Zoos on Paper: An Investigation of Zoo Maps

Oh, forgot that part. I think it got considerably worse. The earlier one is more filled up and more professional looking. The new one looks, well, very blank.

 

In my opinion it still is bad, but I think it got a little better, It isn't as flat, has icons, and an ok color scheme. However, that's just my opinion

 

I know, I just find it quite funny he didn't even notice there's a PLATYPUS in that zoo. If that zoo was real, I bet it's going to be a huge hit, not only from the basic ABC species, but also rare species featured in that zoo.

 

Although San Diego was discussed at the beginning of the thread, I happen to have an old map that is wildly different from their current one, and I thought it might be of some interest.

For direct comparison, a map I have from late 2017, pretty nearly identical to their current one.


One printed in October 2003, and I got it summer 2004.


On this older map, the number of unlabeled exhibits is cringeworthy! Only a small number of species are clearly indicated. While the current map is busier and more complex, I certainly appreciate all the excellent images showing what is where.

Any other takes on the two?

 

Yes, there is not that much clear labelling, but I honestly find it charming. Is that weird?

 

Not at all. The overall layout on the older one is nice, and I think it's a decent map. I prefer seeing cleared labeling/figures myself, but that's personal preference.

 

I'm not a fan of the block silhouettes, but otherwise I like the older map - the paths and exhibits are more clearly distinguished. The artwork on the new map looks great, but it can also be very distracting.

 

Here are different maps of the Beauval zooparc:

1996 :



Quite old but it makes sense.

2017 :


I find it quite well done. In addition we have all the large species on the side and the dimensions are respected.

2020 : https://zooparc.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pdf/plan_de_visite_2020.pdf


When you visit the park you have in addition to this not very detailed plan another plan of each zone with the species.
So you have a map that shows you where the 3 zones are: historic alleys, African plains and Pacific forests. And another plan that details these areas.

 

It could be an Australian zoo, where Platypuses are relatively common, as are koalas.

 

I've found a contender for worst map. I'm going to link it so you know I didn't save the file wrong or something. At least I know the shape of it? https://ci.alamogordo.nm.us/DocumentCenter/View/1627/Alameda-Park-Zoo-Map-PDF

 

Yeah, definitely a strong contender for the worst!

 

So here is Ueno zoo's map.
The upper one is 2016, while the lower one is 2019. Contrasting design between them. I think the newer one looks better but is up to debate.

Another thing is 2016's map is A4 while 2019's map is A3. What I want to say is does size matter in map design? What are your thoughts?

 

Hmm. Visually, I prefer the newer one. But! Just glancing at them, before expanding the images, I was able to quickly ID more animals on the older one without trying to look for them, if that makes sense? They're easy on the second one, too, but only after I looked at it.

Size wise, I think it depends on how readable to map is, along with how many large maps are set up to reference. If it's heavily text-based, or something like San Diego's, I want a large copy! If there isn't much to it, like Bronx or DC for example, a smaller one to orient myself is okay.

 

Although this thread is about maps, I feel there is something to be said here about layout. Some zoos, like National Zoo, St. Louis Zoo, and any zoo in a big loop, would be a lot easier to make a map that is very easy to understand than something filled with confusing paths.

 

National Zoo isn't a loop. A lot of it has to do with the creation of the zoos. Some started small and kept adding in, creating a bunch of directions, like the Bronx. Others have to deal with natural features they have to work around, and/or limited space that creates the need for so many cross paths. Some could be improved fairly easily, but taking the time to do that takes away money from the animals, updating exhibits, etc.

 

I think San Diego's numerous paths is partly due to their terrain; as anyone who has visited knows, the zoo is quite hilly!

 

I figured that was more of an issue out west than it is here on the other coast! Oregon Zoo was a pain for my flat ground loving legs.Turtle Back Zoo (which is named after the rock formation it's by) has a steep incline in the middle, with exhibits layered and plants or animals that don't mind that sort of land in between (maned wolves, birds). The outer loop, especially at the newer end, has a more gentle slope, but the paths in the middle require some muscles I hadn't used in ages (probably since I went to Oregon!).

 

I agree that National Zop is not a loop. However, its design benefits from the same things as loop zoos. There is one route that can be taken to see almost the entire zoo and it is easy to find your way when there. It would be fairly easy for a first time visitor without a map to go and find their way around.

 

I was wondering what you all thought of this map (the Montpellier zoo in France):

https://parc-loisir.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Plan-Zoo-de-Montpellier.jpg

It is very functional and shows the exhibits well, but I think some improvement can be made upon it. I can't quite put my finger on it though. I think part of the problem is that the tropical house which is right next to the main entrance, is so small in comparison to the rest of the zoo, yet holds many more species.

The reason why I ask is that I want to make a new map for this zoo. It is quite close to my heart, and is one of my 'home zoos' if you like. I have visited easily 20 times, and I like to think I know it quite well, so I thought it would be the zoo best suited for this kind of project given zoos like London, Vincennes and Beauval (all of which I know less well) have better maps and are in better financial situations given this zoo is free apart from the rainforest house. I guess I essentially wanted to give back to the zoo for all the fun I've had on their grounds for free over the last 15 years.

I think the primary problem with making a San Diego-like map is that the zoo is quite sparse and the exhibits are really large. This is a problem in itself because I don't like drawing 'silhouette' or 'functional' maps, I prefer the graphical and animal-centric approach that zoos like SDZ, LAZ, ZSL or Bristol take. I'm also not very good at vegetation.

The zoo has a formidable African ungulate collection: Les animaux du zoo de Montpellier | Zoo de Montpellier but also has large collections of South American animals (the majority of which are housed inside the tropical house but also in a Pantanal kind of area) and will be building a large European complex as well as renovating their African ungulate area. This will see the installation of new and exciting species such as Sand cats, Bat-eared foxes, Bonelli's eagles, a species of lynx, Iberian wolves, Little owls and genets and should be completed in 2021 but this will likely be more like 2022 due to the current crisis. Luckily, the council of the city are funding the zoo so they are not as short of funds as they otherwise would be and they are also paying for the renovations, which will cost 30 million euros, just under half the cost of Africa Rocks for comparison.

Their best exhibits are the exhibit(s) for cheetah, who live in 8 different enclosures, depicting slightly different African biomes. The whole cheetah complex is over 12,000 sqm (130,000 sqft) and the combined size of all the enclosures is 9990 sqm (107500 sqft). They were the first European zoo to breed cheetahs (in 1968) and in 2018, 10 cheetah cubs were born at the zoo. The African ungulate developments are set to consist of 3 massive enclosures, each 15,000 sqm in size, holding between 6 and 8 species each.

What do you think? What should I change about the map, or do you think it is good?

 

Krefeld -1960
Whipsnade -1967