OkapiFan
Well-Known Member
Very! But that's what this thread is for!
Zoo/Aquarium Hot Takes
- Thread starter pachyderm pro
- Start date
ZoologicallyDepraved
Well-Known Member
What I meant by the second one is that photographing animals in zoos is cheating in comparison to photographing them in the wild. I have nothing against the practice, but I do not believe it should be categorized under wildlife photography.
USDA means *something*, just not much. It means you've passed the bare minimum. Animals have shelter and clean food and water, there's fencing, you have paperwork documenting your animals and how they're euthanized if needed, they get some sort of health care from a vet.
I've never seen anyone call if wildlife photography.
Pleistocene891
Well-Known Member
I'm interested to hear your top 5 zoos in the country.
ZoologicallyDepraved
Well-Known Member
1. Brookfield Zoo. Great species variety and research on animal welfare. The dolphins are a plus, and I look forward to their return.
2. San Diego Zoo. Fantastic and rare species, and great investment in conservation.
3. Zoo Atlanta. Founders of the Great Ape heart project.
4. ZooTampa. I love how they have multiple rescued species, as well as many local animals.
5. North Carolina Zoo. Mainly because of size, which allows better exhibits and more species.
I was literally going to joke that Brookfield would be number one.
I like Brookfield a lot - but not that much!
ZoologicallyDepraved
Well-Known Member
Ha, what can I say? I'm a sucker for zoos that invest in animal welfare research.I was literally going to joke that Brookfield would be number one.
I like Brookfield a lot - but not that much!
Pleistocene891
Well-Known Member
Are these just including the zoos you've visited or all zoos in the country?
ZoologicallyDepraved
Well-Known Member
All the zoos in the country. I have not visited Brookfield, Atlanta, or North Carolina. This is based mainly on what I know of them, and maybe a Secrets of the Zoo episode or two.
I've actually been working on a thread that will partially highlight their animal welfare research. They do some incredible things off-site and behind the scenes and it seems like a common thread in the tenure of director Strahl was this sort of behind the scenes investment and innovation. That much is a very legitimate reason to praise them.
This is going to come off like a red hot take though because the actual zoo's campus reputation here is awful. Seven Seas and Tropic World take a lot of criticism and the latter is probably one of the most unpopular individual exhibits on this entire website and even its defenders have softened with how many species have been emptied or shifted focus to the well-needed improvements. I love Brookfield like a member of my family but it's been like watching a relative you love slowly wither and die... up until this week's announcement finally made the Tropic World renovations official and not a pipe dream.
San Diego, Bronx, Omaha and St. Louis usually dominate the popularity polls and you'll notice that those four, along with Detroit, dominate because they have many exhibit complexes considered among the very best in the country. I don't know of a single exhibit at Brookfield that comes up in that conversation, unfortunately.
Are we talking about the nature of exhibit design?
ZoologicallyDepraved
Well-Known Member
No, but rather, behavior. Sure, all animals are capable of being inactive, but reptiles tend to do it the vast majority of the time. As a beardie owner I have noticed that reptiles get lazy in captivity (I still make sure to take her out enough so she can exercise), which isn't a bad thing for their welfare in these particular types of animals, but it doesn't make for very interesting viewing.
Not sure if an episode or two of Secrets of the Zoo really qualify someone to rank the top five zoos in the nation…
Lafone
Well-Known Member
Zoo photography is by definition taking photos at a zoo. Therefore in itself it can’t be ‘cheating’.
So not so hot tbh.
Now had you said photographing wild animals at the zoo was cheating as all wild animals should only be photographed in the wild and real photographers would only touch that etc etc, maybe that would have made some sense. Old hat, pointless view as people can photograph what they like though.
So not so hot tbh.
Now had you said photographing wild animals at the zoo was cheating as all wild animals should only be photographed in the wild and real photographers would only touch that etc etc, maybe that would have made some sense. Old hat, pointless view as people can photograph what they like though.
Kalaw
Well-Known Member
Two hot takes:
- Bristol Zoo's Reptile House Was Better Than London's: Perhaps seeing it on no less than 20 different visits doesn't help its case, but London's reptile house, although wonderful and filled with rarities, always seemed a little repetitive for me. Bristol having both more conventional terrariums and open-topped exhibits (such as that wonderful one for Trinidad Stream Frogs and various Asian turtle species), as well as smaller room filled with amphibians, juveniles and smaller lizards, always excited me more. Maybe not quite as many rarities, but with Pygmy Leaf Chameleon, it was hardly lacking in that respect either.
As a side note, I have similar feeling's towards the former aquariums at both zoos, with Bristol's tunnel tank with the Mississippi Paddlefish and three species of gar putting all of London's offerings to shame. However, due to the sheer scale of London's aquarium, I wouldn't go quite so far as to say Bristol's was better.
- Hemsley Conservation Centre Is A Good Zoo: One of the best collections of rarities in the UK is often criticised for its low standard of exhibitry, but when I finally made it there, mainly to see the Aardwolf, I was decently impressed. The open-topped Kinkajou enclosure was great, the callitrichid enclosures were pleasant and the Tayra enclosure was far larger than many others which I had seen. The only two genuinely bad habitats were those for the Rusty-spotted Cats, which the zoo has stated is only temporary, and the Brazilian Tapir and Capybara enclosure, which for the small number of species it displays (one tapir and one capybara, I believe) isn't even that small. Couple that with all the rarities mentioned earlier, and you have one of the best small zoos in the country.
- Bristol Zoo's Reptile House Was Better Than London's: Perhaps seeing it on no less than 20 different visits doesn't help its case, but London's reptile house, although wonderful and filled with rarities, always seemed a little repetitive for me. Bristol having both more conventional terrariums and open-topped exhibits (such as that wonderful one for Trinidad Stream Frogs and various Asian turtle species), as well as smaller room filled with amphibians, juveniles and smaller lizards, always excited me more. Maybe not quite as many rarities, but with Pygmy Leaf Chameleon, it was hardly lacking in that respect either.
As a side note, I have similar feeling's towards the former aquariums at both zoos, with Bristol's tunnel tank with the Mississippi Paddlefish and three species of gar putting all of London's offerings to shame. However, due to the sheer scale of London's aquarium, I wouldn't go quite so far as to say Bristol's was better.
- Hemsley Conservation Centre Is A Good Zoo: One of the best collections of rarities in the UK is often criticised for its low standard of exhibitry, but when I finally made it there, mainly to see the Aardwolf, I was decently impressed. The open-topped Kinkajou enclosure was great, the callitrichid enclosures were pleasant and the Tayra enclosure was far larger than many others which I had seen. The only two genuinely bad habitats were those for the Rusty-spotted Cats, which the zoo has stated is only temporary, and the Brazilian Tapir and Capybara enclosure, which for the small number of species it displays (one tapir and one capybara, I believe) isn't even that small. Couple that with all the rarities mentioned earlier, and you have one of the best small zoos in the country.
AZA zoos all do this to some extent. An overview of AZA and welfare: https://assets.speakcdn.com/assets/2332/aza_accreditation_process_and_welfare_final.pdf
The general public often doesn't hear about it as much because for many zoos, they aren't doing research on big/popular animals like apes. It's often things like frogs, insects, and other small creatures. Many, if not all, AZA zoos have rescues, both from the wild and from the pet trade. AZA zoos are also required to work on conservation programs.
Lafone
Well-Known Member
No one I’ve seen in any photo forum or elsewhere categorises it in that way. Straw takes aren’t that hot. Do you actually do any photography?
ZoologicallyDepraved
Well-Known Member
Yes- I myself have seen it categorized that way. Just not here. I do wildlife photography. It does seem the way I came across was confusing. Pretty new to this forum and still adjusting to the community.
ZoologicallyDepraved
Well-Known Member
Allow me to rephrase. The show introduced me to the zoo, and then when checking it out virtually, I was impressed with the field conservation programs. Communication is not my strong suit.
Where have you seen it if you don't mind me asking? I've never seen or heard of it being categorized as such either.