What will be the best zoo in 2015?

[Buckeye092]

I have never heard this but would love to know why you say this.

Someone I know with many contacts inside WCS told me this, and I do not doubt his information. I'm surprised WCS didn't come right out and say it instead of blaming the economy. And considering the exhibit was aging and losing popularity I'm not surprised the exhibit was closed.

 

[Buckeye092]

@tigertiger: While everyone is entitled to their own opinion I think you are not giving Columbus as much credit as it deserves. We do have many "standout" exhibits:
- Manatee Coast (regarded as the best manatee exhibit in the US)
- Asia Quest (Regarded as #2 behind Asia Trail (and we beat them in species diversity))
- African Forest (Regarded as one of the top three behind CGF and Pangani at DAK)
- North America (while it is over 20 years old it still beats many new exhibits in terms of species diversity)
- And of course individual exhibits that are very well done (Bonobo, Sun Bear, Tiger, Bison/Pronghorn, Komodo Dragon, Small Clawed Otter, Kiwi, Red Kangaroo, Mexican Wolf, Moose)

And I agree with you; as of now we do not come close to beating San Diego or Bronx but I do not believe it is due to our lack of "standout" exhibits.

 

[BlackRhino]

@tigertiger: While everyone is entitled to their own opinion I think you are not giving Columbus as much credit as it deserves. We do have many "standout" exhibits:
- Manatee Coast (regarded as the best manatee exhibit in the US)
- Asia Quest (Regarded as #2 behind Asia Trail (and we beat them in species diversity))
- African Forest (Regarded as one of the top three behind CGF and Pangani at DAK)
- North America (while it is over 20 years old it still beats many new exhibits in terms of species diversity)
- And of course individual exhibits that are very well done (Bonobo, Sun Bear, Tiger, Bison/Pronghorn, Komodo Dragon, Small Clawed Otter, Kiwi, Red Kangaroo, Mexican Wolf, Moose)

And I agree with you; as of now we do not come close to beating San Diego or Bronx but I do not believe it is due to our lack of "standout" exhibits.

Do you mean 3rd best African RainForest exhibit or gorilla exhibit? If you mean gorilla exhibit Lincoln Park's is most definitely the 3rd best.

Don't forget to add your excellent elephant exhibit, currently one of the top two in the midwest, although I think that will change when Cleveland opens their elephant exhibit.

 

[tigertiger]

Someone I know with many contacts inside WCS told me this, and I do not doubt his information. I'm surprised WCS didn't come right out and say it instead of blaming the economy. And considering the exhibit was aging and losing popularity I'm not surprised the exhibit was closed.

Can't say I'm surprised. Personally, I've been to the zoo well over a 100 times by now and have only been in there probably twice and never enjoyed it. Far too dark to actually see any of the animals!

 

[tigertiger]

@tigertiger: While everyone is entitled to their own opinion I think you are not giving Columbus as much credit as it deserves. We do have many "standout" exhibits:
- Manatee Coast (regarded as the best manatee exhibit in the US)
- Asia Quest (Regarded as #2 behind Asia Trail (and we beat them in species diversity))
- African Forest (Regarded as one of the top three behind CGF and Pangani at DAK)
- North America (while it is over 20 years old it still beats many new exhibits in terms of species diversity)
- And of course individual exhibits that are very well done (Bonobo, Sun Bear, Tiger, Bison/Pronghorn, Komodo Dragon, Small Clawed Otter, Kiwi, Red Kangaroo, Mexican Wolf, Moose)

And I agree with you; as of now we do not come close to beating San Diego or Bronx but I do not believe it is due to our lack of "standout" exhibits.

None of those are really 'standout,' however. When I leave Congo, for example, I go "wow and the Okapi exhibit was phenomenal and WOW the first gorilla window is great and omg did you see the next one, just AMAZING." When I leave Asia Quest or the Manatee Coast I go, "Cool animals" without the same effect. While Columbus has very few exhibits that I go "ick" or have a negative feeling to (fewer than Bronx, easily), none of them are knockdown, standout amazing on their own. Asia Quest is a nice building with a great theme (I LOVE the statues of cats lost at the entrance), I don't find myself going "Wow, these habitats are great for the animals and look at this this this this and this!" I find myself saying, again, "Cool animals...that snake is big."

The exception for me is the elephant ranges which are probably the best elephant exhibit I've ever seen. I'm very curious to see the Polar Bear exhibit open because I think that is going to be knockdown exhibitry for the zoo.

The Komodo Dragon, Small Clawed Otter, and Moose exhibits ARE great exhibits for those animals but the Tree Kangaroo exhibit is definitely one of those exhibits where I feel bad for the animal.

 

[mweb08]

@tigertiger: While everyone is entitled to their own opinion I think you are not giving Columbus as much credit as it deserves. We do have many "standout" exhibits:
- Manatee Coast (regarded as the best manatee exhibit in the US)
- Asia Quest (Regarded as #2 behind Asia Trail (and we beat them in species diversity))
- African Forest (Regarded as one of the top three behind CGF and Pangani at DAK)
- North America (while it is over 20 years old it still beats many new exhibits in terms of species diversity)
- And of course individual exhibits that are very well done (Bonobo, Sun Bear, Tiger, Bison/Pronghorn, Komodo Dragon, Small Clawed Otter, Kiwi, Red Kangaroo, Mexican Wolf, Moose)

And I agree with you; as of now we do not come close to beating San Diego or Bronx but I do not believe it is due to our lack of "standout" exhibits.

Other than the Manatee Coast, and it's not like you're beating out many zoos there, I'm not sure where you come up with these regarded as comments. African Forest is not that good imo, and while Asia Trail is pretty good, it's nothing special imo. I actually think the N. America section is the best there.

 

[Buckeye092]

Other than the Manatee Coast, and it's not like you're beating out many zoos there, I'm not sure where you come up with these regarded as comments. African Forest is not that good imo, and while Asia Trail is pretty good, it's nothing special imo. I actually think the N. America section is the best there.

A zoo guide, I forget which one, that was printed a few years after African Forest opened up stated it was "the second African Forest exhibit after CGF." On Page 278 of "America's Best Zoos" we are listed as #2 for best Asian Animals and Exhibits, no doubt because of Asia Quest, not Islands. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and I do respect yours.

I also believe that one is more easily blown away by the Bronx or San Diego because their reputation is so much better than every other zoo in the US.

@BlackRhino - I was referring to African Forest as a whole. While I'm very proud of our accomplishments in regards to gorilla breeding and husbandry, I do not believe our outdoor exhibit is the best in the US.

 

[tigertiger]

I also believe that one is more easily blown away by the Bronx or San Diego because their reputation is so much better than every other zoo in the US.

Interesting, but the same could be said of Columbus with its huge media presence due to Jack Hanna. I mean, Jack Hanna is essentially my life hero and anyone with the slightest interest in animals has surely seen a good portion of his shows or appearances.

When I was a little kid, I didn't know other zoos EXISTED or that people liked them but I knew I loved Bronx. When my mother took me to the Central Park Zoo I recall looking at her and going "that's it?" and then years later having the same question in regards to Philadelphia.

 

[mweb08]

A zoo guide, I forget which one, that was printed a few years after African Forest opened up stated it was "the second African Forest exhibit after CGF." On Page 278 of "America's Best Zoos" we are listed as #2 for best Asian Animals and Exhibits, no doubt because of Asia Quest, not Islands. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and I do respect yours.

I also believe that one is more easily blown away by the Bronx or San Diego because their reputation is so much better than every other zoo in the US.

@BlackRhino - I was referring to African Forest as a whole. While I'm very proud of our accomplishments in regards to gorilla breeding and husbandry, I do not believe our outdoor exhibit is the best in the US.

Well that statement sounds like it was the second exhibit of its kind built. I guess it depends on what other exhibits can be compared to African Forest. I think most of the individual exhibits in African Forest are just good, not great, and some other zoos have as good or better exhibits for many of the same animals, but they may not be all together. San Diego for example has as good or better exhibits for many of the same animals plus very good exhibits for animals(hippo, pygmy hippo, crocs in adjacent exhibit, various monkeys) that could also be in an African Forest exhibit, however, SD doesn't have them all in one themed exhibit.

So while African Forest is nice, it's not great as a whole imo.

America's Best Zoos is also looking at collection and would count the islands I'm sure in that ranking. So that's not saying Asia Quest is the second best Asia exhibit out there. It's also not listed in either guys top 25 exhibits. It's a fine exhibit, but I don't think it's great by any means.

Going back to America's Best Zoos, they have SD at first for bears and primates and Cincinnati first for cats, but those zoos do not have the best exhibits for those animals.

 

[snowleopard]

After spending a considerable amount of time glancing through the latest and greatest photos from the San Diego Zoo (courtesy of "geomorph") I am still convinced that no other zoo in North America is as impressive. I am the first to critique the older canyon enclosures, and there are still some scattered cages that seem somewhat out of place around the grounds, and Elephant Odyssey has definitely had mixed reviews, BUT in terms of both animal collection and overall quality of exhibitry the San Diego Zoo is as amazing as ever.

There are some other excellent zoos (Bronx, Columbus, Omaha, Woodland Park, Miami, etc) but how can they compete with: Ituri Forest, Monkey Trails and Forest Tales, Gorilla Tropics, Polar Bear Plunge, Giant Panda Research Station, Tiger River, Outback, Absolutely Apes, Reptile House, Reptile Mesa, East African Kopje, Sun Bear Forest and all of the magnificent aviaries scattered across the zoo. Wow. I wonder how many zoos on the planet can even compare to San Diego's overall excellence? Toss in the Wild Animal Park and two of the all-time greatest zoos are within 30 minutes of each other.

 

[BlackRhino]

After spending a considerable amount of time glancing through the latest and greatest photos from the San Diego Zoo (courtesy of "geomorph") I am still convinced that no other zoo in North America is as impressive. I am the first to critique the older canyon enclosures, and there are still some scattered cages that seem somewhat out of place around the grounds, and Elephant Odyssey has definitely had mixed reviews, BUT in terms of both animal collection and overall quality of exhibitry the San Diego Zoo is as amazing as ever.

There are some other excellent zoos (Bronx, Columbus, Omaha, Woodland Park, Miami, etc) but how can they compete with: Ituri Forest, Monkey Trails and Forest Tales, Gorilla Tropics, Polar Bear Plunge, Giant Panda Research Station, Tiger River, Outback, Absolutely Apes, Reptile House, Reptile Mesa, East African Kopje, Sun Bear Forest and all of the magnificent aviaries scattered across the zoo. Wow. I wonder how many zoos on the planet can even compare to San Diego's overall excellence? Toss in the Wild Animal Park and two of the all-time greatest zoos are within 30 minutes of each other.

I really would not consider the Miami Metrozoo remotely close to excellent. Maybe average at best. And I am still a firm believer that Bronx is better than San Diego. All those exhibits you mention are very good, but are none are like that of the Congo Gorilla Forest or Arctic Ring of Life, and in my opinion for a zoo to be the very best, it must have an exhibit that blows your mind because of its excellence.

 

[ANyhuis]

I really would not consider the Miami Metrozoo remotely close to excellent. Maybe average at best. And I am still a firm believer that Bronx is better than San Diego. All those exhibits you mention are very good, but are none are like that of the Congo Gorilla Forest or Arctic Ring of Life, and in my opinion for a zoo to be the very best, it must have an exhibit that blows your mind because of its excellence.

Welcome back, Black Rhino!
I'm almost stunned when I hear someone who still thinks Bronx is better than San Diego. Bronx's REAL competition is with Omaha for the #2/#3 position. SD is far and away the best! Saying that Bronx is better because of one single exhibit is like (to use a sports analogy) a basketball team is the best because they have the best player. To use YOUR local area, BRhino, your Cleveland Cavaliers probably have the NBA's best player (Lebron James), but they clearly don't have the best team. Congo Gorilla Forest is the "Lebron" of zoo exhibits, but San Diego (and Omaha) have better overall "teams" of exhibits.

 

[reduakari]

Welcome back, Black Rhino!
I'm almost stunned when I hear someone who still thinks Bronx is better than San Diego. Bronx's REAL competition is with Omaha for the #2/#3 position. SD is far and away the best! Saying that Bronx is better because of one single exhibit is like (to use a sports analogy) a basketball team is the best because they have the best player. To use YOUR local area, BRhino, your Cleveland Cavaliers probably have the NBA's best player (Lebron James), but they clearly don't have the best team. Congo Gorilla Forest is the "Lebron" of zoo exhibits, but San Diego (and Omaha) have better overall "teams" of exhibits.

Veering away from sports analogies, and simply talking about exhibits, I would argue that Himalayan Highlands, Baboon reserve, Tiger Mountain, and Madagascar are all superior to any single exhibit at San Diego. Throw in the "800-pound gorilla" that is Congo, together with the still-excellent Jungle World, Wild Asia, African Plains and World of Birds, as well as the top-notch Butterfly Garden and shorebird aviary, and I agree with Black Rhino that Bronx is still the best "exhibit zoo" in the country.

 

[ANyhuis]

Veering away from sports analogies, and simply talking about exhibits, I would argue that Himalayan Highlands, Baboon reserve, Tiger Mountain, and Madagascar are all superior to any single exhibit at San Diego. Throw in the "800-pound gorilla" that is Congo, together with the still-excellent Jungle World, Wild Asia, African Plains and World of Birds, as well as the top-notch Butterfly Garden and shorebird aviary, and I agree with Black Rhino that Bronx is still the best "exhibit zoo" in the country.

As I said above, I'm STUNNED! To me, this is a slam dunk (sorry -- another sports term).

Tiger Mountain? That's a single-species exhibit! A good one, yes, but will anyone pull off the interstate to see a great exhibit of tigers? By that criteria (which exhibits bring in the crowds), San Diego's Panda Reserve is far better than Tiger Mountain! Same with their Koala exhibit.

I do agree that Bronx is the best "exhibit zoo". By that I mean that if you simply compare the EMPTY exhibits, Bronx wins. In fact the nation's #2 "exhibit zoo" (comparing empty exhibits) is probably owned by Disney. #3 is probably Woodland Park.

But drop in the animals and San Diego's superb collection overwhelms.

 

[reduakari]

As I said above, I'm STUNNED! To me, this is a slam dunk (sorry -- another sports term).

Tiger Mountain? That's a single-species exhibit! A good one, yes, but will anyone pull off the interstate to see a great exhibit of tigers? By that criteria (which exhibits bring in the crowds), San Diego's Panda Reserve is far better than Tiger Mountain! Same with their Koala exhibit.

I do agree that Bronx is the best "exhibit zoo". By that I mean that if you simply compare the EMPTY exhibits, Bronx wins. In fact the nation's #2 "exhibit zoo" (comparing empty exhibits) is probably owned by Disney. #3 is probably Woodland Park.

But drop in the animals and San Diego's superb collection overwhelms.

Well, that's an interesting way to look at things that would not have occurred to me. Yes, San Diego's collection IS stunning, but less and less so as rare/interesting hoofstock species vanish in favor of burros and domestic horses (to cite my favorite example of the "dumbing down" of the zoo's offerings). And while koalas and pandas may have more drawing power than tigers (although if you look at polls tigers always rank very high on visitor's "wish lists"), the crude stockades in which San Diego displays these animals are nothing to write home about.

 

[ANyhuis]

Well, that's an interesting way to look at things that would not have occurred to me. Yes, San Diego's collection IS stunning, but less and less so as rare/interesting hoofstock species vanish in favor of burros and domestic horses (to cite my favorite example of the "dumbing down" of the zoo's offerings). And while koalas and pandas may have more drawing power than tigers (although if you look at polls tigers always rank very high on visitor's "wish lists"), the crude stockades in which San Diego displays these animals are nothing to write home about.

Actually, Tiger River is one of San Diego's best exhibits, and one that Black Rhino (the instigator of this debate) raves about.

I would, however, like to see those polls, which rank tigers so highly on visitor's wish lists. I don't disagree that tigers are popular. That is why they are exhibited by almost every zoo, including most of the very small zoos, around the country. Because they are so common, that is why I say they won't pull anyone off the interstate to come see them. Why should someone from Coal Valley, Illinois (population under 7,000) or from Issaquah, Washington (population 11,000) want to go out of their way to see a nice tiger exhibit, when their small hometown zoo has them? On the other hand, how far would they have to drive to see a giant panda, a koala, a manatee, a giant otter, or other unique exciting animals?

San Diego has, we believe, the nation's best collection and overall exhibits of Birds, Reptiles, Primates, and Bears. These are some pretty popular types of animals to excel in.

 

[reduakari]

Actually, Tiger River is one of San Diego's best exhibits, and one that Black Rhino (the instigator of this debate) raves about.

I would, however, like to see those polls, which rank tigers so highly on visitor's wish lists. I don't disagree that tigers are popular. That is why they are exhibited by almost every zoo, including most of the very small zoos, around the country. Because they are so common, that is why I say they won't pull anyone off the interstate to come see them. Why should someone from Coal Valley, Illinois (population under 7,000) or from Issaquah, Washington (population 11,000) want to go out of their way to see a nice tiger exhibit, when their small hometown zoo has them? On the other hand, how far would they have to drive to see a giant panda, a koala, a manatee, a giant otter, or other unique exciting animals?

San Diego has, we believe, the nation's best collection and overall exhibits of Birds, Reptiles, Primates, and Bears. These are some pretty popular types of animals to excel in.

I agree Tiger River is quite good--the "crude stockades" I was referring to are the panda and koala exhibits, which don't come close to better examples found elsewhere.

I sincerely doubt our interstates are crowded with people clamoring to see giant otters, or even manatees for that matter. Yes, koalas and pandas are big draws because they ane "cute" and rare. But if they were as common as tigers, I'm not sure how long these rather inactive animals would be such an attraction.

San Diego's huge walk-through aviaries are wonderful, but the row upon row of smaller aviaries are of interest only to a few rabid bird nuts, because the presentation is so unimaginative and repetitive.

The reptile exhibits are comprehensive and interesting, aided immeasurably by San Diego's great climate.

Monkey Trails offers some good primate exhibits, and the gorilla habitat is pretty good too.

But the 1920s-era bear grottos are very outdated, and neither of the newer polar bear or sun bear exhibits are even close to "top of class."

But back to Black Rhino's point: NONE of San Diego's exhibits (except maybe the big aviaries) is a blow-your-socks-off, heads and tails "winner." They are all mostly just good enough, or substandard. To use your basketball analogy, San Diego has a very deep bench but no superstars.

 

[ANyhuis]

To use your basketball analogy, San Diego has a very deep bench but no superstars.

That's very true, but ONLY when talking about "empty exhibits".

Their Panda Conservation Center is clearly a "superstar" when you see a panda cub rolling around in the grass or swinging in a tree. I believe that being surrounded by up to 20 koalas is also superstar status. Seeing the Zoo from a London-style doubledecker bus also has a superstar feel.

I would also argue with the "no superstars" statement overall. San Diego's Ituri Forest, Monkey Trails, and Gorilla Tropics would all make any "Top 50" exhibits list. Consider this -- San Diego has TWO underwater hippo exhibits, while Bronx doesn't even have any hippos at all.

Another thing, which SnowLeopard has discussed, that puts San Diego heads-and-tails above Bronx: Hours! Trying to see all of Bronx's many great exhibits in its ultra-short, year-round 7-hour day (10-5) is a maddening experience. Even worse, some of its best experiences (ie, Wild Asia monorail) close up to an hour earlier (4pm). In contrast, San Diego is open for 9 hours (9-6) most of the year and for 11 hours (9-8) in the summer. This must be factored in.

 

[mweb08]

I don't think SD Zoo has anything on the level of CGF, but I do think they have great exhibits, and combined with the collection have the ability to knock your socks off at times. Especially to people who aren't zoo nerds like most of us and visit a ton of them. Since most of us have been to a lot of zoos, including ones with pandas, koalas, underwater hippo viewing, underwater polar bear viewing, gorillas, orangutans, etc we aren't going to be blown away by seeing them there, but a lot of people would be. And even for me, who has been to the SD Zoo about 20 times in the past 5 years, it's still amazing to see so many animals, and animals I really want to see, and often in good to great exhibits.

I also think Black Rhino's rule to rate zoos is a bad one. Any rating that has Detroit or Cleveland above San Diego is questionable at best.

I will say that overall, the Bronx has better quality exhibits. I don't think all those exhibits reduarki listed are better than anything in SD though.

San Diego has more exhibits and animals though. To me, having pandas, hippos, pygmy hippos, bonobos, orangutans, koalas, jaguars, mountain lions, and elephants and rhinos you can see for more than 30 seconds while moving are a huge advantage for SD.

Of course Bronx has some animals that SD doesn't, but not as many, and not as many of the "star attractions."

To me, the tram is disappointing at Bronx since it doesn't stop or give you much time to view the animals. Plus, it's not like you can walk to get your own view.

Climate and the aforementioned hours are obviously another things favoring SD. Maybe shows too? Does the Bronx have good shows like SD does?

 

[BlackRhino]

I don't think SD Zoo has anything on the level of CGF, but I do think they have great exhibits, and combined with the collection have the ability to knock your socks off at times. Especially to people who aren't zoo nerds like most of us and visit a ton of them. Since most of us have been to a lot of zoos, including ones with pandas, koalas, underwater hippo viewing, underwater polar bear viewing, gorillas, orangutans, etc we aren't going to be blown away by seeing them there, but a lot of people would be. And even for me, who has been to the SD Zoo about 20 times in the past 5 years, it's still amazing to see so many animals, and animals I really want to see, and often in good to great exhibits.

I also think Black Rhino's rule to rate zoos is a bad one. Any rating that has Detroit or Cleveland above San Diego is questionable at best.

I will say that overall, the Bronx has better quality exhibits. I don't think all those exhibits reduarki listed are better than anything in SD though.

San Diego has more exhibits and animals though. To me, having pandas, hippos, pygmy hippos, bonobos, orangutans, koalas, jaguars, mountain lions, and elephants and rhinos you can see for more than 30 seconds while moving are a huge advantage for SD.

Of course Bronx has some animals that SD doesn't, but not as many, and not as many of the "star attractions."

To me, the tram is disappointing at Bronx since it doesn't stop or give you much time to view the animals. Plus, it's not like you can walk to get your own view.

Climate and the aforementioned hours are obviously another things favoring SD. Maybe shows too? Does the Bronx have good shows like SD does?

I never rated Detroit above San Diego, and the only reason I personally rate Cleveland so high is because it is my home zoo, and I have gotten to know the staff there really well. If I wasn't being biased Cleveland would be much lower, although once are new elephant habitat opens, which should be amazing, Cleveland should go up much more. One new set of exhibits can make a zoo much better, and Cleveland's elephant exhibit will change the whole front portion of the zoo, and be much more African Savanna themed then a badly outdated depressing pachyderm house.