San Diego Zoo The Greatest Or Most Overrated?

[KCZooFan]

It seems to me (I maybe wrong, as so often before) that people mainly want to think San Diego is an overrated zoo just because the want to topple the king of zoos. I am often guilty of insulting a perfectly good zoo for no reason other than just to prove it isn't as great as everone says. San Diego is obviously no perfect zoo, but it is just about the best the United States can offer. Yes, some parts aren't good, but a lot of the criticism seems like a need to disagree with popular opinion. It is always easier to find flaws in those on top.

 

[gerenuk]

The central part of the zoo has been in various stages of construction during a 25 year duration that only recently ended with the Monkey Trails development. However, the rest of the zoo has seen little development to come in line with modern zoo exhibit practices in the same period of time. And its not because some people don't like certain exhibits. But over a 30 year span, only bits and pieces of the remaining zoo property has seen such development. And only recently has an entire portions of the zoo been redeveloped (Reptile and Horn & Hoof Mesas). Probably 40-50% of the zoo remains much the same (with some renovation) as it did in 1980? While it can be said that the rest of the zoo is slated for development, this has been true since the creation of the zoo's bioclimatic plan in the 1980s. Another common phrase that can also be used to describe zoos throughout the country. The rest of the zoo world has progressed at a quicker pace and several zoos do exist that have no/few exhibits that in need of replacement and are as old as many at San Diego (Atlanta, Miami, Jacksonville, Columbus, Woodland Park, ASDM, Oakland)

The concept behind this thread is not whether San Diego is good or not (because it is a great zoo). Or if they are leaders in the field. But how the San Diego zoo measures up to other zoos and expectations. And in this regard, the San Diego zoo is just not the institution it used to be.

 

[reduakari]

The central part of the zoo has been in various stages of construction during a 25 year duration that only recently ended with the Monkey Trails development. However, the rest of the zoo has seen little development to come in line with modern zoo exhibit practices in the same period of time. And its not because some people don't like certain exhibits. But over a 30 year span, only bits and pieces of the remaining zoo property has seen such development. And only recently has an entire portions of the zoo been redeveloped (Reptile and Horn & Hoof Mesas). Probably 40-50% of the zoo remains much the same (with some renovation) as it did in 1980? While it can be said that the rest of the zoo is slated for development, this has been true since the creation of the zoo's bioclimatic plan in the 1980s. Another common phrase that can also be used to describe zoos throughout the country. The rest of the zoo world has progressed at a quicker pace and several zoos do exist that have no/few exhibits that in need of replacement and are as old as many at San Diego (Atlanta, Miami, Jacksonville, Columbus, Woodland Park, ASDM, Oakland)

The concept behind this thread is not whether San Diego is good or not (because it is a great zoo). Or if they are leaders in the field. But how the San Diego zoo measures up to other zoos and expectations. And in this regard, the San Diego zoo is just not the institution it used to be.

I would generally agree with these comments, although I would take issue with the notion that Atlanta, Miami , Oakland and Columbus have no need to replace most of their exhibits. Atlanta, in particular, is really showing signs of aging 20 years after being rebuilt, and has recognized that in their new master plan that calls for everything in the zoo to be replaced, except the gorilla exhibits.

San Diego, because of its history and prominence, is (and should be) held to a higher standard than other zoos. Recent exhibits do not meet the standards set by those built there in the late 80s/ early 90s, justifying the criticism and concern about the declining level of quality at what most people assume is the world's best zoo.

 

[gerenuk]

I would generally agree with these comments, although I would take issue with the notion that Atlanta, Miami , Oakland and Columbus have no need to replace most of their exhibits. Atlanta, in particular, is really showing signs of aging 20 years after being rebuilt, and has recognized that in their new master plan that calls for everything in the zoo to be replaced, except the gorilla exhibits.

The rest of the zoo world has progressed at a quicker pace and several zoos do exist that have no/few exhibits that in need of replacement and are as old as many at San Diego (Atlanta, Miami, Jacksonville, Columbus, Woodland Park, ASDM, Oakland)

These zoos were used as examples of how the zoo field has progressed over the last 30 years. May have been better to state that these zoos have no/few exhibits that are from pre-1980 and in need of replacement, showing that they have been well development during a time when San Diego didn't as much.

 

[DavidBrown]

The rest of the zoo world has progressed at a quicker pace and several zoos do exist that have no/few exhibits that in need of replacement and are as old as many at San Diego (Atlanta, Miami, Jacksonville, Columbus, Woodland Park, ASDM, Oakland)

These zoos were used as examples of how the zoo field has progressed over the last 30 years. May have been better to state that these zoos have no/few exhibits that are from pre-1980 and in need of replacement, showing that they have been well development during a time when San Diego didn't as much.

I'm not sure that your assessment is accurate about the pace of change over the last 30 years gerenuk. In many ways San Diego set the standard and the pace for that change at other zoos that you cite with exhibits like their kopje exhibit and Tiger River. It has taken them a long time to catch the majority of their zoo facility up to the standard that they set because they had a massive amount of change to make. In that same period of time the Wild Animal Park has been consistently excellent and they have built up an international conservation program at a scale that only a few zoos have (e.g., WCS, Smithsonian National, Zoological Society of London). Relative to the zoos that you cite I think San Diego empirically has kept up their pace of change.

It may be at the scale that the San Diego Zoo exists that comparing it to Seattle, Oakland, etc. may be apples and oranges. The U.S. zoos that it should be compared with perhaps are the Bronx (and the network of programs and zoos that they operate), Omaha (?), and Smithsonian National maybe (with their conservation center and field programs). Comparing all of those zoos I would say that San Diego compares quite favorably in its rate of change and accompanying quality. Omaha has had a very rapid rate of change, but many of its new exhibits compare unfavorably to San Diego's in quality and may in fact be worse than San Diego's remaining old exhibits (e.g., Omaha's newish bear exhibits vs. San Diego's old existing bear grottoes).

 

[gerenuk]

Actually San Diego's kopje and tiger river exhibits were built in response to Woodland Park Zoo and its 1976 long-range plan. San Diego hasn't set the pace for much of exhibit design in the last 30 years. Even its elephant exhibit was designed in response to the construction of new elephant exhibits at other zoos. But the zoo's influence on other zoos are not what is at question. Even my example of the zoo's development on a visitor's expectation doesn't quite measure why the zoo is overrated.

We can also judge a zoo by its programs, but the issue at hand is the zoo's physical facility, collection, and guest services. The San Diego Zoo can be compared against other zoos around the county, but that also will not necessarily cause the zoo to be overrated. And yes we can talk about the Wild Animal Park, but it is a different park - the zoo shouldn't be judged by what happens at another park (though the zoological society can). Its the zoo's reputation and the high expectations that one has of the zoo that causes this disappointment.

 

[DavidBrown]

Actually San Diego's kopje and tiger river exhibits were built in response to Woodland Park Zoo and its 1976 long-range plan. San Diego hasn't set the pace for much of exhibit design in the last 30 years. Even its elephant exhibit was designed in response to the construction of new elephant exhibits at other zoos. But the zoo's influence on other zoos are not what is at question. Even my example of the zoo's development on a visitor's expectation doesn't quite measure why the zoo is overrated.

I don't think your assertion that San Diego has not been a leader in zoo design is correct. What are you basing this on? You keep throwing out opinions like they are scientific data and telling those who disagree with you that they are wrong. San Diego is one of the historical leaders in zoo design and built upon what Seattle started and carried it forward with Seattle and many others. Seattle is a great zoo. San Diego is a great zoo. There is NO "greatest" zoo. There are several great zoos.

 

[gerenuk]

I didn't say that any zoo was the greatest. Simply that San Diego Zoo is overrated. I have also not said that your opinions are wrong. And I do apologize if you misunderstand debate for arrogance on my part. Sir, you were the one who wanted to dispute my opinion on the difference of the zoo's development in comparison to the rest of the zoo world. I pull my opinions from over 15 years of research and attention to the developments of zoos in the United States. And I must ask how you have derived that San Diego Zoo is a leader in zoo design? Do you have any examples of what zoos have been influenced by designs at San Diego?

On a separate note, with regards to exhibit design it was the Woodland Park Zoo's 1976 long range plan that set the pace for zoo design over the last 30 years. San Diego Zoo had the architecture firm who wrote the Woodland Park Zoo's plan, Jones & Jones, design their kopje and Tiger River exhibits. San Diego recognized the work the firm did in Seattle and wanted it replicated at their zoo. Yes, historically San Diego has been a leader in design. But in the last 30 years their exhibits haven't really been any different than other exhibits around the same time.

For example when Gorilla Tropics (1991) was built other exceptional primate were constructed as well - Bronx's Baboon Reserve (1,990), Dallas' Wilds of Africa (1990), Detroit's Great Apes of Harambe (1989), Zoo Atlanta's Ford African Rain Forest (1988).

 

[gerenuk]

To be a leader in zoo design. A zoo, in my opinion, must have an exhibit that is unlike others at the time and influences the development of exhibits at other zoos.

Today's exhibits are still influenced by the work and/or exhibits of Hagenbeck, Woodland Park Zoo, and Disney's Animal Kingdom. Time will tell if San Diego becomes a leader again in zoo design.

 

[reduakari]

To be a leader in zoo design. A zoo, in my opinion, must have an exhibit that is unlike others at the time and influences the development of exhibits at other zoos.

Today's exhibits are still influenced by the work and/or exhibits of Hagenbeck, Woodland Park Zoo, and Disney's Animal Kingdom. Time will tell if San Diego becomes a leader again in zoo design.

San Diego's 1970s design aesthetic was widely adopted throughout the US, particularly on the west coast. Vaguely "African" buildings, widespread use of telephone pole "bomas" and "softserve ice cream" rockwork walls followed SDZSs lead all over the place. But after the brief flirtation with Jones and Jones (kopje and Tiger River), the zoo and Safari Park have really not done anything design-wise that either breaks new ground or which constitutes an improvement on concepts pioneered by others.

It's true that many of the really objectionable old facilities at San Diego are slowly being replaced ( the monkey quadrangle most prominently), but most of the new exhibits are remarkably pedestrian. The new takin, red panda and viper complex is a good example of this: an odd mix of poorly- carved "rock" mixed incongruously with heavy-handed metal enclosure techniques, poor sightlines, glass barriers too reflective to see through, etc.

The attention to detail that distinguishes truly great exhibits from all the rest--whether part of completely new concepts or good iterations of ideas done by others in the past--is largely lacking in the vast majority of San Diego's work over the past 20 years.

 

[Otter Lord]

Are we arguing that the SDZ have not kept pace in terms of design quality or their rate of renovation? They're coming up with exhibits as fast as anyone else, certainly not the fastest, but they're also bigger than most zoos and have tougher terrain. Construction also tends to work out of favor for SDZ because tourists don't expect to see a ton of construction work being done when they come.

For the average zoo visitor at SDZ, their exhibit design is over-rated, simply because the average local or tourist hasn't been to many zoos and can't compare the SDZ with what other zoos have done. I have to agree that Tiger River and the Kopje exhibit are really the zoo's only spectacular exhibits, and that their exhibit design is not very cutting edge, but I think across the board SDZ is probably the greatest in the United States. All their newer exhibits, with the exception of EO, are still good exhibits even if they are not cutting edge. Of course, this is no excuse for a zoo that can do cutting edge design, they do read as "great" exhibits to the average visitor. Plus they have all the husbandry equipment, keeper amenities, and infrastructure required of modern zoos.

Now I haven't been to any major zoos in the South, but I have been quite a few zoos that have been argued as contenders by a few on this site, such as Bronx, Omaha, St. Louis, Columbus, Oklahoma City, and Woodland Park Zoo. Across the board San Diego does trump them on other categories than exhibit design that I think the carries through to the average zoo visitor.

Entrance Area: Flamingo Lagoon is one of the best opening scenes walking into a zoo. Guests don't like to walk far between exhibits and the SDZ makes a great first impression by having an exhibit right at the entrance that looks nicely. OKC and St. Louis have great entrances too, but flamingo lagoons is better than any of their closest exhibits.

Reptile House: I would say its better than Saint Louis and Bronx's.

Guest Services: Bronx, as expected with NY, has terrible guest services. I wouldn't expect to see someone in SDZ keep a job with profane language. Zoos are family-oriented attractions and should be conducted as such. I have always had good experiences with vendors at the SDZ. I am not arguing that the SDZ has the best services, but it definitely has it taken care of.

Food Service: Although pricey, people here have mentioned that they probably have the best food and best variety. Treetops terrace and the Sabertooth Grill are great relaxing areas to eat with satisfying views. Most Zoos only have two large food areas through their zoo, SDZ has at least 5.

Collection: Still the best collection around, and we all know no average visitor cares about Borneo bearded pigs or Barbary deer. They expect to see lions, giraffes, elephants, bears, and tigers. As you start to go down the most-well known animals list, SDZ has them, with the addition of two huge favorites: Pandas and Koalas, which the SDZ has great history with both.

Location: Best climate in the United States -> best horticulture collection in a zoo, most sunny days, more outdoor exhibits. Also set in scenic Balboa Park, which practically put San Diego on the map. The Bronx Zoo is set in the Bronx, how friendly are 13 feet fences with barbed wire?

Sorry to make another large post about the San Diego Zoo; I'm pretty sure most people here think its all I talk about, but oh well. I am critical of it just as most people here, but I do because it is my home zoo and its a shame to watch it depreciate in quality. Its not the best in terms of exhibit design at all, definitely over-rated but still the greatest.

 

[Arizona Docent]

Location: Best climate in the United States ...most sunny days...

As someone who lives near two zoos in the Tucson desert, I can guarantee you San Diego does NOT have the most sunny days of any American zoo

(Perhaps you meant to say mostly sunny days...)

 

[ANyhuis]

I could not agree with Otter Lord more! Yes, if ALL you care about is exhibit design, then the Bronx Zoo would be the best. But there are other factors (which Otter Lord points out) that must be considered. San Diego is by far the nation's (and probably the world's) best when it comes to "Collection" -- both with the extensiveness of its Collection, and with the many rare animals in its Collection. San Diego is also tops in Guest Services and other factors, among which I'd include Rides and Shows.

I've been to over 230 great zoos on 3 continents and, as of this date, I've yet to see a zoo that surpasses the San Diego Zoo. (But I haven't seen Singapore or Leipzig yet.)

 

[Cat-Man]

^ ANyhuis, have you been to Berlin Zoo or Tierpark? because i believe there collections surpass san diego's in terms of size, however none of them hold koala, and only 1 panda between them. Just though i'd point that out

Apart from that, i agree on all points as stated by otter lord + ANyhuis

 

[Cat-Man]

^ ANyhuis, have you been to Berlin Zoo or Tierpark? because i believe there collections surpass san diego's in terms of size, however none of them hold koala, and only 1 panda between them. Just though i'd point that out

Apart from that, i agree on all points as stated by otter lord + ANyhuis

 

[ANyhuis]

^ ANyhuis, have you been to Berlin Zoo or Tierpark? because i believe there collections surpass san diego's in terms of size, however none of them hold koala, and only 1 panda between them. Just though i'd point that out

Apart from that, i agree on all points as stated by otter lord + ANyhuis

Yes, I have -- and I agree. Berlin's zoos may have more extensive animal collections, though I'd still give the nod for "Rare and Feature animals" to San Diego.

 

[Cat-Man]

Really, why is that? What majorly rare species can you see in San Diego, but not in Berlin?. I hope you don't feel like I'm patronising you or having a go, I'd just like too know why you feel like that & some examples

 

[Otter Lord]

As someone who lives near two zoos in the Tucson desert, I can guarantee you San Diego does NOT have the most sunny days of any American zoo

(Perhaps you meant to say mostly sunny days...)

You are correct. Sorry when typing I sometimes forget to use the correct terminology. I think I met more or more than average sunny days, as I do not normally use absolutes so freely.

@Anyhuis and Cat-Man: Berlin definitely has more species. ANyhius, I am also interested in your reasoning for why SD has a better collection despite Berlin having more.

 

[AnaheimZoo]

Entrance Area: Flamingo Lagoon is one of the best opening scenes walking into a zoo. Guests don't like to walk far between exhibits and the SDZ makes a great first impression by having an exhibit right at the entrance that looks nicely. OKC and St. Louis have great entrances too, but flamingo lagoons is better than any of their closest exhibits.

I've never been to OKC Zoo or ST.L Zoo. Are their entrance exhibits flamingos as well?

Guest Services: Bronx, as expected with NY, has terrible guest services. I wouldn't expect to see someone in SDZ keep a job with profane language. Zoos are family-oriented attractions and should be conducted as such. I have always had good experiences with vendors at the SDZ.

Yes, you're right. I love the Bronx, but guest services could be sooooo much better. And I also remember from my trip last year (April 2010) that a security guard (or whatever she was) was sternly telling a few kids to stop chasing a peafowl. Then under her breath she mumbled, "She's not a f-ing toy..."

Collection: Still the best collection around, and we all know no average visitor cares about Borneo bearded pigs or Barbary deer. They expect to see lions, giraffes, elephants, bears, and tigers. As you start to go down the most-well known animals list, SDZ has them, with the addition of two huge favorites: Pandas and Koalas, which the SDZ has great history with both.

Does anyone (Otter Lord, Cat-Man, ANyhuis, Arizona Docent or whoever) know the number of species exhibited by:
San Diego Zoo?
Berlin Zoo?
Berlin Tierpark?
Thanks.

The Bronx Zoo is set in the Bronx, how friendly are 13 feet fences with barbed wire?

That's funny. What's also funny is that when you're at the Grevy's Zebra exhibit at the Bronx Zoo, look behind you and you can see people standing on the balconies of their apartments. Sure is a fantastic view!

Sorry to make another large post about the San Diego Zoo; I'm pretty sure most people here think its all I talk about, but oh well. I am critical of it just as most people here, but I do because it is my home zoo and its a shame to watch it depreciate in quality. Its not the best in terms of exhibit design at all, definitely over-rated but still the greatest.

Well, I sure don't mind at all! I completely agree with you, as well!
Now I apologize for a somewhat lengthy, slightly unnecessary post.

 

[mweb08]

I mostly agree with what Otter Lord says.

As far as the most sunny days comment, how about the most sunny days that people would actually want to be outside in.

Anyway, concerning the pace of improvement...

What was good about the SDZ before 1980 other than the inherent advantages of being in San Diego?

Hasn't the vast majority of the exhibits that make the zoo considered among the best been completed since then?