I haven't been up to chester Zoo and seen the Islands development and from what Ive read that it is going to be fantastic when fully finished whether all our zoos both big and small should be going down this fantastic exhibit route. Should all zoos perhaps like London Zoo try and re create a gorilla kingdom? As zoo goers do we expect to see less traditional cage type exhibits? Do we want to see less cage type exhibits? Do we want to see more mixed exhibits ? Do we want to have more walk throughs ? I dont mean every zoo suddenly gets Lemurs and Squirrel monkeys and creates one but perhaps while these animals are at a Zoo should this be the norm?Would any other primate walk throgh work ? Would say a Tiger Territory type exhibit work for leopards or Pumas for instance? Do we want to see more animals on island type exhibits surrounded by water ? Do we as punters want to interact more with some animals.or are the public just too bloody stupid? I know it costs money to build them . I know we as guests have a budget as well. Would you pay more for less ?
Exhibits in UK Zoos
- Thread starter garyjp
- Start date
I missed seeing Islands by 2 days unfortunately, but it is (& will be) an excellent exhibit.
However, that is Chester & what suits there wouldn't necessarily fit elsewhere. It has been built without losing any species (actually gaining them!). Chester have the spare land to do this, others don't. They also probably have more funds available to do it.
I don't want to start on Land of the Lions again, I've made my feelings known on London threads, but as long as enclosures are adequate, I'm happy to view the animals in them. I firstly go to zoos to see animals & preferably lots of them and some less common ones, not to stare at a few expensive new enclosures.
I regularly visit the Aspinall parks these days at the expense probably of Marwell or London, largely for this reason.
In short, No, most other zoos shouldn't attempt to build similar 'super exhibits' unless they have the space to do it without losing species.
However, that is Chester & what suits there wouldn't necessarily fit elsewhere. It has been built without losing any species (actually gaining them!). Chester have the spare land to do this, others don't. They also probably have more funds available to do it.
I don't want to start on Land of the Lions again, I've made my feelings known on London threads, but as long as enclosures are adequate, I'm happy to view the animals in them. I firstly go to zoos to see animals & preferably lots of them and some less common ones, not to stare at a few expensive new enclosures.
I regularly visit the Aspinall parks these days at the expense probably of Marwell or London, largely for this reason.
In short, No, most other zoos shouldn't attempt to build similar 'super exhibits' unless they have the space to do it without losing species.
Last edited:
Thanks Pipaluk for the quick reply! Im just playing devils advocate a little, just to confirm its about numbers of species for you - so if say a smaller zoo took you on a journey that had a number of super exhibits which contained your variety and numbers but was more aimed at smaller mammals or birds would you find it as rewarding as seeing some of the larger mammals that we generally associate with zoos. Land of the Lions isnt open yet is it?
Hello Pipaluk. I advise a visit to Plzen Zoo. A good collection of ABC species and a lot of XYZs. About 20 years ago, it had about 50 species of mammals. Now it has about 250.
I'm not sure a series of small mammal exhibits ( a modern Clore Pavilion) would necessarily be classed as a super exhibit. But I would rather have seen that at London than a £5m plus lion enclosure or just some renovation of the existing enclosures to hold smaller cats or other carnivores would have been a better idea.
....- Hold on though aren't most of the enclosures still standing when everyone (who was in favour of land of the lions) thought they needed demolition?
Thanks for the suggestion, I will add it to my 'to visit' wish list.
FunkyGibbon
Well-Known Member
Whether UK zoos should be following the example of Islands is something of a moot point. Is there any other with the combination of space, money and will to do it? (Genuine question, but I think not)
It seems from back reading on this site, that most UK zoochatters are perfectly happy with fenced enclosure. Based on visitor numbers the general public seem to be pretty okay with them too. I'm sure if you ask people directly they will say they would rather all the animals had more space and no bars, but the prevailing wisdom on this site (hardly unbiased admittedly) is that visitor numbers drop drastically if a collection thins out too much.
I would like to see primate enclosures that combine caging with an immersive approach. I think if you put the viewing windows low down, and inset them into the enclosure so the sides aren't obvious, stuff the enclosure full of 'lianas' and other semi-naturalistic furniture, especially a lot of clutter to obscure the sides and roof, then you would have a great exhibit.
Zoos will probably continue to push the envelope on walkthroughs. More and more species and mixes will be attempted I think. As long as it doesn't effect breeding rates or animal/visitor welfare I am definitely in favour of this.
It seems from back reading on this site, that most UK zoochatters are perfectly happy with fenced enclosure. Based on visitor numbers the general public seem to be pretty okay with them too. I'm sure if you ask people directly they will say they would rather all the animals had more space and no bars, but the prevailing wisdom on this site (hardly unbiased admittedly) is that visitor numbers drop drastically if a collection thins out too much.
I would like to see primate enclosures that combine caging with an immersive approach. I think if you put the viewing windows low down, and inset them into the enclosure so the sides aren't obvious, stuff the enclosure full of 'lianas' and other semi-naturalistic furniture, especially a lot of clutter to obscure the sides and roof, then you would have a great exhibit.
Zoos will probably continue to push the envelope on walkthroughs. More and more species and mixes will be attempted I think. As long as it doesn't effect breeding rates or animal/visitor welfare I am definitely in favour of this.
Love the use of XYZ's -never seen before, brilliant!
Basically agree with this view. Interested to know what potential walk-through mixes might be? I've been surprised that Trentham feels that human/macaque interaction is considered risk-free, particularly when you consider the disease potential.
Zooplantman
Well-Known Member
As someone who has followed many threads on ZooChat about UK zoos and opinions on themed exhibits and "US style exhibits", I have been fascinated to see how Chester's Islands has changed the tone of the UK discussion.
I follow, grinning
I follow, grinning
i dont know i think alot of zoochatters are happy with the status quo, personally i think that zoos do need to improve all the time and exhibits like the islands are going to be the future whether its a big zoo like chester or a small one. zoos whether we like it are in the entertainment business and most of their visitors want to be entertained or have a special experience no different to going to a modern cinema or a theme park. i think visitors would like to see big open exhibits without bars where possible.
as with the other point above walkthroughs it must be all about risk to both animals and public. perhaps where there is a squirrel monkey walkthrough it might be interesting to add say capuchins as an example .
I personally prefer good quality enclosures for more species than exceptional enclosures for one species. If that £5 had been spent on a small mammal house at Whipsnade not only would I be there the day it opened but they would actually be conserving more species with the same money (ZSL is after all conservation based).
However the zoos serve the public and the public want the big 5 which sadly means the other 10 million species miss out on the much needed exsitu conservation space.
If we also think about the animals welfare for a second, just because an immersive exhibit looks good to humans doesn't mean it is what the animal in question wants. Gorrilas clearly prefer climbing structures to the open island exhibits, just watch groups in a cage, much more climbing keeps them fitter and more engaged IMO. Also are mix species actually a good idea mixing animals that could potentially cause stress to one another ?
However the zoos serve the public and the public want the big 5 which sadly means the other 10 million species miss out on the much needed exsitu conservation space.
If we also think about the animals welfare for a second, just because an immersive exhibit looks good to humans doesn't mean it is what the animal in question wants. Gorrilas clearly prefer climbing structures to the open island exhibits, just watch groups in a cage, much more climbing keeps them fitter and more engaged IMO. Also are mix species actually a good idea mixing animals that could potentially cause stress to one another ?
Capuchins would possibly be the worst animal for a walkthrough, a Health and safely nightmare! Big teeth, highly strung and very very clever combine to little Johnny having a finger removed and the zoo being sued.
I think this is the problem with walk throughs the risk factor its not the animals its the little Johnnys and all the other members of the general public who by nature can be and are very stupid at times. These are all wild animals and can all bite. I like a walk through i must be honest. I think with walk throughs its a question of space and its certainly an exhibit where you can mix species naturally i dont want to see say wallabies & Squirrel Monkeys.I suppose you could put marmosets in with Squirrel Monkeys but in a big walkthrough would they just get lost in the exhibit. We are lucky we can talk and debate this and not have the resonsibility of putting it into practice.
I just think that perhaps we could have a combination of it all an exceptional mixed walk through exhibit where the animal/birds welfare is put first. perhaps with walk through we are all assuming the public at ground level perhaps have the public elevated like the snowdon aviary - im not putting it up as a shinning light just the elevated design and no real interaction with whats on display.
FunkyGibbon
Well-Known Member
As I alluded to earlier in the thread, I have spent several happy hours reading old threads about US immersion vs UK functionality from before I joined the site. The best are the comments on pictures of Aspinall cages! I suspect that part of the reason for what we might call the 'UK position' is that Island style exhibits have never been an option over here, so people choose to enjoy and 'prefer' what they have. It also seems that there was a certain entrenching of position on both sides, which maybe lead people to argue viewpoints they wouldn't have arrived at by themselves. As you say, it is notable that Chester has escaped the criticism given to a lot of collections on this site a few years ago that immersive exhibits wasted space and prioritised visitor experience over animal welfare.
Despite this, I still remain unconvinced by immersion. The best bit about Islands is the central plaza. On a hot summer day I truly felt I had left the UK and was in a tropical paradise. I was completely sold. As soon as I saw the first enclosure though, the illusion was shattered. No matter how skillfuly the barriers are blended into the exhibit, you are still abruptly aware that you are looking at an animal in captivity. Now maybe this is the fault of Chester's execution, and other places do succeed in the illusion, but somehow I doubt it.
I think that Islands has raised the stakes in the UK zoo game in several ways.
It is the biggest and boldest development for many years - perhaps since Blackpool was built from scratch in 1972. All the large mammal species have large outdoor enclosures, visible from the footpaths (without bars or fences) and from the boats (except for the babirusa), plus off-show indoor and outdoor enclosures too (and indoor on-show enclosures for the orangs and gibbons and the macaques too). The boat rides allow visitors a second tour of the exhibits with alternative viewpoints of the animals.
In addition the educational and catering facilities and the gift shop are integrated with the design and theme of the exhibits. I think that the complexity of the design partly explains the delays in the opening of the project.
I doubt whether other British zoos have the space or the financial resources to replicate all these features of Islands, even on a reduced scale. The theme concept is the easiest to apply, ZSL has done it already in parts of Whipsnade and Regents Park and will do more in the new Lion complex. I am sure we will see more of it in the future. I do agree with FunkyGibbon that this is essentially just cosmetic, the really authentic part of the experience in a zoo is the view of the animals and their behaviour. I would suggest that other zoos will adopt and adapt the ideas of designing exhibits with several viewpoints (the macaques at Islands have five - two in the Monsoon Forest, two main ones outdoors beside the footpath and one from the boat) and of a children's trail with question leaflets given out at the start, clues along the way and a validation point at the end.
Alan
It is the biggest and boldest development for many years - perhaps since Blackpool was built from scratch in 1972. All the large mammal species have large outdoor enclosures, visible from the footpaths (without bars or fences) and from the boats (except for the babirusa), plus off-show indoor and outdoor enclosures too (and indoor on-show enclosures for the orangs and gibbons and the macaques too). The boat rides allow visitors a second tour of the exhibits with alternative viewpoints of the animals.
In addition the educational and catering facilities and the gift shop are integrated with the design and theme of the exhibits. I think that the complexity of the design partly explains the delays in the opening of the project.
I doubt whether other British zoos have the space or the financial resources to replicate all these features of Islands, even on a reduced scale. The theme concept is the easiest to apply, ZSL has done it already in parts of Whipsnade and Regents Park and will do more in the new Lion complex. I am sure we will see more of it in the future. I do agree with FunkyGibbon that this is essentially just cosmetic, the really authentic part of the experience in a zoo is the view of the animals and their behaviour. I would suggest that other zoos will adopt and adapt the ideas of designing exhibits with several viewpoints (the macaques at Islands have five - two in the Monsoon Forest, two main ones outdoors beside the footpath and one from the boat) and of a children's trail with question leaflets given out at the start, clues along the way and a validation point at the end.
Alan
overread
Well-Known Member
It's my view and observation that people are tactile creatures by nature. Seeing an animal is one thing; being able to reach out and touch quite another.
Take people to the zoo and ask them what they liked best and chances are big impressive animals like lions or tigers would really have to put on a show (nor just sleep or yawn) to get remembered over the lemur enclosure where they were in there with them being clambered over.
I know a good few zoos try to cover this with regular domestic species, its easier and cheaper and generally a bit safer, however it also only reinforces for already domestic species and in a conservation angle would only be viable for things like heavyhorses where they are in decline as a working breed.
Otherwise if a zoo wants to engage its visiting audience with wildlife then the more you you can immerse the visitor in that the better.
It's why I'm always rather sad that things like "feed the tigers" etc... are often held behind a large pay-wall since its just that kind of interaction that makes an experience far more memorable and more likely to influence those visiting (young and old) than just seeing the animal being fed.
The other side of the coin is filling dreams and many dream of going on safari, but often lack the time, money or family support to allow them to take the trip. So I can certainly see that being able to repeat it in the UK on home soil where the cost is less and the travel time vastly reduced is a big thing. Heck I know my dad often mentions the safari-style parks in the UK far more so than Banham or other zoos.
I do often feel that the UK has an odd stance with captive animals in that animals which are not destined for reintroduction programs are still kept at arms length; both directly and indirectly. You hardly ever see keepers interacting with anything but the safest of animals in the open and generally even then at arms length. The only times I can recall UK staff working with more dangerous animals is on the television and in "behind the scenes". Otherwise to the public eye we keep a distance. We don't have a Steve Irwin in the UK and I think that concept is a downside for how we view and engage with wildlife.
Take people to the zoo and ask them what they liked best and chances are big impressive animals like lions or tigers would really have to put on a show (nor just sleep or yawn) to get remembered over the lemur enclosure where they were in there with them being clambered over.
I know a good few zoos try to cover this with regular domestic species, its easier and cheaper and generally a bit safer, however it also only reinforces for already domestic species and in a conservation angle would only be viable for things like heavyhorses where they are in decline as a working breed.
Otherwise if a zoo wants to engage its visiting audience with wildlife then the more you you can immerse the visitor in that the better.
It's why I'm always rather sad that things like "feed the tigers" etc... are often held behind a large pay-wall since its just that kind of interaction that makes an experience far more memorable and more likely to influence those visiting (young and old) than just seeing the animal being fed.
The other side of the coin is filling dreams and many dream of going on safari, but often lack the time, money or family support to allow them to take the trip. So I can certainly see that being able to repeat it in the UK on home soil where the cost is less and the travel time vastly reduced is a big thing. Heck I know my dad often mentions the safari-style parks in the UK far more so than Banham or other zoos.
I do often feel that the UK has an odd stance with captive animals in that animals which are not destined for reintroduction programs are still kept at arms length; both directly and indirectly. You hardly ever see keepers interacting with anything but the safest of animals in the open and generally even then at arms length. The only times I can recall UK staff working with more dangerous animals is on the television and in "behind the scenes". Otherwise to the public eye we keep a distance. We don't have a Steve Irwin in the UK and I think that concept is a downside for how we view and engage with wildlife.
One of my best zoo memories is being allowed to scatter-feed the bears at Whipsnade simply by getting there early in the morning and being a sweet little 9 year old boy (though I say it myself...).
overread
Well-Known Member
Exactly - heck myself I know that for me its interaction in the form of photography that builds my engagement with the subject far more. Many times most of the adults I see at zoos who are not part of a family gathering
are often those with a camera taking photographs.
Engagement with the subjects at a zoo is critical. Simply seeing an animal isn't generally enough; you have to become involved and engaged with. Of course you have to have boundaries too as too much casual involvement can breed an atmosphere where people push at the boundaries more and more which can cause problems. However I do feel that "hands off" is a bad policy in general for visitors.
Heck I suspect a lot of the "glass bangers" would stop if they had a little involvement as they'd hopefully start to become more aware of the animals. It's easy to bash at the glass for the tiger; harder if you know the tigers name, history and suchlike.