I've Started this thread so us Zoochatter together, we can decied the top ten list of the worlds best zoos you simpley contribute what you think are great zoological gardens, they can be Hardcore zoos, zoos that started as rescue centres (or centers if your American) Theme parks combined with zoos, anything! Ill start with some Chester zoo Howletts Port lympne Taronga Zoo Bronx Zoo San diego Zoo San Diego WAP Miami Metro Zoo Melbourne Zoo The National Zoological Gardens of South Africa Busch Gardens Africa Singapore Zoo Singapore Night Safari Disneys Animal Kingdom with more to come these are in no order. They can be zoos you haven't visited either so please contribute THX in Advance
Henry Doorly Zoo in Omaha is typically considered a top 3 or so zoo in the U.S. depending on if places like DAK and SD WAP are considered zoos. Woodland Park, Columbus, North Carolina, Brookfield, and St. Louis seem to be considered in the next class after the aforementioned ones in the states. Probably missing a couple there as well. Maybe Phoenix.
Berlin Zoo Berlin Tierpark Prague Zoo Rotterdam Zoo Vienna Zoo I would put these at the top in Europe Then there's Antwerp Zoo Zurich Zoo Leipzig Zoo (when Gondwanaland is ready they might move up) Hagenbeck's Hamburg ZooParc Des Beauval Burgers' Zoo Arnhem Close behind. Did i miss anything?
Melbourne Zoo and Taronga are the only real contenders form Australia but Werribee Open Range Zoo is fantastic for naturlistic exhibits and Healesville Sanctuary and Currumbin Sanctuary are the 2 best Native Zoos.
Yes IMO: Munchen zoo Bioparc Valencia Parc Paradisio Bioparc zoo de Doue I would leave out Hamburg and Antwerp
Here's an article that does a pretty good job of listing the best: The World's Best Zoos - ForbesTraveler.com Hey, I was quoted from in the article!!
As I said in another thread, I'm not sure how seriously that list can be taken when it has the National Zoo and Toronto Zoo listed, neither of which are considered great. I haven't been to any of the overseas zoos listed, so not sure how worthy they are, although I've heard very good things about a couple of them.
I usually tend to agree with you, mweb08, but this time I'll slightly disagree with you. I've always heard of Toronto raved about as one of the Continent's very best zoos. When SnowLeopard panned it, that was the first time I'd ever heard anyone dislike it. It certainly is a huge zoo with an enormous collection and some animals that are rarely seen anywhere else in North America (ie, wisents, Barbary apes, etc.). As for the National Zoo, I'd probably agree that it's not among the 15 best in the world, but I do put it among the 15 best in the USA. They have a great collection, giant pandas, and some terrific indoor animal houses. So all in all, the Forbes article isn't a bad list of the "world's best". But on the other hand, I think you and I would agree that the biggest omission is .... Omaha! I also don't like the way the group the two Berlin zoos together, as well as grouping the San Diego zoos together.
I'm not saying Toronto or DC are poor zoos. I just don't think either are considered elite. I went to the National Zoo just last week, and it's a good zoo, but I don't see how it can be listed in a worlds best list, or in the top 4 US zoos(counting DAK). Was that in order? If so, that makes it way worse. How good this list is depends a lot on how credible the selections of the overseas zoos are, which I can't really analyze. Yes, Omaha probably should have been on the list, certainly over DC and Toronto, but it's difficult for me to say what should be on the list beyond some obvious ones since I don't know much about foreign zoos. I just know that there's no reason for DC to be on the list, and I don't see much of a case for Toronto either.
No, I think the list was in alphabetical order. As for the foreign (non-USA) zoos, I've been to 5 of them (Berlin, Chester, Prague, Vienna, and of course Toronto) and all of the others are great! Even those that I haven't been to (Basel, Pretoria, Taronga, Ueno, Singapore) are zoos that I've heard nothing but great things about. The only zoo that was a surprise to me was France's Beuval -- only because it's a relatively new zoo. If you go to their website, they indeed appear to be a very impressive zoo too.
If Toronto is such a great zoo, then why has there been article after article online talking about a $250 million overhaul of the grounds? The animal collection is vast, but many of the pavilions are badly outdated with small animal enclosures, and in terms of truly world class exhibits there are exactly zero. Maybe the African Savanna? That area of the zoo is quite nice, but for an exhibit person such as myself I think that the Calgary Zoo is even better, and there are at least 30 zoos just in North America that are better than Toronto. The National Zoo has the brilliant "Asia Trail" area, "Amazonia", giant pandas and is much better than the Toronto Zoo, but neither are in the top 10 in North America.
Well the new tundra exhibit looks like it could be really good, but if the zoo isn't as good as the National Zoo, than yeah, it's a total joke for it to be on this list.
Tiergarten Schönbrun Vienna for the beautyfull exhibits and architecture and a very nice collection. Burgers Zoo for its ecodisplays, biggest rainforest, biggest desert in the world with a roof. Also Burgers Ocean and they have a very nice collection of animals and plants(biggest mangroveplant collection outside the mangroves)
I could see the National Zoo in a top zoo list. They have the brilliant Asia Trail which has the best Sloth Bear, Giant Panda, Clouded Leopard, Red Panda, and small Clawed Otter exhibits. It also has the upcoming Elephant Trails, as well as the O-line and Amazonia rain forest exhibit. To me that sounds like a pretty good list of exhibits. I think its nice to see a list that doesn't have Henry Doorly Zoo once in while, and I think before they put Henry Doorly Zoo they should put either St. Louis or Woodland Park. Maybe Omaha when they open more exhibits (like their elephants), but thats not even in the design process yet, and many things at Omaha still need to be overhauled. Sadly the exhibits that do need overhauls won't be renovated for perhaps another decade or so. What a shame for a zoo that is considered so great.
Have you been to any of the zoos you mention here? The National Zoo is good, but Elephant Trails can't be considered yet, and one great exhibit(Asia Trail) doesn't make a zoo great. I haven't seen one person on here who's been there say it's a top 5 US zoo, probably not top 10 either, have you? And I'm not talking about lists like mine that just limit it to zoos they've been to. It's probably in the 11-20 range, which is why it's absurd for it to be on a world's best list. Henry Doorly Zoo is much better than the National Zoo imo. Omaha really doesn't have that much that's needs to be overhauled compared to many other older zoos. It's in the same boat as many in that regard, but has other things which place it above most. San Diego, which I know you love, has more stuff that needs to be overhauled than does Omaha imo. Which is why I don't understand your attacks on Omaha on this while you almost ignore it with SD. Henry Doorly will be working on the new elephant exhibit in the near future, otherwise, much of the cat complex should be upgraded, and they have a small monkey cage area that's not needed because I believe they're all represented in Lied Jungle anyway. The bear exhibits certainly could be better, but they were pretty much the norm until recently, and aren't awful either. You may be right that Woodland Park or St. Louis should be above Omaha though, but I don't know since I haven't been to them. I think the chances are much higher for WP compared to St. Louis based on pictures and what I've read on here.
I didn't say it IS one of the best zoos in the world, but that I could see why it might be considered. 11-20 is still pretty high for a zoo considering their are 60 zoos reviewed in ABZ that are considered the best in the U.S. San Diego also needs some exhibits to be overhauled, but its cat exhibits are much better than Omaha. They are all outdoors and are extremely dense with plants and deadfall rather than concrete and glass cages that have the occasional log and toy. Have you seen the episode of Ultimate Zoo detailing the making of River's Edge? It's quite an amazing exhibit and very highly regarded. they also have Penguin & Puffin Coast which is said to be America's best penguin exhibit. Toss in above average cat & ape exhibits and a great collection and you have a great zoo. I would say Woodland Park is just a tad better, but overall they are pretty equal.
Why can you see a zoo that struggles to make the top 15 US zoos, if it even does, in a top 15 zoos of the world list? That doesn't make sense. Omaha's outdoor cat exhibits aren't much different than SD's with the exception of the the tiger and new jaguar exhibit at SD obviously being better. Yeah, they do have the brutal indoor part which they need to address, something SD doesn't have to deal with due to weather. SD also has a ton of poor cages throughout the zoo for various primates, birds, and small mammals. Omaha doesn't have this problem other than one small section near the childrens zoo. And of course before EO, they also had a poor elephant exhibit to go along with a poor rhino exhibit, but you seemed ok with that, you even defended the rhino exhibit. Yes, St. Louis has a a couple highly touted exhibits, not as many as Omaha though. On paper, I'm pretty sure Omaha stacks up very nicely to St. Louis, however, that's not how this should be judged, but since you didn't answer my question regarding you actually going to any of these zoos, I assume that's exactly how you're judging it.
i've decided to change it to the top 100, we could start by nominating thebest zoos from each countery
