San Diego Zoo San Diego: The Perfect Zoo?

[TeaLovingDave]

I’ve only just caught up with this very interesting thread. I am wholeheartedly in the San Diego camp, and reading some of the comments above I am reminded of the (world’s best) film critic, Mark Kermode, who recently opined that the only people who liked the film Hereditary were Those who didn’t really understand horror. Cue, lots of responses from slightly miffed listeners, claiming that they did indeed like and understand horror – and also liked and understood this film.

I might be slightly misinterpreting your analogy - are you saying that people who disagree about San Diego being the best zoo in the world don't really understand zoos? Or, alternatively, that you believe those who disagree with this statement are directing this accusation at those who agree with it? I don't think either would be fair to assume.

No, San Diego stands alone. Us nerds talk in hushed tones of Vienna and Berlin, but nobody else does. Whereas if I were to ask my non-zoonerd Australian friends to name the most famous zoo in the world I’m confident some, at least, would come up with San Diego. And with all due respect to a wonderful city, it’s not exactly well known outside the US like New York, Singapore, Berlin and Vienna are either.

There is no zoo on the planet that is more World-Famous than San Diego Zoo.

As with @Dassie rat and @Tim May , I would argue that although the quality of the collection has certainly diminished in recent decades London Zoo is probably still just as world-famous as San Diego.

FWIW, with the exception of Highland Wildlife Park - which I visited as a toddler and hence was always aware of - the first zoos which came to my attention as more than merely abstract "place name + zoo" were London Zoo, Berlin Zoo, San Diego Zoo and Chester Zoo in roughly that order.

 

[TZDugong]

As with @Dassie rat and @Tim May , I would argue that although the quality of the collection has certainly diminished in recent decades London Zoo is probably still just as world-famous as San Diego.

FWIW, with the exception of Highland Wildlife Park - which I visited as a toddler and hence was always aware of - the first zoos which came to my attention as more than merely abstract "place name + zoo" were London Zoo, Berlin Zoo, San Diego Zoo and Chester Zoo in roughly that order.

As I’ve said in a previous comment to Dassie Rat, London Zoo might be famous in the UK and Europe, but it isn’t so well known in my area of the world. In my experience San Diego is more universally known, I have Australian relatives who’ve heard of San Diego, heck I even saw someone wearing a San Diego zoo hat in Chile! For London, I bet most people know that there’s a London Zoo, but nothing else, while almost everyone at least knows San Diego is “world famous”.

 

[mweb08]

I'd bet that most Americans would assume that London has a zoo, but wouldn't know it for a fact.

 

[CGSwans]

I'd bet that most Americans would assume that London has a zoo, but wouldn't know it for a fact.

Substitute ‘London’ for ‘any non-American city’ and ‘zoo’ for ‘any type of civic institution that exists in an American city’ and I suspect that statement would hold!

 

[sooty mangabey]

All that said, what built heritage does San Diego retain, really? The reptile house and Mesa, certainly. There’s the bear pits, but I don’t think even the fiercest SD partisan could argue for their unique heritage value. The big aviaries are old but remain fully functional, so there’s no reason to pull them down... but is there anything truly distinctive about them? The rest of the zoo is, if not new, certainly contemporary in its appearance and presentation.

I think you’re absolutely right. For obvious (temperature-related) reasons, this isn’t a zoo with lots of buildings in the style of somewhere in northern Europe (or even northern USA). I think I meant, more, the way that the history is highlighted in the ways that the zoo talks about itself. The history book, mentioned by @TZDugong above, is a good example of this: it’s a fantastic book, and is indicative of the fact that the zoo is very comfortable with, and proud of, its past.

 

[mweb08]

Substitute ‘London’ for ‘any non-American city’ and ‘zoo’ for ‘any type of civic institution that exists in an American city’ and I suspect that statement would hold!

Quite possibly. Which goes against the argument that London is the most world famous. However, I'd say Berlin and Singapore are more famous in the US than London. Maybe even the Australia Zoo because of Steve Irwin.

 

[ThylacineAlive]

Quite possibly. Which goes against the argument that London is the most world famous. However, I'd say Berlin and Singapore are more famous in the US than London. Maybe even the Australia Zoo because of Steve Irwin.

As someone who grew up on The Crocodile Hunter and loved Steve Irwin, Australia Zoo is probably the 6th zoo that pops into my mind when I think "Australian zoo"

Growing up the Big Five were always San Diego, Bronx, the Berlins, and DAK.

~Thylo

 

[sooty mangabey]

I might be slightly misinterpreting your analogy - are you saying that people who disagree about San Diego being the best zoo in the world don't really understand zoos? Or, alternatively, that you believe those who disagree with this statement are directing this accusation at those who agree with it? I don't think either would be fair to assume.

Blimey - this is getting complicated!

The second, I think - I inferred the suggestion that only someone who didn’t really know their zoos could believe that SD was the world’s best.

 

[mweb08]

As someone who grew up on The Crocodile Hunter and loved Steve Irwin, Australia Zoo is probably the 6th zoo that pops into my mind when I think "Australian zoo"

Growing up the Big Five were always San Diego, Bronx, the Berlins, and DAK.

~Thylo

Yes, but you're a zoo nerd. The average American doesn't know any Australian zoos or non North American zoos for that matter. They'd potentially know the zoo I mentioned because Steve Irwin was a big deal.

 

[TZDugong]

As someone who grew up on The Crocodile Hunter and loved Steve Irwin, Australia Zoo is probably the 6th zoo that pops into my mind when I think "Australian zoo"

Growing up the Big Five were always San Diego, Bronx, the Berlins, and DAK.

~Thylo

You’ve brought up the zoo that we’ve all somehow neglected to mention, DAK. Disney has such a strong pull on North Americans (not sure about the rest of the world), that I bet it would be much more recognizable than San Diego.

 

[ThylacineAlive]

Yes, but you're a zoo nerd. The average American doesn't know any Australian zoos or non North American zoos for that matter. They'd potentially know the zoo I mentioned because Steve Irwin was a big deal.

I know non-zoo nerds who know of Berlin (maybe not that there are two zoos, though I doubt most people know there are two San Diegos) and even Singapore.

I think the problem is the name of the zoo. If it was Sydney Zoo that'd be one thing, but it's just called Australia Zoo. Due to this, I think most people would remember that he worked at an Australian zoo, but probably have no idea that there is a zoo specifically named Australia Zoo.

~Thylo

 

[pachyderm pro]

Before this gets any deeper, perhaps we should move these posts regarding what zoo is the most iconic to a separate thread, if Thylo is up for it. It seems things have been pretty derailed from his original intent.

And while were at it can a moderator please add the San Diego zoo prefix to the title?

 

[ThylacineAlive]

Before this gets any deeper, perhaps we should move these posts regarding what zoo is the most iconic to a separate thread, if Thylo is up for it. It seems things have been pretty derailed from his original intent.

And while were at it can a moderator please add the San Diego zoo prefix to the title?

I've never had too much of a problem with threads derailing a bit if the conversation is still constructive, but that's up to the mod crew. This topic is probably worthy of its own thread so it can be discussed more thoroughly, though.

Do the prefixes make the thread easier to find? More so than the tags anyhow? I usually don't add prefixes because I think "San Diego Zoo San Diego: The Perfect Zoo" or "Bronx Zoo Bronx Zoo News Thread 2018" are weird titles.

~Thylo

 

[sooty mangabey]

You’ve brought up the zoo that we’ve all somehow neglected to mention, DAK. Disney has such a strong pull on North Americans (not sure about the rest of the world), that I bet it would be much more recognizable than San Diego.

I don’t think this would be the case in Europe. From my many, many conversations with people about zoos over many years, the only overseas city that is synonymous with its zoo, for the Person On The Clapham Omnibus, is San Diego. Berlin is some distance behind – although its historical importance and cultural significance are known about by the sort of people who do know about cultural and historical significance. And for those who have passed through, Singapore often gets a mention (although, to return to the earlier point, I often think that it is only people who don’t really understand zoos who are bowled over by Singapore’s design. Possibly I’m being unfair there).

For those who do not really have a great deal of interest in zoos, places like Omaha and even New York simply don’t register – in the UK at least.

 

[pachyderm pro]

Do the prefixes make the thread easier to find? More so than the tags anyhow? I usually don't add prefixes because I think "San Diego Zoo San Diego: The Perfect Zoo" or "Bronx Zoo Bronx Zoo News Thread 2018" are weird titles.

~Thylo

If one were to search a specific prefix, they could find every thread related to that zoo. So if I were to search specifically San Diego zoo related threads, this would not be as likely to come up and would not show up at all if I chose threads with that prefix, making it harder to find.

 

[ThylacineAlive]

DAK wouldn't be synonymous with Orlando, though, it'd be synonymous with Disney. And yeah, Disney's huge so that might hurt my point, but I think the company really has made it's own little staple as having a hand in the animal world. Every few years they put out a movie or documentary about chimps or pandas or elephants or some other cute popular creature, and are world famous for The Jungle Book and The Lion King (the latter being directly responsible for the popularity of warthogs and Meerkats in US zoos). They also definitely have a presence worldwide. The theme parks are also world famous, so I really do think DAK might be in the conversation.

Maybe it's a Northeastern thing in the same way that knowing about London Zoo is a UK thing, but I honestly don't think I've ever had a zoo discussion with a non-zoo person who didn't hold Bronx to the same reputation as San Diego whether or not they'd ever actually visited a zoo. And it's not like the Northeast is small, a quick Google search tells me it's nearly double the size of the UK.

In response to your "getting it" comments, I also don't think it's fair to suggest that people who either dislike or like a zoo when you either like or dislike that same zoo just don't "understand zoos" if that is what you're saying. Sometimes a non-zoo nerd can still know exactly what they're talking about and better back-up their opinion more than some on here have.

~Thylo

 

[mweb08]

I've talked to quite a few people who knowing my interest in zoos or after finding out about it, ask what are the best American zoos. Everyone assumes San Diego. The Bronx is pretty mixed and this even includes family of mine that do or have lived in North Jersey. I also live in Baltimore so obviously much closer to the Bronx than San Diego. The midwestern zoos really get screwed in this though. For instance, I mention Henry Doorly / Omaha and the vast majority of people never even heard of it before.

 

[snowleopard]

A fascinating thread! For myself, being a Canadian looking from the outside, there is no doubt at all that San Diego is more famous than any zoo on the planet. As I said before, every single time I'm asked what my favourite zoo is, the questioning individual either guesses my answer or is not shocked at all with my reply. Tons of Canadians in my part of the world (an hour out of Vancouver) visit southern California, with San Diego Zoo and/or SeaWorld usually their only destinations that involve captive animals. The many folks that go to Los Angeles or San Francisco never visit those zoos and I cannot think of a single non 'zoo nerd' that has ever been to either of those facilities. However, every British Columbian who has been to San Diego has invariably toured the zoo or the safari park.

The same logic applies to London Zoo and its fame across international borders. Looking at the situation through my own personal lens, I can name 5 Canadian relatives that have all visited the city of London on more than one occasion but not once have any of them taken a stroll around the zoo. It has become a running joke as they all know of my zoo obsession but there are far too many other tourist attractions in London for any of my relatives to give the zoo any kind of glimmer of hope of a visit. At a high school that I taught at a few years ago there was a crowd of a dozen Canadian teachers who ventured overseas to both Paris and London for a professional development opportunity and not one of those well-educated, intelligent individuals had even heard of London Zoo! They probably all assumed that the city of London in fact had a zoo but none of those teachers were aware of its significance. I really do feel as if London Zoo is a world-famous, staggeringly important institution and I have quite a few history books about London Zoo. Here is the critical point that I'm attempting to make: the facility is world-famous to me and all us zoo nerds but not anywhere close to the same level of worldwide fame as San Diego Zoo. In the year 2018 the city of London is known for many things but NOT its zoo, while the city of San Diego is known primarily for its zoo.

 

[ThylacineAlive]

All this talk about other cities like LA, New York, London, etc. all having other tourist attractions which appeal to the general public more than the zoos makes me think, does the city of San Diego just not have much to do for tourists apart from the beaches and the zoo/SeaWorld? Thinking about it, I really can't think of much else the city is known for. I mean, there was the football team but that's gone now. Obviously I doubt San Diego is just a boring city because lots of people go but it doesn't seem to have any big tourist hot spot other than zoological attractions and beaches, something which probably has played into the zoo's marketing.

~Thylo

 

[sooty mangabey]

More to the point, if you refer to my opening post, basically everyone I know outside of the zoo world who has actually visited SDZ no longer think it's the greatest.

In response to your "getting it" comments, I also don't think it's fair to suggest that people who either dislike or like a zoo when you either like or dislike that same zoo just don't "understand zoos" if that is what you're saying. Sometimes a non-zoo nerd can still know exactly what they're talking about and better back-up their opinion more than some on here have.

~Thylo

I don’t want to get in to a “you said, I said“ argument but, from the earlier post quoted above, I inferred, possibly incorrectly, that you were suggesting that to laud San Diego was indicative of a going to broader ignorance. You seem to be getting a bit cross here, so I’m going to bow out of this one now!