Bronx Zoo Bronx Zoo review

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have to weigh in on this topic but basically just to say one thing that has always bothered me on here. Just because a zoo is not AZA doesn't automatically mean that it is of lower quality. I have been to many zoos across this country. I've seen many non AZA zoos that are really nice and I've seen some AZA zoos that I was pretty disappointed in. I've also talked to many keepers at AZA zoos that wished they weren't AZA for a variety of reasons. All I will say is that just because a zoo is not AZA does not mean that they weren't approved to be in AZA....it could mean they don't necessarily want to be.
At the risk of being attacked, I will say Bronx has never been one of my favorites either. I know you can buy an all-in-one ticket but I don't really agree with making your visitors pay to go into each area separately. Just seems to be a way of forcing people to buy the most expensive ticket.
 
Arizona Docent said:
Zoos do contribute to conservation, but not nearly enough IMO. AZA accredited zoos, which promote conservation as one of their hallmarks, donate an average of just under three percent of their annual budgets to conservation projects. That is laughable. Can you imagine any charity asking you for a donation and you ask them how much of your donation goes to the actual work versus office expense, and they say oh about three percent to the work and ninety seven percent to office expense, marketing and administration!
Click to expand...

Oh yes three percent is simply sad and laughable! Though zoos are businesses and not so much charities. At the same time they ask for donations for conservation and then it doesn't go there and that's simply a disgrace! The AZA is meh and I don't know much on the ZAA so I can't contribute there but they really need to be doing more.

~Thylo:cool:
 
ZooLover4Life said:
Lions are not endangered of going extinct.
Click to expand...
The population of the West African Lion is predicted to be around 400. Yeah, they need help.
ZooLover4Life said:
I prefer lions in a zoo anyway rather than in the wild running amok killing their own young and slaughtering all kinds of other animals. I feel bad for the zebra being eaten alive. Sorry for having a heart. I know you're going to come at me about "balance" and all this other conservation stuff. Heard it all before. No need. I have different values. To me there's nothing nice about the Saranghetti other than sunsets. It's a brutal awful killing field.
Click to expand...
First off, it's Serengeti. Saranghetti sounds almost like an Italian dish. Secondly, it can be tough to see animals being hunted and killed by predators. But it's happened for as long as predators and prey have existed. Do you feel this guilty whenever you sit down and eat a cheeseburger? And "brutal awful killing field." It's nature, not war. And even in the struggle of "survival of the fittest", the miracle of life continues.
 
Phantom Gaur said:
I have to weigh in on this topic but basically just to say one thing that has always bothered me on here. Just because a zoo is not AZA doesn't automatically mean that it is of lower quality. I have been to many zoos across this country. I've seen many non AZA zoos that are really nice and I've seen some AZA zoos that I was pretty disappointed in. I've also talked to many keepers at AZA zoos that wished they weren't AZA for a variety of reasons. All I will say is that just because a zoo is not AZA does not mean that they weren't approved to be in AZA....it could mean they don't necessarily want to be.
At the risk of being attacked, I will say Bronx has never been one of my favorites either. I know you can buy an all-in-one ticket but I don't really agree with making your visitors pay to go into each area separately. Just seems to be a way of forcing people to buy the most expensive ticket.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. I visited the Maritime Aquarium before it was in the AZA and I was shocked to find out it wasn't accredited since it was a very nice aquarium and better than some AZA places I've seen.

Yeah the whole separate payment thing is annoying. I kind of understand for something like the monorail and maybe the Children's Zoo but it's a bit much with JungleWorld and Congo Gorilla Forest. For the record, though, I think an online all access ticket costs about the same as a regular ticket at the gate. Now I have to disagree with the reasoning behind the separate prices. Now I'm not an expert on this subject but I do remember a bit that I read on the subject. You have to remember that Bronx is a big zoo that not only has to make money for itself, but also some of its profits go to the smaller collections and the WCS. Additionally, a lot of funding that the WCS and, more importantly, the city might give to Bronx is now going to the aquarium. If Bronx did not ask for extra for admission into some of its better exhibits, it wouldn't be able to keep them running. Remember that they had to close a lot of exhibits and boot a ton of species back in 2009 due to budget cuts. That's why there's no more World of Darkness or Rare Animal Range. African Plains was never even finished for Pete's sack! The zoo is only now getting back up and pushing forward from that. So it's not just so much that the zoo wants to squeeze every penny from its visitors, it's just that they can't afford to run the exhibits without that extra income, even though I agree it isn't really that fair to many people. I remember not being able to visit either CGF, WAM, or JW on my visits due to us not being able to pay separate pricing each time. For the record, though, I think both JW and CGF are free during the winter.

~Thylo:cool:
 
BeardsleyZooFan said:
The population of the West African Lion is predicted to be around 400. Yeah, they need help.

First off, it's Serengeti. Saranghetti sounds almost like an Italian dish. Secondly, it can be tough to see animals being hunted and killed by predators. But it's happened for as long as predators and prey have existed. Do you feel this guilty whenever you sit down and eat a cheeseburger? And "brutal awful killing field." It's nature, not war. And even in the struggle of "survival of the fittest", the miracle of life continues.
Click to expand...
I'm talking lions overall are not at risk of going extinct. They're not critically threatened like some species. There's about 40-50k lions at least in central afica. If I was giving money it would be for cheetahs, not lions. They're in much more trouble.

I'm a vegetarian so no I don't eat cheese burgers. A 12 year old dying of luekemia is also nature at work. It's a bad uncaring world out there and I'm not going to worship it. Sorry. Just my values. I wish large predators never evolved to kill and most animals were herbivores or just ate fish/insects like on some small island chains. But unfortunately that's not reality.
 
ThylacineAlive said:
Oh yes three percent is simply sad and laughable! Though zoos are businesses and not so much charities. At the same time they ask for donations for conservation and then it doesn't go there and that's simply a disgrace! The AZA is meh and I don't know much on the ZAA so I can't contribute there but they really need to be doing more.

~Thylo:cool:
Click to expand...

I'm happy just visiting the zoo's as long as the animals are not abused like some roadside hell hole.(monkeys/elephants being kept alone, clear neglect ect) Then my wallet goes elsewhere and I will not support the zoo. I have no tolerance for that. I don't expect a zoo to be a conservation chairty to save species. I expect them to be a ZOO! lol To have animals that are well taken care of for people to view.
 
ZooLover4Life said:
I'm talking lions overall are not at risk of going extinct. They're not critically threatened like some species. There's about 40-50k lions at least in central afica. If I was giving money it would be for cheetahs, not lions. They're in much more trouble.

I'm a vegetarian so no I don't eat cheese burgers. A 12 year old dying of luekemia is also nature at work. It's a bad uncaring world out there and I'm not going to worship it. Sorry. Just my values. I wish large predators never evolved to kill and most animals were herbivores or just ate fish/insects like on some small island chains. But unfortunately that's not reality.
Click to expand...

Lions are an endangered species. They aren't Critically Endangered as a whole, no, but still are endangered as a whole.

For someone who doesn't like carnivores the only species you've brought up by name that you like in zoos are Lions and tigers! And there would be soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo many problems in the world without carnivores to balance things out! And it sounds as though you only don't like carnivorous mammals but are okay with birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish, and inverts.

Let's please keep deadly diseases and illnesses that are causing small children to prematurely die out of things here, please.

~Thylo:cool:
 
ZooLover4Life said:
There's about 40-50k lions at least in central afica
Click to expand...

Last time there was an official estimate - over ten years ago now - the population in the entirety of Africa was said to possibly be as low as 16,000 individuals, and no higher than 40,000. So I rather doubt there are 50,000 in central Africa alone now - especially when one consider that in the mid-1990's the world population was something like 100k and thus the downwards trend is pretty rapid.

Also, comparing a child dying of Leukemia to a zebra being killed by lions is in extremely poor taste.
 
TeaLovingDave said:
Also, comparing a child dying of Leukemia to a zebra being killed by lions is in extremely poor taste.
Click to expand...
It's not the same thing. The point I'm making it it's both NATURE at work. Cleaning out the gene pool. I was pointing out had CRUEL it is. That's all. I'm not equating a human life with a zebra. I'm not fanatical.
 
@ZooLover4Life. Why is it that you disagree with zoos being for conservation, or as you stated "don't expect a zoo to be a conservation charity to save species"?
 
ZooLover4Life said:
It's not the same thing. The point I'm making it it's both NATURE at work. Cleaning out the gene pool. I was pointing out had CRUEL it is. That's all. I'm not equating a human life with a zebra. I'm not fanatical.
Click to expand...

I'd offer you a bulldozer but it seems the shovel if working out just fine for you.

:p

~Thylo:cool:
 
ThylacineAlive said:
Lions are an endangered species. They aren't Critically Endangered as a whole, no, but still are endangered as a whole.

For someone who doesn't like carnivores the only species you've brought up by name that you like in zoos are Lions and tigers! And there would be soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo many problems in the world without carnivores to balance things out!
Click to expand...
Not true. A new balance would develop. Breeding would slow down. Look at remote island chains that lack predators for evidence. I like lots of animals at the zoo. Also, some of the worst exhibits were actually ungulates at bronx zoo. I swear I couldn't even tell what some of them were it was such a long view to end of the exhibit.
 
ThylacineAlive said:
I'd offer you a bulldozer but it seems the shovel if working out just fine for you.

:p

~Thylo:cool:
Click to expand...

Hey we saw where this was going after first reply. You can't deviate from the average forum members viewpoint. It quickly derails into off topic nonsense. You come onto the bronx zoo forum section and give it a bad review is like going on a angelina jolie fan page and trashing her acting skills. I also have different values than people on here who seem to view zoos as entities who exist for conservation only, which I quite frankly find absurd.
 
ZooLover4Life said:
It's not the same thing. The point I'm making it it's both NATURE at work. Cleaning out the gene pool.
Click to expand...

And *now* you just compared a child dying of Leukamia to "cleaning out the genepool".......

I'm going to be charitable and assume you did NOT mean to say that, so I'm just gonna point to the little blue title under my username and ask you to quit this line of argument, as opposed to assuming you MEANT to make that analogy and *telling* you to quit it.
 
TeaLovingDave said:
And *now* you just compared a child dying of Leukamia to "cleaning out the genepool".......

I'm going to be charitable and assume you did NOT mean to say that, so I'm just gonna point to the little blue title under my username and ask you to quit this line of argument, as opposed to assuming you MEANT to make that analogy and *telling* you to quit it.
Click to expand...

I stand by my original statement. Nature sucks. A 12 year old dying of luekemia is also nature at work. Bad dna in the child. Brutal, cruel and disgusting. Nature is cruel uncaring and lacks compassion for living things. Therefore I don't worship it. My point really wasn't comparing it to a zebra. Lets get real. You know exactly the point I was making.
 
ZooLover4Life said:
Not true. A new balance would develop. Breeding would slow down. Look at remote island chains that lack predators for evidence. I like lots of animals at the zoo. Also, some of the worst exhibits were actually ungulates at bronx zoo. I swear I couldn't even tell what some of them were it was such a long view to end of the exhibit.
Click to expand...

And look at when species have been introduced to areas where they have no natural predators. They're spread like wildlife and decimated the natural habitat.

So Bronx's ungulate enclosure suck because they're big grassy fields and large forested paddocks? Personally the only one I've ever had a problem with the the viewing for the nyala and the Thompson's Gazelle enclosure.

~Thylo:cool:
 
ThylacineAlive said:
And look at when species have been introduced to areas where they have no natural predators. They're spread like wildlife and decimated the natural habitat.

:
Click to expand...

Of course because they never evolved for that environment. Their breeding rate is too fast. They evolved to adapt to predatory pressure. My point is it would be better if they evolved without predators at all. Then this would not be an issue. What does this have to do with bronx zoo? Take it back to the topic rather than derailing it please.
 
TeaLovingDave said:
And *now* you just compared a child dying of Leukamia to "cleaning out the genepool".......
Click to expand...

That's exactly what it's doing. That's cleaning the gene pool out in a BRUTAL horrific way. Exactly that. Bad genes in the child caused cellular mutations which led to carcinogensis. Nature doesn't care that we are smart self aware creatures with emotions.

That's why nature sucks!
 
ZooLover4Life said:
Of course because they never evolved for that environment. Their breeding rate is too fast. They evolved to adapt to predatory pressure. My point is it would be better if they evolved without predators at all. Then this would not be an issue. What does this have to do with bronx zoo? Take it back to the topic rather than derailing it please.
Click to expand...

Well technically they did evolve to that environment as that's why they've survived and done so well. And even with species who have naturally spread their ranges. No predators=bad.

I'm not even going to comment of the "what does this have to do with the Bronx Zoo?" question....

~Thylo:cool:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top