Even considering that there may be a tech solution to allow so many rabbits in one community (which would be far, far more advanced than what we see of Zootopia itself, and that's nowhere indicated - in fact, Bunny Burrows seems to be the ideal idyllic rural landscape, and is made even fun of by Nick) they would have personal issues in exponential growth. Like, what about parenting? Hundreds of children? (Physiologically doubtful anyway...)
If I would be a writer for the franchise and be whipped into coming up with a solution, I'd say: The number of children was an exaggeration. The Hopps have, maybe, ten kids (how many are actually on any family shot of them?) and represent the agrarian uneducated no-contraception part of the population (which, as legend has it, exists among humans as well), while the majority has settled on a two point one kid schedule that would keep the population mostly constant. The total bunny number is a relic of the times when there was no contraception available. The increase of the total number is due to the rubes and will go down to zero over time, balancing births and deaths.
Bellwether says that the prey outweight predators by a factor of ten, which seems fairly low if the prey had actually multiplied for centuries without being eaten. Maybe she talks only of Zootopia proper, not taking Bunny Burrows into account, but still... it is a huge issue.
That would not just affect the prey. Predators too would have an issue with too many kids which no longer starve and die in accidents or from sicknesses. Humans do, at the moment, and we have long gestation and nursing periods and mostly only one kid at a time to decelerate the issue a bit, and we're still at a horrific growth. I can imagine that the Zootopian world would run into the consequences much earlier, maybe faster than their technological progress can make amends for. (What came before Zootopia? A few world wars?)
But then, we're in a fantasy world. Better not to overthink it.
On another paw, I read in the linked article that the predators eat insects (maybe processed), which is a fairly smart solution - and actually leaves the door open for intelligent birds and reptiles. I'm still not convinced of such an extension; it would raise a lot of questions, like, why no birds in Zootopia? They could be quite useful to have... so what is the segregation into cities for? Or: Where's the actual limit of intelligence then? What about amphibians and fish (the latter were mentioned as confusing in the article already)? We'd have marine mammals if such an extension would be needed for a story, and flying mammal species to cover that habitat, so it's not really necessary to become all-inclusive. "Mammals only" seems like a reasonable restriction; the world is fairly complicated as it is...
If they ever do a series for Zootopia, I just hope they will keep a reasonable level of world-building, and not run it into the ground like Dreamworks did with the Kung Fu Panda TV series... *sigh*
Even considering that there may be a tech solution to allow so many rabbits in one community (which would be far, far more advanced than what we see of Zootopia itself, and that's nowhere indicated - in fact, Bunny Burrows seems to be the ideal idyllic rural landscape, and is made even fun of by Nick) they would have personal issues in exponential growth. Like, what about parenting? Hundreds of children? (Physiologically doubtful anyway...)
If I would be a writer for the franchise and be whipped into coming up with a solution, I'd say: The number of children was an exaggeration. The Hopps have, maybe, ten kids (how many are actually on any family shot of them?) and represent the agrarian uneducated no-contraception part of the population (which, as legend has it, exists among humans as well), while the majority has settled on a two point one kid schedule that would keep the population mostly constant. The total bunny number is a relic of the times when there was no contraception available. The increase of the total number is due to the rubes and will go down to zero over time, balancing births and deaths.
Bellwether says that the prey outweight predators by a factor of ten, which seems fairly low if the prey had actually multiplied for centuries without being eaten. Maybe she talks only of Zootopia proper, not taking Bunny Burrows into account, but still... it is a huge issue.
That would not just affect the prey. Predators too would have an issue with too many kids which no longer starve and die in accidents or from sicknesses. Humans do, at the moment, and we have long gestation and nursing periods and mostly only one kid at a time to decelerate the issue a bit, and we're still at a horrific growth. I can imagine that the Zootopian world would run into the consequences much earlier, maybe faster than their technological progress can make amends for. (What came before Zootopia? A few world wars?)
But then, we're in a fantasy world. Better not to overthink it.
On another paw, I read in the linked article that the predators eat insects (maybe processed), which is a fairly smart solution - and actually leaves the door open for intelligent birds and reptiles. I'm still not convinced of such an extension; it would raise a lot of questions, like, why no birds in Zootopia? They could be quite useful to have... so what is the segregation into cities for? Or: Where's the actual limit of intelligence then? What about amphibians and fish (the latter were mentioned as confusing in the article already)? We'd have marine mammals if such an extension would be needed for a story, and flying mammal species to cover that habitat, so it's not really necessary to become all-inclusive. "Mammals only" seems like a reasonable restriction; the world is fairly complicated as it is...
If they ever do a series for Zootopia, I just hope they will keep a reasonable level of world-building, and not run it into the ground like Dreamworks did with the Kung Fu Panda TV series... *sigh*