Zoo/Aquarium Hot Takes

[Echobeast]

Though it has some odd theming, my gripe about the Scutes Family Gallery (from seeing Zoochat pictures) is that some of the reptile enclosures are just awful from a husbandry standpoint.

People can make whatever opinion they want from pictures but working there and knowing personally the keepers who keep those animals, they get amazing care. CMZ also has an in-house avian/reptile board certified vet so all of those reptiles are fine husbandry wise.

 

[Junklekitteb]

My own 'hot' take: felids are extremely overrated. They hardly ever do anything except sleep in the corner and they all look virtually the same.

 

[Azamat Shackleford]

People can make whatever opinion they want from pictures but working there and knowing personally the keepers who keep those animals, they get amazing care. CMZ also has an in-house avian/reptile board certified vet so all of those reptiles are fine husbandry wise.

Having owned three snakes and being familiar with basic snake husbandry, these enclosures aren't adequate. Seeing that the left enclosure has a garter, and that garters prefer basking, I think that's a red flag in itself. If the enclosures have been revamped or removed since then, or if the exhibit has been changed to improve animal welfare requirements (ex. more hides, more climbing structures, etc), then I'll take back what I said.

Reptile House 2012 - Snake Enclosures - ZooChat

There's no way that's suitable to house a knight anole in, considering there's almost no climbing opportunities for the poor animal. Wayyy too small as well.
Reptile House 2012 - Bookshelf Exhibits - ZooChat

 

[Westcoastperson]

What?! JJ was kept only temporarily for rescue purposes, and this was greedy?

Sorry I missed this, What I was saying is that these SeaWorld employees learned how to care for a baleen whale and set industry standards. The higher ups had nothing to do with that, the employees inovate not the company.

Do they have the money to spend? People don't work for free you know. They have rides to maintain and animals to care for. I would argue that your point is invalid unless you can show they actually have the money to spend. Especially after the blow from being closed during Covid.



How about Disney's Animal Kingdom then? They're world-class in terms of care, and under a major for-profit company far-bigger than SeaWorld.
Or how about Six Flags?

I have the financial reports and I will look tomorrow if you would like to continue this conversation in the morning but I’m not really in the mood to scroll through financial reports tonight.
Disney as a company I have my hesitations because they do take profit but they have great exhibits for their animals, do great educational work, and since the film studios creation they have focused on educating the public on conservation and wildlife. As for six flags they aren’t as conservation minded so you could argue they don’t deserve their spot in the AZA but at least they have good exhibits.

 

[Echobeast]

Having owned three snakes and being familiar with basic snake husbandry, these enclosures aren't adequate. Seeing that the left enclosure has a garter, and that garters prefer basking, I think that's a red flag in itself. If the enclosures have been revamped or removed since then, or if the exhibit has been changed to improve animal welfare requirements (ex. more hides, more climbing structures, etc), then I'll take back what I said.

Reptile House 2012 - Snake Enclosures - ZooChat

There's no way that's suitable to house a knight anole in, considering there's almost no climbing opportunities for the poor animal.
Reptile House 2012 - Bookshelf Exhibits - ZooChat

I don’t think owning three snakes makes anyone an expert including me which is why we default to experts such as board certified vets at AZA accredited institutions.

And changes have been made to the exhibits since 2012 when it first opened. I posted pictures when this topic came up a few years back.

Blue spiny lizard exhibit

• Echobeast
• 25 Mar 2019

Half tile, half bark substrate with multiple hides.

Bearded dragon exhibit

• Echobeast
• 25 Mar 2019

About 4 feet long. Half bark, half tile. Upside down chest is the hide. He was under it when the...

Burmese python exhibits

• Echobeast
• 25 Mar 2019

This is the renovated gator exhibit. Renovated in early 2017 and built for the zoo’s two male...

The snake exhibits are larger and have varying substrates including natural substrates and moss hides in each exhibit None of the exhibits have colored sand in them anymore and all of them have varied substrates and multiple hides. The reptiles are also rotated off exhibit every so often to more “traditional” setups.

I honestly encourage people to actually visit CMZ and see the setups as I’ve known people with your sentiment before who have come around after seeing it or talking to the keepers.

 

[Azamat Shackleford]

I don’t think owning three snakes makes anyone an expert including me which is why we default to experts such as board certified vets at AZA accredited institutions.

And changes have been made to the exhibits since 2012 when it first opened. I posted pictures when this topic came up a few years back.

Blue spiny lizard exhibit

• Echobeast
• 25 Mar 2019

Half tile, half bark substrate with multiple hides.

Bearded dragon exhibit

• Echobeast
• 25 Mar 2019

About 4 feet long. Half bark, half tile. Upside down chest is the hide. He was under it when the...

Burmese python exhibits

• Echobeast
• 25 Mar 2019

This is the renovated gator exhibit. Renovated in early 2017 and built for the zoo’s two male...

The snake exhibits are larger and have varying substrates including natural substrates and moss hides in each exhibit None of the exhibits have colored sand in them anymore and all of them have varied substrates and multiple hides. The reptiles are also rotated off exhibit every so often to more “traditional” setups.

I honestly encourage people to actually visit CMZ and see the setups as I’ve known people with your sentiment before who have come around after seeing it or talking to the keepers.

Calm down. Never said I was an expert, nor did I say I was perfect, just because vets are board-certified and whatnot doesn't excuse the fact that these setups were unsuited to their inhabitants. I've seen a plethora of AZA setups whose husbandry standards with reptiles and other animals being almost unsuitable for the inhabitants involved. As I already said, if they improved the exhibits (like you said), I take back my statement.

I didn't say all the exhibits in the house are bad, some seemed pretty adequate to me. You're entitled to believe whatever you want, and that's completely fine. We'll just have to agree to disagree here

 

[Great Argus]

I have the financial reports and I will look tomorrow if you would like to continue this conversation in the morning but I’m not really in the mood to scroll through financial reports tonight

Given they are a publicly traded company, they are required to post everything, and I have read through their latest report just tonight. I think the amount they are spending is reasonable considering their overall expenses.

Disney as a company I have my hesitations because they do take profit but they have great exhibits for their animals, do great educational work, and since the film studios creation they have focused on educating the public on conservation and wildlife.

And they have such great exhibits and educational work because they have money. I highly doubt SeaWorld's top executives are greedier than Disney's.

As for six flags they aren’t as conservation minded so you could argue they don’t deserve their spot in the AZA but at least they have good exhibits.

*cough* Neither Six Flags is AZA accredited. Also they have average to subpar exhibits in my opinion. (Based on multiple visits to Discovery Kingdom).

 

[Echobeast]

Calm down. Never said I was an expert, nor did I say I was perfect, just because vets are board-certified and whatnot doesn't excuse the fact that these setups were unsuited to their inhabitants

I didn’t mean to come off as rude or aggressive and I apologize for that. But I feel when there are actual experts with actual certifications in the area and they are fine with it, it takes precedence over opinions based on basic husbandry experience. This topic gets brought up a lot and when I know the people personally I can get a bit defensive.

 

[Azamat Shackleford]

I didn’t mean to come off as rude or aggressive and I apologize for that. But I feel when there are actual experts with actual certifications in the area and they are fine with it, it takes precedence over opinions based on basic husbandry experience. This topic gets brought up a lot and when I know the people personally I can get a bit defensive.

Apology accepted. Just remember though that even experts can be wrong and that nobody's perfect. We can all learn from something

 

[Westcoastperson]

Given they are a publicly traded company, they are required to post everything, and I have read through their latest report just tonight. I think the amount they are spending is reasonable considering their overall expenses.



And they have such great exhibits and educational work because they have money. I highly doubt SeaWorld's top executives are greedier than Disney's.



*cough* Neither Six Flags is AZA-accredited. Also, they have average to subpar exhibits in my opinion. (Based on multiple visits to Discovery Kingdom).

I know they're publicly traded and I have the pdf of the expenses open I just don't have the energy to look through it and then do the math today but I will try tomorrow morning.
You do raise a fair point about Disney having more money and they're executives are known for money grabs. But does that really stop SeaWorld from adding better education and better exhibits? I mean look at Kali River Rapids at the Disneys Animal Kingdom and Shipwreck Rapids at SeaWorld San Diego. Disney does an amazing job at incorporating education about slash and burn to farm and has a large spacious exhibit for Gibbons. SeaWorld has an okay exhibit for Sea Turtles that are hard to see and a flamingo pool (which now I believe only holds ducks and Nene) which you can only see if you decide you don't want to ride while in line. There are only a few areas that are even close to educational and they just give random animal facts. SeaWorld definitely had the chance to build better exhibits there and incorporate some sort of message about reef destruction or the impacts that the tourism industry could have on the environment (the whole area is themed around a cruise ship). SeaWorld had the chance and decided they would rather go for the theme park approach than the educational approach when there were multiple opportunities to do so. The whole reason that area exists is to bring in money, SeaWorld executives didn't care how large or how viewable the exhibits were. At least with Disney, they tried to get educational value out of the area and build good exhibits for their animals.
Also, I had no idea if Six Flags was accredited or not. I had heard their exhibits were ok, not special but not terrible.

 

[Great Argus]

You do raise a fair point about Disney having more money and they're executives are known for money grabs. But does that really stop SeaWorld from adding better education and better exhibits?

What does Disney having more money and greedy executives have to do with SeaWorld's education and exhibits? I'm assuming you mean SeaWorld should strive to do better with what they have?

I mean look at Kali River Rapids at the Disneys Animal Kingdom and Shipwreck Rapids at SeaWorld San Diego. Disney does an amazing job at incorporating education about slash and burn to farm and has a large spacious exhibit for Gibbons. SeaWorld has an okay exhibit for Sea Turtles that are hard to see and a flamingo pool (which now I believe only holds ducks and Nene) which you can only see if you decide you don't want to ride while in line.

I fail to see how the two areas are comparable. The areas have similar names but don't have the same animals or purpose.
The long Flamingo pool visible its entire length from a main walkway? I can't figure out which exhibit you mean here. (And yes, I have been to SeaWorld SD)

There are only a few areas that are even close to educational and they just give random animal facts. SeaWorld definitely had the chance to build better exhibits there and incorporate some sort of message about reef destruction or the impacts that the tourism industry could have on the environment (the whole area is themed around a cruise ship).

I agree SeaWorld's signage is generally rather poor from what I remember. They could do better there.

The whole reason that area exists is to bring in money, SeaWorld executives didn't care how large or how viewable the exhibits were.

It is a for-profit facility you know. All the exhibits I saw during my visit were perfectly adequate for the animals and I don't recall any only viewable in line.

And here's a question for you. If the SeaWorld executives are as money-hungry as you say, then why do the parks stand by the Orcas and other cetaceans? They're expensive to maintain, bring the parks under fire by activists, and have even killed trainers. A lot of expense and bad press there. They had attendance drops after Blackfish and other PETA nonsense. But yet the company fights to keep its Orcas and other cetaceans despite all of that.

 

[amur leopard]

I don't see why any zoo or aquarium would need to be for-profit besides to make money. And if the purpose of a zoo is to make money is it a morally acceptable zoo? If you know any reason that it is morally acceptable for a zoo to be for-profit then I would understand why they could be accepted.

A large percentage of the zoos in France, Italy and the rest of Southern Europe are private. Why? Because they wouldn't be able to stay afloat without the income generated. Not all countries subsidise zoos with public money, some have to bring in the money themselves.

1 million was the Rescue centers profit, 1,398 million was the annual profit. I have the investor's reports from 2019 but I don't know where it says how much was spent on operating costs if you're looking for that.

So you completely made up the figure for operating costs...

Moving away from this conversation, modern exhibits are often really ugly. Many major developments from the 70s-00s are what catches my interest and adds charm to a zoo.

Not sure I agree, although thinking more about it modern exhibits have an advantage in that they don't often suffer from the effects of age on an exhibit (paint coming off, weeds, outdated signage etc.). I would however bear in mind that often these older exhibits can not only have more time for plants to grow etc. but also often are closer to our hearts because they have always been there, if you see what I mean.

My own 'hot' take: felids are extremely overrated. They hardly ever do anything except sleep in the corner and they all look virtually the same.

I think this one comes down to personal preference. I personally find that felids are pretty easy to distinguish (at least most) and pretty interesting to watch generally, though I agree they can be quite inactive at times.

 

[Great Argus]

It is also relatively cheap to run considering it only costs 1 million USD to run and in 2019 SeaWorld Anual revenue was 1,398 million USD. That means they dedicated 0.07 percent of their profit to animal rescues. Another note they only donate 16.5 million USD to conservation which is 1.2 percent of their total profit.

1 million was the Rescue centers profit, 1,398 million was the annual profit. I have the investor's reports from 2019 but I don't know where it says how much was spent on operating costs if you're looking for that.

So you completely made up the figure for operating costs...

I unfortunately have the feeling @amur leopard is right looking over the 2019 report again. First you say the rehab program costs 1 million to run, and then you say this;

1 million was the Rescue centers profit

But how is a dedicated rehab center spread between 3 facilities making a million dollars in profit? Also if we both are looking at the 2019 investor's report as I think we are I have no clue where you're pulling that million dollars from.

Additionally your wording is incorrect. The 1,398 million is their total income, not their actual profit.

 

[amur leopard]

Just to put this to bed:

SeaWorld's total income in the year 2019 was 1.398 billion USD.
SeaWorld's total costs in the year 2019 were 1.308 billion USD.

SeaWorld's total net profit therefore was 89.476 million USD, so only 1.3 billion less than the figure previously claimed on this thread.

Furthermore, the figure you gave for SeaWorld's conservation fund appears to be all-time and not annual, so we cannot say for sure what their annual contribution to conservation is. However, as has been stated before, they rescue thousands of marine animals every year as well as giving a substantial sum of money to conservation around the globe. How you can possibly say that SeaWorld has 'only' given $16.5 million to conservation is beyond me.

In conclusion, while I do accept some of the arguments proposed of improving SeaWorld's model more generally, I do think that talking about SeaWorld's finances is not the right route to go down to make that point.

On a separate note, 22 million visitors a year? Aren't there only 3 SeaWorld parks plus Busch Gardens?

 

[Great Argus]

On a separate note, 22 million visitors a year? Aren't there only 3 SeaWorld parks plus Busch Gardens

They run a total of 12 parks.
3 Seaworlds
2 Busch Gardens
3 Aquaticas
Discovery Cove
Sesame Place
Water Country USA
Adventure Island

I believe 9 of those parks exhibit animals, the exceptions being the last 3 on the list.

 

[JT]

SeaWorld does not belong in the AZA.
I have seen with both of my eyes the care that happens behind the scenes at SeaWorld San Diego and I can say for sure that they have some of the most dedicated people on the planet and some of the best care in the world. But the actions that their higher-ups (CEOs, presidents, etc) do not represent what an AZA aquarium should be.
They are for-profit meaning they make money off of the shows and animals. Instead of building better exhibits for their animals and dedicating themselves to animal care after BlackFish, they built more rides to bring back attendance. They have shown that they care more about money than conservation for years now by opening rides instead of renovating terrible exhibits.
They build terrible exhibits. Their Commersons Dolphin pool was so small it killed an animal and forced the company to move them to a larger exhibit in Florida. Those who have been to any SeaWorld park understand that they have small exhibits with a general lack of natural substrate and many of their exhibits severely lack in education.
They have set many industry standards because of their great care but that also means that some of the terrible things they do like build terrible exhibits and constantly use shows also become part of the industry standard. I can't think of one aquarium that only exhibits dolphins and doesn't also have shows. The AZA needs to set their own standards and aquariums need to stop following SeaWorld and build better exhibits and stop constantly using shows.
Also, one small note, no for-profit zoos or aquariums should be allowed in the AZA.

The seas at Epcot has dolphins and I don’t believe they use them in shows.

 

[birdsandbats]

Agreed 100%, it's nothing but an oversized waste of space, and it's more of a place where you "just go to say you went". Is it the hemisphere's largest polar bear exhibit? Yeah, but a lot of it is wasted space and you only have a slight chance of seeing the damn bears in-person. I think the underwater viewing is great and all, but man, it's mainly just wasted potential. Imagine if they added more species to make up for all that space...

I wish I could like this post twice, so happy someone else agrees with me on this one.

 

[birdsandbats]

Sorry I missed this, What I was saying is that these SeaWorld employees learned how to care for a baleen whale and set industry standards. The higher ups had nothing to do with that, the employees inovate not the company.

What did you expect? Most of the company higher-up don't interact with the animals at all, of course it's the keepers who figure out how to care for an animal. They are the ones actually working with the animal!

 

[Batto]

I don’t think owning three snakes makes anyone an expert including me which is why we default to experts such as board certified vets at AZA accredited institutions.

Funny enough, I'm a board certified vet (though not at AAZV), a zoo owner and keep various snakes. And nevertheless (or maybe because of this), I agree with @Azamat Shackleford 's opinion. Being a board certified AZA (or rather, an ACZM Diplomate) vet does not necessarily mean that you have extensive practical experience in the husbandry of each and every species, but that you have general husbandry knowledge and even more, expertise in the treatment of diseased / sick animals (in which proper husbandry estimation plays an important role). Over the years, however, I've gotten the impression via personal encounters that modern reptile husbandry might not be the main focus of interest for many zoo vets. Those who are interested go to ARAV conferences... ^^ Furthermore, the individual cultural imprint and experience should also be taken into account: what is considered adequate or good in one country by local experts could be considered inadequate or even illegal in others.
So just having a great vet and a great staff doesn't automatically guarantee impeccable husbandry that cannot be improved upon.
For those of you who want to read the previous discussion on this:
Stupidest Exhibit Ideas Ever

 

[Azamat Shackleford]

@Batto You said it way much better than I could