ZooChat Exhibit Design Think Tank: what exhibit ideas lie beyond the known?

[Zooplantman]

Many zoo education and exhibit departments (museum folks too) do or contract to have done post exhibit evaluations to measure whether the visitors got the message. And yes, in many instances they are understanding basic science and something of the conservation issues.

What I am unsure of is whether it really matters to conservation whether a nice family from Ohio or Amsterdam understands that biodiversity matters and that Javan rhinos are disappearing.

What are the things a zoo visitor can really do?
Stop having children and teach their kids to not have kids
Radically reduce their consumption of resources, consumer products of all kinds
Radically reduce their consumption of energy
Give serious financial support to conservation NGOs
Bombard their Federal representatives with emails and letters supporting conservation priorities
Actively boycott and speak out against nations with inadequate conservation records

But in general, exhibit signage asks little of the visitor. Much is said but nothing is asked.

I know you have written about wanting to promote giraffe conservation, so I can ask you: what concrete actions do you need that family to take and how would you spell it out clearly for them?

I think figuring out whether zoo conservation education efforts are effective, and if not, how to try and improve them, is really important and would like to retrain myself as a social scientist to do this research if nobody else is doing it...

Maybe the real need is to ask the general public this: What would it take to have you make conservation of wild places and wild species a priority in your life: more important than the latest iPhone, more important than replacing your 3-year old car, more important than your gym membership, more important than having a second child?

 

[DavidBrown]

I know you have written about wanting to promote giraffe conservation, so I can ask you: what concrete actions do you need that family to take and how would you spell it out clearly for them?

That is a very good and difficult question.

Zoos promote their animals as being ambassadors for the conservation of their wild relatives. What does this mean exactly? For the most part it seems like the concept has not been very well developed.

With developments like the Congo Gorilla Forest with its direct link between the money people pay to see the gorillas and its funding gorilla (and other species) conservation this link is being better defined, but there is much more that one could do with the concept.

For giraffes there are several conservation problems, some of which zoos have unwittingly perpetrated and can help fix. The most basic problem is that people have assumed that there is only one giraffe species and that giraffes are not endangered. The different subspecies of giraffes are not interchangeable because they are reproductively isolated from each other. Several of the giraffe subspecies (possibly full species) are very endangered. The West African giraffes and Rothschilds giraffes are nearly as endangered as the Sumatran and Javan rhinos. The reticulated giraffes are nearly as endangered as tigers. The Central African giraffes may be hovering near functional extinction.

I guess the first essential concrete action is for the hypothetical family, or any person who really likes giraffes, to realize that there are possibly more than one species and that some kinds of giraffes need conservation help. There are conservation field projects for reticulated, Rothschild’s, and West African giraffes. These projects need material support of course, but equally importantly they need people who like giraffes to be aware of them and do things like keeping tabs on how the giraffes are doing. Money is important (and essential). People who care about the continuing survival of giraffes are equally important. Is there a way that zoo giraffes can generate qualitative as well as quantitative support for giraffe conservation? I think that there is, but I have not thought through how this works in a concrete way. We are going to have a workshop on this at an upcoming giraffe conference where zoo giraffe folks and wild giraffe folks will be present, so that is a concrete start at least.

I outlined an idea in the post above responding to Drew about how to try and draw people in to appreciating giraffes more by observing their behavior in a scientific context and "becoming" a biologist studying giraffes. This concept is in no way ground-breaking...many zoo education departments do this in some way through their programs..but with internet technology one could try and show people how giraffe behavior (or any species) observed in the zoo

 

[Zooplantman]

Is there a way that zoo giraffes can generate qualitative as well as quantitative support for giraffe conservation? I think that there is, but I have not thought through how this works in a concrete way. We are going to have a workshop on this at an upcoming giraffe conference where zoo giraffe folks and wild giraffe folks will be present, so that is a concrete start at least.

Oh I think that's HUGE

 

[Jurek7]

All exhibit ideas based on unique behavior (like tool-using New Caledonian Crows) have problem: animal acts so usually once or few times per day. Visitors will go disappointed.

However, it works on shows of trained animals, and feeding/demonstration sessions at animal enclosures. Singapore Night Safari has nice shows, Apeldoorn zoo has nice presentations combined with tele-screens.

What are the things a zoo visitor can really do?

I think few consumer behaviors in USA measurably influence giraffes in Africa. Asking for something may be also contra-productive - for example, if to cut energy consumption fewer tourists fly to Africa, national parks there will go bankrupt.

However, visitors thankfully give donations to animals. Bronx zoo is example how this works. This also directly helps animals.

 

[Drew]

I think few consumer behaviors in USA measurably influence giraffes in Africa. Asking for something may be also contra-productive - for example, if to cut energy consumption fewer tourists fly to Africa, national parks there will go bankrupt.

I think you have highlighted one of the best ways consumer behaviour can influence giraffes in Africa.....increase tourism! I have been involved in the past with the "Team in Training" which is put on by The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society. The overview is that you raise money to support the society and in return they offer training, coaches, and pay your travel expenses to compete in an endurance sport adventure at a major destination (i.e. marathon at Disney). I think something similar could be applied to conservation abroad. Not only would the trip to Africa be motivation to help raise awareness and money but the tourist dollars you bring in let the African people know that the wildlife they have is an extrememly valuable asset to their economy and worth protecting and expanding. And the stories you tell of your amazing adventure might then inspire others to follow in your path.

 

[Jurek7]

I think you have highlighted one of the best ways consumer behaviour can influence giraffes in Africa.....increase tourism!

In fact, I visited Namibia and Botswana after being inspired by exhibits Etosha and Gamgoas in Basel zoo. Nearby Zurich zoo opened Masoala exhibit, and tourism to real Masoala park in Madagascar increased by 50%, with most tourists being Swiss!

This is something zoos can easily do, by forming partnerships with ecotourist bureaus and national parks. It also is realistic. Zoo visitor is unlikely to overturn his lifestyle after visiting a zoo, but buying a holiday in Africa is possible option. However, good exhibits recreating real places help more than generalized fairyland Africa typical in zoos.

Ecotourism is one of few options how people in tropics can get income without destroying nature. I remember pleading letters some time ago on birdforum, when somebody from Africa asked birders to come to their country, because local reserves with endemic birds were in danger of being immediately cut because in slump in tourism.

 

[Zooplantman]

Some thoughts;

Given that human population is growing fastest in these very areas where wildlife is threatened (http://www.zoochat.com/65/human-population-growth-vs-wildlife-conservation-242792/), what level of ecotourism will be required to provide enough income to these countries to raise the general standard of living to that of the developed nations?

What would be the impact on the wildlife and on the host country of that amount of ecotourism?

Given how many wild areas need protection around the world, how many ecotourists, traveling how many times per year would be required for ecotourism to be of use as a major conservation strategy? Or is it merely a small player?

What happens to wildlife protection during periods of economic downturn such as the planet is currently experiencing? If ecotourism income drops, how are preserves... preserved?

If indeed ecotourism is only a small contributor to wildlife conservation, then we return to the question: what are the conservation objectives of zoo exhibits and interpretation? Can the objectives be reached?

If, as @Jurek7 suggests, people are unlikely to change their lifestyle, then with greater human population and increased consumption of resources and development of land (in other words: things continuing in the direction they are going), what does conservation of wildlife and wild places involve? What does it require?

Are there really any substantive conservation efforts that can come from zoo interpretation except as a fund raising mechanism (like the Bronx Zoo's Congo Gorilla Forest)?
Can donations at the gate for conservation keep pace with the increased pressure on wild life from the human population and consumer lifestyle? How much of their income do we need to get them to part with?
If, in fact, zoo exhibits are basically funding appeals for conservation, how does that inform our design of exhibits and the entire zoo experience? (Bringing my comments back to the original topic of the thread.)

 

[Zoovolunteer]

One ssuggestion I have relates to nocturnal houses. They invariably have the lights down begin at the start of the zoo day, and though mixed exhibits are usual they are all of nocturnal species. Why not change the schedule so that the lights go down or come on at midday? This would enable people to see the changeover between day active and nocturnal animals using the same habitat, and also effectively create two seperate exhibits in the same space, depending on whether the visitor came in the morning or afternoon.

 

[lee456]

One idea that I have heard of before which I have yet to see fully replicated is the "Biojar Concept". It's a very tricking yet rewarding system, whereby an entire ecosystem is replicated within an enclosure (the jar). I know that there are exhibits which are close to be fully self sufficent out there. On a small scale they example I saw was an old paladrium set up near a window. The water was collected from a local watersoure and the inverterbrates that were in this water sample were allowed to reproduce. Plants were placed in the enclosure next. It's worth mentioning that the whole thing was near a window. So sunlight -> plant growth and forms algae -> inverterbrates feed on this and then a few fish were added. The water is managed by the plants and the system after a little tweakng entered equilibrium. Therefore the water was never changed and the inhabitants were never fed. Cool little system that I have only seen a few amateur hobbyists employ!

 

[Newzooboy]

I think one aspect of enclosure construction that is often under-utilised is vertical space - not only for the animals but for visitors also.

So, a rainforest habitat has a series of layers from ground to canopy each representing a different ecosystem. Could a very tall exhibit feature a number of these - essentially a mixed exhibit but the different animals would naturally occupy different 'layers. I realise that animals in captivity might not 'obey' the layers but if food and shelter were appropriately placed for each layer it might work.

Viewing for visitors would need to be at the level of each layer, so I'm thinking a very tall skyscraper like construction (obviously not that tall but you get the idea) with the exhibit(s) on the outside and viewing from the inside - i.e. up a central passage.