Can a zoo be too big?
- Thread starter MurphyFox
- Start date
My opinion is simple: if a zoo can't reasonably be done in one day, it's too big.
Imo opinion a zoo cannot be too big provided it's collection is interesting enough and they sell 2-days tickets.
To me, the only situation in which a zoo can be too big is if they have too many animals to care for, which would never happen as a zoo only has as many animals as they are able to care for. So, no.
I understand that some think that a zoo that takes more than one day to see is too big but I personally see it as a plus. The bigger collection, the better!
I understand that some think that a zoo that takes more than one day to see is too big but I personally see it as a plus. The bigger collection, the better!
Given the current conservation needs of the world, I don't think any zoo genuinely engaged in breeding threatened/vulnerable/endangered species could be too big.
How do you feel about the size of San Diego Zoo? I’ve been there many times and I feel like I do miss some things each visit since I spend my day photographing as many species as possible. Aside from photographing, I find myself resting more so since the very uphill slopes can be tiresome if there all day as I usually am
I do make use of the elevator or Bashor Bridge when possible on my routes.A zoo can only be too big if it has a negative effect on animal husbandry.
For example, herd animal illness not being picked up in a safari park setting, leading to animals dying, when closer quarters contact would have revealed the problem.
The only other way I can see is if the space is not used effectively, such as cramming in lego dinosaurs or some such, rather than using it for animals.
For example, herd animal illness not being picked up in a safari park setting, leading to animals dying, when closer quarters contact would have revealed the problem.
The only other way I can see is if the space is not used effectively, such as cramming in lego dinosaurs or some such, rather than using it for animals.
I mean, there have been/are sketchy zoos that have more animals than they can care for. But ZooChatters don't go to such places, lol. I don't think places like that usually survive long-term anyway.
Depends on the standpoint:
1) From a visitor standpoint:
When the zoo receives many complaints about being too large and multiple visitors are having issues treking the grounds then it is too large. Examples would be multiple guests getting heat exhaustion when trying to normally walk in the park.
2)Animal Welfare:
When the exhibits begin to be completely natural and the animals are almost living on their own it's too large. When the zoo becomes a nature preserve or sanctuary it's too much.
3)Enviormental (similar to 2):
When the size of the zoo is so large it is beginning to hurt native ecosystems it's too large.
4)Conservation/Breeding:
None
1) From a visitor standpoint:
When the zoo receives many complaints about being too large and multiple visitors are having issues treking the grounds then it is too large. Examples would be multiple guests getting heat exhaustion when trying to normally walk in the park.
2)Animal Welfare:
When the exhibits begin to be completely natural and the animals are almost living on their own it's too large. When the zoo becomes a nature preserve or sanctuary it's too much.
3)Enviormental (similar to 2):
When the size of the zoo is so large it is beginning to hurt native ecosystems it's too large.
4)Conservation/Breeding:
None
Can you elaborate more on part 2? surely a bigger natural exhibit is better for the animals?
I think @snowleopard and I would disagree with you!
I believe Snowleopard, or someone else, once somewhat famously coined the phrase "I visit 'em so you don't have to".
When it comes to zoo size, it's interesting to note that the biggest standard zoos in North America all opened between 1974 and 1980: Toronto, North Carolina, Minnesota, Miami. They're all really good zoos that bear lots of similarities to one another in their biogeographic layouts, massive hoofstock paddocks and pavillion-style buildings (minus Miami) with extensive use of poured concrete. There are clear challenges that size has imposed. Among them are sites that are not convenient to visit without a car, the general failure of the monorail/tram transportation systems that they all use or used, the added costs of maintaining paths, bridges, etc. on large sites, and difficulty providing well-placed visitor amenities like restaurants. They've also mostly not developed to the scale of initial plans, with all but Toronto basically getting "stuck" at two continents for several decades because maintaining existing infrastructure made expansion more difficult. I think these zoos demonstrate where the upper limit of feasible size is for a standard zoo; bigger zoos only really work as specialist hoofstock-focused places like San Diego Zoo Safari Park.
To each their own. A 2-day ticket is better than having to buy a 1-day ticket twice, but personally I'd rather not have to pay for a night in a hotel and multiple meals on top of paying more money to see the same zoo. If it's a world-class zoo I'll do it to get the full experience, but I won't be thrilled about it.
I was able to do SDZ in a day - barely. It was before I got really interested in birds, though; if I were to go back I'd probably skip a few areas to make it work. I think the zoo pushes on "too big" mainly because it has so many species and exhibits (which I imagine slows us ZCers down more than regular visitors) and because some of the paths are long and steep. Saint Louis is 75-80% of San Diego's area and I can do SLZ in a day or less very easily.
I've never been to a zoo that took me more than a day, so for me this is more of a hypothetical question.
Okay, but staying in a hotel between two visits of normal-sized zoos, or for an two-days visit for a world class institution, that makes little difference to me: it fully depends on what is upcoming.
I'm going to Omaha within two years, it's would disturb me a lot if I couldn't see every single stone and corner, every single species and exhibit of this place.
Besides that, staying in the same place for two nights gives me the opportunity to see a bit of the place as well. Which is, when zoo tripping to places you might not expect coming soon again, imo a benefit.
I will stay in Philadelphia for a second night, for a quick re-visit of the zoo in the morning of the second day, and visiting the Art Museum in the afternoon. That of course is a personal choice and depending on the place.
Sphenisciologist
Well-Known Member
If the zoo is too massive to the point where you can’t even finish it in walking distance, they should import trolley’s or some other kind of vehicle transportation.
Bengal Tiger
Well-Known Member
Visitors could come multiple days, and enter through different entrances in order to see the various parts of the zoo.
I suppose that's one way of looking at it. Another way would be that if you're on a time or financial budget you might have to sacrifice another zoo in order to visit the same place twice - which *would* normally be the case for me if I happened upon a 2-day zoo, since more often that not I visit zoos when traveling. Alternatively, I also often do zoos as day trips if I'm nearby - but not nearby enough that I could easily drive there and back twice, meaning a hotel room would be an additional price that for a 1-day zoo would have been unnecessary.
Neither zoo took me more than a day, but again to each their own; if you want the extra time I'm sure you could make use of it (especially for Omaha, which *is* quite large). Your point about a half-day revisit then doing something else is good if there happens to be other things in the area I want to do, although it would depend on whether the zoo has 2-day tickets or if I'd have to buy the ticket again.
I don't think a zoo can be too big.
Sure it can be meaninglessly cluttered, far too spaced-out, or so boring that it feels like it's too big, but overall a good, high quality zoo where you take longer than a day to complete it is fine.
Sure it can be meaninglessly cluttered, far too spaced-out, or so boring that it feels like it's too big, but overall a good, high quality zoo where you take longer than a day to complete it is fine.
I had to take two days for my first visit to Omaha earlier this year, and this was with both Great Ape areas, the Wild Kingdom Pavillion, and the lower floor of Lied Jungle closed.