Which is better omaha or bronx?

[mweb08]

People can judge all they like just based on pictures, and sometimes I do too, but it's not even close to being an ideal way to judge. The Lied Jungle for instance cannot be fairly judged just based on pictures, it's something you need to experience. The experience is much better there than at the Bronx imo, which is broken up into different rooms instead of being one very large and impressive rainforest that you feel immersed in.

 

[mweb08]

As far as best exhibits, I'd take Omaha's top 5 over the Bronx's:

Lied Jungle
Desert Dome
Kingdoms of the Night
Scott Aquarium
Expedition Madagascar

vs.

Congo Gorilla Forest
JungleWorld
Madagascar
Tiger Mountain
Himalayan Highlands or Baboon Reserve

But after that, I agree that the Bronx has better quality on average.

 

[reduakari]

People can judge all they like just based on pictures, and sometimes I do too, but it's not even close to being an ideal way to judge. The Lied Jungle for instance cannot be fairly judged just based on pictures, it's something you need to experience. The experience is much better there than at the Bronx imo, which is broken up into different rooms instead of being one very large and impressive rainforest that you feel immersed in.

Actually, Jungleworld works better because the views into the various sections are much more controlled and intentionally focused. In Omaha, (as in many big indoor zoo rainforests), the visitor is always aware of the giant ugly ceiling above. In JW, overhead canopies, rock formations, banyan trees etc. are used in sequence to keep your eye trained on the habitats, and not to be distracted by the overhead architecture. The views into the langur exhibit and--especially--the gibbon forest are stunningly accurate vignettes of pure tropical forest that are unmatched in Omaha's huge but ariplane hangar-like building.

The walk on the forest floor of the Lied Jungle IS pretty fantastic, but up close the artificial rocks and trees there are just not as artfully detailed and realistic as the smaller but more focused habitats of JW. And don't get me started about all of the animals crammed into tiny "caves" throughout Lied Jungle (or any of Omaha's big indoor exhibits).

 

[mweb08]

JungleWorld may be better with the details that you mention, but I don't think it compares as an experience and I much prefer one very large space over going through doors and pathways where the immersion effect is lesser imo. So no, I don't think it works better at all in that regard and I noticed the ceilings at least as much at JW as I did at LJ.

 

[BlackRhino]

Exhibit quality I think Bronx wins by a landslide as the focus in Omaha's exhibits is almost exclusively visitor experience. Animal Collection would probably go to Omaha, as with their aquarium, and nocturnal house they clearly have more species than Bronx. On rainforest exhibits I think it could be argued either way depending on personal preference as I think everyone agrees both are very good. Madagascar exhibit would probably go to Bronx. There are more areas one could judge though then just those four, but Bronx definitely has better exhibits for the large popular animals, as their gorillas are in arguably the best exhibit in the nation. Also, some the best exhibits for tigers, snow leopards, okapis, and indian rhino can be found here. Omaha's large mammals are all in antiquated and/or tiny enclosures except their gorillas and orangs, but clearly Bronx's gorilla exhibit is miles better than Omaha's so no argument there. They are both great zoos, and I personally would rank Bronx higher than San Diego, as having been to SDZ three times I find it quite over rated especially after all the amusement-park like changes. They also have a huge lack of great exhibitry, as was illustrated with the haphazardly designed Elephant Odyssey. No doubt San Diego's collection and breeding records are amazing though.

 

[siamang27]

From what I understand, the rainforest exhibit at Omaha is more imersive from a visitor's point of view, however, the animal exhibits are below average in size and in some cases extremely small. I'm sure some of the exhibits are ok but from what I've heard the majority are too small. If Omaha exhibited fewer species in there and enlarged the exhibits that remain I think it could be excellent. Bronx's exhibit is less imersive but the exhibits are larger for the animals that live there. Again, I haven't been to either so this is based only off of information/pictures...

I have, however, been to SDZ twice. Bronx and Omaha both have exhibits that stand out from the rest. Bronx has Congo Gorilla Forest as well as several other great exhibits. Omaha has Kingdoms of the Night (haven't heard anything negative about that exhibit) plus lied Jungle and Desert Dome, as even if the animal exhibits are poor the visitor experience is excellent.
San Diego has nothing that is the best of its kind, or really memorable apart from the animals. There are many nice exhibits but nothing that is outstanding, except some of the aviaries, which are probably some of the nicest walk-through ones in North America.

Even so I still rank San Diego as the 1 zoo in North America. Then again, whenever I get to the Bronx that might change!

 

[dinosaur50]

i have been 2 bronx but not

i have been 2 bronx but not Omaha or sdz but thier a lot of what i would call best exhibits that that could make the top 5 like World of Birds

 

[mweb08]

Exhibit quality I think Bronx wins by a landslide as the focus in Omaha's exhibits is almost exclusively visitor experience. Animal Collection would probably go to Omaha, as with their aquarium, and nocturnal house they clearly have more species than Bronx. On rainforest exhibits I think it could be argued either way depending on personal preference as I think everyone agrees both are very good. Madagascar exhibit would probably go to Bronx. There are more areas one could judge though then just those four, but Bronx definitely has better exhibits for the large popular animals, as their gorillas are in arguably the best exhibit in the nation. Also, some the best exhibits for tigers, snow leopards, okapis, and indian rhino can be found here. Omaha's large mammals are all in antiquated and/or tiny enclosures except their gorillas and orangs, but clearly Bronx's gorilla exhibit is miles better than Omaha's so no argument there. They are both great zoos, and I personally would rank Bronx higher than San Diego, as having been to SDZ three times I find it quite over rated especially after all the amusement-park like changes. They also have a huge lack of great exhibitry, as was illustrated with the haphazardly designed Elephant Odyssey. No doubt San Diego's collection and breeding records are amazing though.

That's not true. The rhinos, giraffes, and zebra all have good exhibits. I'm not sure what else you're considering in the large mammal group.

I love how changing the map and names of the sections at SD is such a detriment to some people.

 

[mweb08]

From what I understand, the rainforest exhibit at Omaha is more imersive from a visitor's point of view, however, the animal exhibits are below average in size and in some cases extremely small. I'm sure some of the exhibits are ok but from what I've heard the majority are too small. If Omaha exhibited fewer species in there and enlarged the exhibits that remain I think it could be excellent. Bronx's exhibit is less imersive but the exhibits are larger for the animals that live there. Again, I haven't been to either so this is based only off of information/pictures...

I have, however, been to SDZ twice. Bronx and Omaha both have exhibits that stand out from the rest. Bronx has Congo Gorilla Forest as well as several other great exhibits. Omaha has Kingdoms of the Night (haven't heard anything negative about that exhibit) plus lied Jungle and Desert Dome, as even if the animal exhibits are poor the visitor experience is excellent.
San Diego has nothing that is the best of its kind, or really memorable apart from the animals. There are many nice exhibits but nothing that is outstanding, except some of the aviaries, which are probably some of the nicest walk-through ones in North America.

Even so I still rank San Diego as the 1 zoo in North America. Then again, whenever I get to the Bronx that might change!

I think you're exaggerating the differences in space for the animals at the two zoos rainforests. Yes, Omaha has a few problems in that regard, with the tapir exhibit being the worst offender, but for the most part, I wouldn't call the exhibits too small. The Bronx's leopard exhibit is also too small.

SD has plenty of very good exhibits that are among the best of their kind, but sure, they don't have something that matches CGF or any of the big indoor exhibits at Henry Doorly. Monkey Trails, Gorilla Tropics, Tiger River, Ituri Forest, along with the aviaries you mention are all top notch imo.

 

[BlackRhino]

That's not true. The rhinos, giraffes, and zebra all have good exhibits. I'm not sure what else you're considering in the large mammal group.

I love how changing the map and names of the sections at SD is such a detriment to some people.

Thank you for proving my point exactly! They are good exhibits your right, but I meant some of the best of their kind. All the animals I named at Bronx are some of the best of their kind. I don't think Omaha has one of the best rhino, giraffe, or zebra exhibits. They are just good. Bronx Zoo's giraffe & zebra exhibit is better than Omaha's, and so is it's rhino exhibit. Bronx also has very good exhibits for African Wild Dogs, lions, and a variety of antelope, not to mention all the other animals that I named before.

And I don't get what their isn't to understand. A large mammal is basically any type of big cat, bear, great ape, pachyderm, or hoofstock.

 

[ANyhuis]

I once, along with a collegue of mine, decided to do an exhibit-by-exhibit comparison of the San Diego and Bronx Zoos. So we did some thinking and matched up the different exhibits and features in each zoo, at least trying to compare like exhibits. Here was what we came up with:

Bronx Zoo’s Exhibits: San Diego Zoo Exhibits: Edge?

Congo Gorilla Forest Gorilla Tropics (w/bonobos), Ituri Forest SD

JungleWorld Tiger River Bronx

Wild Asia Monorail Guided Bus Tour, former Elephant Mesa SD

Skyfari (now closed) Skyfari aerial tram SD

African Plains Elephant Odyssey, Kopje, Canyons Draw

Baboon Reserve Absolutely Apes Draw

Himalayan Highlands Panda Research Station SD

Tiger Mountain Cat Canyon exhibits Bronx

World of Darkness (closed) Kiwi House, Flying Foxes SD

World of Birds, Scripps Aviary, Wings of Australasia, SD
Aquatic Bird House Hummingbird Aviary, Parker Aviary

Aitken Sea Bird Colony Owens Rain Forest Aviary Draw

Birds of Prey Birds of Prey SD

Madagascar, Monkey Hs Monkey Trails SD

Children's Zoo Children's Zoo Draw

Zoo Center, Astor Court Flamingo Lagoon, Gardens Draw

Sea Lion Pool Sea Lion Show SD

Bear Overlook Polar Bear Plunge, Sun Bear Forest SD

Butterfly Garden Insect House (in Children’s Zoo) Draw

MouseHouse Koala Exhibit, Meerkats, etc. SD

World of Reptiles Reptile Mesa SD

Rare Animal Range, Canyon exhibits Draw
Northern Ponds

Bug Carousel, Camel Ride Balboa Park Miniature RR, Bronx
Simulator ride

Zoo Shuttle Express Bus Draw

Animal Enrichment progs Shows (Hunte, Dr. Zoolittle) SD

Restaurants (Somba,etc) Restaurants (Treehouse, etc.) SD

Of course all of the opinions in the column "Edge" are our opinions, not necessarily fact. Also note that some of the Edges in that column are huge, such as SD's Polar Bear Plunge and Sun Bear Forest VS Bronx's Bear Overlook -- that's a huge advantage to San Diego!

If you agree at all with our ratings above, here's the "final score":
San Diego 14, Bronx 3, with 8 Draws. That's pretty convincing, I'd say. Now we need to do a similar comparison for Bronx vs Omaha.

 

[ANyhuis]

Shoot, I hate how ZooChat deletes spaces. Not sure if the previous post is even readable.

 

[Shirokuma]

I think that's an interesting formula but I'm not sure that those comparisons work, whilst it's fair to directly compare, for example, the bear exhibits, Himalayan Highlands and the Giant Panda research station are completely different, both in style of exhibit and species on display.

 

[mweb08]

Thank you for proving my point exactly! They are good exhibits your right, but I meant some of the best of their kind. All the animals I named at Bronx are some of the best of their kind. I don't think Omaha has one of the best rhino, giraffe, or zebra exhibits. They are just good. Bronx Zoo's giraffe & zebra exhibit is better than Omaha's, and so is it's rhino exhibit. Bronx also has very good exhibits for African Wild Dogs, lions, and a variety of antelope, not to mention all the other animals that I named before.

And I don't get what their isn't to understand. A large mammal is basically any type of big cat, bear, great ape, pachyderm, or hoofstock.

I proved your point by showing that your statement was wrong? Hmmm, ok, whatever you say. The Bronx has a great rhino exhibit for the rhino, but it's not good at all for the visitor. I'll take Omaha's rhino exhibit over the Bronx's and the giraffe and zebra exhibits are about equal. Omaha also has good antelope exhibits and a very good exhibit for the African wild dogs, although, not so much for the visitor. The Bronx has poor bear exhibits and a small leopard exhibit as well. So this isn't the landslide you are making it out to be.

By the way, it's there, not their in needless remark, which also has a double negative.

 

[groundskeeper24]

I've never been to Omaha, so I'm not qualified to say which is better.

That said, I think that there is just something about the Bronx that is enchanting to a certain type of zoo-goer. There's just a feel to the place that is different. It's so heavily wooded and confusing to navigate to a person that hasn't been there often that it seems even bigger than it actually is. There's a sort of Old World park charm to it.

I last visited San Diego in 1996. I've been there twice. It's never been anything short of amazing. I still like Bronx better. The only thing I like better about San Diego is their ability to house reptiles outdoors.

The exhibitry at the Bronx just seems like more of a combination of big budget and attention to detail. SD just seems like big budget. That's enough to beat most US zoos, but I'll take the detail. Woodland park is the only place I've been that seems to have the same idea on a general scale.

Other zoos like SD, DAK, and Columbus may indeed be better places for families or the general public to visit. I'm not families or the general public. I'm a grown dude that likes to go to zoos and see lots of animals in imaginative enclosures. It's not the norm, but it is what it is, and i feel like there are no better places for oddballs like myself than Bronx or Woodland Park.

 

[Shirokuma]

I think that there is just something about the Bronx that is enchanting to a certain type of zoo-goer. There's just a feel to the place that is different. It's so heavily wooded and confusing to navigate to a person that hasn't been there often that it seems even bigger than it actually is. There's a sort of Old World park charm to it.

I last visited San Diego in 1996. I've been there twice. It's never been anything short of amazing. I still like Bronx better. The only thing I like better about San Diego is their ability to house reptiles outdoors.

The exhibitry at the Bronx just seems like more of a combination of big budget and attention to detail. SD just seems like big budget. That's enough to beat most US zoos, but I'll take the detail. Woodland park is the only place I've been that seems to have the same idea on a general scale.

Other zoos like SD, DAK, and Columbus may indeed be better places for families or the general public to visit. I'm not families or the general public. I'm a grown dude that likes to go to zoos and see lots of animals in imaginative enclosures. It's not the norm, but it is what it is, and i feel like there are no better places for oddballs like myself than Bronx or Woodland Park.

I agree entirely, you've summed it up perfectly for me.

 

[mweb08]

I will say this, these three zoos are close enough that whichever comes out with a very good exhibit next will probably take over or remain in the top spot. We have no info that I'm aware of on SD or the Bronx coming out with anything, but we do have some info on Omaha's plans, which are massive, but far from finalized and lacking a timetable.

 

[ANyhuis]

The Bronx zoo has the best exhibits ( as shown by the aza exhibit awards)

I would urge throwing out entirely the AZA Best Exhibit awards as a criteria for judging. As I've pointed out many times, the awards tend to be very biased (at least in the past they were). Try walking through Omaha's Lied Jungle, then through Woodland Park's Tropical Rainforest building. When you realize that Woodland Park won the award that year, you should laugh! It should also be remembered that many major zoos don't even submit their excellent new exhibits for the AZA awards. Omaha hasn't submitted any exhibits since 1992. Disney, Columbus, Sedgwick County, and many others are also zoos that have never won an AZA exhibit award -- which shows that the award is basically a joke.

Other zoos like SD, DAK, and Columbus may indeed be better places for families or the general public to visit. I'm not families or the general public. I'm a grown dude that likes to go to zoos and see lots of animals in imaginative enclosures. It's not the norm, but it is what it is, and i feel like there are no better places for oddballs like myself than Bronx or Woodland Park.

This is my whole point. When we talk about "Which zoo is better", don't we generally mean "Which is better for the most people"? If we mean "Which is better for ME", then that could have very specific answers for every single person. So when we remember that 3/4 of all zoo visitors are either children or their accompanying adults, for any zoo to be the "best" for the most visitors, it has to be great for children. This is why I factor in strongly the zoos' Children's Zoo, their rides, their shows, and other things important to kids.

It's not the norm, but it is what it is, and i feel like there are no better places for oddballs like myself than Bronx or Woodland Park.

So I guess this statement is saying that Bronx and Woodland Park are the best zoos for "oddballs". I hope this isn't insulting, but I would tend to agree.

A few key points need to be remembered in this comparison:
1. Direction of Zoo: While Bronx has been closing down exhibits (World of Darkness, Rare Animal Range, Skyfari), Omaha has been adding even more (Insect building, Madagascar, sky ride).

2. Winter: Some of Bronx's best exhibits (Congo Gorilla Forest, Wild Asia, Baboon Reserve) are either closed or severely cut back for 4-5 months of the year. At Omaha, the best exhibits (Lied Jungle, Kingdoms of the Night, Desert Dome, Scott Aquarium) are all indoor climate-controlled exhibits. So for these colder months, Omaha is clearly better.

3. Hours: Bronx is only open from 10-5, and they chase you out of the zoo at closing time. I've never gone there when I didn't feel I needed more time. Omaha is open from 9:30-5, but the grounds remain open for at least 2 hours after closing. Thus, as long as you do the indoor exhibits by 5, you usually have plenty of time. This, by the way, is where San Diego really shines, with their summertime late hours.

 

[Shirokuma]

Direction of Zoo: While Bronx has been closing down exhibits (World of Darkness, Rare Animal Range, Skyfari), Omaha has been adding even more (Insect building, Madagascar, sky ride).

I'm not sure if it's fair to say that this makes one zoo better than the other. I'd prefer a zoo to make tough decisions and cut back when necessary rather than keeping or adding things for the sake of 'completeness'.

Bigger doesn't meen better and less can often be more in the context of zoos.

 

[mweb08]

I'm not sure if it's fair to say that this makes one zoo better than the other. I'd prefer a zoo to make tough decisions and cut back when necessary rather than keeping or adding things for the sake of 'completeness'.

Bigger doesn't meen better and less can often be more in the context of zoos.

How can them closing down the World of Darkness be considered a positive when ranking them vs the other top zoos? Now the actual direction doesn't matter imo, since we are talking about right now rather than the future, but the Bronx isn't as good of a zoo as they would have been with those other elements.