In terms of aesthetics there is no comparison, but you have a valid point as if we were to assess an exhibit based purely on functionality then there could be a debate over which exhibit is more practical for the apes. The gibbons in Minnesota might not feel as confined as their counterparts in Sacramento, the water moat allows for a form of mild enrichment, and the views are certainly better with no bars in the way!
I really hate seeing these wonderful animals in such barren exhibits. Both the concrete floor and the chain-link fence are really an eyesore. Correct me if i'm wrong, my understanding is that the Sacramento Zoo is planning to renovate some of the primate enclosures. Anyways, this exhibit really doesn't show the potential that this Zoo has.
I really hate seeing these wonderful animals in such barren exhibits. Both the concrete floor and the chain-link fence are really an eyesore. Correct me if i'm wrong, my understanding is that the Sacramento Zoo is planning to renovate some of the primate enclosures. Anyways, this exhibit really doesn't show the potential that this Zoo has.
I completely agree with you here about this exhibit being ugly (albeit functional) and the Sacramento Zoo having great potential. The primate area really needs a deep overhaul with new exhibits for the mangabeys and ring-tailed lemurs (or new species in new enclosures) and gibbons. The chimp and orang exhibits, while arguably still functional, are now almost 30 years old and it would be wonderful if new exhibits could be built for them. Unfortunately that is also deeply expensive and seems unlikely to happen anytime soon, but I'm not sure what the thinking of management is on this.
