Woodland Park Zoo Seattle's Woodland Park Zoo 2008

Snowleopard:
As we've discussed on another thread, your nearby Woodland Park Zoo is indeed a great zoo! On the other hand, I hate to introduce some controversy, but the AZA "Best Exhibit" awards are very politically motivated. If you go to the AZA's website and look at the list of the past winners for this award, you'll be some very weird choices. You'll also see what I think is an obvious bias towards certain zoos (that win over and over) and against others (San Diego, Omaha, Columbus, Brookfield, Disney, etc.) That Omaha has not won this award yet says it all to me!
 
ANyhuis said:
Snowleopard:
As we've discussed on another thread, your nearby Woodland Park Zoo is indeed a great zoo! On the other hand, I hate to introduce some controversy, but the AZA "Best Exhibit" awards are very politically motivated. If you go to the AZA's website and look at the list of the past winners for this award, you'll be some very weird choices. You'll also see what I think is an obvious bias towards certain zoos (that win over and over) and against others (San Diego, Omaha, Columbus, Brookfield, Disney, etc.) That Omaha has not won this award yet says it all to me!
Click to expand...

Well, yes and no, I think.
For one thing, the application process is very involved. Many zoos won't bother. It can be alot of effort for something that only matters to other zoo directors. The public has no notion of this contest.
For another thing, the judges only have the application by which to judge. They do not see the actual exhibit. So a zoo that puts a great deal of professional marketing expertise into their application has a good shot at an award...sometimes the applications look better than the actual exhibits!
Also, like any such peer-award situation, people will have personal opinions ("We should honor a smaller zoo." "Oh no, not another polar bear exhibit." "Well, they are hosting this year's conference, after all!", etc) that colors the final decision.
The "jury" changes year to year, so unless you believe that the entire AZA professional membership has it in for Lee Simmons and the Henry Doorly Zoo, the "politics" explanation doesn't float.

But I agree with your underlying assumption (I think I see it) that the AZA awards prove very little.
 
Per Zooplantman's points---if you look at the exhibit award criteria on the AZA website, you will see there are many considerations that need to be met beyond those that "meet the eye" when simply looking at an exhibit. Visitor use/learning evaluation, safety procedures and in situ conservation connections among them.

As to perceived politics--it is true that Omaha was very upset when its Lied Jungle did not win the Exhibit Award during the AZA Conference they were hosting (Seattle's smaller Rain Forest exhibit won instead). They have not submitted an application for an award since.......

Disney and Columbus likewise have not bothered to apply, probably for the reasons Zooplantman noted.

It is much easier and "cleaner" in Australia, where the 15 or so zoos in ARAZPA compete for such awards in a much clearer "playing field."
 
That the judges do not see the exhibit in person says it all about the credence the award can be given methinks...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top