@Pleistohorse : I dare to say that I'm usually pretty good in understanding jokes. Yours, however, I unfortunately didn't get.
USA Today Best Zoo, Zoo Exhibit, Aquarium and Safari Park Polls 2019
- Thread starter SharkFinatic
- Start date
I'm going to agree with Echobeast here. The best ranked zoos between genuine zoo enthusiasts, and your average Joe Public, vary widely (although there certainly is overlap), and what constitutes a good zoo for one certainlt doesn't carry over to the other! I am a zoo professional as well, and in the 5+ years I've been in the field, do you know how many zoo enthusiasts (genuine ones) I've met? Perhaps five or six. My current facility is a standard walkthrough zoo, average visitation time is usually 2-3 hours. During the off season, probably 80% of our guest base is mothers with their kids, and school/daycare groups for children between the ages of 5 and 10. During the on season, the demographic changes some, but the majoirty of the visitor base is still families, or couples without children. The demographics at my last facility, a small aquarium, were more varied, however during my two years there, working in a very frontline position, I think I met a total of perhaps 4 or 5 people who where what you could consider genuine zoo ethusiasts. Quite literally 99.5% of our guest base was just your average joe public. And to be quite frank, this really is the crowd zoo's need to cater to! As great as our support is, if it was solely up to hardcore zoo fans, and they were the groups zoos were mainly catering towards, they would have a very hard time, as we comprise an INCREDIBLY small demographic towards their visitation. While it can *occassionally* be commercially viable to be a specialized facility, just as frequently, that can result in a flop as well (look at Todd Daltons closed down facility, for instance).
Anyway, without rambling on too much, I would say these lists certainly do have merit, as the overall "best" zoo's in America are those with good, well kept, diverse (but not in your face about it) collections; enclosures that are clean, visually appealing, meet the animals needs well and where the animals are generally easy to see, and most importantly, that they are easy and pleasant for your average visitor (read, family with young children) to visit. This of course including things such as the size of and ease of moving through the facility, the ability to keep children entertained, and things to keep their paying parents happy, including but not limited to decent, ideally reasonably priced food, playgrounds, the regular occurrence of washrooms and water fountains, a proper visitor setup for the climate ( shaded viewing, AC in indoor public areas, misters, water features, etc in warm climates, and of course warm indoor viewing, places to warm up , and areas to act as wind blocks during cold weather), and good sight lines and barriers for public viewing into exhibits.
Anyway, without rambling on too much, I would say these lists certainly do have merit, as the overall "best" zoo's in America are those with good, well kept, diverse (but not in your face about it) collections; enclosures that are clean, visually appealing, meet the animals needs well and where the animals are generally easy to see, and most importantly, that they are easy and pleasant for your average visitor (read, family with young children) to visit. This of course including things such as the size of and ease of moving through the facility, the ability to keep children entertained, and things to keep their paying parents happy, including but not limited to decent, ideally reasonably priced food, playgrounds, the regular occurrence of washrooms and water fountains, a proper visitor setup for the climate ( shaded viewing, AC in indoor public areas, misters, water features, etc in warm climates, and of course warm indoor viewing, places to warm up , and areas to act as wind blocks during cold weather), and good sight lines and barriers for public viewing into exhibits.
Last edited:
No problem, I’m not that good at telling them.
It’s a quote (lparaphrased) from the movie A Big Year.
Two English Birders descend on High Island Texas, where Owen Wilson’s American character, is attempting to list and quantify every bird he sees in order to rank at the top of the annual rankings of American (and Canadian) Birders.
The stuffy Englishmen, sniff in disdain, at the gauche Yanks, and one opines that “only Americans could turn Birding into a competition,” and then huff in a very Continental (for British Islanders) way. Owen Wilson, whose character is the once and future greatest American Birder, quips as he passes, “that’s right and you don’t want to miss this one,” and flips a bird of his own, as he rushes out in pursuit of his lists and rankings.
The course of the conversation kinda reminded me of that scene.
@Pleistohorse : Thank you for the explaination.
Maybe that overlap is bigger than we all assume. I think that in general, both the average zoo visitor and the zoo nerds enjoy a clean, well-kept zoo with healthy-looking animals, pleasant dining / relaxation options and modern amenities. At best, a zoo that offers pleasant entertainment, relaxation and good memories (and maybe even education ^^) for a reasonable price. What sets some zoos apart from others might be different for the zoo nerd from the average zoo visitor, who hasn't seen a dozen + Meerkat enclosures or fake ruins. Depending on the individual nerd, that defining quality can be an unusual collection, a rare species, an unique enclosure design, efficient teaching program or a smart novel behavioural enrichment item, a cool safety feature or a clever medical training program. Or just a really great zoo restaurant or zoo shop. Or a combination of all of that, which might not be apparent to the average zoo visitor (even though I like to think that people instinctively realize greater quality when confronted with it). However, in some regards, the perception of the "normal" zoo visitors and zoo nerds can differ significantly when Average Joe lacks the background knowledge to acknowledge the situation correctly. Or when the zoo nerd blends out the dirty broken amenities, unclean surroundings and bad dining options just to observe his/her favourite must-see rare species.
Imperator Furiosa
Well-Known Member
Voted St. Louis for best zoo, MOLA for best exhibit, the Shedd for best aquarium, and Northwest Trek for best safari park.
Well this has turned into quite the discussion (part of which I ignited). I think it's worth discussing and I think we can do it in a civilized manner, so here I go.
Someone thought that my dismissal of the panel was unjustified and then went on to list their qualifications, especially pointing out the two zoo professionals. I never said the zoo professionals were not qualified, I said there should be more zoo professionals instead of five family bloggers.
I have been to enough zoos to observe that yes, young mothers with small children are the major demographic (which I think is another problem, one Arizona Sonora Desert Museum alleviates with their wider offerings, but that's a discussion for another thread). My objection is that selecting a panel that represents the average visitor is not the best way to rate the quality of an institution or a product. When you read reviews of, for example, best new cars of 2019, they do not select a panel of average commuters. They talk to car experts, people who know cars (comfort, performance, etc). Even if it's a poll, they will still have an expert panel to make the initial list. If you see a poll on sports teams, they do not just pick people who write about travel or entertainment venues who just happen to go to a game among other activities. They pick people who who write sports columns, not general travel columns.
I do not object to including one or two of the mom bloggers in a panel. But to have five out of seven is grossly unbalanced. If they want people outside the zoo industry, why not add one or two top contributors from ZooChat, people (like @snowleopard ) who have actually been to all the big American zoos? Do you honestly think these mom bloggers have been to more than half a dozen zoos in person? I am not familiar with their work so if they have, apologies in advance, but somehow I doubt it.
Someone thought that my dismissal of the panel was unjustified and then went on to list their qualifications, especially pointing out the two zoo professionals. I never said the zoo professionals were not qualified, I said there should be more zoo professionals instead of five family bloggers.
I have been to enough zoos to observe that yes, young mothers with small children are the major demographic (which I think is another problem, one Arizona Sonora Desert Museum alleviates with their wider offerings, but that's a discussion for another thread). My objection is that selecting a panel that represents the average visitor is not the best way to rate the quality of an institution or a product. When you read reviews of, for example, best new cars of 2019, they do not select a panel of average commuters. They talk to car experts, people who know cars (comfort, performance, etc). Even if it's a poll, they will still have an expert panel to make the initial list. If you see a poll on sports teams, they do not just pick people who write about travel or entertainment venues who just happen to go to a game among other activities. They pick people who who write sports columns, not general travel columns.
I do not object to including one or two of the mom bloggers in a panel. But to have five out of seven is grossly unbalanced. If they want people outside the zoo industry, why not add one or two top contributors from ZooChat, people (like @snowleopard ) who have actually been to all the big American zoos? Do you honestly think these mom bloggers have been to more than half a dozen zoos in person? I am not familiar with their work so if they have, apologies in advance, but somehow I doubt it.
So I am going to weigh in, and will probably regret doing so in a few hours.
I've objected on past threads to the use of the term "Best" and I will do so here as well. How you would define and measure what constitutes the best zoo has never (or likely ever will be) laid out and agreed upon.
With that said, respectfully I have to disagree with some of the points made by @Arizona Docent. I do not think that it is a fair comparison to make between lists on best new cars or top sports team and lists on zoos. There are a measurable ways that cars are evaluated (speed, gas mileage, safety), and while I'm sure there are debates over the adequacy of those measures, similar measures are lacking for zoos. Similarly, you can have experts evaluate hockey teams based on wins, goals for, goals against, puck possession, corsi (where once again debates exist over the validity of the measures).
What measures might be utilized for zoos? I would hazard to guess that many on here would object to evaluating zoos simply on the number of species held and the size of the zoo. Some might favour naturalistic exhibits, but how exactly would you measure that? An exhibit with foliage is probably preferred over an exhibit with concrete and wood, but how do we measure two different exhibits that both have lots of natural substrate? This is also under the assumption that an agreement could be reached on what measures matter (should educational value count?).
I agree with @Echobeast's assertion that the composition of the panel reflects the priorities and target audience of this poll. To me, this poll is primarily concerned with the favourite zoo for mom bloggers and their family. More zoo experts, or ZooChat contributors are quite possibly excluded from the selection panel as their input is not what the aim of the poll is striving for.
Yes, using the term "best" is problematic. However, that is one of the reasons I simply do not pay attention to the poll. It's not an actual evaluation of zoos. If zoos are able to do well in the poll and that acts as a moral boost for staff or helps to increase their attendance that is fantastic. Hopefully the mere existence of the poll inspires some families or individuals to visit one of the nominated zoo or their local zoo. The results and omission of certain facilities is not going to influence my opinion or zoo travel plans in any way.
I've objected on past threads to the use of the term "Best" and I will do so here as well. How you would define and measure what constitutes the best zoo has never (or likely ever will be) laid out and agreed upon.
With that said, respectfully I have to disagree with some of the points made by @Arizona Docent. I do not think that it is a fair comparison to make between lists on best new cars or top sports team and lists on zoos. There are a measurable ways that cars are evaluated (speed, gas mileage, safety), and while I'm sure there are debates over the adequacy of those measures, similar measures are lacking for zoos. Similarly, you can have experts evaluate hockey teams based on wins, goals for, goals against, puck possession, corsi (where once again debates exist over the validity of the measures).
What measures might be utilized for zoos? I would hazard to guess that many on here would object to evaluating zoos simply on the number of species held and the size of the zoo. Some might favour naturalistic exhibits, but how exactly would you measure that? An exhibit with foliage is probably preferred over an exhibit with concrete and wood, but how do we measure two different exhibits that both have lots of natural substrate? This is also under the assumption that an agreement could be reached on what measures matter (should educational value count?).
I agree with @Echobeast's assertion that the composition of the panel reflects the priorities and target audience of this poll. To me, this poll is primarily concerned with the favourite zoo for mom bloggers and their family. More zoo experts, or ZooChat contributors are quite possibly excluded from the selection panel as their input is not what the aim of the poll is striving for.
Yes, using the term "best" is problematic. However, that is one of the reasons I simply do not pay attention to the poll. It's not an actual evaluation of zoos. If zoos are able to do well in the poll and that acts as a moral boost for staff or helps to increase their attendance that is fantastic. Hopefully the mere existence of the poll inspires some families or individuals to visit one of the nominated zoo or their local zoo. The results and omission of certain facilities is not going to influence my opinion or zoo travel plans in any way.
"Best" is always objective. People have different needs, desires, and interests. To use the car example, you can rank using quantitative things like best mileage, but ultimately a "best car" list is useless because some people want one that works well for their family, some people prioritize being environmentally-friendly, some just want a car that goes fast and looks cool. My friends want ones that can fit lots of dog crates, clean easily, and get great mileage. The same goes for zoos. Even on here, we constantly disagree about who the best ones are. The Bronx, for example, has a lot of uncommonly seen species, especially birds, but for me the old enclosures, frequent lack of signage, and often confusing pathways really take away from it. Others aren't so bothered by those things.
You accidentally wrote the opposite of what your post says. I think you meant to write " 'Best' is always subjective..."
I will humbly submit that if the goal of the poll is indeed to determine which zoos are best for the demographic of young families, then at the very least the title of the polls should be reworded Ten Best Zoos for Families or Best Zoos to Visit with Small Children. If I am reading people's comments correctly, I see conflicting statements about the importance of this poll. On one hand people are saying it doesn't really matter, it's just a fun exercise that will always be subjective. On the other hand they are saying it does matter because zoos use the results in their marketing and as a source of pride.
While there will always be disagreements on what to prioritize in their rankings, I do think there are factors that can be used: conservation initiatives, animal husbandry, species variety, natural exhibits, etc. The fact that substandard safari parks like Natural Bridge and Out Of Africa made the list along with greats like Northwest Trek says to me the panel's knowledge of zoological institutions is questionable.
While there will always be disagreements on what to prioritize in their rankings, I do think there are factors that can be used: conservation initiatives, animal husbandry, species variety, natural exhibits, etc. The fact that substandard safari parks like Natural Bridge and Out Of Africa made the list along with greats like Northwest Trek says to me the panel's knowledge of zoological institutions is questionable.
Those aren’t necessarily conflicting. To the zoos that are nominated and the communities that visit those zoos, a high spot on the list can be very prideful. To us zoo nerds, we know better than to look at this list in any other way than just for fun. It all depends on who’ perspective we view it from. Again, this leads us to the point that all “Top Zoos” lists are nothing but subjective.
I will agree that it would be nice to have an expert that represented zoo nerds as a part of their panel. Someone like snowleopard who has been to so many. But then again, we probably aren’t a large enough demographic for a large publication such as USA Today to give us representation.
I do like how they do this annually. It gives zoos a chance to improve themselves and move up the rankings each year. One flaw with the poll is the exploitable “vote once a day” rule. Individually, I could vote for my favorite everyday for a month and have 30x the voting power than someone who sees the poll once and forgets about it. Again, another reason to take the poll with a grain of salt.
Maybe a better poll for us in particular would be one that rewards more individual accomplishments a zoo might participate in each year. Something like “Best New Exhibits of 2019” or “Excellence in Conservation” lists. Maybe not with a top ten format but just recognizing the best of that year. Maybe that would avoid all the arguing about which is better.
Yes, thanks! Changed the sentence structure, forgot to change the key word
I agree that the title would be better as something more than just "Best Zoo", but it follows all of their other things, like Best Small Town, Best Sports Stadium, whatever. I also think someone on the panel should have visited all of the nominees, or at least most of them, but that's probably not very practical, especially for a yearly thing.
FunkyGibbon
Well-Known Member
@m30t You are right to point out that many of variables one would want to evaluate when determining a zoo's quality are very hard to quantify. However, with a more knowledgeable panel at least these factors would be being considered. None of the five bloggers mention a single zoorelated interest in their bios, I think it's fair to question the extent to which animal welfare was factored in, for example.
I think a panel of zoonerds would do a better job, although it would need to be large enough to deal with the wide variety of opinions in our community (just think how much we disagree internally). Better still would be a genuinely occupationally diverse panel: keeper, educator, management, casual visitor, enthusiast, government inspector, academic researchers and so on.
I think a panel of zoonerds would do a better job, although it would need to be large enough to deal with the wide variety of opinions in our community (just think how much we disagree internally). Better still would be a genuinely occupationally diverse panel: keeper, educator, management, casual visitor, enthusiast, government inspector, academic researchers and so on.
Last edited:
A goodly deal part of nerddom is the arguing about what puts the best in "the best". Without stretching my imagination I could conceive of dozens of categories of what "the best" might be. And no matter how much you can objectify some of it (number of species, rare species not seen at other zoos commonly, breeding etc etc) there will always be a HUGE subjective part.
Half of us would save all our money for a year and fly to God knows where to see a tonkin snub nosed monkey, where some kid might pass by and complain they aren't jumping around like the rhesus macaques next door. Or somebody might see 5 baby gorillas and think the exhibit isn't natural enough. Or somebody might not like a zoo cause they didn't have a vegan menu.
The grand spectacle is the thing and there is room for a multitude of opinions.
Half of us would save all our money for a year and fly to God knows where to see a tonkin snub nosed monkey, where some kid might pass by and complain they aren't jumping around like the rhesus macaques next door. Or somebody might see 5 baby gorillas and think the exhibit isn't natural enough. Or somebody might not like a zoo cause they didn't have a vegan menu.
The grand spectacle is the thing and there is room for a multitude of opinions.
To begin, I want to reiterate that I do concur with the sentiment that the title of the poll is problematic.
@FunkyGibbon I agree that the bloggers mentioned are quite probably not zoo enthusiasts. The site is very clear though that the panelists were selected for being "travel experts." While we may not like it, and might be misled by the title of the poll, the intent is quite evident that it is looking for the "best" zoos for families to visit/travel to.
The occupationally diverse panel you suggest would likely produce interesting results, and possibly offer a more complete overall evaluation of zoos than this poll does. The composition of this panel would take a lot more effort for the editors. My impression from looking at the site (it's not a publication I pay a great deal of attention to generally) is that it is focused on continually churning out polls, which could mean it doesn't take the composition of it's panelists that seriously. The proposed panel may also not be near as focused on travel advice for young families, which seems to be what this poll is after.
A more general thought, most of the panelists have externally verifiable credentials. They run their own websites on travel, contribute to media publications, etc. Page views, social media followers are just a couple ways of the top of my head that a degree of credibility could be given to those panelists. There are very knowledgeable individuals who participate on this forum, but I think it would be a challenging task for an outsider to come in and verify who to qualify as an "expert." Number of posts would be insufficient as quantity surely does not equate with quality, number of zoos visited demonstrates interest and passion but does necessarily indicate expertise, response/likes from other users could possibly demonstrate the value but could easily be misinterpreted with likes given for positive news (ie a rare species birth) versus likes for a valuable contribution by the poster and that would only be internal feedback. I don't want this to come off as a shot, as there are many individuals on here who's comments and insights I greatly respect. That respect came from prolonged periods of time spent on the site over several years, not something that it is realistic for the editors to do when selecting panelists (especially given that it is not our perspective that they are looking for).
@FunkyGibbon I agree that the bloggers mentioned are quite probably not zoo enthusiasts. The site is very clear though that the panelists were selected for being "travel experts." While we may not like it, and might be misled by the title of the poll, the intent is quite evident that it is looking for the "best" zoos for families to visit/travel to.
The occupationally diverse panel you suggest would likely produce interesting results, and possibly offer a more complete overall evaluation of zoos than this poll does. The composition of this panel would take a lot more effort for the editors. My impression from looking at the site (it's not a publication I pay a great deal of attention to generally) is that it is focused on continually churning out polls, which could mean it doesn't take the composition of it's panelists that seriously. The proposed panel may also not be near as focused on travel advice for young families, which seems to be what this poll is after.
A more general thought, most of the panelists have externally verifiable credentials. They run their own websites on travel, contribute to media publications, etc. Page views, social media followers are just a couple ways of the top of my head that a degree of credibility could be given to those panelists. There are very knowledgeable individuals who participate on this forum, but I think it would be a challenging task for an outsider to come in and verify who to qualify as an "expert." Number of posts would be insufficient as quantity surely does not equate with quality, number of zoos visited demonstrates interest and passion but does necessarily indicate expertise, response/likes from other users could possibly demonstrate the value but could easily be misinterpreted with likes given for positive news (ie a rare species birth) versus likes for a valuable contribution by the poster and that would only be internal feedback. I don't want this to come off as a shot, as there are many individuals on here who's comments and insights I greatly respect. That respect came from prolonged periods of time spent on the site over several years, not something that it is realistic for the editors to do when selecting panelists (especially given that it is not our perspective that they are looking for).
The votes are in!
Best Zoo winners: Best Zoo Winners: 2019 10Best Readers' Choice Travel Awards
Best Zoo Exhibit winners: Best Zoo Exhibit Winners: 2019 10Best Readers' Choice Travel Awards
Best Safari Park winners: Best Safari Park Winners: 2019 10Best Readers' Choice Travel Awards
Best Aquarium winners: Best Aquarium Winners: 2019 10Best Readers' Choice Travel Awards
Best Zoo winners: Best Zoo Winners: 2019 10Best Readers' Choice Travel Awards
Best Zoo Exhibit winners: Best Zoo Exhibit Winners: 2019 10Best Readers' Choice Travel Awards
Best Safari Park winners: Best Safari Park Winners: 2019 10Best Readers' Choice Travel Awards
Best Aquarium winners: Best Aquarium Winners: 2019 10Best Readers' Choice Travel Awards
They weren’t last year either. Their social media doesn’t push it like the other zoos.