Sunday, October 11, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
A Blog designed for discussion of topics related to, but not limited to, Circus, Zoos, Animal Training, and Animal Welfare/Husbandry. Sometimes opening up the dialog is the best starting point of all. And if for nothing else when people who agree and don't agree, get together and start discussing it, it will open up a lot of peoples minds. Debate and discussion even amongst themselves opens a window where there wasn't one before.
The Circus "NO SPIN ZONE"
Relevent Stops On The Information Highway
- Custom Motorcycle Accessories by Ian
- Bob Cline's Sawdust and Spangles
- Buckles Blog
- Christophe Roullin Circus News
- Gary Robinsons Circus Blog
- Jamie Clubbs Blog
- Marco Kristens Circus Williams
- Ryan Easley's ShowMe Elephants
- Showbiz Daves Blog
- The Bartlett Society
- Thomas Bohners Cage Act History
- World of Dancing Horses
Manure Pile/Post Archive
Consultants
Wade G Burck
Adam R Burck
Eric G Burck
Adam R Burck
Eric G Burck
Posts
6 comments:
There were cages on the lower level on the left side as well as the cages on top. When Mike Kostial Sr. started the lion show in 1933 he used those cages that led to an arena. Jules Jacot would use those cages for his big acts from 1943 to 1955. The lion show moved to its own building in 1957. The Feline House (originally called the Animal House in 1913 or so) was demolished in the early 1970s for Big Cat Country.
Jim,
Great stuff again, thank you. I never realized there were cages below or that this is where the original, eventually world famous lion show as was first held. How did they "clean" the cages above? Wouldn't water run into the cages below, or was there some type of "gutter/drain pipe leading else where? Also, why did they not attempt to retain/rehab this building as they have beautifully done with the reptile and bird houses?
Wade
The cages on the top did have gutters and all. Not to say there never was a leak but it was pretty dry below. As to saving the building: I'm an advocate of saving buildings but this one didn't bother me too much. It wasn't in good condition and it wasn't very attractive. Outside of some lion head decorations that were saved we didn't loose much. St. Louis has been pretty good about saving classic buildings like the reptile, bird, and primate buildings. Just hope they don't mess with the bear displays.
Respectfully I would have to disagree with Jim regarding the bear grottos. They were innovative for their time and a great adjustment from the barred cages beforehand, but that was in 1920. They may be a historical relic, similar to the buildings mentioned previously since the zoo was one of the first to incorporate these new exhibits, but that does not imply they give the best husbandry possible. The Brookfield Zoo has the same design and is in the process of building a completely new habitat for their three species of bears. Regardless of their historical improvements and standings, the animals are still on concrete.
Radar,
I think when Jim says "don't mess with" he was referring to obliterating them like they did with the lion house. Note what Lincoln park did with their old lion house. There is nothing more wonderful then experiencing the Old, with the improvements of the new.
Wade
Radar,
I agree that the STL bear pits aren't ideal bear facilities. They could be larger, not all concrete floors, and other improvements. The backgrounds are made from molds from the Mississippi Palasades, a local connection. They have withstood the ages well and still would add to an improved bear display.
I like the newer big bear displays with grassy lawns and streams for large brown bears. A large pool for underwater viewing of polar bears is great. However, the STL bear displays could be improved for spectacled, asiatic black, or other smaller bears.
In my opinion, Brookfield's bear exhibit are rather small and the rock work "box-like". Outside of being about 80 years old they aren't especially unique. I'm sure they can do better.
Post a Comment