The Role of Architectural Design in Promoting the Social Objectives of Zoos

A Study of Zoo Exhibit Design with Reference to Selected Exhibits in Singapore Zoological Gardens

by Michael Graetz

PART 4 CASE STUDIES

4.4 Underwater-viewed Exhibits

Objectives

To examine the differences in responses to four major under-water viewed exhibits in Singapore Zoo and to assess the validity of landscaping and habitat simulation as a determinant of visitor preference for each exhibit. The four exhibits are: Polar Bear, Sealion, Crocodile and Pygmy Hippo. The Crocodile exhibit was included to round out the picture of all examples of one exhibit type in Singapore Zoo and the Polar Bear and Sealion were revisited.

Besides exhibit design, the other major factor in visitor preferences is likely to be a predisposition towards the animal species. It has been mentioned that the Polar bears are the single most popular animal in Singapore Zoo. For various reasons, it is arguable that the crocodiles are the least well-liked. Thus the difficulty lies in overcoming these marked psychological differences between the exhibits that exist even before the factor of their settings are considered.

There are, however, significant variations in these settings. This is a reflection, in part, of their vintage. The Polar Bear is the oldest, being completed in 1987, and the Pygmy Hippo the most recent (1993).

Results

This study compares visitor responses to the four under water view exhibits in Singapore Zoo. Only the data on the crocodile exhibit were gathered specifically for this case study, the other three exhibit being the subject of separate studies. Some additional data was, however, collected on the Sealion and Polar bear to standardise the data used in this comparison. The detailed results for the four exhibits are compared in Table V.

The main conclusions derived from these data are summarised as follows:

Discussion

On balance, these exhibits are among the most naturalistic, if not the most habitat oriented exhibits in Singapore Zoo, with the exception of the Polar Bear display. And yet they are the most artificial and technology intensive. This latter similarity makes them obvious candidates for comparison.

The Polar bears and the crocodiles make a particularly interesting comparison, revealing the effects of cultural or societal factors. The Polar bear is entrenched in the minds of people all over the world as an icon of the animal kingdom. In zoos it is exotic to the great majority of humanity, but it has always been more common in temperate zoos. Thus it is an even greater novelty in Singapore, and this probably accounts for its high intrinsic popularity.

The crocodile is very much maligned in popular local culture, having an anthropomorphic association of rapaciousness, much as the wolf has in Western societies. As an animal, it is intrinsically less appealing for being a reptile and a remorseless man-killer. It is classed along with snakes and most invertebrates as appealing through the fascination of horror.

Rather than conclude that there is nothing to be done when Polar bears can be successfully displayed in a concrete pit, these results which confirm the stereotypes also suggest that animals with poor popular reputations, but never-the-less with stories to tell, can be redeemed by the design of their enclosures. The introduction of under water viewing for Polar bears gave the exhibit a boost even though the species had been displayed for some years and its undoubted popularity had long since settled into a fixed pattern of viewership. The plan to do the same with crocodiles, which had been displayed with an above water view, was based on the assumption that this species would receive the same sort of boost.

This type of exhibit suits aquatic animals which remain submerged most of the time. It gives the opportunity to observe underwater behaviour, which may not have been seen before zoos began such displays. As under water viewing is such an attractive idea, it is tempting to simply install glass viewing panels and do little else with the display. The Polar Bear Exhibit is rather like this, though the reasons have more to do with cost than expediency. With less demanding animals in terms of barriers, the opportunity was taken to not only show them under water, but to give the enclosures a suitable habitat treatment.

Figure 89 Section through Pygmy Hippo riverbank exhibit (drawing: Sherman & Yañez)

Another factor is location within the zoo. Marketing considerations dictate such decisions as putting the most popular animals near the greatest concentration of visitors, which in Singapore Zoo is the intersection of two main road loops and main eating area. The sealion and Polar bear fall within this ambit but the pygmy hippo and crocodile are out on limbs somewhat. This may cut their potential viewers but not apparently in the case of the pygmy hippo. Still, two thirds of all visitors eventually will see all four exhibits. The simple format of these survey which required mostly yes or no answers does not capture statistically to what degree visitors were impressed by the design and landscaping effort. Visitors either spontaneously offered praise, or were apparently indifferent and gave straight forward answers. Most will give positive answers, however. Thus, in interpreting these results, the relative responses are more significant than absolute responses. This is shown by the fact that ten percent of visitors at the crocodile found it the least impressive compared to forty two percent across all exhibits.