Different zoo traditions in Europe and The USA?

I think the most obvious is that places in Europe don't seem to bother with over expensive immersion exhibits. I don't really know why that is though.
 
ashley-h said:
I think the most obvious is that places in Europe don't seem to bother with over expensive immersion exhibits. I don't really know why that is though.
Click to expand...

I would distinguish (and this is my guess only, and my limited experience. Zoochat members are better able to speak to it than I am: ) between UK zoos, and German and Dutch Zoos and the rest of Europe. They are all rather different in their approaches, not one monolithic "European approach" to design
 
Aha... I agree and I mentioned that very aspect in the discussion in the gallery... so I am not the only one to pay attention to it...

Good start! More views on the subject?
 
Zooplantman said:
I would distinguish (and this is my guess only, and my limited experience. Zoochat members are better able to speak to it than I am: ) between UK zoos, and German and Dutch Zoos and the rest of Europe. They are all rather different in their approaches, not one monolithic "European approach" to design
Click to expand...

No... but still... as I put it in the gallery discussion - are there ANY European exhibits even coming close to these breathtaking US examples of landscaping design"?

And please remember that this thread is not limited to design - are there other differences?

I have, for instance - and I do not know if this is in any way true - read that there is a reluctance in American zoos to feed carnivores with dead carcasses in front of the visitors? True or false?
 
Dan said:
No... but still... as I put it in the gallery discussion - are there ANY European exhibits even coming close to these breathtaking US examples of landscaping design"?

And please remember that this thread is not limited to design - are there other differences?

I have, for instance - and I do not know if this is in any way true - read that there is a reluctance in American zoos to feed carnivores with dead carcasses in front of the visitors? True or false?
Click to expand...

Excellent "landscape immersion" exhibits in Europe I know about include Andean bear, Masoala and Himalayan exhibits in Zurich; Pongoland and Africa in Leipzig; Burgers' Zoo Ocean, Desert and Rainforest exhibits; Prague's island area and Indonesian house. Emmen's penguin exhibit also looks extraordinary.

One of the big differences is that most European zoos do not feel compelled to put up daunting handrails and other barriers that the legal climate in the US almost always seems to require. It's very hard to create a sense of connection with an animal or sense of sharing its environment when there's always a sturdy fence keeping you away from the "danger" of falling into a hidden moat or sticking your hands where they don't belong....

Very few US zoos dare feed whole carcasses to carnivores, as the public will just not accept it. Some do feed "quartered" carcasses however.
 
reduakari writes:

"Very few US zoos dare feed whole carcasses to carnivores, as the public will just not accept it. Some do feed "quartered" carcasses however."

This is interesting and yet worryingly to read.

More comments?
 
Americans have often been disgusted by the carnal nature of...well nature. Its that "Bambi" image that gets them the most. Most Americans wont even try to eat different meats themselves apart from beef, pork, sheep, poultry, fish, and the occassion venison. Very few eat horse, bison, alligator, or any other kind of meat.
 
okapikpr said:
Americans have often been disgusted by the carnal nature of...well nature. Its that "Bambi" image that gets them the most. Most Americans wont even try to eat different meats themselves apart from beef, pork, sheep, poultry, fish, and the occassion venison. Very few eat horse, bison, alligator, or any other kind of meat.
Click to expand...

I actually think the same would go for most Europeans but it would not explain the reluctance to watch carnivores in a zoo consume any kind of carcasss?
 
reduakari said:
....

Very few US zoos dare feed whole carcasses to carnivores, as the public will just not accept it. Some do feed "quartered" carcasses however.
Click to expand...

I've also been wondering if this is a US - rest of the world type thing. When I was at the Calgary Zoo I was VERY surprised to see an African rock python devouring a whole chicken (feathers, beak, etc...) I was wondering if I had ever seen anything like this in a US Zoo, but couldn't come up with it. The zoos I was familiar with feed their pythons after hours. There were also carcasses in the wild dog, wolf, and bear enclosures.
 
It was done in US zoos in the past and is now done pretty exclusively "after hours."
I wouldn't discount the effect of PETA, IDA, etc here
US visitors would LOVE to see a carcass devoured, but they get told that its morally wrong. Back to US history: we were "founded" by many groups but the Puritans got political control early and still have it!

As to those barriers, my UK connections are concerned that they too will have to go that way in the near future. Now they just have to post dumb signs for dumb people everywhere.
 
ashley-h said:
I think the most obvious is that places in Europe don't seem to bother with over expensive immersion exhibits. I don't really know why that is though.
Click to expand...

Because we would still recognise what it really is!

Dan, I was going to start a discussion similar to this but thought better of it ;)
 
taun said:
Because we would still recognise what it really is!

Which would be a far better way to exhibit animals than the "Pigpens" and "Chicken coops" so widely seen in the much-touted zoos of the British countryside? Zoos are theater--good immersion exhibitry is like Broadway compared to a junior high school drama production, where all the parents clap at the wonderful "talents" of their children. Same basic idea--only one is done with professionalism and taste, the other strictly amateur hour.....
Click to expand...
 
reduakari said:
Which would be a far better way to exhibit animals than the "Pigpens" and "Chicken coops" so widely seen in the much-touted zoos of the British countryside? Zoos are theater--good immersion exhibitry is like Broadway compared to a junior high school drama production, where all the parents clap at the wonderful "talents" of their children. Same basic idea--only one is done with professionalism and taste, the other strictly amateur hour.....
Click to expand...

Am sorry but spending millions of pounds dressing up just for the public (not talking about inside the actual enclosures) is just a waste of money. I would rather see the money spent on the animals. Or are a lot of the members on these boards just want to see all nicely presented and comfortable viewing in fake surroundings as long as they don't see the night quarters or off-show areas which can be horrible small or not really suitable for the animals?

Please check out some of the British main stream zoo's you will see that enclosure are built with the animals in mind and that you don't have to dress up a cage to make it nice for the public! Your references seemed too based on a tin pot of a Zoo, and you have not considered the wide variety and wonderful zoo’s that do exist in Britain and Europe.
 
taun said:
Am sorry but spending millions of pounds dressing up just for the public (not talking about inside the actual enclosures) is just a waste of money. I would rather see the money spent on the animals. Or are a lot of the members on these boards just want to see all nicely presented and comfortable viewing in fake surroundings as long as they don't see the night quarters or off-show areas which can be horrible small or not really suitable for the animals?

Please check out some of the British main stream zoo's you will see that enclosure are built with the animals in mind and that you don't have to dress up a cage to make it nice for the public! Your references seemed too based on a tin pot of a Zoo, and you have not considered the wide variety and wonderful zoo’s that do exist in Britain and Europe.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you. I must say their seems to be a bit more variety in the standards of zoos in europe (partiuclarly the UK) as the large mainstream zoos have fantastic exhibits but smaller zoos have adequate enclosures, I feel in the US most of the zoos are the same, ie. they all have huge glamourous enclosures. To sum it all up American zoos have far more exhibits where as UK zoos have more enclosures.
 
Last edited:
Folks,

Nationalistic innuendo, while hilariously backward, misses the point. Do you want to have a new idea or simply start a cultural war?

I come from a place much like the position @reduakari described in his post. @taun clearly sees the zoo experience differently and prefers it that way. OK so far.

So why do US and Australian zoos all build the one while UK and many European zoos build the other? What's that about?

1. Do both work equally well for visitors? Do zoos of each type do as well financially in their respective markets?

2. When a UK or European zoo dresses it up (like an American zoo) does the public like it or not like it? Can anyone offer an example of such an exhibit?

3. Why do people feel
Dan said:
OK - the indoor exhibits! That is another matter, I believe; I do not find big differences there..
Click to expand...
Why is it OK indoors but not outdoors?

4. Is this all about money? Is it easier for an American zoo to raise multi-millions for a zoo exhibit, while the governance structure and/or economy of European zoos makes that more difficult?

Rather than flailing around prejudices and unexamined opinions, can we try to dig a little deeper - in the spirit of Dan's original post - and see what we discover?

My limited experience working with European and UK (I insist that they are different) zoo staff is that they are conflicted about it. On the one hand they desperately want exhibits as compelling as Congo Gorilla Forest, yet on the other hand they abhor being too American or Disney. They cannot clearly explain where they draw the line and they have yet to create their uniquely UK or European version of it. Biopark Valencia looks to me like it is trying.

I notice here on Zoochat that people describing the great indoor European exhibits have big awestruck emotional responses to them; yet when they describe outdoor enclosures the responses are more coolly "great for the animals." I do not understand these different standards. How something like Berger's or Masaola can sit beside something like London's gorilla exhibit baffles me (OK, my "sit beside" is intended to be more metaphorical than geographical). If you say Wow when you see an indoor exhibit, how can you be equally happy with the sort of outdoor enclosures you see?
 
I would just like to say quite alot of Zoos in the UK do feed whole carcsses take Howletts and Port Lympne for example feed their Tigers 1 carcass between 5-8 days or so,
And also if you look at the Tiger enclosures at Howletts and Port Lympne impressive they are not but natural they are, The tigers love them they are full of grass,pools,trees,hills and plenty of platforms with plenty of climbning equipment and old tyres,scratching posts etc,Tigers can be abit hard to spot as the fence can tend to be abit far away from the barrier giving the cats privacy.They have had unparalled breeding success with them.The indoor enclosures are wooden dens but give the animals lots of privacy as there are no viewing windows.The animals get privacy,natural surroundings,Carcass meals and many things to enjoy in their enclosure.
This isnt a matter of what we think is best its what the animals think is best.We can build what we think is great for viewing and zoo visitors but if the animals dont like it,Then whats the point?
We all think different things are the best so we have to respect that :)
Regards
 
I'm British but live in the USA and have worked in zoos in both countries. There are two words that describe the differences between the zoo visitors of both countries and they are expectation and tolerance.

I wish I could give a direct quote, but in one of Gerald Durrells books he states something along the lines that enclosures should be designed with the animals needs considered first, then the keepers needs and those of the visitor should be considered last. I think the british are more tolerant of respecting an animals needs and putting them before there own. I hate to make sweeping generalisations between nations and know that it is wrong, but it is only a trend I have observed. In the states a lot more of the zoo visitors I speak to are into hunting and I think the whole mind set of this is captured excellantly in the documentry of Louis Therouxs hunting trip which is about American tourists participating in canned hunts in South Africa and can be found online if anyone is interested. I think this leads to a mind set of humans being on a higher plane than animals and that the visitors needs should come first, I think the thread in the USA forum on Philadelphia zoo highlights this point. In the zoo environment on the USA side of the pond if you explain an animal is resting in the shade and isn't visible it is often met with anger, after all they have paid their gate money and want to see what they have paid for, in the UK the zoo visitor is more tolerant and more likely to come back later in the day. A zoos gate reciepts are dependent upon people returning regularly to the zoo, not seeing animals may deter an american visitor from returning so more immersion exhibits are required, whilst in the UK a higher percentage of zoo goers would be more likely to make a return visit to see the animals they had missed last time.

The level of expectation is also higher in the USA because of the competition, as mentioned about the sheer size and extravagance of some of the tourist destinations, then zoos have to compete on a similar playing field and compete. The scale and extravagance of the competiton in the UK is not so great and therefore zoos can remain more tradional and put the animals requirements before those of the visitor.

My apologies in advance to anyone offended by my generalisations, but they are taken from observations from zoos on both sides of the Atlantic and are based on trends, of which there are many exceptions on both sides.
 
@zebedee101, much of what you write makes great sense to me.

I also read in some of the European's posts here an underlying assumption that there is a conflict between "doing the best for the animals" and "immersion type exhibits," as though creating an experience of ecosystems for the visitor in its very nature diminishes the animals' care or facilities.
Why must that be? In my experience, a well-designed exhibit works wonderfully for animals, keepers and visitors. I don't get this either/or thing
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top