And not just the majority of zoos there, but zoos in every part of the country (at least in the case of myself and snowleopard). I think this speaks volumes.
Best State for Zoos
- Thread starter KCZooFan
- Start date
And not just the majority of zoos there, but zoos in every part of the country (at least in the case of myself and snowleopard). I think this speaks volumes.
mweb08
Well-Known Member
No response to what I said? Would you not agree that it's largely a quantity over quality debate when viewing CA vs Texas? Or at least a quality depth vs quality at the top since CA has quantity as well, it's just not nearly as strong 3-8 as Texas is.
jbnbsn99
Well-Known Member
I think there is an objective way to do this and eliminate personal bias. Pick the top 10 (or 5 or whatever number) zoos in a state and give each a numerical grade. Base the grade solely off of what the zoo itself presents to the guest and not against another zoo. This would eliminate "my zoo has this so its better than yours." Once the grades are taken either do a cumulative grade (0-1000) or an average grade (0-100).
Talli
Well-Known Member
Boy, I'm just going to have to keep thinking about this one. Of course, I haven't met a zoo poll yet I could really decide on an answer to. I just keep thinking of other factors.
I'm always kind of surprised about the raves SD Zoo gets. Yes, it has some brilliant exhibits, but there are still so many that make me think - why is that still here? What they have the best of is climate and PR. And I have to say the Wild Animal Park isn't nearly as much fun for me without the train.
I think New York popped into my head first with an institution in each burrough of NYC, and several beyond(and Bronx being a favorite), and then I thought about just how many animal places are in Florida - almost 100 that I know of - almost half as many more as the 70+ on my California list. Of course they're not all "zoos", just places that display animals other than "farm animals". But then, Texas and Ohio do both have some amazing zoos. And, if you think just per capita - I think you have to pick North Dakota with zoos in Minot, Bismarck, Wahpeton, Watertown and Fargo - a state with just over 600 thousand!
I think I'll vote Team Tapir. Wish I still had a zoo going spouse!
I'm always kind of surprised about the raves SD Zoo gets. Yes, it has some brilliant exhibits, but there are still so many that make me think - why is that still here? What they have the best of is climate and PR. And I have to say the Wild Animal Park isn't nearly as much fun for me without the train.
I think New York popped into my head first with an institution in each burrough of NYC, and several beyond(and Bronx being a favorite), and then I thought about just how many animal places are in Florida - almost 100 that I know of - almost half as many more as the 70+ on my California list. Of course they're not all "zoos", just places that display animals other than "farm animals". But then, Texas and Ohio do both have some amazing zoos. And, if you think just per capita - I think you have to pick North Dakota with zoos in Minot, Bismarck, Wahpeton, Watertown and Fargo - a state with just over 600 thousand!
I think I'll vote Team Tapir. Wish I still had a zoo going spouse!
My fellow Arizonan and I see eye to eye on this one.
The San Diego Wild Animal Park is actually a lot more improved since they opened Elephant Odyssey at the SD Zoo because the African Elephants now have the who habitat to roam, and the multiple births they have had in the past year make that portion of the park much more entertaining. Once the new Tiger Exhibit opens it will be even better.
And chastise me if this doesn't make sense but while I think San Diego Zoo is the best of Zoos I have had most of my favorite experiences at other Zoos, the size of the crowds in SD sometimes make enjoying something amazing more difficult and I have to take a weekday off in the fall or winter, get there right as the doors open, and use my membership to be really entertained.
As for the poll I have to give it to my home state of California, especially if aquariums are thrown into the mix. Not just because of what big Zoos like San Diego, LA, and Sea World have to offer, but I have had lots of fun at smaller Zoos like in Santa Ana, Irvine, and Atascadero.
And chastise me if this doesn't make sense but while I think San Diego Zoo is the best of Zoos I have had most of my favorite experiences at other Zoos, the size of the crowds in SD sometimes make enjoying something amazing more difficult and I have to take a weekday off in the fall or winter, get there right as the doors open, and use my membership to be really entertained.
As for the poll I have to give it to my home state of California, especially if aquariums are thrown into the mix. Not just because of what big Zoos like San Diego, LA, and Sea World have to offer, but I have had lots of fun at smaller Zoos like in Santa Ana, Irvine, and Atascadero.
I decided to revisit this thread as I find the discussion interesting, and what is even more intriguing is how sparsely spread out many of America's AZA-accredited establishments are. Almost half of the states in America have either 0, 1 or 2 accredited institutions, and Alaska, Maine, Vermont and Wyoming are 4 U.S. states that according to the most recent membership update have 0 accredited zoos or aquariums.
The leading states? California is ahead with 24, Florida and Texas have 16, New York has 11, Illinois 9, Pennsylvania 8 and Ohio and Kansas have 7 each. That is according to the most updated data on the AZA website.
The leading states? California is ahead with 24, Florida and Texas have 16, New York has 11, Illinois 9, Pennsylvania 8 and Ohio and Kansas have 7 each. That is according to the most updated data on the AZA website.
I'm in the midst of a month-long road trip, and I'll have soon visited every single half-decent California zoo and aquarium. The fact that California is leading this poll is a joke, unless one includes aquariums. Simply looking at zoos then San Diego Zoo and San Diego Zoo Safari Park are brilliant, and then there is a very long list of average to mediocre zoos. Of the major cities Oakland, Santa Barbara and Los Angeles are all average, and San Francisco is borderline terrible. There is an enormously steep decline after the two big San Diego parks. However, California's aquariums are fantastic! Monterey Bay Aquarium, Aquarium of the Pacific, Steinhart Aquarium and Birch Aquarium are all terrific, San Diego SeaWorld is massive and even Aquarium of the Bay is worth a visit. California must clearly be the #1 state for aquariums, but for zoos there isn't much to write home about after the pair of San Diego behemoths.
Texas has one great zoo in Dallas, and then many average to excellent ones in Fort Worth, Cameron Park, Caldwell, Houston, Gladys Porter and El Paso. Overall, looking only at zoos, then Texas is the clear winner. If one were to include aquariums then things get quite tricky.
Texas has one great zoo in Dallas, and then many average to excellent ones in Fort Worth, Cameron Park, Caldwell, Houston, Gladys Porter and El Paso. Overall, looking only at zoos, then Texas is the clear winner. If one were to include aquariums then things get quite tricky.
mweb08
Well-Known Member
How nice of you to call my and others opinion a joke.
Once again, it's a quantity versus quality debate for me. CA crushes TEX at the top, then I guess TEX crushes CA in the 3-6 range if the 4 weakest TEX zoos out of what you just listed are significantly better than OAK, LA, Santa Barbara, and SF.
I can see going with the quantity, but I'd rather have arguably the best zoo in the nation and likely the best animal park that generally ranks higher than the best zoo TEX has to offer than to have a bunch of solid to very good zoos.
Just by looking at your list I'd take CA over TEX for the same reason and I would rank the Safari Park higher than you do.
Your rankings:
SD(1)
SDZSP(10)
OAK (40s?)
LA(48) -Added a new elephant exhibit since and will soon be adding more.
SB(50ish?)
SF(53)
VS.
DAL(12)
FW(27)
CALD(28)
HOU(32)
El Paso(?)
GPZ(40)
SA(52)
Well the poll days say what is the best state (overall), not what state has the best zoo. By that reckoning, we should just ignore the word state and make a poll what is the best zoo in the country. Of course if visiting the two San Diego facilities gives you more enjoyment than visiting the several other decent ones in another state, then I guess California is your best state for zoos. Just seems (in my opinion) to be out of keeping with the spirit of the question.
Of course no one is wrong when voting for what they like best - you like what you like. And since everyone has different interests, it is hard (impossible) to make a truly objective ranking of zoos. But I do find it interesting that both Snowleopard and myself, two of the most widely travelled U.S. ZooChatters, voted for Texas.
mweb08
Well-Known Member
Your logic is interesting to me. I get going with quantity over quality, but I don't get how you can possibly interpret my stance as just picking the best zoo. I think Omaha and the Bronx are roughly as good as SD, and if either of those states had strong 2nd options and some solid depth, I'd choose them. If Texas or another state had zoos ranked as followed: 6, 7, 10, 14, 22, 25, then sure, I'd take that over CA with zoos ranked lets say 1, 5, 40, 45, 50, 55. But they don't, they have a zoo that based on rankings I generally see on here is nowhere close to SD, and they have a bunch of zoos that are closer to the quality of OAK/LA than they are to SD.
When considering what state is best overall for zoos I think it's perfectly reasonably to consider quality at least as much as quantity. CA offers both, but obviously is beat out by other states in quantity as Texas and Florida for example probably have more zoos and likely have better depth in terms of quality, especially with Texas.
For me, I look at this question as if I could only visit zoos in one state for the rest of my life, or if I could consistently and easily visit zoos from one state but rarely visit other zoos, or if I could choose one state to visit zoos and had never visited before, what would I choose(not considering non-zoo factors). So in all scenarios I'd go with CA since I would rather have 2 great zoos and various average at best zoos than have one very good zoo and various average to above average zoos.
What if a state had 8 zoos ranked between 26-39, would that be your choice? 10 zoos? How about 15 zoos between 31-49?
Last edited:
I guess I like Dallas and Fort Worth a lot more than you and most of the other forum members. And I guess I am too soured over what San Diego did with Elephant Odyssey - it used to be one of my favorite zoos, but no longer. (I am, however, very interested to see what the Safari Park will do with the upcoming tiger exhibits - those definitely look promising).
The zoos in Tyler and Waco (Texas) both look very good based on what has been posted here, but I will be seeing them in person for the first time in September. Maybe then I will be able to compare the two states (California and Texas) a little more accurately.
The zoos in Tyler and Waco (Texas) both look very good based on what has been posted here, but I will be seeing them in person for the first time in September. Maybe then I will be able to compare the two states (California and Texas) a little more accurately.
mweb08
Well-Known Member
Well I don't think EO hurt the zoo at all even though it should have been better.
Otherwise, I just want to say that I'm fine with you or anyone else taking Texas over CA, I just don't appreciate my and others opinions being called a joke. That's a absurd and disrespectful thing to say in my opinion and I would have thought Snowleopard was better than that. It would be one thing we chose a mediocre state, but that is clearly not the case. Even though you guys disagree with my argument, it is a reasonable one I think.
Otherwise, I just want to say that I'm fine with you or anyone else taking Texas over CA, I just don't appreciate my and others opinions being called a joke. That's a absurd and disrespectful thing to say in my opinion and I would have thought Snowleopard was better than that. It would be one thing we chose a mediocre state, but that is clearly not the case. Even though you guys disagree with my argument, it is a reasonable one I think.
@mweb08: I can see your rationale, as you figure that having two truly great zoos (San Diego Zoo and Safari Park) and then a bunch of average to mediocre ones is better than having maybe one great zoo (Dallas) and a bunch of average ones. As I've been to just about every major zoo both in Texas and California I would choose Texas for sure, but that state doesn't have a single zoo that is as impressive as the two San Diego parks so you make a good point there. If we were to include aquariums then it would be a tough call as California has the best set of aquariums of any state in the country.
If this were facebook I would "like" this.
Me too! We need a like button.
mweb08
Well-Known Member
Added Living Desert, which using SL's ranking really makes a difference here.
Rankings side by side look something like this:
1 12
10 27
35 28
43 32
48 40
50 45
53 52
Average Rankings:
CA: 34.3
TEX: 33.71
So extremely close. Now some of those rankings may change and I'm just guessing on El Paso, but that makes it pretty clear that CA has a valid case if one thinks Snowleopards rankings hold much weight.
mstickmanp
Well-Known Member
I'm sure that with the new elephant exhibit, reptile exhibit, and Rainforest of the Americas, the LA Zoo will/should get a new/better ranking from Snowleopard if he decides to visit again in the future. Not to mention that he didn't get to see the Francois Langur exhibit open, so that can further help the zoo's rank. Also, lets not forget about Oakland and Fresno getting new exhibits in the next couple of years. With these 3 zoos improving it will further solidify CA as the best state for zoos. I did vote for Ohio when this thread was first started, but after reading some of the comments I do believe that CA is the best state for zoos, with Texas as a close second.
jbnbsn99
Well-Known Member
Of course since SL visited Texas several new exhibits have opened that may change his ranking of those as well. But, really who cares, it is an effort in futility, and really seems like were are like kids saying "mine is better" " no mine is better" "no mine" "MIIIIINE"
mweb08
Well-Known Member
Yeah, well again, I'm fine with people taking Texas or whatever over CA; however, I did not care for a couple people basically saying that picking CA was absurd. I think I have shown that is clearly is not the case.
Last edited: