Sorry, I've got to disagree. I'd rather see a cage or enclosure to give me a feel for a zoo I'm unlikely to visit (anytime soon, if ever) than an umpteenth picture of a commonly displayed species. i.e. we all know what a Meerkat looks like but it's nice to see how different zoos across the globe keep and display animals.
That's not to say I don't like animal pictures too, the Bonnet Macaque shot in this zoo's gallery is great.
Do you not think so? I always find photos of exhibits preferable to close-ups of animals. A gibbon will look like a gibbon anywhere but the exhibitry is what differentiates zoos.
It has been regularly demonstrated on various threads that the same or even greater number of ZooChat gallery browers are mostly here for the zoo/enclosure shots rather than the animals (and exhibit shots usually have more views than animal shots on average).
I always try to give a balanced view of the zoos I visit in the photos, which in this case means posting this cage.
I knew there'd be comments on the photos of this complex, but I really didn't expect that.
Maybe you'd get more out of the gallery if you concentrated on discussing things that do interest you rather than telling us what doesn't - and then those that are interested here can carry on without having to justify their interest.
I agree with Maguari. It has been proven time and time again (and this is coming from someone who has uploaded over 16,000 photos to this site - plus more before THE GREAT PURGE) that exhibit/enclosure/cage/habitat photos get at least ten times more views than a photo of an animal. Who wants to see yet another picture of a giraffe? Folks would much rather see a giraffe exhibit.
On a side note, what a dreadful gibbon cage! Aesthetically awful in so many ways...
Ugly as sin - but it at least has a 'climbable' roof and window viewing and I can honestly say I've seen worse (not least the 'no furnishings' enclosure for the same species in Hanoi). Not much else I can say for it though!
