Again what false statements. I went to Bronx in October, the Axis Deer were not on the monorail. That is a fact. The Axis Deer were off exhibit likely to make room for the Bactrian deer.
Just because you didn't see them doesn't mean they aren't there. I saw them last year. Animals temporarily going off-show while new additions acclimate and new mixtures are tried is not the same as what you've insinuated.
The elephant comment is literally in the show from Jim Breheny himself. That is also a fact.
Can you show us where? I just tried searching for the segment and I haven't been able to find it. The elephant statement is initially from way before Jim Breheny was running the zoo, and as far as I've seen has simply been copy and pasted in publications about the zoo ever since.
I will say, even if the zoo does choose to phase-out elephants once their current animals die, considering the massive amount of negative publicity the ARA lobby has created for them I can't say I'd blame them. I do think it'd be a massive loss and hope they choose to continue on with them, however.
They have also objectively phased out animals like slender loris, most of their nocturnal species, several mice, etc. these are all also facts.
So you are referring to animals that have not been at the zoo in over a decade as evidence that within the last decade the zoo has done nothing but phase-out animals?
The slender loris were not phased-out, that is not a fact. They had one animal left which I believe died. That's not the same, they were never going to be able to continue with them. It's not like that habitat was then closed off or left empty either.
If by "nocturnal species" you mean the World of Darkness cast, then yeah, many of them left the zoo when the building closed
in 2009. Many of the species left in the house by its closing were just redistributed to other parts of the zoo, though. The last of those animals to be phased-out would have been the night-monkey, Brazilian Porcupine, and Pallas's Long-Tongued Bat when the Monkey House closed
in 2012.
Which mice has the zoo phased-out? I've been keeping notes from my visits to the zoo since 2011 and the line-up in that building has remained pretty stable throughout that time. The only species I can think of that died off that they could have feasibly gotten back are maybe the Fat-Tailed Gerbil and Screaming Hairy Armadillo. The latter is a recent absence, though, and their habitat is currently under renovations for a new animal. In recent years, they have also brought new species to the exhibit such as zebra mouse (a 2020 addition), Eastern Deer Mouse (a 2018 addition), Mohol Bushbaby (a 2015 addition), giant sengi (a 2016 addition), and Feathertail Glider (a 2021 addition). Let's not forget that they also added two jerboa species, Woodland Dormouse, Daurian Pika, and the aforementioned hairy armadillo during this time, though sadly these species have died off. Of course, dying off and there being no animals available to replace them is
not the same thing as the zoo actively phasing them out. The zoo has also moved their tenrec to the building following their displacement within Madagascar! by the tree boa.
Again, if you're only going to cite information from the recession or give extremely vague examples like "nocturnal species" and "etc." instead of actual evidence of your claims, then please just stop.
They also have many animals backstage such as warthog, cheetah, several wallaby species, grizzly bear and many other animals. These are all facts.
The zoo doesn't have "several wallaby species" off-exhibit. In fact, the zoo doesn't have any wallabies. The only macropods in their collection are Matschie's Tree-Kangaroo (on-exhibit) and Red Kangaroo (a single male in their animal ambassador program). The warthog (a single male) and the Cheetah (two brothers) are also part of the zoo's animal ambassador program. Now the zoo is at fault for having animal ambassadors off-exhibit? Literally every AZA zoo has ambassador animals off-exhibit, you just happen to know about Bronx's.
Whatever reasons behind those decisions matter little (whether it be budget, modern animal welfare concerns, etc).
Actually they do matter- a lot. They are the
reasons why somethings are the way they are. Understanding them is important. Refusal to do so is why you're trying to tell us that a zoo choosing to replace a species there is absolutely no chance for them to replace once they die is the same thing as a phase-out. Whether or not you choose to accept the reasons is up to you and out of our control, but they do matter.
Them having "nice habitats back in the 80s that were decades ahead of their time" are also again, irrelevant.
Actually it is relevant. What you've just done is admit that your belief is akin to "if it's not new and shiny, it's inferior", meanwhile you complain when old things that you liked are no more. Do you see how that is an impossible line to walk?
And before you pounce on me here, let me note that your statement above is not the same as us saying that them losing a bunch of species back in the 00's is irrelevant. The different is that they've added new species and new individual habitats since that time, whereas they've not lost most of their state of the art exhibits.
You are allowed to disagree but no one is "wrong" in saying that, or else this isn't a place to discuss opinions it is definitely just a way to self validate your favorite zoos.
The first half of the above is absolutely correct when referring to an opinion.
The latter half is not what's happening here.
All those claims say is that the zoo is good and might one day be better. But it doesn't make a compelling argument for why I can't say its a bit overrated.
100% on this bit and I want to acknowledge that. What might be one day doesn't matter, but what might be one day is not the same as what currently is.
I was simply voicing my own opinion on preferring some other zoos relative to Bronx. So yes, everyone jumping on my throat about an opinion on an opinion thread is dumb, cause what is the point about the thread then. Bronx is one of my local zoos, I'm a loyal customer, a member, I go at least 2-3 times a year and I'm not even from New York. I love the zoo but to say its the second best in the world in the year 2022 is just an outrageous claim to me. But again, it's an opinion.
Reasons I personally think its not "as good" as 2008 are obvious. No more skyfari, no more world of darkness, no more polar bears, and again, them stating after Happy and Patty die, they aren't getting more elephants. Whatever reasons behind those decisions matter little (whether it be budget, modern animal welfare concerns, etc). Those reasons to me, and many others, are valid and should be considered here.
Voicing your opinion is fine, no one is coming after you for your opinion. What you cannot do is make false claims in support of your opinion, refuse to provide actual evidence, and then hide behind your opinion when people inevitably call you out for making falsehoods.
You're allowed to think they zoo is overrated because they no longer have a nocturnal house, skyfari, your favorite animal, whatever. You're not allowed to make up claims about a degrading collection and lack of "progression".
You're allowed to not be impressed by the zoo's gorilla habitats because you don't like the viewing opportunities. You cannot expect people to not respond when you claim it's a "standard gorilla exhibit" when, objectively, it is far above and beyond the vast majority.
Your opinions and what you're passing off as facts are very different. Nobody is saying your opinion is wrong, it's the info. claimed to be objective truths which we take issue with. This is a common issue on the internet I find, people combining their opinions with false information and then taking the correction of said information as an attack or invalidation on their opinion. You can think and feel however you like, but if you're going to share them with others you're expected to be factual with your reasons why, if you choose to share them (which you don't have to do if you don't want to!). What a pointless opinion thread it would be if everyone just shouted whatever they wanted and then, once an opinion is shared, the only people allowed to comment on it are those with the same opinion. In today's society, echo chambers can be very,
very dangerous places.
I am hoping this is the last I have to comment on this matter.
~Thylo
And in general it's always nice to hear other voices chime in either way. Contrary to what some might think, I actually do not like being the only contributor. Like, at all 
