Zoo/Aquarium Hot Takes

TinoPup said:
Have you seen one in person?
Click to expand...
Yes I saw one on a visit to Natural Encounter Inc.. The size of the bird is impressive but that’s it. It’s just big and hunt sloths, whoop-de-doo. As far as larger eagles I think Philippine eagles and Martial eagles (the latter of which I also saw at NEI) are more intriguing. But then again my favorite species of eagle is the bald eagle and this is the hot takes thread so this explanation is probably worthless.
 
PossumRoach said:
Yes I saw one on a visit to Natural Encounter Inc.. The size of the bird is impressive but that’s it. It’s just big and hunt sloths, whoop-de-doo. As far as larger eagles I think Philippine eagles and Martial eagles (the latter of which I also saw at NEI) are more intriguing. But then again my favorite species of eagle is the bald eagle and this is the hot takes thread so this explanation is probably worthless.
Click to expand...

It's an interesting take. What do you think the other two large species have that the harpy doesn't?
 
I've got one of several hot takes in zoo exhibit design as someone who studies it as a hobby and shakes my head whenever there is a lack of this particular element in certain exhibits, but here goes - moats are good, and the recent practice of phasing them out in favor of mesh fences and glass viewing windows (or cable fences in the case of large mammals *cough cough Atlanta* is aggravating personally. That said, I completely understand smaller zoos that don't utilize moats, as their intent is to maximize the amount of space given to their animals. My belief when it comes to exhibiting animals, is that there ideally would be different ways of viewing that would please the general public. Moats for completely unobstructed viewing, mesh/harp wire for getting closer to the animal (and actually using your five/six senses to fully comprehend what's coming your way), and glass for absolutely up-close viewing. As stated earlier, I completely understand the reason for moats not being utilized in smaller zoos like Akron, whose main goal is to maximize the amount of space that any given animal has, i.e. large predators and lesser apes. It can also be an issue of resources and animal husbandry where it's difficult to clean moats. And I also understand the necessity of prioritizing up-close viewing in terms of animals like snow leopards, jaguars and cougars, all of which are incredibly powerful jumpers that need fully meshed over habitats. That said, if a zoo is large enough and has the resources for implementing unobstructed viewing like moats and it chooses not to anyway, I see that as a missed opportunity of the highest order. (Looking at you, San Diego Zoo, making history with the U.S.'s first moated lion exhibit only for their modern-day habitat to be a dinky little netted over cage.)

TL;dr, moats good, small zoos don't use them for completely understandable reasons, but bigger zoos should use them especially if they have the space and budget.
 
PossumRoach said:
Yes I saw one on a visit to Natural Encounter Inc.. The size of the bird is impressive but that’s it. It’s just big and hunt sloths, whoop-de-doo. As far as larger eagles I think Philippine eagles and Martial eagles (the latter of which I also saw at NEI) are more intriguing. But then again my favorite species of eagle is the bald eagle and this is the hot takes thread so this explanation is probably worthless.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I have to disagree. Large birds of prey are inherently cool.
 
CGSwans said:
Zoos should let herbivore species breed without restriction and feed the surplus to carnivore species.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling that some collections in Europe *have* done the latter - I have distinct memories of seeing lions somewhere in Germany eating zebra meat.
 
WalkingAgnatha said:
There was also that giraffe bull which was fed to lions in Europe. (UK?)
Click to expand...

Ah yes, of course - Marius, at Copenhagen in Denmark.

Should have recalled that one given the amount of fiery debate and argument that whole incident provoked on Zoochat!
 
Right, but that was sort of opportunistic, after what I think was an unplanned breeding. Zoos should be doing it deliberately. Species such as ungulates, macropods and rodents can benefit from social structures that mimic those in the wild. Carnivores get more varied and more ‘wild’ prey. It’s a win-win for all except the zoo’s marketing and communications department.
 
CGSwans said:
Right, but that was sort of opportunistic, after what I think was an unplanned breeding. Zoos should be doing it deliberately. Species such as ungulates, macropods and rodents can benefit from social structures that mimic those in the wild. Carnivores get more varied and more ‘wild’ prey. It’s a win-win for all except the zoo’s marketing and communications department.
Click to expand...

Some zoos here do raise their own rodents for feeding, but it's often easier to just get them shipped in. Some zoos also vary the meats given to carnivores, while others stick to the commercial diets.
 
TinoPup said:
Some zoos here do raise their own rodents for feeding, but it's often easier to just get them shipped in. Some zoos also vary the meats given to carnivores, while others stick to the commercial diets.
Click to expand...

I don’t mean breeding feeder rats, though they do show the inherent absurdity of not being willing to breed and feed out capybaras.
 
Here my two cents: Cetaceans of every possible species should be very promoted in captivity, only the species that are too difficult to have a good welfare about (baleen whales, deep water species) should be avoided. I find absolutely absurd that countries like UK, Canada and Mexico ban cetaceans from captivity. Every aquarium in the world should have a wide variety of cetacean species, especially those that are not bottlenoses. Cheers on China for increase the killer whale captive population! But we need many more freshwater dolphins, porpoises and oceanic dolphin species in Europe and North America :)
 
Kakapo said:
Here my two cents: Cetaceans of every possible species should be very promoted in captivity, only the species that are too difficult to have a good welfare about (baleen whales, deep water species) should be avoided. I find absolutely absurd that countries like UK, Canada and Mexico ban cetaceans from captivity. Every aquarium in the world should have a wide variety of cetacean species, especially those that are not bottlenoses. Cheers on China for increase the killer whale captive population! But we need many more freshwater dolphins, porpoises and oceanic dolphin species in Europe and North America :)
Click to expand...
Maybe ban is too far, but there are very few exhibit which are actually large enough and provide good enrichment for the species. "Cheers on China for increase the killer whale captive population!" no. just no. I'm not against orca in captivity, but it's just too small for the inhabitants, and the only thing China keep them is for shows, and more orcas make the show more impressive.
 
TinoPup said:
It's an interesting take. What do you think the other two large species have that the harpy doesn't?
Click to expand...
Well first of all I have bias towards animals that are brown. Second of all I think that the other two eagles I mentioned have petter looking faces. And third of all I just feel like they aren’t as overrated as the harpy eagle. Also I will also bring up Steller’s sea eagle which I forgot to do so in my last post. That animal is also cooler than the harpy

birdsandbats said:
Sorry, I have to disagree. Large birds of prey are inherently cool.
Click to expand...
I never said large birds if prey, let alone eagles, weren’t cool. I only brought up size because harpies are not the only large eagle so therefore they are not special. I literally brought up two large eagles that are cooler than the harpy on that post and later mentioned the steller’s fish eagle. And since you are bringing up large birds of prey, while I mainly focused on large eagles, I can mention seven more large birds of prey cooler than the harpy eagle: Blakiston’s fish owl, California condor, Andean condor, king vulture, secretary bird, Bearded vulture, and red headed vulture. Honorable mentions include every other large vultures I may have forgotten to mention, wedge tailed eagle, and any other Haliaeetus eagles I didn’t mention on my previous posts.


Coelacanth18 said:
A giant crested
Click to expand...
Martial eagle.
Coelacanth18 said:
monkey-eating eagle
Click to expand...
Philippine eagle
Coelacanth18 said:
named after a mythical Greek personification of storm winds?
Click to expand...
That doesn’t make it any cooler but to each their own. And I am saying this as someone who likes a ratite named after a goddess associated with fertility and the earth.

Harpies would be cool if they were living in my walls and tormented in my sleep by whispering nasty things and saying “I am living in your walls”
 
Kakapo said:
Here my two cents: Cetaceans of every possible species should be very promoted in captivity, only the species that are too difficult to have a good welfare about (baleen whales, deep water species) should be avoided. I find absolutely absurd that countries like UK, Canada and Mexico ban cetaceans from captivity. Every aquarium in the world should have a wide variety of cetacean species, especially those that are not bottlenoses. Cheers on China for increase the killer whale captive population! But we need many more freshwater dolphins, porpoises and oceanic dolphin species in Europe and North America :)
Click to expand...
Ok that’s definitely a hot take. I agree educationally having many different species of cetacean would be extremely valuable however we have to weigh the benefits vs. the issues. First of all cetacean care is extremely expensive to care for. They require lots of food that can be harder for inland facilities to provide, they require lots of water filtration, and cetacean exhibit construction can be extremely costly.
Not every aquarium need’s cetaceans, there are many that don’t have the space and that pride themselves on not needing such animals. Places like Monterey Bay, Tennessee River Aquarium, New England Aquarium, and Aquarium of the Pacific; all arguably great aquariums don’t have the space or need for cetaceans.
As for the China statement (specifically the Chimelong holding facility): they aren’t increasing the population for educational purposes and they aren’t distributing Orcas for educational purposes. I’m sure you know that so what’s the point of congratulating them? Yay we have more cetaceans being used solely for profit? Weigh the benefits, yes more Orcas but for what?
 
StoppableSan said:
(Looking at you, San Diego Zoo, making history with the U.S.'s first moated lion exhibit only for their modern-day habitat to be a dinky little netted over cage.)
Click to expand...

Wasn't this Bronx? I sweat I've read that the African Plains exhibit was the first time a US zoo exhibited a big cat outside of a cage. It was also one of the world's first, though one or two European zoos got to it first I believe.

~Thylo
 
ThylacineAlive said:
Wasn't this Bronx? I sweat I've read that the African Plains exhibit was the first time a US zoo exhibited a big cat outside of a cage. It was also one of the world's first, though one or two European zoos got to it first I believe.

~Thylo
Click to expand...
San Diego's lion grotto opened up in 1923, while Bronx' lion habitat opened up in the 1940s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top