My point is that for museums, schools, botanical gardens, the "best of" lists often DO factor "that stuff" in. But because zoos are generally not regarded as serious by most of the public and press, "top ten" lists etc. tend to be focused only on the fun side of things. Which continues the spiral where zoos--despite the deadly serious issues they are trying to address--get relegated to being thought of as just a leisure time consideration (or de-funded by governments and donors as "unessential").
San Diego Zoo The Greatest Or Most Overrated?
- Thread starter snowleopard
- Start date
My point is that for museums, schools, botanical gardens, the "best of" lists often DO factor "that stuff" in. But because zoos are generally not regarded as serious by most of the public and press, "top ten" lists etc. tend to be focused only on the fun side of things. Which continues the spiral where zoos--despite the deadly serious issues they are trying to address--get relegated to being thought of as just a leisure time consideration (or de-funded by governments and donors as "unessential").
mweb08
Well-Known Member
I don't think they usually do factor that stuff in much. Maybe they should, but I don't see it. I think most people are either unaware of what schools, museums, gardens, and zoos do outside of what they see, or if they are aware, they mostly consider that separately rather than how they rank the place.
There is an emerging trend in many new exhibits to connect the animals in front of people with the conservation issues facing their wild relatives and their habitats.
Your own Indianapolis Zoo is a leader in this from what I have read and heard about their new cheetah exhibit. Isn't it directly tied to Laurie Marker's cheetah conservation work in demonstrating how her program is using sheep dogs to keep wild cheetahs away from livestock in Namibia, and thus not getting blown away by angry farmers?
I remember reading an interview with the Indy zoo director also about how he wanted to tie the proposed African ape exhibit to conservation issues like halting the bushmeat trade and halting deforestation.
The new wave of elephant exhibits seem to be focusing on linking the zoo elephants with wild counterparts. At the LA Zoo part of the exhibit is a video and graphic station on the wild elephants of Cambodia and visitors can text a number and give directly to the wild Cambodia elephant project. The National Zoo's elephant overlook has a very groovy set of exhibits on elephant conservation. There is also a great tiger conservation trail exhibit next to the tigers.
The first wave of giraffe conservation exhibits that will show people how the zoo giraffes in front of them are connected to conservation of wild giraffes is in development.
I have not seen Omaha's new Madagascar exhibit, but they have a very important lemur conservation genetics project going and hopefully that is part of the exhibit.
The trendline seems to be that conservation is coming out of the back offices of the zoo and on display, where it will hopefully find at least a small and dedicated audience.
The AZA has made very public that they and their member zoos want to be a real force for wildlife conservation. Building exhibits that promote conservation awareness of species, and hopefully action that visitors can participate in, seems to be an essential part of their strategy.
Last edited:
Similar to the Congo Gorilla Forest @ the Bronx Zoo. Towards the end of the trail, you can just select a research project you'd like to donate to just by selecting it on the touch-screen. Then it says "Thank you for donating" or whatever. Pretty simple! Plus, there are 4 or 5 of these screens in the room, so it's not like you need to wait on a line to do it!
Maybe conservation messages are getting through to the public faster. I'm worried because of the rumors that each generation is getting more sucked into using technology excessively and spending more time indoors and being isolated and bla bla, and I really hope that doesn't happen. Of course there are still going to be those who still love nature and embrace it, but I rather the number of those people increases instead of decreases.
I'm glad zoos are introducing new ideas/concepts for conservation-associated exhibits.
Zooplantman
Well-Known Member
So the real question becomes not only "do the visitors care whether there is a conservation message" but also "is there any conservation action that the visitors can and in fact will do?"
Posting messages is easy. Getting people to change their lives is not so easy.
Or do we simply want their money to support our work?
Yeah, I guess it does pretty much does come down to that...
... perfectly worded, zooplantman!
Last edited:
You have framed the question very well. Finding ways for zoo vistors to meaningfully participate in conservation of the species on exhibit is a great challenge.
The first wave of conservation participation exhibits seems to be giving people some input on what species their conservation surcharge that they paid to enter the zoo (or exhibit) goes to. Good examples of this that I'm aware of are the Congo Forest at Bronx Zoo, Boise Zoo's conservation program where the visitors vote on what projects to donate a large grant to($25,000 last I checked), and the emerging "Quarters for Conservation" programs that seem to be at several zoos.
Beyond money, what can people do? One possible area is helping keep tabs on how many animals of a given species there are. The African elephant specialist group of the IUCN maintains a database of how many elephants there are in Africa and what the conservation status of their populations is (increasing, decreasing, or stable). AZA zoos could step in and perform the same function for many other species that have no similar program, and find ways to build a public interface for visitors to directly see what the actual conservation status of their favorite species is. How this would work exactly, I don't know...there is some early exploration of the idea occurring.
If anyone has any other ideas or examples of how to answer the question: "is there any conservation action that the visitors can and in fact will do?", the giraffe conservation community at least would greatly welcome them. This is a very important area of research and exploration for the zoo world if they really want to become meaningful conservation organizations...and the message that they are sending is that they do...
Zooplantman
Well-Known Member
Seafood Watch Program | A Consumer's Guide to Sustainable Seafood | Monterey Bay Aquarium
Here is a brilliant example of something that visitors could do to affect the depletion of wildlife besides giving money.
Obviously it is more difficult to affect issues like poaching, deforestation and habitat destruction or funding national parks in other countries, but can information programs be created to guide consumers to put pressure on governments and industries that either benefit from the destruction of Nature or fund it or ought to fund conservation?
There is unfortunately a huge gap between the "give us money so we can do better conservation work" approach and the far more indirect conservation benefits that potentially come through changing people's behavior in ways that reduce demands on the environment. "Being green" is--with good reason--a major emphasis of zoos today. In some cases, one can draw a connection between visitor actions and species conservation (cell phone recycling reduces pressure on African rainforests; discouraging consumption of palm oil-based products might slow the destruction of orangutan habitat). But these connections are usually pretty indirect and require visitors to absorb more information than they are likely to, given the casual recreational basis for most visits.
I agree Seafood Watch is an outstanding example of an effective behavior change initiative, now adopted by many zoos and aquariums based on Monterey's initial success with it.
Another area where zoos can do an enormous amount of good is by effectively spreading awareness of conservation issues that people don't know about. It is very helpful if they include at least basic suggestions on how to help, but publicizing conservation issues in an engaging way can be huge.
In a world of constant information bombardment even the most obvious conservation issues like ivory poaching get drowned out by competing messages. Zoos can help greatly with conservation awareness because 1.) people are looking at the animal whose wild relative is being affected, 2.) they are not being bombarded with advertising and other information. One of the obvious problems with this is that conservation issues are often very unpleasant. Nobody wants to go to a zoo to see elephants and gorillas and see accompanying images of dead elephants with their tusks hacked off or gorilla body parts being barbecued. I remember during the elephant poaching crisis in the 1980s that zoos were broadcasting "don't buy ivory" messages, so there are ways to get these messages out. Eventually the ivory ban happened. There were many, many people campaigning to happen, and it seems very likely that zoos helped do this in a meaningful way by helping spread awareness about the problem.
For an issue like giraffe conservation, there are likely at least seven or eight reproductively isolated groups of giraffes. Are they full species? Possibly. Most of them are endangered or becoming so. Zoos have been telling visitors for decades that there is one species of giraffe and that it is not endangered. Getting the REAL giraffe conservation story out there to folks is a HUGE CHALLENGE. When conservation issues get publicized in a television show (e.g., a "60 Minutes" report), a movie, or a National Geographic article, that is wonderful, but the message goes away when the next episode of the show, the next movie release, or the next issue of National Geographic comes out. Zoo exhibits are permanent structures, and thus a potentially amazing place from which to raise conservation awareness on a sustained basis. How one actually does this, I have not yet figured out...
In a world of constant information bombardment even the most obvious conservation issues like ivory poaching get drowned out by competing messages. Zoos can help greatly with conservation awareness because 1.) people are looking at the animal whose wild relative is being affected, 2.) they are not being bombarded with advertising and other information. One of the obvious problems with this is that conservation issues are often very unpleasant. Nobody wants to go to a zoo to see elephants and gorillas and see accompanying images of dead elephants with their tusks hacked off or gorilla body parts being barbecued. I remember during the elephant poaching crisis in the 1980s that zoos were broadcasting "don't buy ivory" messages, so there are ways to get these messages out. Eventually the ivory ban happened. There were many, many people campaigning to happen, and it seems very likely that zoos helped do this in a meaningful way by helping spread awareness about the problem.
For an issue like giraffe conservation, there are likely at least seven or eight reproductively isolated groups of giraffes. Are they full species? Possibly. Most of them are endangered or becoming so. Zoos have been telling visitors for decades that there is one species of giraffe and that it is not endangered. Getting the REAL giraffe conservation story out there to folks is a HUGE CHALLENGE. When conservation issues get publicized in a television show (e.g., a "60 Minutes" report), a movie, or a National Geographic article, that is wonderful, but the message goes away when the next episode of the show, the next movie release, or the next issue of National Geographic comes out. Zoo exhibits are permanent structures, and thus a potentially amazing place from which to raise conservation awareness on a sustained basis. How one actually does this, I have not yet figured out...
The host zoo for this thread, San Diego Zoo, is actively involved in conservation projects around the world, which you will know about if you are a member and get their monthly magazine. But I am amazed how there is virtually no mention of their conservation efforts on the actual zoo grounds (except maybe in the redo of Polar Bear Plunge).
When I do my 15 minute slide show and lecture on Wild Cats, which is the first Saturday of the month at Reid Park Zoo, I end it with a list of 5 things that I do in my own life to help animals. I tell people if they all pick a couple of these, then we can help keep animals around for the next generation. I think by saying "Here is what I do in my own life" people are more receptive than if I say "here is what you need to do."
For those of you who are curious, here is the list I present (each item appears on the screen in succession with an accompanying photograph).
1) Leave land for animals (live in the city instead of building a new property on vacant land in the country).
2) Bus, bike or walk (I bike almost everywhere).
3) Use a refillable water bottle (instead of constantly discarding plastic ones).
4) Don't eat shrimp (shrimp farming destroys coastal mangrove forest is Asia and now in the Amazon as well).
5) Support a conservation organization (this includes Reid Park Zoo).
When I do my 15 minute slide show and lecture on Wild Cats, which is the first Saturday of the month at Reid Park Zoo, I end it with a list of 5 things that I do in my own life to help animals. I tell people if they all pick a couple of these, then we can help keep animals around for the next generation. I think by saying "Here is what I do in my own life" people are more receptive than if I say "here is what you need to do."
For those of you who are curious, here is the list I present (each item appears on the screen in succession with an accompanying photograph).
1) Leave land for animals (live in the city instead of building a new property on vacant land in the country).
2) Bus, bike or walk (I bike almost everywhere).
3) Use a refillable water bottle (instead of constantly discarding plastic ones).
4) Don't eat shrimp (shrimp farming destroys coastal mangrove forest is Asia and now in the Amazon as well).
5) Support a conservation organization (this includes Reid Park Zoo).
@Arizona Docent: This is great. Thank you for sharing. The wild cats of the world and the Reid Park Zoo are very lucky to have you. I wish that you could on a world zoo speaking tour on behalf of the cats, or "franchise" the talk out to speakers at other zoos.
@Alan Nyhuis and anyone else interested: here is the interview with the Indiana Zoo director talking about how he wants the new gorilla exhibit to specifically motivate visitors to help conserve gorillas:
Indy Zoo plans gorilla exhibit - 13 WTHR
I really want to come up with some new way, but it seems like every thing I try and think of ends up going right back to just being simple requests for donations from guests. It's hard to get away from that concept.
You make very thought-wrenching points, DavidBrown. Zoos have, are, and always will be perfect places to raise awareness, but that means some zoo will eventually have to present a new way of spreading the word. ArizonaDocent is right, I think, in saying that the "here's what I do-" approach is more receptive than the "what you should go do is-," but while it is more receptive, there will always be people who ignore it or aren't as deeply moved by it. Does anyone have other suggestions as to how zoos would hook people in? Because David's right, I can't figure any out. If you show gruesome pictures of butchered antelope and starving animals with protruding rib cages, that's definitely going to turn some people off. It's like those abandoned pet commercials, sometimes too depressing to keep people watching, and you don't want that.
And like reduakari stated, the cell phone thing would be asking a little too much of guests. But with so many possibilities out there, I guess some zoos in the future are just going to have to experiment and see what works.
perceptron
Member
The San Diego Zoo will be launching a new website dedicated to their conservation efforts, along with a new twitter feed and Facebook page. I haven't seen any of these yet, and no clue if they will actually help, but social media is probably a good bet to help raise awareness.
Perhaps another idea would be to create interactive phone apps for the different exhibits (no idea what they would be, but I am sure it could work). It would provide donations for the zoo from the download fee and/or advertisements, and if it created some akin to a game, people might actually read and learn. I cannot speak for anyone else, but it wouldn't surprise me if the average zoo goer above the age of 8 is more inclined to read their phone nowadays over the exhibit placards. Really, the way I have presented this, it's nothing more than the paper-based scavenger hunts for kids that many zoos have, but I'm sure someone could create something better. I know the OC Zoo has a phone based audio tour that I enjoyed, though I think something better would be required. Stupid question, but have other zoos tried anything along these lines? Are they popular at all?
Perhaps another idea would be to create interactive phone apps for the different exhibits (no idea what they would be, but I am sure it could work). It would provide donations for the zoo from the download fee and/or advertisements, and if it created some akin to a game, people might actually read and learn. I cannot speak for anyone else, but it wouldn't surprise me if the average zoo goer above the age of 8 is more inclined to read their phone nowadays over the exhibit placards. Really, the way I have presented this, it's nothing more than the paper-based scavenger hunts for kids that many zoos have, but I'm sure someone could create something better. I know the OC Zoo has a phone based audio tour that I enjoyed, though I think something better would be required. Stupid question, but have other zoos tried anything along these lines? Are they popular at all?
The question is actually very perceptive and not at all stupid.
I think you are likely right that social media is potentially a huge future for zoo conservation awareness work. Exhibits can be made interactive in ways that were never possible before. Exhibits can potentially be directly networked to field sites where conservation programs for the wild relatives of the exhibit animals are, thus establishing a direct connection for zoo visitors.
The Santa Barbara Zoo has started putting graphics up with embedded video signals that can be scanned with smart phones to show videos of the animals. Being a techno-idiot and user of a dumb phone, I have not experienced this yet. I would be really interested in hearing case studies of how social media is being used in exhibits and zoo interpretation if any body has any to share.
Interesting idea, but potentially two-edged sword. If you can see everything on your phone, why bother with zoo? Zoos should be careful not to lose in this game.
You bring up a good point, but with all of the media in the world (television, movies, IMAX, theme park rides, smart phones, etc.) it seems like zoos would have already lost. People like seeing real animals.
Woah, forgive me for just writing on here now, but as a first-year college student i've been quite busy, but this thread intrigues me.
For me personally the San Diego Zoo is hardly overrated. It is a beautiful institution with many outstanding exhibits. I have been 3 times (once in late 2007 and twice in one week in 2009) so I have not been since Elephant Odyssey opened. I am disappointed with the renaming of all the sections and the commercialization, but I am sure the exhibits themselves have not changed much. There are so many great exhibits here that it's difficult to say this place is overrrated.
However, San Diego is not my #1 zoo, I place it at #2. Personally I prefer the Bronx Zoo more which I recently visited in April 2011. The Bronx Zoo's exhibits have more thought put into them, and I love the idea of an incredible replication of the Congo rain forests in Africa. That exhibit was fantastic and worth the price of admission alone. The vastly underrated Tiger Mountain struck me at how much detail is put into a single animal's exhibit. Nearly all the exhibits are above average here, and even their grottos are not that bad for grottos. There is a huge wide open feel here, which is incredible being in the middle of the Bronx, and I love the feeling of being in a huge park. Bronx does have its downfalls and my biggest one was that exhibits like JungleWorld now have an admission price. I was also disappointed they don't have a great gift shop at all, as I love collecting books detailing exhibits at the zoo. I have a wonderful book with graphics and lengthy descriptions of San Diego, yet there was nothing to be found at the Bronx. For such a highly rated institution this was slightly disappointing even though it has nothing to do with exhibits.
Bottomline is although San Diego is not my #1 favorite zoo, it still is hardly overrated and definitely in the top 3 best zoos in America.
For me personally the San Diego Zoo is hardly overrated. It is a beautiful institution with many outstanding exhibits. I have been 3 times (once in late 2007 and twice in one week in 2009) so I have not been since Elephant Odyssey opened. I am disappointed with the renaming of all the sections and the commercialization, but I am sure the exhibits themselves have not changed much. There are so many great exhibits here that it's difficult to say this place is overrrated.
However, San Diego is not my #1 zoo, I place it at #2. Personally I prefer the Bronx Zoo more which I recently visited in April 2011. The Bronx Zoo's exhibits have more thought put into them, and I love the idea of an incredible replication of the Congo rain forests in Africa. That exhibit was fantastic and worth the price of admission alone. The vastly underrated Tiger Mountain struck me at how much detail is put into a single animal's exhibit. Nearly all the exhibits are above average here, and even their grottos are not that bad for grottos. There is a huge wide open feel here, which is incredible being in the middle of the Bronx, and I love the feeling of being in a huge park. Bronx does have its downfalls and my biggest one was that exhibits like JungleWorld now have an admission price. I was also disappointed they don't have a great gift shop at all, as I love collecting books detailing exhibits at the zoo. I have a wonderful book with graphics and lengthy descriptions of San Diego, yet there was nothing to be found at the Bronx. For such a highly rated institution this was slightly disappointing even though it has nothing to do with exhibits.
Bottomline is although San Diego is not my #1 favorite zoo, it still is hardly overrated and definitely in the top 3 best zoos in America.
The concept of this zoo being overrated by so many people is the long-term, word-of-mouth marketing of this zoo. For many people, one of their biggest dreams is visiting the San Diego Zoo - which to many is considered the greatest in the world. In their minds, they have developed preconceived notions of how great this place is and what they may expect! However once they reach the zoo and visit it, they have realized that parts of the zoo are wonderful, yet other parts are less than desirable. This often leaves the visitor with feelings of some disappointment that resonates in their opinion of the zoo. While a zoo having both excellent and undesirable sections is very common, the reputation of the San Diego Zoo of being the best persuades certain people to hold this zoo in higher regards.
It is through this logic, that the San Diego Zoo should/can be considered overrated.
There was a time, when the San Diego Zoo was the best in almost everything they did and they certainly deserved their reputation (exhibits, breeding, guest services). However in many respects, today there other zoos that excel in areas that San Diego once did (DAK, Woodland Park, etc). The zoo world has vastly changed over the last 30 years and San Diego, physically, did not progress at the same pace that other zoos have.
It is through this logic, that the San Diego Zoo should/can be considered overrated.
There was a time, when the San Diego Zoo was the best in almost everything they did and they certainly deserved their reputation (exhibits, breeding, guest services). However in many respects, today there other zoos that excel in areas that San Diego once did (DAK, Woodland Park, etc). The zoo world has vastly changed over the last 30 years and San Diego, physically, did not progress at the same pace that other zoos have.
I would dispute this actually. San Diego still has several outdated exhibits (e.g., carnivore and goat grottoes), but relative to what they have fixed over the last 20 years this is a relatively small amount of the zoo. I would certainly agree with your assessment if the San Diego Zoo still had massive primate and bird cage complexes from the 1930s sitting in the middle of it, but all of these exhibits have been replaced with a world-class rain forest exhibit. The central part of the zoo has been completely modernized now. The remaining crummy exhibits seem to be slated for renovation so it is not like management is unaware that they have problems, like some zoos seem to be.
Lots of people here don't like Elephant Odyssey for a variety of reasons, but most of these reasons are because of personal design preferences, not because the actual elephant exhibit is inadequate as an animal habitat.
The polar bear complex is as good as any modern zoo polar bear exhibit and the interpretation is outstanding.
San Diego certainly has flaws and I think that you are right that they risk their reputation if they thoughtlessly turn the zoo and Safari Park into theme parks like Disney's Animal Kingdom. There does seem to be a real danger of this happening with the instillation of tacky ziplines, hot air balloon rides, 3D theaters, etc.
I think that they are still leaders in many ways though. Their conservation program is not WCS, and maybe will never be, but it does make significant contributions to Hawaiian bird conservation, desert tortoises, California condors, and other species.