.

The capuchin island is very pretty too - and I even recognised a few of the individual capuchins that I'd remembered from Melbourne Zoo a decade ago.

The Australian native collection is a good size and I think they have the proportions of natives and exotics about right.

I like the Tasmanian devil section - nice big enclosures with lots of space and good viewing for the public.

I also really like the fact that there are wild wallabies and small marsupials hopping around the zoo grounds - as well as native birds.

There are more species in the zoo now than 10 years ago, and they have obviously put in the effort to get as many exotics as possible - though I don't like how some are housed.

The effort that has been put into improving this zoo is very, very noticeable - and it should be mentioned.

The negatives:

In a nutshell, the main problem with this zoo is that there are far too many cages: They are large cages, with enough space in most - but they are cages nonetheless. There is far too much wire in the place and not enough moats or glass areas. The whole place feels like a gaol or detention centre. It's not a nice feel when looking at animals.

The lions and tigers have large enough areas, and they are planted out fairly well - but if they could include some glass viewing areas it would greatly improve both exhibits.

The leopard enclosure if awful - as it's simply a large cage. It's also not planted out well with foliage. These are the types of enclosures that zoos like Melbourne Zoo demolished 10 years ago, and now we have a zoo actually building them in this day and age??? I realise that leopards need to be kept in enclosures with a caged roof (legally) but surely planting the enclosure out with greenery would make it a lot nicer.

The snow leopard enclosure is better though - as the rocky terrain in it looks like snow leopard habitat. It's not as good as the snow leopard enclosure at Melbourne, but it is acceptable...

The biggest disappointment to my mind though was the housing of the various species of gibbon. Gibbons simply should NOT be housed in cages in my opinion. The cages for the silvery gibbon and white handed gibbon are both large, but they look awful - and are very bare with almost no foliage. I understand that a number of zoos still have these types of cage enclosures, but I can't understand why any zoo would build these new in this day and age. They are simply outdated.

Surely gibbons should be housed on islands planted with trees - where they can see the sky without wire in the way. The gibbon islands at Mogo, Adelaide, Melbourne and Dubbo are all great examples of beautiful homes for gibbons.

The frustrating thing here is that the zoo has gone to the trouble to get more gibbon species but instead of building an island enclosure they have decided on the cage option. In my view it would've been far better to display one species of gibbon and do it properly on an island rather than 3 in these awful, barren cages.

The zoo has a lovely island enclosure for the capuchin monkeys, so I can't really understand why they couldn't build something similar for the gibbons....

Everything I've just said about the gibbons also applies to the de Brazza monkeys. Why bring them in if you house them like that??? In fact, the de Brazza acquisition is an epic fail in my view. We (myself and my fiance) couldn't even look at them housed like that. The gibbons at least have space - the de brazzas don't. Build them an island or send them somewhere else that can accomodate them better!

Some of the other small cages for primates are still there too. The mandrill, siamang, macaques and ring-tailed lemurs are housed in blatantly unacceptable conditions - these are the type of cages that give all zoos a bad name. These are old though and hopefully will be demolished soon enough - or renovated and used for smaller, more appropriate species.

Suggestions and improvements:

Firstly, get rid of the cages: They are tacky and unsightly.

1. Spend the money to build some primate islands - the zoo has an extensive primate collection but the way most of it is displayed actually makes it a negative thing rather than a positive thing.

2. Include some glass areas in the big cat enclosues - or better still, use moats where possible (though I do understand that would cost more).

3. If zebra or antelope (or even white rhino) could be sourced, then the zoo has ample space to display them. I'm not a fan of bringing in every species under the sun just for the sake of it, but I think these could enhance the giraffe area.

Conclusions:

All in all, the zoo has improved enormously in the past decade - but then it was starting from a long way back too. Huge effort has clearly been put in and the improvements are noticeable and numerous.

However, the cages and excessive use of wire are a really big issue in my opinion. It feels like this zoo has decided to bring in as many different species as it can possibly lay its hands on and display them as cheaply as possible - rather than build a beautiful environment and house what would look good in that environment. This is always going to be a challenge for private zoos (which don't have the funding of government run zoos) - but then maybe private zoos should just be smaller if they can't afford nicer enclosures. Smaller zoos which are beautiful can have the same appeal as larger zoos. Mogo's primate islands are a good example of this.

Going forward I'd like to see the primate collection decrease. I think a quality rather than quantity approach would be far better for this zoo. Focusing on a few more ungulates would also be worthwhile in my view - as you don't need cage type enclosures for these animals. Fences don't cost that much.

All in all I think a good next step for this place would be to hire an architect or planner who could design some more interesting and creative ways of displaying the animals. The collection is big enough now - so now it should be about housing them better.

The zoo has improved a lot but still has a long way to go.

Thanks for the comprehensive review. No facility is perfect, so it’s always good to hear positives and negatives.

With regards to downsizing their primate collection, they have a single elderly female Mandrill and Sulawesi black macaque, neither of which are to be replaced last I heard (designated as phase out).

When the De Brazza’s were imported in July 2023, it was mentioned they would be staying at Tasmania prior to transferring to Darling Downs Zoo (i.e. they won’t be a long term resident).

 

[Grant Rhino]

Thanks for the comprehensive review. No facility is perfect, so it’s always good to hear positives and negatives.

When the DeBrazza’s were imported in 2023, it was mentioned they would be staying at Tasmania prior to transferring to Darling Downs Zoo, so they won’t be a long term resident.

With regards to downsizing their primate collection, they have a single elderly female Mandrill and Sulawesi black macaque, neither of which are to be replaced last I heard (designated as phase out).

I knew that the female mandrill was quite old - so obviously her species will be phased out.

There was no Sulawesi black macaque there that I could see. I only saw 3 long tailed (crab-eating) macaques.

Great to see that the de brazza accomodation is only temporary - hopefully Darling Downs has a nice island for them.

 

[Abbey]

TASMANIA ZOO REVIEW:

I visited Tasmania Zoo last week and here is my review:

I have visited this zoo once before - back in around 2013 (so 11 years ago) and I was extremely unimpressed back then - I found it messy, disorganized and full of awful cages. The primate cages were particularly disgraceful. However, I'd heard about a lot of the progress made over the past decade and I wanted to see how much it had improved.

I think the place has improved enormously in the past decade, but there are still some fundamental problems.

The positives:

The zoo is a lot tidier now and feels more organized in a lot of ways. The front section with the numerous species of marmoset and tamarin (as well as meerkats, red pandas, squirrel monkeys etc) is very nice. The enclosures for these small monkeys are high quality and have a lot of room. I like how they surround the cafe area. It was particularly nice to see golden handed tamarins - a species I don't think I've ever seen before.

The giraffe enclosure at the back of the zoo is also nice - it has enough space and a pretty backdrop of rolling hills. I'm surprised that they haven't endeavoured to include zebra or an antelope species in with the giraffes though - but maybe something like that is in the pipelines and we just don't know about it yet.

The capuchin island is very pretty too - and I even recognised a few of the individual capuchins that I'd remembered from Melbourne Zoo a decade ago.

The Australian native collection is a good size and I think they have the proportions of natives and exotics about right.

I like the Tasmanian devil section - nice big enclosures with lots of space and good viewing for the public.

I also really like the fact that there are wild wallabies and small marsupials hopping around the zoo grounds - as well as native birds.

There are more species in the zoo now than 10 years ago, and they have obviously put in the effort to get as many exotics as possible - though I don't like how some are housed.

The effort that has been put into improving this zoo is very, very noticeable - and it should be mentioned.

The negatives:

In a nutshell, the main problem with this zoo is that there are far too many cages: They are large cages, with enough space in most - but they are cages nonetheless. There is far too much wire in the place and not enough moats or glass areas. The whole place feels like a gaol or detention centre. It's not a nice feel when looking at animals.

The lions and tigers have large enough areas, and they are planted out fairly well - but if they could include some glass viewing areas it would greatly improve both exhibits.

The leopard enclosure if awful - as it's simply a large cage. It's also not planted out well with foliage. These are the types of enclosures that zoos like Melbourne Zoo demolished 10 years ago, and now we have a zoo actually building them in this day and age??? I realise that leopards need to be kept in enclosures with a caged roof (legally) but surely planting the enclosure out with greenery would make it a lot nicer.

The snow leopard enclosure is better though - as the rocky terrain in it looks like snow leopard habitat. It's not as good as the snow leopard enclosure at Melbourne, but it is acceptable...

The biggest disappointment to my mind though was the housing of the various species of gibbon. Gibbons simply should NOT be housed in cages in my opinion. The cages for the silvery gibbon and white handed gibbon are both large, but they look awful - and are very bare with almost no foliage. I understand that a number of zoos still have these types of cage enclosures, but I can't understand why any zoo would build these new in this day and age. They are simply outdated.

Surely gibbons should be housed on islands planted with trees - where they can see the sky without wire in the way. The gibbon islands at Mogo, Adelaide, Melbourne and Dubbo are all great examples of beautiful homes for gibbons.

The frustrating thing here is that the zoo has gone to the trouble to get more gibbon species but instead of building an island enclosure they have decided on the cage option. In my view it would've been far better to display one species of gibbon and do it properly on an island rather than 3 in these awful, barren cages.

The zoo has a lovely island enclosure for the capuchin monkeys, so I can't really understand why they couldn't build something similar for the gibbons....

Everything I've just said about the gibbons also applies to the de Brazza monkeys. Why bring them in if you house them like that??? In fact, the de Brazza acquisition is an epic fail in my view. We (myself and my fiance) couldn't even look at them housed like that. The gibbons at least have space - the de brazzas don't. Build them an island or send them somewhere else that can accomodate them better!

Some of the other small cages for primates are still there too. The mandrill, siamang, macaques and ring-tailed lemurs are housed in blatantly unacceptable conditions - these are the type of cages that give all zoos a bad name. These are old though and hopefully will be demolished soon enough - or renovated and used for smaller, more appropriate species.

Suggestions and improvements:

Firstly, get rid of the cages: They are tacky and unsightly.

1. Spend the money to build some primate islands - the zoo has an extensive primate collection but the way most of it is displayed actually makes it a negative thing rather than a positive thing.

2. Include some glass areas in the big cat enclosues - or better still, use moats where possible (though I do understand that would cost more).

3. If zebra or antelope (or even white rhino) could be sourced, then the zoo has ample space to display them. I'm not a fan of bringing in every species under the sun just for the sake of it, but I think these could enhance the giraffe area.

Conclusions:

All in all, the zoo has improved enormously in the past decade - but then it was starting from a long way back too. Huge effort has clearly been put in and the improvements are noticeable and numerous.

However, the cages and excessive use of wire are a really big issue in my opinion. It feels like this zoo has decided to bring in as many different species as it can possibly lay its hands on and display them as cheaply as possible - rather than build a beautiful environment and house what would look good in that environment. This is always going to be a challenge for private zoos (which don't have the funding of government run zoos) - but then maybe private zoos should just be smaller if they can't afford nicer enclosures. Smaller zoos which are beautiful can have the same appeal as larger zoos. Mogo's primate islands are a good example of this.

Going forward I'd like to see the primate collection decrease. I think a quality rather than quantity approach would be far better for this zoo. Focusing on a few more ungulates would also be worthwhile in my view - as you don't need cage type enclosures for these animals. Fences don't cost that much.

All in all I think a good next step for this place would be to hire an architect or planner who could design some more interesting and creative ways of displaying the animals. The collection is big enough now - so now it should be about housing them better.

The zoo has improved a lot but still has a long way to go.

Likewise, thank you for this review. I've never visited Tasmania Zoo myself, so it's always good to hear from other posters who have been there and can offer their feedback. It's a tricky one re gibbons in cages. I've heard both arguments - the one which you make, and also that mesh exhibits allow the gibbons opportunities for brachiation (albeit less natural ones) within the fullness of the space available to them, unlike an island in which there's a lot of free air space inaccessible to humans or gibbons. I agree with you in that I mostly prefer island exhibits for gibbons, although it seems like a problem at Tasmania Zoo is the lack of foliage and natural climbing structures available.

 

[Grant Rhino]

Likewise, thank you for this review. I've never visited Tasmania Zoo myself, so it's always good to hear from other posters who have been there and can offer their feedback. It's a tricky one re gibbons in cages. I've heard both arguments - the one which you make, and also that mesh exhibits allow the gibbons opportunities for brachiation (albeit less natural ones) within the fullness of the space available to them, unlike an island in which there's a lot of free air space inaccessible to humans or gibbons. I agree with you in that I mostly prefer island exhibits for gibbons, although it seems like a problem at Tasmania Zoo is the lack of foliage and natural climbing structures available.

It's a good point you raise actually (re brachiation) and it's valid. I just find the wire so off-putting. I think the best is an island with a lot of climbing frames and ropes - even if they aren't actually trees. I really struggle with cages in zoos.

 

[Zorro]

Thank you for your review Grant. I tend to agree with @Abbey Yes I do agree with you open Islands look very nice and I do like the primate Islands at the Western Plains zoo at Dubbo, I have changed my mind in the last ten years or so regarding this aspect of keeping primates. I have watched the primates at the Darling Downs zoo for hours and I noticed the lemurs and Tamarins/Marmoset's and Gibbons use every inch of their mesh covered enclosures which to me means they live in a more of a 3D habitat where they can climb on side walls and the roof which has to give them more exercise and also more of a view than just being on an Island.
I know that at the Port Lympne zoo in the UK the massive Gorilla palace is a vast mesh covered enclosure the Gorillas are given access to an outside area which is mostly lawn which much of the time they tend to avoid be far happier in the enclosed space an in the outside lawned area which would match up with them living in a enclosed forest much of the time in the wild as with many other smaller primate species.

 

[Babirusa]

A very interesting review!

It does seem from the images posted here that many of the zoos with rapidly expanding collections are going for much simpler construction cages to rapidly expand the collection, but as many have said sometimes there are benefits to these cages for animals like gibbons that can utilise the space much more effectively than other species, I do however agree that heavy planting is a must for primate and most felid species in zoos!
Did you get any photos of the changes?

 

[Grant Rhino]

It does seem from the images posted here that many of the zoos with rapidly expanding collections are going for much simpler construction cages to rapidly expand the collection,

This is something I find really disappointing in so many ways:

Firstly, the "arms race" to have the most species is just tacky and trashy in my view. Less is more - and I love really well designed, interesting and natural enclosures. I find zoos with box cage style enclosures really boring. I think that this is what causes so many people out there to hate zoos - and to be honest I don't blame them.

Secondly, when you're on a safari in the wild, you almost never see every single local species - so why would people expect to see them all at a zoo? Again, less is more.

Thirdly, I was born in the mid 1970s and grew up in Melbourne during the new (at the time) "no more cages at Melbourne Zoo" philosophy. At the time MZ was cutting edge with its moats and naturally planted enclosures. I guess I expected all zoos to be like that and it disappoints me when other zoos aren't (even 40 years later).

but as many have said sometimes there are benefits to these cages for animals like gibbons that can utilise the space much more effectively than other species, I do however agree that heavy planting is a must for primate and most felid species in zoos!

This is the part that really gets to me actually: A well planted out cage can still look okay - but a cage with no natural planting just feels like a prison and simply makes everything that anti-zoo people say come true. Heavy planting should really just be a no-brainer! I was actually amazed by how few plants were in the gibbon cages. It's disappointing too when you can see that the very same zoo has done such a good job planting out the cage enclosures for their marmosets, tamarins, squirrel monkeys etc. I felt that the leopard enclosure was particularly ugly - yet the snow leopard enclosure was okay because of the natural habitat of these respective species.

Did you get any photos of the changes?

No - I very rarely take photos in zoos anymore - and especially not when there are cages. I've spent a lot of time taking photos in the wild in recent years, and taking photos in zoos just feels a bit staged - a bit like canned hunting, or fishing in a fish farm (not that I've ever done either). I do use zoos for practice though - to try out angles, ideas, settings etc. I didn't get any at TZ though except for a few giraffe shots with the hills in the background - and no sign of enclosures, fences etc. I did get a lot of nice shots of the albino Bennett's Wallabies down at Bruny Island though - in the wild of course.

 

[Zoo Tour Australia]

@Grant Rhino The thing is cages are more affordable than building moats around and island and the likes Melbourne Zoo are Government owned so they have more available funds for enclosures.

 

[Zoofan15]

@Grant Rhino The thing is cages are more affordable than building moats around and island and the likes Melbourne Zoo are Government owned so they have more available funds for enclosures.

That’s a good point. I particularly like Darling Downs Zoo’s small cat cages. They’re simple, yet spacious and as funds allow, they can be furnished with additions that make them more aesthetically pleasing. In the meantime, the cats have all the space they need.

It was noted when Taronga’s orangutans moved out of the old cages that although the bars seemed antiquated, the apes loved to brachiate from them. They were arguably more at home in that exhibit than they ever would have been in the open air grassed exhibits other zoos of that era were beginning to build.

 

[Tiger91]

Thank you for your review Grant. I tend to agree with @Abbey Yes I do agree with you open Islands look very nice and I do like the primate Islands at the Western Plains zoo at Dubbo, I have changed my mind in the last ten years or so regarding this aspect of keeping primates. I have watched the primates at the Darling Downs zoo for hours and I noticed the lemurs and Tamarins/Marmoset's and Gibbons use every inch of their mesh covered enclosures which to me means they live in a more of a 3D habitat where they can climb on side walls and the roof which has to give them more exercise and also more of a view than just being on an Island.
I know that at the Port Lympne zoo in the UK the massive Gorilla palace is a vast mesh covered enclosure the Gorillas are given access to an outside area which is mostly lawn which much of the time they tend to avoid be far happier in the enclosed space an in the outside lawned area which would match up with them living in a enclosed forest much of the time in the wild as with many other smaller primate species.

Im also in the camp with you and abbey, islands look great when done well. But cages if they have enough space are actually more enriching then islands can be as they present the ability to climb more. Taronga's white cheeked gibbons used to brachiate along there roof, which I seen a few times. But when I would see the silvery gibbons on the island with the nice fig tree. I never really seen them be as active in climbing. Though that could be argued it could be a timing thing. The exhibit looked nice but functionally had less ability for them to use.
The new types of mesh that places like taronga use for lions and tigers are more aseptically (LOL I mean aesthetically) appealing then hard wire but essentially achieve the same result.

 

[Riley]

I found this an interesting point of view, the exhibits at Tasmania Zoo that you seemed to have the biggest problems with is as a result of aesthetics as opposed to suitability for species. As someone who’s seen the zoo myself I feel it’s a bit harsh, especially when comparisons are being made to larger government funded zoos.

Mesh roofed exhibits for gibbons are actually recommended in husbandry manuals for the species as they offer a greater usability and ability to move around naturally. Even in regards to plantings, the zoos first white cheeked gibbon exhibit has a large number of wattles growing in it that have taken time to establish since being built and the other white cheeked gibbons and the silvery gibbons both have had trees planted in them but look to have taken some damage from their inhabitants, I think it’s important to keep in mind that a zoo in Tasmania with never be able to offer the same deep rainforest planting that are seen in other zoos.

The criticism of the lack of island exhibits is one that I feel is unfairly harsh. Tasmania Zoo built a number of islands on the dam behind where the giraffes are now with the plan being for these to hold primates but as much as the zoo’s management pushed for it they got refused by the local authorities. Tasmania, like every other state, manages its zoos to independent standard to the rest of Australia, so the zoo has been forced to build within the limitations they have. They even tried to get their existing capuchin island approved for lemurs but weren’t allowed.

Other points of interest would be the De Brazza enclosure which is as previously stated is only a temporary accommodation so we can forgive the zoo for not building a flash new exhibit for a temporary species but this exhibit is no different to the meshed primate enclosures at Mogo and not much smaller than the meshed exhibits at Melbourne's tree tops, and both facilities you praised for their exhibits.

The leopard enclosure was also only finished a few short months ago so may be looking a bit bare as the plants and grass establish, but this is the same at most new enclosures unless there’s a huge lot of money put into horticulture, which I don’t think is fair to expect from a small private facility.

Although I don’t necessarily agree with some of the statements made, I do respect your right to express your opinion on the zoo however I did feel the need to offer up another point of view because I feel Tasmania Zoo has a lot more to be commended for than what was offered in your review.

 

[Grant Rhino]

@Grant Rhino The thing is cages are more affordable than building moats around and island and the likes Melbourne Zoo are Government owned so they have more available funds for enclosures.

I made this very point myself in my original review post.

While I understand finance is an issue for private zoos, I don’t think it should ever be used as an excuse for things not being to the same standard as better zoos. For example, if a zoo can only afford to feed the African wild dogs Pal or Chum or some other canned dog food would we all be so accepting of this?

My view is (and always has been) that if someone can’t run a zoo up to a certain standard then they shouldn’t be running a zoo at all. Likewise if a zoo can’t display a particular species well enough then it shouldn’t display that species. Not all zoos should display every species. Some simply can’t afford to do so.

I don’t think Tasmania Zoo is a bad zoo by any means - but it does have it’s limitations and I think it should work within those limitations.

 

[Grant Rhino]

I found this an interesting point of view, the exhibits at Tasmania Zoo that you seemed to have the biggest problems with is as a result of aesthetics as opposed to suitability for species. As someone who’s seen the zoo myself I feel it’s a bit harsh, especially when comparisons are being made to larger government funded zoos.

Mesh roofed exhibits for gibbons are actually recommended in husbandry manuals for the species as they offer a greater usability and ability to move around naturally. Even in regards to plantings, the zoos first white cheeked gibbon exhibit has a large number of wattles growing in it that have taken time to establish since being built and the other white cheeked gibbons and the silvery gibbons both have had trees planted in them but look to have taken some damage from their inhabitants, I think it’s important to keep in mind that a zoo in Tasmania with never be able to offer the same deep rainforest planting that are seen in other zoos.

The criticism of the lack of island exhibits is one that I feel is unfairly harsh. Tasmania Zoo built a number of islands on the dam behind where the giraffes are now with the plan being for these to hold primates but as much as the zoo’s management pushed for it they got refused by the local authorities. Tasmania, like every other state, manages its zoos to independent standard to the rest of Australia, so the zoo has been forced to build within the limitations they have. They even tried to get their existing capuchin island approved for lemurs but weren’t allowed.

Other points of interest would be the De Brazza enclosure which is as previously stated is only a temporary accommodation so we can forgive the zoo for not building a flash new exhibit for a temporary species but this exhibit is no different to the meshed primate enclosures at Mogo and not much smaller than the meshed exhibits at Melbourne's tree tops, and both facilities you praised for their exhibits.

The leopard enclosure was also only finished a few short months ago so may be looking a bit bare as the plants and grass establish, but this is the same at most new enclosures unless there’s a huge lot of money put into horticulture, which I don’t think is fair to expect from a small private facility.

Although I don’t necessarily agree with some of the statements made, I do respect your right to express your opinion on the zoo however I did feel the need to offer up another point of view because I feel Tasmania Zoo has a lot more to be commended for than what was offered in your review.

Yes - aesthetics are really important to me in what I want from a zoo. They are not so important to everyone but they are to me.

As I said in my previous post, lack of funds should never be used as an excuse for mediocrity. Not everyone should run a zoo and not every zoo should display every species. I don’t have a swimming pool - maybe if I had more money then I would - but I don’t.

I didn’t know that meshed roofed exhibits were recommended for gibbons - and it makes me feel better to hear this. I just wish they would put more plants in there! Hopefully the trees will establish over time.

The point you make about rainforests in Tasmania is interesting but bear in mind that Tasmania does have some of the oldest rainforest in the world! That said though it’s not easy to replicate. On a serious note here though, a zoo in a cold climate should probably focus on cold climate animals (snow leopards, red pandas etc). As I’ve said, play within your limitations. Zoos in the tropics probably shouldn’t have polar bears for example. Not every zoo should display every species.

It’s really disappointing to hear about the islands - and if I’d known this I’d have been a bit more sympathetic maybe. However, you can only control what you can control and here is another case of having to play within their limitations. Unfortunately this is a serious limitation and one that makes absolutely no sense to me - and it is certainly not the zoos fault. Due to these limitations maybe larger primates just aren’t right for this place.

Re the deBrazza cage, I agree that the meshed primate enclosures at both Mogo and Melbourne are also sub-standard and I don’t like them either for anything bigger than squirrel monkeys. That said, these are old - they are not newly built. The ones at MZ are at least planted out well though - but too small for gibbons in my view.

How did they get the capuchin island approved in the first place btw?

Re the leopard cage, hopefully the foliage grows quickly and it will look better as it establishes itself. However I think it should be up to a zoo to spend money on horticulture. If they can’t afford decent plants in a leopard enclosure then don’t display leopards. Decent horticulture should be a non negotiable in my view. Play within your limitations. Small private facilities should not be exempt from planting out enclosures well. That said hopefully it will grow fairly quickly. That cage will look a lot better with foliage - and it’s not like the leopard will eat it.

As for your final paragraph, I do agree with you that this zoo is doing a lot of things well - particularly their small primates and their native species. I did mention this in my original post too. I’m more than happy to disagree with people on other points though. I’m genuinely saddened to hear about the local authorities disapproving the islands though.

 

[Grant Rhino]

The new types of mesh that places like taronga use for lions and tigers are more aseptically (LOL I mean aesthetically) appealing then hard wire but essentially achieve the same result.

This is a really, really good point. The difference (in aesthetics) is chalk and cheese. Hard wire looks so tacky and prison-like, yet the new type of mesh makes an enclosure look so much better.

A good case in point are the snow leopard enclosures at both Melbourne and Tasmania. They aren’t that different from one another except for two things: size and the type of mesh. The difference in appearance is enormous though.

I think all zoos should really pay attention to this stuff. Detail matters! We pay attention to detail when designing and decorating our own homes and businesses so zoos should too.

If Tasmania Zoo used the new mesh for the gibbon exhibits then they would look fine when I think about it. That mesh is fine for the Francois langurs at Taronga - so it would look fine there too.

This post has actually made me realise what it is that I don’t like about the exhibits in this place. I knew something was off but couldn’t put my finger on it. It’s the type of mesh.

 

[Steve Robinson]

it’s not like the leopard will eat it.

Don't bet on that! I bred him and can tell you that he has destroyed palm trees, tipuana trees and even pepperina trees here. He is a lout when it comes to vegetation!!

Here at the DDZ we used to get similar reviews about perceived lack of vegetation. Some years down the track, and it does take that long, vegetation is now better established and those criticisms have largely vanished. I guess that a private zoo owner just has to have a thick skin and lots of patience. And, from the animal's point of view, it is reassuring that both DDZ and Tasmania Zoo consistently achieve ZAA Animal Welfare accreditation.

Your realisation about the type of mesh needs further scrutiny. Many of us have evaluated the Chinese flexible mesh and have decided to err on the side of caution. Industry insiders are well aware of the limitations of this type of mesh - not all incidents like the Taronga lion issue make it into the public forum.

Given the attention paid to our design plans by government agencies such as the various State Vertebrate Pest authorities, and the leniency that is often given to State owned and operated entities, it is just far safer for us to use tried and trusted containment methods - especially if there are no negative welfare outcomes for the occupants.

Nevertheless an interesting review @Grant Rhino - I can look forward to a similar one if you ever visit us.

BTW - have you ever reviewed Howlett's or Port Lympne?

 

[Grant Rhino]

Don't bet on that! I bred him and can tell you that he has destroyed palm trees, tipuana trees and even pepperina trees here. He is a lout when it comes to vegetation!!

Okay so it's going to be a big job for them when it comes to planting out that exhibit!

Here at the DDZ we used to get similar reviews about perceived lack of vegetation. Some years down the track, and it does take that long, vegetation is now better established and those criticisms have largely vanished. I guess that a private zoo owner just has to have a thick skin and lots of patience. And, from the animal's point of view, it is reassuring that both DDZ and Tasmania Zoo consistently achieve ZAA Animal Welfare accreditation.

I certainly don't doubt that it's fine from the animal's point of view - though I am a strong believer in, and have strong opinions on aesthetics - as I believe that the aesthetics are what endear (or don't endear) the general public to zoos.

I haven't been to DDZ - but I intend to when I'm next in Brisbane. Question: do you have vines growing up the mesh in your exhibits? Thinking about the Tasmania Zoo gibbon and leopard exhibits, they would look a lot better with vines growing up them.

Your realisation about the type of mesh needs further scrutiny. Many of us have evaluated the Chinese flexible mesh and have decided to err on the side of caution. Industry insiders are well aware of the limitations of this type of mesh - not all incidents like the Taronga lion issue make it into the public forum.

Given the attention paid to our design plans by government agencies such as the various State Vertebrate Pest authorities, and the leniency that is often given to State owned and operated entities, it is just far safer for us to use tried and trusted containment methods - especially if there are no negative welfare outcomes for the occupants.

I can imagine that these things would be very frustrating. However, it's another good example of playing within our limitations. Government run zoos also have to play within their limitations too - a case in point being Melbourne sending the elephants to WORZ due to lack of space.

I'm keen to hear a bit more about the mesh question though - I'm curious about this.

I can look forward to a similar one if you ever visit us.

I definitey will! And I can promise that I will go in there with an open mind, no preconceived ideas, and just call it as I see it - like I do with all of my reviews.

As zoo enthusiasts on a forum like this I really do believe that it's our duty to be honest, hard hitting but fair, as well as complimentary where credit is due when we review zoos. I try to be as balanced, objective and unemotional as possible when reviewing - but of course I'm an emotional being like everyone else in the world and I do have things that I like and dislike - just like everyone else

BTW - have you ever reviewed Howlett's or Port Lympne?

No - I've never even heard of either place - let alone been to either. I will look them up though.

 

[Abbey]

Don't bet on that! I bred him and can tell you that he has destroyed palm trees, tipuana trees and even pepperina trees here. He is a lout when it comes to vegetation!!

Here at the DDZ we used to get similar reviews about perceived lack of vegetation. Some years down the track, and it does take that long, vegetation is now better established and those criticisms have largely vanished. I guess that a private zoo owner just has to have a thick skin and lots of patience. And, from the animal's point of view, it is reassuring that both DDZ and Tasmania Zoo consistently achieve ZAA Animal Welfare accreditation.

Your realisation about the type of mesh needs further scrutiny. Many of us have evaluated the Chinese flexible mesh and have decided to err on the side of caution. Industry insiders are well aware of the limitations of this type of mesh - not all incidents like the Taronga lion issue make it into the public forum.

Given the attention paid to our design plans by government agencies such as the various State Vertebrate Pest authorities, and the leniency that is often given to State owned and operated entities, it is just far safer for us to use tried and trusted containment methods - especially if there are no negative welfare outcomes for the occupants.

Nevertheless an interesting review @Grant Rhino - I can look forward to a similar one if you ever visit us.

BTW - have you ever reviewed Howlett's or Port Lympne?

Having grown up with the multi-million dollar exhibits at Taronga as my norm, I was surprised when I visited Howletts in 2015 and found that many of the exhibits seemed to prioritise functionality over being aesthetic. It didn't inherently bother me, but it was different from what I was expecting.

 

[Zorro]

Having grown up with the multi-million dollar exhibits at Taronga as my norm, I was surprised when I visited Howletts in 2015 and found that many of the exhibits seemed to prioritise functionality over being aesthetic. It didn't inherently bother me, but it was different from what I was expecting.

I believe they have bred (heard a couple of years ago) over 130+ Gorillas so all that mesh did not bother them it would seem

 

[Zoofan15]

Having grown up with the multi-million dollar exhibits at Taronga as my norm, I was surprised when I visited Howletts in 2015 and found that many of the exhibits seemed to prioritise functionality over being aesthetic. It didn't inherently bother me, but it was different from what I was expecting.

I believe they have bred (heard a couple of years ago) over 130+ Gorillas so all that mesh did not bother them it would seem

Howletts welcomed their 150th gorilla infant in July 2022. They’ve been breeding the species since 1975 and have produced more infants than every other UK facility combined.

Melbourne Zoo’s Gorilla Rainforest opened in 1990 and remains an impressive exhibit to this day. Taronga’s exhibit (opened 1996) is comparatively small; but is an aesthetically pleasing exhibit and impressive for its era. I feel like a lot of emphasis was placed by those zoos on designing naturalistic open air exhibit to encourage breeding; but will acknowledge the lack of breeding in the old cages at Taronga can be attributed to a number of factors unrelated to their housing. They were kept in pairs and at least one of the males of those pairs (Buluman) was sterile.