There is such a dearth of truly excellent jaguar exhibits in American zoos that this fairly new one (2009) is actually not that bad at all and it is one of the few bright spots within the much-maligned Elephant Odyssey complex. I think that off of the top of my head the 3 best jaguar exhibits in America (or at least my 3 favorite) would be Woodland Park (lush jungle), Jacksonville (two temple-themed exhibits) and Saint Louis (large, open-top enclosure). With Miami, San Diego and Living Desert all having opened decent jaguar exhibits in the past 3 years, and with Santa Ana possibly constructing one in the long-term, the overall quality has increased considerably.
Leopard and jaguars don't seem to be near as popular in the zoo world as lions and tigers. How many good to great lion or tiger exhibits have been created in American zoos. Way more than the six you list for jaguars. I've always wondered why. They are both beautiful cats, and it is always interesting to see a jaguar in the water or a leopard up high. Much more so than seeing a group of lions sleeping on their sides. I can think of only one good jaguar and leopard exhibit I've seen (both at St Louis) while I've seen 5 good lion exhibits and 4 good tiger exhibits.
This jaguar exhibit is accompanied by one of the most spectacular live animal demonstrations that I have ever seen.
A keeper was giving a jaguar talk and telling about how jaguars like water and actively fish. Live fish were released into the pond an the jaguar jumped in the water, swam the length of the pond, and jumped out of the other side of the pond with the fish, which it then devoured. The pond was deep and clear enough that you could watch the jaguar swimming under water. Amazing!
Philadelphia also has a solid jaguar exhibit and a very good leopard exhibit (amur/snow rotation). Maryland has a good leopard exhibit.
Part of the problem is leopards and jaguars exhibits are more often fully enclosed than tiger and lion exhibits, which generally limits space and viewing.
Part of the problem is leopards and jaguars exhibits are more often fully enclosed than tiger and lion exhibits, which generally limits space and viewing.
I there a reason for this though? Jaguars especially could easily be exhibited in open-topped exhibits, such as at Saint Louis. Its not that they can't be exhibited in open enclosures, its just that they aren't. Leopards would be more difficult as they are good climbers though.
I there a reason for this though? Jaguars especially could easily be exhibited in open-topped exhibits, such as at Saint Louis. Its not that they can't be exhibited in open enclosures, its just that they aren't. Leopards would be more difficult as they are good climbers though.
Jaguars are good climbers as well. So basically climbing and jumping ability lead to these cats along with mountain lions often having enclosed exhibits. Of course them being smaller also leads to smaller enclosures.
Of course zoos can get around these issues, but obviously many choose not to.
As far as the St. Louis exhibits, aren't they ones where you look pretty far down upon the cats? That's not ideal.
Jaguars are good climbers as well. So basically climbing and jumping ability lead to these cats along with mountain lions often having enclosed exhibits. Of course them being smaller also leads to smaller enclosures.
Of course zoos can get around these issues, but obviously many choose not to.
As far as the St. Louis exhibits, aren't they ones where you look pretty far down upon the cats? That's not ideal.
Well I generally prefer open and glass/mesh viewing. But if I were to choose between glass or mesh where you can get very close to the cat and be on their level versus being well above the cats with open viewing, I would take the former.
Lions and tigers are the most iconic and popular of the big cats so it makes sense that they receive more attention from zoos, but I agree that jaguars and leopards can be very good attractions as well.
