Toronto Toronto Zoo Ongoing Projects | 13.5m | 2s | Toronto Zoo | Zeidler

MetroMan said:
^ Yes, I like the direction that the Zoo is taking but I'd like to see it move more quickly away from artificial exhibit-like enclosures and more towards naturalized habitats where humans are visitors with minimal disruption of those habitats. Flyover Maglevs and treetop viewing areas are a couple of ways to do it. We have a lot of space in Rouge Park, there's no reason animals should be contained to such a small area. Monetize the ease of travel between habitats and better views rather than access to a centralized and closed off zoo.
Click to expand...

Sounds promising. I would imagine a certain percentage of those who argue against animals in cages won't be mollified simply because the cages are larger or more natural to them. A challenge to creating naturalized habitats for some groups of animals is that some natural habitats are difficult to re-create. How well can you create a Savannah or a tropical rainforest in a temperate forest ? Many species will still require pavilions for no other reasons than to contain or protect them. Another problem that might be easy to solve through cleaver design is that most if not all of the various species and groups need a particular behind-the-scenes infrastructure behind them. I've never been quite thrilled with captive animals simply for entertaining or to let folks who can afford it can wake up to a gibbon out their window but I do realize ya goota pay the bills. Toronto, and many others, have a definite educational, scientific sustainability role that is of paramount importance.
 
^ This is why I think that access to educational components of the zoo and general access to the animals from public trails should be free. Upsell the convenience connecting all the habitats, better views, tours, renting spaces for events, hotel stays and other entertainment as a way of generating revenue.

I'm one of those people who argue against animals in cages and I'd be satisfied with a zoo that moves away from animals in exhibits inside of human areas and instead towards animal habitats with minimally obtrusive human viewing areas. I don't like seeing animals in captivity but I'm reasonable. I know that zoos can exist to provide education to people living in cities, promoting conservation and aiding in research.

What cannot continue is keeping animals that in the wild roam long distances but in zoos are kept in small enclosures where all they do is sleep covered in faeces and flies. That's simply cruel. With the amount of space available in the Rouge Valley, this doesn't have to be the case. We can have zebras and giraffes roaming together for long distances in a corridor followed closely by a Maglev line to improve or even guarantee the odds of seeing them from the train. We live in an era with powerful information systems. We don't have to rely on fixed plaques telling us about what we're looking at. It's possible to track animals and automatically adapt the narration and screens in the Maglev train: "If you look to your left, you see the Masai Giraffe...".

We could have large areas where lions and other wildcats roam but are lured to viewing areas where they're fed. Other animals that in the wild make permanent homes, such as primates, could be kept in a natural treed area with fenced-in tree top viewing areas. We're in small spaces in their home; they're not in enclosures in human spaces. That's the big difference.

Overall, I know that the Toronto Zoo is one of the better ones but they still have work to do if they're going to survive in a generation where kids and teens growing up oppose traditional zoos.
 
Last edited:
MetroMan said:
^ Yes, I like the direction that the Zoo is taking but I'd like to see it move more quickly away from artificial exhibit-like enclosures and more towards naturalized habitats where humans are visitors with minimal disruption of those habitats. Flyover Maglevs and treetop viewing areas are a couple of ways to do it. We have a lot of space in Rouge Park, there's no reason animals should be contained to such a small area. Monetize the ease of travel between habitats and better views rather than access to a centralized and closed off zoo.
Click to expand...
We can have something like Jurassic Park (but without dinosaurs of course). However, the City of Toronto would still own the zoo (though things such as concessions and janitorial services would be contracted out).
 
MetroMan said:
^ This is why I think that access to educational components of the zoo and general access to the animals from public trails should be free. Upsell the convenience connecting all the habitats, better views, tours, renting spaces for events, hotel stays and other entertainment as a way of generating revenue.

I'm one of those people who argue against animals in cages and I'd be satisfied with a zoo that moves away from animals in exhibits inside of human areas and instead towards animal habitats with minimally obtrusive human viewing areas. I don't like seeing animals in captivity but I'm reasonable. I know that zoos can exist to provide education to people living in cities, promoting conservation and aiding in research.

What cannot continue is keeping animals that in the wild roam long distances but in zoos are kept in small enclosures where all they do is sleep covered in faeces and flies. That's simply cruel. With the amount of space available in the Rouge Valley, this doesn't have to be the case. We can have zebras and giraffes roaming together for long distances in a corridor followed closely by a Maglev line to improve or even guarantee the odds of seeing them from the train. We live in an era with powerful information systems. We don't have to rely on fixed plaques telling us about what we're looking at. It's possible to track animals and automatically adapt the narration and screens in the Maglev train: "If you look to your left, you see the Masai Giraffe...".

We could have large areas where lions and other wildcats roam but are lured to viewing areas where they're fed. Other animals that in the wild make permanent homes, such as primates, could be kept in a natural treed area with fenced-in tree top viewing areas. We're in small spaces in their home; they're not in enclosures in human spaces. That's the big difference.

Overall, I know that the Toronto Zoo is one of the better ones but they still have work to do if they're going to survive in a generation where kids and teens growing up oppose traditional zoos.
Click to expand...

That's interesting- it's sort of along the lines of what BIG proposes here- where it's the people who are enclosed in a pod-like vehicle, and where the animals roam (more) freely.

https://www.archdaily.com/532248/big-unveils-design-for-zootopia-in-denmark
 
Johnny Au said:
We can have something like Jurassic Park (but without dinosaurs of course). However, the City of Toronto would still own the zoo (though things such as concessions and janitorial services would be contracted out).
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I've been thinking but didn't want to say it because... you know, dinosaurs eat the visitors.

But yes, a natural habitat like park with animals invisibly kept in their areas using moats and hidden fences and visitors seeing them from an elevated Maglev train and in treehouses or glass enclosures at Maglev stations. We could also have safari like vehicles roaming the park at ground level, getting closeup views of the animals. Smaller, harmless animals would be kept behind fences in walkable portions of the zoo but larger animals and those dangerous to people would be kept in naturalized areas viewable from the train.
 
Realistically, as was stated you cannot recreate the natural habitat of Lions, tigers etc in the Rouge. You can create a habitat for bears, foxes and moose but that's about it.

The Americas pavilion at the Zoo is always quite humid because of the animals belonging there. Certain animals need climate controlled enclosures otherwise they would perish. Take the elephants for example, they could not adapt well to our climate and were too big for most enclosures so they were sent off to a more suitable environment.

No matter how you spin it, you cannot just let wild animals roam free without consequence with or without a maglev. Do you really think animals like a lion or tiger will place nice with their natural food source just because it is a more natural habitat?

Nothing is worse for a kindergarten teacher seeing two animals mating in a zoo, you can imagine their reaction if an animal was seen eating another zoo animal in front of a group of children. Animals need to be caged up not only for display but for their own protection. Toss a sloth in an environment with a jaguar and see what happens..
 
Why is maglev being proposed here? Do the potential benefits remotely outweigh the technological risk? It’s not as if there aren’t other, well established technologies that would work.
 
pman said:
Why is maglev being proposed here? Do the potential benefits remotely outweigh the technological risk? It’s not as if there aren’t other, well established technologies that would work.
Click to expand...

What I don't get is how seriously people took this proposal - especially given the track record of commercial maglevs AND the lack of functional prototypes from the proponent. Sure it is "risk free", but the whole thing feels like vapourware.

AoD
 
there are some big names behind it - but yea, I think the only reason the city is even considering it is because it's essentially risk free. Either the proponent delivers, or they don't, and we are back to where we are today.

The idea here is that the Maglev company has a nice low cost system they can set up to test the system. The existing infrastructure is already mostly in place. This is the functional prototype.
 
innsertnamehere said:
there are some big names behind it - but yea, I think the only reason the city is even considering it is because it's essentially risk free. Either the proponent delivers, or they don't, and we are back to where we are today.

The idea here is that the Maglev company has a nice low cost system they can set up to test the system. The existing infrastructure is already mostly in place. This is the functional prototype.
Click to expand...

I am not sure if the zoo is the right place for engineering models - and to go nothing to revenue service is just bizarre. In fact it is really odd that they didn't get all of that done despite having "big names behind it" makes the whole enterprise even more dubious.

AoD
 
Richard White said:
No matter how you spin it, you cannot just let wild animals roam free without consequence with or without a maglev. Do you really think animals like a lion or tiger will place nice with their natural food source just because it is a more natural habitat?
Click to expand...

Good point. Any enclosure would have to separate the zoo animals in large, valley spanning enclosures from the the native valley dwellers. Obviously that is done now, but it would have to be continued on a much larger scale. It is likely that many of the valley dwellers would move on, but the Rouge Valley, like many others, is a natural wildlife corridor and the impact on local fauna would have to be assessed.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
I am not sure if the zoo is the right place for engineering models - and to go nothing to revenue service is just bizarre. In fact it is really odd that they didn't get all of that done despite having "big names behind it" makes the whole enterprise even more dubious.

AoD
Click to expand...

The location of the zoo is probably secondary to Toronto's climate. The Scarborough RT is a test track that went directly into revenue service. Of course, the concept wasn't as much a leap in technology as Maglev has been over the last 20 years.
 
maestro said:
The location of the zoo is probably secondary to Toronto's climate. The Scarborough RT is a test track that went directly into revenue service. Of course, the concept wasn't as much a leap in technology as Maglev has been over the last 20 years.
Click to expand...

Which gets me thinking.. how will a maglev train fair in the snow. Anyone who currently lives in Scarborough knows how often the RT goes out due to snow. It is essentially the same thing.
 
Richard White said:
Which gets me thinking.. how will a maglev train fair in the snow. Anyone who currently lives in Scarborough knows how often the RT goes out due to snow. It is essentially the same thing.
Click to expand...

They are not very similar. Maglev doesn't come in contact with any rails as it is all done by magnets so no friction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maglev
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top