Zoo Layout Poll

[Hvedekorn]

Continent is my favourite. Habitat is also good.

I think, to the more knowledgeable zoo-goers is layout by family (like cats in one department, parrots in one department etc.) also good. This way, you can take a quick look at your favourite animals if you don't have so much time left.

If the zoo doesn't seem like a messy building site, I'm also fine with a random order. The bad thing about dividing the zoo in continents is that it can get pretty predictable - in most Australia areas you are sure in advance to see kangaroos/wallabies, emus and maybe a kookaburra or some other bird. It ruins much of the surprise element. If you see an emu exhibit between an ocelot and a jackass penguin, it becomes more interesting because you never saw it coming.

 

[Javan Rhino]

I like by biome and then continent. For example, if you look at my zoo on the 'design a zoo' topic, you will see I have split the zoo into four 'Biome parks.' So, you can easily find what you want to see (the problem with the suprise is that you can easily miss things if you don't pass them). For example, the zoo-goer could think 'right, I want to see the Koala and the kookaburra next, they'll be in the woodlands and mountains park and in the Australian Forest.'

 

[traipen]

Continents would be my preference as it comes closer to some of the sights I have observed in some of the wilds of North America, Africa, Asia, and Australia.

 

[Simon McGlary]

I've gone with continents. It provides an opportunity to have, within the same area, animals that depend on the same environment, the well known animals and the lesser known animals. This can include mammals, birds, reptiles, invertebrates and plants and show what biodiversity is all about. Also, to save a species you have to save the environment that species lives in and therefore lots of other species.

 

[jusko88]

In my opinion, I think people can learn more about animals if there exhibits were set up taxonomic style. I think it would be so cool to go to a zoo and see 2 paddocks, one with A moose and a pudu. Compare the biggest deer to the smallest deer. Then in the other have A giant eland and a royal antelope and compare the biggest antelope to the smallest antelope. Same with having exhibits with all leopard species. I personally would enjoy a zoo in current day to open a Canid House.

 

[Norwegian moose]

I am maybe controversial when I say that the taxonomic layout is the best one (though continents is also good). Why cant you build a good taxonomic arranged zoo in the modern time, if all the animals are well cared for. It would maybe require more space because to have a good taxonomic display you would need many more species than in a normal biographical exhibit, but if the animals are well cared for, I dont see anything wrong with a zoo layout divided into taxonomic principals.

 

[jbnbsn99]

I am maybe controversial when I say that the taxonomic layout is the best one (though continents is also good). Why cant you build a good taxonomic arranged zoo in the modern time, if all the animals are well cared for. It would maybe require more space because to have a good taxonomic display you would need many more species than in a normal biographical exhibit, but if the animals are well cared for, I dont see anything wrong with a zoo layout divided into taxonomic principals.

Because there is more to every single animal, plant, or any other living thing than just taxonomy. In order to fully appreciate an animal, you must see how it lives. Taxonomy exhibits are artificial. Go outside and look at the wildlife around you, they aren't arranged by taxonomy.

In order to understand a lion, I need to know where the lion lives, what it eats, what dangers does it face. I don't necessarily need to know that it is most closely related to the Leopard and Jaguar.

Taxonomy is a much higher level concept that most zoo visitors won't care about.

(Now, to go buy me head in my copy of Ungulate Taxonomy for the rest of the day to atone for my sins.)

 

[Norwegian moose]

Because there is more to every single animal, plant, or any other living thing than just taxonomy. In order to fully appreciate an animal, you must see how it lives. Taxonomy exhibits are artificial. Go outside and look at the wildlife around you, they aren't arranged by taxonomy.

In order to understand a lion, I need to know where the lion lives, what it eats, what dangers does it face. I don't necessarily need to know that it is most closely related to the Leopard and Jaguar.

Taxonomy is a much higher level concept that most zoo visitors won't care about.

(Now, to go buy me head in my copy of Ungulate Taxonomy for the rest of the day to atone for my sins.)

Well I dont see anything wrong in taxonomic displays, and I dont see anthing wrong with the continent/habitat displays, it is just that, that so many zoos have them that it is nice to see something else like the taxonomic display method, as long as the animals are well cared for.

 

[tschandler71]

I like the idea of building exhibits around a keystone species/charismatic megafauna ie Elephant, Panda, Bear, Big Cat, Gorilla, Orangutan and then the other animal exhibits showcase the animals of their ecosystem as best as possible.

IE range of the jaguar at Jacksonville, Giants at dallas, Trails at Birmingham, China at Memphis,

 

[chrisbarela]

What about alphabetical? You know... Aardvarks and aardwolves up front and zebras and zebus last...

 

[Chlidonias]

I prefer my zoos to be organised by colour.

 

[Buldeo]

Does any of what I have said really apply to your average viewer? Probably not, but if a zoos puts the effort forward to present animals in a way that tells a powerful message of where they are from, then that message might resonate in someone who can do something. It might inspire a future generation of scientists, zoo people, exhibit designers, etc. I know it did me.

Jbnbsn99 has largely spoken for me already. To it I would like to add: It is often forgotten in zoos how we humans have interacted and related to our animal cousins over the years. By focusing on their places of origins (whether continental or biome), it helps to solidify the connection to the animal's place in its home and how it has impacted our lives; i.e., the tiger's place in Indian legend and mythology. See: Vaghdeva, for example.

So, in short, I prefer a combination of Continent & Biome. I opted for continent in the poll, though.