Zoos in The U.S spend millions of dollars when it comes to new exhibits. Does anyone know any zoos that Hyped up a new exhibit so so much... and is was ultimintely a giant let down, and a huge waist of money?
Worst waste of money by zoos
- Thread starter pachyderm pro
- Start date
Here's a massive belt for your huge waist.
???????????????????????
I corrected the title of the thread earlier, for anyone who is wondering...
Spoilsport 
How did I not get that. Lol but really though what are some waists of money zoos have done?
Nikola Chavkosk
Well-Known Member
Bitola zoo in R. Macedonia (small and insignificant country) spent about 150,000 euros (not excactly sure) (about 165,000 USD) for building traditional, old-looking house in the zoo, as attraction for visitors. Ok they spent money (from EU-funds as part of neighboring collaboration with the Greece, because Bitola zoo is at about 15 km from the Greek border) also for the providing new exhibits and enlarging them, but the spending on the house was not very ''zoo - thing''. Instead, I would add several other enclosures (for existing and for new additional animals from species not represented in the small zoo) with that money.
jbnbsn99
Well-Known Member
Facepalm...
Dingdingding we have a winner!
Nikola Chavkosk
Well-Known Member
Just to note, those 165,000 USD here would be equal to some 500,000 USD in the US or UK for example, owning to building cost.
Thanks for the response but are there any animal exhibits that where way to over hyped and where a let down?
Although I personally have never viewed it myself (certainly hope to in the future), San Diego's Elephant Odyssey seemed to have been met with a lot of disappointment and even some criticism on Zoochat on the fact that they replaced a wonderful set of rare and beautiful animals (Horn and Hoof Mesa) with Elephant Odyssey. I have only seen pictures of it so thus I cannot judge.
I've saw it last summer after seeing hundreds of photos of it. I didn't have much of an opinion on it and I didn't expect anything amazing after all the criticism but if I had to summarize it, I would say it's a lot of dirt and has too many visible cable fences. I also noticed the area and it's exhibits are a lot smaller then what photos show. Actually, the zoo itself was a lot smaller then what I anticipated.
I agree with the above discussion of Elephant Odyssey. Sure, a few of the more-or-less barren exhibits suited their inhabitants, for example, the pronghorn, but exhibit sizes were smaller than I hoped for and most of the viewing was obstructed in one way or another. I wasn't a fan of the exhibits for François or silvery langurs either, because they were essentially indoors, with no vegetation and quite poor viewing.
The polar bear exhibits of the Kansas City Zoo ($11 mil USD) and the Saint Louis Zoo ($16 mil USD) were a bit of a letdown, though the latter was better. KCZ has better viewing and a much, much better water area than SLZ, which has natural substrate but is laid out a bit odd.
The Omaha's Henry Doorly Zoo's Expedition Madagascar exhibit ($10 mil USD) was hit and miss. Some exhibits (fossa, aye-aye, perhaps smaller birds and herps) were great, while the outdoor lemur habitats are extremely noticeably poorly made, and the indoor lemur habitats are barren, outdated glass boxes.
The hippo exhibits of the San Antonio Zoo (unsure of cost) was a bit of a letdown, however, the hippos are permitted to graze in the African wild dog habitat at night, according to a post on this website, so I'd let it slide.
The new hippo exhibit at the Cincinatti Zoo isn't the greatest, but I haven't seen it, so I'll let someone else cover it if they wish to.
That's all for now, but I may chime back in later.
The polar bear exhibits of the Kansas City Zoo ($11 mil USD) and the Saint Louis Zoo ($16 mil USD) were a bit of a letdown, though the latter was better. KCZ has better viewing and a much, much better water area than SLZ, which has natural substrate but is laid out a bit odd.
The Omaha's Henry Doorly Zoo's Expedition Madagascar exhibit ($10 mil USD) was hit and miss. Some exhibits (fossa, aye-aye, perhaps smaller birds and herps) were great, while the outdoor lemur habitats are extremely noticeably poorly made, and the indoor lemur habitats are barren, outdated glass boxes.
The hippo exhibits of the San Antonio Zoo (unsure of cost) was a bit of a letdown, however, the hippos are permitted to graze in the African wild dog habitat at night, according to a post on this website, so I'd let it slide.
The new hippo exhibit at the Cincinatti Zoo isn't the greatest, but I haven't seen it, so I'll let someone else cover it if they wish to.
That's all for now, but I may chime back in later.
Given a lot of people say it takes two days to see the zoo properly, I'd hate to imagine how big it would have to be to satisfy you
possibly Tierpark Berlin size?
I don't understand the dislike against the odyessy It is a interesting concept and is major improvement over the cramped elephant mesa. Even though most of horn and hoof mesa is gone. some of it still remains with some rare species like pronghorns .
Given a lot of people say it takes two days to see the zoo properly, I'd hate to imagine how big it would have to be to satisfy you
I'm a fast walker whenever I go to zoos. Reason being is because I usually no longer stop to watch the animals but I go to photograph them. When I know there's no opportunity for a photo, I move along after a few seconds. If I do have opportunities, I could be at one spot for more than 20 minutes. These are some of the reasons why people don't come to zoos with me. I'd also like to add that not only were many exhibits empty but the entire Africa Rocks section was gone. The zoo that always exhausts me is the Columbus Zoo. At 580 acres, over a few miles worth of guest paths, walking fast, and always going through the zoo twice, it's more than big enough to me.
the concept is good. The execution is not. That is why people have a problem with it.