Why are gorillas more popular zoo animals than chimps (or are they)?

DavidBrown

DavidBrown

Well-Known Member
15+ year member
Great apes are zoo superstars, but anecdotal observations suggest to me that gorillas are far more popular than chimpanzees and I'm curious
1) if this is actually the case and
2) if it is true, why?

Gorilla exhibits are marquee attractions at zoos and generate much excitement. There seem to be new gorilla exhibits built at zoos on a regular basis, but far fewer chimp exhibits seem to be getting built.

Zoos with chimps seem to be contracting as zoos with old chimp exhibits either send their chimps away without rebuilding new exhibits or close down their chimp programs when their chimps pass away.

Has anybody formally studied the relative popularity of the two species and teased out what might make gorillas more popular than chimps (if this is indeed the case)?

Are chimpanzees "overexposed" because we see them all the time in commercials, movies, etc. and thus they are of less interest in zoos?

I'd be interested in any thoughts that people have on these questions.
 
Now that you bring this up, it does seem that Gorillas are more popular than Chimpanzees. I have no scientific research to back it up, but I think with more people hearing that Chimpanzees are dangerous animals (examples. Stamford, CT attack and South Africa attack), yet not hearing about Gorilla attacks. I think the gorilla's reputation as a gentle giant comes into play here.
 
We are attracted to large, powerful animals with 'presence'. Gorillas tick all these boxes and they have a fearsome reputation not in the least part due to King Kong movies.

There are no chimps at any of the zoos in and around Melbourne, but two zoos have gorillas, and they are always a popular draw card. I have no evidence to suggest that chimps are more popular than gorillas or vice versa.
 
Also I think Chimps freak us out on a deep level. They seem really close to us and it makes the thought of keeping them somewhat unnerving. That and add in like Nano said the Planet of the Apes factor.

Yes, regular Chimpanzees are very violent dangerous animals but Bonobos aren't and I don't think enough exhibits focus on those differences.
 
I would argue differently from those that have already posted, and I believe their popularity is due to multiple factors.

First, gorillas have more presence: simply put, they are larger. It's the same reason why elephants are popular, bigger is better. Additionally, gorillas physically age better; they remain attractive for quite a longer period of time. Older chimps assume a more grizzly appearance.

Next, I think that people believe (whether true or not) that gorillas are more endangered, and therefore, are a bigger commodity. Recent evidence has suggested that many people believe wild chimpanzee populations are not in danger of extinction, simply because of their portrayal in the popular media (see Ross et al. 2008, or PM me for a copy of the article). People are more attracted to exhibits that house animals that they believe are more endangered.

While what has been said already may be true, I think the aforementioned factors are more influential. I'm excited to hear what other people think of this, because personally, I also am drawn to gorilla exhibits more than chimpanzee exhibits.
 
laduec said:
I would argue differently from those that have already posted, and I believe their popularity is due to multiple factors.

First, gorillas have more presence: simply put, they are larger. It's the same reason why elephants are popular, bigger is better. Additionally, gorillas physically age better; they remain attractive for quite a longer period of time. Older chimps assume a more grizzly appearance.

Next, I think that people believe (whether true or not) that gorillas are more endangered, and therefore, are a bigger commodity. Recent evidence has suggested that many people believe wild chimpanzee populations are not in danger of extinction, simply because of their portrayal in the popular media (see Ross et al. 2008, or PM me for a copy of the article). People are more attracted to exhibits that house animals that they believe are more endangered.

While what has been said already may be true, I think the aforementioned factors are more influential. I'm excited to hear what other people think of this, because personally, I also am drawn to gorilla exhibits more than chimpanzee exhibits.
Click to expand...

Very good points, especially the first one. People seem to be drawn to a big strong silverback gorilla rather than a grizzly alpha male chimp. I too, am drawn to Gorilla exhibits more than Chimpanzee exhibits.
 
This is an interesting thread, and when analyzing zoos in the United States it seems that there are at least double the number of outstanding Lowland Gorilla exhibits in comparison to Chimpanzee habitats. Kansas City has an absolutely spectacular, 3-acre enclosure for chimps, and there are great ones in Dallas, Los Angeles, Saint Louis, Busch Gardens, Lincoln Park, Detroit and North Carolina to make it 8 terrific chimp exhibits.

Gorillas, on the other hand, can be found in greater numbers and I can rattle off 17 top-notch exhibits in the U.S.: Bronx, Disney, Dallas, Atlanta, Woodland Park, Lincoln Park, Sedgwick County, North Carolina, Kansas City, Saint Louis, Denver, San Francisco, San Diego, Busch Gardens, Louisville, Riverbanks and Gladys Porter (average enclosure but the huge troop makes it worthwhile).

Gorillas have shed their King Kong image, are viewed as gentle giants, and Howletts footage of keepers going in with them has contributed to their appeal. Toddlers falling into gorilla enclosures at zoos in Chicago and Jersey (Channel Islands) have not been harmed, which has added to the mystique, and I cannot imagine what horrors would happen if a youngster fell into a Chimpanzee exhibit. Gorillas seem to be more well-liked and the proliferation of new enclosures in American zoos is in contrast with the fact that in the past decade probably not a single U.S. zoo has created a new habitat for Chimpanzees.
 
snowleopard said:
Gorillas seem to be more well-liked and the proliferation of new enclosures in American zoos is in contrast with the fact that in the past decade probably not a single U.S. zoo has created a new habitat for Chimpanzees.
Click to expand...

what about the Houston Zoo?
 
Gulo gulo said:
what about the Houston Zoo?
Click to expand...

Good point! That exhibit just opened slightly over a year ago and is a great example of a top-notch, new Chimpanzee enclosure. I visited Houston Zoo in 2010 and so I'd forgotten that a new African complex had been built since then. Also, there have been rumors of Lowland Gorillas in the future plans in Houston.
 
I think too few zoo directors and visitors know much about conservation. Directors have an idea about what visitors want and expect to see and then exaggerate the importance of having a new exhibit for the chosen species. I have been to several zoos that have spent a fortune on new exhibits for popular species, such as large cats and great apes. The zoos state that they have to do this to save the species from extinction. They never point out that the species has already been saved from extinction and, in many cases, there is insufficient natural habitat to enable reintroduction for captives. A few months ago, there was a lot of criticism on Zoochat about Damian Aspinall sending captive gorillas to Africa, where there is a high risk of them being killed. If there is little scope of gorillas being returned to the wild and thriving there, is there really any point in having about 750 captive western lowland gorillas, occupying the space that could be used by species that could be bred and reintroduced to suitable habitats? The fact is that for many visitors, gorillas have a greater charisma than do chimpanzees and zoo directors use this to boost revenue. It would be better to keep gorillas in large, natural groups, but have fewer zoos keeping them.
 
DavidBrown said:
Has anybody formally studied the relative popularity of the two species and teased out what might make gorillas more popular than chimps (if this is indeed the case)?
Click to expand...

Many people have highlighted the most salient factors already on this interesting thread.

I would say the overall factor is 'impressiveness' which Gorillas have in abundance, more so than Chimpanzees, and in Zoos, only really shared by Elephants. Zoos know Gorillas, for many of the reasons already discussed above, are a big draw to the public, so usually aim to include them in their collections if possible. The formation of 'bachelor' groups for surplus males has made their availability for new exhibits much wider too.

You are right that many Zoos that used to exhibit two, or three Ape species have dropped Chimpanzees-the rank order of popularity as an exhibit of the Apes seems to be in favour of 1. Gorillas. 2 Orangutans. 3. Chimpanzees (Bonobos rather lie outside this order).

A few zoos however have gone the other way. In the UK Edinburgh has focused on a large social Chimpanzee group in state of the art housing(Budongo). They did have Gorillas previously but it was never a very satisfactory display (since converted for the Giant Pandas) and I think it was a conscious decision here to focus on the Chimps instead. Some other smaller zoos which can't afford the expense of building for Gorillas and will never have them, also still have Chimpanzee groups as the 'next best thing' but they never have the public appeal of the larger Apes, I don't think. However, where there are no Gorillas, they are an alternative.
 
tschandler71 said:
Yes, regular Chimpanzees are very violent dangerous animals but Bonobos aren't and I don't think enough exhibits focus on those differences.
Click to expand...

Don't be misled into thinking Bonobos are non-violent. They can be aggressive/dangerous to people, at least in captivity, though perhaps more peaceful within their own communities.
 
Considering the fact that most male ZooChatters here seem to favour gorillas, I wonder if this would be true for female zoo visitors too.

My home Zoo Berlin keeps chimps, bonobos, gorillas and orang utans.
For unknown reasons it wanted to get rid of the group of chimps and send them to China in 2003, later argueing, with the bonobos the zoo offered already a chimp collection (?).
A public outcry, to keep the chimps, followed and was successful.

Could it be, that chimpanzees are simply more difficult to handle in a zoo and therefore less appreciated by zoo managements?
Is is possible, that deep down there is a feeling, they are so much like us, and after all we know about them now, they shouldn't be kept behind bars?

Prefering gorillas to chimpanzees is also a question what you are looking for in a zoo. Is it just an animal in your collection? Or do you want to watch behaviour, or even try to get some sort of contact?

In my experience for the latter much more can be expected from the chimps.
 
Taisha said:
Prefering gorillas to chimpanzees is also a question what you are looking for in a zoo. Is it just an animal in your collection? Or do you want to watch behaviour, or even try to get some sort of contact?

In my experience for the latter much more can be expected from the chimps.
Click to expand...

You are correct that Chimpanzees are usually far more active than Gorillas, particularly when kept in large social groups. Gorillas in large social groups can be active too, but Chimps are still usually even more so. I think that may have been one reason Edinburgh plumped for a large Chimp group and dispersed the very small (I.3 then 1.2 then 1.1.) and more inactive Gorilla group.

The reaction of the Berlin public is fairly typical though- suddenly when it seemed they might leave, the Chimps were more appreciated.
 
I agree with the above and a lot of people have offered many reasons for why Gorilla are more popular than Chimps. They are also more Popular than Orangutans too in my opinion. Many of the suggestions as to why Chimps are less popular cannot be applied to the Orangs or other animals in the zoo for that matter.


I never really thought about this, I could watch Gorilla all day but just glance at Chimps in a zoo. I thought it was just a personal preference, obviously not the only one.

As Impressive as they are, I dont think its the size factor. Out of the big Herbivorous I would say that Elephants are more popular than Hippo or Rhino. Hippos and Rhino are bigger than Gorilla yet they would not rank near on the popularity scale.

Lions and Tigers I would say have equal popularity.

Is there a primitive reason for this, did our ancestors have to fear the Chimps or Hippos more than the Gorilla? Or was it an evolutionary safe guard, an innate biological response, against Chimps and early humanoids cross breeding?

Maybe we see ourselves too much in Chimps and it "freaks us out" words I have heard too often in Chimp houses for viewers through the glass.
 
Vulpes said:
I agree with the above and a lot of people have offered many reasons for why Gorilla are more popular than Chimps.

Maybe we see ourselves too much in Chimps and it "freaks us out" words I have heard too often in Chimp houses for viewers through the glass.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Bottom line: chimps aren't very nice, just like us
 
An interesting question, which has produced some interesting answers - most of which I agree with.
I think people are impressed by the size of gorillas, but also by their calm and dignified dispositions (this is largely unconscious of course, but we do this all the time with the people we meet, so we inevitably do it with apes too). Gorillas are generally strong and silent and seem in control of themselves. Chimps are exactly the opposite, and although it's easy to recognise how similar they are to us, the qualities we share with them are not the ones which we most admire in ourselves. Bonobos are generally more attractive and laid-back; but I agree with Pertinax, when they do get agitated their banshee soprano screams and unremitting dedication to violence are deeply troubling (based on my observation of the bonobos and their keepers' faces during an incident I witnessed).
However, I firmly believe that every zoo that can afford to do so should provide suitable accommodation for both gorillas and chimps in reasonably large groups, plus a smaller group of orangs of either species (perhaps with bonobos and the other species of orangs too). I think every child deserves the opportunity to watch these animals, and many adults will also want to do so. They are of enormous educational value and they are all severely threatened with extinction. I cannot understand why a large zoo would not want to keep both chimps and gorillas.

Alan
 
Last edited:
gentle lemur said:
An interesting question, which has produced some interesting answers - most of which I agree with.
I think people are impressed by the size of gorillas, but also by their calm and dignified dispositions (this is largely unconscious of course, but we do this all the time with the people we meet, so we inevitably do it with apes too). Gorillas are generally strong and silent and seem in control of themselves. Chimps are exactly the opposite, and although it's easy to recognise how similar they are to us, the qualities we share with them are not the ones which we most admire in ourselves. Bonobos are generally more attractive and laid-back; but I agree with Pertinax, when they do get agitated their banshee soprano screams and unremitting dedication to violence are deeply troubling (based on my observation of the bonobos and their keepers' faces during an incident I witnessed).
However, I firmly believe that every zoo that can afford to do so should provide suitable accommodation for both gorillas and chimps in reasonably large groups, plus a smaller group of orangs of either species (perhaps with bonobos and the other species of orangs too). I think every child deserves the opportunity to watch these animals, and many adults will also want to do so. They are of enormous educational value and they are all severely threatened with extinction. I cannot understand why a large zoo would not want to keep both chimps and gorillas.

Alan
Click to expand...

I agree with you, Perhaps our perceived impression of the Gorilla is how we would like to see ourselves however we turn away when we see the undesirable traits reflected in the Chimpanzee.

Planet of the apes is a good demonstration of how humans perceive the three species. The Gorilla is Large powerful and loyal. As we would all like to consider ourselves to be.

The Chimp is smart but also very aggressive, The most human like in the movies. The Orangutan is the old wise one.

We tend to avoid people with erratic violent natures so perhaps this is projected to the Chimp as a species????
 
A reason why chimps are ´less attractive´ could also be that females in heat ( is it called this way ? ) are for many people an unattractive sight. Gorillas and Orangs don't have these swellings which migth make them more attractive and also the questions from your children what's wrong with the chimp-female migth make you feel sohow unpleasant.
However, this is just a thougth.
 
Out of all the primates I have seen in zoos,the group spent most time watching were the Tonkean macaques at Strassbourg Zoo. It was the first time I had ever seen the species and I worked out which individual was dominant to the others and how the individuals interacted with each other. I disagree that a primate has to be big to be interesting and I have seen many visitors at London Zoo who enjoy seeing the squirrel monkeys and emperor tamarins.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top