Isn’t “Africa Rocks” in San Diego and the pavillion at Prague called “Africa from near”? I have that pavillion on my list, because I really like it. I do agree that most exhibits in it aren’t roomy, but it’s an amazing place of discovery (at least it was when I visited, quite a few years ago). And I usually like the snug feel, so now I wonder how the Etosha pavillion is like
A true gem, imo, and a nice addition to your list. What I perhaps find most noteworthy of Etosha (but also Gamgoas, the exotarium and certain other parts of Zoo Basel), is how they reconcile brutalist (or at least unpretentious, concrete-heavy) architecture, with beautiful naturalistic enclosure design. For me, these create an impression much like in an art or history museum, where the exhibits are constituted by small slabs of (seemingly untouched) nature as precious artwork. I had very much hoped (but didn't expect) that Zurich would include something like Etosha in their Lewa project - which ofc they didn't. Judging by the plans published thus far, there are however indications that the new management and director might have more interest to this kind medium-sized of zoo exhibits.
I always thought (actually suspected) that planning permissions here had to preserve the landscape around the nearby Friedrichsfelde palace. Camel paddocks fit landscape of the open meadow, and (very basic) deer paddocks were built because of the association of keeping deer with hunting residences. One curiosity: the moat is very shallow, and I saw once a camel standing up to its knees in water and grazing grass on the visitor side. But it did not make a step and walked out.
One of the most interesting zoo exhibits was for years in this building: a mixed predator-prey exhibit of snakes and mice. The reason it worked well was that the harvest mice are diurnal, fast and climbing, and lived in tall weeds with sleeping holes above ground. Puff adders, while rodent hunters, are extremely slow, nocturnal and had the access to the mice area inconvenienced by sharp straw pieces, and no possibility to stalking the mice invisible or entering their sleeping holes. But visually it was a miracle - a predator and a prey living together in a rather small area. Unfortunately both were replaced by horned vipers and some large spider.
In theory yes, in practice not so much. It is a very large well-structured exhibit. So the mongoose roam in the areas where the crocs do not have access to and only venture into crocodile territory when the crocs aren't too near. The mix seems to work fine, you get slightly shier mongoose than in a normal exhibit, but they did not look stressed to me... Didn't the Africa house change names over the years? It now seems to be called "Africa from up close" indeed . I personally think the Africa house, together with the jungle house and polar bear exhibit, is the weakest part of the zoo. Too many all-indoor small enclosures for me. With a fascinating collection for sure, but collection alone is not a reason to include it in this thread for any exhibit. I think camels are unable to deal with the most shallow of moats. Krefeld and the former exhibit in Arnhem also have hardly any moat to speak of, but it works fine. I would have loved to see that, I did never mind seeing a Cerastes, but that must have been even more interesting.
This calls for @Jana! It was called “Africa from near/up close” when I visited in 2006 and 7. I believe the pavillion was just open at the time. With Talapoin, fennec and honey badger as major attractions in daytime exhibits, mixed with springhaas and galago’s in nighttime exhibits (among many smaller in/vertebrates) I found it a wonderful way to come up close to some of Africa’s more unknown small mammals. Basically being bombarded with the group of animals I like best, all behind glass and (therefore) up close, I left the pavilion with a big smile
Have been doing some googling, Africa Rocks! seems only to have been the name of the outside area, which is indeed rocky.
37. Gondwanaland Zoo Leipzig, Germany Opened: 2011 Size: 16500 square metres Inhabitants: Wide array of African, Asian, S-American and nocturnal species including giant otter, Malayan tapir, owl-faced monkey and eastern quoll. Contrary to Burgers’ Bush and Masoala this is not so much a hall that tries to replicate a living rainforest. But rather a zoo in a rainforest setting, so more of a small replica of the Singapore Zoo in a greenhouse. The building was originally planned in the centre of the zoo to link the three main zoo parts: Africa, Asia and South America, which were originally all part of the historic continent of Gondwana. It was in the end built at the border of the zoo. Since it's opening an impressive amount of plant growth has taken place, but it cannot hide that the building is filled to the brim with a boat ride and animal exhibits, so the real rainforest feeling never really comes. The copious use of mock-rock doesn’t help either. Even though some of the planned species, like Sumatran rhino and clouded leopard, never materialised, it is sometimes quantity above quality, with multiple enclosures being clearly on the small side. But there are some impressive exhibits, like for giant otters and Sunda gharial. This is a zoo within a zoo despite its flaws it is one of the more impressive structures in any European zoo. @twilighter @gulogulogulo @LaughingDove @LaughingDove @gulogulogulo Similar exhibits: The Rimbula greenhouse in Wildlands, Emmen, the Netherlands, is the largest tropical greenhouse in a European zoo for now. But despite its size it manages to feel smaller than the other greenhouses. It sometimes feels as if they visited Gondwanaland and managed to not take all the good things. A boat ride and the indoor elephant enclosure take up far too much space to allow for a real rainforest feeling. Copious cross-viewing and extremely visible “behind the scenes'' cages do not help either. @vogelcommando (shortly after opening, the vegetation is much denser now) @vogelcommando @vogelcommando
There’s no way they actually had seriously intended for this, right? Successfully obtaining the species is already completely unrealistic, but keeping a rhinoceros indoors year-round is just as shocking.
Yes that is the mock rock monstrosity I mean They actually did put some serious effort in. The enclosure is now home to Malayan tapir. The original plans did intend for an outdoor enclosure too, which never materialized.
Given that puff adders do not tend to play football, I'd rather nominate these gentlemen in regard to fastest strikers: 15 Fastest Soccer Players In The World Ranked (2022 Update) | Authority Soccer
On a serious note. The concrete examples here in this thread are from a very functional design style, without any attempt at recreating nature and the concrete has a clear purpose. The concrete fits the objective, in contrast the majority of fake rock work used today is completely unnatural and doesn't do anything to add to the naturalistic look the exhibit is supposed to have. I guess this also does depend on how you define naturalistic. For me naturalistic is that the exhibit is supposed to look like the natural habitat. In the real world rocks are quite scarce in rainforest and grassland habitats... In many cases fake rock work is unconvincingly used to mask concrete walls or indoor housing, it is often done in such non-naturalistic ways that it is a design flaw imo. I particularly dislike concrete trees, like in Prague's Indonesia jungle and the massive rock walls that often dominate modern carnivore exhibits, but are not integrated in the landscape in any meaningful way and just appear out of nowhere. Why one doesn't use regular fencing combined with vegetation is sometimes puzzling me. Nowhere goes is as desperately wrong as in Knoxville's black bear thingy: @Coelacanth18 Good rock work certainly exists. Proper examples are many of the Kopje exhibits in Europe, rock work aiming to recreate riverbanks, as in Basel, desert rock formations as in Burgers' Zoo and some coastal and mountain displays. Pretty sure you are in the wrong thread, let me point you to the right direction: zoo exhibit design manual; bad practice examples.
