Cincinnati Zoo - Gorilla Exhibit

When I was there, I didn't think it was such a bad exhibit. I actually remember it as seeming bigger than it looks in the photo, not smaller than it looks as someone else has said. But maybe I don't remember it that well, since I spent most of my time with the cats.

True, the photo doesn't really give a good idea of the size of the exhibit...to many plants!

Cinzoo man, snowleopard has right to post his own opinion whether you agree with it or not.

@Cinzoo man, snowleopard is a zoo critic and has strong opinions about what he thinks are good exhibits. I have had a similar reaction as you to his reaction to my original hometown zoo, the Sacramento Zoo. You can see our exchanges about the chimp exhibit in the Sacramento Zoo gallery.

It is important to realize that he, and many other people on this site, have been to hundreds of zoos and seen lots of exhibits. They are not likely meaning to attack your zoo, and if they are then hopefully they mean it constructively. Most people who post here want to see zoos improved and criticisms of particular exhibits are because they want to make them better, not make fun of them. snowleopard can be a little acerbic sometimes, and he knows this and has moderated his tone somewhat over time.

I see from you profile that you have been to a few zoos, and that is great. With your interests I expect that you will probably be like snowleopard and others on this site and visit dozens or hundreds of zoos. After you've seen several gorilla exhibits perhaps you will see why people make these comments about Cincy's exhibit. It is likely a good exhibit, but like many zoos, perhaps it needs to be upgraded when time and money allow.

Instead of getting upset when people make negative comments, perhaps you can suggest what is good specifically about the exhibit in question and what you think needs to be improved about it? That would be quite interesting to know coming from someone who knows the exhibits in question. Just a thought.

@Cinzooman: I see that you have been to 7 zoos, which is great and noteworthy for someone of your age, but when you get older I'm sure that you'll realize that this gorilla exhibit (built in the late 1970's) is past its due date. In this thread I typed the word "disappointing" twice (both in 2008) and if you think that is too harsh then you have obviously not read many of my zoo reviews as I've used many words that are far more acerbic.

I did a quick count and I believe that I've seen exactly 45 zoos with gorillas, with 24 of the exhibits being impressive and 16 disappointing in American zoos, plus 5 additional zoos with gorillas not within the United States (Taronga, Melbourne, Zurich, Toronto, Calgary). Quite honestly Cincinnati Zoo's gorilla exhibit is far from terrible and in fact I'd put it in the middle of the pack of the 45 different gorilla habitats that I've been privileged enough to see. It is not nearly as incredible as my two favourites (Bronx and Disney's Animal Kingdom) but a hell of a lot better than all-indoor enclosures in Buffalo and Brookfield.

Overall Cincinnati Zoo has some terrific sections such as Jungle Trails and the Insect House, and in 2008 there were several poor ones such as the Nocturnal House, Cat House, Reptile House and ancient bear grottoes. From what I've heard the new Night Hunters revamp is for the most part awful, and while Cincinnati maintains an awesome collection the exhibits are most definitely a hit-and-miss affair. If there is one thing that I've learned via my 98 zoo reviews that I've posted on this site, it is that there are loads of people who are in favour of their hometown zoo and find it difficult to ever accept outside criticism. My most legendary review was when I gave Toronto Zoo a subpar grade and I never heard the end of it from fellow Canadians!

1978, and read my review/tour of the zoo to see what I think of it and know every animal in every exhibit (except the bird house even though I do know all of them). Thanks for understanding even though this doesn't need a renovation and it isn't a grotto.

If it isn't a grotto than what is it? It looks very similar to a grotto to me. I'm no exhibit architect but although this cage has plants and a small waterfall that doesn't mean it isn't a grotto. Any other animal grotto has plants and a waterfall. This one is just a little more lush.

Why wouldn't it need a renovation? There's defiantly things to improve, isn't there? This exhibit is old and when an exhibit gets old it needs to be renovated. Preferably at this moment but since it is still fine for the gorillas, just not great, it will have to wait until all the other projects at the zoo are finished. I'm sure the gorillas are happy and healthy and from a animal care stand point that is all that matters but since this exhibit is open to the public it needs a little more than just ok.

Actually it would be great to see the gorillas moved down to Jungle Trails where the Orangutans are - and maybe connect Jungle Trails to the new African savanna exhibits. Then renovation the current gorilla exhibit for orangutans and tie it into an Asia area around the entrance (elephants, wildlife canyon, etc.).

Are there any plans to build an additional gorilla exhibit to this one and/or enlarge this one at some point? It sounds like the Cincy gorilla troop is expanding in numbers.

Out of curiosity does anyone know how large this yard is relative to other zoos? Are there any threads here that compare gorilla exhibit sizes across zoos?

This discussion does raise (yet again) the question of what is a good exhibit and from whose point of view are we judging? Certainly the Cincinnati exhibit has had remarkable breeding success for a very long time. The zoo has managed a large number of gorillas by rotating them in and out of the exhibit in modest sized groups and by using the exhibit's protected location to let animals out in cooler weather than some zoos would.

The exhibit does not have the visual/emotional impact for the visitor that the Bronx Zoo's or Woodland Park's or Bush Garden's or Atlanta's exhibits have, of course, but it cost a fraction of what those cost (except perhaps WPZ's) and the Cincinnati Zoo is much smaller in acreage that all of those (except Atlanta). It also gets a great deal COLDER in Cincinnati's long winter!

So when one states that this exhibit is good or bad, perhaps they ought to qualify the statement with particulars. Better than some other huge zoo 1000 miles away? Better for the animals? Better than it could be given what this zoo has to work with? Better than any other gorilla exhibit costing below $10million? What are we talking about?