NNM.
Well-Known Member
Before I begin this, I would just like to apologize for the wreck that is my Roger Williams Park Zoo review. Someone who had it as their home zoo pointed out things that I had misremembered, specifically for certain bird exhibits, and they would know that zoo better than I would. All I would like to say is that if I came off as overtly negative in that review, please know that I liked that zoo and gave it a good score. I am sorry.
Onto the review.
For the longest time, I had been parading around the idea that Zoo New England's Stone Zoo is bad.
That was my last memory of it, walking from one flimsy and weak exhibit to another. I left almost depressed on that visit. But I later kept hearing people say it's actually superior to its big brother, the Franklin Park Zoo. I didn't agree, but in fairness, I may be a bit biased towards Franklin Park - Hell, one of their pygmy hippos is my profile picture. I then looked up some recent pictures of enclosures, and they looked surprisingly decent in them. So I decided to give Stone another chance. Was it the utter dump I remembered, or was there something I hadn't noticed?
Well, that was underwhelming. Stone Zoo is somehow both better and worse than I remembered. And the most notable thing about it is that it's wildly (pun not intended) inconsistent. One moment you'll walk past a genuinely top-tier enclosure, the next you're looking at a rickety pile of wire with little inside. I don't understand why this is, but it made this visit especially frustrating. Let's elaborate on that, shall we?
Caribbean Coast:
We start on a surprisingly good beginning. Caribbean Coast is an excellent start to the romp through Stone Zoo, and I only wish it kept this level of quality all the way through.
Flamingos:
A very solid enclosure for an animal that I've seen quite a few decent enclosures for. I especially like the two separate water features, and it's a good size. There are also free-flight macaws and scarlet ibis in this aviary, but the cold weather rendered them invisible. 8/10
Jamaican iguana:
Another point in this exhibit's favor is the uncommonly-seen zoo animals it has. This lizard was also absent, but the empty enclosure was large and very dymanic. 8/10
Bush dogs:
Another rarely-featured species, it's a bit detached from the aviary, but still a good and spacious enclosure for an animal not very large. 7/10
Overall: 8/10
Yukon Creek:
Wow, that didn't take long. This area has the exhibit quality that I expected to find here on my revisit. I was unimpressed, except for the decent Northern theming.
Black bears:
One thing that Franklin Park undoubtably has over Stone is its animal collection, which does factor in a zoo’s quality. Having such iconic animals as gorillas, giraffes, lion, and hippos helps them a good deal and they also get some of the better enclosures at that zoo. Stone meanwhile, presents its most iconic animal here, and not in very flattering fashion. Besides the few exceptions, this zoo has the same general issue as its sibling of undersized enclosures with lackluster fencing, although in this case, they often think sticking a glass pane somewhere in the wire will fix everything. However, Stone usually does not have the good conditions and setup of within, which is far worse than just being too small. And this comes into play here. This exhibit is tiny. The two bears have little room to walk around, and something that struck me in many exhibits here is that animals that like to climb have oddly few opportunities to do so, and that applies to the bears. Not a promising sign. 5/10
Bald eagle:
I regret bashing the Roger Williams eagle exhibit, this one makes it look state-of-the-art. I don't like the net cast over the already cage-liked barrier, and the bird had little room to fly around. 4/10
North American porcupine:
This review is already getting redundant. It's small, even for a porcupine, and another common problem is that climbing or swimming animals don't have enough flat land to simply walk around on, and this is the first sign of that. 5/10
Lynx:
A tiny bit bigger than the others in relation to animal size, but still not spacious enough. Unfortunately the highlight of this disheartening exhibit. 6/10
Arctic fox:
The animal was off-exhibit, but I can still judge the enclosure. It has the same issues as the previous, with not enough climbing areas either. 5/10
Reindeer:
They saved the worst for last for this one. I had earlier compared the bears to Franklin Park's lion exhibit before coming back here, and decided upon doing so that the latter still worked for one animal and still had more space. I did the same with this one and Franklin's nyala and pig exhibit, and it's not fair to do so. This enclosure is awful. The two deer inside have far too little room to move around, it's barren and bland, and it's made up of ugly and cheap-looking pole-and-wire. A culmination of almost everything wrong with Stone Zoo. 3/10
Overall: 5/10
Treasures of the Sierra Madre:
The overwhelming issues with Yukon Creek are not as prevalent here, but some do still apply. I do like the theming of this one, too, actually, the Western motif works well.
Roadrunner:
Off-exhibit, and I'm glad it is. A literal cage with not very much within. Don't these birds literally have the word "run" in their name? I hope I made a mistake and looked at the wrong exhibit, or something. 3/10
Peccary:
It's easy to tell this was originally made for coyote, as the terrain is too bumpy for the pigs. But at least it has just enough space for them, even if I still don't like the wiry fencing. 6/10
Terrariums:
Some glass enclosures appear inside of a wall, housing such creatures as California king snake and Pueblan milk snake. They were mostly just standard for what they were, although the king snake one was surprisingly vertical. 6/10
Lizards:
Gila monsters, spiny iguanas, and a third species that slips my mind all share an honestly well-sized enclosure that doesn't just feel like a terrarium. Perhaps that's because it was the former ringtail exhibit. 8/10
Peregrine falcons:
Falcons get a better deal at Stone than Franklin Park surprisingly, for while the pygmy falcons got the worst enclosure there, these peregrines have much more room. It still looks like a cage, though. 6/10
Coati:
Yet another common problem for climbing animals here is that their enclosures are all a bit too vertical, which results in an aforementioned problem of not enough regular space. The white-nosed coati have this, as well as inside an unpleasant wire cage. At least it has more climbing area than other residents that need such things. 5/10
Bats:
This one is tied with the lizards for the best exhibit in Sierra Madre. Granted, Seba's short-tailed bats are tiny, so they don't need a huge amount of space, but the convincingly-crafted cave within this "mine shaft" is dynamic and has room for the bats to flutter around. 8/10
Ringtail:
These have a new enclosure in what once was a collection of terrariums, and while it does have areas for climbing, and is appropriately dark inside, I'm not sure how I feel about the design. I appreciate sticking to the Western theme, but the interior is meant to look like the inside of an old building, with shelves and desks. It could be much worse, but I don't know how well that accustoms to a ringtail's exercise needs. 6/10
Jaguar:
I remember this one being a lot worse. There's less netting than I remember, being glass this time, and I actually like seeing a jaguar shown in a desert environment rather than a forest. But it's still flawed. While the size issue doesn't stick out as much as the bears, it's still there, the water feature isn't big enough for a semi-aquatic animal, and the climbing structure problem continues, that one awkwardly-built wooden tower isn't cutting it. 6/10
Overall: 5/10
Animal Discovery Center:
One of the better exhibit areas, although this one used to be better, surprisingly. It was a once large building, but is now a little hut. But I don't really mind. It more or less is a small reptile house featuring lizards, snakes, turtles, and frogs. Some terrariums are alright, some are small, all of them look a bit...pet store-ish, in a way I can't explain. But it works well enough. Not much else to say.
Overall: 7/10
Windows to the Wild:
Ooh, boy. I had especially bad memories about this one, even though nine-year-old me had it has his favorite when he first went. This exhibit isn't good, but admittedly not as awful as I remembered. That may have had something to do with a next door exhibit being worked on, but there were still some flaws that exist today, too. Not the least of which is that the building itself is just dated, unpleasant, and ugly, being gloomily lit inside as well. And there are other problems, which almost makes me glad that such engaging animals as meerkats, tree kangaroo, terns, boas, fruit bats, emperor tamarins, elephant shrews, and spectacled owls are long gone.
Sloth (solo exhibit):
It's about on-par with the Franklin Park sloth enclosure...or it would be if not for the off-putting concrete floor in the obviously-walled enclosure, which makes less effort to hide itself than those at Franklin's infinitely superior indoor habitats. It did have some enrichment, which made me realize that enrichment is actually weirdly sparse at Stone Zoo. 6/10
Black-and-white colobus (indoor):
More or less the same deal as above. Although it used to be much worse, there was an "under construction" point where all they had was a plastic slide. Yes. 5/10
Rock hyrax (exhibit one):
It's a bit small, but that's more excusable for this kind of animal. At least it actually bothers with a suitable terrain. 7/10
Blanding's turtle:
I think this was a temporary situation, or at least I hope to God it is, because these two turtles are in literal tubs, with hardly anything natural in them. Just...bad. Temporary or not, it's the worst exhibit at this already unimpressive zoo. 2/10
Hyacinth macaw:
Plenty to perch on, but not enough room to fly, especially bad for the largest parrot in the world. It's even more sad, considering that its cousins have it great in Caribbean Coast. 6/10
Multi species exhibit:
Sloths make a comeback in a better enclosure than last time, sharing it with agouti and cotton-top tamarins, which, if I can give Stone anything over Franklin Park, it's that cotton-top tamarins get a much better exhibit here than there. I still don't like the floor. 7/10
Prehensile-tailed porcupine:
This one is on equal footing with the last one, with the same issues. 6/10
Silvery-cheeked hornbill:
Speaking of not enough flying room, that applies to this one, too. Not much else to say. 6/10
Rock hyrax (exhibit two):
Both better and worse than the other one. It's roomier, but also too steep in some areas. It's easy to tell that this used to have Inca terns in it. 6/10
Great Indian hornbill:
Ditto from the other birds. 6/10
Spurred tortoise:
I can't grade this one, because it was under construction. I'll just note that the flamingos used to be here.
Barn owl:
Outside the main building sits a small barn-like structure that still lacks proper flying space, even if I do like the theme. 6/10
Overall: 5/10
Treetops and Riverbeds:
This one felt very loose in what animals made it up. The only three species (formerly four, it once had spider monkeys) have very little connection with each other, and it may as well be a continuation of Windows to the Wild, especially with...
Black-and-white colobus (outdoor):
It's more roomy than the indoor one, but still fully-netted and with, again, not many climbing opportunities, which is especially strange for a monkey. 5/10
River otters:
It was more dynamic than I remembered, which is good, but it brings back the issue of not enough walking room and the water looked too shallow for otters, which like to dive. 6/10
Gibbons:
In a strange twist, I actually remember this one being better. It's a good size, but that's a double-edged sword because their enclosure looks like a plant cover you'd get from The Home Depot. And which so much head room, AGAIN they don't have much to climb on, and I don't know how to feel about them climbing on the actual metal. 6/10
Overall: 6/10
Alfred Huang North American Crane Exhibit:
One of the better exhibits, but still not perfect.
Whooping crane:
This is strange, because I found the black-necked crane in what is normally this animal's enclosure, forcing this crane into a smaller one with Barrow's goldeneye as well. Then again, the black-necked crane is usually in Himalayan Highlands, and I will not cover their exhibit over there, because it's under construction. The actual enclosure here is nice and spacious, though. 7/10
Overall: 6 or 7/10
Barnyard:
Another point it gets over Franklin Park is that I like this farm area better. I miss the pygmy zebu it used to have, but the goats and sheep have a good barn setup here. Not much else of note.
Overall: 7/10
Himalayan Highlands:
Finally, we arrive at one I actually want to talk about. This is where Stone Zoo gets...weird, because this area has a batch of legitimately fantastic enclosures, and some...not so much. Also, the name is the same as an exhibit at Bronx Zoo, which just makes me wish I was there instead.
Yak:
It's the same deal as the reindeer. Bland and too small for a large ungulate like this one. 4/10
Snow leopard:
Wow, from an outright bad enclosure to one that's actually really good. A bit vertical, but that mostly works for snow leopards. The best cat enclosure from both Zoo New England zoos. 8/10
Markhor:
Wait, two great exhibits in a row? This one is even bigger and better, with there being more ground space and many opportunities for these alpine ungulates to hope around. Very good work. 9/10
Overall: 8/10
Mexican Gray Wolves:
And the recount can end on a high note! This is by far the best exhibit at the zoo, and the best from either Zoo New England zoo, I'd say. It's large, it's montane, it's grassy, it has good viewpoints, and solid shelters. What happened, why can't the rest of the zoo have this quality?
Overall: 9/10
I wish I can say Stone Zoo proved me wrong and proved itself as an underdog, a small, but good zoo that was overlooked, like Franklin Park. But I'm sorry, there's just too much bad to overlook. On the other hand, it's still not quite as awful as I recalled, to the point where I no longer think it's truly bad, but it is painfully mediocre. The best word I can use to describe this zoo overall is "bizarre." Not because of the animal collection, because that's not particularly special, except for the rarely-seen residents. No, it's because of how utterly inconsistent it is. It's a mix of some great enclosures I'd expect to see at a highly-rated zoo, a plethora of those that are middle-of-the-road, and a handful of genuinely terrible dirt pits. I don't understand it. I'm glad the really good ones are there, but they make me wish they were at better zoos. I do think Zoo New England's Stone Zoo is slowly improving, and I think it can continue to do so, but it has a very long way to go and I really don't see why some think Franklin Park Zoo is weaker, even without its nostalgia clogging my vision. It's not as bad as I remember, but I wouldn't blame you for skipping this one.
Overall: 5/10
Onto the review.
For the longest time, I had been parading around the idea that Zoo New England's Stone Zoo is bad.
That was my last memory of it, walking from one flimsy and weak exhibit to another. I left almost depressed on that visit. But I later kept hearing people say it's actually superior to its big brother, the Franklin Park Zoo. I didn't agree, but in fairness, I may be a bit biased towards Franklin Park - Hell, one of their pygmy hippos is my profile picture. I then looked up some recent pictures of enclosures, and they looked surprisingly decent in them. So I decided to give Stone another chance. Was it the utter dump I remembered, or was there something I hadn't noticed?
Well, that was underwhelming. Stone Zoo is somehow both better and worse than I remembered. And the most notable thing about it is that it's wildly (pun not intended) inconsistent. One moment you'll walk past a genuinely top-tier enclosure, the next you're looking at a rickety pile of wire with little inside. I don't understand why this is, but it made this visit especially frustrating. Let's elaborate on that, shall we?
Caribbean Coast:
We start on a surprisingly good beginning. Caribbean Coast is an excellent start to the romp through Stone Zoo, and I only wish it kept this level of quality all the way through.
Flamingos:
A very solid enclosure for an animal that I've seen quite a few decent enclosures for. I especially like the two separate water features, and it's a good size. There are also free-flight macaws and scarlet ibis in this aviary, but the cold weather rendered them invisible. 8/10
Jamaican iguana:
Another point in this exhibit's favor is the uncommonly-seen zoo animals it has. This lizard was also absent, but the empty enclosure was large and very dymanic. 8/10
Bush dogs:
Another rarely-featured species, it's a bit detached from the aviary, but still a good and spacious enclosure for an animal not very large. 7/10
Overall: 8/10
Yukon Creek:
Wow, that didn't take long. This area has the exhibit quality that I expected to find here on my revisit. I was unimpressed, except for the decent Northern theming.
Black bears:
One thing that Franklin Park undoubtably has over Stone is its animal collection, which does factor in a zoo’s quality. Having such iconic animals as gorillas, giraffes, lion, and hippos helps them a good deal and they also get some of the better enclosures at that zoo. Stone meanwhile, presents its most iconic animal here, and not in very flattering fashion. Besides the few exceptions, this zoo has the same general issue as its sibling of undersized enclosures with lackluster fencing, although in this case, they often think sticking a glass pane somewhere in the wire will fix everything. However, Stone usually does not have the good conditions and setup of within, which is far worse than just being too small. And this comes into play here. This exhibit is tiny. The two bears have little room to walk around, and something that struck me in many exhibits here is that animals that like to climb have oddly few opportunities to do so, and that applies to the bears. Not a promising sign. 5/10
Bald eagle:
I regret bashing the Roger Williams eagle exhibit, this one makes it look state-of-the-art. I don't like the net cast over the already cage-liked barrier, and the bird had little room to fly around. 4/10
North American porcupine:
This review is already getting redundant. It's small, even for a porcupine, and another common problem is that climbing or swimming animals don't have enough flat land to simply walk around on, and this is the first sign of that. 5/10
Lynx:
A tiny bit bigger than the others in relation to animal size, but still not spacious enough. Unfortunately the highlight of this disheartening exhibit. 6/10
Arctic fox:
The animal was off-exhibit, but I can still judge the enclosure. It has the same issues as the previous, with not enough climbing areas either. 5/10
Reindeer:
They saved the worst for last for this one. I had earlier compared the bears to Franklin Park's lion exhibit before coming back here, and decided upon doing so that the latter still worked for one animal and still had more space. I did the same with this one and Franklin's nyala and pig exhibit, and it's not fair to do so. This enclosure is awful. The two deer inside have far too little room to move around, it's barren and bland, and it's made up of ugly and cheap-looking pole-and-wire. A culmination of almost everything wrong with Stone Zoo. 3/10
Overall: 5/10
Treasures of the Sierra Madre:
The overwhelming issues with Yukon Creek are not as prevalent here, but some do still apply. I do like the theming of this one, too, actually, the Western motif works well.
Roadrunner:
Off-exhibit, and I'm glad it is. A literal cage with not very much within. Don't these birds literally have the word "run" in their name? I hope I made a mistake and looked at the wrong exhibit, or something. 3/10
Peccary:
It's easy to tell this was originally made for coyote, as the terrain is too bumpy for the pigs. But at least it has just enough space for them, even if I still don't like the wiry fencing. 6/10
Terrariums:
Some glass enclosures appear inside of a wall, housing such creatures as California king snake and Pueblan milk snake. They were mostly just standard for what they were, although the king snake one was surprisingly vertical. 6/10
Lizards:
Gila monsters, spiny iguanas, and a third species that slips my mind all share an honestly well-sized enclosure that doesn't just feel like a terrarium. Perhaps that's because it was the former ringtail exhibit. 8/10
Peregrine falcons:
Falcons get a better deal at Stone than Franklin Park surprisingly, for while the pygmy falcons got the worst enclosure there, these peregrines have much more room. It still looks like a cage, though. 6/10
Coati:
Yet another common problem for climbing animals here is that their enclosures are all a bit too vertical, which results in an aforementioned problem of not enough regular space. The white-nosed coati have this, as well as inside an unpleasant wire cage. At least it has more climbing area than other residents that need such things. 5/10
Bats:
This one is tied with the lizards for the best exhibit in Sierra Madre. Granted, Seba's short-tailed bats are tiny, so they don't need a huge amount of space, but the convincingly-crafted cave within this "mine shaft" is dynamic and has room for the bats to flutter around. 8/10
Ringtail:
These have a new enclosure in what once was a collection of terrariums, and while it does have areas for climbing, and is appropriately dark inside, I'm not sure how I feel about the design. I appreciate sticking to the Western theme, but the interior is meant to look like the inside of an old building, with shelves and desks. It could be much worse, but I don't know how well that accustoms to a ringtail's exercise needs. 6/10
Jaguar:
I remember this one being a lot worse. There's less netting than I remember, being glass this time, and I actually like seeing a jaguar shown in a desert environment rather than a forest. But it's still flawed. While the size issue doesn't stick out as much as the bears, it's still there, the water feature isn't big enough for a semi-aquatic animal, and the climbing structure problem continues, that one awkwardly-built wooden tower isn't cutting it. 6/10
Overall: 5/10
Animal Discovery Center:
One of the better exhibit areas, although this one used to be better, surprisingly. It was a once large building, but is now a little hut. But I don't really mind. It more or less is a small reptile house featuring lizards, snakes, turtles, and frogs. Some terrariums are alright, some are small, all of them look a bit...pet store-ish, in a way I can't explain. But it works well enough. Not much else to say.
Overall: 7/10
Windows to the Wild:
Ooh, boy. I had especially bad memories about this one, even though nine-year-old me had it has his favorite when he first went. This exhibit isn't good, but admittedly not as awful as I remembered. That may have had something to do with a next door exhibit being worked on, but there were still some flaws that exist today, too. Not the least of which is that the building itself is just dated, unpleasant, and ugly, being gloomily lit inside as well. And there are other problems, which almost makes me glad that such engaging animals as meerkats, tree kangaroo, terns, boas, fruit bats, emperor tamarins, elephant shrews, and spectacled owls are long gone.
Sloth (solo exhibit):
It's about on-par with the Franklin Park sloth enclosure...or it would be if not for the off-putting concrete floor in the obviously-walled enclosure, which makes less effort to hide itself than those at Franklin's infinitely superior indoor habitats. It did have some enrichment, which made me realize that enrichment is actually weirdly sparse at Stone Zoo. 6/10
Black-and-white colobus (indoor):
More or less the same deal as above. Although it used to be much worse, there was an "under construction" point where all they had was a plastic slide. Yes. 5/10
Rock hyrax (exhibit one):
It's a bit small, but that's more excusable for this kind of animal. At least it actually bothers with a suitable terrain. 7/10
Blanding's turtle:
I think this was a temporary situation, or at least I hope to God it is, because these two turtles are in literal tubs, with hardly anything natural in them. Just...bad. Temporary or not, it's the worst exhibit at this already unimpressive zoo. 2/10
Hyacinth macaw:
Plenty to perch on, but not enough room to fly, especially bad for the largest parrot in the world. It's even more sad, considering that its cousins have it great in Caribbean Coast. 6/10
Multi species exhibit:
Sloths make a comeback in a better enclosure than last time, sharing it with agouti and cotton-top tamarins, which, if I can give Stone anything over Franklin Park, it's that cotton-top tamarins get a much better exhibit here than there. I still don't like the floor. 7/10
Prehensile-tailed porcupine:
This one is on equal footing with the last one, with the same issues. 6/10
Silvery-cheeked hornbill:
Speaking of not enough flying room, that applies to this one, too. Not much else to say. 6/10
Rock hyrax (exhibit two):
Both better and worse than the other one. It's roomier, but also too steep in some areas. It's easy to tell that this used to have Inca terns in it. 6/10
Great Indian hornbill:
Ditto from the other birds. 6/10
Spurred tortoise:
I can't grade this one, because it was under construction. I'll just note that the flamingos used to be here.
Barn owl:
Outside the main building sits a small barn-like structure that still lacks proper flying space, even if I do like the theme. 6/10
Overall: 5/10
Treetops and Riverbeds:
This one felt very loose in what animals made it up. The only three species (formerly four, it once had spider monkeys) have very little connection with each other, and it may as well be a continuation of Windows to the Wild, especially with...
Black-and-white colobus (outdoor):
It's more roomy than the indoor one, but still fully-netted and with, again, not many climbing opportunities, which is especially strange for a monkey. 5/10
River otters:
It was more dynamic than I remembered, which is good, but it brings back the issue of not enough walking room and the water looked too shallow for otters, which like to dive. 6/10
Gibbons:
In a strange twist, I actually remember this one being better. It's a good size, but that's a double-edged sword because their enclosure looks like a plant cover you'd get from The Home Depot. And which so much head room, AGAIN they don't have much to climb on, and I don't know how to feel about them climbing on the actual metal. 6/10
Overall: 6/10
Alfred Huang North American Crane Exhibit:
One of the better exhibits, but still not perfect.
Whooping crane:
This is strange, because I found the black-necked crane in what is normally this animal's enclosure, forcing this crane into a smaller one with Barrow's goldeneye as well. Then again, the black-necked crane is usually in Himalayan Highlands, and I will not cover their exhibit over there, because it's under construction. The actual enclosure here is nice and spacious, though. 7/10
Overall: 6 or 7/10
Barnyard:
Another point it gets over Franklin Park is that I like this farm area better. I miss the pygmy zebu it used to have, but the goats and sheep have a good barn setup here. Not much else of note.
Overall: 7/10
Himalayan Highlands:
Finally, we arrive at one I actually want to talk about. This is where Stone Zoo gets...weird, because this area has a batch of legitimately fantastic enclosures, and some...not so much. Also, the name is the same as an exhibit at Bronx Zoo, which just makes me wish I was there instead.
Yak:
It's the same deal as the reindeer. Bland and too small for a large ungulate like this one. 4/10
Snow leopard:
Wow, from an outright bad enclosure to one that's actually really good. A bit vertical, but that mostly works for snow leopards. The best cat enclosure from both Zoo New England zoos. 8/10
Markhor:
Wait, two great exhibits in a row? This one is even bigger and better, with there being more ground space and many opportunities for these alpine ungulates to hope around. Very good work. 9/10
Overall: 8/10
Mexican Gray Wolves:
And the recount can end on a high note! This is by far the best exhibit at the zoo, and the best from either Zoo New England zoo, I'd say. It's large, it's montane, it's grassy, it has good viewpoints, and solid shelters. What happened, why can't the rest of the zoo have this quality?
Overall: 9/10
I wish I can say Stone Zoo proved me wrong and proved itself as an underdog, a small, but good zoo that was overlooked, like Franklin Park. But I'm sorry, there's just too much bad to overlook. On the other hand, it's still not quite as awful as I recalled, to the point where I no longer think it's truly bad, but it is painfully mediocre. The best word I can use to describe this zoo overall is "bizarre." Not because of the animal collection, because that's not particularly special, except for the rarely-seen residents. No, it's because of how utterly inconsistent it is. It's a mix of some great enclosures I'd expect to see at a highly-rated zoo, a plethora of those that are middle-of-the-road, and a handful of genuinely terrible dirt pits. I don't understand it. I'm glad the really good ones are there, but they make me wish they were at better zoos. I do think Zoo New England's Stone Zoo is slowly improving, and I think it can continue to do so, but it has a very long way to go and I really don't see why some think Franklin Park Zoo is weaker, even without its nostalgia clogging my vision. It's not as bad as I remember, but I wouldn't blame you for skipping this one.
Overall: 5/10
