How Animal Behavior Drives Zoo Design

Some designers begin with a poem.  Others look at the educational message.  Still others envision a place.  I always start with the animal. When I start my design process with the animal, I don't literally mean that I sit down with Google (or even--do you remember this--flipping through books!) spending  hours researching the animal's natural history.  What I mean is that I immediately register what I know about that animal and have that inform all aspects of design.  Of course, I've been doing this for a while and I have quite a bit of animal trivia logged away in my own dusty library of grey matter.

But, really, what is it that informs design?  What information about an animal is truly useful in creating its surroundings?  The subject of animal behavior is a nearly unending panacea of amazing stories, but determining what facts help inform design can be an overwhelming question.

For fun, below is my absolute favorite (and quintessential) animal behavior example.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NtegAOQpSs]

To help you navigate the masses of information available about specific animals, I've condensed the vast subject of animal behavior into six basic categories relevant to zoo designers.

1. Food Acquisition:  Are they carnivores, omnivores, or herbivores?

2. Social Structure:  Do they live in groups, pairs, or singly?

3. Time of Activity: Are they nocturnal, diurnal, or crepuscular (active at dawn and dusk)?

4. Micro-Habitat: Do they live primarily in trees (arboreal), on land (terrestrial), in water (aquatic), or some combination of any or all of the three?

5. Personality: Are they shy, curious, skittish, indifferent, vicious?

6. Reproduction: Does their reproductive strategy require any particular element in their physical environment?

Each of the above will provide insight into the physical surroundings that will best house an animal in captivity.  For example, carnivores tend to exert energy in bursts, spending the rest of the day sleeping.  They also tend to prefer the high vantage points where they can scan the horizon and smell the air.  Knowing this, we'd immediately suggest providing this carnivore with several high points in their exhibit, preferably where they can be in close proximity to the guest as they sleep.  Jungala at Busch Gardens achieves this well with their tiger pop-up--highest point of the exhibit is actually a viewing window!

Another great example is the amazing bower bird.  We could easily create just another generic aviary with a gravel floor or concrete basin.  But understanding their reproductive behavior would allow us to create an environment whereby they are able to create their own habitat.  {Or, more than that, we could re-create one of their creations on the guest side of things in order to illustrate their great ability.}

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPbWJPsBPdA]

Beyond these basics, understanding animal behavior encourages us to strive for ever-more enriching environments.  To design an enrichment device, or simply to provide a habitat that provides the most basic form of enrichment--choice, requires that you understand the natural history of an animal.

Oftentimes designers who do not have a specialization in animals, jump immediately to the guest experience; creating a place or a story for the visitor.  But, we must understand that a good guest experience at a zoological park revolves around the ANIMAL, not the setting we create.  People come to the park to see animals.  And if the animals look unhealthy or unhappy, the most beautiful ancient Mayan ruins won't save the experience.  Look to the animals first.  Be inspired by their lives before creating a story, and you'll see that your final product will be by far the best experience possible for both guests and the animals living there.

Every animal has a story.  Its our job to tell it.

Resources:

"Integrating Animal Behavior and Exhibit Design" by John Seidensticker and James Doherty

"Part Five: Behavior" from Wild Mammals in Captivity

Dolphins, "We've been trying to tell you for yeeeaaarrrsss now..."

Last week, the PGAV Zoo Design Specialty Development Team met to discuss enrichment.  As prep for this discussion, we read a few short articles, including this one from Jon Coe.  In it, he asserts that the purpose of enrichment is to provide animals with Competence, Choice and Collaboration. Competence, according to Coe, is the ability to perform natural behaviors at a level that which, if when returned to the wild, the animal would be able to sustain itself.

Choice is the basic fundamental of enrichment, in my eyes.  Just like us, animals in captivity are happier when  able to assert some level of control over their lives.  Providing animals with choices, like micro-climate or socio-behavioral options, as well as more advanced choices, like problem solving, will enhance their lives incalculably.

And finally, we arrive at Collaboration.  This concept was something I hadn't really considered until reading Coe's article, but the idea is fairly straight-forward.  Some enrichment allows a relationship between keeper and animal that would not otherwise occur; the keeper and animal work together, or the animal relies on the trainer in order to achieve something.  Training as enrichment is the obvious example here.

I mention all of this because of a video clip one of the SDT members shared with us last week.  Beyond being absolutely mind-blowing (but also, not really!), it truly supported the idea of Collaborative enrichment AND Choice.  Fast forward to 7:45.

Enjoy!

http://www-tc.pbs.org/video/media/swf/PBSPlayer.swf

Watch the full episode. See more NOVA scienceNOW.

Teaching the Next Generation Zoo Designers

People are always floored when they learn what I do for a living.  I don't blame them.  It's not like high school guidance counselors are pushing kids to become zoo designers or aquarium architects.  There are no high-profile television shows about zoo designers, no yearly review of the best zoo design schools at the best price.

Ultimately, this lack of awareness about our field brings questions.  And one that is always, guaranteed to come up is 'where did you learn to do this?'  When I describe  my homemade educational program achieved through determination, passion and a plucky ingenuity,  indelibly, my listener almost always appears disappointed with my answer.

So, in an effort to reduce the looks of disappointment that my fellow zoo designers must endure, I've introduced a new educational, career development program within PGAV.  This program is called the "Specialty Development Group (SDT)."

At PGAV, we have many specialists: ride designers, green designers, interpretive & storyline developers, resort designers, among others.  And most of these specialists learned their trade through their own plucky ingenuity and years of experience.  But, we have many young people at PGAV as well.  People who have a passion for destinations like theme parks, aquariums and zoos, but who may not have had the chance to pursue a specialty in school due to strict program requirements.

In an effort to fully develop these young designers, we've decided to actively teach them, rather than hope they pick up the nuances of these specialties through on the job training.  The Zoo Design SDT which I lead is the pilot program.  We have a small group of three trainees, myself as leader, and a VP, who has over 20 years of experience in the animal exhibitry field.

We meet once a month for about an hour.  In this time, we discuss any news that we've found interesting over the last month, including project news or world zoo / aquarium happenings.  We usually have one person give a quick site visit presentation (they are required to visit 3 zoos or aquariums over the yearlong course), then delve into the monthly discussion or lecture.

The monthly topics are pre-determined via syllabus and have been chosen and arranged to allow a logical flow from general zoo design philosophy into specifics, like LSS design and enrichment.  This portion of the program is very much like a class, with required readings, in-meeting activities, discussions, formal lectures and guest speakers.

Beyond these meetings, we go on field trips together, and we create a monthly Animal of the Month info sheet to be shared with the entire PGAV office.  These sheets cover everything from the basics (animal size, conservation status, behavior, social structure) to husbandry requirements and recommendations to the world's best exhibits.

The participants are also required to write two papers during the year.  The first, a simple white paper, is open to any topic of interest to the participant, limited only to the subject of zoo or aquarium design.  The second, and final project, is a paper addressing the future of zoo design--a topic of great interest to everyone in zoo design.

Of particular note, the SDT is not supposed to function as a class.  Everyone attending the meetings must partake in the activities and homework.  So, as leader, not only do I create the lesson plan and lectures, but I also do research for the Animal of the Month info sheets, write papers, and present on site visits.  In this way, not only do the newbies learn, but the experienced zoo designers continue to learn as well.

Personally, I've found the SDT has renewed my passion and required me to not site idly by, as is so easy to do as a professional.  This type of professional development requires me to evaluate day to day work, to think more deeply about philosophy and ethics and about the long-term implications of everything we do as designers.

Even more, I'm so proud of our participants who, despite a very taxing workload, are able to attend meetings regularly, excitedly share experiences, and think critically about the topics we discuss.

I'm very proud to be leading the charge to help educate our future zoo design leaders and hope other professionals at zoo design firms  take advantage of our experiences with this issue.

If you are interested in our program description or syllabus, please email me directly.  I'm glad to share!

More Evidence of the Economy's Effect on Zoos

From Albuquerque, NM:

[vodpod id=ExternalVideo.780136&w=425&h=350&fv=%26skin%3DMP1ExternalAll-MFL.swf%26embed%3Dtrue%26flv%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww%252Ekrqe%252Ecom%252Ffeeds%252FoutboundFeed%253FobfType%253DVIDEO%255FPLAYER%255FSMIL%255FFEED%2526componentId%253D19756198%26img%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fmedia2%252Ekrqe%252Ecom%252F%252Fphoto%252F2009%252F02%252F04%252FZoo%255Fresidents%255Fignore%255Ftoub4871cf0%252D8a04%252D42fb%252Db2dc%252Db3a065d2f1d10001%255F20090204201201%255F640%255F480%252EJPG%26story%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww%252Ekrqe%252Ecom%252Fdpp%252Fnews%252Fenvironment%252Fenvironment%255Fkrqe%255Falbuquerque%255Fzoo%255Fresidents%255Fignore%255Ftough%255Ftimes%255F200902042038%26]

From Reuters:

"Zoos Lack Funds to Inspire Obama's Future Scientists"

From Wildlife Conservation Society, New York:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHGuofPUnLo]

Small and Sad: Dubai Zoo's Relocation on Hold Again

Amidst the worldwide economic crisis, Dubai's exponential construction and growth has come to a screeching halt.  Countless numbers of projects have been put on hold, until costcutting measures can be instated, or until the lending market (on which Dubai solely relies for its development capital) thaws.

Among these projects is the desperately bad, 5 acre  Dubai Zoo.  Built in the 1960s in the area referred to now as "Old Dubai", the Zoo has a long history of re-designs, master plans, and promises unkept, but this was to be the one that worked. 

The city has been building to its master plan, progressing to the goal of a vast metropolitan area comparable to the world's greats.  Pockets of developments can be seen across the desert; a strange world of clusters of towering skyscrapers dotting a sea of sand, connected by the widest highway you'll ever see.  These pockets are the early developments of the metro's "cities", similar to NYC's burroughs.  Among the cities, Sports City, Industrial City, Waterfront City, and Dubailand. 

Dubailand was to be the new home for the Dubai Zoo.  Dubailand, currently under construction and halted, was to be an entertainment haven, offering a variety of theme parks, malls, and, of course, the new Zoo. 

Details on the new zoo vary widely, but it appears to be approximately 200 acres and will include the zoo, a night safari, resort style accommodations, and education facilities. 

However, it remains to be seen if this relocation will actually occur, or will this just be another in a long line of unkept promises.

Read all about it here.

Historic Renovation to House Monkeys at KC Zoo

Kansas City Zoo has been workly lately to give itself  a face-lift.  The Zoo, considered by locals to be the "red-headed step kid" to the world-famous St. Louis Zoo (a mere 3 hours' drive away), has seen less and less support in recent decades.  To counter this, the Zoo has set about new construction and renovations projects throughout the facilty. 

On the heels of the recently re-opened front entry plaza, including streamlined ticketing, parking, and otters as soon as you walk in, the Zoo is currently working on a renovation of its historic 1909 building.  This building, which started its life as the sole animal habitat for the Zoo, has been through several iterations, most recently as an education building. 

Now, however, construction is reclaiming its primary use, and inside the building a rainforest exhibit is being created.  Tropical plants are being flown in from Florida to make as realistic a home as possible for the monkey species, anteaters, tropical birds, and capybara which will call this place home.

The relatively small budget of $5.1 million will allow for nearly 8000 square feet of exhibit space and 5000 square feet of support.  The highlight of the exhibit is a glass enclosed bridge through the trees, where guests should be able to view monkeys playing in the branches, up close.

This exhibit is due to open in May, coinciding with the Zoo's Centennial celebration.  Other upcoming plans include new homes for polar bears and penguins.

Little Rock Zoo Loses Elephant Expansion Option

Little Rock Zoo, a measly 33 acres and bounded by urban land, recently lost its most viable option for expansion when the city decided to donate an empty stadium and its lot, not to the zoo as expected, but to the hospital.

Click HERE for video coverage

Little Rock Zoo is one of the few zoos in the country keeping elephants in their collections.  The land was to be used by the Zoo as an expansion to their current exhibit, in an effort to meet AZA requirements for keeping elephants. 

The requirements state that institutions holding elephants must keep at least three females in a group, and are recommending institutions have the ability to be used for breeding.  This means the Zoo would have to increase its size for at least one additional animal, as they currently have two females, and, if following the breeding route, would have to add space for at least one male.  All of this would also include increasing the safety and security of the current exhibit to bring it up to standards for housing bull elephants.  The Zoo estimated, rather loosely, that this project would cost between $10 and 20 million. 

Now that the stadium land option is gone, the Zoo intends to hear additional options for expansion, which includes crossing the highway passing along its southern border.  The future of the Little Rock Zoo remains to be seen, however, as pressure from the state capitol is pushing to move the zoo outside of the city proper, and the mayor is considering cutting the budget by $2 million. 

Here is a very good article about the history of the zoo, and its potential future.

Bristol Zoo's New Eco-Zoo

Its been touted as the "Eden Project" of wildlife. 

However, if you've been to the Eden Project, you'll know this project seems to fall short.  Very short, in my opinion.  

The Eden Project was, and is, as innovative in approach, as it was in design, made all that more impressive by the fact that botanical gardens and arboretia tend to be, well, on the more dull side.  The Eden Project, built in a reclaimed clay mine, brought hip to gardens; it connects the reality of being green to the flashy, trendy movement.  It creates a place to enjoy nature as an art, and art in nature, sometimes quite literally.  It's also beautiful, fun, exciting, and a gorgeous piece of architecture and landscape architecture.

Bristol Zoo's "Eco-Zoo", which was conceived over 40 years ago and since shelved, claims to become "the first conservation-led animal visitor attraction of its kind in the UK."  The $140 million Park is planned at 136 acres, and aims to be open by 2012, a lofty goal considering it hasn't yet been approved.  The Park estimates attendance at 400,000 annually.  

Touting itself as the "next generation of zoological attractions", I'm especially curious at what it aims to do differently.  The single article I could find about it outlines a few key points:

1.  "Bristol's "eco zoo" could connect the inherent interest value of captive animals with the conservation methods needed to save their wild cousins."

2. "The whole idea of captivity will be reduced to a minimum....The often controversially cramped spaces of the Victorian era's most famous zoos are gone – replaced with open land, moats and ditches."

3. "...most importantly, the four themed areas of the park...have all been chosen to reflect specific areas of the world where conservation is desperately needed to save critically endangered species. "

 So far, this sounds very similar to most zoos creating new exhibits across the U.S. and world.  Victorian era design died in the Victorian era, and as illustrated in a previous post, the idea of landscape immersion has been around since the 1970s.  Creating themed areas based on conservation needs is what is done with virtually every new exhibit out there.  What of all of the recent and upcoming Arctic exhibits?  Bronx Zoo's Madagascar!? I'm duly unimpressed thus far...

The Eco-Zoo's British Woodland Exhibit

But then there's this:

"Food for the animals will be organic, while 80 per cent of the building material will be locally sourced and sustainable. "

And this:

"Every aspect of the park's design incorporates sustainability, from the buildings and the engineering infrastructure to the landscape."

Now that's new.  Seriously, folks.  Zoos tout themselves as conservation leaders, but are some of the most un-green institutions out there.  Tremendous amounts of water and electricity are wasted daily on washout of stalls and sustaining water life support systems in tanks and pools, amongst other things.  

Buildings themselves are most often behind the scenes and often suffer from the smallest budget.  For this reason, environmentally friendly alternative building practices rarely are integrated.   Recently, however, some zoos have been making an effort with their "non-animal" buildings, such as the LEED silver certified Nutrition Center at St. Louis Zoo.  

Speaking of the infamous LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Accreditation, no standards exist for buildings housing animals.  So, zoos and aquariums looking to do right by the environment through LEED (and gain a little good press and grant money, too), are oftentimes without means.   In the non-profit sector (as in many others), if you can't gain revenue or attendance increases from something, it isn't done.  And there goes the green leadership...

However, if this project can put their money where their mouth is (almost literally!), they may be onto something special.  If not for innovation in zoological exhibit design, then definitely for innovation in zoological construction and green design. 

I'll be keeping my eyes peeled for more news about this potentially exciting project.

Berlin Zoo's Super Star Needs Bigger Habitat

Berlin Zoo's megastar polar bear, Knut (the zoo's equivalent of a studio produced boy band), turned two  on Friday, December 5.  However, the celebration was a quiet affair. 

News that the bear needs a larger enclosure as he reaches maturity has the bear's biggest fans all atwitter.  Due to the omnipresent credit crunch, the Zoo's intention to renovate the bear's home have all but disappeared.  Instead, the Zoo is looking for potential new homes at European zoos far and wide.

I'm impressed to hear the Zoo is willing to give up its 27% increase in attendance in exchange for "doing the right thing"--for the bear itself (to have a healthier and happier life), and for the species as a whole (to be given a chance to breed). 

Read the whole story here.  There's a nice little video along with the article that I can't seem to get into the post.  Check it out.

Jenny Stays...the Final Word

I found this very good blog / article about the final decision, including the RFP for the proposed new exhibit.  Enjoy!

New York Times Covers Jenny the Elephant's Plight

Jenny in the NY Times

Check it out here.

Admittedly, the article seems a bit slanted on the animal rights side, but still a good story. It truly is amazing how this topic strikes the heart of the nation.

Erie Zoo's New Tiger Exhibit

The AP story about Erie Zoo's shy tiger is showing up in most of the nation's local papers and is plastered all over the internet...just try googling Erie Zoo and tiger!  The brief article tells us the tiger, a male named Nikki, who is a recent addition to the zoo, is taking his sweet time to explore the exhibit.  Two months, so far, and he's only poked his head out.  The article does not go into detail about the exhibit.

After some searching, I've found some additional information related to zoo design.  The $500,000 exhibit renovation included adding a yard (essentially doubling the space for the tigers), adding grass versus the traditional rockwork underfoot, and upgrading the visitor experience to include glass viewing for nose-to-nose interaction, mesh training panels, and shade to encourage lingering (and in Erie, I suspect, to protect from snow).  Here's a video on the new exhibit.

Nikki came from the Brookfield Zoo, whose tiger exhibit leaves much to be desired.  The Brookfield exhibit is a remnant of the historic bear pits, and is mostly rockwork.  The Zoo has upgraded as much as possible by adding some natural substrate and encouraging vegetative growth, but the exhibit is highly dated.  Visitors can view 180 degrees along the moated pathway.  Nikki's hesitation to explore might be exacerbated by the extreme difference in habitats, not to mention his change of city and additional new neighbors.  Or, he could, as the AP puts it, just be shy. 

If anyone has more data on the new Erie renovation, please pass it along.  I'm curious especially about size and barriers.

MI Zoo's Reaction to San Fran's Tiger

This article is definitely a little late in the game, but its an interesting read in relation to how zoos nationwide are affected by local tragedies. 

Essentially, the attack in San Francisco has caused zoos to re-evaluate the safety of their own enclosures, and, in some instances, add additional safeguards to new and existing exhibits.  John Ball Zoo opened the Lions of Lake Manyara exhibit this summer, after having carefully considered the events in San Francisco. 

The zoo community is very close-knitted.  Issues that affect one zoo, also have effects elsewhere.  Keep this in mind when designing for multiple zoos.  We can always learn from each other.

American Tigers Pave Way for Baghdad Zoo

Baghdad Zoo has probably never been at the forefront of innovation in animal husbandry and exhibitry, but after enduring continuous destruction from war over the last few years, its been decimated.  The zoo's collection has depleted to just under 800 specimens of mostly birds.  Recently, in an act of good will, the U.S. has endeavored to send the Zoo a pair adolescent tiger siblings from a sanctuary in North Carolina.  The act is controversial for many reasons, but, from our point of view, mostly because of the lack of modern (ethically) designed habitat for the tigers.

 

On the flip side, the move brings a positive light to the zoo, which has already increased the visitor attendance.  An increased attendance will, eventually, lead to capital projects which will hopefully include a new tiger exhibit. 

For the time being, the cubs are provided with all of the basic elements standard in exhibits: natural substrate, a medium sized pool, enrichment devices and shade from the sun.  That's a start.  And, if you consider the environment from which they came, being that sanctuaries rarely spend money on the aesthetic design of an animal habitat, the new home is probably not much different for them. 

Hopefully, the heightened Zoo security will keep the tigers safe from harm.  Safety is the real issue here.  Aesthetics will provide a much more comfortable home for the tigers, giving them more places of reprieve from being on exhibit, as well as providing more complex spaces for play.  However, the main reason we provide aesthetically pleasing exhibits is for the guest.  In this case, the guests, I assume, are happy to just have a functioning zoo at all.

Take a look at a video of the cubs in their new home, here.

Dallas Zoo Changes Plans for Elephant

Last month, I reported on Dallas Zoo's decision to send their last remaining elephant, Jenny, to a wildlife park in Mexico.  It was announced this week that the Dallas city council has stepped in, reacting to the pressures of animal activists, and has requested the Zoo to find an alternate home for Jenny.  No plans have been reported, but it is safe to assume that the Zoo will consider the Tennessee Sanctuary suggested by the activists.  The Elephant Sanctuary boasts 2700+ acres at its disposal, providing 300+ acres for African elephants, and 2400+ acres for Asians.  Additionally, the Sanctuary has one 9000 sf African elephant barn, one 17,000 sf Asian elephant barn, plus separate quarantine facilities. 

Rotation Exhibits: How To Guide

The idea of rotating animals through several exhibits as a means of enrichment and variability is a relatively new one.  The popularity of the idea is widespread, despite the requirements of large spaces, intensive staff involvement, and complex (or flexible) holding facilities.  Generally, we've been incorporating some sort of rotation capability in all of our exhibits for the past several years.  If the staff is willing, the advantage is great:  providing several smaller exhibits in which to rotate through the animals during the day provides active animals, which in turn, provides engaged guests. 

The upcoming Louisville Zoo Glacier Run exhibit takes full advantage of this type of exhibitry.  Despite the main exhibit area being on the small size, the bears here will have several play areas away from the main exhibit, thereby increasing the overall territory of the animals.  The downside to this is casual visitors may not understand the complexity of the bears' lifestyle, and may judge the exhibit as inadequate. 

However, understanding how to incorporate this important concept will enhance most zoo exhibitry, and many times, is a creative solution to a tricky problem.  Read more about rotation from da man, Jon Coe, here.

Alternative Zoo Design Revolution?

For those following the conversation yesterday about the next big step in zoo design, I'm posting the article by Coe and Mendez that outlines his theory of the "Unzoo." Let me know what you think!

The Next Zoo Design Revolution?

Landscape immersion, which is a type of design intended to "immerse" the visitor in the same natural habitat as the animal, effectively began with the Woodland Park Zoo's gorilla exhibit.  Created by zoo design godfathers Grant Jones and Jon Coe as a collaboration with Woodland Park then-director David Hancocks and biologist Dennis Paulson, they coined the term landscape immersion, and thus began the philosophical shift from a homocentric view of zoos to a biocentric view.  We now spend massive amounts of resources re-creating "natural" places and cultural phenomena, in an effort to connect people to the earth; to inspire respect of natural places.  Back in 1978, this style of design was fresh, new, innovative, revolutionary; nearly thirty years later, the style has become so a part of zoo culture that any exhibit not designed in this manner is questioned for its validity and chances of success.  However, should landscape immersion continue to be our design standard?  How do we push to the next step beyond landscape immersion?

True and successful landscape immersion requires designers to experience a habitat first-hand before beginning to design a re-creation of it.  They research the essence of the habitat, the ecosystem structure within the habitat, and the natural ebbs and flows the habitat would undergo.  The animal is an integral part of the ecosystem, not just the centerpiece of a painted scene.  The visitor is whisked away to another world, drastically different from the asphalt sidewalks and ice cream shops of the zoo midway.  Today's landscape immersion is, too often, not this.  Today's landscape immersion usually means planting the visitor space with the same plants as seen in the animal exhibit, and using props from a culture as shade structures, means to hide back-of-house buildings, and educational interpretives.  Moreover, today's visitor to a modern zoo no longer has their breath taken away by a landscape immersion exhibit; they simply expect to be immersed in an animal's habitat. The magic of landscape immersion is gone.  Along with that, the opportunity to educate and inspire is waning, because, as Coe has said himself, "Only the emotional side, in the end, has the power to generate changes in behavior" (Powell, 1997).  If the "oh my" moment is gone, does education stand a chance?  

Landscape immersion does not generate longer experiences, as commonly believed.  This can easily be shown true by simply observing visitor behavior at exhibits.  After studying visitor length-of-stay time at viewing areas, little to no difference can be observed between the old, concrete moated tiger exhibit at Philadelphia Zoo and the landscape and cultural immersion tiger exhibit at Disney's Animal Kingdom.  The average maximum stay time of 90 seconds has been consistently shown through observations at other exhibits as well, including the gorilla exhibit and bongo exhibit at Cincinnati Zoo, and the polar bear exhibits at Detroit Zoo and Louisville Zoo.  Despite renovations and millions of dollars spent on landscape, rockwork, and interpretives, the most we can expect of our visitors is a minute and a half.  Is this time shorter now than at immersion exhibits in the early 1980's?  What can we do now to increase this time?  Or, what can we do to get the most impact for our minute and a half?

One of the biggest complaints against landscape immersion is the difficulty, generally, in spotting and clearly seeing the animals.  Therefore, proximity to animals should be a chief concern in exhibit design.  Visitors want to experience something special.   They want to do something no one else gets to do; something they have never done.  Most importantly, in doing these things, visitors feel connected to the animals.  Creating the connection should be of the utmost concern for designers and zoos. 

Another component lacking in modern zoo design (not just landscape immersion specifically) is the integration of behavioral enrichment into the basic design process.  Too often behavioral enrichment is an aspect of the exhibit that is not addressed by zoos to the architectural designer, even if the behavioral enrichment program is being developed concurrently.  Most zoos still see the enrichment program as a separate aspect of the new exhibit to be implemented by the keepers after the exhibit is opened.  Most architectural designers are ignorant to the importance of behavioral enrichment as a means not only to increase the health and welfare of the animal, but also in creating an active exhibit with active animals, which translates into longer stay times.  Thus, enrichment generally is not addressed as an aspect of design, and ultimately we see beautiful new landscape immersion exhibits with large orange boomer balls and blue plastic barrels.  Can these be considered cultural props?  Recently, behavioral enrichment has been integrated beautifully into primate exhibits, but what about ungulates and big cats? 

Connection creation and enrichment are the two most important issues that we must address in order to move beyond landscape immersion. The complexity of stepping beyond landscape immersion may seem a daunting task.  However, the essence of the next successful step will be in creating "novelty"-something new or unexpected.  Novelty to visitors, both within every new exhibit they encounter, as well as within the same exhibit upon repeat visits.  We must create novelty to animals, both in new enrichment devices and methods, as well as within their own habitats.  We need to make adaptable habitats that can be changed on a daily, weekly, monthly or seasonal basis.  We need to make experiences for the visitor and animal that they can share, becoming intuitively novel, since every person or animal will react slightly different in new situations.  Thus, our new exhibits will stay new, increasing visitor repeat attendance, and discouraging cookie cutter exhibit design. 

But how do we begin to do this?  In addressing the issues of connection creation and incorporation of enrichment into design, the first and most critical step will be to develop stronger relationships between architectural designers and zoo staff.  Designers need to be educated by the keepers on animals' behaviors, both in the wild and in captivity, as well as on methods of behavioral enrichment.  Designers should spend a day or two working side-by-side with the keepers as "keepers for a day." This will help designers to not only understand the needs of the keepers in their daily work routines, but also to help create bonds between designers and the animals whose homes they are creating.  The zoo staff has a passion for animals that most architectural designers are lacking.  This passion needs to be shared and experienced by the designers. 

In "novelty-based" design, zoos and designers need to work together to develop new methods of enrichment and test them before integrating them into design.  Design schedules and budgets should include a phase for enrichment development and testing, wherein the designers work with the keepers to create prototypes to be tested with the animals.  If the zoo is designing exhibits for animals they currently do not have in collection, partnerships should be developed to test enrichment devices at other zoos with those animals.  These findings should be recorded scientifically and published for the entire zoo community to share.  If the zoo uses training as enrichment, the designers need to experience training sessions and clearly understand the need and utility of the training.  Keepers and designers should be discussing how all of these methods can be displayed on exhibit.

Specific enrichment goals need to be addressed at design kick-off meetings, making numerical goals for incorporating enrichment devices and creating new methods.    Enrichment must be seen as a philosophical aspect of design, incorporated into the master planning process, because if animals are active and happy, visitors will become more engaged.  Enrichment must be planned not only for the opening day of the exhibit, but for the future of the exhibit as well.  Animals become acclimated to enrichment devices and stop using them.  We must plan for this, developing phasing plans for enrichment, and flexibility of the exhibit design for novelty of the environment.  Most importantly, after the construction is complete, studies must be conducted to determine the successes and failures of enrichment techniques.  These results should be shared with the zoo community, and especially, the designers. 

Secondly, the "novelty-based" design process must become "connection-centered," not visitor-centered or animal-centered.  Connections are created both by proximity and by experience.   Landscape immersion began to explore this idea by attempting to have visitors and animals in the same habitat, thus experiencing the same things.  However, in landscape immersion, we don't experience the same things at all.  As visitors, we have a choice to move into a different area, to eat ice cream or hot dogs, to sit and watch the gorillas or to go see the penguins.  We don't swim in the same water as the polar bears and we don't get to swing around on ropes like orangutans.  What if we started creating these shared experiences?  Can we make environments for animals and visitors that are truly similar?  What if the actions of a visitor change the environment for the animal?  What if the actions of an animal change the environment for the visitor?  No longer would we be bound by the idea that the habitat must look like the animals' wild habitat.  We could make it look like any thing, any place, any time, as long as the visitor and animal are engaged and ultimately, connected.  

We have already seen a movement starting to push beyond landscape immersion, and, in some instances, toward "novelty-based" design.  Several new exhibits, including the St. Louis Zoo ‘Penguin & Puffin Coast' exhibit and the San Francisco Zoo's ‘Lipman Family Lemur Forest', utilize natural habitat but also incorporate distinctly non-immersive elements, and are exceedingly successful.  These exhibits focus on getting the visitor close to the animals (connection-centered) and being surrounded by active animals (behavioral understanding and enrichment incorporation).  This experience, which will be different and therefore novel upon each visit, makes these exhibits extremely emotional and therefore memorable to visitors, and begins to create a connection.  These exhibits are a step in the right direction toward "novelty-based" design.  Using this type of design, we can move to the next incremental step in the evolution of landscape immersion, keeping the "oh my!" moment, and continuing to educate and inspire our zoo visitors.

A Quick Lesson in Zoo Design History

Over time, zoos' physical forms have been a direct reflection of our society's values and understanding of science. It is important to understand where we've been in order to move forward, and its is also important for visitors to the older zoos to understand why certain buildings and exhibits are the way they are (as we know, zoos usually do not have an abundance of money, and struggle to keep their physical state up with the trends). Zoos, in the form we know them now, have been in existence since the mid-18th century. Prior to this, private collections existed throughout the world as far back, it is believed, to Mesopotamian times. Romans kept animals, of course, for sport, but would display the animals in a zoo-like manner, prior to their being released to their deaths in the Coliseum. But we'll focus on the mid-19th century forward.

We can easily divide the eras in zoo design into three general categories:

1. Zoos as Jails (mid 19th to late 19th century)

2. Zoos as Art Galleries OR the Modernist Movement (early to mid 20th century)

3. Zoos as Conservation and Education Facilities

Zoos as Jails

This was the Age of Enlightenment and the Romantic Age, where beauty was of the upmost value and our understanding of the natural world was blossoming into a science.  Hard science in this time was all about classification and comparison.  Linneaus and Darwin were the scientific stars.  The earliest official zoos began during this period, with the London Zoo in 1828 and Philadelphia Zoo in 1874.  The early zoos were based on the mission of science for science's sake, but also were places for socializing.

As such, a balance between beauty and classification was struck.  The zoos of this time were laid out by taxonomic families, and the term "House" came into being, as in Cat House, Bird House, etc.  The architectural style was over the top beautiful.  Highly ornate bird cages and buildings themed in the most dramatic fashion were everywhere.  But, cages were small, animals were short lived, and people enjoyed the animals as beautiful objects rather than living beings.

Zoos as Art Galleries OR the Modernist Movement

During this time, the world was experiencing several wars.  The study of nature became much less important, but Romanticism still existed.  Science progressed into problem solving, and medical advances were abundant.  Vaccinations became prevalent and the idea of killing germs to increase health and extend life expectancy came into being.

During this time, zoos held a similar value as art galleries, and the exhibits became mini-paintings and sculptures.  In the Romantic movement, a proper landscape exists with a foreground, mid-ground, and background.  Carl Hagenbeck became the first-ever to apply this theory to zoo design resulting in the birth of the barless (or 'moated') exhibit.  His motivation was more about creating a living Romantic landscape, like the famous painters of his time, than to recreate nature for moral sensitivities.  This style started to  catch on in zoos, but generally became popular much later.

At the same time, the modernist movement was catching fire.  Modernism requires that form follow function.  This belief along with the advances in medicine and desire for sterilization, created zoo exhibits that were easily hosed down and cleaned regularly.  This meant concrete everywhere.  Additionally, the Modernist Art scene infiltrated zoo design, and the hard, simple lines for which modernist style is famous, reigned supreme.  The result was exhibits that look more like sculpture than habitat.

With both the Romanticism and Modernist styles abounding in this time period, zoo design was more about creating an art gallery than a responsible home for animals.  Interestingly, due to the increased attention to health, captive animals' life expectancies did increase almost to today's levels.  The only thing missing was attention to the animals' mental health.

Zoos as Conservation and Education Facilities

Since the mid-20th century, our society has developed a strong sense of environmental awareness and human rights ethics, which eventually gave way to animal rights as well.  In 1950, Hediger wrote "Wild Animals in Captivity" which opened people's eyes to the idea of husbandry practices and exhibit design based on an animal's natural history.  What a novel approach!  With the advances in healthcare (which overlaps into this era), animals in captivity began to be treated for physical as well as mental health.

During the 1970s, a group of folks at the Woodland Park Zoo (including two young designers from Jones and Jones Architects) decided to resurrect Hagenbeck's ideas from long ago--and to advance them.

Instead of creating a living painting, they wanted to put the visitor into the habitat...Immerse them in the painting.  And, instead of creating a visually exciting statement only, they decided to re-create the habitat in the which the animal was naturally seen.  All of these things were incorporated into the gorilla exhibit at Woodland Park Zoo, and, thus, landscape immersion was born.

Since then, the idea of landscape immersion has caught on like wildfire, and today, is the standard of responsible zoo design.  Understanding the past, I have to wonder where we are headed next...A topic for future discussion.

Add to Facebook

Add to Digg

Add to Del.icio.us

Add to Stumbleupon

Add to Reddit

Add to Blinklist

Add to Ma.gnolia

Add to Technorati

Add to Furl

Add to Newsvine

The Future of Science Based Institutions

The question of co-evolution amongst zoos, aquaria, and science museums has been a lingering muse for decades now.  Back in 1986, Jon Coe cleverly equated the historical relationships to convergent evolution, and through his paper, which was more history lesson than predictor of the future, compared their similarities through time.  Ultimately, he suggests "an awareness of others and ourselves, together with a willingness to communicate, can lead us further into an exciting co-evolution of zoo, aquariums and natural history museums." I'd like to take it a step further.

I often wonder why we separate all of our science institutions, dividing the natural world into equal, but succinct pieces: land animal (zoos), plant (botanical gardens), aquatic animal (aquaria), and the sciences (natural history museums and science centers).  Of course, overlap occurs; zoos have fish and aquatic mammals, botanical gardens have butterfly houses, science museums have dioramas of the natural history of living creatures.  Additionally, the method of teaching the general sciences varies greatly from conservative natural history museum approaches to more "fun" and interactive science centers.

As Coe mentioned, the teaming up of these institutions would be a powerful force.  However, if, going beyond what Coe suggested, we created one institution that presented all of these disciplines, we'd be teaching holistically, presenting a unified view of the natural world that so many children and adults rarely get the chance to see.

The world has changed dramatically since the inception of these learning institutions.  Most zoos and natural history museums began at the turn of the 19^th century, when for the good majority of people, we still lived in a mostly untouched rurality.  These people grew up with nature, lived in nature, or could easily visit nature, and learning about the natural world was most easily understood by the breaking down of components.

Today, however, most people live in cities or suburbs.  Any nature we experience regularly is man-made or man-influenced, and certainly does not contain a wide variety of species or habitats.  Learning about nature now becomes easier through an immersive, holistic approach.  Add in society's constant bombardment with story driven entertainment and eye-candy, and learning almost requires the same treatment.  Or so I postulate.

The Museum of Life and Science in Durham, North Carolina has already come to the same conclusion.  Currently, they house live animals, present botanical displays, a natural wetland trail, and incorporate hands-on science center activities throughout.  This is not enough for them, however.

We envision a one-of-a-kind place, a science park, offering extraordinary experiences indoors, outdoors, and virtual where children and adults learn through the pursuit of their own interests and curiosity. We will be recognized as the leader in public engagement with science in the Triangle region and as a model for science museums across the nation.

Will this be the future of science institutions?  A one-stop shop, so to speak, for education and entertainment about the natural world?  All things are intertwined; nature is a web of life.  Why not present it that way?

Read the follow-up to this post: 'MULTI-DISCIPLINARY INTEGRATION...A MOUTHFUL OF FUN.'