I am not surprised that you love the Wildlands zoo, but let me respectfully disagree with some of the points you make. I feel many of your arguments are not nearly as black and white as you make them.
First, it is debatable whether Wildlands is very successful with families. There has been a lot of criticism, especially in the first year about a lack of animals, a lack of signage and lack of a clear vision. It seemed as the zoo didn't know what it wanted to be, a zoo, a themepark or a combination of both. It ended up failing in all 3 departments. In recent years the zoo has actually moved away from the themeparky focus, because it had to make a choice of what it wanted to be. So what they have been doing is adding more animals, more signage (many visitors specifically asked for this) and they have closed half of the new roller coaster, which was a failure both economically and with the visitors, not because they don't like rollercoasters, but it is not a great ride. This means that the zoo is more and more moving mainstream zoo. It is still different with regards to the theming, which is much heavier than in other Dutch zoos. Zoos like Gelsenkirchen and Hannover which are following a similar path do however show that it is very hard to make this kind of zoo profitable and even after 20+ years Zoo Hannover is not profitable (which given the income it generates is pretty shocking).
That a themepark + zoo combination can successfully exist, doesn't mean that every zoo that does this succedes and Emmen clearly did not have the resources or vision to do so. in Europe both Tayto, Ireland, and Kolmarden, Sweden, show ways in which it can be done, but their approaches are very different.
The fact that DAK is the world's top attendance zoo is purely based on its location in the middle of a whole range of other themeparks, resorts, etc., which make it a prime holiday destination for a huge country. It is still a huge achievement to be so successful, but it makes comparing their attendance figures with basically any other zoo worthless (maybe except Loro Parque and the Sea Worlds). Especially comparing with Emmen is worthless given the location in a "lowly" populated & non-touristy corner of the Netherlands, away from other major tourism attractions, in a country where there are plenty of other zoos that can be reached with the same driving distance.
Many of DAK visitors, as in many themeparks will be one off visitors, which makes sense given the location, but most zoos depend on a different type of visitors as well: the locals who either have an annual pass or visit semi-regularly. This group of people has been seriously let down in Emmen and the number of annual memberships has plummeted very steeply 1 year after opening.
There are however many many different options to help zoos become more attractive as tourist attractions. Zoos like Artis and Zoo Berlin are located in tourist hotspots and both have been increasing their attendance in recent years. Especially in Artis this development is somewhat surprising, given the dire state the zoo was in 20 years ago. The message has however been very clear that Artis is a place where nature and culture interact and this message has been well received. A theme ride in Artis (or Vienna for that matter) would be nothing short of blasphemy.
The old Emmen zoo was also clearly different from any other zoo around, with a strong focus on education and exhibiting large groups of animals, but it was feeling the limits of its location. The Biochron was a fantastic living museum on evolution, but it showed its age. I feel that giving the Biochron a 50 million euro update, updating its displays and creating a new aquarium (see the Darwineum in Rostock to see what is possible), both zoo and city would have been better of.
We have discussed about this before, but there are so many options to entertain and educate people simultaneously. Zoos know that they are in the entertainment business, up to a certain extent, that doesn't mean they shouldn't focus on education. There are several models around which successfully show how education can be well integrated in a serious zoo. Prime examples are Apenheul and Zürich. Apenheul has a hands on approach with a lot of volunteers around the zoo, but also a lot of interpretative signage as well as interactive displays, mainly aimed at children. Zürich has a more "serious" approach, with more educational displays, but it is all very visually and props, like a real cage of 2 cubic meters in which an Orangutan was kept as a pet, make sure an impact is made. There are a lot of complaints about the Ape house in Zürich, but educationally it stands out positively.
The most problematic is that you seem to think that animals themselves cannot be enough entertainment by itself, which is something that baffles me. If they weren't, zoos wouldn't exist. The best entertainment any zoo could have are animals that are visible and behaving naturally. There are so many ways zoos can stand out and get people to learn about nature (entertaining visitors is the first step, because otherwise they would not become interested in animals). I personally think it is much harder, but much more worthwhile, if a zoo can entertain and sensitise people for nature using Fiddler crabs than with a huge African savannah.
First, it is debatable whether Wildlands is very successful with families. There has been a lot of criticism, especially in the first year about a lack of animals, a lack of signage and lack of a clear vision. It seemed as the zoo didn't know what it wanted to be, a zoo, a themepark or a combination of both. It ended up failing in all 3 departments. In recent years the zoo has actually moved away from the themeparky focus, because it had to make a choice of what it wanted to be. So what they have been doing is adding more animals, more signage (many visitors specifically asked for this) and they have closed half of the new roller coaster, which was a failure both economically and with the visitors, not because they don't like rollercoasters, but it is not a great ride. This means that the zoo is more and more moving mainstream zoo. It is still different with regards to the theming, which is much heavier than in other Dutch zoos. Zoos like Gelsenkirchen and Hannover which are following a similar path do however show that it is very hard to make this kind of zoo profitable and even after 20+ years Zoo Hannover is not profitable (which given the income it generates is pretty shocking).
That a themepark + zoo combination can successfully exist, doesn't mean that every zoo that does this succedes and Emmen clearly did not have the resources or vision to do so. in Europe both Tayto, Ireland, and Kolmarden, Sweden, show ways in which it can be done, but their approaches are very different.
The fact that DAK is the world's top attendance zoo is purely based on its location in the middle of a whole range of other themeparks, resorts, etc., which make it a prime holiday destination for a huge country. It is still a huge achievement to be so successful, but it makes comparing their attendance figures with basically any other zoo worthless (maybe except Loro Parque and the Sea Worlds). Especially comparing with Emmen is worthless given the location in a "lowly" populated & non-touristy corner of the Netherlands, away from other major tourism attractions, in a country where there are plenty of other zoos that can be reached with the same driving distance.
Many of DAK visitors, as in many themeparks will be one off visitors, which makes sense given the location, but most zoos depend on a different type of visitors as well: the locals who either have an annual pass or visit semi-regularly. This group of people has been seriously let down in Emmen and the number of annual memberships has plummeted very steeply 1 year after opening.
There are however many many different options to help zoos become more attractive as tourist attractions. Zoos like Artis and Zoo Berlin are located in tourist hotspots and both have been increasing their attendance in recent years. Especially in Artis this development is somewhat surprising, given the dire state the zoo was in 20 years ago. The message has however been very clear that Artis is a place where nature and culture interact and this message has been well received. A theme ride in Artis (or Vienna for that matter) would be nothing short of blasphemy.
The old Emmen zoo was also clearly different from any other zoo around, with a strong focus on education and exhibiting large groups of animals, but it was feeling the limits of its location. The Biochron was a fantastic living museum on evolution, but it showed its age. I feel that giving the Biochron a 50 million euro update, updating its displays and creating a new aquarium (see the Darwineum in Rostock to see what is possible), both zoo and city would have been better of.
We have discussed about this before, but there are so many options to entertain and educate people simultaneously. Zoos know that they are in the entertainment business, up to a certain extent, that doesn't mean they shouldn't focus on education. There are several models around which successfully show how education can be well integrated in a serious zoo. Prime examples are Apenheul and Zürich. Apenheul has a hands on approach with a lot of volunteers around the zoo, but also a lot of interpretative signage as well as interactive displays, mainly aimed at children. Zürich has a more "serious" approach, with more educational displays, but it is all very visually and props, like a real cage of 2 cubic meters in which an Orangutan was kept as a pet, make sure an impact is made. There are a lot of complaints about the Ape house in Zürich, but educationally it stands out positively.
The most problematic is that you seem to think that animals themselves cannot be enough entertainment by itself, which is something that baffles me. If they weren't, zoos wouldn't exist. The best entertainment any zoo could have are animals that are visible and behaving naturally. There are so many ways zoos can stand out and get people to learn about nature (entertaining visitors is the first step, because otherwise they would not become interested in animals). I personally think it is much harder, but much more worthwhile, if a zoo can entertain and sensitise people for nature using Fiddler crabs than with a huge African savannah.
:
