The Phylogenetics of Zoo Exhibits: The Reptile House Problem

[15399]

I think for many zoos, they would feel that money would be better spent on something biogeographic than on a massive taxonomic building, especially as aviaries and reptile houses often lack superstar draws.

There have been quite a few zoos building new reptile houses in recent years, so I think they'd disagree with you on this one. I'd also say, while they aren't as much of "superstars" as big cats, great apes, or elephants, there are quite a few reptiles capable of holding their own, and are fairly popular. Some that I can think of include:
- crocodilians
- komodo dragon
- penguins
- anaconda/reticulated python/other huge constrictors
- bald eagles (and a lot of other raptors)
- owls

So there are definitely some marketable species that could be included in a reptile house which includes the birds!

 

[Mickey]

Literally what is the problem? I honestly cannot see how this is an issue by any means, you also already stated that birds and reptiles get mixed or exhibited in attractions under the same theme.
I cannot even think what is an alternate question to yours but "Why aren't reptile houses given more long and comprehensive or scientifically accurate names?", which is still not an issue.
Also I am not attacking you nor am I mad in case it seems so.

 

[amur leopard]

There have been quite a few zoos building new reptile houses in recent years, so I think they'd disagree with you on this one. I'd also say, while they aren't as much of "superstars" as big cats, great apes, or elephants, there are quite a few reptiles capable of holding their own, and are fairly popular. Some that I can think of include:
- crocodilians
- komodo dragon
- penguins
- anaconda/reticulated python/other huge constrictors
- bald eagles (and a lot of other raptors)
- owls

So there are definitely some marketable species that could be included in a reptile house which includes the birds!

Of course there are animals which are more popular within reptiles and amphibians, but the general trend nowadays is towards biogeographic exhibits with one or two big draws (i.e. tigers, not bald eagles) because they offer a cross-section of the wildlife that can be seen in a certain area, offer opportunities for education on predator-prey relationships and also in many ways do a better job of contextualising the animal in its habitat than a taxonomic exhibit.

Taxonomic buildings aren't just going out of fashion for these reasons, though. While in a fiscal manner it makes more sense to make one building to house a host of similar animals, a large reptile house can become mundane to the average visitor, particularly with long rows of similar terraria are devoted to similar species. Even if you have crocodilians or komodo dragons within, visitors won't be attracted to such a display nearly as much as a tiger exhibit, say.

In my opinion, the most amazing thing about Earth's fauna is its sheer variety. The biogeographic model in zoos harnesses this variety by displaying species from massively different classes but similar ranges displayed in the same context. The taxonomic model, while it offers educational opportunities with regards to phylogeny, doesn't use this massive variety to its full effect. I also think that while it isn't a good thing that smaller, less charismatic species are sometimes used as 'sideshows' to megafauna within a biogeographic exhibit, people spend more time looking at, say, an amphibian or invertebrate (if the exhibit is sufficiently noticeable) than if they were in a large taxonomic building with a whole host of apparently similar species.

 

[TinoPup]

Similarly what about arthropods? Most reptile houses I've been in have the odd arachnid or stick insect in a small exhibit or two.
Given reptiles, amphibians, and arthropods are typically rather similar in requirements of exhibit size and appearance, as well as average maintenance, I think it's usually rather handy for those taking care of them. I prefer to go by what's best for the animals and the keepers taking care of them - Green Sea Turtle and Spider Tortoise may be closely related, but they have vastly different requirements. Same situation with Salties and Electric Blue Dwarf Gecko. For husbandry purposes they may be better off placed in different areas of the zoo.

I've seen a few signs lately that explain how horseshoe crabs aren't crabs but are weird spiders

 

[JVM]

There have been quite a few zoos building new reptile houses in recent years, so I think they'd disagree with you on this one. I'd also say, while they aren't as much of "superstars" as big cats, great apes, or elephants, there are quite a few reptiles capable of holding their own, and are fairly popular. Some that I can think of include:
- crocodilians
- komodo dragon
- penguins
- anaconda/reticulated python/other huge constrictors
- bald eagles (and a lot of other raptors)
- owls

So there are definitely some marketable species that could be included in a reptile house which includes the birds!

If you could name some of the zoos that have built new reptile houses, I would love to hear it. That is not sarcasm, I would find it genuinely positive news and appreciate the information! I am often happy to be wrong on these sorts of things.

There is a difference between popular animals and superstars and I would say big cats, great apes, elephants and so forth are "superstars", as are penguins. Those other animals I think qualify as popular not as superstars -- for example, I love Red Panda, I think they are popular, but I don't think most visitors would be drawn in to a large complex by only that animal. We could debate back and forth on this since we probably have very different sampling sizes, and yours is probably better than mine.

The only reptile buildings I have visited that include animals you've listed are those at the National Zoo (which was fifteen years ago, sadly) and Tropical Discovery at the Denver Zoo, setting aside some smaller crocodilians at a few other reptile buildings. (I admit I am still not well traveled.) Tropical Discovery is not a uniform or traditional reptile house, but it is a fantastic exhibit that would make an ideal blueprint for the kind of mixed building I proposed earlier, though it is well worth mentioning that it was obviously much larger than any of the reptile buildings I had previously visited and presumably much more expensive than constructing something on par with a traditional reptile house.

 

[15399]

If you could name some of the zoos that have built new reptile houses, I would love to hear it. That is not sarcasm, I would find it genuinely positive news and appreciate the information! I am often happy to be wrong on these sorts of things.

There is a difference between popular animals and superstars and I would say big cats, great apes, elephants and so forth are "superstars", as are penguins. Those other animals I think qualify as popular not as superstars -- for example, I love Red Panda, I think they are popular, but I don't think most visitors would be drawn in to a large complex by only that animal. We could debate back and forth on this since we probably have very different sampling sizes, and yours is probably better than mine.

The only reptile buildings I have visited that include animals you've listed are those at the National Zoo (which was fifteen years ago, sadly) and Tropical Discovery at the Denver Zoo, setting aside some smaller crocodilians at a few other reptile buildings. (I admit I am still not well traveled.) Tropical Discovery is not a uniform or traditional reptile house, but it is a fantastic exhibit that would make an ideal blueprint for the kind of mixed building I proposed earlier, though it is well worth mentioning that it was obviously much larger than any of the reptile buildings I had previously visited and presumably much more expensive than constructing something on par with a traditional reptile house.

Zoo Knoxville opened a reptile house this year, Zoo Atlanta opened a reptile house only a few years ago.

 

[Zooplantman]

There have been quite a few zoos building new reptile houses in recent years, so I think they'd disagree with you on this one. I'd also say, while they aren't as much of "superstars" as big cats, great apes, or elephants, there are quite a few reptiles capable of holding their own, and are fairly popular. Some that I can think of include:
- crocodilians
- komodo dragon
- penguins
- anaconda/reticulated python/other huge constrictors
- bald eagles (and a lot of other raptors)
- owls

So there are definitely some marketable species that could be included in a reptile house which includes the birds!

Now since these debates over baseless assertions are more smoke than fire, I want to add here that a focus on "superstar species" is a rather narrow way of looking at things. Zoos consider many issues when planning new exhibits for one thing, and for another a great reptile complex may be a more popular attraction than an ok orang exhibit. A reptile complex usually adds a large indoor exhibit space to a zoo so serves visitors at all times of year and in all weather (unlike most lion exhibits). It also adds the potential for an event space to add income to the zoo.

 

[Zooplantman]

Two additional things to consider:
Any new zoo exhibit needs to be marketable. Selling Our Spanking New Phylogenics House may be a flop to the Marketing and Development Departments
Further, while the husbandry of these groups presents some differences, the humans are a greater issue than the animals: the organization of curatorial departments may be the obstacle. In some zoos a reptile department and a bird department may comfortably co-manage a building while in others that just ain't gonna happen

 

[Lota lota]

while in others that just ain't gonna happen

Why?

 

[Aardwolf]

A building built from scratch as a joint bird/reptile house could be pretty successful and could be quite fantastic - if it was designed with that function in mind. Cases in which I've seen zoos trying to shoehorn birds into an existing reptile house or vice versa have not been that successful. Reptiles were housed in exhibits that weren't made for the heat and humidity needed, or birds were in exhibits which weren't designed with flight in mind. In each case, it was kind of a mess.

On the phylogenetic subject, I also know plenty of amphibian keepers who would love to emancipate themselves from reptile houses, both from climatic/abiotic factors as well as to save their animals from the strictly reptile keepers, some of whom, in my experience, can be a little... indelicate with the less-forgiving care requirements of many amphibians.

 

[Zooplantman]

Why?

There is rivalry and competition in zoo departments like in any human organization. Depending on the leadership and the organization culture it may be a hindrance ... or not

 

[Lota lota]

There is rivalry and competition in zoo departments like in any human organization. Depending on the leadership and the organization culture it may be a hindrance ... or not

But does exhibits that have a considerable ammount of both birds and herps like indoor rainforests also have rivalry problems amongst the staff?

 

[Zooplantman]

But does exhibits that have a considerable ammount of both birds and herps like indoor rainforests also have rivalry problems amongst the staff?

It has happened, yes. It depends on the institution: what the management will tolerate. Many (most?) keepers are very cooperative with each other. The case has been made that reptile keepers tend towards certain personality traits, bird keepers towards different traits, mammal keepers different again. There are probably more exceptions that adherents to the rule but it is a recognizable dynamic in zoo staff.
Better facilities have clear lines of authority so in a rain forest building there are senior keepers and all the keepers must follow their lead regardless of their specialty.

 

[Aardwolf]

Bird and reptile keepers (and, in such facilities where they still exist, small mammal keepers) are often in competition for the same exhibit spaces, the jewel-cases that accompany the larger mammal exhibits.

 

[15399]

Bird and reptile keepers (and, in such facilities where they still exist, small mammal keepers) are often in competition for the same exhibit spaces, the jewel-cases that accompany the larger mammal exhibits.

From what I've observed, it also seems like the lines between keeper specialties have become more and more blurred- often to minimize the travel time between exhibits in a keeper's section. Maybe less so with reptiles since reptile houses are still fairly common, but with birds I know a lot of zoos don't necessarily have a designated "bird team", and instead lump them in with the same keeper staff doing other animals nearby. This may make more sense logistically and efficient-wise depending on the zoo's layout, as compared to having one keeper need to service aviaries in distant parts of the zoo.

 

[Zooplantman]

From what I've observed, it also seems like the lines between keeper specialties have become more and more blurred- often to minimize the travel time between exhibits in a keeper's section. Maybe less so with reptiles since reptile houses are still fairly common, but with birds I know a lot of zoos don't necessarily have a designated "bird team", and instead lump them in with the same keeper staff doing other animals nearby. This may make more sense logistically and efficient-wise depending on the zoo's layout, as compared to having one keeper need to service aviaries in distant parts of the zoo.

Sad to see specialists disappear. A keeper who is dedicated to birds (or reptiles or carnivores or....) will gain insights into their animals that a general keeper will never develop.

 

[Lota lota]

Sad to see specialists disappear. A keeper who is dedicated to birds (or reptiles or carnivores or....) will gain insights into their animals that a general keeper will never develop.

Is this the trend both in North america and Europe?

 

[Jurek7]

a great reptile complex may be a more popular attraction than an ok orang exhibit. A reptile complex usually adds a large indoor exhibit space to a zoo so serves visitors at all times of year and in all weather (unlike most lion exhibits). It also adds the potential for an event space to add income to the zoo.

This is my observation, too! Reptile houses are very popular in northern zoos, and large indoor space usually with lush exotic vegetation plays a large part.

Two side observations:
- only a small minority of visitors find reptiles creepy or ugly (generally older women). Most people find them interesting and often colorful. More, in zoos which feed snakes with live prey on exhibit (e.g. in The Netherlands) practically all visitors watch it with interest, not cruel or disgusting.

- zoos have surprisingly superficial idea what species and exhibits will be popular among visitors. Which is not a good business for a type of institution which often is short of money, and for which every exhibit is a major and scarce investment.

Maybe less so with reptiles since reptile houses are still fairly common, but with birds I know a lot of zoos don't necessarily have a designated "bird team", and instead lump them in with the same keeper staff doing other animals nearby. This may make more sense logistically and efficient-wise depending on the zoo's layout, as compared to having one keeper need to service aviaries in distant parts of the zoo.

Unfortunately, this is bad husbandry-wise. Most birds and reptiles are rather difficult to care well, and e.g. an elephant or a primate keeper is unlikely to watch carefully after or recognize signs of poor health of a small bird or a snake in a 'side jewel exhibit'. This is getting more important as zoos must sustainably breed birds and reptiles and must take care of more of small threatened animals.

 

[15399]

Unfortunately, this is bad husbandry-wise. Most birds and reptiles are rather difficult to care well, and e.g. an elephant or a primate keeper is unlikely to watch carefully after or recognize signs of poor health of a small bird or a snake in a 'side jewel exhibit'. This is getting more important as zoos must sustainably breed birds and reptiles and must take care of more of small threatened animals.

Don't think of it as an elephant keeper also happening to care for a few birds. It's more so a keeper who's a trained professional caring for animals that happen to be from multiple different taxonomic groups. I wouldn't call it a husbandry problem for a professional to be working with animals from different taxonomic groups, especially when there is a lot more that is similar than that is different most of the time. Further, I'm not talking about elephant keepers even- elephants often have their own team as they take up so much time to take care of, but I don't see anything wrong with a keeper being trained in and working with a combination of reptiles, birds, small mammals, etc. Give the keepers more of the credit they deserve.

 

[Kudu21]

Don't think of it as an elephant keeper also happening to care for a few birds. It's more so a keeper who's a trained professional caring for animals that happen to be from multiple different taxonomic groups. I wouldn't call it a husbandry problem for a professional to be working with animals from different taxonomic groups, especially when there is a lot more that is similar than that is different most of the time. Further, I'm not talking about elephant keepers even- elephants often have their own team as they take up so much time to take care of, but I don't see anything wrong with a keeper being trained in and working with a combination of reptiles, birds, small mammals, etc. Give the keepers more of the credit they deserve.

It’s really not that simple, though. As a keeper myself, I would echo @Zooplantman and @Jurek7 and say that a “jack of all trades is a master of none”. No matter how similar you may think the needs of various taxa are, in reality, they really are drastically different — as @Zooplantman has described with reptiles and amphibians — and even within taxa this can be so. By having generalized departments with staff taking care of an assortment of taxa, you will always be increasing the margin for error, even with the most skilled and seasoned staff, to the Nth degree. I will always be of the opinion that not having specialized staff results in poorer quality of life for the animals because there is just so much in-depth knowledge that you will not begin to understand or pick-up on if you are not devoting your time and focus to them. We have lost so much zoological management knowledge as zoos have moved away from this set up. There’s a reason why medical specialists exist. Would you want someone who is just familiar with the cardiovascular system to perform your heart surgery or a cardiologist that has spent their whole career studying it? I have been very strategic in my career to ensure that I stay specialized in hoofstock to ensure that I know the ins-and-outs of their management and husbandry and can be that expert as we continue to lose those in the zoological community.