San Diego Zoo San Diego: The Perfect Zoo?

[Chlidonias]

I grew up on Steve Irwin and Jeff Corwin, I'd never heard of Jack Hanna until around the time I joined this forum. Even then, I never associated Irwin with the Australia Zoo and until this very moment I did not know Corwin was associated with Georgia Aquarium.

I had to google it. Apparently Jeff Corwin hosted a tv series about the Georgia Aquarium called Ocean Mysteries. I'm not sure how that translates to it being "most famous".

I have heard of Jeff Corwin - wouldn't be able to tell you anything about him though. I wouldn't even be able to identify him from a line of mugshots. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find (non-Zoochat) people outside the USA (and outside of a certain age) who have heard of either Jeff Corwin or Jack Hanna. I suspect even the city of Columbus is pretty unknown outside of the USA, let alone its zoo.

Steve Irwin is obviously still world-famous but only as "the Crocodile Hunter" - I'd wager that relatively few people associate him with Australia Zoo because he is largely famous for his persona.

 

[sooty mangabey]

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find (non-Zoochat) people outside the USA (and outside of a certain age) who have heard of either Jeff Corwin or Jack Hanna. I suspect even the city of Columbus is pretty unknown outside of the USA, let alone its zoo.

Yes, the name of Jack Hanna is one with which I was familiar, but I was, and largely still am, ignorant of what it is that he actually did to make his name. Seeing all the hoopla about him at Columbus zoo did, I must admit, give me a fairly low impression of him – there was an awful lot of faux khaki “explorer“ chic going on, and anybody who allows themselves to be known as “jungle jack“ loses a few credibility points in my book as well! Is that being unfair to the man? Is he somebody with genuine scientific credentials, or simply a marketing creation? I did contemplate buying his autobiography in the Columbus zoo shop but didn’t do so – and now rather wish I had.

 

[birdsandbats]

Yes, the name of Jack Hanna is one with which I was familiar, but I was, and largely still am, ignorant of what it is that he actually did to make his name. Seeing all the hoopla about him at Columbus zoo did, I must admit, give me a fairly low impression of him – there was an awful lot of faux khaki “explorer“ chic going on, and anybody who allows themselves to be known as “jungle jack“ loses a few credibility points in my book as well! Is that being unfair to the man? Is he somebody with genuine scientific credentials, or simply a marketing creation? I did contemplate buying his autobiography in the Columbus zoo shop but didn’t do so – and now rather wish I had.

Not sure If has any scientific credentials, but I know he has done some important conservation work.

 

[Batto]

If I might add my 2 cents: I think that most of you overestimate the significance zoos have for non-zoo fans, i.e. the vast majority of humankind. There, I said it.
Most tourists don't travel to California to visit SDZ. Or to Berlin to visit Berlin Zoo (let alone the Tierpark). Or to Singapore to visit the various zoos there. Or to London for London Zoo.

However, they visit these zoos (especially when they have smaller kids) as established parts of the "must see" local attractions. Loro Parque & Tenerife is a great example for that; pretty much every first-time tourist on that island will go to the zoo during his/her stay.
The majority of people on this planet only takes notice of an individual zoo on a global scale when something unusual & marketable happens that makes international news and/or is a social media hit, like a cute baby animal, a killed gorilla/giraffe etc. Or when the particular zoo is prominently featured on national (Zoo Leipzig, Loro Parque...) or international media (TV, books), often in connection with a charismatic person associated with that zoo (Grzimek & Frankfurt, Durrell & Jersey, Steve Irwin & Australia Zoo, Jack Hanna & Columbus Zoo etc.).
If I were to ask my local fellow countrymen about the most famous zoo for them, they'll probably mention Loro Parque, Zoo Berlin, Leipzig and Hannover. SDZ or Bronx Zoo would only pop up in the conversation among those who have been to California / NYC.
If we see zoos more as brands, I doubt that any zoo has a true global recognition value among the general global public.

 

[Chlidonias]

Yes, the name of Jack Hanna is one with which I was familiar, but I was, and largely still am, ignorant of what it is that he actually did to make his name. Seeing all the hoopla about him at Columbus zoo did, I must admit, give me a fairly low impression of him – there was an awful lot of faux khaki “explorer“ chic going on, and anybody who allows themselves to be known as “jungle jack“ loses a few credibility points in my book as well! Is that being unfair to the man? Is he somebody with genuine scientific credentials, or simply a marketing creation? I did contemplate buying his autobiography in the Columbus zoo shop but didn’t do so – and now rather wish I had.

He doesn't appear to have been anything other than a zoo director. The reason he is famous in the USA is because he was always on the talk shows with animals from the zoo, especially on Letterman. I sort of have a feeling that he is almost like David Attenborough for Americans.* Attenborough is famous for being a tv naturalist but appears to be largely unknown in the USA - they even re-voice the Attenborough series there, apparently - and I guess Hanna is like a really dumbed-down American version of Attenborough.



*I realise that comparing Hanna to Attenborough is a grave insult to Attenborough, and I do apologise.

 

[mweb08]

I get the whole "...and the beautiful weather!" argument in favor of San Diego. However, I feel the following climate discussion has been a bit simplistic so far. Particularly, I wouldn't agree, that a subtropical climate is by definition the best zoo climate. A well planted, well designed zoo in a temperate zone with seasons - spring, summer, fall, winter - can make the seasons a real strength. Days with newly fallen snow can offer some of the best zoo experiences out there, with very active animals exploring their transformed habitats and playing in the snow (and typically very few other visitors). Spring blossoms and fall colors are also an extravaganza a zoo like San Diego simply cannot offer. Moreover, the seasons can offer a 'tropical' experience in summer and an 'arctic' one in winter, thus a temperate zoo is arguably much better suited to represent outdoors the diversity of biomes of our planet. While some (justifiably) lament what they perceive as (in)adequate indoor winter housing for tropical species in temperate zoos, I personally took issue with e.g. the polar bears at San Diego, which are housed absolutely inadequately climate-wise year round. Furthermore, hot & sunny days typically offer the kinds of conditions that will see the least active animals for most species, save reptiles. Finally, some of the most revered zoo enclosures are indoor enclosures that could or would not be built in more southerly climes.

I agree that the occasional snow day at a zoo is fun to see however many animals that zoo has which would be out in that snow. Still, these cold weather zoos are generally very far from peak level when it's cold. Like I said, no one would consider the Bronx for the #1 spot if the state of the zoo was always that of a cold day with various animals off exhibit and others in clearly inferior situations.

I think you're mischaracterizing the weather in San Diego. The average high in a month doesn't go over 77 degrees while the average high does get down into the 60's for half the year. It also lacks the humidity of much of the country, which is a huge difference maker.

So while a zoo in the Mid-Atlantic (where I live), Northeast, or Midwest can provide better climates for cold weather animals for a good portion of the year, it actually gets worse for them in the summer. July and August in NYC for instance has average highs of 85 and 84 with high humidity.

So of course no zoo has perfect climate for every species, but San Diego is better on a consistent basis for the vast majority of species and visitors.

 

[Coelacanth18]

Attenborough is famous for being a tv naturalist but appears to be largely unknown in the USA - they even re-voice the Attenborough series there, apparently - and I guess Hanna is like a really dumbed-down American version of Attenborough.

They did? When I have watched his series on DVD and on American cable, it is Attenborough narrating. I think many Americans are actually familiar with his voice, if not with the man himself. I've also seen him charicatured in a couple of television satires.

I learned about Jack Hanna by going to a live animal presentation in my area as a child, which he led and was present for. I wouldn't say that he and Jeff Corwin are as famous as Irwin (or Attenborough), but I think they would be recognizable to at least some American non-zoo nerds.

 

[ThylacineAlive]

Like I said, no one would consider the Bronx for the #1 spot if the state of the zoo was always that of a cold day with various animals off exhibit and others in clearly inferior situations.

100% correct, except that this is not the situation the zoo is in and thus your point is entirely mute.

~Thylo

 

[mweb08]

100% correct, except that this is not the situation the zoo is in and thus your point is entirely mute.

~Thylo

Umm, I thought you said no one was ignoring the condition of zoos when it's cold? Yet, if my point is entirely mute that's exactly what you're doing.

 

[ThylacineAlive]

Umm, I thought you said no one was ignoring the condition of zoos when it's cold? Yet, if my point is entirely mute that's exactly what you're doing.

No.. Saying that Bronx gets knocked down because people wouldn't like the zoo as much if it were exactly the same but in a state of forever winter is an entirely mute point because, while likely true, the fact of the matter is that that is not the state the zoo is in and never will be. It's the exact same argument as saying people wouldn't like SDZ as much if it was over 100 degrees every single day forever. Of course they wouldn't, but that's not the reality of the situation so I don't see the sense in bringing it up. It's talking in complete hypotheticals and fantasy scenarios.

I think the point that should be taken from this conversation is that, yes, Bronx keeps tropical species indoors for a certain part of the year and that's a valid criticism, but SDZ also keeps Arctic species outdoors in constant heat with little to no shade cover all year and that is also a valid criticism. You're acting like the latter point is just being nitpicky when, from an animal husbandry standpoint, it's just as valid, regardless of what the situation is at other zoos as well.

~Thylo

 

[Muckleskate]

When you say the "best" what exactly are you looking for? From a visitor viewpoint is it the entertainment value as opposed to the educational value? Do you include the reproduction statistics, especially among the rarer and endangered species? What might seem unexciting and not not entertaining to the casual visitor may be the "best" to those denizens who are contentedly reproducing. Of course, if the visitors and their children do not find entertaining things to do and see, they don't come back. And it is very difficult to be both educational AND entertaining enough to hold very short attention spans. If a zoo can be entertaining, educational and have an outstanding breeding program . . . you have hit the jackpot!!

 

[Daktari JG]

People are strange beasts. For most zoo visitors the perfect zoo has much more to do with animals running ,playing, flying, swimming, calling, rutting etc
with petting a wallaby or hedgehog than it does with viewing a fossa
or a 50 million dollar exhibit upgrade.
And truthfully those are elements that a "perfect zoo" will better emulate than a poor one where the animals are bored, hot, neurotic.

 

[Chlidonias]

I wouldn't say that he and Jeff Corwin are as famous as Irwin (or Attenborough), but I think they would be recognizable to at least some American non-zoo nerds.

Yes, that is exactly what I was saying. Neither Corwin nor Hanna are anywhere near as famous globally as Irwin or Attenborough - that's like comparing a Liberian Mongoose to a Meerkat. But Hanna especially is well known in the USA to the general public because he was a talk-show fixture (which appears to be the only reason he is so well known). Outside of the USA you'd find it difficult to find anyone who has heard of him. So if it is said that the Colombus Zoo is "the most famous" because of Jack Hanna, that is true only on a local scale. (And, even having said that, how many American non-zoo-nuts would associate Hanna with Columbus Zoo specifically and not just "that zoo guy"?)

 

[Otter Lord]

Since we've circled this issue a billion times on this forum, I'd like to point out that this conversation always ends at the disapproval of San Diego's exhibits. Why is something we continually discuss? Because San Diego continually underscores on exhibits despite all it possesses. The zoo routinely shells out on shiny big ticket features (large waterfalls, giant underwater pools, stainless steel mesh tents, utili-trees) and still builds exhibits like managerial containment areas for their brilliant collection rather than being a 21st century that composes memorable nature-filled experiences.

As a local San Diegan who's traveled to over 50 zoos across the globe, I would say that San Diego's best exhibits don't even come close to probably the best exhibits in most zoos. For the past 25 years, every zoo in the country has been building exciting new exhibits that progressively improve animal's welfare and connect people to nature both intellectually and spiritually. San Diego just keeps building exhibits that are increasingly more industrial, sterile, and unnecessary. The best of what other zoos have is better than the best of San Diego exhibit-wise.

Here are zoos whose best exhibit is better than San Diego's best. It's not a complete list, but I would say that I prefer these exhibits over the current Tiger River, African Kopje, Asian Leopards, Absolutely Apes, Elephant Odyssey, Panda Forest, or African Rocks.

San Diego Zoo Safari Park/WAP - Heart of Africa, Lion Camp, Tiger Trail, Condor Ridge, Australian Walkabout
LA Zoo - Golden Monkey, Elephants of Asia, LAIR
Fresno Zoo - Sea Lion, African Adventure
Woodland Park Zoo - most of it
Bronx Zoo - most of it
Dallas Zoo - Africa
Omaha - Africa, and probably Asian Highlands
Fort Woth - MOLA
National Zoo - Sea Lion, Asia Trail
Houston Zoo - Gorilla Forest
Saint Louis - Rivers Edge
OKC Zoo - Oklahoma Trails
Honolulu Zoo - Africa
Columbus - Africa, Polar Frontier
Minnesota Zoo - Minnesota Trails, Russia's Grizzly Coast, Dhole

 

[DevinL]

In My First US Zoo Trip thread I wrote:

"San Diego Zoo has some great exhibits, but so do a lot of zoos now. The Edmonton Valley Zoo isn’t AZA accredited and isn’t an elite zoo, but it still has an exceptional Arctic Shores exhibit featuring pinnipeds. If that exhibit was at the San Diego Zoo it would be one of the best mammal exhibits there and it would be very popular."

I agree with Otter Lord that for all the assets San Diego Zoo has it's disappointing that they haven't created better exhibits.

 

[nczoofan]

Does anyone know what architecture/design firms the zoo works with? Also does the San Diego Zoo have an internal exhibit design department like the Bronx Zoo? I know its an expensive department to have, but with organizations like the San Diego Zoo Global and WCS exhibits are always being planned or renovated.

 

[DevinL]

ELM worked with the Miller Hull Partnership on Africa Rocks at the San Diego Zoo.
Neri Landscape Architecture led site planning for Elephant Odyssey.
Daneen Powell Atelier led the design for the exceptional Tiger Trail at the San Diego Safari Park and have contributed to a less extensive degree on other projects at the San Diego Zoo.

 

[mweb08]

No.. Saying that Bronx gets knocked down because people wouldn't like the zoo as much if it were exactly the same but in a state of forever winter is an entirely mute point because, while likely true, the fact of the matter is that that is not the state the zoo is in and never will be. It's the exact same argument as saying people wouldn't like SDZ as much if it was over 100 degrees every single day forever. Of course they wouldn't, but that's not the reality of the situation so I don't see the sense in bringing it up. It's talking in complete hypotheticals and fantasy scenarios.

I think the point that should be taken from this conversation is that, yes, Bronx keeps tropical species indoors for a certain part of the year and that's a valid criticism, but SDZ also keeps Arctic species outdoors in constant heat with little to no shade cover all year and that is also a valid criticism. You're acting like the latter point is just being nitpicky when, from an animal husbandry standpoint, it's just as valid, regardless of what the situation is at other zoos as well.

~Thylo

Except as I've said a few times now, the heat is actually a bigger problem in New York than it is in San Diego. That isn't a subjective thing either, it's objectively true.

I can go to San Diego anytime of the year and be confident that the weather isn't going to adversely affect my visit in a major way. That is very far from the truth for The Bronx.

Look, you say that you and others consider zoos being sub optimal for part of the year in your evaluations of them, but I just don't see any evidence of that. I almost never see people being this up when evaluating northern zoos in here and in this thread there's been some admissions that it's not ideal, but then defending the winter situation at the same time and amazingly seemingly trying to claim that San Diego has a climate problem that is somewhere in the same ballpark as The Bronx. So if it matters that a fair amount of animals are in much worse indoor homes (some visible to the public and some not) for roughly a fifth to a third of the year depending on the species, then tell me how that shows up in your evaluation.

 

[Chlidonias]

Except as I've said a few times now, the heat is actually a bigger problem in New York than it is in San Diego. That isn't a subjective thing either, it's objectively true.

I can go to San Diego anytime of the year and be confident that the weather isn't going to adversely affect my visit in a major way. That is very far from the truth for The Bronx.

Actually that is subjective and very much not objective. People respond to temperature and humidity in different ways. Your reaction to San Diego versus New York weather is not a universal, it is personal.

 

[mweb08]

Since we've circled this issue a billion times on this forum, I'd like to point out that this conversation always ends at the disapproval of San Diego's exhibits. Why is something we continually discuss? Because San Diego continually underscores on exhibits despite all it possesses. The zoo routinely shells out on shiny big ticket features (large waterfalls, giant underwater pools, stainless steel mesh tents, utili-trees) and still builds exhibits like managerial containment areas for their brilliant collection rather than being a 21st century that composes memorable nature-filled experiences.

As a local San Diegan who's traveled to over 50 zoos across the globe, I would say that San Diego's best exhibits don't even come close to probably the best exhibits in most zoos. For the past 25 years, every zoo in the country has been building exciting new exhibits that progressively improve animal's welfare and connect people to nature both intellectually and spiritually. San Diego just keeps building exhibits that are increasingly more industrial, sterile, and unnecessary. The best of what other zoos have is better than the best of San Diego exhibit-wise.

Here are zoos whose best exhibit is better than San Diego's best. It's not a complete list, but I would say that I prefer these exhibits over the current Tiger River, African Kopje, Asian Leopards, Absolutely Apes, Elephant Odyssey, Panda Forest, or African Rocks.

San Diego Zoo Safari Park/WAP - Heart of Africa, Lion Camp, Tiger Trail, Condor Ridge, Australian Walkabout
LA Zoo - Golden Monkey, Elephants of Asia, LAIR
Fresno Zoo - Sea Lion, African Adventure
Woodland Park Zoo - most of it
Bronx Zoo - most of it
Dallas Zoo - Africa
Omaha - Africa, and probably Asian Highlands
Fort Woth - MOLA
National Zoo - Sea Lion, Asia Trail
Houston Zoo - Gorilla Forest
Saint Louis - Rivers Edge
OKC Zoo - Oklahoma Trails
Honolulu Zoo - Africa
Columbus - Africa, Polar Frontier
Minnesota Zoo - Minnesota Trails, Russia's Grizzly Coast, Dhole

I think you're being too harsh to San Diego Diego and too generous at times to other zoos.

That said, I agree that some other zoos match and even exceed the highs of San Diego and some others don't have the lows of San Diego.

However, even without considering the climate advantage or year round exhibitry and animal welfare advantage if you will, I think San Diego comes out ahead.

I think that because I do think they have some great exhibits, which collectively are difficult for most zoos to compete with. Those that can compete or even win out when comparing great exhibits generally fall short in the depth of good to very good exhibits though. And they definitely fall short imo in collection, where San Diego crushes most zoos and beats all American zoos in mt view. I can certainly support this claim further, but I'll leave it at that for now.

The one thing I'll add in this post is that I've been to Henry Doorly and Saint Louis in the last few days and The Bronx within the year and those zoos as well as every other zoo I've been to max out at about 75% of time to see the entire zoo when compared to San Diego. San Diego just keeps hitting you with more and more cool things to see, generally done at least pretty well (obviously there are exceptions).