@Dan: I'm sorry but it sounds to me that you have simply decided not to like the RSCC. I am not commenting on the other exhibits but this one certainly cannot be described as "horrible". I don't think that this enclosure is suitable for pumas but I could easily see a clouded leopard living here if more climbing structures and a denser vegetation was added.
I'm with the others on this one: I agree it could be bigger, but definitely not "shamefully small". My original criticism of this enclosure some months ago was relating to the Clouded Leopards. Now I have a better idea of its size relative to its occupants I think - like Toddy says - it is an adequate size but could do with more vegetation and climbing structures.
Well guys, we will have to agree to disagree on this one.... PS But if you will bear with me for just another little while, please consider these statistics: The RSCC is only 1,5 acre big, that´s about 6000 sq meters! Yet it contains dozens and dozens of enclosures. In comparison with some Swedish examples of mine, the total size of the zoo is only twice the size of the snow leopard enclosure at Kolmården Zoo. It is half the size of the new bear enclosure that Borås Zoo has just started building. The bear enclosure at RSCC is probably smaller than what I and Swedish forumster Jodea agreed on to be the worst bear enclosure at a Swedish Zoo - the enclosure for mother bear with cubs at Skanes Animal Park. Sorry, but I really dislike what I see in these pictures from RSCC.
Bigger than i thought. And really not that bad. Much stuff in the enclosure and if there is enough enrichment it's totaly ok
Indeed, it's not best suited for two pumas but for a single clouded leopard I think it's fine, although there seems to be less plant in here than there were on my last visit which is odd.
Hey Ash and Animal, I have used this argument before but I will try it out again: Would you consider letting a dog into this enclosure, leave it there and expect it to live a good life? Whatever the "enrichment"... If not - why expect a puma or other big predator to be satisfied?
Well at least the 3 palm trees aren't dead as in previous photos of this "exhibit." But this whole idea of a "timeshare" exhibit is sad--the zoo doesn't have enough room and/or cash to build two separate exhibits for two species, so they are forced to rotate in and out of this small, poorly furnished cage?
Reduakari, what happened to your praise of Denver's new Asian Tropics, a prominent feature of which is the rotation of three species through - rather small - enclosures. I see little difference between the rotation in this exhibit, which you call "sad", and that at Denver which you described as "very good" and "admirable for its overall ambition" just yesterday. PS. I would have thought most people would have realised that if the exhibit's palm trees are now alive they were never "dead" .
As I have said from the beginning, I don't really consider this exhibit suitable for two pumas (although do think that a lot of the criticism of it is very unfair). However, for a Clouded Leopard it is about as large as the Aspinall cages - which are widely praised for their quality of welfare - and so with more plantings and climbing apparatus, which they do seem to be doing, I see no problem with this exhibit. Just because a humanised and terrestrial canid would not feel comfortable in this, does not mean that a highly arboreal felid would not either.
I'm not saying that the RSCC is perfect, it's not. In fact, many of the exhibits are woefully inadequate for their occupants. Yet there is a good "feel" to the place, and it's clear that the staff are trying to make things better - that will take time. I truly believe that when they finally increase the acreage and acquire more funds, this zoo will really be one to watch.
