Right! I've had a few people message me now asking for my thoughts on this but I haven't really had the time to properly respond until now:
First off, this is all a little difficult to respond to since I was not present for your visit, and as such I cannot simply tell you that this is not how the zoo is since I don't think you would lie about what you experienced visiting a zoo I know you have a high regard for. I can, however, comment from the perspective of someone who visits several times a year.
I've personally never been a fan of the signage design in JW. I understand what it's going for, but the way the signage is designed has always appeared dirty and faded to me. There's definitely a few spots, particularly in the main free-flight room, where older signage is faded or frayed, but a lot of the signage in the building is relatively newer. The design makes it look dirty to me, but I think it's more of a case of how it's meant to look (which can be a valid criticism in its own right...). As far as dirty glass and broken barriers go, could you give specifics? I genuinely can't think of where exactly this would be and I can't say I've ever noticed any issues myself. Now the education signage outside of the exit is... disappointing. It used to have a countdown of how many acres of natural rainforest remained, too. I loved that display, and it's beyond me why it's never been fixed. I'm sure it's a lot more complex than replacing a circuit or a wire, but I, too, wish that they'd get this back up and running again. If for nothing else, it really did get the message across very well.
I'll address the bolded momentarily.
Again, which fences and signage? The fencing has always been simplistic and some of the barriers on the older enclosures are, well, old, but I can't recall any damages or signage that was in too bad of shape. The only section that springs to mind is the old fencing for the abandoned yard that's next to where the new kids playscape is, but that's because they've been tearing it up as part of the new developments. Personally, again, I really can't say I've ever had problems with the Gelada glass being dirty. In fact, some of my best Gelada and ibex pictures have been through the glass viewing and you can't even tell there's glass in the way. I haven't been since the beginning of the year, though, so maybe the Spring/early Summer hasn't been kind to them. I haven't checked out the educational display in about a year so I have no idea how rough it's looking now but it was fine back then. Baboon Reserve as a whole I think suffers mostly from the fact that the massive enclosure just looks so empty nowadays. That's not the zoo's fault, of course, seeing as it's only been a few years since they were able to import new Gelada stock for breeding, and the Nubian Ibex program is struggling a bit. The food shack is not a cafe, it's specifically a specialty burger stand. You may have noticed that the zoo has a lot of new specialty food stands scattered all over, including one that specifically serves alcohol! They've all been added in in recent years, to great success as far as I can tell. I'm not sure why the burger one would be closed on a Saturday in July, but I can guarantee you that it's usually open and pretty busy.
Now this is where I really don't know what you're talking about
Pretty much all of the enclosures here were revamped only a couple years ago and I think they look great. The animals all got new substrate and amenities, and in general all the habitats are much more naturalistic than they were previously. The species list is even better than it was before as well. The outdoor enclosures got new substrate and branches for the primates. I'm not sure what else you would want done with them, seeing as they're a short row of medium-sized cages.
Never used it, can't comment. I've never had a problem with any of their other bathrooms, though. I've always particularly liked the "green restroom" that's just outside the main entrance.
Perhaps, but the reptile house is 120 years old after all
Can't say I've noticed any particular issues with the appearance of either, though, except that WoB is not the prettiest building. Ironically, on one of my last visits I was standing across the path from the WoR entrance and was thinking about how great the building looked..
(BTW I'm not ignoring your positive comments, I just agree with them and therefore have nothing to add)
The outside of the ABH needs some love, no argument there. It's also never been the prettiest building at the zoo, though. As for the inside, I remember the building closed for a good while a few years ago to undergo some renovations, so I can only assume that the functionality and animal quarters are all being kept up to par.
Now I have not been to Brookfield or Lincoln Park unfortunately, so I cannot comment on them. You also already know my opinions on the San Diegos, so I will not go too deeply into them again here. I have, of course, been to Cincinnati and, to put things as bluntly as I can on a family friendly forum, I find comparing Bronx to it to be absolutely absurd! To be clear, I quite like Cincinnati. I've defended Cincinnati many times on this forum. I'm looking forward to Cincinnati's future. That said, one of the best zoos in the country the Cincinnati Zoo is not. From my understanding, things have taken major turns for the worse in recent years. The bird department in particular has been left with no curator more often than it's had one, leading to a rapidly decreasing collection and not enough experienced staff to care for what is left. The reptile department, while surprisingly strong, has arguably the worst reptile house in the AZA. From what I've been told by those who've been recently, Night Hunters (opened 2011) is already peeling and half-empty with many enclosures already beginning to fall into disrepair. The new African exhibit has been an undeniable disaster design and functionality-wise. And the hoofstock exhibits... I understand that not every zoo can enclose large, naturally breeding herds in naturally growing grassy fields and woodlands the way Bronx can, but Cincinnati probably has the worst hoofstock yards I've ever seen in an AZA zoos. With some exceptions, they are bland, barren, and far too small. The wild horse yard (which to be fair is now being replaced by a kangaroo walkthrough) could only house two non-breeding animals per AZA regulations. I think the neighboring Takin enclosure could house three. Their mixed savanna yard looks like a manicured golf course that can only house one or two individuals of the multiple hoofstock species kept in it due to space limitations-- not to mention the divisive conditions for the birds that are crammed in there... And the hippos..... The zoo got lucky that their male died shortly after the calf was born prematurely as having 1.1.1 was in violation of AZA spatial requirements for the species. But now that it's accepted that hippos should be housed in groups of at least three, the zoo's only three-year-old exhibit is failing on that front as well. It's too bad the zoo decided that adding in Meerkats and a playground at the last minute was more important than their hippos having adequate space to live in. Compare that to Bronx, with their multi-acre natural habitats, world-class exhibits, and potentially largest animal collection in the country (does anyone actually know which zoo has the most species? I know Bronx keeps more than SDZ, and Omaha no longer keeps more reptiles than Bronx. I don't actually know who's left who might have more). Comparing the two is honestly like comparing apples to spaceships IMO.
Your last visit to Bronx was in 2008ish, correct? Judging from your question about the Skyfari, you never saw the zoo after the effects of the severe 2009 budget cuts hit it. This might explain why you feel the way you do. As you probably know, the zoo had to close down several of its exhibits due to the cost of operation being higher than what they could then afford. This included World of Darkness, Rare Animal Range, the Monkey House (off-exhibit areas were in too rough of shape to continue using without renovations they couldn't afford), and the Skyfari (was no longer turning a profit regardless; it also had safety issue). The zoo also had to significantly reduce its collection size in the exhibits that remained open. After this, the zoo entered a period of almost stasis, where exhibits were definitely being neglected of routine maintenance and virtually nothing was happening. Then in 2014, they finally started turning things around again. Since then, the second floor of World of Birds, the Zoo Center, and the Children's Zoo have all received major renovations, the Mouse House and World of Reptiles have both had most of their enclosures completely redone and "naturalized" (something WoR in particular was in desperate need of), brand new standalone enclosures have popped up all around the zoo (JW, African Plains, WoR, ABH, WoB, etc.), and plenty of new visitor amenities in the form of new eateries, a playground, and non-animal attractions have been added. The animal collection has also grown significantly since then, and a lot of very rare species have joined the zoo's ranks. Even as we speak, new displays are under construction for new species. The zoo's blackest eye, the old Polar Bear grotto, is a thing of the past and is being converted into a highly naturalistic exhibit for a very rare new mammal.
Personally, I started visiting regularly in 2011, right in the middle of the zoo's dark period. The Monkey House was still open at the time as it closed in 2012, and aside from that closure I had no idea about how bad the zoo was struggling. I didn't see a zoo in decline, I only saw the zoo for what it was at the time, how it had always been as far as I knew. Maybe if I had visited the San Diegos back then, I'd have called them the best zoos in the US, though I still maintain that the worst of what Bronx has had to offer during my years of visiting is still light years better than the many rough spots still found at SDZ today. Bronx was already absolutely superb in the eyes of someone who had no historical context to compare it to, so for me it's done nothing but get better and better and better with time, further cementing it as the best zoo in the country. Would I see the zoo as being worse now than it was before had I shadowed you on your last visit? Perhaps. I don't think so, though, despite the saddening loss of the closed exhibits. I had no historical bearing for London when I first visited, and I thought it was arguably the second best in the UK after Chester. After my second visit only two years later, I could see what everyone was talking about when they complained about the zoo's decline. I've never felt that way in relation to Bronx. Was Bronx a better zoo in 2008 than it is in 2019? I think I'd argue no, but I honestly can't say. Is it a better zoo now than it was in 2013? Absolutely. To me, that's what matters. Since your last visit was pre-budget cuts, I can see how you might be worried about the state of the zoo and direction it's heading. I can assure you, though, it's heading in the right direction.
I've never understood the argument that a zoo needs to be actively working on massive new developments (clearly the major renovations already taken and taking place do not count...) for them to be in the discussion of who's the best zoo. I'm not just responding to your comment here, but to this general criticism that I've seen thrown at Bronx many times on here. Zoos such as Omaha in particular and San Diego to an extent have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on amazing new exhibits that have greatly increased the quality of the zoos. Meanwhile, Bronx has not. But keep in mind that these other zoos are spending this money to replace exhibits that were often horrible for the animals. What exhibits or sections at Bronx need to be overhauled exactly? They could use a new giraffe house and the odd enclosure here and there, yes, but what major developments really need to be done aside from the general renovations of existing exhibits that are already underway? If Bronx ever replaced African Plains with an exhibit like Africa Rocks I'd actually argue that the zoo had declined in quality a bit. Don't get me wrong, I want to see brand new exhibits at the zoo, too, I just don't understand why the lack of them (so far) must mean the zoo is in decline. I also don't understand why the incredible work that has already been put in in recent years is so often dismissed to the point that people still insist that no new developments are taking place... I'd much rather what exists be brought up to the best standard possible before any expansions take place.
Good thing Bronx doesn't have a pit full of Meerkats and instead have been bringing in odd rodents, freshwater turtles, passerines, and larger carnivores
I'm pretty sure the entirety of the admission into CGF goes to conservation, not just part? Also, you can see gorillas without actually entering CGF should the animals choose to enter that half of the yard.
Regardless, the "total experience" ticket is the base ticket at the zoo. I think it's $39 and change at the moment, which is maybe a little pricey but not unexpected from a zoo of this magnitude (certainly far from what certain other major zoos charge!). If one were to walk up to the ticket booth and ask for a single ticket, this would be the ticket they'd be charged for. You have to specifically ask for the cheaper ticket that doesn't include the admission into CGF, Wild Asia Monorail, JungleWorld, Butterfly Gardens, the Children's Zoo, and the carousel. You're not being charged extra to visit these exhibits, you're being given the option to pay a cheaper admission at the price of not being able to see a small percentage of the zoo. If you then change your mind or perhaps only want to visit one of these exhibits, you can pay the small fee to enter or upgrade your ticket within the zoo. Bronx isn't the only US zoo to do something like this.
The Bronx unfortunately does not share in the luxury of deep pocketed donors or city/state tax reliefs in the same ways San Diego and Omaha do. They must also share their available funds with four other collections and a worldwide conservation organization in a way that no other zoo has to. The extra admission from those who chose not to pay the flat entry fee helps lighten the load of the cost of operation a bit as well as support the conservation programs we all rightly praise them for. Also remember that the zoo has free admission on Wednesdays, so the extra admissions sort of becomes crucial then. And to be honest, I really don't think $39 is a bad value considering everything you get with it...
While I agree that opening hours should be a bit longer, calling 7.5 hours (they're open until 5:30pm, with some animals beginning to be moved around 4:45ish) crappy is still extreme to me. That's literally half an hour shorter than Omaha's "superior opening times", which opens at 9am and closes at 5pm. In fact, a lot of major zoos that are not in areas with as generous of hours of daytime as Southern California have similar hours... which we've discussed before... at length...
Also something we've discussed before, the giraffes have something like four or five pens in the house, it's not just the one you see on-exhibit. I do agree that a new house should be made a priority, though.
So I already went into detail about Bronx's admission earlier so I won't get into that again, but let's compare prices. Let's call Bronx's admission $40 here. San Diego Zoo's admission is $56 according to their website. If you want to buy SDZ's total experience ticket, which adds a single showing in their 4-D theater, it's $62. But Bronx does have that $17 parking fee, which brings us up to $57. Bare in mind, most visitors per week will be taking public transportation, or using city parking, but that's not applicable to many of us here so I won't deny that $57 is pricey. BUT, Bronx offers a 10% discount on all tickets purchased online, whereas SDZ has no such deal. This puts Bronx at $53 per person for a visit including parking, and $36 for gate entry only. SDZ does have their $90 two-day ticket, and Omaha has 50% off admission for a second day visit, but at Bronx you can use your receipt from your first visit to get a return visit for free. @Vision did this when he visited the zoo in 2017. Also keep in mind that Bronx does have free admission on Wednesdays. So theoretically one could visit the Bronx Zoo for three days in a row for only $36 if they were smart... Personally I'd call that a good deal.
Don't forget about the WCS membership as well. The base membership for a single adult is $75 and that includes the Bronx Zoo, Central Park Zoo, Prospect Park Zoo, and Queens Zoo, though it does not include the New York Aquarium or parking at the zoo (both of which can be added for a $30 up charge each). Omaha's base membership is $89 and SDZ's is $112. If one includes free parking into their membership plan, the cost is $105. So that's four zoos +parking for a full year for $105.* Add the aquarium in and that's still only $135 per year for five collections +parking. All WCS membership plans also include discounted admission to Bronx's dinosaur safari and zipline course, extended hours events, and a free t-shirt (we all know how expensive zoo shirts can be
) along with the usual member discounts on food and merchandise.
*This is what I currently have.
And for the record, as already discussed slightly earlier on this thread, the Children's Zoo at Bronx is not only farmyard animals. Giant Anteater, Fennec Fox, pudu, porcupine, sloth, coati, squirrel monkey, mara, otter, prairie dog (with one of those tunnels that puts you inside the enclosure), skunk, owl, parrots, alligator, turtles/tortoises, catfish, and many other wild animals are exhibited here along with your mix of domestics ranging from Zebu to guineapig. I take it you skipped the CZ on your visit or something like that then?
One thing we can agree on, though, is that Omaha is absolutely spectacular. It's the only zoo I've visited in the US thus far that I honestly think could potentially be better than Bronx. The African and new Asian exhibits are phenomenal, and Desert Dome/Kingdoms of the Night are definitely in the top 10 best exhibits in the US. Simmons' Aviary dwarfs even the largest at SDZ. The zoo still has a few glaring issues, though, such as the numerous middle tier primate habitats and the amount of water that was pouring through the roof of Desert Dome at the end of my second day tells me that the zoo has their fair share of maintenance problems as well. I think Omaha sits comfortably at a close second to Bronx, perhaps if only due to the WCS's unmatched conservation programs. I'd like to see where both zoos are again in 10 years, as it is entirely possible that Omaha can overtake the #1 spot for me by then should Bronx not keep up with their slew of renovations and projects.
I had planned to visit Saint Louis after Omaha back in May, but unfortunately I had to cancel those plans due to how ridiculously difficult and expensive it is to reach Omaha from anywhere. From what I've heard from people whose opinions very closely match my own, however, I highly doubt I'd put the zoo anywhere near Bronx's level. I suppose an asterisk will have to remain on that statement until I get myself there, though.
While I've already discussed how Bronx's admission and value are not nearly as bad as you claimed, I would like to refer you again to my response to @reduakari's comment, as it is perhaps more applicable here than it was to him (I started writing all of this long before you commented..). The ideas that old=worse, and nothing new=bad are utterly ridiculous. When a zoo is filled with exhibits from the 70's, 80's, and even the 40's that are far better than what some aforementioned zoos are building in the 2010's, the fact that that $158million went to building one of the nicest-- though not nearly the largest-- shark exhibits in the country at a sister collection that needed a new exhibit far more urgently does not bother me one bit.
~Thylo
First off, this is all a little difficult to respond to since I was not present for your visit, and as such I cannot simply tell you that this is not how the zoo is since I don't think you would lie about what you experienced visiting a zoo I know you have a high regard for. I can, however, comment from the perspective of someone who visits several times a year.
I've personally never been a fan of the signage design in JW. I understand what it's going for, but the way the signage is designed has always appeared dirty and faded to me. There's definitely a few spots, particularly in the main free-flight room, where older signage is faded or frayed, but a lot of the signage in the building is relatively newer. The design makes it look dirty to me, but I think it's more of a case of how it's meant to look (which can be a valid criticism in its own right...). As far as dirty glass and broken barriers go, could you give specifics? I genuinely can't think of where exactly this would be and I can't say I've ever noticed any issues myself. Now the education signage outside of the exit is... disappointing. It used to have a countdown of how many acres of natural rainforest remained, too. I loved that display, and it's beyond me why it's never been fixed. I'm sure it's a lot more complex than replacing a circuit or a wire, but I, too, wish that they'd get this back up and running again. If for nothing else, it really did get the message across very well.
I'll address the bolded momentarily.
Again, which fences and signage? The fencing has always been simplistic and some of the barriers on the older enclosures are, well, old, but I can't recall any damages or signage that was in too bad of shape. The only section that springs to mind is the old fencing for the abandoned yard that's next to where the new kids playscape is, but that's because they've been tearing it up as part of the new developments. Personally, again, I really can't say I've ever had problems with the Gelada glass being dirty. In fact, some of my best Gelada and ibex pictures have been through the glass viewing and you can't even tell there's glass in the way. I haven't been since the beginning of the year, though, so maybe the Spring/early Summer hasn't been kind to them. I haven't checked out the educational display in about a year so I have no idea how rough it's looking now but it was fine back then. Baboon Reserve as a whole I think suffers mostly from the fact that the massive enclosure just looks so empty nowadays. That's not the zoo's fault, of course, seeing as it's only been a few years since they were able to import new Gelada stock for breeding, and the Nubian Ibex program is struggling a bit. The food shack is not a cafe, it's specifically a specialty burger stand. You may have noticed that the zoo has a lot of new specialty food stands scattered all over, including one that specifically serves alcohol! They've all been added in in recent years, to great success as far as I can tell. I'm not sure why the burger one would be closed on a Saturday in July, but I can guarantee you that it's usually open and pretty busy.
Now this is where I really don't know what you're talking about
Pretty much all of the enclosures here were revamped only a couple years ago and I think they look great. The animals all got new substrate and amenities, and in general all the habitats are much more naturalistic than they were previously. The species list is even better than it was before as well. The outdoor enclosures got new substrate and branches for the primates. I'm not sure what else you would want done with them, seeing as they're a short row of medium-sized cages.Never used it, can't comment. I've never had a problem with any of their other bathrooms, though. I've always particularly liked the "green restroom" that's just outside the main entrance.
Perhaps, but the reptile house is 120 years old after all
Can't say I've noticed any particular issues with the appearance of either, though, except that WoB is not the prettiest building. Ironically, on one of my last visits I was standing across the path from the WoR entrance and was thinking about how great the building looked..(BTW I'm not ignoring your positive comments, I just agree with them and therefore have nothing to add)
The outside of the ABH needs some love, no argument there. It's also never been the prettiest building at the zoo, though. As for the inside, I remember the building closed for a good while a few years ago to undergo some renovations, so I can only assume that the functionality and animal quarters are all being kept up to par.
Now I have not been to Brookfield or Lincoln Park unfortunately, so I cannot comment on them. You also already know my opinions on the San Diegos, so I will not go too deeply into them again here. I have, of course, been to Cincinnati and, to put things as bluntly as I can on a family friendly forum, I find comparing Bronx to it to be absolutely absurd! To be clear, I quite like Cincinnati. I've defended Cincinnati many times on this forum. I'm looking forward to Cincinnati's future. That said, one of the best zoos in the country the Cincinnati Zoo is not. From my understanding, things have taken major turns for the worse in recent years. The bird department in particular has been left with no curator more often than it's had one, leading to a rapidly decreasing collection and not enough experienced staff to care for what is left. The reptile department, while surprisingly strong, has arguably the worst reptile house in the AZA. From what I've been told by those who've been recently, Night Hunters (opened 2011) is already peeling and half-empty with many enclosures already beginning to fall into disrepair. The new African exhibit has been an undeniable disaster design and functionality-wise. And the hoofstock exhibits... I understand that not every zoo can enclose large, naturally breeding herds in naturally growing grassy fields and woodlands the way Bronx can, but Cincinnati probably has the worst hoofstock yards I've ever seen in an AZA zoos. With some exceptions, they are bland, barren, and far too small. The wild horse yard (which to be fair is now being replaced by a kangaroo walkthrough) could only house two non-breeding animals per AZA regulations. I think the neighboring Takin enclosure could house three. Their mixed savanna yard looks like a manicured golf course that can only house one or two individuals of the multiple hoofstock species kept in it due to space limitations-- not to mention the divisive conditions for the birds that are crammed in there... And the hippos..... The zoo got lucky that their male died shortly after the calf was born prematurely as having 1.1.1 was in violation of AZA spatial requirements for the species. But now that it's accepted that hippos should be housed in groups of at least three, the zoo's only three-year-old exhibit is failing on that front as well. It's too bad the zoo decided that adding in Meerkats and a playground at the last minute was more important than their hippos having adequate space to live in. Compare that to Bronx, with their multi-acre natural habitats, world-class exhibits, and potentially largest animal collection in the country (does anyone actually know which zoo has the most species? I know Bronx keeps more than SDZ, and Omaha no longer keeps more reptiles than Bronx. I don't actually know who's left who might have more). Comparing the two is honestly like comparing apples to spaceships IMO.
Your last visit to Bronx was in 2008ish, correct? Judging from your question about the Skyfari, you never saw the zoo after the effects of the severe 2009 budget cuts hit it. This might explain why you feel the way you do. As you probably know, the zoo had to close down several of its exhibits due to the cost of operation being higher than what they could then afford. This included World of Darkness, Rare Animal Range, the Monkey House (off-exhibit areas were in too rough of shape to continue using without renovations they couldn't afford), and the Skyfari (was no longer turning a profit regardless; it also had safety issue). The zoo also had to significantly reduce its collection size in the exhibits that remained open. After this, the zoo entered a period of almost stasis, where exhibits were definitely being neglected of routine maintenance and virtually nothing was happening. Then in 2014, they finally started turning things around again. Since then, the second floor of World of Birds, the Zoo Center, and the Children's Zoo have all received major renovations, the Mouse House and World of Reptiles have both had most of their enclosures completely redone and "naturalized" (something WoR in particular was in desperate need of), brand new standalone enclosures have popped up all around the zoo (JW, African Plains, WoR, ABH, WoB, etc.), and plenty of new visitor amenities in the form of new eateries, a playground, and non-animal attractions have been added. The animal collection has also grown significantly since then, and a lot of very rare species have joined the zoo's ranks. Even as we speak, new displays are under construction for new species. The zoo's blackest eye, the old Polar Bear grotto, is a thing of the past and is being converted into a highly naturalistic exhibit for a very rare new mammal.
Personally, I started visiting regularly in 2011, right in the middle of the zoo's dark period. The Monkey House was still open at the time as it closed in 2012, and aside from that closure I had no idea about how bad the zoo was struggling. I didn't see a zoo in decline, I only saw the zoo for what it was at the time, how it had always been as far as I knew. Maybe if I had visited the San Diegos back then, I'd have called them the best zoos in the US, though I still maintain that the worst of what Bronx has had to offer during my years of visiting is still light years better than the many rough spots still found at SDZ today. Bronx was already absolutely superb in the eyes of someone who had no historical context to compare it to, so for me it's done nothing but get better and better and better with time, further cementing it as the best zoo in the country. Would I see the zoo as being worse now than it was before had I shadowed you on your last visit? Perhaps. I don't think so, though, despite the saddening loss of the closed exhibits. I had no historical bearing for London when I first visited, and I thought it was arguably the second best in the UK after Chester. After my second visit only two years later, I could see what everyone was talking about when they complained about the zoo's decline. I've never felt that way in relation to Bronx. Was Bronx a better zoo in 2008 than it is in 2019? I think I'd argue no, but I honestly can't say. Is it a better zoo now than it was in 2013? Absolutely. To me, that's what matters. Since your last visit was pre-budget cuts, I can see how you might be worried about the state of the zoo and direction it's heading. I can assure you, though, it's heading in the right direction.
I've never understood the argument that a zoo needs to be actively working on massive new developments (clearly the major renovations already taken and taking place do not count...) for them to be in the discussion of who's the best zoo. I'm not just responding to your comment here, but to this general criticism that I've seen thrown at Bronx many times on here. Zoos such as Omaha in particular and San Diego to an extent have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on amazing new exhibits that have greatly increased the quality of the zoos. Meanwhile, Bronx has not. But keep in mind that these other zoos are spending this money to replace exhibits that were often horrible for the animals. What exhibits or sections at Bronx need to be overhauled exactly? They could use a new giraffe house and the odd enclosure here and there, yes, but what major developments really need to be done aside from the general renovations of existing exhibits that are already underway? If Bronx ever replaced African Plains with an exhibit like Africa Rocks I'd actually argue that the zoo had declined in quality a bit. Don't get me wrong, I want to see brand new exhibits at the zoo, too, I just don't understand why the lack of them (so far) must mean the zoo is in decline. I also don't understand why the incredible work that has already been put in in recent years is so often dismissed to the point that people still insist that no new developments are taking place... I'd much rather what exists be brought up to the best standard possible before any expansions take place.
Good thing Bronx doesn't have a pit full of Meerkats and instead have been bringing in odd rodents, freshwater turtles, passerines, and larger carnivores
I'm pretty sure the entirety of the admission into CGF goes to conservation, not just part? Also, you can see gorillas without actually entering CGF should the animals choose to enter that half of the yard.
Regardless, the "total experience" ticket is the base ticket at the zoo. I think it's $39 and change at the moment, which is maybe a little pricey but not unexpected from a zoo of this magnitude (certainly far from what certain other major zoos charge!). If one were to walk up to the ticket booth and ask for a single ticket, this would be the ticket they'd be charged for. You have to specifically ask for the cheaper ticket that doesn't include the admission into CGF, Wild Asia Monorail, JungleWorld, Butterfly Gardens, the Children's Zoo, and the carousel. You're not being charged extra to visit these exhibits, you're being given the option to pay a cheaper admission at the price of not being able to see a small percentage of the zoo. If you then change your mind or perhaps only want to visit one of these exhibits, you can pay the small fee to enter or upgrade your ticket within the zoo. Bronx isn't the only US zoo to do something like this.
The Bronx unfortunately does not share in the luxury of deep pocketed donors or city/state tax reliefs in the same ways San Diego and Omaha do. They must also share their available funds with four other collections and a worldwide conservation organization in a way that no other zoo has to. The extra admission from those who chose not to pay the flat entry fee helps lighten the load of the cost of operation a bit as well as support the conservation programs we all rightly praise them for. Also remember that the zoo has free admission on Wednesdays, so the extra admissions sort of becomes crucial then. And to be honest, I really don't think $39 is a bad value considering everything you get with it...
While I agree that opening hours should be a bit longer, calling 7.5 hours (they're open until 5:30pm, with some animals beginning to be moved around 4:45ish) crappy is still extreme to me. That's literally half an hour shorter than Omaha's "superior opening times", which opens at 9am and closes at 5pm. In fact, a lot of major zoos that are not in areas with as generous of hours of daytime as Southern California have similar hours... which we've discussed before... at length...
Also something we've discussed before, the giraffes have something like four or five pens in the house, it's not just the one you see on-exhibit. I do agree that a new house should be made a priority, though.
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!
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.
So I already went into detail about Bronx's admission earlier so I won't get into that again, but let's compare prices. Let's call Bronx's admission $40 here. San Diego Zoo's admission is $56 according to their website. If you want to buy SDZ's total experience ticket, which adds a single showing in their 4-D theater, it's $62. But Bronx does have that $17 parking fee, which brings us up to $57. Bare in mind, most visitors per week will be taking public transportation, or using city parking, but that's not applicable to many of us here so I won't deny that $57 is pricey. BUT, Bronx offers a 10% discount on all tickets purchased online, whereas SDZ has no such deal. This puts Bronx at $53 per person for a visit including parking, and $36 for gate entry only. SDZ does have their $90 two-day ticket, and Omaha has 50% off admission for a second day visit, but at Bronx you can use your receipt from your first visit to get a return visit for free. @Vision did this when he visited the zoo in 2017. Also keep in mind that Bronx does have free admission on Wednesdays. So theoretically one could visit the Bronx Zoo for three days in a row for only $36 if they were smart... Personally I'd call that a good deal.
Don't forget about the WCS membership as well. The base membership for a single adult is $75 and that includes the Bronx Zoo, Central Park Zoo, Prospect Park Zoo, and Queens Zoo, though it does not include the New York Aquarium or parking at the zoo (both of which can be added for a $30 up charge each). Omaha's base membership is $89 and SDZ's is $112. If one includes free parking into their membership plan, the cost is $105. So that's four zoos +parking for a full year for $105.* Add the aquarium in and that's still only $135 per year for five collections +parking. All WCS membership plans also include discounted admission to Bronx's dinosaur safari and zipline course, extended hours events, and a free t-shirt (we all know how expensive zoo shirts can be
) along with the usual member discounts on food and merchandise.*This is what I currently have.
And for the record, as already discussed slightly earlier on this thread, the Children's Zoo at Bronx is not only farmyard animals. Giant Anteater, Fennec Fox, pudu, porcupine, sloth, coati, squirrel monkey, mara, otter, prairie dog (with one of those tunnels that puts you inside the enclosure), skunk, owl, parrots, alligator, turtles/tortoises, catfish, and many other wild animals are exhibited here along with your mix of domestics ranging from Zebu to guineapig. I take it you skipped the CZ on your visit or something like that then?
One thing we can agree on, though, is that Omaha is absolutely spectacular. It's the only zoo I've visited in the US thus far that I honestly think could potentially be better than Bronx. The African and new Asian exhibits are phenomenal, and Desert Dome/Kingdoms of the Night are definitely in the top 10 best exhibits in the US. Simmons' Aviary dwarfs even the largest at SDZ. The zoo still has a few glaring issues, though, such as the numerous middle tier primate habitats and the amount of water that was pouring through the roof of Desert Dome at the end of my second day tells me that the zoo has their fair share of maintenance problems as well. I think Omaha sits comfortably at a close second to Bronx, perhaps if only due to the WCS's unmatched conservation programs. I'd like to see where both zoos are again in 10 years, as it is entirely possible that Omaha can overtake the #1 spot for me by then should Bronx not keep up with their slew of renovations and projects.
I had planned to visit Saint Louis after Omaha back in May, but unfortunately I had to cancel those plans due to how ridiculously difficult and expensive it is to reach Omaha from anywhere. From what I've heard from people whose opinions very closely match my own, however, I highly doubt I'd put the zoo anywhere near Bronx's level. I suppose an asterisk will have to remain on that statement until I get myself there, though.
While I've already discussed how Bronx's admission and value are not nearly as bad as you claimed, I would like to refer you again to my response to @reduakari's comment, as it is perhaps more applicable here than it was to him (I started writing all of this long before you commented..). The ideas that old=worse, and nothing new=bad are utterly ridiculous. When a zoo is filled with exhibits from the 70's, 80's, and even the 40's that are far better than what some aforementioned zoos are building in the 2010's, the fact that that $158million went to building one of the nicest-- though not nearly the largest-- shark exhibits in the country at a sister collection that needed a new exhibit far more urgently does not bother me one bit.
~Thylo
