« Homeland security | Main | Child Abuse Prevention Month »

March 31, 2008

KC Zoo too big

The zoo has the same problem as the city of Kansas City does: too few inhabitants per square mile. I frequently visit the zoo, but it seems it is more for the exercise than to see the animals.

The zoo is much too big for the number of creatures it has, just like Kansas City is too big for the number of people we support.

A great model for a zoo is the one in Wichita. It is smaller, but it seems like it has more animals, because you don’t have to walk as far.

My solution? Sell half of the land and use the money to create a smaller, denser zoo. I bet that would increase attendance and reduce the amount of financial support needed.

Allan Anderson
Kansas City, North

Comments

solomon

Chris40,

The things about the zoo being soo big is that you don't have to see it all in one day. No one goes to the art gallery intent on seeing and appreciating each peice of art. No one goes to Worlds of Fun with the expectation that they'll have time to take every ride.

The zoo, as you correctly stated, is for humans. The other side of that is that a larger area gives the captive animals room to move, which IMO, is a better captitvity.

I find zoo's depressing. I also find stories about poachers wiping out Gorillas and Rhino's, destruction of rain forests responsible for the demise of Orangutangs and Tigers and all the other things that are inevitable depressing.

You and I will see animals in our zoo now that 75 years from now will not exist in the wild at all.

Chris40

Solo, the zoo is for people, not for animals. If we had the animal's best interest at heart, there wouldn't be a zoo at all.

I'm just saying that the zoo is mostly for parents to bring their young children in the animals. It's just not that much fun for a 5 year old to walk for four straight hours in the summer heat.

solomon

Chris40,

If the zoo was only for you I'd think you have a point. If the zoo is for you AND the animals then I believe the expanse is warranted. Regardless of who has a better zoo, ours is nice and not cramped.

The comment about selling land in the park, Colonel Swope gave the land to the citizens of KC for a park. It does not belong to any current or future administration to sell.

Chris40

I agree with the letter about the zoo being too big and spread out. I can't think of any other place where you basically walk for 4 straight hours. I enjoy the zoo, but every time we decide to leave it's because we are tired of walking, not because we are tired of looking at the animals.

St. Louis zoo is 50 times better.

NoMoreMrNiceGuy

Allan what would end up happening is they would sell off the land and the money would end up going for the stadium or some other much more important project to benefit slef centered elitists.

Lost_In_Ambivalence

This coming from people who probably have twice as many rooms in their house as they need.

solomon

Start seling off Swope Park?

PrairieVoice

I think anyone who visits the zoo will agree. Another good example is the zoo in Sioux Falls South Dakota. Not many exotic animals (no elephants or hippos) but what they do have are up close and the place is clean as a whistle. The problem for zoo officials is to balance out the desire to create natural habitats with the need to make the animals visible to guests and create an entertaining environment. That is why the seal "show" isnt any kid of real show like you see at say Sea World. Also no performing monkees, lions, or elephants. The old zoo used to do this. What good is it to take your kids to the zoo and the animals are only some little brown dot far away?

 
About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About Knight Ridder | Copyright