It’s Up To You....

sooty mangabey said:
Interesting - and extraordinary - figures. Thanks.

I appreciate that it’s possibly quite a weasely way of looking at things but it strikes me that it’s quite difficult to separate “pure” conservation spending from more general spending. If resources are being spent maintaining an SSP species, does this count as conservation spending? Does education work count as conservation spending – whether it has a conservational leaning, or whether it is just inculcating a sense of wonder in the minds of visitors? One could argue that keeping a pit full of meerkats is conservation work: a child who sees them, and is inspired by them, is going to grow into an adult whose behaviour is less damaging to the planet (or that’s the hope anyway!).
Click to expand...

The WCS's annual reports include the details on how money is acquired and spent. Most of the conservation funding is from private grants and the federal government through programs such as USAID (which is currently at threat of being cutback). Its not something that can be moved over to the zoos category and I think undercutting the international conservation work would be a mistake. Many of the smaller and medium sized zoos in the AZA (my local NC Zoo included), give sums of money to WCS programs alongside their own in-house conservation programs.

WCS Annual Reports - WCS.org

Maintaining SSP species is not included in the 116 million, which actually refers only to global programs. These programs are in 60 countries, and make WCS one of the largest international conservation organizations along with the WWF. Yet much work does occur at the Bronx and smaller zoos, besides just administrative work. For example the breeding of the Maleo behind the scenes informed WCS efforts on how best to preserve the species' habitat in the wild. Yet the money spent on keeping the Maleo would not even count as conservation funding for the WCS.

One last thing I wanna mention is about the Bronx Zoos recent collection planning. An interview I saw with I believe the director of the zoo, talked about realigning their collection plan to focus around species of conservation concern. The new exhibit for rhim gazelle, gharial, and influx of rare turtle species were all part of this effort. WCS is not just gonna build a meerkat exhibit for the visitors sake unlike many zoos do, as all their exhibits have to be linked to a conservation program the WCS operates. So maybe the zoos may not be getting anything flashy as of recent, yet that is not to say much work has not been done to zoo as of recent.
 
sooty mangabey said:
Yes, the zoo’s conservation work is stellar. And a lot is made of this. I’d ask three things, though:
1. How much do 80% of visitors really care about such things?
2. Is Bronx’s work significantly better than, say, Omaha’s? Is it true, as a friend said to me yesterday, that “no zoo contributes more to conservation”?
3. If we measure a zoo’s quality by its conservation work, London would be one of the best in Europe. Sadly, it isn’t!
Click to expand...
Your questions would make the WCS Board and staff cry. They have worked for a century to make you aware of their work.
 
Free of charge is a fairly easy concept..but then absolutely nothing is free if there is an attached cost to maintaining it and thats your definition ie a walk around the moors here - hills kept naked by local government/national government/ EEC/private landowners etc - very few folks would regard such a hike as in anyway"not free". Getting a bit away from NY zoos I feel.Interested to know that, whatever the definition, there is now a charge on the wonderful Staten Island Ferry(tho ive no idea how easy the zoo is from there... i was always picked up by car and it seemed a reasonable distance).
 
Tim Brown said:
Free of charge is a fairly easy concept..but then absolutely nothing is free if there is an attached cost to maintaining it and thats your definition ie a walk around the moors here - hills kept naked by local government/national government/ EEC/private landowners etc - very few folks would regard such a hike as in anyway"not free". Getting a bit away from NY zoos I feel.Interested to know that, whatever the definition, there is now a charge on the wonderful Staten Island Ferry(tho ive no idea how easy the zoo is from there... i was always picked up by car and it seemed a reasonable distance).
Click to expand...
No, still no charge to the rider. It may not be "free" in the strictest sense but rather, subsidized; still, the rider does not need to take out a wallet at the exact moment of boarding nor ten minutes after that nor an hour after that. They will have the illusory experience that it is free and if they are not NY state tax-payers they will be correct. If, on the other hand, they are NYS tax payers they will be foolling themselves. On the other hand if they are a NY state tax -payer accompanying a UK visitor it will get tricky. (We could push this all the way Monty Python if someone has the inclination)
 
Zooplantman said:
No, still no charge to the rider. It may not be "free" in the strictest sense but rather, subsidized; still, the rider does not need to take out a wallet at the exact moment of boarding nor ten minutes after that nor an hour after that. They will have the illusory experience that it is free and if they are not NY state tax-payers they will be correct. If, on the other hand, they are NYS tax payers they will be foolling themselves. On the other hand if they are a NY state tax -payer accompanying a UK visitor it will get tricky. (We could push this all the way Monty Python if someone has the inclination)
Click to expand...

Indeed - and we are quite 'off-thread'. 'Free of Charge' is not actually an especially clear concept; and often describes something which is actually charged for but the cost is hidden from the consumer - usually because that is what the consumer wants to make him feel content.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Zooplantman said:
Your questions would make the WCS Board and staff cry. They have worked for a century to make you aware of their work.
Click to expand...

I think the level of conservation work is made obvious by the zoo: it’s a message that is broadcast very loudly. My point was, though, that other zoos also practise this (if not to the same extent), but that, in itself, does not make a zoo either popular or “good” to visit. I certainly wouldn’t want the staff to cry!
 
Andrew Swales said:
Indeed - and we are quite 'off-thread'. 'Free of Charge' is not actually an especially clear concept; and often describes something which is actually charged for but the cost is hidden from the consumer - usually because that is what the consumer wants to make him feel content.
Click to expand...
Actually, this isn’t off-thread at all. A bugbear with the Bronx is the extra charge levied for many elements within the zoo: Wild Asia monorail (fair enough - as you get whizzed past various species, you are on a ride, so a charge is possibly appropriate...), Congo (brilliant, but why pay more for the Gorilla exhibit?), the Children’s Zoo (again, why?), Jungle World (...?).

It seems as if the majority of visitors buy “everything-included” tickets, so why have this as a separate charge? Understandable on a Wednesday, when general admission is apparently free, but at other times it feels ungenerous - and inefficient in its use of staff (all those people checking tickets could be undertaking routine maintenance!).
 
sooty mangabey said:
Congo (brilliant, but why pay more for the Gorilla exhibit?),.
Click to expand...
Admission collected at Congo Gorilla Forest is used directly to fund WCS conservation work in that region. The entire visitor experience was designed to underscore that point by giving the visitor the decision, towards the end, of how they want their fee spent.
I suppose we failed.
 
Having reflected some more, I think it important to reiterate that despite my comments about scruffiness and an occasional sense of near abandonment, the Bronx is, without question, a genuinely wonderful zoo.

World of Birds is fantastic: each display is beautifully put-together, the collection is great, and the interpretive material is superb. The area looking at the proportion of eggs that make it to adult birds is an enduring classic. Likewise, the Reptile House, although very traditional, is highly professional in its presentation.

Some of the exhibits from the 1980s onwards are, still, among the very best (even if they do require some TLC): the Gorilla area of Congo Forest is stunning, Snow Leopards and Tigers are wonderful (although, as always, I’d like more “supporting” exhibits too), and my personal favourite is the Gelada / Ibex / Hyrax display - outstanding!

Also, not discussed often here is the Children’s Zoo. Leaving aside all of my ‘issues’ with such a place (essentially, why should a Giant Anteater be only for children?), I have to say that this whole area is beautifully done. A number of relatively small enclosures, attractive in their design, showing off some commonly-seen species. If it were a free-standing zoo in a small town it’d be seen as an absolute gem.
 
Zooplantman said:
Admission collected at Congo Gorilla Forest is used directly to fund WCS conservation work in that region. The entire visitor experience was designed to underscore that point by giving the visitor the decision, towards the end, of how they want their fee spent.
I suppose we failed.
Click to expand...
I don’t think the zoo “failed” here at all. The idea of deciding where a slice of your entry cost should go is a brilliant one. I just feel that the levying of extra charges leaves a bad taste. Of course, a visitor is going to pay anyway, but I’d prefer simply to have a flat admission which includes everything (including direct donation to in-situ projects). The difference, as suggested above by @Andrew Swales, is a psychological one as much as anything, but I don’t think people like having to pay more for “extras” - I certainly don’t.
 
sooty mangabey said:
I don’t think the zoo “failed” here at all. The idea of deciding where a slice of your entry cost should go is a brilliant one. I just feel that the levying of extra charges leaves a bad taste. Of course, a visitor is going to pay anyway, but I’d prefer simply to have a flat admission which includes everything (including direct donation to in-situ projects). The difference, as suggested above by @Andrew Swales, is a psychological one as much as anything, but I don’t think people like having to pay more for “extras” - I certainly don’t.
Click to expand...
The zoo has often debated the virtues of full-fare vs pay as you go vs. select options at entry.
But Congo is different. Our challenge was to turn casual visitors "into conservationists." Impossible as that sounds, it was decided that paying towards conservation and then learning about the conflicting needs to be funded would help visitors become more engaged. I do think that a strong case could be made that the scheme would work better (psychologically) if it didn't feel exactly like taking out your wallet to ride the monorail or enter the Childrens Zoo or buy a hamburger.
 
The implementation of the all-day “value pass” to the various paid attractions at the zoo addresses the concerns noted about feeling “nickeled and dimed,” and probably increases revenue overall. But it greatly diminishes the sense of the Congo fee and related conservation choices voting activity being an “act of conservation” as originally intended.
 
An insightful review from @sooty mangabey , meaning that Central Park Zoo, Prospect Park Zoo, New York Aquarium and Bronx Zoo have now all underwhelmed slightly...although of course they all have their fantastic attributes at the same time.

An interesting discussion has developed about the Bronx Zoo, but there has been no mention on this thread of the crappy opening hours (10:00 - 5:00 plus animal exhibits closing at 4:30) during weekdays. For a major zoo to have such crummy hours all summer long is a huge disappointment. (On a side note, think of the poor giraffes locked in the tiny Carter Giraffe House for at least 17 hours per day...or for weeks on end in the winter. Are they ever given outdoor access at night? I'd be surprised if that ever occurs.)

It's not a cheap zoo to visit, with a $40 'total experience ticket' on top of $17 parking for anyone with a vehicle. If, hypothetically, I was away from British Columbia and I took my family to the Bronx Zoo then it would be $200 U.S. ($262 CAD) just to walk in the entrance. Add on the $17 for parking, plus lunch, snacks and any souvenirs, and then I could take my wife and 4 kids around and see perhaps 50% of the zoo. Ha! Look daddy...a squirrel! :p

If one wanted to get the basic ticket at the Bronx Zoo, then charging extra for the Children's Zoo ($6 per person) seems expensive for what is mainly barnyard animals. The Bug Carousel at $6 is an eye-popping price, $6 for the Butterfly Garden, $6 for Congo Gorilla Forest, $6 for the Wild Asia monorail and then another $6 for JungleWorld. I can perhaps agree with the Wild Asia monorail extra price (Dallas charges $5 for their monorail ride) and the Bug Carousel is another ride and so $6 (which is exorbitant) makes sense. Without a doubt, the conservation message for Congo Gorilla Forest has become muddled with all of the extra fees around the zoo. For example, charging $6 per person for JungleWorld is ridiculous. Why not have Omaha's Henry Doorly Zoo & Aquarium start charging for all of their buildings? Lied Jungle, Scott Aquarium, Desert Dome, Kingdoms of the Night, etc. Omaha has a 5-acre Children's Zoo that is included free with admission and I could take my whole family to that zoo for only $107 U.S. ($140 CAD) which is pretty close to half the cost of what the Bronx Zoo would be. The only extra costs in Omaha would be the Skyfari ride, the Carousel ride and the stingray petting tank, which all seem reasonable to charge extra for.

I could take my family to the Henry Doorly Zoo for 50% of the cost of going to the Bronx Zoo and the icing on the cake is that Henry Doorly also offers 50% admission on a second day! I could then spend two full days in Omaha, with longer days due to the superior opening hours, and it would still be cheaper than the Bronx Zoo. I couldn't find anything on the Bronx Zoo's website that has a second day at half-price or any kind of similar discount. Of course, the Bronx is located in New York City, which is one of the truly great cities of the world and a splendid place for tourists to spend money and see attractions. But at this current time, I would argue that Omaha has the far superior zoo and even hardcore, staunch Bronx supporters would have to admit that what has taken place just in the past decade in Omaha has been incredible. At best, the zoos are fairly even in offering a full-day visitor experience of the highest caliber, but while the Bronx needs a good lick of paint, Omaha is under constant construction. Looking at just the past few years, there is the superlative 28-acre African Grasslands, 8-acre Asian Highlands and 5-acre Children's Adventure Trails, not to mention the revamped Scott Aquarium and $14 million Alaskan Adventure Splash Park or $9 million Glacier Bay Landing or the upcoming $22 million California Sea Lion exhibit...I'm not sure that Bronx is even close these days, judging from comments of zoo nerds, and it would cost my family double the amount of money to visit.

While I'm discussing ticket prices, in what has turned into a long post...San Diego Zoo has a great $90 pass that is a '2-Visit Pass' for either a day at the zoo and then another day at the safari park...or two days at one location. There is even a '3-For 1' Pass that adds SeaWorld into the mix that costs $149 per adult and visitors have a full week to see the trio of attractions.

Lastly, looking at Saint Louis Zoo, that is an amazing facility arguably up in the Top 5 zoos in the country. It is a free establishment and the last time I visited (solo in 2014) I didn't spend a penny except for a cheap lunch and I was there all day. There are 8 added attractions that cost extra, but those range from a 4-D Theater to various rides to a sea lion show. The only truly ridiculous one is the $4 charge for the Children's Zoo, although the first hour there is free. Every zoo nerd always visits the Children's Zoo because there are animals like Tasmanian Devils, tree kangaroos, otters, Naked Mole Rats and Fennec Foxes.

Overall, one could argue that San Diego, Omaha and Saint Louis are all terrific zoos that each have longer opening hours than the Bronx. All are progressive zoos that offer up more value than the Bronx Zoo, and tickets are better deals in all three locations in comparison to the Bronx. San Diego, Omaha and Saint Louis have radically transformed their campuses in the past decade, while Bronx has stood by while the New York Aquarium opened 'Ocean Wonders: Sharks!' for a whopping $158 million U.S. ($207 million CAD). The Bronx Zoo is long overdue for a major exhibit that will force people to sit up and notice an institution for more than its conservation work.
 
snowleopard said:
It's not a cheap zoo to visit, with a $40 'total experience ticket'
Click to expand...

snowleopard said:
While I'm discussing ticket prices, in what has turned into a long post...San Diego Zoo has a great $90 pass that is a '2-Visit Pass' for either a day at the zoo and then another day at the safari park...or two days at one location.
Click to expand...

So $40 is too much to pay for one day at a collection, but $90 is "great" for two days at a collection..... :P

40 x 2 = 80
90 / 2 = 45

80 < 90
40 < 45

14608107_1180665285312703_1558693314_n.jpg
 
@TeaLovingDave That’s your takeaway from my post? Sheesh! :rolleyes:

$90 for a couple of days at San Diego Zoo and San Diego Zoo Safari Park, which are, according to @sooty mangabey, “miles and miles” ahead of the Bronx Zoo = a sweet deal!
 
snowleopard said:
@TeaLovingDave That’s your takeaway from my post? Sheesh! :rolleyes:

$90 for a couple of days at San Diego Zoo and San Diego Zoo Safari Park, which are, according to @sooty mangabey, “miles and miles” ahead of the Bronx Zoo = a sweet deal!
Click to expand...

It is indeed a great deal; this is not in dispute - especially when one considers that the one-day basic ticket for San Diego is half again as expensive as the "total experience" ticket for Bronx.

But.......still more expensive on a day-by-day basis than the entry price you cite as too high :P not to mention the fact that were one to visit Bronx on multiple days you could probably get away with getting the basic ticket on the second day, reducing the overall cost further.
 
Parking price should be included if we're comparing entry fees, since it's essential. SDZ is free, the safari park is $15. Bronx is $17. So $40 x 2 + $17 x 2 = $114 for Bronx, $90 + $15 = $105 for San Diego.

It should also be noted that Omaha is part of the AZA reciprocal program, giving you 50% off admission (and parking there is free). San Diego and WCS both aren't participants, and San Diego only allows people to purchase their membership if they live in certain zip codes near the zoo. Most WCS memberships don't include parking for Bronx or the Aquarium, and don't include all of the Bronx add-ons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top