Which is better omaha or bronx?
- Thread starter elephantking
- Start date
-
- Tags
- omaha
I disagree, it can still be a great zoo even without World of Darkness. It could close down a number of exhibits and still be a great zoo and still be 'better' than others.
One of the reasons Bronx closed the World of Darkness is that it was in desperate need a major renovation, to the tune of millions of dollars. It was decided it was better to close now and wait for a time when resources are available to make the exhibit state-of-the art again (as it was when it opened in 1969).
In contrast, Omaha continues to exhibit rare African primates in corncribs and warehouse a "stamp collection" of large cats in repetitive tile cells.
The new leadership at Omaha clearly understands the need to make changes, as demonstrated by their excellent and thoughtful Master Plan, as well as the decison to move animals out of the innappropriate spaces of some of the newer exhibits (no more "cougars in a crevice" in the Desert; nor tail-less raccoons dangling on sticks above alligators).
But in the end I'll take the high-quality approach of the Bronx over the hit-and-miss offerings of Omaha, or the resolutely average level of exhibitry in San Diego.
And despite ANyhuis's disparaging remarks, the AZA exhibit awards received by the Bronx and Woodland Park are meaningful--just like the Academy Awards there is room for disagreement, but taken as a body of work it can't be denied that these two zoos simply do exhibits consistently better than any others.
mweb08
Well-Known Member
I don't think you understand what I meant. Of course it can still be a great zoo and better than others, but it's not as good as it would be with it. I'm not sure how that can be argued unless it was a bad exhibit, which isn't the case from what I understand.
mweb08
Well-Known Member
I'm not saying it was a poor choice to close down World of Darkness, I'm simply saying it isn't as good as it would be with it at this very moment.
The large cats have outdoor enclosures as well, but yes, the management is right to go a different direction in the future.
San Diego has plenty of well above average exhibits, but I don't care to argue with you about this because it will go nowhere. Your favorite is the Bronx, I also love it, but only it's 3rd on my list, we will just have to agree to disagree.
However, like I said though, whichever of the top 3 zoos comes out with a very good to great exhibit next will retain or take over the top spot in my mind. So that could be the Bronx, although there's no evidence that they're coming out with anything in the near future as far as I know.
I wouldn't really consider Skyfari at Bronx or the Sky Ride at Henry Doorly to be exhibits in their own right, they are just rides which give visitors a different perspective of existing exhibits.
Rare Animal Range consisted of two large paddocks, one for guanaco and one for Formosan Sika Deer. Removing the animals from this area does not greatly impact the number of species at the Bronx Zoo.
While the World of Darkness exhibit is now closed nocturnal animals are still being exhibited elsewhere in the zoo. Aardvarks, duiker, and owls are exhibited in the Giraffe Building and a section of the New World Primate House in Astor Court has been converted to house Dourocouli, Two-toed Sloth, Agouti, and a few of the small bat species from one of the World of Darkness exhibits. I didn't get to go into the Mouse House on this visit but I would imagine that they may have moved one or two species from World of Darkness over to there as well.
And lets not forget that Bronx isn't simply closing exhibits, when Madagascar! opened fairly recently.
I have not yet visited the Henry Doorly Zoo but I cannot rate it higher than the Bronx when it exhibits big cats in horrendous tile cells.
mweb08
Well-Known Member
Just another example of a zoo being penalized on here for making their indoor holding areas open to the public. The tigers, lions, leopards, jaguars, and pumas have outdoor exhibits as well. They aren't that good I'll grant you, but they do exist.
As i said, I won't judge Omaha without seeing it.
As for the Bronx's much publicized closures, I don't see it as much different than what has been going on in US zoos as a general trend over the last 10 years. Bronx was just a bit more honest about being cash-strapped.
While many good zoos look to be opening newer better exhibits, they probably get rid of more large animals than they gain in the long run. How many birds and hoofed stock are gone or off-exhibit in SD and SDWAP in the last 12 years? They open big money exhibits that get a lot of attention, but they still do away with many more that just as the thinking was in the Bronx, have less drawing power than monkeys, elephants, polar bears and lemurs. To boot, SD isn't even hurting for cash.
I don't get why Bronx gets criticized for this practiced, labelled as "outsourcing animals" and other institutions don't even have it mentioned.
As for the Bronx's much publicized closures, I don't see it as much different than what has been going on in US zoos as a general trend over the last 10 years. Bronx was just a bit more honest about being cash-strapped.
While many good zoos look to be opening newer better exhibits, they probably get rid of more large animals than they gain in the long run. How many birds and hoofed stock are gone or off-exhibit in SD and SDWAP in the last 12 years? They open big money exhibits that get a lot of attention, but they still do away with many more that just as the thinking was in the Bronx, have less drawing power than monkeys, elephants, polar bears and lemurs. To boot, SD isn't even hurting for cash.
I don't get why Bronx gets criticized for this practiced, labelled as "outsourcing animals" and other institutions don't even have it mentioned.
I guess my feeling with this is that since big cats draw such a big crowd that they deserve to be the focal point of some immersive experience rather than be showcased in what seem like jewelbox exhibits. It is nice that the cats can be viewed in their indoor "holding" exhibits but shouldn't most of them be exhibitable outside anyway in the winter? I think that the visitor take-home message achievable when exhibiting big cats is enormous and it is a disservice to the establishment to lose such a take-home message. They should redesign this area to be more immersive and increase the visitor experience.
mweb08
Well-Known Member
I'm not critcizing them for it, I'm simply stating that the zoo would currently be better with it than without it while not considering finances. Agree or disagree with that?
SD has been criticized many times on here for that. I think there move was more due to lack of space for EO than due to not having the money to keep the exhibits open. While many here aren't happy with that decision and the resulting exhibit, the general public is.
mweb08
Well-Known Member
That is the plan.
My point is this: Most zoos have indoor holding areas for their big cats along with many other animals, most of these indoor areas are not exactly good for the animals, but some people seem to act like they don't even exist at the places where they aren't open to the public, while they hammer the zoos that do let the public see the animals more often and/or see more of their collection. So two zoos can have the exact same indoor holding areas for their jaguars for example, but only one will be knocked.
As you have said, the outdoor enclosures at Omaha are pretty sad too. But your point is well taken--the Bronx off-exhibit holding areas for lions, tigers, snow leopards etc. are not much different from what is there for everyone to see at Omaha. But the difference is the primary (outdoor) exhibit spaces are brilliant.
mweb08
Well-Known Member
Well it's nice we have some common ground for once.
Yes, the Bronx outdoor exhibits are much better for their cats, there is no doubt about it. The cheetah and lion exhibits are solid at Omaha though. But yes, that's an advantage for the Bronx and the one that should be primarily talked about, not the indoor cat exhibits that many focus on.
It certainly would be better with it. I agree on that point. I also don't really want to poop all over San Diego or the WAP. As a lifelong zoo nut, it's just not in me to bash the institutions that I've been indoctrinated (and seen) to believe are standard bearers. That would be SD. I was pretty excited about the imaginative concept of EO. I was disappointed about HH Mesa getting the axe, but it is what it is. Hopefully when some greenery grows in, EO will be much nicer to look at. Heck, I've only seen it in pics, so maybe I'd think it was just great in person.
My only real point is that I'm a rare kind of person, ie a fan of zoos for the sake of nothing other than collection and exhibitry, not neccessarily in that particular order. Many of us on here are that way. That and the fact that I love the Bronx Zoo are all I'm saying. I love CGF, Baboon reserve, Madagascar, Jungle World, African Plains, Himalayan Highlands espescially, and yes, even crappy old Bengali Express Monorail. I'm a massive fan of Asian megafauna, and for me that's the best place to see tons of that particular type of animal in huge groups, in big fields, if only for a glimpse. Their exhibitry blew my mind when I saw it. If it was a rock band, it would have "melted my face", lol. I've never seen snow leopards in such great enclosures. Sometimes I get the notion that designers for Bronx could build a new exhibit focusing on hamsters or guinea pigs, and I would think it was great.