It's worth noting that a LOT (probably more than half) of the Wroclaw reptile/amphibian collection is held offshow!
ZooChat Cup Group B: Berlin Zoo vs Wroclaw
- Thread starter CGSwans
- Start date
It's worth noting that a LOT (probably more than half) of the Wroclaw reptile/amphibian collection is held offshow!
Thanks Dave, that is probably the decisive factor for me then.
According to the latest annual report Zoo Berlin holds 66 species of reptile, 41 species of amphibian, 410 fish species and 293 invertebrate species, of which 2/3 are aquatic.
This still means that Wroclaw has probably over twice as many herp species on show and the numbers from amur leopard are an overestimate.
It's at times like this that I wish I'd given into temptation and written up a full onshow herp list for Wroclaw a few weeks ago whilst visiting 
On a side note, given they have visited both of the collections in question (and across a similar timespan to myself) I would be interested to hear the opinion of @ShonenJake13 and @ThylacineAlive !
On a side note, given they have visited both of the collections in question (and across a similar timespan to myself) I would be interested to hear the opinion of @ShonenJake13 and @ThylacineAlive !
This means that Berlin has 517 vertebrate ectotherms to Wroclaw's 666. However, as TLD pointed out, half of Wroclaw's reptiles and amphibians are off-show, which means the final on-show tally of vertebrate ectotherms is:
Berlin: 517
Wroclaw: 520
(Extremely close...)
However, it must also be noted that off-show species have a purpose and they are still worth something in this tie....
Meanwhile I have a few photos from Wroclaw:
This pufferfish exhibit has a fantastic back wall and then kind of spirals off to the sides. There is a rogue pipe, in clear sight, and the walls are plain. In contrast, the back wall is lushly planted and allows the pufferfish to camouflage itself. This has been perfectly demonstrated in the photo; first person to spot the pufferfish wins!
A very nicely planted exhibit, with lots of seaweed. Not sure what fish is housed, but I'm sure it suits it well. Perhaps it is a leafy sea dragon
However, not a fan of the rockwork. Either you do rockwork well or - you don't do rockwork...
Two extremely good vivaria for trunk snakes and caecilians. Well planted, nice landscaping. Good size. The rockwork on the other hand....
These exhibits are...so-so. I couldn't really find many examples of reptile exhibits...
The radiated tortoise one has good landscaping, perhaps the substrate could be slightly softer and not hay. The pool is all right, size could be bigger, but is fine...
The one just above is for smallish frogs... The rocks and vegetation is good... but then the back significantly lets it down, especially the bare metal sheet...
Would be nice to have a pool as well.
The terrarium building as a whole is very nice EXCEPT FOR THE ROCKWORK. I'm sorry I keep going on about it but it is simply terrible. Look at the first of the two photos above. It is very nice and quite similar to Berlin zoo's in style, slightly less boxy though, except for the rockwork. It looks like plasticine, (probably because it is
) or landscaping from this fantastic television series: land of the lost 1974 - Bing videoOn a serious note, the building is fantastic. The enclosure in the middle seems to have lots of different species so I would guess it is a mixed exhibit for turtles, which it seems suited to.
The building looks quite old, and there are quite a few terrariums in there.
And lastly, this is the Komodo dragon exhibit and it looks quite nice. This is only a section of it, but there is much more to it, looking similar to this actually. Again, rockwork...
I couldn't find any photos of the Afrykarium, but there are some very nice and developed exhibits in there, including a nile croc pool (2.5 metres deep, or around that) and lots of nice fish tanks near the hippopotami.
And there you have it!
I will still hold back my vote, although I'm leaning towards Berlin (mainly because of the awful rockwork and sometimes ill-disguised pipework and metalwork in Wroclaw)
Next, I will try and find some info on conservation work, although there might not be anything...
Of course, both the zoos are partaking in conservation efforts by breeding these animals at the zoo, but in-situ conservation efforts might be an interesting game-changer, who knows?
Attachments
You can't just round down like that and still try to give a precise figure
Well what else am I meant to do??
The point is, it is close between the two in terms of species exhibited.
Insert the word "approximately" before the numbers
or write them as c.520 and c.517.On a side note, there is a remarkable absence in the gallery of the main aquarium-related highlight at Wroclaw, an exhibit complex based around the local Oder river basin - when I get home from work I will have to look to see if I have any decent shots to remedy this.
Here are some pictures from the Afrykarium by @LaughingDove :
And a picture of the Odrarium by @Arek:
It is obvious that in terms of size Berlin has nothing to compare this with and though Berlin has a lot to offer, in terms of collection it is not ahead of Wroclaw, whereas in exhibitry Wroclaw seems ahead. Though I must say that the quality of theming in the Afrykarium is a bit bland.
And a picture of the Odrarium by @Arek:
It is obvious that in terms of size Berlin has nothing to compare this with and though Berlin has a lot to offer, in terms of collection it is not ahead of Wroclaw, whereas in exhibitry Wroclaw seems ahead. Though I must say that the quality of theming in the Afrykarium is a bit bland.
You've convinced me to vote for Wroclaw.Here are some pictures from the Afrykarium by @LaughingDove :
And a picture of the Odrarium by @Arek:
It is obvious that in terms of size Berlin has nothing to compare this with and though Berlin has a lot to offer, in terms of collection it is not ahead of Wroclaw, whereas in exhibitry Wroclaw seems ahead. Though I must say that the quality of theming in the Afrykarium is a bit bland.
Yikes this is tough!
Ok......so Berlin Zoo has one building for all of their ectotherms. It's a nice building for sure, and the way they have connected each level with the crocodilian pools in the middle of the house being visible from the ground (fish) floor, the first (reptiles) floor and the second (amphibians and inverts) floor is really great. There's some cracking species onshow at each level, and some really nice exhibitry.
However, Wroclaw is a really strong contender. Their Terrarium may not be the prettiest in terms of layout/interior design, but they keep (and breed!) hundreds of reptiles. Granted their amphib and invert game could be a bit stronger, but let's touch back on that in a minute.
Now, as far as fish are concerned, the Odrarium and Afrykarium simply blow Berlin's collection out of the water. Many may argue that this is because they have tons more space to do stuff compared to Berlin's house but guys, let's be honest, a massive shark tank with a walkthrough tunnel would win in most people's books compared to a small (nicely done admittedly) tank in a small house. The other fish tanks in the Afrykarium are nicely designed, although admittedly not quite Burgers' Zoo standard.
The Odrarium is singlehandedly the most underrated exhibit in the whole of Wroclaw Zoo in my humble opinion. So many people overlook it because, well, it's "just an area for freshwater fish". But the tanks replicate the conditions of the Oder river basin perfectly, with realistic mixes of fish that would regularly come into contact with one another, and specifically mixed in tanks to replicate what part of the basin they would find each other in. The salmon are found at the 'mouth' of the Odrarium, whereas the huge Wels catfish are in the very middle, and the smaller perch species are in a quiet 'tributary' mixed with garganey. So that's one of the four groups of ectotherms done and dusted; point to Wroclaw.
Now, amphibians and inverts. There are quite a few invert enclosures across Wroclaw's terrarium; mainly arachnids and stick insects but also plenty of cockroaches and beetles. There's also a few exhibits dotted about in the zoo's desert and Madagascar houses and, whilst they're nice and all, they are essentially the inverts version of a lot of Plzen's enclosures; they're average and work for the species but there's nothing 'mind blowing'. Berlin's invert enclosures aren't mind blowing either mind you, but at least they do a fair bit with not much, whereas Wroclaw's inverts are more of a stampbook style of exhibitry (all the stick insects next to each other, all the cockroaches next to each other, all the tarantulas next to each other etc.). Wroclaw do have a small butterfly walkthrough in the Terrarium but again, it's not much to write home about. Inverts wise, point to Berlin Zoo.
Amphibians. This in my opinion is a bit of a tie. Neither collection has a ton of amphibians on exhibit, but both zoos have their own plus points. Berlin has those lovely aquatic setups and some memorable mixes like bumblebee toad and Ranitomeya vanzolinii, and Wroclaw has a lot of great species (mountain chicken, various whipping frog species, both species of green toad) but not great exhibitry. So, point to both.
T-t-t-tiebreaker time! Now we get to the main course for both....reptiles. People would do well to not necessarily adopt a mindset like they do with Plzen ("I know the species are kept in an enclosure the size of a locker....but that species list though!") and look at each collection critically, as both have killer species lists but the exhibitry, husbandry and conservation for sure matter a lot here. Wroclaw have H U N D R E D S of reptiles, and a lot are pretty rare in zoos sure, but are they all kept in decent exhibits? They have a lot of pretty massive turtles (snappers, matamata, softshells) which don't get a whole lot of room in their respective exhibits, and their crocodilians in the Terrarium don't get much room at all (the same cannot be said for the Nile crocs in the Afrykarium who have a lovely enclosure but you get the point). There's a lot of mixes for space's sake, not all of which I can see being massively productive/helpful for the species in said enclosure. Why not have the chameleon in its own exhibit instead of mixing with uromastyx, green lizards etc? Why do you need so many freshwater turtles in that one little moat area? Do those Galapagos tortoises really need so little room? Etc. It feels like a lot of shoehorning goes on in the Terrarium but people are willing to overlook it because the species list makes them salivate.
Berlin's collection isn't much better, but hear me out. Anyone who is voting on the basis of their having sea snakes can take that back, as despite what ZTL says they do not have any sea snakes anymore. Their crocodilians get more room than the ones in Wroclaw's Terrarium sure, but what about those Nile crocs in the Afrykarium? It's nice seeing gharial and all, but I'd like to see them kept in an exhibit that really allows them to grow a decent size and still get to live their mainly aquatic lifestyle. Now, I do like the aspect of the crocodilian pools at Berlin having underwater viewing in the ceiling of the ground floor, but that doesn't really defeat Wroclaw's Nile croc exhibit. Nevertheless, keeping crocodilians in wall enclosures I'd expect for some iguanas or a smaller monitor species is still pretty unforgiveable, so Berlin just edges it on crocs for me.
On the subject of monitors, both zoos have great enclosures for theirs. The Komodo dragon area at Wroclaw is superb, but I also really like the Mertens water monitor enclosure at Berlin.....
Snakes wise, Wroclaw has to win on species and, actually, exhibitry. Lizards wise it's pretty close but again, Wroclaw edges it based on their lovely gecko and wall lizard enclosures. Chelonia wise I'm going to give it to Berlin just because those turtle setups on the upper floor for Wroclaw's Terrarium do kinda depress me.
Well well.......we have a tie on reptiles. Lizards and snakes go to Wroclaw. Crocs and chelonia go to Berlin.........
....you didn't really think I'd forget Berlin's tuataras did you? Berlin gets a bonus point for that.
People really like Berlin Zoo for this. Of course, why wouldn't you? The Aquarium has it all, and in one building with a lot of amazing exhibitry.
But Wroclaw, despite the flaws and stampbook style of the Terrarium, has a superb Afrykarium, an amazing and massively underrated Odrarium, and some nice ectotherm exhibits tucked away in other areas of the zoo.
I may prefer Berlin overall, but Wroclaw edges it for me for now.
Ok......so Berlin Zoo has one building for all of their ectotherms. It's a nice building for sure, and the way they have connected each level with the crocodilian pools in the middle of the house being visible from the ground (fish) floor, the first (reptiles) floor and the second (amphibians and inverts) floor is really great. There's some cracking species onshow at each level, and some really nice exhibitry.
However, Wroclaw is a really strong contender. Their Terrarium may not be the prettiest in terms of layout/interior design, but they keep (and breed!) hundreds of reptiles. Granted their amphib and invert game could be a bit stronger, but let's touch back on that in a minute.
Now, as far as fish are concerned, the Odrarium and Afrykarium simply blow Berlin's collection out of the water. Many may argue that this is because they have tons more space to do stuff compared to Berlin's house but guys, let's be honest, a massive shark tank with a walkthrough tunnel would win in most people's books compared to a small (nicely done admittedly) tank in a small house. The other fish tanks in the Afrykarium are nicely designed, although admittedly not quite Burgers' Zoo standard.
The Odrarium is singlehandedly the most underrated exhibit in the whole of Wroclaw Zoo in my humble opinion. So many people overlook it because, well, it's "just an area for freshwater fish". But the tanks replicate the conditions of the Oder river basin perfectly, with realistic mixes of fish that would regularly come into contact with one another, and specifically mixed in tanks to replicate what part of the basin they would find each other in. The salmon are found at the 'mouth' of the Odrarium, whereas the huge Wels catfish are in the very middle, and the smaller perch species are in a quiet 'tributary' mixed with garganey. So that's one of the four groups of ectotherms done and dusted; point to Wroclaw.
Now, amphibians and inverts. There are quite a few invert enclosures across Wroclaw's terrarium; mainly arachnids and stick insects but also plenty of cockroaches and beetles. There's also a few exhibits dotted about in the zoo's desert and Madagascar houses and, whilst they're nice and all, they are essentially the inverts version of a lot of Plzen's enclosures; they're average and work for the species but there's nothing 'mind blowing'. Berlin's invert enclosures aren't mind blowing either mind you, but at least they do a fair bit with not much, whereas Wroclaw's inverts are more of a stampbook style of exhibitry (all the stick insects next to each other, all the cockroaches next to each other, all the tarantulas next to each other etc.). Wroclaw do have a small butterfly walkthrough in the Terrarium but again, it's not much to write home about. Inverts wise, point to Berlin Zoo.
Amphibians. This in my opinion is a bit of a tie. Neither collection has a ton of amphibians on exhibit, but both zoos have their own plus points. Berlin has those lovely aquatic setups and some memorable mixes like bumblebee toad and Ranitomeya vanzolinii, and Wroclaw has a lot of great species (mountain chicken, various whipping frog species, both species of green toad) but not great exhibitry. So, point to both.
T-t-t-tiebreaker time! Now we get to the main course for both....reptiles. People would do well to not necessarily adopt a mindset like they do with Plzen ("I know the species are kept in an enclosure the size of a locker....but that species list though!") and look at each collection critically, as both have killer species lists but the exhibitry, husbandry and conservation for sure matter a lot here. Wroclaw have H U N D R E D S of reptiles, and a lot are pretty rare in zoos sure, but are they all kept in decent exhibits? They have a lot of pretty massive turtles (snappers, matamata, softshells) which don't get a whole lot of room in their respective exhibits, and their crocodilians in the Terrarium don't get much room at all (the same cannot be said for the Nile crocs in the Afrykarium who have a lovely enclosure but you get the point). There's a lot of mixes for space's sake, not all of which I can see being massively productive/helpful for the species in said enclosure. Why not have the chameleon in its own exhibit instead of mixing with uromastyx, green lizards etc? Why do you need so many freshwater turtles in that one little moat area? Do those Galapagos tortoises really need so little room? Etc. It feels like a lot of shoehorning goes on in the Terrarium but people are willing to overlook it because the species list makes them salivate.
Berlin's collection isn't much better, but hear me out. Anyone who is voting on the basis of their having sea snakes can take that back, as despite what ZTL says they do not have any sea snakes anymore. Their crocodilians get more room than the ones in Wroclaw's Terrarium sure, but what about those Nile crocs in the Afrykarium? It's nice seeing gharial and all, but I'd like to see them kept in an exhibit that really allows them to grow a decent size and still get to live their mainly aquatic lifestyle. Now, I do like the aspect of the crocodilian pools at Berlin having underwater viewing in the ceiling of the ground floor, but that doesn't really defeat Wroclaw's Nile croc exhibit. Nevertheless, keeping crocodilians in wall enclosures I'd expect for some iguanas or a smaller monitor species is still pretty unforgiveable, so Berlin just edges it on crocs for me.
On the subject of monitors, both zoos have great enclosures for theirs. The Komodo dragon area at Wroclaw is superb, but I also really like the Mertens water monitor enclosure at Berlin.....
Snakes wise, Wroclaw has to win on species and, actually, exhibitry. Lizards wise it's pretty close but again, Wroclaw edges it based on their lovely gecko and wall lizard enclosures. Chelonia wise I'm going to give it to Berlin just because those turtle setups on the upper floor for Wroclaw's Terrarium do kinda depress me.
Well well.......we have a tie on reptiles. Lizards and snakes go to Wroclaw. Crocs and chelonia go to Berlin.........
....you didn't really think I'd forget Berlin's tuataras did you? Berlin gets a bonus point for that.
People really like Berlin Zoo for this. Of course, why wouldn't you? The Aquarium has it all, and in one building with a lot of amazing exhibitry.
But Wroclaw, despite the flaws and stampbook style of the Terrarium, has a superb Afrykarium, an amazing and massively underrated Odrarium, and some nice ectotherm exhibits tucked away in other areas of the zoo.
I may prefer Berlin overall, but Wroclaw edges it for me for now.
OK Here is some info on the conservation efforts in situ conducted by each respective zoo:
Berlin zoo:
Berlin zoo:
- Titicaca water frogs - they support studies on the frog, leading scuba diving expeditions to monitor numbers, etc... They also conducted an investigation into why 'an alarming number' of frogs were found dead in the lake in 2015. They are also finding suitable reintroduction locations for the near future.
- Lower Oder Valley National park- funnily enough it is not the zoo with the house focused on the Oder that supports an initiative to support its existing wildlife and rewild it, as well as fighting industrial plans. The Berlin zoo has supported the many species of amphibians, reptiles and fish that live there since 1996, with regular population monitoring and opposition to plans to industrialize the area despite its National park status.
- Berlin zoo also took 8 finescale splitfins from the wild in Mexico and started breeding them. Since then, those 8 have bred to form a shoal of 48 fish. This is significant, because the splitfin's numbers are lower than 150 individuals. Berlin zoo has also been tracking the surviving wild specimens and reintroducing zoo specimens back to their natural habitat.
- Gharials: Berlin zoo is also supporting gharial conservation efforts by taking gharial eggs from wild nests and raising the gharials under human care, meaning less stress on the gharial community in the wild. Once they reach 1 metre in length, they are returned to the wild. They also attack radio tags so they can track and monitor the gharial population.
@ShonenJake13, thank you for your extensive reply! That's something I can base my vote on.
I would also like to invite @Batto to give some remarks on the reptile husbandry in both collections. Is there a great difference in animal welfare between these zoos?
I would also like to invite @Batto to give some remarks on the reptile husbandry in both collections. Is there a great difference in animal welfare between these zoos?
I find myself agreeing almost entirely with @ShonenJake13's summary of the situation here.
So let's break it down with a few extra points:
Reptiles: Berlin has the better enclosures for reptiles for the most part, although the star enclosures at Wroclaw (namely the Nile Crocodile one) beats out anything at Berlin. Berlin has tuatara and gharial, but Wroclaw focuses on a lot of other even more obscure and endangered species such as odd geckos and freshwater turtles. Anyone making the point that Wroclaw is hurt by about half of their collection being bts, remember that the lionshare of Berlin's collection appears to be bts based on the numbers provided above. Wroclaw have waaaay more species on-show, spread out all over the zoo, than Berlin does. Still, the sometimes cramped quarters in the Terrarium leave me split as to whether the increased number of species at Wroclaw deserves the win..
Amphibians: Berlin has half a floor dedicated to amphibians, that right there deserves major points in my book. Additionally, based on my visit, there are more amphibians on-exhibit at Berlin than at Wroclaw (though that could have changed since) which the much more diverse and unique collection being at the former. For that, I will give the edge in this category to Berlin.
Fishes: Berlin's aquarium is great, but it's fairly basic in design imo, whereas Wroclaw has some of the best exhibitry I've ever seen for fish-- and fish alone! Not to mention they put a real focus on native freshwater species and have some highly endangered African cichlids/tilapias in those tanks and bts. The Afrykarium alone outshines Berlin fish-wise, but the Odrarium hammers their win home.
Invertebrates: This is another group that Berlin dedicates half of a floor to and I counted 60 species on-exhibit when I visited with Jake in 2018. Their collection mostly focuses on beetles, mantids, stick insects, and jellies, but there's a little something of pretty much all the major groups there. Meanwhile, I counted 37 species on-exhibit during that same trip, mainly focused on arachnids and cockroaches. Of course, it should be noted here (as well as with amphibians actually) that I ended up being a bit rushed going through the Terrarium and therefore will have missed some species. Regardless, Wroclaw is still behind in this area by a fair few species. As far as exhibitry goes, I somehow find myself more attracted to Wroclaw's displays than Berlin's, despite Berlin being the zoo that has a room centered around them. I am left pretty split here as well.
Appropriately enough, I find myself giving this match a tie in my head based on the above. I think I'm going to give Wroclaw the slight edge for now, though, based on one main reason: presentation. Wroclaw's exhibits for ectotherm far outshines anything at Berlin. I feel as though the exhibitry at Wroclaw is what will stick with most visitors more than Berlin's fantastic but rather simplistic display system (not meant to be an insult in anyway). Additionally, ectotherms can be seen mixed into the non-ectotherm exhibits all across the zoo as well as having a whole house dedicated to them, whereas Berlin limits them to only one areas.
There is one final point I haven't seen mentioned which I think should be mentioned: The entirety of Berlin's ectotherm collection is condensed to a single building which one has to pay extra to see. I don't know if that matters to anyone, I don't even know if it matters to me, but I do want to just float that out there.
~Thylo
So let's break it down with a few extra points:
Reptiles: Berlin has the better enclosures for reptiles for the most part, although the star enclosures at Wroclaw (namely the Nile Crocodile one) beats out anything at Berlin. Berlin has tuatara and gharial, but Wroclaw focuses on a lot of other even more obscure and endangered species such as odd geckos and freshwater turtles. Anyone making the point that Wroclaw is hurt by about half of their collection being bts, remember that the lionshare of Berlin's collection appears to be bts based on the numbers provided above. Wroclaw have waaaay more species on-show, spread out all over the zoo, than Berlin does. Still, the sometimes cramped quarters in the Terrarium leave me split as to whether the increased number of species at Wroclaw deserves the win..
Amphibians: Berlin has half a floor dedicated to amphibians, that right there deserves major points in my book. Additionally, based on my visit, there are more amphibians on-exhibit at Berlin than at Wroclaw (though that could have changed since) which the much more diverse and unique collection being at the former. For that, I will give the edge in this category to Berlin.
Fishes: Berlin's aquarium is great, but it's fairly basic in design imo, whereas Wroclaw has some of the best exhibitry I've ever seen for fish-- and fish alone! Not to mention they put a real focus on native freshwater species and have some highly endangered African cichlids/tilapias in those tanks and bts. The Afrykarium alone outshines Berlin fish-wise, but the Odrarium hammers their win home.
Invertebrates: This is another group that Berlin dedicates half of a floor to and I counted 60 species on-exhibit when I visited with Jake in 2018. Their collection mostly focuses on beetles, mantids, stick insects, and jellies, but there's a little something of pretty much all the major groups there. Meanwhile, I counted 37 species on-exhibit during that same trip, mainly focused on arachnids and cockroaches. Of course, it should be noted here (as well as with amphibians actually) that I ended up being a bit rushed going through the Terrarium and therefore will have missed some species. Regardless, Wroclaw is still behind in this area by a fair few species. As far as exhibitry goes, I somehow find myself more attracted to Wroclaw's displays than Berlin's, despite Berlin being the zoo that has a room centered around them. I am left pretty split here as well.
Appropriately enough, I find myself giving this match a tie in my head based on the above. I think I'm going to give Wroclaw the slight edge for now, though, based on one main reason: presentation. Wroclaw's exhibits for ectotherm far outshines anything at Berlin. I feel as though the exhibitry at Wroclaw is what will stick with most visitors more than Berlin's fantastic but rather simplistic display system (not meant to be an insult in anyway). Additionally, ectotherms can be seen mixed into the non-ectotherm exhibits all across the zoo as well as having a whole house dedicated to them, whereas Berlin limits them to only one areas.
There is one final point I haven't seen mentioned which I think should be mentioned: The entirety of Berlin's ectotherm collection is condensed to a single building which one has to pay extra to see. I don't know if that matters to anyone, I don't even know if it matters to me, but I do want to just float that out there.
~Thylo
Thanks mate, but I've only been behind the scenes at Berlin - and the standard there was good, also "thanks" to the Greens being rather dominant in the Berlin city counsil. And I haven't been to the Afrykacarium yet.
I'm struggeling with this one...
I've been more than a dozen times to the Berlin aquarium and I really believe that it is a 'Masterpiece' - especially when putting it into perspective to the fact that it is more than 100 years old and managed in an excellent way to combine historic elements with state of the art aquarium standards.
One the other hand I've not been to Wroclaw yet but the pictures and the reviews for the Afrykarium are really impressive. On the other side I'm not that much impressed by quality of many of the other exhibits outside the Afrykarium.
So the question is how to vote and what to rate higher:
I've been more than a dozen times to the Berlin aquarium and I really believe that it is a 'Masterpiece' - especially when putting it into perspective to the fact that it is more than 100 years old and managed in an excellent way to combine historic elements with state of the art aquarium standards.
One the other hand I've not been to Wroclaw yet but the pictures and the reviews for the Afrykarium are really impressive. On the other side I'm not that much impressed by quality of many of the other exhibits outside the Afrykarium.
So the question is how to vote and what to rate higher:
- The really impressive Afrykarium at Wroclow which is brand new but which I've not seen yet to get a personal Impression
- The more than 100 year old aquarium of Berlin which has nothing that outstanding like the Afrykarium but seems to me being slightly better in its overall standards its scientific approach
I agree with pretty much absolutely everything you said there except that. Wroclaw's terrarium system is not different, (from what I have seen) to Berlin's - in fact I'd even say Berlin's looks a bit better....
One word - school
Funnily enough however, I haven't been able to find any Wroclaw conservation efforts. Didn't seem to be on their site, although you never know... I don't speak Polish so maybe Google Translate was bad...
Does anyone have any info on this?
Just to back myself up on the terrarium Berlin vs Wroclaw, I have attached a few photos...
Wroclaw:
Berlin:
Wroclaw:
Berlin:
Wroclaw:
Berlin:
In my opinion, Wroclaw has nice reptile and amphibian exhibit. I know the Afrykarium is stunning, but most of the species on their ectotherm list are either housed in the terrarium or in other parts of the zoo. I agree that Wroclaw wins on fish, however I am not on board with saying Wroclaw is better in reptiles. I certainly don't agree with saying that the Terrarium in Wroclaw is nicer than Berlin's aquarium.
Here are my reasons why:
If you compare and contrast the two buildings, They both have quite old buildings housing their reptiles and amphibians... Both built around 1915, give or take a few years.
First comparison to make is the quality of the exhibits themselves. Now, as demonstrated in the top two photos, Wroclaw's exhibits are fundamentally good, but a feature of them lets it down. In this case, it is the side walls and the conspicuous pipe. On the other hand, Berlin's exhibit is well planted with vegetation most likely suited to the fishes' habitat. They can also hide in the vegetation when they don't want to be seen by the visitors. However, only by using its supreme camouflaging skills can the pufferfish escape the probing eyes of visitors, because there isn't anywhere for it to hide. I know that Berlin loses in fish, but I just wanted to make the point that Wroclaw's collection is highly variable and there is a large gap between their best and their worst...
However, I would still say that Wroclaw wins on fish because of its fantastic Afrykarium and Odrarium.
In terms of amphibians and insects, I'm pretty sure Berlin should win... The exhibit quality of Berlin for their amphibians, as shown in the last photo, is much better than Wroclaw's (the third photo), and Berlin has over twice as many amphibians on-show. Berlin has lushly-planted exhibits, reflecting their collection's rainforest habits, and they also have pools to cool down in and satisfy their amphibious habits. On the other hand, the Wroclaw enclosure looks quite scruffy because on the rusty metal plate separating two enclosures, and the exhibit has no pool nor vegetation, and I don't know of many amphibians who don't go near water, even Chacoan burrowing frogs need water. Wroclaw has virtually no insects, whereas Berlin has a large area devoted entirely to them, with exhibits that keep up to the standard of their amphibian ones.
So, for me, that is 1-1, so virtually the same conclusion @ShonenJake13 reached after allocating two points.
Then, the tiebreaker. Reptiles. Firstly, species-wise, Wroclaw is better. However, in terms of quality of exhibit, presentation and size of exhibit, Berlin wins imo. The fourth photo shows an example of an average Berlin exhibit. It has places, to hide, god rockwork, good vegetation, large size... Wroclaw exhibits can be seen in photo 5. They are nowhere near as large, glass is reflective and dirty, but the exhibit is decently planted. For me, that is more important than the slightly larger species list. Furthermore, Berlin has gharials etc... In terms of Chelonians, Berlin wins hands down for reasons @ShonenJake13 outlined. For crocs, Berlin also wins easily. For lizards, it is tight, but because of the rockwork, the dirty glass and overall smaller size of enclosure at Wroclaw, Berlin wins for me. And snakes follow suit imo. Therefore, for me, after a tonne of deliberation, thought and debate in my head, after sifting through tons of data and so on, and after going through the whole gallery of both zoos, Berlin wins 2-1.
Does anyone have any info on this?
Just to back myself up on the terrarium Berlin vs Wroclaw, I have attached a few photos...
Wroclaw:
Berlin:
Wroclaw:
Berlin:
Wroclaw:
Berlin:
In my opinion, Wroclaw has nice reptile and amphibian exhibit. I know the Afrykarium is stunning, but most of the species on their ectotherm list are either housed in the terrarium or in other parts of the zoo. I agree that Wroclaw wins on fish, however I am not on board with saying Wroclaw is better in reptiles. I certainly don't agree with saying that the Terrarium in Wroclaw is nicer than Berlin's aquarium.
Here are my reasons why:
If you compare and contrast the two buildings, They both have quite old buildings housing their reptiles and amphibians... Both built around 1915, give or take a few years.
First comparison to make is the quality of the exhibits themselves. Now, as demonstrated in the top two photos, Wroclaw's exhibits are fundamentally good, but a feature of them lets it down. In this case, it is the side walls and the conspicuous pipe. On the other hand, Berlin's exhibit is well planted with vegetation most likely suited to the fishes' habitat. They can also hide in the vegetation when they don't want to be seen by the visitors. However, only by using its supreme camouflaging skills can the pufferfish escape the probing eyes of visitors, because there isn't anywhere for it to hide. I know that Berlin loses in fish, but I just wanted to make the point that Wroclaw's collection is highly variable and there is a large gap between their best and their worst...
However, I would still say that Wroclaw wins on fish because of its fantastic Afrykarium and Odrarium.
In terms of amphibians and insects, I'm pretty sure Berlin should win... The exhibit quality of Berlin for their amphibians, as shown in the last photo, is much better than Wroclaw's (the third photo), and Berlin has over twice as many amphibians on-show. Berlin has lushly-planted exhibits, reflecting their collection's rainforest habits, and they also have pools to cool down in and satisfy their amphibious habits. On the other hand, the Wroclaw enclosure looks quite scruffy because on the rusty metal plate separating two enclosures, and the exhibit has no pool nor vegetation, and I don't know of many amphibians who don't go near water, even Chacoan burrowing frogs need water. Wroclaw has virtually no insects, whereas Berlin has a large area devoted entirely to them, with exhibits that keep up to the standard of their amphibian ones.
So, for me, that is 1-1, so virtually the same conclusion @ShonenJake13 reached after allocating two points.
Then, the tiebreaker. Reptiles. Firstly, species-wise, Wroclaw is better. However, in terms of quality of exhibit, presentation and size of exhibit, Berlin wins imo. The fourth photo shows an example of an average Berlin exhibit. It has places, to hide, god rockwork, good vegetation, large size... Wroclaw exhibits can be seen in photo 5. They are nowhere near as large, glass is reflective and dirty, but the exhibit is decently planted. For me, that is more important than the slightly larger species list. Furthermore, Berlin has gharials etc... In terms of Chelonians, Berlin wins hands down for reasons @ShonenJake13 outlined. For crocs, Berlin also wins easily. For lizards, it is tight, but because of the rockwork, the dirty glass and overall smaller size of enclosure at Wroclaw, Berlin wins for me. And snakes follow suit imo. Therefore, for me, after a tonne of deliberation, thought and debate in my head, after sifting through tons of data and so on, and after going through the whole gallery of both zoos, Berlin wins 2-1.
Attachments
That's not really true, Wroclaw have good handfuls of beetle, cockroach, mantis and stick insect species. They also have near (possibly actual) double figures of tarantula species (including some obscure ones) -I know they're not insects but for this challenge I suspect many will group them with insects. Exhibits, if my memory's correct, only really range from rudimentary to okay though.