Austin vs Las Vegas: Which one needs a big zoo more?

After reading some threads about cities in need of zoos, I came to the conclusion that Austin, Texas and Las Vegas, Nevada were the main cities in need of a good, big zoo.
Which one do you think needs a big zoo more? Do you think it would continue running after many years, or are there not enough people/tourists interested in going to a zoo there so it would have to shut down soon after it opened?
Las Vegas may have more tourists than Austin, however I think the majority of people living and visiting Vegas are less interested in going to a zoo than people in Austin.
Is there enough space in the area for a good, large zoo around the size of San Diego Zoo or something similar?

 

I kind of approach this one also considering that I think Austin is a lot more "progressive" in the "trendy" department... when I consider the population in Austin, even though it's in Texas, I worry about the locals having more of an anti-zoo sentiment than the LV local population -- but I haven't spent too much time in Austin to really know. I think that LV is a bigger tourist destination (though their draw is more likely gambling), and their locals are less likely to be anti-zoo, so, an LV zoo might be more successful. Another thing to consider is additional costs of operating a zoo where such temperature extremes are possible. I would think many species kept outside sensitive to weather than can seasonally change from 30 to 100+?

 

What an odd question

 

A Safari Park/Zoo is to open in Dubai later this year, and it has similar temperatures to LV, so it could still be possible.

 

I think that people mainly go to Las Vegas is just for the casino, and not really for zoo.Austin is more like zoo-need than LV.

 

Although this is possible, I don't think it would be too much of an issue since there are zoos located in other liberal and "progressive" cities, such as Portland, Seattle, San Francisco, Boston, and NYC.

Phoenix and Tucson have zoos operating under very similar temperature and seasonal conditions, so while it would be a challenge compared to many other places I don't think it would be prohibitive.

The Strip is indeed where the vast majority of tourists go, but the Las Vegas area is home to nearly 2 million people, including a large number of middle-class families with children; the very demographic that visit zoos in droves. There also aren't any major zoos nearby, so no competition, whereas Austin is only an hour away from the San Antonio Zoo.

 

Do you think there is enough space in/near Las Vegas for an 100 acre+ zoo that operates well. A large landfill could easily be converted into a zoo (just like in Dubai).

 

I find that while established zoo/aquaria are often the target of ARA's... but NEW zoos are even more likely to be met with more severe activism. I'm definitely not saying that we should give in to them, but it may be something to consider when setting up a new zoo. The new dolphinarium in Scottsdale is a great example of this- loud activism, but man they can't close the turnstiles if they wanted to.

My point is that financially supporting animals in those temperatures is likely very expensive. LV isn't a poor city by any means... but it's no where closely relate-able to Dubai.

Yes. LV is in the desert- there is much land around to use. More of a concern, I would think is available infrastructure to support a zoo- access to water, etc.

 

They could use the method of water recycling which some other zoos are/will use.

 

Do you think many non-migratory Canadian, European and Northern Asian animals would do well in Vegas.
I think animals in the Gobi desert and steppes would be fine (such as saiga antelope and bactrian camels) because the weather can be extremely hot and cold. However how would animals such as European Bison, reindeer, wolverines and sable cope in Vegas?

 

I am slightly biased in that I live significantly closer to Austin than Las Vegas, that being said I think Austin would be better because it seems to be a concentration of young people that would be willing to go to a zoo, many of which I know want a zoo (My cousins included). Las Vegas could have a large zoo, but people go to Vegas to gamble, not to visit a zoo. The main income for the zoo would be families taking their children since gambling isn't for children.

 

I see what your are saying, but I don't think Austin would be that much of a problem with people attempting to shut it down. Certain species would most likely be protested. I agree with your point that it being a new zoo would bring more criticism, since the zoos mentioned above like New York have been around before people loudly criticized zoos.

This was seen in the Dallas World Aquarium which is fairly recently built when they attempted to have an exhibit for Amazon River Dolphins.

 

I see your point, but I'm not sure a dolphinarium is a great example. The captivity of cetaceans is a hot topic right now and the public's distaste for it appears to have grown rapidly in the last few years; I have not seen that same trend for most species, and the majority of zoos don't appear to be eliciting much controversy.

 

I'm gonna go with Vegas. As others have mentioned,yes. Gambling is the focal point of Vegas,but I think gambling is taking a downturn. If you'll notice,a lot of the newer casinos have draws beyond gambling,new hotels are finding things like rides and shows to dominate. One of the upcoming hotels,Resorts World Las Vegas,even has a panda exhibit and aquarium planned for the property. If Vegas is deemed able to sustain 2 aquariums,,I'd say a zoo can certainly work out,especially as seeing that the aquarium in Mandalay Bay and the exhibits at the Mirage aren't a full day event. I'd say a sizable enough zoo or safari park attraction can do just fine,because it really is the one thing Vegas doesn't have.

 

I think both places could support zoos. They have the population, Vegas of course is more of the tourist attraction.

Vegas would likely get more visitors. They could do fine with certain animals, seeing as how places like Tucson and Phoenix have zoos. Animals like polar bears, reindeer, and Amur Tigers would be out, as would maybe tropical species like gorillas. But there could still be potential.

Austin would support more variety of species more than likely.

 

Vegas would really depend on the location as to who would be the primary visitor. If it were near (as in on or a block or so off) the strip, it would catch a fair amount of tourists, but if it were off strip (as it almost certainly has to be) then it is pretty much only going to cater to locals - of which there certainly are enough of to support a zoo, IMO.

 

You don't think tourists would be willing to leave the Strip?

 

Austin resident here.
I brought up the idea once to a then current, now former member of council. He seemed inclined to go with it but had a questions, which is where would one go. Austin has lots of greenbelts through the city, areas of hiking and explorations, but we don't have a lot of parks, and even less with parking. If you were to build one it would be well south or west of the city and possibly outside of city limits. Throw in, the price of land is ridiculous, we have a real housing crisis in terms of affordability where many people who work downtown actually live in the next county over.

So, you show me a place to build it, and a plan to buy the real estate, it can happen, but I can only wish you luck with that.

 

@Trowaman What about Zilker Park? It’s large, has a lot of space that doesn’t appear to be serving a particular purpose besides being a park, and it’s very close to downtown. The city’s botanical gardens and science center are already located there as well.

 

Right out. Zilker is filled to the brim. Go through it on any day in summer and the land is packed with families using every inch of the land for picnics, frisbee, Touch football and more. The back half has the pool/river that doesn’t have enough parking as it is. And during winter months it’s used for the lights festival that does crazy business.

Then you throw in the concerts that use the land, ACL is happening right now and is using that entire park.

Zilker is not an option.