This is important!

[gentle lemur]

Please read this article from today's Guardian and think about it. I believe that some other British zoos are going in the same direction and I welcome the trend.
Letting thousands of poorer families into London Zoo for £3 has changed us for ever | Matthew Gould

 

[dillotest0]

This is reallly nice ...
I have felt for quite a while that zoos truly do have the resources to change the way the public and politicians alike view biodiversity ...
To see this going on here really makes me happy.

 

[Lafone]

It’s a really good scheme.

Crowd management is an issue for anyone planning to do this - entry, facilities, toilets etc need to cope with the numbers and on the first couple of days it was clear that was an issue.

The booking system they put in helps with that and shows how well this is being managed.

The heavy crowds have put me off visiting as a member (the Whipsnade queues were massive).

You have to face into the fact that weekends in popular times are now no longer going to be easy times to visit any more though. That closes off a zoo option for me, as a member on a purely personal level that’s a bit vexing as membership is not cheap even for those not on benefits.

However there is a much larger pay off. And the greater good thing has to come into play. At the end of the day the zoo isn’t really for me, I recognise that as an adult, visiting without kids, to take pictures, enthuse over animals and have a fun day out, I am an outlier for ZSL. I’ve already paid membership. And I’m not going to save the planet as the next generation. It’s my choice not to want to visit when it’s crowded too, no one is making me.

People getting access to see animals up close, kids getting an understanding of the importance of conservation and giving that access to people on low incomes where a zoo visit is a luxury they can’t always afford is awesome.

Worth the effort and the issues it causes for other visitors in the long term.

The benefits outweigh the potential problems.

The zoo will need a grant to keep doing it - even with twice the number of visitors with most of them paying 1/10 of the price they can’t generate the right income as rightly pointed out in the article.

I like the direction ZSL is going in with this scheme and leading the way gives me a lot of hope for how good the zoos will be in future.

 

[Cobi]

Edinburgh Zoo is also doing a great deal of work at the moment extending access to the zoo to people who might not otherwise be able to visit.

 

[zoomaniac]

After hardly critizing London Zoo (or more exactly: Its leaders) I have to praise it now for this step. This is a good thing in many ways, not only to gain people for conservation, but also to ensure that zoos will have (enough) visitors in future. Great work! And thank you in the name of many (british) families who can not afford a regular entrance fee.

 

[Arizona Docent]

I believe most cities in the United States have social services that offer low income families discounted (or free) tickets to zoos and similar attractions. It's not something you can just line up for at the zoo to get, which seems to be the case here, thus the crowd issues. Since the American tickets are distributed on an individual basis through the social service office, crowds are never an issue as far as I know. And of course our national zoo, along with its fellow Smithsonian museums, are free to all, but that is assuming you can get to Washington DC.

I do feel in the case of London they need a better way to control the crowds, as it sounds like a nightmare and if I was a member I would be very upset. I also wonder how hordes of crowds - many of whom presumably do not know how to act around animals - will affect more sensitive species. There is one flaw in the article (in my opinion). It goes under the false assumption that visiting a zoo will result in changed behavior to positively impact the environment. Most people just go to the zoo for a fun time and to look at the animals with no impact on their personal behavior. A few people may make a change, and a few is better than none, so I am NOT opposed to this scheme. I am just stating my opinion that zoos in general overestimate their influence.

 

[PossumRoach]

I do feel in the case of London they need a better way to control the crowds, as it sounds like a nightmare and if I was a member I would be very upset. I also wonder how hordes of crowds - many of whom presumably do not know how to act around animals - will affect more sensitive species.

I am not sure if I would be comparing apples to oranges, but back before Covid-19, bronx was free to visit on Wednesdays (sans the total experience exhibits which you still had to pay for.) When I was in summer camp back at 2015, I recall Madagascar! being stuffed like a can of sardines. When I last revisited the Bronx at 2019 it was also on a Wednesday and there were people everywhere including guests smoking on zoo grounds, listening to music with speakers on the entrance, and one guy vaping in the second floor of World of birds. I am not insinuating that this behavior wouldn’t happened on a normal non-free day, but I’d argue it’s more likely to happen on a free day.

 

[RatioTile]

I am not sure if I would be comparing apples to oranges, but back before Covid-19, bronx was free to visit on Wednesdays (sans the total experience exhibits which you still had to pay for.) When I was in summer camp back at 2015, I recall Madagascar! being stuffed like a can of sardines. When I last revisited the Bronx at 2019 it was also on a Wednesday and there were people everywhere including guests smoking on zoo grounds, listening to music with speakers on the entrance, and one guy vaping in the second floor of World of birds. I am not insinuating that this behavior wouldn’t happened on a normal non-free day, but I’d argue it’s more likely to happen on a free day.

The Bronx Zoo is still free to visit on Wednesdays.

 

[PossumRoach]

The Bronx Zoo is still free to visit on Wednesdays.

Well that’s good to know. I sort of lost track after the covid reservations kicked in and they looked like they were there to stay

 

[15399]

I'm glad to see London Zoo offering a cheaper admission price, and I wish more zoos across the world would follow suit and either decrease their admission or offer more opportunities for free/reduced entry for those of need. This gets to the heart of the role of zoos in society, in my opinion. Zoos (and aquariums and museums, for that matter) should be, at their most basic level, community institutions, as many zoos were built with community support and funding, and a lot continue to receive support as well. As such, zoos should be engaged institutions at the community level, and a great resource for all members of the community, regardless of income. Especially keep in mind the fact that for many families admission prices add up quickly. If a zoo ticket costs $20 for one person, which seems like a rather standard price, then for two parents to bring their three kids it'd cost $100 for admission to the zoo. Sure, that's not as expensive as a trip to the amusement park, but it's still outside of what many families can afford to spend on a recreational activity.

There are also examples of zoos that are free and still thriving, such as Saint Louis, Lincoln Park, and Como Park Zoos in the United States (plus National Zoo, but they're a different story since they get federal funding). While I don't know the breakdown of revenue for these zoos, it is clear they are valued members of the community and still manage to exist, and build new exhibits, despite the lack of an entry fee. Zoos provide an invaluable service to the community, and it's a shame to see some institutions take on a sort of elitism where only those who can afford are welcome. In an era where access to outdoor spaces is at an all-time low, and people are living increasingly indoor, sedentary lifestyles, zoos should be doing everything they can to welcome all people to access their outdoor spaces, walk around, appreciate nature, and hopefully learn something as well, not further limiting access to people who can afford the luxury of a day to the zoo.

Instead of making most revenue through admissions, zoos could (and should) shift some of that burden to other revenue sources. Charge for parking, for instance, or incorporate more paid attractions within the zoo. Alternatively, plenty of zoos have started to embrace special events and night access, to see lantern festivals, holiday lights, etc., and a further embracement of special events and other opportunities should allow zoos to match their current revenue earnings while decreasing ticket prices. Perhaps offering multiple levels of admission could also work, allowing visitors to visit the zoo's ground for free, but pay an extra fee for access to indoor exhibits, or certain marquee attractions, so that even those who can't afford to get the whole experience can at least get some zoo experience.

 

[ifesbob]

Having events/experiences/exhibits (not a fan of the latter, but whatever) with a higher fee/a fee in general (in the case of Henry Vilas, events and such are the only times they can charge a fee) means that more people can visit the zoo for a lower price.

Additionally, I think there are a lot of people in the world (myself included) who are willing to donate either to cover for reduced-cost admissions or in general to keep a zoo cheaper/free. I don't use cash much, so I'm usually willing to put a chunk of whatever happens to be in my wallet into a donation bin/container.

I think larger zoos have to work on crowd management, though. In terms of the smoking and such, I think a lot of that has to do with excessive crowds and not that any individual person taking advantage of reduced-cost tickets is more likely to engage in that behavior. If you are not able to handle managing massive crowds, you should have time-restricted entry. Especially for zoos, crowd management is important for the health of animals, so that's a factor too.

The "are people actually learning about conservation" aspect is important, though, but since that is one of the major goals of zoos/aquariums in general, I think it's crucial that everyone has access to that.

Also, zoos could (should?) offer free field trips to (if not all) at least poorer schools. Adults should have access to that too, obviously, but children are also extremely important to reach.

 

[Jurek7]

German zoos often have reduced price for the unemployed, in the middle of the week and / or in winter.

Many cities also have programs to prevent social exclusion of poor people, which typical example is a poor family avoiding taking children to the zoo.

 

[Great Argus]

If a zoo ticket costs $20 for one person, which seems like a rather standard price, then for two parents to bring their three kids it'd cost $100 for admission to the zoo. Sure, that's not as expensive as a trip to the amusement park, but it's still outside of what many families can afford to spend on a recreational activity.

While I certainly do agree it can add up quickly, I also look at how many families have expensive devices for all the kids and how much the parents are willing to pay for sporting events but not necessarily recreational activities. Not to mention just about everybody wants to go to Disney but they're also the most expensive park around. Yet people are still willing to shell out for it. I usually find it more of a "where do the priorities and interests lie" rather than a "can they afford it" question. Many facilities close to me have discount days and other ways of encouraging lower income families to visit at a price they can afford.

Instead of making most revenue through admissions, zoos could (and should) shift some of that burden to other revenue sources. Charge for parking, for instance,

Many larger zoos already do, and it's usually $10-15. I suspect we'll see more zoos move that direction if inflation keeps up.

Perhaps offering multiple levels of admission could also work, allowing visitors to visit the zoo's ground for free, but pay an extra fee for access to indoor exhibits, or certain marquee attractions, so that even those who can't afford to get the whole experience can at least get some zoo experience.

Personally I dislike this sort of option. Unless it's something like an expensive high-quality traveling exhibition I strongly disagree with fees to see additional exhibits. It is limiting and often frustrating to people visiting on a budget, I've witnessed this before. For things like carousels and trains that's one thing, they're add ons and generally aren't very expensive anyway. But paywalling exhibit complexes or buildings behind a $5-10 ticket just really rubs me the wrong way.

 

[TinoPup]

Many zoos in the USA have discount days for residents of their town or county, some even for the entire state. Over 1k museums are participants in Museums For All (Museums for All), which gives free or discount admission to those on food stamps; I've been mentioning zoo/aquarium participants of this in my where to see animals in the USA thread. Some libraries will have memberships to local zoos that you can "check out", like a book, and use to go to the zoo for free.

It's great to hear this stuff is catching on elsewhere in the world.

 

[JVM]

Lincoln Park Zoo is free -- and his is absolutely critical to why the Chicago public loves it. It's more than a collection of animals on display -- it is like a public park. On one occasion some gentleman sat by the hoofstock yards playing on guitar. One visit as a child, we spent a while playing by the ducks. Some used to discuss renting the now discontinued paddleboats as a date idea. The zoo was able to be a community hub partly because there was no buy-in. In many ways I think the fact it is free emphasizes it value to the average person better than a zoo -- because there is no illusion that the zoo is being run for profit or to make money off you, as is a common claim by those who are anti-captivity. Nor can anyone claim to be 'ripped off' by something that charges nothing. There is nothing keeping anyone from coming in and leaving as they please during opening hours.(There is a parking fee but that's not exclusive to the zoo, parking in Chicago is nasty.)

In spite of all of that, it is a very modern institution that frequently raises money in capital campaigns for improvements. They never appear in even a slight need for cash. No signs of decay.

My emphasis is not simply to glorify my local zoo but to also explain why I think programs like this are so valuable. It elevates the zoo in a way that's hard to put into a neat and tidy sentence for me.

It's also an unfortunate notice that no matter how easy you make it for the poor to enter a public institution on a discount, or whatever programs exist, many people will never think to look up them up or find that information unless it is presented to them and publicized. Some will only be aware there is an admission fee and assume it is too high without even checking the value or the amount or what discounts or available or what days they are open. I do think zoos and museums could do more to advertise these programs and reach those people who might otherwise not be aware what options are available.

Also, zoos could (should?) offer free field trips to (if not all) at least poorer schools. Adults should have access to that too, obviously, but children are also extremely important to reach.

Any trip to Lincoln Park, you usually see multiple chains of inner city kids on field trips.