Which zoo should I go to?

Ok, well the trip is over, I went to Omaha, KC, Lincoln Park, Shedd, and Columbus.

I'll start with Shedd, I thought it was quite good, but not as good as I was expecting based on what a few on here said, not sure it's any better than the Baltimore Aquarium. It does have belugas, so maybe that puts them over the top.

I will say that Shedd has the best anaconda exhibit I've seen, the snake had about 4-5 feet(deep) of water to swim in, and we the visitors had an underwater view. Zoos should take note of how to make a normally somewhat boring snake exhibit exciting.

Out of the 4 zoos I went to, I would rank them this way:

Omaha
Columbus
KC
Lincoln Park

I will post pictures and possibly more detailed reviews soon, but for now I will give some summaries.

Omaha:

The Lied Jungle is the best exhibit I've visited, although I agree with those who say some of the animals could use more space, it's just an amazing experience for a zoo lover like me or someone who isn't much of a zoo goer like my friend. One great part of this was the free flying bats, two of which almost flew into my face, quite a rush!

The Desert Dome and Kingdom of the Night is of the same vein, great indoor exhibits, but maybe could have some more space for some of the animals. Thise are also among the best exhibits I've been to.

The next best thing is probably a great aquarium which features a shark tunnel and a very good penguin exhibit. Other highlights include a cool butterfly/insect house, good gorilla and orangutan exhibits, and plenty of large fields for hoofstock. Also a good small mammal house and very good and large aviary.

Negatives include a bad indoor cat house which goes along with mediocre outdoor exhibits. A poor elephant exhibit. And mediocre bear exhibits.

If they had a good elephant exhibit and just a couple of good cat exhibits, I think I'd put this zoo above San Diego.


Columbus:

Very solid zoo, reminds me of Miami in that there isn't really much of anything that's bad or great, just a lot of decent to very good. Doesn't take nearly as much time to go through as SD or even Omaha imo.

As I said, most of the zoo was at least decent, what stood out most was the North America section, manatee exhibit and aqaurium, and the bonobo exhibit. I wasn't much of a fan of the orangutan or gorilla exhibits though.


KC:

Can be summed up by saying Africa section is great, rest of zoo is mediocre. The exceptions are the small indoor tropics house and much of australia. Could use more animals from continents other than there main two sections.

Highlights from Africa included perhaps the best cheetah and lion exhibits along with very good exhibits for elephants, chimps, gorillas, wild dogs, and various hoofstock and birds. The hippo exhibit was very disappointing however with the lack of underwater viewing to go along with a rather small pool and exhibit in general to go along with generic steel fences. The serval exhibit was the other negative here due to a lack of space.

Negatives included the tiger, orangutan, and various monkey cages plus an unusual amount of walking in between exhibits in spots.


Lincoln Park:

Good zoo for its size, and being free doesn't hurt.

Positives were the great ape exhibits, a pretty good cat complex, and a very good small mammal/reptile house.

I'm not sure if I recall anything horrid about this zoo, I'll have to look back at some pictures, and I'm sure some of you will remind of issues.
 
Last edited:
mweb08,
I think I agree with almost everything you said -- it's refreshing to see zoo reviews that aren't overly critical.

Minor disagreements: I think Omaha's elephant is not so bad. It's kind of ugly, but at least it's spacious. I suppose, however, that their leader (Lee Simmons) agrees with you, as he's very anxious to build a new elephant habitat. It'll hold a large herd of elephants and have underwater viewing. I find your evaluation of KC's lion exhibit ("the best") interesting. I can't argue too much, as I also find it "one of the best", but I like SDWAP's "Lion Camp" to be slightly better -- have you seen it? Also didn't think KC's hippo exhibit was so bad. While it's true that underwater hippo viewing is becoming more and more common, it's not quite to the point that we can can a hippo exhibit is "bad" if they don't have underwater viewing, is it? What makes KC's Africa exhibit so amazing is that have almost EVERYTHING you could think of from the African continent! What don't they have? Okapis, Cape buffalo, and that's about it! Every other major animal is there!
 
@mweb08: short but informative reviews that pretty much nail the 4 zoos that you visited. Omaha is fantastic, and yet there are certain parts of the zoo that are badly outdated and tiny. You liked the same exhibits that are consistently praised, and of course the big cat area and bear grottoes are something that no one really likes to see anymore. Of the 5 places that you listed the one that I haven't been to is Kansas City, which one person once told me is the worst major zoo in North America in the wintertime as a huge section of the zoo (Africa) is closed for the season. Naturally in the summer everything is open to the public and thus it is a very good collection, but primarily only with the African animals. You summarized Lincoln Park and Columbus briefly but quite well, and so now it is time for photos!:)
 
snowleopard said:
Brookfield is a huge zoo with massive acreage and an impressive animal collection. If you are interested in "quantity" then that is one of the top 10 zoos in North America and it will take most of the day to fully visit. However, the zoo has many average to mediocre exhibits, and in the next decade or so close to half of the zoo is going to be redeveloped. Wolf Woods is fantastic and there are still a lot of quality enclosures in the African section, but the emphasis is on the mammoth animal collection.
Click to expand...

While Brookfield indeed has some "mediocre exhibits" (31st Yards, Bear Grottoes, Baboon Island, and probably Pachyderm House), but it also has more than its share of terrific exhibits. Tropic World, while criticized by some, is (in Jon's and my opinion) still one of the best indoor rain forest buildings in the nation -- probably one of the Top 3. Seven Seas Panorama is one of the best dolphin exhibits/shows in any zoo. Habitat Africa is an intriguing set of exhibits with interactive views of okapis, Congo buffalo, wild dogs, and aardvarks. Australia House has a great bat flyway and rare wombats to see. The Living Coast, Fragile Kingdom, and The Swamp are all nice re-creations of natural habitats. If you have children along, Brookfield has our pick for the nation's second-best children's zoo in the USA.
 
Brookfield does have some great exhibits. I really like their giraffe and okapi habitats. The Wolf exhibit is also really good, and they also have a great collection of pachyderms.
 
ANyhuis said:
mweb08,
I think I agree with almost everything you said -- it's refreshing to see zoo reviews that aren't overly critical.

Minor disagreements: I think Omaha's elephant is not so bad. It's kind of ugly, but at least it's spacious. I suppose, however, that their leader (Lee Simmons) agrees with you, as he's very anxious to build a new elephant habitat. It'll hold a large herd of elephants and have underwater viewing. I find your evaluation of KC's lion exhibit ("the best") interesting. I can't argue too much, as I also find it "one of the best", but I like SDWAP's "Lion Camp" to be slightly better -- have you seen it? Also didn't think KC's hippo exhibit was so bad. While it's true that underwater hippo viewing is becoming more and more common, it's not quite to the point that we can can a hippo exhibit is "bad" if they don't have underwater viewing, is it? What makes KC's Africa exhibit so amazing is that have almost EVERYTHING you could think of from the African continent! What don't they have? Okapis, Cape buffalo, and that's about it! Every other major animal is there!
Click to expand...

My problem with the elephant exhibit was mostly that the two elephants they had were separated, and basically just standing next to each other on opposite sides of the fence. If that's not normally the case, then it's not that bad.

Yes, I've been to Lion Camp, I was a member of the SDZ for years and just moved from that area. I would say they're pretty even, however, I'm going to guess that KC has more space for their lions. Not sure though. WAP has had many cubs over the past few years though, so not sure if KC can compete with that.

It wasn't just the lack of underwater viewing as I said, I'm not saying it was horrible, but it doesn't measure up to the standards of the rest of the exhibit.

Yeah, Africa at KC is great, but if I were them I'd try to get some more antelope/gazelle to put into that large section in the middle. Cape Buffalo would obviously be a great addition as well. Okapi would fit in where the bongo are if that mixed species exhibit would work.
 
snowleopard said:
@mweb08: short but informative reviews that pretty much nail the 4 zoos that you visited. Omaha is fantastic, and yet there are certain parts of the zoo that are badly outdated and tiny. You liked the same exhibits that are consistently praised, and of course the big cat area and bear grottoes are something that no one really likes to see anymore. Of the 5 places that you listed the one that I haven't been to is Kansas City, which one person once told me is the worst major zoo in North America in the wintertime as a huge section of the zoo (Africa) is closed for the season. Naturally in the summer everything is open to the public and thus it is a very good collection, but primarily only with the African animals. You summarized Lincoln Park and Columbus briefly but quite well, and so now it is time for photos!:)
Click to expand...

I would say Omaha has no more outdated sections/exhibits than SD. The other main outdated part of Henry Doorly is the monkey cages over by the african wild dogs, they were really bad.

I'm sure KC would be bad without Africa, since that section accounts for the vast majority of the zoo, and is by far the best reason to go. In the winter time, they should make their admission very cheap, and maybe they do. Their red kangaroo exhibit however, is another positive that I don't believe I mentioned, quite large, lots of kangaroos, and no barriers.

Photos coming sometime soon, I just got my stuff from the moving company, so haven't setup my computer yet.
 
mweb08 said:
Their red kangaroo exhibit however, is another positive that I don't believe I mentioned, quite large, lots of kangaroos, and no barriers.
Click to expand...

We put KC on the Top Ten list for "Australian Animals & Exhibits", and we named it #1 for seeing kangaroos.
 
I have begun to post pictures of Henry Doorly and will continue throughout the night and will get to the other zoos.
 
Yeah, I contacted ZooChat about it, so hopefully they'll put up a KC Zoo section. Otherwise, I'll do that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top