What will be the best zoo in 2015?

What will be the best zoo in 2015?

  • Total voters
    77
The case for DAK at #1 in 2016

I think leaving Disney's Animal Kingdom (DAK) off of this survey is a mistake! Of course you (mweb08) state your case as follows:

mweb08 said:
I don't consider it <Disney's Animal Kingdom> a zoo, I consider it a theme park since it has roller coasters/rides, and most people go there in large part due to other reasons than viewing animals. There's nothing wrong with that at all, but I wouldn't consider it a zoo in the traditional sense.
Click to expand...

I would agree that they are not a "traditional" zoo, as yes, they do have theme park rides, roving Disney characters, and amazing shows (both Broadway-style and a 3D movie). But they also have some of the very best zoo exhibits in the world! Certainly not all of the 9.5 million visitors per year are there to see the animals. But if even a quarter of them are, that would make DAK one of the Top 6 most visited zoos in the USA! I do know that at least some of DAK's visitors are there to see the animals and experience it's amazing zoo exhibits. Here on this board, Snowleopard and Blackrhino are 2 who have gone to DAK with the express purpose of seeing it as a zoo. (And, as I've pointed out to them, if you ONLY go there to see a "zoo", you'll at least think it's way too expensive!) I guess I'm thinking that at least a fourth of DAK's visitors are like me -- I badly want to see it as a zoo, AND I want to enjoy the Disney World effects as well.

But deciding what qualifies as a "zoo" is an issue I've been through twice, in writing my (our) books. In my first (1994) book, I decided that Busch Gardens and San Diego Wild Animal Park were not zoos, so I only gave them a paragraph review in the book. (DAK wasn't open then yet.) This turned out to be one of the biggest critiques I received with my first book. So when Jon and I started planning for America's Best Zoos, we carefully thought this out. We decided that SDWAP, Busch, DAK, and for that matter -- the Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum -- all qualified as zoos. Of course there are some zoological parks that are equally questionable. How about Florida's drive-through park, Lion Country Safari. One online source recently rated it as one of the Top 10 "zoos" in the nation. (Most of us on ZooChat panned that choice quite strongly, however.) Some would suggest Washington's Northwest Trek, Texas' Fossil Rim, or even Ohio's The Wilds as possible "zoos" for our book. Fortunately, Jon and I both agreed that none of these were quite up to the level of the "Top 60" needed to make our book -- so thus we didn't need to seriously consider whether or not they are truly "zoos".

OK, back to DAK. If we can agree that they really are a zoo (and I know not all of you are on board with that), then I would strongly suggest they should be on this ballot. First of all, with their excellent Kilamanjaro Safari, Maharajah Jungle Trek, and Pangani Forest Trail, they have 3 of the best zoo exhibits in America! In fact, in addition to SnowLeopard's Top 4,
snowleopard said:
it's interesting how the top zoos being tossed around are often San Diego, Bronx, Omaha and Columbus. Of course opinions are subjective and others on ZooChat might endorse a few zoos besides those 4, but it seems as if the top zoos are often difficult to displace at the top of any imaginary ranking system. I have seen all 4 zoos being mentioned, and they are the 4 best I've visited in North America.
Click to expand...
MY choice for #5 is Disney's Animal Kingdom!

But we're talking about 7 years in the future -- 2016. Consider one major factor that will likely be important in becoming (or staying) the USA's #1 zoo in 2016: MONEY! Of all the zoos we are talking about, which one could have an almost-unlimited source of money to create the necessary new exhibits to cement its place as America's #1 zoo? Easy -- Disney!

Suppose, for example, the following were to occur: Disney gets a new CEO in 2011, someone who loves animals and loves zoos. He/she looks at his already-excellent DAK park and decides he wants it to not just be "comparable" with San Diego, Omaha, and the Bronx -- he wants it to be better! So he decides to invest over $200 million of Disney profits into literally doubling the zoological exhibits at DAK. The park already has excellent animal and cultural exhibit areas for Africa and Asia, now suppose they create equally great exhibit areas for Australia and South America. With the opportunity to "advertise" its nation to the millions of Disney guests, Australia agrees to let DAK display all of its rare animals in this new "DAK Australia" land -- koalas, dingos, wombats, Taz devils, and even platypuses! The land also features a Kilamanjaro-level tour bus ride through the area, and perhaps another great Disney 3D movie. In their new South American exhibit, they feature jaguars, giant otters, river dolphins, and much more. They have an incredibly realistic ride-through Amazon boat tour, allowing guests to see the dolphins, otters, and much more from both above and below water.

If all of the above were to happen, would there be any doubt that DAK would be a strong contender for the #1 slot? Do they have the money for it? Not now, during the recession -- but if there's a strong recovery, they could have the funds.
 
Well it might then be the best place to see captive animals in the country, but it still wouldn't be the best zoo.;)
 
mweb08 said:
Well it might then be the best place to see captive animals in the country, but it still wouldn't be the best zoo.;)
Click to expand...

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. Believe me, I've done a lot of thinking about this point -- and I can see both sides!
 
ANyhuis said:
We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. Believe me, I've done a lot of thinking about this point -- and I can see both sides!
Click to expand...

Well I think Disney themselves disagree with you. They list it as a theme park on their website.
 
mweb08 said:
Well I think Disney themselves disagree with you. They list it as a theme park on their website.
Click to expand...

That's right, but I think this is purely a "marketing" thing. If they get labelled as a "zoo", that would cut down their appeal to some of those 3/4 (see above) of their visitors who come only for the theme park. All I can say is that they were more than glad to be included in a book called "America's Best Zoos". They cooperated with us fully in writing the chapter about their park. My only complaint about them is that they haven't sold our book in their gift shops (yet).
 
They don't label themselves as a zoo because a significant portion of it is a theme park.

Of course they were happy to be in that book, free positive publicity.

I also have no issue with you and your co-author placing it in your book, I don't think you need to adhere to any thoughts of what a zoo is for that book.
 
mweb08 said:
They don't label themselves as a zoo because a significant portion of it is a theme park.
Click to expand...

MWeb, I hope you agree this is a friendly "debate". (Maybe I'm a bit gunshy, since I'm engaged in a harsh, angry -- from his side -- argument on another thread. I don't want that with you!)

As for what Disney calls their park, do you remember back in the '90s when the Bronx Zoo decided "we're not a zoo, we're a wildlife conservation center". After a few years, their marketing told them that was a dumb idea and they changed their name back. I doubt you would've said they're not a zoo then, right? How about Arizona-Sonora, are they a zoo? They say they're "part zoo, part botanical garden, and part natural history museum". And also how about the Tulsa Zoo, does their North American Living Museum disqualify them?

If we're going to rule out any zoo that is not "pure" enough, we'd also have to cut Memphis and Oakland (and Canada's Granby), as they both have mini-amusement parks on their grounds, with 5 or 6 carnival-like rides. Even my Indianapolis Zoo now has a "family coaster" ride. San Diego's high-flying Sky Safari would be a thrill ride if it were in Disneyland. Even the Bronx Zoo has said they will be replacing their sky ride with an "amusement park type ride". Where do we draw the line?

I would humbly suggest we consider any park that is AZA-accredited, cooperates with other zoos in breeding and conservation, and has serious zoo exhibits as a "zoo". If you reconsider and add DAK to the survey, I will still stick with my vote for San Diego. I'm just saying that DAK deserves some consideration.
 
I have no angst here, so no worries there.

Regardless of what the Bronx Zoo calls itself, I still feel it's clearly a zoo.

I haven't been to those other places, so not sure about them, but I'm quite sure that the vast majority of people who go there go primarily to see the animals.

There is a difference between having a sky-ride or carousel or someting of that nature and having big roller coasters, the lion king play or whatever it is, and so on. People aren't going to those places you listed because of the sky ride or whatever other small rides they have, they're going primarily to view animals. That is not the reason why Disney has the attendance that they do.

DAK obviously is part zoo, I just wouldn't call the entire establishment a zoo. If you want to rank it against zoos, that's fine, I may too if I ever go there, but that would just be for comparison sakes, I would never call it the best zoo because it's a theme park.

This is just semantics, so it's not a big deal, just how I feel.
 
mweb08 said:
There is a difference between having a sky-ride or carousel or someting of that nature and having big roller coasters, the lion king play or whatever it is, and so on. People aren't going to those places you listed because of the sky ride or whatever other small rides they have, they're going primarily to view animals. That is not the reason why Disney has the attendance that they do.

DAK obviously is part zoo, I just wouldn't call the entire establishment a zoo. If you want to rank it against zoos, that's fine, I may too if I ever go there, but that would just be for comparison sakes, I would never call it the best zoo because it's a theme park.
Click to expand...

Glad this isn't turning nasty! Actually, though, I've already conceded that the majority of DAK's visitors are not there for the animals, in fact I estimated that perhaps 3/4 are there for the theme park and 1/4 for the animals. The reality (I think) is that DAK has a "zoo within a theme park". Yes, it's a theme park, with Disney-style rides and shows, plus Tigger and Mickey Mouse walking around signing autographs. But inside this theme park there is a VERY good zoo!

I don't know if you've seen our book, MWeb, but if you do, take a look at the way we covered Disney's Animal Kingdom. Because our book is a travel guide to Zoos, we almost entirely wrote our DAK chapter about its zoo features. We very, very briefly covered the non-zoo rides and shows. As I look at the chapter, it's 5 pages long. Less than a single page is used to describe the roller coasters and Disney shows. So IF we were to compare DAK against the best zoos (San Diego, Omaha, Bronx, Columbus), I would propose it should be compared ONLY for its zoo features. In such a comparison, it would get zero credit for the "Expedition: Everest" roller coaster or "It's Tough to Be a Bug" 3D movie. In the same way, the Columbus Zoo gets zero credit, in these comparisons, for the huge waterpark at its entrance.
 
I own your book and have read it.

As I said, it is part zoo. And yeah, in comparisons, you have to eliminate all the non-zoo stuff. However, I still wouldn't call it a zoo.

The water park at Columbus is separate from the zoo.
 
ANyhuis said:
How about Arizona-Sonora, are they a zoo? They say they're "part zoo, part botanical garden, and part natural history museum". ...we'd also have to cut Memphis and Oakland (and Canada's Granby), as they both have mini-amusement parks on their grounds...
Click to expand...

I was at Memphis two years ago and I do NOT recall seeing any type of amusement park rides. Where are they, in the children's zoo? (That's the only area I did not go into).

As for Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum in my hometown of Tucson, I love it, I would definitely consider it a zoo, but they have the WORST name of any AZA facility. Not only is it inaccurate (they're not a museum), four words is way too long (one of my pet peeves).
 
Arizona Docent said:
I was at Memphis two years ago and I do NOT recall seeing any type of amusement park rides. Where are they, in the children's zoo? (That's the only area I did not go into).
Click to expand...

The "Children's Rides" area is between the children's zoo ("Once Upon a Farm") and the Tropical Bird House. The rides are seasonal and cost $1 each. I think they have 4-5 small amusement park style rides.

Arizona Docent said:
As for Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum in my hometown of Tucson, I love it, I would definitely consider it a zoo, but they have the WORST name of any AZA facility. Not only is it inaccurate (they're not a museum), four words is way too long (one of my pet peeves).
Click to expand...

Actually the Earth Sciences building is very much a geology museum, with a walk-through simulated cave and over 14,000 minerals from the Sonora Desert to see. They include copper leaves, gold nuggets, and even a genuine moon rock to see and touch.

But I agree that the name is not good. Could they drop the "Sonora" part, or is there some agreement with the Mexican state of Sonora? If they dropped it they could be the Arizona Desert Zoo & Museum (ADZM), or Arizona Desert Zoo for short.
 
jrj073000 said:
I've never been - but I've heard great things about River Banks Zoo.
Click to expand...

The Riverbanks Zoo is a very pretty little zoo in Columbia, South Carolina, the state's capital city. It's one of the most attended zoos in the nation, per capita. It's one of only 9 zoos in the nation with koalas. Besides them, it's best known for: a very natural-looking African exhibit, Ndoki Forest, with elephants, giraffes, gorillas, and more; a nice (though slightly-dated) Aquarium/Reptile Complex building; a small, but very nice, Birdhouse (with an attractive penguin display); and for an extensive botanical garden, across the Saluda River -- a long hike (or tram ride) from the rest of the Zoo.

This is definitely an up-and-coming zoo, but it's nowhere near being ready to challenge for the position of #1 in the nation!
 
I've never been to Riverbanks, but it is one of the few U.S. zoos that successfully breeds black-footed cats. So one of these days if they have cubs on display, I may have to make a quick trip out there.
 
Well after visiting the Bronx Zoo, I'm going to stick with San Diego as the best current zoo. The answer to this question is still difficult since I don't know what SD(other than the Galapagos tortoise exhibit) and the Bronx will do by 2015, while the plans for Omaha and Columbus are more well-known. If Henry Doorly has a new great Elephant exhibit by 2015 to go along with Madagscar, they'd by a very strong contender imo, while I think Columbus is much further away from the top spot at this time. I guess I'll vote SD, because I assume they'll do something big by then.
 
I voted before on this but have yet to comment. When it comes down to it, I don't think Columbus will ever knock Bronx and San Diego from the 2/1 spot because there isn't enough there to do so and there are no standout exhibits (whereas Bronx and San Diego have so many you need at least 2 hands to count...). Even if the African and PB areas are phenomenal, that would just be two exhibits compared to the numerous at other zoos.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top