Register or Login to Hide This Ad for Free!
Youhow2 said:
Every single time I come back to the site every couple weeks it's just more depressing news. Wow.

Welcome to the new Busch Gardens. Nothing improves a park more than a large corporation buying it out!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Youhow2
I hope they still have the larger (it's all relative; i.e. not very large) Wild Reserve environment. We've spent so much time observing the serval, the sister lemurs, the African porcupine and our family's absolute favorite, Pindari, the wallaroo. Talking with their trainers has been edifying and engaging.

I also really hope the golden eagle, Aquila gets to stay. According to multiple talks with her keepers, she had a difficult time adapting to the move here after her favorite keeper left Tampa's employment. Another move seems cruel.

I love animals so much and realize anthropomorphism may be an issue in my concerns for them. I hope they are able to adapt to their new environments as seamlessly as possible and that they are well cared-for.

I keep thinking of this large, really old sloth we met in Tampa. It was well beyond a sloth's natural life span. And they pampered it there. It didn't have to be shown any more but it loved green beans with the ends cut off and still often craved crawling around a trainer's neck/body like it had been trained to do when it still was an 'ambassador.' The animal care experts there pampered that sloth with well-trimmed beans and allowed it to circumnavigate their torsos to it's heart's content. I'm afraid to find out whether it's gone because it would be sort of heart-breaking...
 
Jesy said:
I hope they still have the larger (it's all relative; i.e. not very large)  Wild Reserve environment.  We've spent so much time observing the serval, the sister lemurs, the African porcupine and our family's absolute favorite, Pindari, the wallaroo.

I have a feeling all the animals you just listed will be some of the first to go, as they were all part of the smaller habitats. (I loved them all too) From what it sounds like, I wouldn't get my hopes up in thinking that any of the animals you just listed will be staying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jesy
Zimmy said:
John,
You do recognize that Anheuser-Busch was also a large corporation....

Very true, I should have worded my response more carefully. We can both agree there was a much more charming and caring approach when it came to managing the park than there currently is under Sea World Ent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Youhow2 and Zachary
I think we should all be very careful not to over romanticize the AB days. The park made plenty of mistakes then too. (I'm looking at you Octoberfest Park)

Much like certain people long for the "good ole 1950s" when everything was simple and easy and great. (as long as you were a white male) people seem to "remember the AB days" as if they were perfection.

Now I am not saying things were not better, obviously we were not talking Zoo cuts back then, but lets keep it in perspective. AB was not some kind of perfect company, first of all their beer is terrible, but that is besides the point. Take a look at the book "Dethroning the King" it is about AB and what led up to the buy out.
 
I was browsing the forums and saw some stuff about other animal exhibits a while ago. Were there cuts back then that removed those other exhibits?
 
Zimmy said:
I think we should all be very careful not to over romanticize the AB days.  The park made plenty of mistakes then too.  (I'm looking at you Octoberfest Park)

Much like certain people long for the "good ole 1950s" when everything was simple and easy and great.  (as long as you were a white male) people seem to "remember the AB days" as if they were perfection.

Forgive me for being a smartass but I would take any stage of the AB era over what state BGW is currently in any day of the week. Sure they weren't perfect but they were a hell of a lot better than SEAS running the park through the ground.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Youhow2 and Zachary
Back when AB owned the park many of thee animals were rented for the season and shipped back to various locations at the end of the season. The Clydesdales didn't even spend the winter here so the relocation of the critters has gone on for decades. Back in 1983 when all of the perimeter deer pens and animals that were viewed only from the train left town about 90% of the zoo staff was let go also.
 
I know they suck, but corporate probably should take most of the responsibility for this, they were the ones who dispersed the budget cuts.
 
I believe it was corporate, as I believe they are the only ones who can authorize between-parks animal transfers and sell-offs. Because if they let BGW make these zoological decisions on their own, I think that would make them even more irresponsible.
 
From what I understand each park was assigned a certain fraction of the $50 million in cuts that has been promised chain-wide. Though I believe there were likely recommendations given to each park on what they should cut, it's my impression that many of the final decisions fell on the parks themselves. That said, though I haven't heard anything specifically saying this, I have a feeling in the pit of my stomach that corporate was far more involved with the zoo downsizing than anything else cut thus far across all of the parks in the chain. That is part of the reason I split the discussion off into its own thread. Something seems off here.
 
Consider Donating to Hide This Ad