I'm missing one important feature of these waterfalls; namely the fact they are often used for the circulation of air within the exhibit. And you see them very often, that's right, but I really like them at my home zoo ( emmen, netherlands) which has some magnificent ones by the way ( especially the one in the kodiak bear enclosure).
Annoying enclosures
- Thread starter foz
- Start date
I'm missing one important feature of these waterfalls; namely the fact they are often used for the circulation of air within the exhibit. And you see them very often, that's right, but I really like them at my home zoo ( emmen, netherlands) which has some magnificent ones by the way ( especially the one in the kodiak bear enclosure).
From a zoo design point of view, waterfalls or any kind of running water feature provide some motion and sound to an exhibit, especially when the animals are not visible/active.
Water features if done well can improve the aesthetics of each enclosure. They just need to be varied in height, gradient and flow.
Of course, as some earlier posts pointed out, water features also have practical functions to circulate water and air, and provide humidity.
Water features if done well can improve the aesthetics of each enclosure. They just need to be varied in height, gradient and flow.
Of course, as some earlier posts pointed out, water features also have practical functions to circulate water and air, and provide humidity.
jedibiscuits
Well-Known Member
Unnatural exhibits... like old-time zoo cages. It just doesn't make the animals feel at home!!! 
Overgrown bushes and plants where guests can't even see any animals.
When the zoo staff haven't switched the signs when they've switch the animals, so then guests think they're looking at a completely different animal.
Overgrown bushes and plants where guests can't even see any animals.
When the zoo staff haven't switched the signs when they've switch the animals, so then guests think they're looking at a completely different animal.
Unnatural exhibits... like old-time zoo cages. It just doesn't make the animals feel at home!!!
If I mention the Howletts/Port Lympne Gorilla cages, is that asking for trouble?
The animals will feel 'at home' (i.e. secure and comfortable) if allowed to behave naturally. In the majority of cases (or even all?) what the exhibit actually looks like is irrelevant to the animal so long as it's structured appropriately to allow them to express as much as possible of its natural activity.
How the exhibit looks is just for the visitors, which is a good enough reason to make it look pretty, of course - whether for education or just to keep the gate cash rolling in. But if a zoo can't afford this or just isn't interested in being pretty (Howletts/Port Lympne) then that doesn't necessarily mean they have bad enclosures from the animal's point of view.
sooty mangabey
Well-Known Member
Unnatural exhibits... like old-time zoo cages. It just doesn't make the animals feel at home!!!
Overgrown bushes and plants where guests can't even see any animals.
I could not improve on the comments of Maguari, above. And in these two desires there is of course a slight contradiction...
In addition to the annoyance of signs with limited information are those zoos with excessive signage (Colchester is/was a particularly memorable example), any incorrect/out-dated information, spelling mistakes and excessive advertising of the zoo at each exhibit ('become a member', 'visit the giftshop'.
It takes the gloss way from the main attraction.
It takes the gloss way from the main attraction.
Simon McGlary
Well-Known Member
For me it has to be piped animal noises. I have to admit that they are used at on entrance of the Magic Forest in Edinburgh but it's everywhere you go at South Lakes (unless it's changed since September 09!