ZooChat Cup Match #18: Cabarceno vs Edinburgh

[CGSwans]

Cabarceno's a dangerous floater in this competition - I suspect it's capable of taking on just about anybody in large carnivore or ungulate categories. It's going to have to do it with something a bit smaller, though: we have our second consecutive fight over reptiles, amphibians, fish and invertebrates.

The concept behind this poll is explained here:
ZooChat Cup

In summary, the rules of the game are as follows:
- You may choose whatever criteria you like to decide how to vote, as long as it only relates to the category above.
- You can use whatever resources you like to inform your vote, including Zoolex, Zootierliste, the ZooChat gallery, trip reviews, zoo maps, books and wherever else. You don't have to have visited both zoos to vote.
- Votes are public and can be changed at any time before the poll closes.
- The aim of the game is to provoke debate. Post explaining why you voted the way you did, and why others should join you.
- Voting closes in four days
- The one thing you can't do is vote based on anything other than the relevant category

 

[SabineB]

this is one strange topic to compare Cabárceno to any other zoo in Europe...

 

[Shorts]

It's hardly Edinburgh's strong suit either.

Without wishing to be too scornful, I wonder what their strongest suit is (primates)?

 

[CGSwans]

this is one strange topic to compare Cabárceno to any other zoo in Europe...

That's why I chose to include it, really, because the impact of the category is so profound. It's very much a joker in the pack.

 

[Brum]

Cabareceno wins this one, spectacular collection of snakes (including hot species) compared to Edinburgh's paltry collection. Easy!

 

[Mehdi]

This is a hard one.

Cabarceno certainly has a very good reptile collection (mostly snakes) but it doesn't have any fish or amphibian according to Zootierliste while Edinburgh has a few species from every category cited so when it comes to diversity, Edinburgh wins.

On the other hand, Cabarceno is not meant to be a stronghold (as far as I know) for ectotherms, while Edinburgh; being a "generalist" zoo should very much be; and yet Cabarceno definitely has the most interesting collection between those 2 in my opinion.

I'm unfortunately discounting invertebrates because I don't know the collection of either zoo, I doubt Cabarceno has a strong collection of those (but please do correct me if I'm wrong) and Edinburgh should have invertebrates in "Wee Beesties" as far as I'm aware.

Exhibit-wise, I know the snakes at Cabarceno are mostly cramped in a single house, definitely sub-par to the other exhibits there. Took a quick look at the gallery, and Edinburgh's exhibits seem to be correct but nothing special but as exhibit pictures are becoming rarer and rarer that is only an assumption and I would love to be corrected.

So until I know what's the collection of invertebrates at both zoos and whether the exhibit at Edinburgh are worth a mention or not, I'm not voting.

 

[CGSwans]

The only member who I know for sure has been to Cabarceno is @Maguari. Any insights?

 

[Maguari]

I've voted Cabarceno. Their reptile enclosures are small, but at least they seem to take an interest in them! Frustratingly, the enclosures are actually really nicely designed for the most part (ironically the worst ones are the larger ones), and the species are interesting. If every enclosure was even 50% larger there'd be no debate to have here at all.

Nothing at Edinburgh at my last visit gave any indication of serious interest in anything other than the mammals. I hope that's not truly the case, but it's certainly the impression a visit gives. Even the birds were reduced on previous visits.

 

[CGSwans]

I've voted Cabarceno. Their reptile enclosures are small, but at least they seem to take an interest in them! Frustratingly, the enclosures are actually really nicely designed for the most part (ironically the worst ones are the larger ones), and the species are interesting. If every enclosure was even 50% larger there'd be no debate to have here at all.

Nothing at Edinburgh at my last visit gave any indication of serious interest in anything other than the mammals. I hope that's not truly the case, but it's certainly the impression a visit gives. Even the birds were reduced on previous visits.

No inverts for @Zoo Tycooner FR to vote on?

 

[Maguari]

No inverts for @Zoo Tycooner FR to vote on?

None at either at my last visit, I don't think - though I seem to recall a few 'discovery centre'-type bits have gone on show at Edinburgh since I was there.

 

[SabineB]

That's why I chose to include it, really, because the impact of the category is so profound. It's very much a joker in the pack.

for sure has been to Cabarceno

Oh i have been to Carbaceno and I have been to Edinburgh too. As was stated before, Carbaceno has a of mostly snakes. And I guess it would be reasonable to favor Carbaceno over Edinburgh for that alone. But Carbaceno is anything but a zoo that should be judged by their cold blooded animals, given what they are as in in natural reserve inbuilt giant safari-type-like zoo. If the snakes will not do it for Carbaceno (and they won't for me) the zoo cup looses an extraordinary institution which has no match in Europe. There is just no zoo that has enclosures like it.

I will vote for Edinburgh nonetheless, the wee beasties area does it for me

 

[sooty mangabey]

Edinburgh did have quite a nice, small reptile house, with some well thought-out displays within it; while at university, many years ago, I spent a number of very happy hours, keeping warm in there and appreciating the exhibits. Now, sadly, like so much that was good at Edinburgh - gone. Not been to Carbaceno, yet, but it has to be better than Edinburgh. Sadly.

 

[Dassie rat]

I wonder if there is competition with Edinburgh's 'Butterfly and Insect World'. N.B. Butterflies are insects. There is a video at

, but I hope the owners don't encourage visitors to touch the butterflies.

 

[Vision]

I've not visited either of these zoos, but of the two I'd much rather visit Cabarceno.

However, I feel like I have to vote Edinburgh for this match-up. The category is "reptiles, amphibians, fish and inverts", not "reptiles", so I don't really think it really reasonable to vote for a zoo that only has reptiles, compared to a zoo that has species in at least 3 of those categories. I doubt it'll matter, but for me Edinburgh wins this.

 

[Dassie rat]

Both: Royal python
Cabarceno: Snakes: Egyptian, snouted, Cape, Moroccan, monocled, Nubian, Indochinese, black-necked and red-necked spitting and Indian cobras; basilisk, eastern and western diamondback, timber, sidewinder, cane brake and Cascabel rattlesnakes; eastern green and black mambas; Timor*, Burmese, Children’s, rock and carpet pythons; Gaboon and eyelash vipers; anaconda; horseshoe whip snake; tiger rat snake; dog-toothed cat snake*; African coral snake; Cuban tree boa;
Lizards: Green iguana; crocodile monitor; Mexican beaded lizard;
Chelonians: Red-eared slider; African spurred tortoise

Edinburgh: Snakes: California, scarlet and Nelson’s king snakes; royal python; montane egg-eating snake*; corn snake; Taiwan beauty snake
Lizards: Central bearded dragon; common blue-tongued skink; common leopard gecko; Natl Midlands dwarf chameleon*
Chelonians: Egyptian and pancake tortoises
Amphibians: Axolotl; blue poison dart frog; Anthony’s poison-arrow frog; Australian green tree frog
Fish: Eyespot and spotted green pufferfish; banded archerfish; Japanese koi carp; cardinal tetra

If this Cup Match were based purely on snakes, Cabarceno would win easily. As it is based on all ectotherms, Edinburgh wins because it has a wider range.

 

[FunkyGibbon]

I've not visited either of these zoos, but of the two I'd much rather visit Cabarceno.

However, I feel like I have to vote Edinburgh for this match-up. The category is "reptiles, amphibians, fish and inverts", not "reptiles", so I don't really think it really reasonable to vote for a zoo that only has reptiles, compared to a zoo that has species in at least 3 of those categories. I doubt it'll matter, but for me Edinburgh wins this.

But by this logic a zoo with a corn snake, a common frog, a gold fish and a stick insect would beat Cabarceno. You've made me think but you've not convinced me!

 

[Vision]

But by this logic a zoo with a corn snake, a common frog, a gold fish and a stick insect would beat Cabarceno. You've made me think but you've not convinced me!

Good point! It is worth noting that that fictional zoo would only have 4 species, though, whereas Cabarceno has a lot more. My reasoning was that with a very similar amount of species, Edinburgh manages to show a much greater variety of cold-blooded animals than Cabarceno does.

For the regular visitor (and, I reckon, a lot of zoochatters as well) that doesn't care too much about snakes, seeing a handful of snake species is enough; at some point people start losing interest. If you can keep people's interest by showing them a very diverse range of cold-blooded animals, in my opinion that defines a better collection.

 

[pipaluk]

Good point! It is worth noting that that fictional zoo would only have 4 species, though, whereas Cabarceno has a lot more. My reasoning was that with a very similar amount of species, Edinburgh manages to show a much greater variety of cold-blooded animals than Cabarceno does.

For the regular visitor (and, I reckon, a lot of zoochatters as well) that doesn't care too much about snakes, seeing a handful of snake species is enough; at some point people start losing interest. If you can keep people's interest by showing them a very diverse range of cold-blooded animals, in my opinion that defines a better collection.

If Edinburgh had a very diverse range, I could understand this argument, but their list isnt impressive at all for amphibians and fish , several pet shop species amongst them, whilst beaten comfortably on reptiles.

 

[Batto]

But by this logic a zoo with a corn snake, a common frog, a gold fish and a stick insect would beat Cabarceno. You've made me think but you've not convinced me!

Just ask yourself: what is more important to you and the role & self-concept of a modern zoo - the sheer number and diversity of species (you are interested in) or the husbandry quality of the kept species? If a zoo kept said common spet store pecies, but at excellent conditions, I'd appreciate this more from an ethic and educational pov than a zoo that keeps a great diversity of species but all (or most of them) at inadequate conditions.
In this case, the ectotherm husbandry in both zoos appears to be upgradeable. And while I usually support zoos with a nice collection of venomous snakes, their husbandry at Cabarceno isn't up to date.

 

[pipaluk]

Can I ask where the amphibians and fish actually are to be seen at Edinburgh please? Or most of the reptiles? I can't recall seeing any of them on my last visit to Edinburgh just over 2 years ago!