GraysonDP
Well-Known Member
Pittsburgh Zoo Review
Date of Visit: July 2007
The Pittsburgh Zoo is a medium-sized zoo with several popular animals but not a particularly extensive collection. It is divided into a themed complexes but most of them are not especially evocative or creative of that theme. The zoo is well supported by its community and is quite popular with locals. The PPG Aquarium is one of the best around and Kids Kingdom is a very good children’s zoo. I enjoyed my visit but ultimately found it to be an average zoo.
Excellent
PPG Aquarium- The best aquarium at a zoo I have ever seen and this modern facility is the best part of the zoo. Tanks for sharks, seahorses, a wide variety of fish, stingrays, sea turtles, octopus, squid and coral are phenomenal, quite detailed and some of the best of their kind. Penguins have a dark exhibit that’s average. It is moderately naturalistic but a bit small and the land area has too much mock rock. Overall, an excellent exhibit and makes Pittsburgh one of the best exhibits for aquatic animals.
Kids Kingdom- A huge children’s zoo that is one of the best of its kind even if some of the animal exhibits are a bit dated. An American alligator exhibit is decent if smallish. A beaver habitat has a large pool and a nice lodge but could use more land area. Kangaroos have a simple nice grassy yard that is smallish. River otters have a disappointing exhibit with too little water and no underwater viewing. A white-tailed deer yard is walkthrough and really nice with lots of space and trees. Skunks have an average sized exhibit with too much mock rock. A habitat for hornbills is quite nice and camels have an atrocious barren stall. Sea lions have a dated exhibit with a decent amount of space and underwater viewing. Exhibit wise this place is lacking in some places but it gives a lot more than most children’s zoos.
Average
Water’s Edge- This polar bear exhibit was only a year old when I saw it and I thought it was quite good at the time but as I’ve now seen many better polar bear exhibits I realize it is quite disappoint. Like Detroit, it has an underwater tunnel but the habitat is too small. It feels like a modern-day grotto with land that’s made up of light brown mock rock. At least the pool is alright and the waterfall with a small pond is quite a nice touch. However, the lack of immersion, naturalism, enrichment and space is very underwhelming. This exhibit is 10 years old but feels like it is 25 years old. When I visited, walruses were scheduled to come but they never came and tiger sharks took their place. An elephant seal is going to be on exhibit there soon. A sea otter habitat is nice and better designed than the polar bear exhibit. However, it still isn’t that large. The theming in the complex is well down and it is a significantly better visitor experience than one for the animals.
African Savanna- The best habitat in the section is grassy cheetah exhibit that used to house wild dogs. It is quite well-planted and has plenty of hiding opportunities. Black rhinoceros have an exhibit that is definitely subpar. It is smallish, lacks naturalism or enrichment and is surrounded by a cable fence. At least it has some mud for wallowing. Amur leopards have an average exhibit that is too small but fairly lush and well-planted. A lion exhibit is quite decent with a nice mix of rocks, vegetation and a nice hill. However, it is nothing that hasn’t been done better at countless other zoos and it isn’t that realistic or detailed.
Zebras, springboks and dama gazelles live in a fairly large grassy yard. It has some trees and termite mounds that add enrichment. African elephants live in a smallish, dry habitat that is adequate but mediocre and outdated. The water-filled moat is nice but the yard is quite ordinary and lacking naturalism and enrichment. A giraffe exhibit is green and grassy but average and standard. It has a good amount of trees for browsing.This section would have been good when it first opened but is dated now.
Poor
Asian Forest- The first section seen by visitors, it is quite a disappointing one. A snow leopard exhibit is quite weak with too little space, height and privacy. A tiger exhibit is better but still subpar. It is a moated exhibit, with quite a tall rocky edge and there is way too much dirt and little vegetation in the yard. Not a good tiger exhibit in my book. A red panda exhibit is alright but not lush enough and lacking ample climbing opportunities. Komodo dragon and muntjac exhibits are average at best.
Tropical Forest- A severely outdated exhibit complex that lacks any naturalism or immersion. Colobus monkeys have the worst exhibit I’ve ever seen for their species. It has almost no space, is entirely composed of fake mock rock, lacks climbing opportunities and enrichments. Additionally all the vegetation is outside the exhibit. Howler monkeys have a few trees in their exhibit but it lacks enrichments and is too small and all fake. Black-and-white lemurs have a terrible enclosure that only has a fake log, some mock rock and a few ropes. A matching one for ring-tailed lemur is nearby. Mandrills and the rare blue monkeys have a tiny exhibit that’s all mock rock, minimal in enrichment and lacking vegetation inside.
Capuchins and sakis practically live in small cages. Sloths and tamarins have habitats that are quite weak. Gibbons have a concrete exhibit which has no vegetation and minimal height. Poison dart frogs live in a terrarium that is quite small. Gorillas have an outdoor habitat that is average sized but all grass and brutal in terms of naturalism and enrichment. Only one tree is found in the exhibit and it basically feels like a soccer field. Also, there is a nasty moat around it. The canopies, detail, enrichments, deadfalls, vegetation and ropes of other gorilla exhibits are nowhere to be found. The indoor exhibit is quite dark and dreary with mostly concrete. Worst of all, orangutans live in an-all indoor exhibit that absolutely sucks. Space wise it is a closet, there is minimal enrichment, no vegetation or naturalism and it is dark and dreary. Disgusting.
Bear Grottos- These disgraces were still around on my visit but it is my understanding that they are gone.
I remember enjoying and liking the Pittsburgh Zoo when I visited but looking back it doesn’t hold up well and is not that memorable. Many of the habitats are pleasant and nice but few are great or state-of-the-art. This strikes me as a zoo that was considered great in the late 80s and early 90s, good in the 2000s and average and slightly outdated today. It is a decent zoo but not a contender for being one of the best zoos in America by any means. I would probably place it between 45 and 55 on a list of America’s best zoos.
Date of Visit: July 2007
The Pittsburgh Zoo is a medium-sized zoo with several popular animals but not a particularly extensive collection. It is divided into a themed complexes but most of them are not especially evocative or creative of that theme. The zoo is well supported by its community and is quite popular with locals. The PPG Aquarium is one of the best around and Kids Kingdom is a very good children’s zoo. I enjoyed my visit but ultimately found it to be an average zoo.
Excellent
PPG Aquarium- The best aquarium at a zoo I have ever seen and this modern facility is the best part of the zoo. Tanks for sharks, seahorses, a wide variety of fish, stingrays, sea turtles, octopus, squid and coral are phenomenal, quite detailed and some of the best of their kind. Penguins have a dark exhibit that’s average. It is moderately naturalistic but a bit small and the land area has too much mock rock. Overall, an excellent exhibit and makes Pittsburgh one of the best exhibits for aquatic animals.
Kids Kingdom- A huge children’s zoo that is one of the best of its kind even if some of the animal exhibits are a bit dated. An American alligator exhibit is decent if smallish. A beaver habitat has a large pool and a nice lodge but could use more land area. Kangaroos have a simple nice grassy yard that is smallish. River otters have a disappointing exhibit with too little water and no underwater viewing. A white-tailed deer yard is walkthrough and really nice with lots of space and trees. Skunks have an average sized exhibit with too much mock rock. A habitat for hornbills is quite nice and camels have an atrocious barren stall. Sea lions have a dated exhibit with a decent amount of space and underwater viewing. Exhibit wise this place is lacking in some places but it gives a lot more than most children’s zoos.
Average
Water’s Edge- This polar bear exhibit was only a year old when I saw it and I thought it was quite good at the time but as I’ve now seen many better polar bear exhibits I realize it is quite disappoint. Like Detroit, it has an underwater tunnel but the habitat is too small. It feels like a modern-day grotto with land that’s made up of light brown mock rock. At least the pool is alright and the waterfall with a small pond is quite a nice touch. However, the lack of immersion, naturalism, enrichment and space is very underwhelming. This exhibit is 10 years old but feels like it is 25 years old. When I visited, walruses were scheduled to come but they never came and tiger sharks took their place. An elephant seal is going to be on exhibit there soon. A sea otter habitat is nice and better designed than the polar bear exhibit. However, it still isn’t that large. The theming in the complex is well down and it is a significantly better visitor experience than one for the animals.
African Savanna- The best habitat in the section is grassy cheetah exhibit that used to house wild dogs. It is quite well-planted and has plenty of hiding opportunities. Black rhinoceros have an exhibit that is definitely subpar. It is smallish, lacks naturalism or enrichment and is surrounded by a cable fence. At least it has some mud for wallowing. Amur leopards have an average exhibit that is too small but fairly lush and well-planted. A lion exhibit is quite decent with a nice mix of rocks, vegetation and a nice hill. However, it is nothing that hasn’t been done better at countless other zoos and it isn’t that realistic or detailed.
Zebras, springboks and dama gazelles live in a fairly large grassy yard. It has some trees and termite mounds that add enrichment. African elephants live in a smallish, dry habitat that is adequate but mediocre and outdated. The water-filled moat is nice but the yard is quite ordinary and lacking naturalism and enrichment. A giraffe exhibit is green and grassy but average and standard. It has a good amount of trees for browsing.This section would have been good when it first opened but is dated now.
Poor
Asian Forest- The first section seen by visitors, it is quite a disappointing one. A snow leopard exhibit is quite weak with too little space, height and privacy. A tiger exhibit is better but still subpar. It is a moated exhibit, with quite a tall rocky edge and there is way too much dirt and little vegetation in the yard. Not a good tiger exhibit in my book. A red panda exhibit is alright but not lush enough and lacking ample climbing opportunities. Komodo dragon and muntjac exhibits are average at best.
Tropical Forest- A severely outdated exhibit complex that lacks any naturalism or immersion. Colobus monkeys have the worst exhibit I’ve ever seen for their species. It has almost no space, is entirely composed of fake mock rock, lacks climbing opportunities and enrichments. Additionally all the vegetation is outside the exhibit. Howler monkeys have a few trees in their exhibit but it lacks enrichments and is too small and all fake. Black-and-white lemurs have a terrible enclosure that only has a fake log, some mock rock and a few ropes. A matching one for ring-tailed lemur is nearby. Mandrills and the rare blue monkeys have a tiny exhibit that’s all mock rock, minimal in enrichment and lacking vegetation inside.
Capuchins and sakis practically live in small cages. Sloths and tamarins have habitats that are quite weak. Gibbons have a concrete exhibit which has no vegetation and minimal height. Poison dart frogs live in a terrarium that is quite small. Gorillas have an outdoor habitat that is average sized but all grass and brutal in terms of naturalism and enrichment. Only one tree is found in the exhibit and it basically feels like a soccer field. Also, there is a nasty moat around it. The canopies, detail, enrichments, deadfalls, vegetation and ropes of other gorilla exhibits are nowhere to be found. The indoor exhibit is quite dark and dreary with mostly concrete. Worst of all, orangutans live in an-all indoor exhibit that absolutely sucks. Space wise it is a closet, there is minimal enrichment, no vegetation or naturalism and it is dark and dreary. Disgusting.
Bear Grottos- These disgraces were still around on my visit but it is my understanding that they are gone.
I remember enjoying and liking the Pittsburgh Zoo when I visited but looking back it doesn’t hold up well and is not that memorable. Many of the habitats are pleasant and nice but few are great or state-of-the-art. This strikes me as a zoo that was considered great in the late 80s and early 90s, good in the 2000s and average and slightly outdated today. It is a decent zoo but not a contender for being one of the best zoos in America by any means. I would probably place it between 45 and 55 on a list of America’s best zoos.
