How Big is Big?

R

redpanda

Well-Known Member
And does it really matter?

Looking through the galleries recently, I have begun to notice many conflicting ideas on how large an exhibit has to be to justify it as "big". Opinions range from those who think size is irrelevant and, as with people, it's what's inside that counts; to others who believe a big enclosure is paramount to the welfare of its inhabitants.

This got me wondering what people base their opinions on in this matter, why do some people think a 500m2 enclosure is adequate, whilst others think it should be 5000?

So what do you base these judgements on; gut feeling, personal experience, WAZA guidelines, a scientific study?

Is there even any hard evidence to suggest an enclosure is large enough for the inhabitants, or is exhibit design just educated guess-work?

And, finally, can enclosures be too big? As an example I give you this picture of the Lynx exhibit from Dortmund Zoo...

http://www.zoochat.com/126/european-lynx-enclosure-dortmund-11-05-a-82146/

...in which visitors will hardly ever get to see these magnificent cats up-close.

I look forward to hearing what my fellow ZooChatter's think and perhaps contribute my own opinions a little later on in the discussion.
 
What an absolutely brilliant post! Too late here in Sweden for me to even begin to think of answering it. But I suspect that this will be a very long thread. Can´t wait to check it out tomorrow.
 
Your link to the pic of Dortmund's lynx enclosure reminded me of the one at the New Forest Otter, Owl and Wildlife Park. Like Dortmund, it is built within a section of natural woodland about 3 acres in size, however it's density and sloping gradient, although an enriching and private habitat for lynx, make them hard to spot if it decides not to show herself. However, as I put animals before people when it comes to enclosure design, I think it's wonderful the cats have such an easy way of making them invisible if they want.
 
Dan said:
I thought this post of redpanda´s would fire up a storm... and I am disappointed by the lack of response to it.

What about if I link to my "personal flagship post" (I am sure that sounds very stupid in English, but what the hell...) on this forum:

http://www.zoochat.com/2/legislation-sweden-minimum-size-zoo-enclosures-24935/

No reactions, no responses to redpanda´s interesting post?
Click to expand...

I was about to reply ;).

As Dan has pointed out, there doesn't seem to be much interest so far, so I shall give a few personal viewpoints and perhaps others will do the same.

Personally, I like large exhibits, especially those that are well-landscaped and have active animals. Not only from a welfare point of view, but also an exhibtry one. Would, for example, Bronx Zoo's Baboon Reserve be as successful at immersing you in the ethiopian highlands if the enclosure was not two acres in size?

ZooLex Exhibit

Having said that, I also think big enclosures are important for the animals, I would imagine the Dortmund Lynx are probably "happier" than those in normal-sized exhibits. Why? Because the enclosure gives its feline inhabitants room to roam and scents to sniff (like what I did there :D) as well as that all important privacy.

So how do I decide "How big is big?" Personally, my opinions are based mostly on gut instinct, personal experience and how I would feel if in the animal's shoes (anthropomorphic, I know, but we are all part of the animal kingdom). I also find the information provided here useful: WAZA - World Association of Zoos and Aquariums - Virtual Zoo. Thinking about it, if everyone else's basis is similarly flimsy, we have a lot of very pointless arguments!

So, once again, I ask what are your views, how big is big and is there any scientific method of knowing? I will be interested to here the views of other zoo-minded people (else I will look a little stupid ;)).
 
To be honest I don't look at the exhibit size. Howlett's gorilla cages aren't huge, but the amount of enrichment in them is phenomenal. Bristol's lion cage isn't huge but it's adequate and they get loads of privacy and enrichment.
I think this, like the aesthetics argument, is purely subjective.
 
That reminds of a quote I saw once in a zoo guidebook in relation to enclosure design (I think it was Chester's): "If you had the choice to live in a small flat with adequate cooking and washing facilities, widescreen TV's, etc. or a huge warehouse with nothing else in it, which would you choose?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top