Out of curiosity, what made you rank DAK so low? Given the zoos you’ve put ahead of it, it seems like most zoochatters think of DAK more highly than you do.
I don't dislike Disney's Animal Kingdom, but I do think from a zoological perspective, not a theme park perspective, there're a lot of areas in need of improvement. My list also likely looks different from those of other zoochatters as I don't consider Zoo size as a major factor in ranking zoos, and would prefer zoos will high quality exhibits and a unique collection, even if slightly smaller than a DAK.
Here are my big problems with DAK, however:
1. Limited viewing opportunities on Kilimanjaro Safaris (as I discussed on the overrated exhibits thread) are a big one. There are some really unique aspects of the safari, such as being one of the only zoos with a large enough bloat of hippos, and it's a shame visitors can't spend more than a minute looking at the hippos. Same with a lot of the other ungulates, nowhere near the amount of time I'd wish to spend seeing some of these animals, and re-riding isn't really an option with how long the lines are, which brings me to
2. Often overly crowded, as someone who is not a fan of crowds, this was one of the big things about DAK I wasn't a fan of. Big crowds also translate to big lines, and while I don't necessarily care for all the ride components of the park, these lines include lines for the Safaris ride, which is the only way to see a lot of the African animals in the park.
3. One of the areas I'm really interested in/passionate about is the educational value of Zoos. From an educational perspective, I find a lot of areas that DAK could improve upon. Signage is sorely lacking on some of the trails, and there's just not a very large focus on education, except for the Wilderness Explorers program- which pretty much only targets one age group. Many traditional zoos do a much better job of focusing on conservation education which is one of the reasons I'm not as big of a fan of Disney as some of the other zoos. This lack of educational focus also was really obvious in the bird show- in which the focus was clearly on providing a funny/entertaining show and not on teaching people about how incredible these birds are. I understand that exposure to animals can go a long way to help people appreciate nature and wildlife, but I don't think this is truly enough to cover a zoo's goal of education, which should be central to any zoo, especially an AZA one.
4. Collection Diversity. The diversity of a collection is something else I view of as really important, and this is another area I feel DAK could use improvement. There's very little in terms of a reptile collection here, with only a few 'ABC' reptiles (komodo dragon, galapagos tortoise, crocodiles), and a handful of rather standard terrariums up at the Planet Watch. Smaller mammals are also underrepresented at DAK, as despite having an excellent line-up or ungulates, big cats, larger primates, etc., there are very few smaller mammal species represented, with only naked mole rats, meerkats, cottontop tamarins, tammar wallabies, angolan colobus, and malayan flying foxes. I would've loved to see the zoo, especially since it has so much space available, truly take advantage of this space by exhibiting a diverse collection, rather than focusing on just a few taxonomic groups. At least DAK does have a good bird collection, with quite a few waterfowl species in the oasis/discovery islands and a large walk-through aviary on both walking trails.
That being said, there is a lot about Disney's Animal Kingdom that is deserving of praise, and I will acknowledge the good in addition to the bad. DAK provides some of the largest gorilla and elephant enclosures in any zoo, and also keeps hippos in a much larger social group than what most zoos provide. These are all things deserving of praise, but weren't enough for it to crack my top three zoos.