Does anyone know anything about the history of the zoo? was it a planned zoo? Looking at pictures I find it interesting that there is a uniformity of design to the enclosures, especially the arficial rocks which to me have a kind of 'playmobil' feel. It looks nice though, even if not entirely naturalistic. Do they plan everything in-house? Any background information would be appreciated!
The Milwaukee County Zoo that you are discussing is not the original zoo of Milwaukee. The original zoo was on only 22 acres in a city park (Washington Park)....officials felt that a proper zoo could no longer be maintained in Washington Park and a zoo new was opened in 1961 on a property consisting of 165 acres. Most of the today's zoo was built at about this time. Milwaukee County Zoo has an excellent history timeline on their website. Milwaukee County Zoo Im not sure who designed the zoo and its exhibits...
wow, thanks for the link,that's a great time line. I wish every zoo had the same thing on their website
I grew up going to the Milwaukee Zoo at least once a year. The highlights were seeing "Samson" (a gigantic gorilla) in the Great Apes House; watching all the monkeys on Treasure Island; seeing the many penguins swimming underwater in the Bird House; and riding the terrific (still one of the best) miniature railroad. They were one of the first (if not THE first) zoos to feature predator/prey exhibits, and they still excel at this.
Predator/prey exhibits were first developed by Hagenbeck in Hamburg, in 1907. Several of these still exist, 100 years later. The first in the US was the African Plains (lions, antelope) at the Bronx Zoo, to this day a wonderful exhibit. Milwaukee also unfortunately began a trend of massive rockwork enclosures where the "rock" was abstracted to the point of being cartoonish (and ugly). This "look" was widely copied in the 60s and 70s, and can still be seen in Columbus, Cleveland and elsewhere.
Please tell me where at the Cleveland Zoo they have this rock work, as I have probably been over 100 times and have yet to see it
@reduakari: Doesnt Brookfield also use the same style of rockwork?...I remember reading somewhere that Milwaukee's designers took influence from some of Brookfield's design. @blackrhino: I believe the Cleveland's polar bear exhibits were created as that time.
@ reduakari - The ugly rockwork that you described was demolished once we took out Herbivore/Carnivore. This is exhibit was the same style as one of Milwaukee's exhibits, and I believe the same company constructed both exhibits.
Brookfield was largely built in the 1930s, well before Milwaukee. It's interesting that as time went on after Hagenbeck, zoo rockwork became more and more "stylized" (i.e. fake looking). Brookfield and Detroit "rocks" are slightly more realistic than what came later at Milwaukee, Cleveland, Columbus, San Francisco, Lincoln Park and San Diego. In the late 60's/early 70's, Arizona Sonora, Bronx and Brookfield started trying to recreate real geology. Today, the best trend is to eliminate rockwork as much as possible, soften it with plantings, but if it's there try to make it logical and believable from a habitat perspective (at least in Seattle, Bronx, Minnesota, Detroit, Portland and a few other places).
BlackRhino, I believe he's referring to the Bear & Tiger exhibits in the Northern Trek area. To be honest, I don't think these "rock work" exhibits look bad at all. In fact, in our book we made Cleveland the Runner-up for Best Zoo for Bears, due to the unparalleled (in the USA) wide variety of bears in this area.
Allen, I am not a fan of the Northern trek area. The Wolf Wilderness is fantastic but the polar bear exhibit is really bad. I terms of collection, Cleveland arguably has the best collection of bears.
What kind of predator/prey exhibits do they have? I was trying to work out from the map on the zoo website and from photos but couldn't figure out exactly. Interesting to hear the debate about rocks, it was the rocks at Milwaukee that prompted me to start this thread, they certainly do look cartoony and whilst I generally dislike non-naturalistic enclosures there's something appealing to me about Milwaukee's rock work...
The Predator/Prey exhibits are sort of a panorama design that Hagenbeck used. At Milwaukee, the "prey" (usually hoofstock or pachyderms) were kept in a yard. Above and behind this hoofstock yard across a moat was a predator (felid or bear at Milwaukee) enclosure. Thus a visitor could see the predator "surveying" over the prey species.
I don't know if this is still the case, but at one time the "South American Panorama" featured jaguars behind a moat if front of various prey species (tapirs, llamas etc.). It is the only exhibit I've ever seen that kept these athletic (and dangerous) cats in a moated exhibit.
@ okapikpr - The upper yard above the South America exhibit was too small to house a large cat like a jaguar - although its possible. I only remember Crested Porcupine above the SA exhibit, Marabou Storks in the moat and Rhea and Anteater in the exhibit, pudu might have been in there also. I dont recall the last time Columbus had a jaguar, then again I wasnt as involved at the zoo when Herbivore/Carnivore existed because I was ten.
What makes Milwaukee's predator/prey exhibits outstanding is that they do it for FOUR different continents! 1. Africa: Lions or hyenas, behind zebras, ostriches, and antelope; Also cheetahs behind impala, gazelles, ground hornbills, and vultures. 2. South America: Tapirs and alpacas, behind jaguars. 3. Asia: Amur tigers and Asian black bears, behind Bactian camels. 4. North America: Polar bears, behind sea lions and harbor seals.
