Rather than call me a liar about a place you haven’t visited, I suggest you look at Basel in the Zoochat gallery
ZSL London Zoo London Zoo discussion thread
- Thread starter Fallax
- Start date
I always think from the photos of the old Sloth Bear enclosure and my vague memory of it that the enclosure was OK, but people on here often say it didn’t work well as an exhibit.
Whilst I appreciate London are stuck with a lot of listed buildings I always think surely the old rows of cages on the other side of the canal could be redeveloped relatively cheaply and display birds and small mammals and open up the zoo a bit more again.
Initially I thought London should bring back polar bears (and am currently building a to-scale prototype of what that could look like in Planet Zoo), but London bringing back sun bears would actually prove to be more fruitful! An active bear species that's perfectly suited for the Mappins and would also tie into Tiger Territory quite nicely, and could also feature other animals that Sir Stamford Raffles also highlighted - binturong, silver-leaf langur, etc. The reason I thought polar bears would also be a good option is because of their significance in London's history (Pipaluk + one of the first zoos to employ underwater viewing of polar bears to my knowledge), and would also tie nicely into if London ever decided to reopen the Aquarium after a lengthy restoration process. Doubt they're short for funds in that aspect, issue is the cost-benefit analysis, is it worth it to pull a Ship of Theseus with the Mappins, demolishing and restoring them with faithful blueprints while using more up to date materials, or are the Mappins that fundamentally flawed?
Was there underwater viewing on the Mappins at one point?
This seems a little harsh to me, top 10 I can understand but top 20? What 20 zoos would you say are better?
Attachments
Kalaw
Well-Known Member
The canalside enclosures are, indeed, the more underutilised part of London Zoo. As well as the cage-like aviaries that you mention (which held owls and lovebirds until very recently), there was once a paddock for Cranes and Geese (I assume they were pinioned), and I am not quite sure what happened to it.
Of course, with the practice of pinioning birds now being very much out of fashion (rightfully so, I believe), this isn't really an option anymore, but I always thought that a charismatic flightless bird, like a cassowary, would suit the area very well.
equidae
Well-Known Member
Getting polar bears would be a horrific move for PR. They’re one of the species most criticised for being kept in captivity, and London gets enough judgement in the news already. Besides, temperatures in the UK are getting increasingly high, especially in the S.E and especially in cities. London is no place for a polar bear.
On this very thread, full of people who actually like zoos, people have criticised the giraffe, zebra, and okapi enclosures for being too small, and yet others seem to think it would be a good idea for the zoo to add more ?
Expansion along the canal would ideal, but I suspect it might also end up a bureaucratic nightmare, just thinking of the problems they had redoing Snowdon. Personally, I think their prioritises should be adapting the Round House for a new species, putting something in the old Galapagos enclosure (maybe a Dik-Dik?), increasing the number of mixed species exhibits (I’m thinking Snowdon in particular), and only then doing something with the Mappins and Casson.
On this very thread, full of people who actually like zoos, people have criticised the giraffe, zebra, and okapi enclosures for being too small, and yet others seem to think it would be a good idea for the zoo to add more ?
Expansion along the canal would ideal, but I suspect it might also end up a bureaucratic nightmare, just thinking of the problems they had redoing Snowdon. Personally, I think their prioritises should be adapting the Round House for a new species, putting something in the old Galapagos enclosure (maybe a Dik-Dik?), increasing the number of mixed species exhibits (I’m thinking Snowdon in particular), and only then doing something with the Mappins and Casson.
Re: Regent's Park's listed buildings, it is worth pointing out that successive Mayors of London have allowed the demolition of multiple listed or historic buildings within London, many of them with much more aesthetic value than the Mappins. The Earl's Court exhibition centre, the old Wembley Stadium, the Fruit & Wool Exchange, the Astoria, 117-125 Bayswater Road including the historic 315 year old Black Lion pub, the original Foyles book shop on Charing Cross Road, and many more. Getting rid of the Lubetkin structures would be impossible, but I can't see much chance of the demolition of a hideous concrete mountain being blocked.
Kalaw
Well-Known Member
I remember the zoo mentioning that turacos were part of the Monkey Valley plans, although I'm not sure whether they were suggesting mixing them with the colobus or placing them in the former owleries.
It was a pretty decent exhibit, far superior than the monstrosity it became after the bears transferred to Whipsnade. The mix with Hanuman langur worked well and, let’s not forget, the bears did breed. Sadly, it was hindered by the emotional/behavioural baggage that the original pair, Lanka and Ceylon, brought with them, particularly Lanka. Ultimately, transfer was the best thing with Lanka being kept off-show for the rest of her life.
And to think, one of the “Masterplans” from the 1990s involved housing gorillas on the Mappins!
Last edited:
It was a pretty decent exhibit, far superior than the monstrosity it became after the bears transferred to Whipsnade. The mix with Hanuman langur worked well and, let’s not forget, the bears did breed. Sadly, it was hindered by the emotional/behavioural baggage that the original pair, Lanka and Ceylon, brought with them, particularly Lanka. Ultimately, transfer was the best thing with Lanka being kept off-show for the rest of her life.
And to think, one of the “Masterplans” from the 1990s involved housing gorillas on the Mappins!
What was the emotional baggage there? I understand the bears did not do particularly well there.
I've seen many others on here speculate that it was a good idea poorly executed. Perhaps if they'd gone down the route of Spectacled Bears, with Coati and a South American Monkey, it may have worked better. And whatever the baggage of the specific bears, it didn't necessarily mean the exhibit had to be closed and turned into what is is now. It seems to me that with whatever behavioral issued were associated with the bears (I'll let others elaborate on the specifics), ZSL just accepted their fate, and didn't have the imagination, or the money, to try and make the exhibit work, and just went for the lowest common denominator.
Lanka arrived with stereotypical behaviour issues which ZSL, to its credit, managed the best it could. I recall Ceylon didn’t live for very long after the cubs were born.
I personally had no problems with “Bear Mountain” but you’re statements correctly highlight that the zoo was on a hiding to nothing with the Mappins. And still is. Maybe they’re just hoping that the whole structure just collapses in on itself, considering it’s the Aquarium that’s keeping the whole thing standing! I dread to think of the maintenance costs
Why were they on a hiding to nothing at the time though? Was there anything about the bear exhibit which made it unsuitable to holding bears, rather than just the individual bears? I've heard rumours the indoor accommodation was poor for the bears and monkeys - is there any truth to this?
Sorry, I should have expressed that is my personal opinion.
Transferring the bear family was ultimately for their emotional and physical wellbeing, but to then turn it into some faux Australian exhibit with fake grass and a couple of wallabies and emu was just lazy, maybe even insulting!
Ah I see, thanks. FWIW I think that the Mappins are awful, but it did seem like ZSL spent a bit of money and innovation to make them into a decent exhibit for the bears, even if there were behavioural or emotional problems for the bears. By the time it was decided the bears should move, that money and innovation dried up.
You mentioned there the enclosure was not good for their physical wellbeing. Why was that?
You mentioned there the enclosure was not good for their physical wellbeing. Why was that?
Again, I should have stated this applied to Lanka, rather than her offspring. Ursula and Columbo, as regular ZSL zoo visitors will hopefully attest, did very well at Whipsnade-as did their mother!
Lafone
Well-Known Member
They did indeed. It was lovely to see how much it changed their lives after they moved to Whipsnade. Much missed too (for me anyway).