Tropic World (Brookfield Zoo) or Jungleworld (Bronx Zoo)

A

aw101

Well-Known Member
Just curious as to your opinions on which is the better exhibit overall in terms of exhibit design, species exhibited and the overall concept. I have only been to the Bronx Zoo and I found Jungleworld to be amazing in it's design. I have mentioned earlier that I found the jaguar enclosure to be insufficient for such a large animal, and I also thought the land area for the Malayan Tapir to be too small in area too. I saw some videos of Tropic World of the Brookfield Zoo on youtube and it looks to be a mass of concrete with unnatural looking trees, looks like they went crazy on the mock rock..

Interesting also how at Tropic World they actually exhibit the mandrills with the pygmy hippos whereas at the Melbourne Zoo they keep the 2 species separated..
 
the jaguar enclosure in jungleworld??? supposed to be an enclosure for Asian Leopards which were confiscated and foisted on the Bronx Zoo as construction of the exhibit was being finalised....
the tropic world exhibit looks outdated now, but got the ball rolling in terms of innovative, indoor exhibits on a grand scale.
 
The glass fronted enclosure where the black leopards/panthers are housed..they are always on the tree structure packing up and down and looking incredibly bored....they need a new exhibit...that exhibit would suit monkeys or anaconda if fitted with a large pool...
 
aw101 said:
Just curious as to your opinions on which is the better exhibit overall in terms of exhibit design, species exhibited and the overall concept. I have only been to the Bronx Zoo and I found Jungleworld to be amazing in it's design. I have mentioned earlier that I found the jaguar enclosure to be insufficient for such a large animal, and I also thought the land area for the Malayan Tapir to be too small in area too. I saw some videos of Tropic World of the Brookfield Zoo on youtube and it looks to be a mass of concrete with unnatural looking trees, looks like they went crazy on the mock rock..

Interesting also how at Tropic World they actually exhibit the mandrills with the pygmy hippos whereas at the Melbourne Zoo they keep the 2 species separated..
Click to expand...

The two buildings can hardly be compared.
JungleWorld attempts to be an immersion experience. The tropical forest is at least as big a player as the animals.
TropicWorld seems to me to be linked old fashioned concrete groto enclosures under a huge roof. So like those old exhibits, there are clearer views of animals, but not happy views.

And i agree about the leopards and tapirs. They are the weakest bits.
Can't do Anaconda, of course, wrong continent.
 
Yes, the black leopards might as well be trapped in a window display at Macy's.

My fave Jungleworld exhibit ever was the family of proboscis monkeys. So tragic that they all died. I could literally sit there for hours on end and watch them.

And to think that they had Bulwer's pheasants at the Bronx Zoo's World of Birds back then as well ( and Rapunzel)...

The Brookfield exhibit didn't do a thing for me. I've been once and never thought about going back. It was so-so, at best. I do like the Brookfield Zoo overall, though.

Tropic World, if I remember correctly, was where the child fell into the gorilla enclosure, was knocked unconscious by the fall, but was protected by a motherly female gorilla until help arrived.

Speaking of the World of Birds at Bronx--it desperately needs an update.
 
kifaru said:
Tropic World, if I remember correctly, was where the child fell into the gorilla enclosure, was knocked unconscious by the fall, but was protected by a motherly female gorilla until help arrived.
Click to expand...

She was named Binte- Jua. I believe she actually carried the child over to the keeper's service door.

You no doubt heard of the very similar happening at Jersey where the Silverback 'Jambo' positioned himself near the small boy(Levan Merritt) as if protecting him from the other gorillas.. If you watch the famous video, it actually looks to me as if he's blocking the female 'Nandi' & baby from approaching nearer to what could be a danger to them.
It normally starts with a shot of the boy lying on the concrete floor but I've also seen a longer version which has a very short shot at the beginning of 'Jambo' walking bipedally and hurriedly CARRYING one of his offspring away from the 'danger'. He deposits him and then returns to inspect the child. I think in the Jersey case the silverback was more concerened with protecting his family from something unknown(the child). (The press hyped it up that he was protecting the child).

Also less often seen is the part where after the group are lured indoors a younger blackback male(Hobbit) is let out-presumably this was a mistake in the general panic. Hobbit, highly excited, charges about the enclosure looking very aggressive and coming nearer to where the boy is lying with each run. A keeper has to stand in the enclosure holding a large stick at him to keep him from coming over while the ambulancemen rescue the boy. A brave keeper. (Hobbit is now in Pretoria Zoo).

Sorry, I've deviated from 'Tropic World' theme but the mention of the Gorilla there was to blame.....
 
Last edited:
@Pertinax: I've seen the footage that you are talking about. I think that there is eventually three different men inside the gorilla exhibit, administering aid to the little boy and warding off the blackback at the same time. The young and cocky gorilla appears to run closer and closer to the fallen boy until eventually he is threatened on a number of occasions by the keeper brandishing a stick. They are all pulled out of the enclosure via a rope that is dropped in from the top of the viewing wall.
 
snowleopard said:
@Pertinax: I've seen the footage that you are talking about. I think that there is eventually three different men inside the gorilla exhibit, administering aid to the little boy and warding off the blackback at the same time. The young and cocky gorilla appears to run closer and closer to the fallen boy until eventually he is threatened on a number of occasions by the keeper brandishing a stick. They are all pulled out of the enclosure via a rope that is dropped in from the top of the viewing wall.
Click to expand...

That's it.. I don't know why 'Hobbit was let out- it was probably a mistake in the mayhem with the electric doors... He certainly doesn't look as if he's got any friendly intentions as he gets closer to the boy with each 'run' The keeper was Andy Woods, not the main gorilla keeper(who was away that day) so I think he was even more brave to do what he did- he sensibly struck a very upright pose and brandished the stick to show 'Hobbit' who was boss. He had to keep him at bay to allow the ambulancemen to access the boy. otherwise....

The very short clip at the beginning of Jambo actually carrying his offspring away from the 'danger' is even more interesting to me- I've only seen that bit quite recently.
 
Jungleworld vs. Tropic World is not even close. The diversity of Jungleworld (Asian tropics only) is at least that of Brookfield's (which includes African, South American and Asian sections), due to the gallery where numerous small reptile, amphibian and invertebrates are displayed. In terms of realism, it's even less close. Jungleworld was the first place that highly realistic rain forest buttress root trees were simulated, on a grand scale. The sight of gibbons brachiating through a living forest, punctuated by those huge trees, is breathtaking and not replicated in any other zoo exhibit.

Agreed, the leopard and tapir enclosures are less than ideal. The original inhabitants of the leopard enclosure were in fact Clouded leopards, who promptly climbed to the most hidden high spot in the exhibit and were basically unseen until replaced by the black leopards.

Also sadly missing today are the giant gharials that for years were the final "wow" in the last viewing area. The "python in the log" overhead in this area is a brilliant bit of exhibit design, crudely imitated but never matched by several other US zoos.

The original plan for the building called for the first exhibit to feature Komodo dragons. This never happened, and over time what was supposed to be a dry volcanic island habitat has been transformed into a more generic tropical space for tree kangaroos and binturong. Not all that successful.

As noted before, Tropic World was doomed to failure when the curators overseeing the design determined no living plants should be accessible to the primates in the exhibits--the usual veterinary paranoia that is thankfully less and less prevalent today. The awful artificial rocks and trees that by default become the exhibit's focal points are lessons in how not to build animal habitats.

Jungle World is still, IMO, the best indoor tropical forest exhibit in the world. Arnhem and Zurich are great, but intentionally do not exhibit much "megafauna", and do little or nothing to mitigate the perception of being in a giant greenhouse. Even with its flaws and areas that have declined, very few exhibits stand the test of time as well as Jungle World (Kifaru's comment about the World of Birds illustrates this).
 
And, may I add, one of the hidden marvels of JungleWorld is that the team thatgned the exhibits as we know them, the choreography of the rooms etc., came along AFTER the building was largely built. The Bronx Zoo created a design department because of JungleWorld and the new team had to make the best of what others handed over to them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JVM
Interesting, so Melbourne Zoo now also seperates their pygmy hippos & mandrills. Same thing in Zoo Halle, even though the crammed exhibit there might have been a major factor in the observed interspecific hostility. There's one zoo in GB where this mixed species exhibit seems to work; can't remember its name though.

From what I heard and read so far, it seems that Tropic World had several animal losses with the Mandrill male involved; Mandrills just seem to be not the best species to integrate in a mixed species exhibit (see: Dresden-killed the banded mongoose, San Diego Zoo-clashed with Forest buffaloes etc.).
@reduakari: "Veterinary paranoia"-?!? Doubt that. The only thing in terms of plants in primate exhibits relevant for zoo veterinary medicine would be possible poisonousness/insalubrity and maybe health problems due to actions like swallowing sharp-edged plant parts or stepping into thorns, male chimp using thicker branches as weapons etc. etc.-and I wouldn't call that "paranoia", but prophylaxis ;). I think it's rather the worries of the zoo horticulturists about constantly destroyed expensive plants (see Terry Maple's comment at Zoo Atlanta on this) and of the zoo security department, who are afraid of plants thrown at visitors (primates, elephants) or used as means to break out of the enclosure, that retain the usage of more plants in primate enclosures.
Additionally, the request of visitors to actually "see" animals and the high energy & intelligence of primates also unfortunately limits the planting of more vegetation.
 
@Writhedhornbill: Ah, excellent, thanks for the advice. They also have the odd Spectacled Bear -Lowland Tapir mixed species exhibit there, don't they?
Sorry for going OT...
 
Sun,

All good points. But think back forty years.
Many many vets prefered primates in sterile tile conditions
Even today vets can often be the most conservative people to review new designs. And of course, many other vets are very pro-plantings.

It seems to me that the differences between TropicWorld and JungleWorld mostly reflect a difference in exhibit philosophy and values. Yes, there are husbandry concerns for everyone involved. But Bronx Zoo's William Conway felt strongly that powerful exhibits made stronger zoo experiences and conservation messages. He often opted for the exhibit experience over the "safer" display of specimens. A savy zoo horticulturist does not place rare specimens near the animals or the public!

That philosophical range or disagreement still exists in zoos, and among us zoo-lovers right here! ;)
 
@sunwukong: Actually, the "paranoia" was not just about plants, but also about that insidious material required to keep plants alive---soil! Tropic World's designers wanted a completely "hoseable" environment, a continuation of the 50s/60s "bathroom period" of zoo architecture where sanitation and ease of cleaning was paramount. So originally no areas of soil were placed in the animal exhibits.

Mandrills have been successfully mixed with DeBrazza monkeys and Red River Hogs at the Bronx zoo, though the adult male is pulled off exhibit when young piglets are present. And the exhibit is very lush, in part because of its size, as well as judicious plant selection and long plant establishment period. Woodland Park zoo has also kept relatively small primate exhibits "green": gorilla, DeBrazza, ruffed lemur, lion-tailed macacque, siamang, even orangutan...
 
@Zooplantman: Ok, got You; You're referring to the zoo "tile" aka "bathroom" epoch in the 1970s/80s-and even today (see most of Hellabrunn's primate enclosures and most of the night quarters in many zoos). Of course veterinarians back then preferred these sterile exhibits-after all, animal trade still delievered wild caught primates (and various other popular species-including parasite infections) and parasite treatment and prophylaxis in zoo animals was still in the rather fledgling stages. So instead of losing their animals to parasitosis, the zoos chose the "sterile" way, making treatment and prophylaxis easier. Nowaday, most (but not all) parasitic odds can be encountered prophylactically-check Your blood/fecal samples etc., and treat accordingly. However, the "war" is not won yet: some parasites still cause serious troubles (being hard to determine, avoid treatment, no treatment available etc.), some have developed tolerance against several tried remedies, and the usage of certain reliable antiparasitica is no longer possible due to the needed drug(s) being banned or not longer produced. Therefore, old problems might come "crawling" back-and new ones might join them. That's why some vets seem to be "very conservative"-simply trying to eliminate or reduce certain risks. And the more zoo medicine knowledge is gathered, the more dangers You see in everything...;)
 
Writhedhornbill said:
Sun, It's south lakes that mixes Mandrills and Hippos
Click to expand...

Yes, and if you look at the photos of them on their website, in one there seems to be a 'stand-off' with a Pygmy Hippo threat-yawning at the male
Mandrill, so maybe there too its not a peaceful co-existence...:(
 
reduakari said:
Woodland Park zoo has also kept relatively small primate exhibits "green": gorilla, DeBrazza, ruffed lemur, lion-tailed macacque, siamang, even orangutan...
Click to expand...

Lion-tailed Macaques seem notorious for destroying grass & plants (in too small an area) and quickly reducing it to bare packed soil. This has happened in Bristol's new monkey exhibit(group of six) and at Colchester the exhibit is similarly bare earth. By contrast Chester's group(about ten+ now) have a large island which has thick grass and vegetation though here they tend to stay inside.
 
I once heard my friend termed Tropic World in Chicago the Tragic World due to insufficient lighting in the building. Maybe that is why most plants are fake. It was pretty ambitious to pull off a rainforest exhibit that represent tropics from three continent. In the end they look like grottos in a giant room.

JungleWorld is obviously the winner of the two. Well designed from a visitor's point of view. Every mock items like rocks and trees are well fabricated. And plenty of light in the exhibits for plants to grow.

As for the birds of the world. They have renovated the exhibit not long ago. They split the renovation into three phases. By now, all phases should be completed. I found them very well done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top