Desert Houses in Zoos

[Batto]

Okay, sorry, super busy right now. So, just a quick explanation: when you deal with big halls you can't just generate one suiting climate for the whole hall. That would cause too many problems with the visitors and is an energetic nightmare. Therefore you work with gradients of abiotic parameters. Most important is temperature. You basically want to create a horizontal and a vertical temperature gradient within the animals comfort range. Through that the animal can choose where to be. That's why I plan with three thermometers. One in the hottest spot on the ground, one on the coldest spot on the ground, one in the air in the maximum height that the animal uses.

Watering plants in buildings like that is a science in itself. The substrate that the plants need is often very sandy, which means that it doesn't hold water. So you either need to let lots of water flow through the soil (natural condition) or you need another method to make the water stay around the roots for longer periods of time.
Option number 1 ist a huge issue for many animals from Arid climates. While they can often deal with extreme temperatures, the constant moisture will cause fungi and pneumonia. Especially in reptiles.

I'm constantly "super busy", but I can still find time for this. ^^ Nevertheless, thank you for your courtesy. I originally assumed you were talking about a bearded dragon tank, not a whole bearded dragon hall. As for the first scenario, I rather tend to use mobile infrared thermometers for my various tanks. But what do I know - I don't keep bearded dragons; just Inland taipans. ^^
As previously mentioned by others, there already exist several working arid plant greenhouses, some even with live animals (including reptiles). So that "science" is doable, depending on the species in question and the technology involved.

For the record: why not assume the next time that you are not the only geek here; that would save your more precious time to be "super busy" and come across as less condescending.

See you at #weltdergifte

 

[Westcoastperson]

Watering plants in buildings like that is a science in itself. The substrate that the plants need is often very sandy, which means that it doesn't hold water.

No those plants can be held in soil perfectly. I have seen many people put them in soil and cover the top but with sand but I just prefer leaving my soil exposed.

So you either need to let lots of water flow through the soil (natural condition) or you need another method to make the water stay around the roots for longer periods of time.

This will drown the plants, don’t forget these are desert plants, most are adapted for storing water for long amounts of time so giving them this much will surely drown them. As for giving them water for long amounts of time there are drip tools you sticking the ground that work very well, but once again only watering them a bit every week is fine. The biggest exception I know to this rule are wildflowers which do need large amounts of water but in distanced times. There are others like this but you can just very simply not include them in animal exhibits.

Option number 1 ist a huge issue for many animals from Arid climates. While they can often deal with extreme temperatures, the constant moisture will cause fungi and pneumonia. Especially in reptiles.

Just put in some soft succulents or dry bushes for reptiles and you’ll be fine, watering requirements for both are small and separate so there’s no need to worry.

 

[Jambi]

I saw a video on YouTube about Omaha Henry Doorly Zoo's desert walkthrough recently, and it looked like a really awesome place, so the idea can be done relatively well, and it's something I wouldn't mind seeing more things like it in other zoos.

 

[Zooplantman]

Watering plants in buildings like that is a science in itself. The substrate that the plants need is often very sandy, which means that it doesn't hold water. So you either need to let lots of water flow through the soil (natural condition) or you need another method to make the water stay around the roots for longer periods of time.
Option number 1 ist a huge issue for many animals from Arid climates. While they can often deal with extreme temperatures, the constant moisture will cause fungi and pneumonia. Especially in reptiles.

Your posts merely say, as far as I can tell, that designing a good desert hall has some challenges. That is true but not constructive. Watering plants in any indoor hall can be likened to a science in itself. A great indoor leaf eating ape or monkey hall is a huge challenge to design and manage but they are done. A really good elephant exhibit has big challenges but they are built.
Zoo staff and designers can accomplish a great deal if they have cause. These challenges have little to do, imo, with the initial question of why are there so few great desert halls.

 

[Zooplantman]

No those plants can be held in soil perfectly. I have seen many people put them in soil and cover the top but with sand but I just prefer leaving my soil exposed.

This will drown the plants, don’t forget these are desert plants, most are adapted for storing water for long amounts of time so giving them this much will surely drown them. As for giving them water for long amounts of time there are drip tools you sticking the ground that work very well, but once again only watering them a bit every week is fine. The biggest exception I know to this rule are wildflowers which do need large amounts of water but in distanced times. There are others like this but you can just very simply not include them in animal exhibits.

Just put in some soft succulents or dry bushes for reptiles and you’ll be fine, watering requirements for both are small and separate so there’s no need to worry.

A technical quibble: growing plants, especially succulents, in a pot is not comparable to growing them well in large planters or in-ground beds. Different substrate, different drainage, different water retention. For a great many species it is far easier to grow them in a pot than a planter bed.
Of course succulents can be grown either way but the lessons of pot culture do not much inform large planter horticulture in my experience.

 

[Westcoastperson]

A technical quibble: growing plants, especially succulents, in a pot is not comparable to growing them well in large planters or in-ground beds. Different substrate, different drainage, different water retention. For a great many species it is far easier to grow them in a pot than a planter bed.
Of course succulents can be grown either way but the lessons of pot culture do not much inform large planter horticulture in my experience.

A pot is just an example, I have seen desert plants and succulents successfully grown in large yards and small pots. They are extremely hardy plants and can be very easily grown in a multitude of conditions. But you are right pot culture is easier on account of control over the general soil area.

 

[Sophie Brugmann]

The biggest issue I see in not allocating enough time to this forum is that my answer looses relevance. I'm sorry I couldn't answer sooner.

I'll still try to answer, especially because I have provoked some emotional responses. My understanding was that the underlying statement of this thread was the bafflement over the lack of desert houses in zoos.

That's why I think it is relevant that it's more difficult to build a good desert hall compared to other biotope types.

And that is what I was trying to express. I never said it's impossible to do so, but I do understand why zoos choose not to do it.

The same goes for the plants. I know that it's not an issue in itself to keep these plants alive. It's just that the needs of the plants and the needs of the (ground dwelling) animals contradict each other. The comparison to elephant and ape enclosures is not very helpful, because they have very little contact area with wet soils and are both are homeothermic.
And of course it's theoretically easier with succulents as vegetation. BUT it will be much more difficult to create an immersive feeling within the hall, because they provide very little three dimensional structure.

 

[Sophie Brugmann]

I'm constantly "super busy", but I can still find time for this. [...] But what do I know - I don't keep bearded dragons; just Inland taipans. ^^

For the record: why not assume the next time that you are not the only geek here; that would save your more precious time to be "super busy" and come across as less condescending.

See you at #weltdergifte

I'm sorry that I hurt your feelings. It was not my intention at all. I will try to make my wording more clear in the future to rule out misinterpretation. Please accept my apology.

 

[Batto]

Plants are not the only thing to create 3d structure with.

I'll still try to answer, especially because I have provoked some emotional responses

Given that humans are emotional beings, pretty much every response here has some kind of emotion behind it. Even yours - unless you happen to be an emotionless robot.
So if you're looking for Sarah Connor - she's not here. ^^

I'm sorry that I hurt your feelings.

No worries - it takes a bit more to achieve that. Just keep in mind what I wrote; not all of us here are just building castles in the sky.

 

[Zooplantman]

The biggest issue I see in not allocating enough time to this forum is that my answer looses relevance. I'm sorry I couldn't answer sooner.

I'll still try to answer, especially because I have provoked some emotional responses. My understanding was that the underlying statement of this thread was the bafflement over the lack of desert houses in zoos.

That's why I think it is relevant that it's more difficult to build a good desert hall compared to other biotope types.

And that is what I was trying to express. I never said it's impossible to do so, but I do understand why zoos choose not to do it.

The same goes for the plants. I know that it's not an issue in itself to keep these plants alive. It's just that the needs of the plants and the needs of the (ground dwelling) animals contradict each other. The comparison to elephant and ape enclosures is not very helpful, because they have very little contact area with wet soils and are both are homeothermic.
And of course it's theoretically easier with succulents as vegetation. BUT it will be much more difficult to create an immersive feeling within the hall, because they provide very little three dimensional structure.

I believe that you were quite clear previously.
I simply disagree based on my decades of experience with zoo design and zoo horticulture.
It is true that a great desert house will be very different from a great tropical forest house but it can be immersive and compelling in its way. I do not believe that design or horticulture constraints have affected zoos' decisions.

 

[Platypusboy]

While "tropical rainforest" houses (usually with a focus on South America, SE Asia or a mix of everything "rainforesty") are a common feature in many non-tropical zoos and exhibit complexes on Artic/Antarctic habitats or the African savanna grassland aren't unheard of (usually centered around popular species, like giraffes, polar bears etc. ), houses dedicated to other habitats are much rarer. In particular, I find the general lack of desert houses in zoos [zoos in deserts is another topic on its own] quite baffling, given that there are already a number of common, popular and, in the case of the USA, even native desert species in zoos. I somehow doubt that building and maintaining a desert house is more expensive than a rainforest house, and as previously mentioned, there are enough species popular even among "normal" visitors to populate them with and keep them interesting.
Anyway, here's a list of zoos that I know to have desert houses or at least larger desert exhibit complexes. Feel free to add others and comment which you like or not.

Europe:
- ARTIS Amsterdam
- Burger's Zoo
- Helsinki Zoo ("Africasia" is actually more savanna - themed, but let's add it here)
- Landau Reptile Zoo
- Tierpark Nuremberg
- Paignton Zoo
- Parken Zoo
- Zoo Plzen
- Desert House Vienna (as an external part of Zoo Vienna)

North America:
- Brookfield Zoo
- Henry Doorly Zoo
- Indianapolis Zoo
- North Carolina Zoo

Rest of the world -?

[Desert Zoos:
- Alice Springs Desert Park
- Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum
- The Living Desert Zoo and Gardens
- Several zoos in North Africa, the Middle East, Australia and SW USA]

Helsinki Zoos Africasia is actually has two sides Sademetsä and aavikko which is translated into rainforest and desert. I do agree that it feels more like a savannah house.

 

[Coelacanth18]

I don't think I saw it mentioned on here, but North Carolina and Indianapolis zoos both have smaller versions of Omaha's Desert Dome. The former has a sizable herp collection, some birds (including free-flight) and a short nocturnal hall with vampire bats and sand cats. The latter is smaller and mostly just has meerkats, a few herps, and then a long darkened hallway full of rattlesnakes.

 

[Batto]

I don't think I saw it mentioned on here, but North Carolina and Indianapolis zoos both have smaller versions of Omaha's Desert Dome. The former has a sizable herp collection, some birds (including free-flight) and a short nocturnal hall with vampire bats and sand cats. The latter is smaller and mostly just has meerkats, a few herps, and then a long darkened hallway full of rattlesnakes.

I actually mentioned both in the very first post.^^

 

[Coelacanth18]

I actually mentioned both in the very first post.^^

I did miss that in fairness, I didn't see anyone describe them on this thread yet.

 

[StellarChaser]

Off the top of my hat, I can think of several tropical rainforest houses without nonhuman primates, including one of the best examples, The Bush at Burger's Zoo. So while I understand your point in regard to the popularity of tropical rainforest houses, I don't see that as a reason for the lack of desert houses, in particular in regard to major zoos that have the budget to do both.

I don't know whether other zoos have money, but I am pretty sure that Toronto Zoo has NO budget to build a desert house. Many zoos either don't have enough space or don't have enough money, they have to make choice between Rainforest and Desert theme. If you ask random people other than zoo nerds, "rainforest and desert which one is more beautiful", most of them would answer you "rainforest".
Another reason could be, the desert animals are often placed into savanna or steppe theme exhibits, such as meerkats.
In addition, many desert species, especially from Australia and Asia, are quite rare in captivity. I search through the media section and don't find any zoo outside of Australia that has greater bilby and thorny devil lizard.

 

[Batto]

Another reason could be, the desert animals are often placed into savanna or steppe theme exhibits, such as meerkats.

That's the one point in your argumentation that I can agree with. Just as species from tropical wetlands are thrown together with rainforest species. Meerkats occur in semideserts and arid savanna/grassland habitats as well, btw.
The current lack of financial ressources of your local zoo does not mean that this is generally the norm for all zoos worldwide. A desert house or exhibit complex doesn't have to be massive and expensive, btw, to be efficient.
Deserts are among the most popular touristic destinations in the world, so I doubt that there is no general public interest in desert houses - which is further supported by the already existing zoo desert houses being quite popular among zoo visitors.
The majority of rainforest species is not widely kept in captivity, if at all. That is especially true for nutritional specialists or species whose further distribution in captivity is limited by national conservation regulations. Which would be the case in your two examples.
Aa previously mentioned, a surprising number of species common in captivity originally occur in deserts. So there are plenty of options to choose from.

 

[Batto]

The desert house at Egapark Erfurt, Germany

 

[Zoo2022]

The desert house at Egapark Erfurt, Germany

Very pretty, and clearly an enormous budget - but all those fancy interactive interactive devices which look great on a designers desk (or when a single person is showing them off) do not work well with heavy zoo or museum footfall. As an example, take the London Natural History Museum where the dinosaur gallery which was built to deal with thousands of visitors, is now broken up into a maze of such pathways (even with dead ends) and exhibits which slow down the crowds and cause huge congestion.

 

[Batto]

Very pretty, and clearly an enormous budget - but all those fancy interactive interactive devices which look great on a designers desk (or when a single person is showing them off) do not work well with heavy zoo or museum footfall. As an example, take the London Natural History Museum where the dinosaur gallery which was built to deal with thousands of visitors, is now broken up into a maze of such pathways (even with dead ends) and exhibits which slow down the crowds and cause huge congestion.

Well, the discrepancy between the aesthetics of the designers and the practical appropiation by the visitors is a common issue in both zoos and museums. Speaking of the latter: there's another German example (sans animals) that I think manages to implement the conveyance of the vast emptiness of deserts quite interestingly [starting at 4:20]

 

[Philipine eagle]

Very pretty, and clearly an enormous budget - but all those fancy interactive interactive devices which look great on a designers desk (or when a single person is showing them off) do not work well with heavy zoo or museum footfall. As an example, take the London Natural History Museum where the dinosaur gallery which was built to deal with thousands of visitors, is now broken up into a maze of such pathways (even with dead ends) and exhibits which slow down the crowds and cause huge congestion.

Agree!

I almost never see anyone using these high tec interactive devices, even when there's no visitor congestion.