The high admission price is unfortunately typical of California zoos though - San Diego is now at $76, starting to rival even the theme parks. Tiny little Sequoia Park out in Eureka is $25 even though you can see everything in maybe half an hour tops. AotP isn't inherently out of step by comparison in state.
I do understand that as a CA resident myself, and yes, San Diego is absolutely quite high. But I don't think anyone can question that SDZ, as one of the very best facilities in the nation and also easily one of the most difficult to explore in a single day, pretty well meets the requisite value one would desire for such a cost. The Safari Park is perhaps even more of a good-value consideration given the incredible novelty of the Africa Tram. I don't think AOP has any justification for its current position by comparison. Not only that, LA Zoo (a facility I think is very comparable to AOP in terms of its actual featured animals, and also its region of course) is only $27, a fairly average or even a little below average rate for a big city zoo. The "combo ticket" for LAZ with AOP being $63 - a mere $8.95 savings from two separate tickets - is also fairly comical as an aside lol.
It depends somewhat upon region, and seems to have a good degree of variability. In America the peak non-theme park-affiliated zoo is higher than the peak aquarium of the same type (SDZ and Safari Park's $76 vs Monterey's $65), but you're probably right that the average aquarium is slightly higher than the average zoo. To use a random city as an example, the Denver Zoo (one of the best I've ever been to) is $26, while the Downtown Aquarium Denver (what I would call an above-average aquarium) is $28.99, so a marginal difference but slight edge to the aquarium.
I do think this probably has something to do with the nature of the activity; a zoo is generally an outdoor facility involving a lot of walking in the heat, while an aquarium is most often fully or at least majority indoors and air-conditioned. It's thus perhaps a bit more of a "luxury" activity to the mind of those establishing these prices.
Ok I don’t think there’s much left to be said about this topic however I would like to point out something that has been pointed out many times on this website: AZA zoos are professional institutions. They do not make decisions for no reason. They do not downsize their collections for the sole purpose of building inferior exhibits. They do not raise ticket prices for no reason. These are large companies with dedicated financial, scientific, and guest satisfaction divisions. Sometimes the decisions they make are complex, we may not have all the pieces of the puzzle. We can sit here and complain and say it doesn’t make sense to us, but this is a professional Aquarium we are talking about. The reasons behind getting rid of the ray pool and replacing it with our living coasts most likely can be attributable to multiple factors. An Aquariums quality is not the only factor that goes into determining ticket prices.
Ok I don’t think there’s much left to be said about this topic however I would like to point out something that has been pointed out many times on this website: AZA zoos are professional institutions. They do not make decisions for no reason. They do not downsize their collections for the sole purpose of building inferior exhibits. They do not raise ticket prices for no reason. These are large companies with dedicated financial, scientific, and guest satisfaction divisions. Sometimes the decisions they make are complex, we may not have all the pieces of the puzzle. We can sit here and complain and say it doesn’t make sense to us, but this is a professional Aquarium we are talking about. The reasons behind getting rid of the ray pool and replacing it with our living coasts most likely can be attributable to multiple factors. An Aquariums quality is not the only factor that goes into determining ticket prices.
I can't help but find this somewhat confusing as a statement. I make no claim that there aren't a plethora of factors going into the ticket price at AOP. I even mentioned a few, those being fluctuating operating costs and planned remodels. But that doesn't set aside the fact that AOP's particular cost is not easily explicable by either point, unless and until they actually release any such remodel plans. I'm certain they have their reasons, I am merely commenting my opinion that those reasons don't seem all that discernible to me.
The simple truth is, this website is a forum, we're going to discuss things and try to put the pieces that we do have together...so, naturally, discussion of something pretty unusual like a $15 spike in admission over 5 years, or an exhibit change that is controversial, is going to happen. I'm glad we had the discussion as I enjoy experiencing differing viewpoints.
True, but such things aren't inherently uncommon to include - SDZ doesn't charge for the buses or sky tram, and the Safari Park doesn't charge for the africa tram. Don't think Oakland charges for their sky tram either.
Not only that, LA Zoo (a facility I think is very comparable to AOP in terms of its actual featured animals, and also its region of course) is only $27, a fairly average or even a little below average rate for a big city zoo.
I do think this probably has something to do with the nature of the activity; a zoo is generally an outdoor facility involving a lot of walking in the heat, while an aquarium is most often fully or at least majority indoors and air-conditioned. It's thus perhaps a bit more of a "luxury" activity to the mind of those establishing these prices.
I think zoos and aquariums are often seen a bit differently as you say. The overall experience is fairly different and a large proportion of aquariums have opened relatively recently. In many cases families grew up going to the zoo but the aquarium is a newer arrival that has more novelty.
All true, but funnily enough I think they’ve actually had more truly large-scale construction projects than AOP in the last decade and a half, when you consider the LAIR and Rainforest of the Americas. AOP really only has Pacific Visions and the few minor overhauls, I suppose you could count SoCal and Our Living Coastline as like one medium scale one together. AOP has thus caught up a little bit lately.
True, but such things aren't inherently uncommon to include - SDZ doesn't charge for the buses or sky tram, and the Safari Park doesn't charge for the africa tram. Don't think Oakland charges for their sky tram either.
We are getting off on a tangent here, but I think they consider the redwood canopy walk the major attraction here, with the zoo a nice adjunct attraction. Until fairly recently SDZ did charge for the bus tour and the Skyfari as separate attractions. Your basic point is true - zoo admission costs have increased greatly in California.
On January 23rd, the aquarium announced they temporarily acquired a group of northern tidewater gobies due to the then-ongoing effects of the Palisades fires. They were released back into the wild in June.
On July 15th, the aquarium announced they collected ~600 California red-legged frog eggs, of which all were successfully reared and released into the wilds of California.
On February 23rd, the aquarium announced they acquired a female (0.1) common raven named Freyja from Ojai Raptor Center in California, which is an ambassador animal.
On March 12th, the aquarium announced they acquired a female (0.1) southern sea otter named Nova in autumn 2024, and is participating in the facility's surrogacy program.
On June 17th, the aquarium announced they, alongside Omaha's Henry Doorly Zoo & Aquarium in Nebraska and San Diego Zoo in California, successfully froze, thawed, and settled larval giant pink stars into juveniles, the first time with a species of sea star.
I was at the aquarium today and happened to find an aquarist near one of the habitats in the Tropical Pacific Gallery. I asked about the female Clipperton angelfish they had, and unfortunately, they no longer keep this species, as she has since passed away.
