According to the amount of people that have mentioned the unbelieveable experiance they have had at this exhibit, I am sure that the visiters experiance is great! The use of moats isn't horrible, it makes you be able to say, look a polar bear no more then 10 feet from me without having any barrier in front. (How is that for visitor experiance!) and there is only one spot of visable hotwire. The exhibit is outstanding and really makes it one of the best in North America. This isn't a good exhibit but a great one. As I said before the rockwork may not be the best but will improve with age as it does in all zoo exhibits around the world. The whole Tundra itself is a remarkable Arctic illusion and regardless of the people who try to tear apart this exhibit, it is great!
But of course this is my opinion, and we all have the right to our own.
Im just going to insert my two cents for the exhibit and rockwork
I think the rockwork is definitily not top-notch, but still givbes the bears something to interact with and is bearable
The hotwire is a bit distracting but It is far more better than a huge wall and it helps meld the two exhibits together (You can see one exhibit from the other which I find attractive)
I don't why were having a debate over visitor quality as isn't this for the animals
Im just giving my opinion but I understand why some people may not like it
Im just going to insert my two cents for the exhibit and rockwork
I think the rockwork is definitily not top-notch, but still givbes the bears something to interact with and is bearable
The hotwire is a bit distracting but It is far more better than a huge wall and it helps meld the two exhibits together (You can see one exhibit from the other which I find attractive)
I don't why were having a debate over visitor quality as isn't this for the animals
Im just giving my opinion but I understand why some people may not like it
I can guarantee you the managers and patrons of the Toronto Zoo had no intention of spending the many millions of doallars they did just "for the animals." Their intent was to create an exhibit that would attract and please people and also be a better home for the animals. They succeeded on the last goal; I'm not convinced they got as far as they wanted in achieving the first goal.
I can see why some might not like the rockwork, but actually being there is a different thing.When I was there I was not paying attention to the rocks or wire, but the size of the enclosure and the fact that there is grass in it.As well as observing the enormous bears inside.I do not think that the rockwork should lower the ratings of this exhibit because there is nothing wrong with actual bear exhibit.There is no grotto,there are no metal bars and really it is quite attractive.So I think for now we should put the small negatives aside and admire what is really a truely great exhibit.
I have enjoyed these debates on the new polar bear exhibit in Toronto. Like most of you, I think the rock work look very un-convincing. But since my personal priority in any zoo discussion is animal welfare, I basically like what I see in all these pictures. I believe the polar bears in Toronto will live better lives than they would do in most other polar bear exhibits.
I have enjoyed these debates on the new polar bear exhibit in Toronto. Like most of you, I think the rock work look very un-convincing. But since my personal priority in any zoo discussion is animal welfare, I basically like what I see in all these pictures. I believe the polar bears in Toronto will live better lives than they would do in most other polar bear exhibits.
Nicely summed up.
I always question why the details could not have been attended to, but that doesn't make it a poor exhibit. Looks like a great place to enjoy polar bears
Just adding a little tid bit of information, with the exhibit up and running with 4 preview days the attendance has been 35, 000 people most of which were asked to fill out a short survey about the exhibit. The surveys were a sucess with everybody asked, they all had a wonderful experiance. Most said the visitor experiance and animal interaction was great, with the sound boxes, volunteer guides etc. So I think both goals were filled in here, both animal quality and visitor experiance!
In all these opinion based debates my thinking is that it is always much easier to be a critic. Nothing is ever or will ever be perfect, so there is always room to find fault however small.
The rock work will become a close representation, no general member of the public visiting this enclosure will be looking at it and think that shade of grey is just too light or dark, or that there is not quite enough fissures within the rock work. What people will see is a nice place for the animal to live in. Yes it could be more authentic, but would it really make a difference to polar bear or public viewer. In reality the only people to whom it really matters are on sites such as these! Me being one of them.
Slightly off-topic, but what the hell? Since the professional zoo landcape designer here at ZooChat - Zooplantman - is reading the thread, I have to take the opportunity to ask a couple of questions.
We both agree that the fake-rock work looks bad. But would you like to take the time and indulge us amatuers a bit more on this subject?
How is fake-rock produced?
From pictures and videos I have gotten the impression that metal framework forms the basis; metal frameworks that express the basic shape wanted is produced and then dirt, grovel etc (?) is used to fill the "empty space" of the metal framework? Then cement (?) is poured all over the frame work and within a rather short time all of the "authentic features" must be created, before the cement "turns to stone" and can no longer be worked with?
Is this a fairly correct description or it is totally wrong?
What about the process of coloring the cement? Complicated or easy, cheap or expensive!
Othe technical aspects that I did not think of?
I would really appreciate a detailed answer if you could take the time, Zooplantman!
