AnActualFan
Well-Known Member
My own Detroit hot take is I really enjoyed their reptile house a great deal and think it is arguably a top 5 in the country.
Zoo/Aquarium Hot Takes
- Thread starter pachyderm pro
- Start date
This is at least the third debate about Brookfield I've seen in the last month and as ZooChat's resident Chicago zoo defender, you guys are killing me. 
I feel like I've already spoken on the topic ad nauseam so instead I'll hit you with my own hot take. In spite of their flaws, both Brookfield and Detroit are comfortably within the top 20 U.S. zoos in my eyes -- whatever that means. I also think they both face a lot of undeserved criticism on this forum more than other American zoos.
Lincoln Park is an incredibly cohesive and rewarding experience and utilizes its footprint significantly better than Brookfield currently. For a landlocked city zoo it's about as good as it gets. They've also become a massive operation on the conservation side of things thanks to Kevin Bell's leadership. Brookfield has always had far more potential of course and I'm optimistic that it will be realized in the years ahead.
I feel like I've already spoken on the topic ad nauseam so instead I'll hit you with my own hot take. In spite of their flaws, both Brookfield and Detroit are comfortably within the top 20 U.S. zoos in my eyes -- whatever that means. I also think they both face a lot of undeserved criticism on this forum more than other American zoos.I actually don't think that's a spicy hot take either.The real take is that Lincoln Park is better quality for what it offers than Brookfield
Lincoln Park is an incredibly cohesive and rewarding experience and utilizes its footprint significantly better than Brookfield currently. For a landlocked city zoo it's about as good as it gets. They've also become a massive operation on the conservation side of things thanks to Kevin Bell's leadership. Brookfield has always had far more potential of course and I'm optimistic that it will be realized in the years ahead.
BirdWorld#33
Member
What makes a cohesive collection? It seems Brookfield Herp, Bird, and Aquatics is cohesive but very focused on Neotropical. I would say other than Australia the mammal area needs some work. Unlike some zoos, Brookfield focuses equally on all taxon. Detroit Zoo seems to
focus on penguins in regards to birds but has a good herp collection.
In regards to conservation Brookfield has been working with Humboldt Penguin and started the Punta San Juan project and Sarasota Dolphin Project which also does shark and ray work, heavy into Blanding Turtles, pangolins, Puerto Rican crested toads, Guam Kingfishers, and emerald dragonflies. Also really focusing on Greater Prairie Chickens and butterfly conservation. According to the master plan, it sounds like local conservation will be ramping up soon which makes sense with the recent focus on Greater Prairie chicken and butterflies. They also developed Vortex which is a program that is used to manage wild populations and does a lot of work with Gorillas and other populations in the wild.
Also, the animal research department and medical team publish a lot of papers on all types of medical and welfare research in zoos. They work on dolphins, elephants, gorillas, chimps, pangolins, and giraffes. They recently opened a radiologist department that assists zoos around the world.
I feel the biggest issue for Brookfield Zoo is they are not the best at promoting the work they do. Also, Kevin Bell started at Brookfield as a keeper before moving to Lincoln Park.
focus on penguins in regards to birds but has a good herp collection.
In regards to conservation Brookfield has been working with Humboldt Penguin and started the Punta San Juan project and Sarasota Dolphin Project which also does shark and ray work, heavy into Blanding Turtles, pangolins, Puerto Rican crested toads, Guam Kingfishers, and emerald dragonflies. Also really focusing on Greater Prairie Chickens and butterfly conservation. According to the master plan, it sounds like local conservation will be ramping up soon which makes sense with the recent focus on Greater Prairie chicken and butterflies. They also developed Vortex which is a program that is used to manage wild populations and does a lot of work with Gorillas and other populations in the wild.
Also, the animal research department and medical team publish a lot of papers on all types of medical and welfare research in zoos. They work on dolphins, elephants, gorillas, chimps, pangolins, and giraffes. They recently opened a radiologist department that assists zoos around the world.
I feel the biggest issue for Brookfield Zoo is they are not the best at promoting the work they do. Also, Kevin Bell started at Brookfield as a keeper before moving to Lincoln Park.
ZooApollo
Well-Known Member
It's been stated one thousand times in here before and probably will be stated a thousand times more.
My hot take is that cetaceans can and should be kept in captivity. If it wasn't for cetaceans, I wouldn't be half as interested in fauna as I am today. I think many people start their interest in animals or zoo/zoo collections with cetacean species like SeaWorld's killer whales.
You can look at bottlenose dolphins ages from back then and compare them to now, and they're outliving their wild counterparts by a lot. I think instead of shutting down cetacean captivity, it just needs to be improved.
Of course, there is something to be said about the captive orca population being bottlenecked (in the US), and probably not going too far in breeding if the breeding program was ever brought back at SeaWorld.
But mainly, I think that cetaceans actually do better in captivity than people give them credit for. And their habitats are not as bad as people say either. I really like the Dolphin Cove habitat at SeaWorld Orlando, as well as the Wild Arctic beluga habitat. Of course, there is room for improvement, and I think they should definitely be updated.
But I am probably much more pro cetacean captivity than a lot of people here. (Or maybe I'm wrong)
My hot take is that cetaceans can and should be kept in captivity. If it wasn't for cetaceans, I wouldn't be half as interested in fauna as I am today. I think many people start their interest in animals or zoo/zoo collections with cetacean species like SeaWorld's killer whales.
You can look at bottlenose dolphins ages from back then and compare them to now, and they're outliving their wild counterparts by a lot. I think instead of shutting down cetacean captivity, it just needs to be improved.
Of course, there is something to be said about the captive orca population being bottlenecked (in the US), and probably not going too far in breeding if the breeding program was ever brought back at SeaWorld.
But mainly, I think that cetaceans actually do better in captivity than people give them credit for. And their habitats are not as bad as people say either. I really like the Dolphin Cove habitat at SeaWorld Orlando, as well as the Wild Arctic beluga habitat. Of course, there is room for improvement, and I think they should definitely be updated.
But I am probably much more pro cetacean captivity than a lot of people here. (Or maybe I'm wrong)
There's lots of people on here who support captive cetaceans, but certainly some who do not. They're just about the only animal I can think of where their presence in captivity is controversial even in the zoo industry itself.
Cetacean captivity is really difficult to justify, especially when most holders display the animals in a show-stage environment. However I do feel like choosing phase-outs and abolishing as a “solution” feels like people want to destroy the problem instead of finding an actual solution.
ZooApollo
Well-Known Member
I understand the aversion to show environments, and shows in general. However, I do not think shows and theatrical presentations are inherently a bad thing because they get an audience who may not care otherwise to be interested in the animal.
I do prefer educational presentations though mostly when education and a little bit of theatrics are present at the same time. (Showing off what the animal can do to the fullest in a fun and presentable way)
I also think that training is genuinely important to a cetaceans life in captivity for mental stimulation and think if it's shown off to people I don't see an issue with it.
I agree with this completely. My thoughts are, if any other animal programs were phased out, they would have never had the chance to improve and thrive.
Lafone
Well-Known Member
I disagree with holding them as it happens as I don’t think any of the captive holdings are adequate for the animals size or needs and their keeping frequently involves circus like conditions which focus on performance which I don’t subscribe to.
As a group the emphasis anmong holders isn’t on conservation and education but on entertainment and I think we as humans do too many unpleasant things to animals in the name of our own fun.
There’s a clear difference between training / enrichment displays with animals and circus performance. People don’t go to killer whale shows to care about animals.
I do agree a solution is needed to the current captive population and ‘rewilding’ them is nonsense and talk of ‘sanctuaries’ is spectacularly naive. But they are also being taken from the wild and the answer isn’t to perpetuate how it is now in my view.
However the only benefit you’ve actually cited for keeping these animals in captivity is engaging you in half your interest in fauna. The same thing could probably have been achieved without having any animals in captivity at all.
I’d suggest to be honest that you don’t make a very good argument for these animals to be in what you note are not so good enclosures which need refurbishment for what you acknowledge is a bottlenecked population. Even if they do ‘better than some people think’ that doesn’t sound like a resounding success to me.
ZooApollo
Well-Known Member
What would you consider circus like conditions? Is it the exhibits, the shows, or the husbandry in general?
I think the welfare difference of captive orcas vs bottlenose dolphins is incredibly different, as we've seen bottlenose dolphins live longer and thrive, but orcas aren't as easy. This is not me saying they can't be held, but they aren't going to exist much longer in North America, with the bottlenecked population I mentioned, and SeaWorld's ban on breeding. Bottlenose Dolphins are going to last a long time, with the advancements in medicine.
I disagree with the sentiment that people don't go to shows to care about animals, as there is an entire community of people going to shows because, well, they care about the animals. Especially nowadays, as the show is not theatrical anymore, besides some music and a few behaviors. But most of the theatrical behaviors have been removed, and there's even an entire husbandry and care segment of the show (they call them presentations now).
I think it's really just up to personal opinion. For me, I'm not against animal shows as a concept. I think there is a difference from a circus that you're pointing and laughing at an animal doing demeaning things vs. a zoological facility with cetaceans where you're seeing what these animals can really do. Again, that is just a personal opinion thing.
As for my interest, I didn’t mean to suggest that engagement alone justifies captivity, I was pointing out that these facilities can give meaningful connections between people and wildlife, which can lead to broader support for conservation. This can be accomplished with any captive animal, but I have heard many people say it was specifically the cetaceans, which was the same as in my case.
For animals being taken out of the wild, that's only really in Asia, Russia pretty much stopped that. I think it is unexcusable though, and really is a terrible thing, and I don't mean to say otherwise.
Lafone
Well-Known Member
For me the seaworld dolphin / killer whale holders are circuses whether they call the shows presentations or not and that’s echoed in other holders. Circuses make money from performing animals and that’s their core aim / purpose. Anything else is incidental.
It’s possible to hold many different sorts of animals in poor conditions and still have them breed and live to a good age.
It is all personal opinion and people can like this sort of thing if they want to. I certainly can’t stop the practice nor impact people liking it. And the practice of doing it is going to go on globally even if some countries stop doing it - many people want to see dolphins and killer whales do tricks and where there’s an audience there will be people catering to it.
However for me the ways dolphins and killer whales are held for show purposes in most places that do it bears little resemblance to the work with other animals in many reputable zoological collections.
And why is that a bad thing?
Lafone
Well-Known Member
I don’t like wild animals used purely for performance purposes. I don’t enjoy it and I think it’s a poor use for them. It’s often historically been accompanied by poor husbandry, poor breeding practices and in some cases cruelty as the animals welfare simply isn’t of primary interest. I think we as humans spend a large amount of time ruining the environment and acting in **** ways to animals of all sorts. I’d prefer we didn’t.
We can’t all like the same things. It would be boring if we did. But for me it’s a ‘bad thing’ and I’m glad wild animal circus acts are banned in the U.K.
Wanderer
Well-Known Member
I'm not opposed to cetaceans being kept in captivity, actually I find it kind of awesome. Sure there are big health and welfare issues, but it is kind of worth it in a way... like if you think of all the resources and effort that are put into it. The shows are really tacky though, surely there are better ways to showcase the animals.
BirdWorld#33
Member
That is a bold statement, unless you have visited every holder and seen the animal presentation. Also, if it is not discussed in shows does not mean holders do not support conservation. Sea World and Brookfield Zoo have supported a lot of research that helps dolphins conservation. The Brookfield Zoo has the longest running dolphin conservation project roughly 55 years.
peruvianbirdie
Well-Known Member
Im sure ppl don’t bat an eye on bird shows and domestic animals preforming such as Universal Studios animal show. It’s important to also remember that cetaceans and other preforming animals HAVE A CHOICE to preform or not though it is rare for shows to be cancelled if an animal not having its day. I personally don’t get the circus vibe at SeaWorld shows (name last time dolphin went through hoops or a sea lion balancing on top of a ball) I mainly see natural behaviors being preformed, and though yes it does have playful music and and trainer skits, is it really doing harm to the animal? Though I wouldn’t wind just a natural performance without exaggeration, I know it the youngsters and nostalgic ppl pumped up. Sorry for the small vent, but I feel like animal shows in modern facilities have evolved and I feel thanks to crappy AR propagandas, it has left a sour taste in many ppls on performance even if it is enriching and engaging for the animal.
I seem to recall some studies showing that many animals respond quite positively to appropriate training and performances. Especially among the more intelligent groups (cetaceans, corvids, parrots, etc) having the extra mental stimulus often seems to do a great deal of good, and they're generally very eager and willing to participate of their own accord. As long as there is due consideration for the animal's choice and capabilities along with a good balance of education involved, I don't have any issue with shows.
merlin
Well-Known Member
One of my hot takes is that I don't think Zoo Jihlava is a very good facility. To be clear, I believe it used to be fine, but it is getting somehow worse and I've seen probably too many animals in a bad shape when I last visited. Let me explain:
I've been to Zoo Jihlava too many times, I've been going there since I was little and it would be probably considered my home zoo. I even used to study in Jihlava for four years, which led me to visiting the zoo really often, sometimes even multiple times a week. However, especially lately I've been more noticing how bad the environment for many animals is. I'm someone who doesn't care as much about the rarities as about the welfare. For example one of the Iberian wolves is in a really bad shape and I really hope for the zoo to give up on this subspecies or maybe wolves in general, since they've been struggling with keeping them for many years now and it is only getting worse. Most of the felids show signs of some kind of stereotypical behavior, especially the Sand cats. Those should finally get an outdoor enclosure probably later this year, however I don't think it will end up good or at least somehow spacious or whatever. I believe all of the things that have been built lately or are still being constructed are straight up bad or simply weird. It's been taking the zoo 5 years! to build an outdoor enclosure for the bamboo lemurs and seeing it now being finally constructed, it is rather ugly. Since the raptor show has been cancelled, they've decided to use the old "wooden box" to house more felid species, or maybe to be specific - to put on display more of the animals they're currently keeping off show, since there are so many Pallas's cats and other cats in the backstage cages. And I believe the enclosures will not be just ugly, but also very small for the animals. In 2025, I would expect zoo's to build somehow good enclosures, trying their best to provide their animals the best care, but I don't see that in Jihlava. I've always critized Olomouc for example for their small enclosures for carnivores, but Jihlava is not doing much better really. Also, the building for the Roloway monkeys is particularly weird too and thankfully I am not the only one thinking it. I can imagine it being used maybe for lemurs or something like that, but I don't like it as an exhibit for the Roloway monkeys, especially since there are some really good monkey enclosures elsewhere in Czechia - and even in Jihlava itself, although it's nothing spectacular. It is really unfortunate nothing better has been built since the lead of the current director and I suppose it is maybe also due to the lack of vision he had when he got this position. He wanted to turn an old fabrique, Modeta, which is standing next to the zoo into an aquarium and that was it. It never happened and we can argue if it's just a fault of the former owner of Modeta, which is also the owner of the zoo - the town Jihlava itself, or how much big of a role he plays in it as well.
To me it kind of looks like the employees of the zoo are forced to build new things themselves or something like that, I don't know.
In short - I don't like how small most of the enclosures are and that some that are currently being constructed are going to be even worse. And since the enclosures are so small, I would expect there would be at least some kind of enrichment for the animals, but there's none.
I probably won't elaborate more on this, since I know how much this point of view triggers even just the czech visitors, but I needed to write this down somewhere.
I've been to Zoo Jihlava too many times, I've been going there since I was little and it would be probably considered my home zoo. I even used to study in Jihlava for four years, which led me to visiting the zoo really often, sometimes even multiple times a week. However, especially lately I've been more noticing how bad the environment for many animals is. I'm someone who doesn't care as much about the rarities as about the welfare. For example one of the Iberian wolves is in a really bad shape and I really hope for the zoo to give up on this subspecies or maybe wolves in general, since they've been struggling with keeping them for many years now and it is only getting worse. Most of the felids show signs of some kind of stereotypical behavior, especially the Sand cats. Those should finally get an outdoor enclosure probably later this year, however I don't think it will end up good or at least somehow spacious or whatever. I believe all of the things that have been built lately or are still being constructed are straight up bad or simply weird. It's been taking the zoo 5 years! to build an outdoor enclosure for the bamboo lemurs and seeing it now being finally constructed, it is rather ugly. Since the raptor show has been cancelled, they've decided to use the old "wooden box" to house more felid species, or maybe to be specific - to put on display more of the animals they're currently keeping off show, since there are so many Pallas's cats and other cats in the backstage cages. And I believe the enclosures will not be just ugly, but also very small for the animals. In 2025, I would expect zoo's to build somehow good enclosures, trying their best to provide their animals the best care, but I don't see that in Jihlava. I've always critized Olomouc for example for their small enclosures for carnivores, but Jihlava is not doing much better really. Also, the building for the Roloway monkeys is particularly weird too and thankfully I am not the only one thinking it. I can imagine it being used maybe for lemurs or something like that, but I don't like it as an exhibit for the Roloway monkeys, especially since there are some really good monkey enclosures elsewhere in Czechia - and even in Jihlava itself, although it's nothing spectacular. It is really unfortunate nothing better has been built since the lead of the current director and I suppose it is maybe also due to the lack of vision he had when he got this position. He wanted to turn an old fabrique, Modeta, which is standing next to the zoo into an aquarium and that was it. It never happened and we can argue if it's just a fault of the former owner of Modeta, which is also the owner of the zoo - the town Jihlava itself, or how much big of a role he plays in it as well.
To me it kind of looks like the employees of the zoo are forced to build new things themselves or something like that, I don't know.
In short - I don't like how small most of the enclosures are and that some that are currently being constructed are going to be even worse. And since the enclosures are so small, I would expect there would be at least some kind of enrichment for the animals, but there's none.
I probably won't elaborate more on this, since I know how much this point of view triggers even just the czech visitors, but I needed to write this down somewhere.
Last edited:
Lafone
Well-Known Member
No it’s just my opinion. You don’t have to visit every holder or seen every show of anything to have one or (unless you have) yours is equally invalid.
I’ve been specific on the sort of circus act I don’t like. Extrapolating that to all shows is incorrect though I get why people do it because they don’t like the objection to keeping dolphins and killer whales in captivity. It doesn’t insult your liking it for me not to however.
I haven’t changed my view based on a this thread either by calls of ignorance nor the suggestion from another poster that I am only forming it due to ‘crappy animal rights propaganda’. It’s possible to be informed and disagree.