I’m in the tentative stage of planning a US trip for the coming summer: a week or so, flying in, then driving around, visiting as many good zoos as possible. My original plan was to fly to Chicago, ‘do’ the three places there, and loop through the big four in Ohio, possibly taking in Detroit, or Pittsburgh, or Indianapolis, as well. However, just as I was about to buy my air ticket I had second thoughts, and started wondering whether a trip to Texas might be better - flying to Dallas, seeing its various collection, and those of Fort Worth, Houston and San Antonio, maybe heading north to Oklahoma City too. Additional information: this may be the last opportunity to visit the USA for a few years. And, while visiting zoos is absolutely the purpose of the visit, and I have no real interest in doing other stuff if it interferes with zoo visits, I do have an interest in dodgy country music, and visiting the home state of Waylon Jennings, Steve Earle and Nanci Griffith is quite appealing, as is the prospect of spending an evening in the Broken Spoke or the Mucky Duck... So - a question to those who know the zoos of the USA: which would you recommend - Ohio and Illinois, or Texas?
Do you have to fly in and out of the same airport? How about Dallas -> Memphis -> Nashville -> Saint Louis -> Chicago? You'd probably want more like 10-12 days to make that work.
Personally I’d advise you to go north. Now I’ve never been to Texas but I have been to almost all the zoos in the north. Detroit is amazing and a must-see. I’d rank it up there with zoos like St Louis and Omaha. Pittsburgh isn’t worth going to but they do have a nice Aviry seperate from the zoo. Honestly, it all depends on what animals you want to see and how easy it is to get to your locations
Could certainly fly in and out of different places - but I’d rather do one relatively “tight” area than spread too thinly. And a week is alll I have - unlike certain Australians I cannot give up months and months to touring overseas zoos (sadly). I’m not so bothered by particular animals - a yapok or two aside, I’m probably not going to see much “new” wherever I end up going. It’s more the zoos themselves. That said, is there still a topi somewhere in Texas? San Antonio?
I have a bias being a Chicago native, but I would recommend heading up my way in favor of Texas. Ironically, I will be taking a trip out to Texas later this year as well. Because of my lack of knowledge on the layout of their zoos, I can't comment on what I think. However, I would happily give my thoughts on my local trio of establishments in the most unbiased way possible. Brookfield Zoo: The Best - Brookfield does not have a single "bad" area. There's definitely some weak points which I will address in a moment, but nothing that's awful or in immediate need of attention. There's only a few areas that are fantastic, but those areas that are, are great. Wolves, giraffes, bison, okapi, kangaroos and a few others all have fantastic enclosures. Other areas that are above average, the polar and grizzly bear yards, the tropical South American bird aviary, and the dolphin building. There is also plenty of historic elements and buildings that are preserved with modern interior. Its a large zoo with a great collection of rarities. The Worst - While the zoo may not have any terrible areas, their are some areas that need some work. The cat grottos, hoofstock pens and parts of Tropic World all need a facelift. There is also a string of empty enclosures that plague the zoo grounds. The abandon bear grottos, baboon island, the aardvark building and the old reptile house all sit empty are all major eyesores. The food is also mediocre in about every part of the zoo, except for maybe the Bison Prairie grill with its half decent bison burgers. Still the good out ways the bad. Lincoln Park Zoo: The Best - Before the zoos "Pride of Chicago" campaign, the place was in pretty bad shape. Luckily almost every awful area in the zoo has been repealed and replaced (Bear Grottos, Penguin house) with new state of the art areas. Just in the past three years the zoo has opened a brilliant Japanese macaque exhibit, a solid if unspectacular African penguin exhibit, and two above average polar bear yards. Besides that, the zoo also offers a spectacular ape building, a nice collection of hoofstock, a hidden gem of a North American themed Children's zoo and the reptile/small mammal building. The Worst - The lion building is in pretty bad state of repair. Luckily the worst enclosures have been cleared out and only a trio of lions, re pandas and some smaller cats remain. Its still a pretty tragic building that's seen better days. Other than that, nothing else is bad similar to Brookfield. The primate house enclosures at a little on the small side but their adequate. Though similar to Brookfield, the food is pretty poor. Shedd Aquarium: The Best - Just about everything is of high quality. Amazon Rising is my favorite and includes dozens of freshwater fish, reptiles, amphibians and even some primates. Wild Reef is also quite a sight to see. The oceanarium has a fantastic panoramic view with lake Michigan, and the stock list of the place is superb. I really don't make it down as much as I would like, but when I do I always enjoy myself. The Worst - Animal wise, nothing. But the prices are outrageous and the line for entry gets irritatingly long. You must get their early. Also out of curiosity, will you be writing your thoughts, feelings and experiences on zoochat similar to your California trip last year? I would love to see what you think.
Then I'm tempted to suggest Texas. You could base in Dallas for four days - Zoo, DWA, Forth Worth and Fossil Rim - then drive to Houston via Cardwell Zoo. Of course I'm only going by maps and reputation.
It also occurs to me that the cost of a flight between Dallas and Chicago might even out to that of a car hire. Have you thought about doing both, and ditching the car?
Another zoo you could possibly do is the Louisville zoo. It’s quite close to Indianapolis and has some interesting exhibits( Islands rotation and Gorill exhibit come to mind).
I have been to Columbus Zoo (long ago) and Cincinnati Zoo (long ago, three times total I think). I have been to the zoos of Texas more recently, most at least two or three times while preparing my 2014 book Zoos of the Southwest. I have never been to Chicago in my life so I cannot comment. Honestly you cannot go wrong either way. If you want to add a nice aquarium then the northern route with Shed is a good choice. In the southern route there is Texas Aquarium in Corpus Christi, but it is nothing special. Dallas Zoo is fantastic - Giants Of The Savanna on its own is worth the trip. Fort Worth Zoo is good and the world class reptile complex MOLA is worth the visit on its own. Fossil Rim Wildlife Ranch is a fun drive-through and their overnight tent camp is a unique experience. You can combine it with a private tour of the off exhibit breeding area for carnivores (cheetah, maned wolf, mexican wolf, etc). Houston Zoo is very nice and their new gorilla exhibit (which I have not seen) is reportedly outstanding. Caldwell Zoo (in Tyler) and Cameron Park Zoo (in Waco) are also excellent and well above the standards you would expect from small town zoos. I also like San Antonio Zoo, much more than most forum members. The daily hippo demo is tons of fun and the small cat grottoes are a personal favorite. The bird collection at both San Antonio and Houston are among the most complete in the country. There is also a small aquarium inside both San Antonio and Houston, a rare feature at traditional zoos. Oklahoma City Zoo I have not been to but it would probably be my personal top choice for zoos that I have not seen but want to. As I said, you cannot go wrong no matter which you decide. Those who are familiar with the north are telling you to go there and those (like me) who are familiar with the south will tell you to go there. It's a tough call. The good thing is there is no bad choice and whatever you decide you will not regret.
I am going to ping @snowleopard for a response, as he is almost certainly the most qualified member on the forum to give a comparison based on personal experience.
I agree with @Arizona Docent that there really no wrong decision! Of course people will tell you to go to the zoos that they are familiar with( I’m guilty of this) but it’s your vacation so choose whatever’s right for you( and take some pictures).
I've visited Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston and OKC twice along with a single visit to San Antonio compared to three visits for Brookfield, one for Lincoln Park, Shedd and Indianapolis, two for Pittsburgh and four for Cincinnati/Columbus. As most others have said, you really can't go wrong either way (which probably isn't much help). I'd lean towards the north largely based on the season you are visiting in. The summer heat in Texas would be more likely to hinder the visitor experience/animal activity than the northern weather. I also think that Columbus is the most complete zoo of the ones listed. I don't mean that as a knock against any of the southern zoos which I all thoroughly enjoyed but I find Columbus is easiest for me to spend an entire day in without realizing it. To further complicate things, being in Chicago you'd be a slight drive away from Omaha. While it's in the opposite direction of everything else, if you could integrate it (even do Chicago to Ohio cities to St. Louis to Omaha), that would make for an epic trip.
Thank you so much for all the excellent comments here. Omaha isn't on the agenda, in part because I've been before (albeit a long time ago - the week the Lied Jungle first opened), and in part because I want to "do" one area thoroughly rather than spread out - if it's to be Ohio, I'd rather get Akron seen, and get the full house for one state... Sitting in cold, grey, February England, the idea of a place being *too* hot is rather alluring, to be honest! Although not a deal breaker (or maker) one big Texan advantage is the more sensible opening times of the zoos there - in the north, it looks as if later opening is only a very occasional treat. Of the Ohio / Illinois zoos, are there any which need more than a day? Columbus? Brookfield? Thank you so much for any answers or further thoughts!
I have never been to Columbus, so I don't know how long it takes. Brookfield takes only slightly longer that a day, but here is a tip. In the summer, on weekends and Fridays, parts of the Brookfield Zoo are open later that usual, because of concerts that the zoo hosts. If you go on a concert day, and save that stuff that is open late for later in the day, you can see the entire zoo in one day. (NOTE: This is just my experience. The experience of others may differ.)
Brookfield needs a full day but not two. Shedd and Lincoln Park could possibly be seen in one day, but I would not recommend it. They both take about 3-4 hours each to tour. EDIT: Cross posted with birdsandbats. Some indoor exhibits like Clouded Leopard Rainforest and Fragile Desert are open until 8 on some nights, but it really shouldn't take that long from my experience. 9 hours should be just enough.
To be fair, that does not include the dolphin show (Not really into those type of things). You really don't need to backtrack much if at all. Most of the attractions are all adjacent to one another (With Wild Reef and the Oceanarium being an exception) and its pretty easy to get around. I suppose it comes down to how interested you are in aquatic animals.
I usually see the dolphin show, but probably the main reason I spend so much time when I go is I spend a good amount of time at every tank, looking for all the different kinds of fish in it, and trying to ID what I do see.
On my quest to tour as many of America's zoos and aquariums as possible I've found myself having visited all of the facilities that you are considering for your USA trip. In fact, if you go back and browse through the thread 'Snowleopard's 2015 Road Trip' you can read about me having visited just about every zoological facility in Texas. I'd vote for the 'North' option because you'll be able to tour 7-8 very high quality establishments and that is something that you and I have discussed in private emails over the past few months. Why change it now? A Texas trip would allow you to tour Dallas and Houston, two of the very best zoos in the nation, as well as several other excellent institutions, but pasty-skinned Englishmen have been known to melt in the volcanic heat of Texas. If you want to do the North Itinerary then you'll have fully packed days at major zoos, with the exception of possibly squeezing Lincoln Park and Shedd Aquarium into the same day. North Itinerary: Lincoln Park Zoo, Shedd Aquarium, Brookfield Zoo, Columbus Zoo, Cleveland Zoo, Cincinnati Zoo, Toledo Zoo and possibly Detroit Zoo. If you want to go with the South Itinerary then you'll have full days at major zoos on 5 occasions (including DWA as you'll spend hours there) and that leaves both Cameron Park and Caldwell as possible half-day zoos...allowing you to maybe add on a second facility for each of those days. South Itinerary: Dallas Zoo, Dallas World Aquarium, Fort Worth Zoo, Cameron Park Zoo, Caldwell Zoo, Houston Zoo and San Antonio Zoo. I've visited 45 out of the 53 zoos in the state of Texas and besides the 7 listed above there are facilities like Downtown Aquarium Houston (just a so-so aquarium but possible to tour on the same day as Houston Zoo because of the facility's late hours); Fossil Rim Wildlife Center (if you like drive-through zoos, which I doubt you do); and Moody Gardens is well worth touring and only an hour from Houston. Judging from your California trip last summer, zoos like Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston and San Antonio are ones that you'll be at from open to close. Other options: Oklahoma City Zoo is just over 3 hours from Dallas Zoo and so that might be appealing and worth a full day of your trip. Houston is 5 hours from New Orleans if you want to make your trip really exciting. That city has Audubon Zoo, Audubon Aquarium of the Americas and the Audubon Butterfly Garden & Insectarium as a triple option in the same general area.
