Join our zoo community

Brookfield Zoo The Current State of Brookfield Zoo

Discussion in 'United States' started by pachyderm pro, 6 Mar 2018.

  1. pachyderm pro

    pachyderm pro Well-Known Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    23 Aug 2016
    Posts:
    3,365
    Location:
    Urbana-Champaign, Illinois
    Above are just a few comments recently made about the Brookfield zoo, and now I feel it's something I want to address. When a zoo starts to take a negative direction, it gets noticed on here pretty fast. San Diego, London, Edinburgh, Melbourne and others have received similar criticism by many zoochatters, but now I feel my local zoo is starting to head down a route that I'm not likening, and it hurts me that much more.

    Brookfield zoo was once on top of the zoo world with it's state of the art exhibits and massive collection. The place was a zoological hot spot ever since it opened in 1934. The zoo was going very strong until about 2006/2007. This is when I feel the zoo began to go downhill and lose its charm. What makes it even worse is that the zoo was at such a high point. The master plan was just released and with a price tag of $125 million, and the wolf woods habitat, the zoos strongest area and one of the best of its kind, just opened. There was a very bright future for the park, but some where down the line they seemed to have lost site of the positive direction they were heading. So with all of this said, I want to separate my talking points to make a stronger more cohesive argument to my stance.

    Dropping the Master Plan:
    The master plan fell apart very fast. I understand that not everything will come out as intended and things will be added/cut through the process, but not a single thing in the master plan was built. It could be argued that Great Bear Wilderness (Then called Great Wild North) was on the plan and built, but the exhibit was significantly cut back, halving the bear habitats, cutting dall sheep and other species. The exhibit came out good, but a mere shadow of what it could have been. Not to mention, the zoo seems to have since completely discarded this plan, as the new children's zoo is completely different then what's listed.To give them credit where it's due, they did renovate the dolphinarium in 2010 (As promised in the plan), but it wasn't anything major and there are dozens of areas that never got built and merely disappeared without a trace (Elephant Trails, Renovated Tropic World, Gorilla Rescue, Siberian Escape, Australia Station, Renovated Feathers and Scales, Renovated Pinniped Point, New North Entrance Plaza, Skytram).

    Disappointing New Exhibits:
    Despite the early 2000s designed master plan, only two new exhibit complexes have been built since. Great Bear Wilderness and Wild Encounters. GBW is the zoos most pricey project with a tag of $27 Million and is a good exhibit, but did not live up to it's true potential. As mentioned earlier, the bear yard size decreased dramatically and multiple species were dropped. The bear exhibits are essentially glorified grottos with the traditional moats and rock walls. They are nice grassy spaces for the bears, the rotation policy is nice, and the underwater viewing is marvelous. However, all these were to be featured in the original plan as well. Not to mention the bald eagle exhibit came out as weak and a little tiny. The bison exhibit I will say, is probably the best new exhibit in the area as its at least an acre in size and features a massive crossing bridge. However, even it is flawed with it's strange location for a barn and overall lack of grass since the opening. The exhibit is still quite nice, but its heavily flawed and the previous wolf woods is much better for the animals and visitors.

    Then there is Wild Encounters, a $6 million Childrens zoo that opened in 2015. I understand that as a Children's zoo, I understand that it won't be as grand as GBW or other complexes, but I still think it could have came out better. First off, having an additional price for entry is really unnecessary. I still think if your traveling for the zoo it's certainly worth it to get in, but they really couldn't find a better source of revenue? The exhibits it self was and is really simple. Goat feeding yard is exactly what you expect (Though admittedly better with a pen where goats can always go to when they don't want to be touched, and brushes available to the public for grooming). The parakeet aviary was designed strangely (Look at the gallery to see some other opinions) and I feel is slightly overcrowded. It apparently is one of the largest of its kind but seemed a little lackluster. The wallaby walkthrough is honestly the highlight of the area. It's large, grassy, aesthetically pleasing, not to much to say about it though. Then there is the three non contact exhibits, red pandas, reindeer and lamas and alpacas. The hoofstock have solid yards with gravel and a few trees, but the red panda exhibit is really weird. The food dispensing tree was a good idea in theory, but my oh my it is hideous. The exhibit it self is also on the small side.

    So two solid exhibits, both of which are highly flawed. The neighboring Lincoln Park zoos new exhibits are much more thoughtfully designed.

    Empty Exhibits:
    This is a major issue that really makes the zoo look worn out. The abandon bear grottos and Baboon Island are hideous and stick out like a sour thumb. They are just massive globs of ugly that each cost a few million to knock down, which is why they still stand. They are stained rock messes that seemingly just sit there with no plans for the future and no historic listings even. Not to mention there are also empty buildings that scatter the grounds. The former aardvark building and reptile house remain empty also with no plans for the future. Plus, there are many empty yards in already existing exhibits. The pachyderm building has one rhino yard that never gets used along with at least 2 empty yards on the other side of the building. These old exhibits make the park seem sloppy and empty. There are plenty of things that could fill these spaces as well. Before any new exhibit areas are built, the zoo needs to focus on leveling these areas and replacing them with new animal attractions.

    Loss of many Species:
    While Brookfield has done some great work recently bringing in smaller lesser known species, many larger animals are gone. Elephants, hippos, walrus, Congo buffalo, warthogs and many others have left the collection. Admittedly, some for good reason, but why not at least make an attempt to bring some of these species back? It also bothers me that the zoo seems to be making a lot of filler exhibits that don't add new species, but rather take away old ones. For example, just a few weeks ago the warthogs and waterbuck were sent out. Their yard is fairly large in size, why not do a small renovation that adds a small water space and some logs and bring back sitatunga - a species crucial to the zoos history with over 500 births - along with maybe a small stork species? But no, instead the yard will not have a renovation but will simply hold some extra addax, yawn. This also happened in Habitat Africa! the Forest as when the buffalo left, instead of bringing in a rare forest creature like bongo or a primate, another yellow-backed duiker which already has an exhibit in the same area. Not all these filler exhibits are bad though, expanding the rhino exhibit into the former elephant yard is smart, because it's right next to the current yard and won't require much of a renovation. Plus it's more space for breeding and I can't envision any other species taking over that space.

    Run Down Areas and Pathways:
    Much of the zoo (Specifically pretty much every hoofstock yard in the place) looks worn down and tired. The hoofstock yards all have an effective but unsightly wooden fence and chain link surrounding the yards. Gerenuk, zebra, dik-dik, addax, camels and other all contain visible chain-link fencing that looks old and stained. There are also many pathways that are not paved and are merely dirt. This also ties into to the whole Empty Exhibit fiasco. Tropic World has probably taken the most damage as everything looks stained and fake, its just a really unpretty situation.

    Well those are just my thoughts. Now what should the zoo do to get out of this funk? Well their going to need some money, but if I were running the show, I would spend the next year or to cleaning up some of the less attractive areas like the hooftsock yards. Then I would prepare a massive new undertaking for the zoo, a complete revamp of Tropic World. First add new outdoor exhibits for gorillas on the site of the old baboon island and reptile house, then maybe an Asian area with orangs and gibbons on the other side of the building. Then when visitors have the chance to see the apes outside, begin work on brand new exhibits in the main building. Add reptile and amphibian exhibits along the wall. Redesign the ape indoor exhibits. Add a true jungle essence to the building. There would need to be money, but it could certainly be done.

    Well, thoughts?
     
  2. The Speeding Carnotaurus

    The Speeding Carnotaurus Well-Known Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    26 Nov 2017
    Posts:
    207
    Location:
    USA
    The fences and empty exhibits are the two worst in my opinion. I don't know too much about zooconomics but how expensive is it to replace chainlink with a simple wooden fence? The worst of the empty exhibits are probably Pachyderm house, Baboon Island, and HAF. I don't really mind Bear Grottos because it is fenced off decently.

    I don't see the point in Wild Encounters as it just acts as a second play zoo rather than a proper exhibit.

    Big Cat Grottos are fine for the moment, just get more trees in a few of them and grass for the sloth bears

    Fragile Kingdoms: Give the fishing cat and clouded leopard at least some leaf litter to play in.

    For Pachyderm House, It seems the pygmy hippos aren't big fans of the large yard. The Tapirs now have a humongous space, so why not get more? At the moment, there are two. Are tapirs particularly costly? Even better, bring in some Malayans along with the Lowlands to take up the space. HAF's empty exhibits should take the least priority as they are not completely empty.

    Tropic World needs a huge redo. The building itself is a great idea. Many simple fixes could improve the building drastically. Natural substrate, a few real plants (no need to replace those big trees), and a few more animals as it feels barren at times. Outdoor ares should be added and the gorilla exhibit needs to be fixed somehow.

    Seven Seas just irks me slightly as the beach theme seems a little cheesy and I would much prefer natural decor.

    Great Bear Wilderness needs a few small animals to add that dynamic to the exhibit.

    Australia needs its decor redone

    Hoofed animals need to be ridded of the chainlink and given a little more relevance

    HAS needs some relevant African animals (Ostrich, warthog, some large antelope, maybe move zebra?)

    This is another thing that personally bothers me, but WHY are there so many fountains?o_O

    This review is way critical, but I just want the zoo to be as great as it once was

    The zoo seems to be going through some serious cuts with no payoff, does anyone know if the attendance has been going down or something? Are they cutting for an expansion? Obviously LPZ is a major rival due to its similar collection and proximity to the city but they shouldn't compete too heavily.

    I'm hoping that bringing Pangolins to the zoo will be a turning point in the rare animals at Brookfield Zoo.
     
    birdsandbats and pachyderm pro like this.
  3. Sheather

    Sheather Well-Known Member 10+ year member

    Joined:
    13 May 2013
    Posts:
    256
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    Great post.

    I don't feel the circumstances are as bad as you portray though. The zoo is I believe still one of the best and I prefer it to Lincoln Park Zoo. I have visited twice this year, and nothing I saw (which was in use) appeared run-down to any noticeable degree. The zoo is clean and the landscaping is beautiful. It has many very excellent indoor exhibits, particularly for its exotic birds - some of the best I have ever seen. Tropic World South America is the best exhibit I have seen for monkeys.

    However, it could definitely be better than it is. The great ape exhibits are now outdated, though not inhumanely so. Tropic World is now old and beginning to show its age simply because it was designed with an earlier method of exhibition in mind, namely all the fake rock and no real plants accessible to the animals, but it has been maintained as best as it could be. The murals still look decent, and they maintain the living vegetation along the walk ways is always healthy and kept up (a few trees always seem sickly, but I believe the birds strip off their leaves.) Tropic World is still an enjoyable exhibit and one of my favorites. To be improved, I think all it requires is to let the apes outside. This could be done with a rotational yard in place of the baboon island. The addition of a greater variety of birds and smaller animals indoors would be nice as well. The biggest issue to me with the complex in the last few years is not that it's a bad exhibit, but it's very sparse. Originally it exhibited a much larger animal population than now, and so now at times it looks very vacant indeed.

    I do agree that the decline of exhibited species, especially hoofstock but also primates and birds (flamingos are gone from the formal pool, parrots are almost all off regular exhibit now except the sad clipped macaw pair in Birds and Reptile's flight room, the budgies and the solitary scarlet-chested parakeet in Australia House), is disappointing and they seem to remove one or two major exhibited species every year as of late - baboons, ibex, dall sheep, aardvark, forest bufallo, red river hog, stingray, waterbuck, ostrich, warthog... I would like to see a larger collection, but this seems to be a problem not just here but all over. Zoos are whittling down what they exhibit, but in turn providing each remaining species more space. So there are positives and negatives with it. But with Brookfield, they are removing many species and then not using the exhibits at all! My biggest complaint is that the zoo does seem empty. There are just not as many animals as there could be, and historically were, and what remains is well cared-for and usually in decent exhibits, but wide-spaced between many areas of nothingness.

    I like the play zoo but it is not perfect. The wallaby exhibit is nice though now I miss the emus. I would like to see a little bit more of the former petting zoo environment returned, but it's nice. The llama and reindeer yards seem a waste to me, not interesting, nobody seems to stop to look at them, and I feel there could have been better choices - I'd like to see the emus here, if they are now too big to trust in a walk through, because they were very tame and affectionate. The red panda exhibit is nice for the species and provides nice opportunities to climb. The goat exhibit, very basic, but it suits goats, and goats are always fun to interact with.

    The parakeet aviary is one of my favorite things in the zoo and I have no negatives about it. It's a good habitat for the species, lots of space, natural light, and they provide bathing pools, chew toys and cuttlebones for them, and is designed to be easily cleaned. A sand floor would look more natural, but would not be sanitary with that many birds. And natural vegetation, as is seen in the other bird aviaries is entirely unfeasible, as parakeets are vegetarian and extremely destructive. And it is always very clean, I don't know how often they wash it, but it always looks pristine. It is not overcrowded, as this species is gregarious - the more the merrier, for budgerigars.

    The wolf exhibit is nice, the bear exhibits are disappointing, but better than the historic ones. I like that they have grass, and the deep swimming pools are nice for them, but they are not large enough in my opinion. However, I would be hard-pressed to find one anywhere in the world which was.

    The hoostock yards are average but it's hard to make a groundbreaking ungulate exhibit. They naturally damage grass, so perfect vegetation will never occur without enormous space. I personally do not mind visible fencing - in my mind, that is what I think of as an old-fashioned zoo, so it is just looks nostalgic, in a way that doesn't hurt the animals well-being as the old-fashioned stone grottos or monkey cages did.

    The best exhibits in the zoo right now as far as both animal welfare and visitor experience are in my opinion all indoors. This zoo has some of the best indoor habitats I've visited. Feathers and Scales (amazing and immersive free-flight habitat for the South American birds), the parakeet aviary, the wallaby walk-through, Wild Coasts, Tropic World (even in its current state it's better than average for all animals but the orangutan and gorilla), and the swamp. The weakest exhibits are the indoor exhibit for the lone male gorilla, which is just a small concrete room, and the worst exhibit in the whole facility, it looks like something from 1950 disguised under some thatched walls and glass windows. Next is the dolphin pool, which is small and very boring (though most are), and the indoor cat exhibits in Fragile Rainforest, which are pretty sad. Then, honestly, would be the new bear grottos, they're not very impressive, but the old ones were worse.

    If I was in charge of the zoo, my priorities would be outdoor great ape enclosures (even just one alternating) and increasing the collection of hoofstock, primates, and birds besides the South American species that currently encompass almost the whole collection (both large indoor aviaries are South American themed.) I would re-purpose baboon island for great apes, ideally it could be taken down but I feel with modification, it could serve to get the apes outside without removing it completely; they'd be on stone, but they'd still have more space. The ground could be replaced with bark chips, a glass fence erected, and new climbing structures mounted. A zoo exhibit does not need to look natural to me, with vegetation, especially since the animals damage it if they can get to it anyway. I would be just as happy to see the apes outside on the island, playing on artificial metal jungle gyms and swings. It would greatly enrich their environment.

    The bears should have more space, but the way the exhibit is built with huge stone walls makes that almost impossible, I think since this is a new exhibit it will be unchanged for a very long time now.
     
  4. d1am0ndback

    d1am0ndback Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    3 Dec 2016
    Posts:
    327
    Location:
    Texas, United States
    A defense I see time and time again here on zoochat for Brookfield is along the lines of "The exhibits aren't great quality but they are ok." I see words repeated such as "decent" "average" and "ok". I see the phrase "It's better than it used to be" used over and over and over again. This is not a sufficient defense! This is exactly what separates Brookfield from, in my opinion, better zoos!

    The biggest problem I have with Brookfield is that they haven't taken the time to really make their older parts high quality. Throughout the zoo paths were unkempt, crumbling, or nonexistent. Remnants of old exhibits haunt much of the zoo, with as mentioned abandoned and empty exhibits taking up space. Even some of the newer or renovated exhibits felt way outdated, such as the dolphin tank, seal exhibits, tropical world, fragile desert, and clouded leopard rainforest.

    In fact, the majority of the zoo has a dated feel to it, the only exception being the wolf exhibit, which from my visit I was shocked to learn was not the most recent addition! This dated feel is very similar to the often and rightly so criticized Hill Country of Texas Wild in Fort Worth. The vast majority of exhibits at Brookfield are to me ok at best, they may be sufficient for the animal but they fail in some way to simulate a natural environment or represent modern zoos to date.

    Another problem with Brookfield I personally had was how unnecessarily spread out the zoo was. Unfortunate visitors like me on hot summer days get bombarded by heat due to a lack of vegetation, all while trekking across beaten down paths for long distances all to see what? A series of subpar bear exhibits? A long chain of average at best hoofstock yards? A mostly abandoned pachyderm building? The effort required to navigate the zoo paired with the crummy paths and aged looking exhibits was enough to discourage me from REALLY wanting to return. Zoos in Texas, particularly Fort Worth, combat the heat problem easily: Planting large trees along the path.

    All this is in sharp contrast of zoos such as Toledo, San Diego, and Columbus which are easier to navigate, well vegetated, condensed, and kept up to high quality in ALL of the zoo with rare examples of outdated or poor exhibitry. Toledo, for example, has a few old or poor exhibits, but even they are better than much of what Brookfield has to show. When you look at these zoos, they all concentrate as much as they can as close as they can together, while keeping it of not just good quality, but great quality. These zoos don't settle for "average", "ok", or "decent". These zoos are constantly in a state of self improvement, rebuilding and staying of high quality before expanding.

    For this, I just personally can't see Brookfield being a World Class Zoo in it's current state. I can't even see it as one of the best zoos in America at this state. Of course this is just my opinion, but it seems to be shared with too many other people to be dismissed.
     
    Grant and pachyderm pro like this.
  5. pachyderm pro

    pachyderm pro Well-Known Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    23 Aug 2016
    Posts:
    3,365
    Location:
    Urbana-Champaign, Illinois
    Thank you for your long and detailed posts.

    @d1am0ndback I wanted to respond to your post because you seemed the most critical and you have been the only outsider so far. Later this year I will be heading to Texas and will be visiting Dallas zoo, Dallas World Aquarium and Fort Worth Zoo, so I am excited to compare them to the trio in my neck of the woods.

    Average is a word that describes Brookfield pretty well. They don't have many bad areas, but besides the wolves and maybe bison or the giraffes, much of the zoo is average exhibits. They're fine in their own right but have potential to be something great, but the zoo isn't using them to their full potential. And I feel that's the problem with the zoos recent direction, they are making an attempt to improve! They aren't even trying in my eyes.

    I'm well aware that Illinois has been in some pretty bad financial shape as of late, but if that's the excuse the zoo will make, I'm going to have to point to the other Chicago zoo, Lincoln Park. Lets get one thing clear, I believe Brookfield is superior to Lincoln Park, pearly on the fact that its about 7 times the size and contains a more diverse list of species. However, I would be kidding myself if I didn't think that Lincoln Park is really giving the place a run for it's money. Since 2015, the zoo opened a brilliant Japanese macaque enclosure, a unique African penguin exhibit, a renovated seal pool, two brand new polar bear yards and a kiddie train. Not to mention a new visitor center next year and a $30 million lion exhibit coming shortly after. And how did Lincoln Park fund all these new attractions? They acted. They launched the "Pride of Chicago Campaign" and have gained $80 million+. That alone could have funded at least 2/3 of Brookfield's master plan. What's stopping Brookfield from starting a fundraiser to improve the place? They need to act or nothing will get done at this aging park.

    I love Brookfield zoo, always have, always will. This place practically raised me and my love of animals of nature. But I can't stand to see the zoo in such a state of mediocracy. I'd be willing to rank Brookfield in the top 25 US zoos, but if they don't act they will lose that rank. They need to tidy up, and a shiny new exhibit would be a great first step.
     
  6. JVM

    JVM Well-Known Member 10+ year member

    Joined:
    1 Nov 2013
    Posts:
    1,484
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    There's clear reasons why Lincoln Park Zoo is winning where Milwaukee and Brookfield are failing.

    Lincoln Park Zoo's location in the heart of the City of Chicago may be its central weakness when it comes to exhibit design, but the convenient location has also allowed it to be a cultural center for the city, especially being close to so many other popular downtown attractions. Being located in the city and also being completely free of admission also allows it to be, for many people, the easiest place in downtown to connect with nature - in some obvious ways, escaping the hustle and bustle of the city, just as a park functions. The free admission however, also means that for so many underprivileged communities in the inner city, this is the only deep connection to nature they'll ever feel.

    Brookfield, on the other hand, has a world-class history but is increasingly disassociated from urban Chicago, nestled away in what can be stereotyped into a wealthy suburb, has rarely exhibited highly charismatic species that weren't featured at the other institution, and charges admission fees on top of parking fees. These are things those of us who value the larger collection and better exhibits will pay for, but not things that interest the casual folks much more. Brookfield is also significantly more modest about its scientific contributions and usually does not make them a selling point. I don't mean any of this as an attack on the zoo, but any good zoochatter might understand that a casual zoogoer cares more about seeing a zebra than a zorilla.

    So, to cut through points - for a wealthy donor looking to make a difference in this area, it unfortunately makes sense that they would see Lincoln Park Zoo as the most appealing option.

    I vaguely recall reading something about Brookfield being tired of going through the same handful of donors asking for money again.
     
    pachyderm pro likes this.
  7. The Speeding Carnotaurus

    The Speeding Carnotaurus Well-Known Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    26 Nov 2017
    Posts:
    207
    Location:
    USA
    Just did a quick google and found that Brookfield Zoo gets 2.3 million visitors whereas Lincoln Park gets about 3 million visitors
     
  8. pachyderm pro

    pachyderm pro Well-Known Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    23 Aug 2016
    Posts:
    3,365
    Location:
    Urbana-Champaign, Illinois
    Yes, Lincoln Park is the third most visited AZA zoo in north America (Beat only by Disney and Busch Gardens). I assume this is because of the free entry and location the heart of the city.
     
  9. snowleopard

    snowleopard Well-Known Member 15+ year member Premium Member

    Joined:
    1 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    7,588
    Location:
    Abbotsford, B.C., Canada
    This thread might interest you:

    America's Most Popular Zoos: Top 41
     
  10. The Speeding Carnotaurus

    The Speeding Carnotaurus Well-Known Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    26 Nov 2017
    Posts:
    207
    Location:
    USA
    Huh, so clearly visitor attendance has little to do with the quality of the zoo as some top notch zoos are lower than Brookfield Zoo.

    Thanks for the link!
     
    JVM likes this.
  11. pachyderm pro

    pachyderm pro Well-Known Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    23 Aug 2016
    Posts:
    3,365
    Location:
    Urbana-Champaign, Illinois
    So today was my first visit to Brookfield zoo since I created this thread. I thought that after visiting and seeing things in person again, I would either feel more positive or negative about the zoos direction. However, I feel a mix of both. The empty exhibits stuck out that much more especially with the zoo having almost no visitors today. It honestly felt a little creepy walking past the old baboon Island in complete silence. I fondly remember eating at the café here and watching all the baboon run around having a grand old time when I was younger. So to see it such an abandon state is really quite disheartening.

    Then I saw many points in my "run down areas" argument. The furthest West hooftsock yards were honestly kind of sad to be at. A trio of zebras were in an incredibly barren paddock with nothing but a few rocks. There was absolutely no one present with at least 100 ft of the exhibit. It was nice to see some active zebras, but it just seems to be in a really dire state at this point. I would have preferred them moving to Habitat Africa over the addax. Right across from the zebras was a huge pile of dirt that just took up a huge area of space for seemingly no reason. They could fit a small cat exhibit or something in there, but no, just a random dirt mountain for no real reason. Not to mention the pathways and roads in that part of the zoo were cracked an uneven in many parts. This is easily the forgotten corner of Brookfield.

    At the same time, my hopes for the future became a little brighter today. I was informed by a Primate keeper that change is coming. Planning for new outdoor exhibits for gorillas, orangutans and gibbons is in full swing. I was thrilled to see that something will finally be done with this aging structure. There is also the addition of several new species around the zoo, including lowland tapirs and Geoffrey's marmosets plus a new exhibit for addax.

    So is Brookfield's state awful? No. I feel it's in somewhat of a state of London zoo. Parts of a once fantastic zoo have become eerie and downright depressing in places, but there are still little gems that make the place great and there is hope for the future.
     
    StoppableSan likes this.
  12. The Speeding Carnotaurus

    The Speeding Carnotaurus Well-Known Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    26 Nov 2017
    Posts:
    207
    Location:
    USA
    With the possibility of a tropic World expansion and renovation things are looking to get better and better.

    I agree the zebra probably should have moved to HAS but judging by the size of their holding area it probably wasn’t large enough because it also houses Dik Dik, Klipspringer, and Gerenuk. Hopefully Zebra can move into the Addax exhibit and that forgotten corner is sectioned off or improved.

    The only glaringly expensive issue left is probably pachyderm house which is definitely getting renovated at some point.
     
  13. pachyderm pro

    pachyderm pro Well-Known Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    23 Aug 2016
    Posts:
    3,365
    Location:
    Urbana-Champaign, Illinois
    At long last, some exciting news. The zoo is currently being considered to be included in the states upcoming capital improvement plan and this is potentially major. Not only are several new exhibits intended to built, there are plans to at last fix many of the smaller issues including addressing many of my complaints above. This is my personal favorite excerpt from the article is this, "This investment from the state will ensure Brookfield Zoo can update aging facilities that have led to leaky roofs and gas lines, electrical failures, flooded paths, potholes and buckled pavement."

    Coalition Calls for Added Funding of Brookfield Zoo in Capital Bill - Suburban Chicagoland
     
  14. Black Footed Beast

    Black Footed Beast Well-Known Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    21 Oct 2018
    Posts:
    315
    Location:
    Illinois
    From my last visit, I feel the highest exhibit in need of a refurb other than Tropic World (Which I did also see some changes coming to the South American Area) is the Pachyderm house which I always feel is the worst part of the zoo
     
    StoppableSan likes this.
  15. Sheather

    Sheather Well-Known Member 10+ year member

    Joined:
    13 May 2013
    Posts:
    256
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    Couldn't help but notice this lovely comment on the article above...

    [​IMG]
     
    ZooNerd1234 and Yi Qi like this.
  16. zoomaniac

    zoomaniac Well-Known Member 10+ year member

    Joined:
    17 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    1,329
    Location:
    Schwerzenbach, ZH, Switze
    Well, probably not the most polite comment, but I think he hits the core and I for myself can understand his anger.
     
    StoppableSan likes this.
  17. jayjds2

    jayjds2 Well-Known Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    10 Nov 2015
    Posts:
    2,742
    Location:
    USA
    Having recently visited Brookfield for the first time, I figured I’d weigh in on this thread.

    Brookfield has the makings of a fantastic zoo. It’s a large zoo near a major metropolitan area, has a long history, a lot of space, and a collection that many zoos would be jealous of.

    So what’s wrong with it?

    In short, nearly everything. Probably the main thing wrong with this zoo is that it keeps animals inside that it really has no business keeping inside. This extends beyond the gorillas and orangutans of Tropic World, but to most of the zoo's exhibits

    A list of buildings and indoor exhibits at the zoo with animals kept exclusively indoors (disregarding the children's zoo, which I did not visit due to its extra cost):

    The Swamp
    Tropic World
    Reptiles and Birds
    Living Coast
    Feathers and Scales
    Habitat Africa! The Forest
    Habitat Africa! The Savanna - Kopje
    Australia House
    The Fragile Desert
    Clouded Leopard Rainforest
    Dolphins

    That's a lot. Building by building, here are my thoughts.

    The Swamp: This is one of the better exhibits on the list. My only fault with the building is the really dark aviary towards the beginning, and dark otter exhibit towards the end, and I felt the rest of the exhibits (mostly herps) were adequate.

    Tropic World: The most controversial exhibit on the list by far. Surprisingly, I actually enjoyed the first few exhibits of the building. They could do with improvement, of course, but they very large South American exhibit (coupled with the smaller monkey monkey/sloth exhibit that reaches over the visitor path) as well as the larger African monkey exhibit, were well done, barring their sterility and barrenness. Both need some love: a heap of mulch on the ground is a good start, and the exhibit has no feel of a jungle or anything tropical whatsoever. But the rest of the building, is just not good. Given a real touch up and completely fresh renovation, this exhibit could be turned around. I know outdoor exhibits for the apes are planned, but this exhibit is a dark mark on the zoo.

    Reptiles and Birds: The better of the zoo's two reptile-and-bird houses, but why does it need two? Could one not be dedicated to one group of animals, and the other the other? The mixed part, in my opinion, detracts from each building, which seem to focus on one or the other already. Reptiles and Birds clearly is better for the reptiles, but in Feathers and Scales the reptiles seem an afterthought. Another gripe: the signage in Reptiles and Birds is the worst I've seen.

    Living Coast: a mediocre aquarium with a theme I didn't realize until the end. A lot of the tanks are on the smaller side, but nothing was bad. But the ending dome exemplifies a point I made earlier: why not outdoors? Bronx has an aviary with a similar theme, and it's one of the best aviaries I've seen. This is not the most egregious example, but still.

    Feathers and Scales: see above.

    Habitat Africa! The Forest: the main exhibit where I agree with animals being indoors. Nocturnal exhibits, species that don't do well, the lot. And indoor exhibits for species usually outdoors.

    Habitat Africa! The Savanna: The exhibit here is the Kopje. Small for the klipspringer, could've been solved by being outdoors, instead of working within the confines of a building.

    Australia House: mostly serving as a nocturnal house, this exhibit is fine and for the wombats was more spacious than I expected. My only complaint would be the aviary for kookaburra.

    The Fragile Desert: although an impressive exhibit, I got a weird vibe from the whole thing and again, most of the species don't really need to be indoors. There were cramped quarters for some species too.

    Clouded Leopard Rain Forest: much the same as the Fragile Desert (appropriate, as they are the same building). An interesting series of exhibits that are mostly adequate, but viewing was poor in many of them and again, nothing really needs to be indoors.

    Dolphins: I didn't really check out this exhibit too much but it seemed to be a pretty standard, too-small exhibit.

    So what does Brookfield need? Some love and some money. As noted in others' posts, a fundraising campaign would do the zoo well. Some parts of the zoo are nice: I liked the wolf exhibit, and the exhibits outside the pachyderm house. But the whole thing needs to reinvent itself to really be considered one of America's top zoos.
     
  18. birdsandbats

    birdsandbats Well-Known Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    17 Sep 2017
    Posts:
    11,359
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    The Klipspringer actually does have an outdoor area, but it is very hidden. I didn't even know it was there until I saw this video by @pachyderm pro:

     
  19. AmbikaFan

    AmbikaFan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    30 Sep 2015
    Posts:
    1,151
    Location:
    Dunellen, NJ, USA
    I've noticed for years that all animals in city zoos come in every night. I've always chalked this up to safety and theft prevention. It sounds like Brookfield has really taken this to the extreme, keeping many species in a "hermetically sealed bubble.". It sounds a bit preposterous, but if someone were to make off with a rare large bird or crocodilian or monkey, they could be held for random or the animal just considered lost. With $1 million/year pandas, perhaps one can't be too careful.
     
  20. The Speeding Carnotaurus

    The Speeding Carnotaurus Well-Known Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    26 Nov 2017
    Posts:
    207
    Location:
    USA
    You also have to keep in mind that Brookfield Zoo was built in 1934 and was designed to exhibit as many animals as possible year round. Considering the harshness of Chicago winters, it makes sense that most animals would have indoor exhibits that were, at the time, comparable to outdoor exhibits. Several of these buildings have already been converted or closed as some animals and their exhibits have been converted. For instance, the Lion house has been converted into Fragile Kingdom. Personally, I think that this was a fairly smart idea at the time to house more species and open new exhibits while not having to demolish old buildings. Several other exhibits have followed this pattern like Tropic World, Dolphins, or the Habitat Africa Buildings. The idea of allowing for year-round animal viewing is sound considering the Chicago climate, however, several of the older buildings have gone out of style. As others have mentioned, a renovation for some of the exhibits while maintaining some of the historic charm would be greatly appreciated.
     
    sooty mangabey likes this.