Attractive Indoor Mammal Exhibits

Millions of dollars are spent on huge indoor facilities across the Northern Hemisphere, but just how attractive are they? Specifically, how aesthetically pleasing are indoor mammal exhibits to the public?
On the thread "Mixed Species Exhibits" several people commented that they found the Brookfield Zoo's Tropic World massive indoor facility to look unattractive because of all the concrete and poor rockwork.
Certainly there are a lot of design limitations imposed by indoor facilities like the presence of walls, heating ducts, and support structures.
However, indoor facilities also present the opportunity to grow plants that are not climatically suited to an area.
Despite spending considerable amounts on indoor exhibits a lot of the indoor facilities at modern northern zoos lag considerably behind in attractiveness compared to their outdoor exhibits displaying the same animals. Or at least I find this to be the case.
My challenge to all the zoo fans here is to give examples of public viewed indoor mammal exhibits or indoor complexes featuring a good proportion of mammals, that are aesthetically pleasing to human viewers. Please include a brief description, mammal species exhibited, pictures (can be via links) of the exhibit, presence of plants, and what features make the mammal exhibit agreeable aesthetically to public visitors.
It might also be interesting to examine bad indoor zoological mammal exhibits, especially disappointing ones.

 

All the mammal tanks in my house!

Adelaide Zoo nocturnal house is pretty good

 

@ZooYouthBen: the nocturnal house at the Alice Springs Desert Park is the best in Australia! That place is unheralded and somewhat unknown, but was a delight to visit. Also, Seattle's Woodland Park Zoo has a terrific nocturnal house, with porcupine, tamandua, dourocoulis, tamandua, sloth, armadillo, galago, and many species of bat.

 

Etosha House in Basel is replicating actual landscapes in Namibia, not generic "exotic place". Somehow it stays in memory - round boulders, dusty ground, thorny bushes and gnarled dead trees. Especially panorama with waist-high glass with hyrax, ground squirrel, sociable weaver colony and commensal lovebirds.

Good are also some exhibits in Grzimek House in Frankfurt, although this place clearly aged. There is rainforest with agouti and tamarins, so you enter and see lower half, and when you leave the house (some 30 exhibits later) you see upper half. Some night panoramas of savanna and rainforest, and boulders in hyrax exhibit are cool.

Many other night-houses and primate halls were mentioned in earlier threads.

 

Although I have not seen it in person the Masoala Rainforest looks breathtaking to me ! I wish there was an exhibit just like that close to Calgary!

Here's a link with plenty of relevant information that I'm sure most of you have checked out.
Exhibit

 

The Twilight Zone at Chester is pretty good for its inhabitants.

For those who don't know, it is Chester's nocturnal house containing Turkish Spiny Mice, Madagascan Hissing Cockroaches, Blind Cavefish, Livingston's Fruitbat, Rodrigues Fruit Bat and Seba's short-tailed bat.

Visitors enter a lobby area where there are tanks for the cockroaches and mice. They also become accustomed to the dark in this area. Visitors then enter the main cave where they are hundreds of free-flying bats living amongst an indoor forest. There is also a pool containing many nocturnal fish. Guests then pass through a viewing tunnel (there is also a tank for cavefish in here) before leaving the cave.

Inside the cave there is a lot on visitor interpretation such as bat holograms and face molds and outside there is examples of bat boxes. In the entrance and exit halls there is information on a wide variety of exotic and british bat species.

In my opinion, it could do with a few more species in though (something like aye-aye in a seperate exhibt or sloths in the main cave)

 

I've been to the Zurich Zoo (one of only two zoos in Europe that I've visited) and the Masoala Rainforest pavilion is a brilliant exhibit. Some people knock it because of the difficulty in spotting animals, but overall it is a very worthy addition to a zoo that has several modern and exciting exhibits. Plus the conservation dollars that are raised are a tremendous boost for Madagascar.

 

I really need to see it in person, but the white-cheeked gibbon enclosure at the Minnesota Zoo looks pretty good to me. It still has too much concrete, but at least the trees look more realistic and there are great backgrounds of vegetation. I really like how the artificial trees have been designed to permit rapid speed brachiations while maintaining visibility of the animals. This feature seems to make this exhibit a very popular one amongst visitors. The ground underneath the fake trees is bare except for three plants and composed of mostly concrete. This doesn't impact much on the aesthetics from a visitors point of view because most of the time they are going to be looking across the elevated boardwalk to the gibbons in the trees and not down at them on the ground.

Check out this ill Youtube video


I also have some picture links
Gibbon at the Minnesota Zoo on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
white gibbon on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
White-cheeked Gibbon (Nomascus leucogenys) on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
White-Cheeked Gibbons on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Gibbon Time Blues on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

I might be visiting both the Minnesota and Brookfield Zoo this summer as part of a massive, 7-8 week road trip. If I do then I'll take lots of photos of Tropic World so that everyone can make their own opinion of the exhibit.

@Taccachantrieri: gibbons (like all primates) are usuallly one of the highlights of any collection. Thanks for the video!

 

Tropic World at Brookfield (often referred to as "Tragic World" by US zoo people) and Minnesota's tropical building (which at least contains real living plants) are both part of the "first generation" of giant indoor mixed species tropical exhibits, built in the 1970s/early 80s. While they both have interesting mixes of animals (Minn. includes sun bear, komodos,small clawed otters, a very large reef aquarium, gibbons, tapir, binturong, chevrotain, clouded leopard plus newer Madagascar and South American zones with tamarins, lemurs etc.), they suffer from a common flaw shared by almost every big tropical house developed since then. Which is that you are always aware that you are in a building, due to the looming roof structures overhead. No "suspension of disbelief" when you see metal superstructure, glass panes and air handling equipment--it always feels like you are in a big greenhouse.
Even the best of the new examples of this building type--(Masoala, Eden Project, Burger's Bush)--all fall down on this point. By far the most compelling indoor rainforest exhibit, therefore, is actually one of the older ones: the Bronx Zoo's Jungle World. There, visitor sightlines are very carefully controlled by a combination of architectural canopies and "natural" features like tangles of banyan roots so that view of the skylights and ceiling are largely obscured, and views are instead focused into the very deep and lush exhibit spaces.

And the animal mix in Jungle World is quite exciting--initial smaller spaces for Tree Roos, binturongs and mangrove fishes and turtles, Javan Langurs and Small-clawed otters together, a nocturnal gallery (chevies and lorises) that then opens into a very dramatic scene including Silvered leaf langurs, black leopards, tapir, gibbon, flying foxes and huge Asian fish and turtles. Initially part of the exhibit, but now unfortunately gone, were Great Hornbills, gharials and Indian giant squirrels. In addition, this was the first place where lush live tropical vegetation was augmented by very realistic giant buttress tree boles and flexible yet hefty artificial lianas. No one has topped Jungle World yet, for pure drama and theater. It's rare that a 23 year old exhibit can make that sort of claim.

 

I was waiting for someone to mention the Bronx Zoo's Jungle World!

@Red uakari I am a bit surprised that you find that the Masoala Rainforest falters in that you are always aware that you are in a greenhouse. The landscaping seems so well thought out and intricate to me that I'm surprised you wouldn't be able to easily ignore the roof, which is mostly transparent anyways. The plants are so different from the outdoor environment that I would think this decidedly enhances the immersion experience. To my eyes the Masoala Rainforest at the Zurich Zoo appears much more attractive and natural than many outdoor exhibits, even if you can see the roof in some places!

I feel that the problem with most indoor rainforest exhibits, and a lot of outdoor ones too, is that they are overly dramatic, and that makes them seem less naturalistic. Many of these exhibits have too many giant waterfalls, canyons, steep cliffs, bare tall trees that allow you to see their whole extent, colourful plants with huge foliage, distorted artificial trees, etc. The Masoala Rainforest does not seem as dependent on these theatrics.


Why hasn't anyone mentioned the Omaha Zoo's famous Lied Jungle and Desert Dome, yet? I remember reading one member say that the Lied Jungle was not very conducive to staff management, and that there were many hidden barriers, but this thread is about aesthetic appearance from a visitors perspective. Hopefully I will visit this Zoo in the near future when I figure out what other attractions I would like to visit in the vicinity.

It might be interesting to discuss why so many visitors actually really like the Tropic World at the Brookfield Zoo. It wouldn't surprise me if it had a lot to do with those theatrics.

 

I agree Masoala is very impressive and at points "believable." Unfortunately, when I was there the red ruffed lemurs were all perched high up--not in the trees but on the scaffolding of the (very interesting) high-tech moveable cleaning platform at the very roof of the building! I spent a lot of time fascinated by the roof technology (which is brilliant), but that distracted me from the habitat experience below. Also, technically the building fails to deliver on the title of this thread, as aside from the red ruffed lemurs and flying foxes, any other mammals in the exhibit one would have to be damned lucky to see (I think there are also mouse lemurs and perhaps a Hapelemur or two, somewhere in there.....).

The only thing impressive about Tropic World in Chicago is the diversity of the collection and the interesting mixes of animals. Aesthetically it is a total disaster.

Omaha's giant "eco-domes" are a mixed bag--some really nice bits, but lots of animals in tiny enclosures and a surfeit of things like evenly-spaced buttress trees (obviously wraped around building structural supports), and a geodesic dome ceiling that overwhelms the desert landscape below. However, the "Kingdoms of the Night" nocturnal exhibit built in the basement of the Desert Dome is hands down the most amazing nocturnal exhibit I've ever seen. The walk-through cave and swamp areas are fantastic. Here, thoughtful sightline control (and low light levels) do wonders.

I agree the "forced drama" of so many big indoor exhibits bring them down a notch, but so often it is the execution that fails, not the idea itself. Jungle World has huge trees, waterfalls, precipitous ravines and spectacular vegetation, but it is all done convincingly. It really all boils down to good taste, something in short supply in most zoos I've been to around the world. Zurich has it, Woodland Park has it, Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum has it, Monterey Bay and Shedd Aquariums have it, and the Bronx has it in spades. Arnhem, Basle and Rotterdam come pretty close with some of their work. And then there's the rest.....

 

The very best indoor gorilla habitat I've ever seen and personally visited is the one at the Toronto Zoo. They have a nice, big enclosure to roam about and play in, and it looks nice to boot. It was opened in 2000, is a far cry from the original concrete and glass structure.

Not all my photos, but here's an idea of what it looks like:

The Gorilla at the Zoo on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
DSC_1134 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
IMG_1503 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Lowland Gorilla - in Black and White on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Toronto Zoo on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

I will also agree that it can be anoying for the experience when the animals are climbing in the roofstructure or in the pipes etc., but that's up to them.

I would think that the animals being hard to spot should make it a very naturalistic exhibit. How easy is it to find these animals in an actual rainforest? I like the challenge in finding some of the animals myself in huge walkthrough enclosures, instead of having them all presented to me.

 

@Toddy: I agree with you on the idea that it is sometimes more stimulating for the visitors to have to search for the animals. In large dome-like structures, or even heavily overgrown enclosures, it is often very difficult to find any animals at all. Most zoo visitors just walk on by, but to have the time to stand there for a few minutes and search for any sign of movement is part of the joy of visiting an excellent zoo.

 

Burgers Zoo is one of the best places to experience this. I love walking along a thin, densely planted rainforest path in Burgers Bush, where you cant' see any walls, the roof, or even other visitors, and you have to look closely to find the bleeding-heart doves sitting in the branches above you or the green geckoes and tree frogs hiding in the vegetation along the path. Or searching for red cardinals and other small birds between the rocks and thorny bushes in Burgers Desert.

 

Some of you may be very surprised to read some of these quotes I have taken from "The Zoo Book A Guide To Americas Best" by Allen W. Nyhuis (1994. Carousel Press, Albany Ca):

"Tropic World ... one of the best and most acclaimed single exhibits in the entire zoo world. ... Tropical rain forests of three continents are displayed with amazing realism." (Page 118)

"Upon leaving Topic World, many visitors remark that they've just experienced a true adventure" (Page 119)

I have heard similiar comments from other people. Check out the caption underneath the third picture down in this link: The Wilderness Classroom » online learning resourse for students of all ages
Yes, I suppose it does, after a hurricane has defoliated all the trees, and God has laid a giant lid over top of everything.


Some people probably prefer tacky looking exhibits, after all the United States is somewhat famous for the bad taste of some of its citizens. As for Canada, well it's the closest country culturally to the United States, so we are hardly immune from such comments. Often people in Canada, even journalists, comment that in essence we are just a slight variation of America, "AmeriCanada", as coined by some.

 

@Meaghan Edwards I was actually going to talk about the Toronto Zoo's gorilla exhibit, and in preparation I've actually seen a couple of those photos before you posted them.
This exhibit is an great example of what constitutes good taste in an indoor gorilla exhibit. I also agree that it might be the best indoor gorilla exhibit aesthetic wise.

Granted this flaw is not aesthetic, but I wish the Toronto Zoo indoor gorilla exhibit had more climbing structures.

As far as their outdoor exhibit is concerned, just what is up with that? It is actually vastly inferior aesthetic wise to the indoor exhibit.

DSCN3848 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Silverback Gorilla on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Silverback Gorilla on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

Im sure you have already realized this, but that book is about 15 years old. Zoo designed as really changed since then...it would be interesting what Nyhuis says in his new zoo guide due to publish this year.

Back then Tropic World was just that to visitors like us (maybe). But to the average visitor that comes to see the animals, not the exhibit, it is still awesome. They are excited to hear the howler monkeys, they dont care too much own fake everything is. Also many people still remember what old monkey exhibits looked like.

Read Brookfield Zoo's history book, it will tell you that Tropic World wasn't what they had hoped. My boss worked at Brookfield when they built Tropic World. She told me the architect was a poet and not much of a designer of animal enclosures. Dont ask me why they chose that guy, ask George Rabb. Right now we will just have to deal with it because there are other species that still need new exhibits at Brookfield, Apes will just have to get back in the line for a new exhibit.

 

The surprising thing about Nyhuis's comments are that Bronx Zoo's Jungle World and the Lied Jungle were also discussed by him, as well as many other great exhibits like the Woodland Park Zoo's gorilla exhibit.
I guess I feel a little jaded because I expected so much from some of these descriptions and then when I actually saw some of these exhibits via the internet (which does not give you a full picture) I was considerably disappointed.

One of the big problems Zoos can run into when building massive indoor exhibits is that they need to hire a firm with considerable experience constructing edifices. These firms do not always have the same expertise in constructing landscapes as they do in constructing buildings.
The Calgary Zoo heavily utilizes the firm PCL Maxim. If you check out their website you will see what a little proportion of their projects require any knowledge of landscape design. It does not really surprise me then that they look for architectural solutions to problems. They constructed what I deem a very expensive and superfluous structure, the massive glass entranceway at the Calgary Zoo's African Savannah, to increase the immersion of vast open spaces, and heighten drama upon entry. This area does not have any animals and is passed through by visitors in a manner of moments. I'm sure money could have been better put to use expanding animal areas.

Check out this picture to see what I am talking about:
_MG_4847 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!