Small, but not shamefully so. The fact that photos have to be taken from a raised walkway around ten feet back always give a skewed perception of its size.
But in my view these cat and bear enclosures that I see in the RSCC gallery really ARE undefendable. They are pityfully small and not much different from the carnivore houses from the 19th century. In my country it would be illegal to hold this puma in an outdoor enclosure less big than 500 sq. meters, if I remember correctly. I like that. I do not like what I see in this photograph.
But in my view these cat and bear enclosures that I see in the RSCC gallery really ARE undefendable. They are pityfully small and not much different from the carnivore houses from the 19th century. In my country it would be illegal to hold this puma in an outdoor enclosure less big than 500 sq. meters, if I remember correctly. I like that. I do not like what I see in this photograph.
Remember, Dan, that pretty much no pictures show the entire bear exhibit as it consists of two rectangles joined in an L-shape, it is not huge but a reasonable size if the vertical height is taken into account. And, like I said, the puma enclosure is small, but not as bad as you make out. They are certainly not as bad as the ancient carnivore houses being several times larger, outside, and complete with vertical space, enrichment, natural substrate, privacy, plantings etc etc
