Myrtle Beach's Ripley's Aquarium is overrated. Advertised as being "the most visited attraction in South Carolina" it is overcrowded and is a pretty standard aquarium.
The Budapest Zoo's Holnemvolt Vár is very overrated. It's a children amusement park with very small paddocks ( approximately 300 square metres enclosure to 3 camels).
I cannot resist: San Diego Zoo. It is regularly called 'the worlds biggest zoo' in newspapers, although it has never been the biggest by any conceivable measure (area, number of species, number of individual animals, visitations etc). San Diego is, of course, a very big zoo, but the sheer excess of this statement annoys me.
There are a good deal of US zoos which have larger collections than San Diego, including Bronx and Omaha. The only area where San Diego excels over other US zoos is their massive bird collection, although I highly doubt they beat out other top notch bird collections around the globe. ~Thylo
Out of interest, what other US zoos have larger collections than San Diego? I mean their collection is still tremendous. On a side note, I’ve never seen San Diego addressed as “the worlds biggest zoo”.
I don't have an exact list, and I'm not sure if species totals are publicly available anymore, but I'm fairly certain Houston is another zoo which is larger. Honestly any large zoo with an sort of an invert or fish collection has a good chance of having a larger collection than San Diego. That said, yes their collection is still tremendous. I've seen it referred to as the "world's best" but never biggest. Usually Bronx is described as the world's largest metropolitan zoo, though I'm not sure if that's entirely correct either. ~Thylo
I've seen it labelled as best but not biggest... Imho San Diego cannot possibly not be overrated really. It is a big attraction among both 'muggle' and nerd audiences, and it is often branded the best zoo in the world. I was once talking with a professor at my school, and when he found out I was interested in zoos, he asked me if I had been to SDZ. Not Prague, not Bronx, not Chester, not even Berlin. This has happened a few times before - even in Europe, SDZ has a considerable reputation to the extent that even 'muggles' will take a detour on their California trip to visit it. In a sense, this shows that San Diego's marketing has paid off. However, I tend to find think slightly saddening. It is as if, in the eyes of most visitors, San Diego is the Holy Grail of zoos and nothing can surpass it, when the reality is that matters are much more nuanced and beyond that considerably more subjective than are made out to be in the media. This results in an enhanced expectation when not just zoo nerds but also muggles enter the gates of SDZ, something that in my opinion no other zoo has achieved as of yet. Others may have good ratings on TripAdvisor or some nice comments on a travel website, but never on the scale of SDZ. Having entered with this preconception, helped on by the hefty entry fee and the million-dollar bronze lion statue out front, they proceed to experience the zoo. They may love it, but it will almost never live up to that expectation, because the latter exists so strongly. Yes, they will get increased visitor numbers - that is the job of the marketing team, not making the visitors think once they have entered that the zoo is perfect and unrivalled. In that sense, San Diego will, almost because of its frankly superb marketing always fall short of preconceived expectations and therefore can only really be overrated to most visitors. I would like to clarify, however, that I have not visited SDZ, although I intend to in the near future once rental cars become an option open to me. I hope I haven't been too vocal given how I'm not exactly in the best of positions to judge SDZ, but I tried to keep it focused on expectation and how it appears from the outside, even as far as Europe rather than the collection and the exhibits themselves, but imo this area is just as important as the actual zoo itself.
If Toronto zoo can be counted as a metropolitan zoo, it is almost three times the size of Bronx. Then again, it is further out from a smaller city, so it is not exactly a fair comparison...
Thiss has always been my main issue with them marketing themselves as the best. While they certainly belong in the discussion, some areas of the zoo are downright deplorable (as has been discussed at length on the forum before). If people look at that and think that this is as good as it gets, they might not have as good of an opinion of zoos as they otherwise could. This isn't helped by the fact that the zoo is so large and has such varied terrain that it's difficult to see the entire place in one day. This may result in visitors seeing all of the bad areas but not fully seeing the best areas, which can further impact opinions. Personally, I know a few people who have visited the zoo while in California and returned not thinking it at all lives up to the hype. I even have two friends who didn't think it was a very good zoo at all! ~Thylo
The current Int Zoo Yearbook lists SDZ as having 660 species(2017 figure), not counting either fish or invertebrates - by the same yardstick the Bronx has 680..these are the two largest in the U.S... although some aquariums,notably the Shedd, have more in total(they listed 1433 species in 2016) and some zoos if you include fish and inverts.
I have heard San Diego claimed to be the biggest several times. I believe they are getting the number through attendance, and excluding animal theme parks and free zoos.
Hmm, I haven't heard that much about Houston so it's interesting to see they have a huge collection. I'd say Toronto does count as a metropolitan zoo, as it's (just) in the boundaries for the City of Toronto. Eh, I disagree. I personally had very high expectations before visiting San Diego, but the zoo exceeded my expectations. If you go into the zoo thinking it's perfect and a lock for the best zoo in the world, you'll leave feeling it's overrated, but that applies to every zoo. Does San Diego have flaws? Absolutely. Did I leave feeling it was overrated? Not at all. I think you're over-exaggerating just how much non-zoo people really think about zoos. For most people, a trip to the San Diego Zoo is just another day in a Southern California vacation. People may really enjoy it and think it's the best zoo they've ever visited, but I doubt many consider it "the Holy Grail of zoos". I'd imagine San Diego lives up to most peoples expectations, which are to have a nice day out with their family and see some cool animals. Again I think you're over-thinking non-zoo peoples expectations of zoos. While I'm not at all downplaying the fact that the zoo has some bad exhibits, I'd hope most people at least see a chunk of the zoo, which will undoubtedly have some good exhibits. I don't imagine many people visit the zoo and only see Urban Jungle and the Bear Grottoes.
Yes, I asked my dad who lived in Toronto for 20 years and he said it was within the city, although it isn't really comparing like with like when putting alongside Bronx. Fair enough. Out of the 3 people who I have talked to who have visited it, none of them are zoo nerds and one left feeling it had more than fulfilled expectation, while the other two felt rather indifferent verging on disappointed by their visit due to the hype about it beforehand. Oh, I have heard it referenced as that many times over here, and not just by the people who visited. Of course most don't see it as a major highlight of their trip, but they will have included it in their trip despite it costing in the region of 300 dollars to stay that extra day. But even if only subconsciously they are thinking that this is the best zoo in the world, because they have been made to believe that by San Diego's trans-continent marketing. That's why they visit. Yes, they would be a shame, although it is possible? They would have seen the rhinos, the giraffes, the zebras and the bears, and who knows, on a very hot day, they might want to leave earlier than expected? Don't they have a massive herptile collection, or am I confusing them with San Antonio or Fort Worth?
Houston 490 without fish and inverts...849 with them included,as I said earlier,Bronx and SDZ are the largest,by species,for higher vertebrates. Herps at Houston exactly 200 taxa as of 2017,SDZ 187,Bronx 201,St Louis 203.
I'd doubt that many people would pay $50 per person just to visit the zoo for 45 minutes. Other "ABC" animals they'd miss out on would be: Elephants, Tigers, Lions, Penguins, both Hippos, Polar Bears, Gorillas and Orangutans. So I'd doubt anyone only visits Urban Jungle and the bear grottoes. Every zoo in Texas has a big herp collection! Hmmm, I've never seen it mentioned like that. And yeah, it's definitely a major tourist destination, but it doesn't have the elevated status zoo nerds give it.
I'd like a quick show of hands from people who have heard anyone say the phrase "Holy Grail of zoos", or even "Holy Grail of [anything]". I've literally never heard anyone use that phrase in spoken language (outside of documentaries and the like), and I can't believe it is that common in general usage in the UK that someone could hear it "many times" with regards to a single subject like a specific zoo.
Schools are strange places then, because 2 teachers have referenced it thus and others have used other names to the same effect
I have to agree on San Diego. Given the amount of money one spends and the caliber at which the zoo has visitors believe it stands it, it is disappointing. Largely this is on the exhibit front especially when it comes to mammals (except for primates). Despite an amazing collection many of the enclosures for mammals are mediocre for a zoo of its caliber. Giraffe, lion, tiger, bears, rhinos are especially notable enough on this front. Yet many other exhibits are average at best, cougar, most hoofstock exhibits (especially the takin exhibit), kangaroo, koala, camel/promghorn, and aye-aye (if still held in that metal cage). For birds and reptiles the story is much better, yet for average visitors mammals are generally far more important. This is not to say I did not enjoy myself at the San Diego Zoo. I did but it most definitely was not a top 3 zoo for me.
