Zoo/Aquarium Hot Takes

StoppableSan said:
I like to think of it like a recipe in a cookbook, it can be a standard run-of-the mill ABC endeavor, but native exhibits or even small mammals/birds/reptiles can be the spices or MSG that amps up the dish to sheer greatness. Take something like a steak (let's say filet mignon), and let's allegorically connect it to some big ticket ABC animal like a gorilla. Standard and perfectly fine on its own. Now let's say some specific herbs, compound butter and spices (long-tailed hornbill for rosemary, African rock python for thyme, black-and-rufous sengi for fennel, talapoin for a compound butter, black duiker for black garlic >heh heh funey<, West African lungfish for chili powder, giant forest hog for lime zest, you can tell this is completely arbitrary but this is just to prove a point etc.), and you get the picture.
Click to expand...
You were hungry while writing this, weren't you? ;)
And I agree: interesting native species can be very intriguing for visitors if presented well.
 
My hot take regarding the stereotypical African Safari areas in zoos: If all the Pleistocene megafauna of the Americas, Eurasia and Australia / Oceania had survived till now, this kind of exhibits would be far less common. Who needs the African megafauna when you could showcase sabertooth cats, mammoths, megalania and giant ground sloths?
And the popular bald eagle would appear rather rinky-dinkly in comparison to the Haast's eagle or a teratorn ...;)
 
Kr0xxx said:
Europe is better for zoos than NA
Click to expand...

Kr0xxx said:
people dont understand that some opinions are just facts and not to be disputed
Click to expand...

Kr0xxx said:
Another hot take:
if you have not seen Douc Langurs in a zoo you are not worth talking to
Click to expand...

Kr0xxx said:
Birds are boring filler animals
Click to expand...

I feel like this is just bait. How can anyone be so pompous?

Kr0xxx said:
Generally speaking Europe has a far better idea of exhibitory and animal welfare.
whether it be that europe euthanises animals rather than keeping them aliving suffering on so many drugs that they may aswell be at an astroworld concert. or something as simple as size of enclosures
Click to expand...

Cool. Saying that this is common information passed between keepers is straight bologna. Dumb generalizations are not hot takes. They're just dumb.
 
"people dont understand that some opinions are just facts and not to be disputed"

I think those are generally just called facts.
 
Since my original take got buried in... all that, I'd like to say it again.

I really am not that big a fan of zoos. Aquariums are far better imo.
 
equidae said:
I'll bite.

What makes you consider aquariums better than zoos? Is that in terms of animal welfare, viewer experience, exhibit design, or what?
Click to expand...

It's really just personal preference. I've always loved marine animals in comparison to land animals, I just think they're so much more interesting. Plus, I can't seem to pay attention at zoos, no matter how hard I try, but whenever I am at an aquarium, I can spend 10 minutes looking at a single tank. Again, it's just personal preference. (also the exhibit design is really cool in a lot of cases)
 
Batto said:
I think that the word you were looking for is "aquatic", given that many public aquaria also display freshwater and brackish water species...;)
Strictly speaking, all aquaria are zoos - just with a special thematic focus.
Click to expand...

Yes, that is the word I was trying to use.
 
Species with poor breeding records and rarities need be phased out of zoos sooner instead of later. I used to feel that these kinds of animals offered each facility a unique character but in light of recent conversation with multiple people, I am increasingly concerned that zoos are not going to survive into the future unless they cut down expenses to focus exclusively on captive breeding programs that have sustainable futures. Too many species are competing for precious space and the only solution is the further homogenization of facilities. It has been a bitter pill to swallow.

The days of daydreaming about road trips to see exotic species are over and done for me; I certainly still plan to visit more major zoos but I will focus on assessing the exhibit quality rather than species lists.
 
JVM said:
Species with poor breeding records and rarities need be phased out of zoos sooner instead of later. I used to feel that these kinds of animals offered each facility a unique character but in light of recent conversation with multiple people, I am increasingly concerned that zoos are not going to survive into the future unless they cut down expenses to focus exclusively on captive breeding programs that have sustainable futures. Too many species are competing for precious space and the only solution is the further homogenization of facilities. It has been a bitter pill to swallow.

The days of daydreaming about road trips to see exotic species are over and done for me; I certainly still plan to visit more major zoos but I will focus on assessing the exhibit quality rather than species lists.
Click to expand...
One the one hand, this would mean the end of establishing new species populations and make visiting zoos obsolete. The new (the rare and the endangered) need friends.
On the other, it would save @snowleopard @TeaLovingDave @Chlidonias and many other far-travelling Zoochatters a lot of money. "Have you seen one, have you seen all"
And it would give small privately owned zoos like my WdG (*Insert shameless self-advertising*) a huge advantage in comparison to homogenized major zoos. So:
 
Batto said:
One the one hand, this would mean the end of establishing new species populations and make visiting zoos obsolete. The new (the rare and the endangered) need friends.
On the other, it would save @snowleopard @TeaLovingDave @Chlidonias and many other far-travelling Zoochatters a lot of money. "Have you seen one, have you seen all"
And it would give small privately owned zoos like my WdG (*Insert shameless self-advertising*) a huge advantage in comparison to homogenized major zoos. So:
Click to expand...
It would definitely save travelling zoochatters money, although the rich tradition here of comparing exhibits would remain at least.

If there are attempts to establish new species populations of anything in the United States, it would be lovely news to me. Besides the platypus I feel I am mostly hearing of improving standards for existing species (absolutely a good thing) and the loss of species that never fared well in captivity to begin with.
 
JVM said:
If there are attempts to establish new species populations of anything in the United States, it would be lovely news to me.
Click to expand...

Madagascar Pond Heron for one. San Diego's recent breeding success with breeding Wattled Jacana is a temporary boost to the population at least. Maybe Fanaloka. Nashville has been upping the Banded Palm Civet population slowly but surely, though it's not new.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top