OK I agree that the polar bear enclosure is poor but it is being redone into a massive exhibit, so....
It has been fundamentally established that future plans are not eligible for consideration. Judging from the plans however, the new exhibit will be a massive improvement, but not massive in and of itself...
So these (I'm guessing) are the 'quite poor' enclosures. I would not even say that it approaches poor, although my benchmark may well be lower than yours
@lintworm.
The top exhibit for jaguarundis is well-planted, with lots of space and many places to hide. It is a good exhibit. The entrance to the oncilla exhibit viewing tunnel is shown in the second photo. I couldn't find a picture showing the actual exhibit, but from the small view we have of it, I imagine it is similar-ish to the jaguarundi exhibit and same with the tayras in the third photo. Then, the leopard cats. While the exhibit may look slightly shabby, the enclosure itself is suitable and good. There is plenty of height to the enclosure, allowing the cats to climb as they would in the wild. Therefore, the bad exhibits aren't actually bad at all really...
The jaguarundi and oncilla exhibits are both thoroughly average. They could be larger, but are well-furnished etc. I don't think they are bad, but they are not winning any prizes either. The Palawan leopard cat exhibit is all indoors, but is probably about as big as other small cat exhibits. It is fundamentally unimpressive.
This is a small section of the coati exhibit, which is lushly planted, with lots of natural climbing opportunities as well as viewing opportunities for visitors. This makes it a very good exhibit for a species often overlooked in zoos.
I agree, this is a good exhibit.
The second photo shows the extent of the exhibit properly, while the first shows a small section. It is a spacious and well-proportioned exhibit with a slide, clear water and a long range of viewing windows. A good exhibit on the whole.
This exhibit is certainly above average for Europe, but sadly that says more about Europe than it does about Prague.
This immense exhibit for bush dogs is outstanding compared to the exhibits this species is normally housed in. Very spacious and impressive.
The size is nice, otherwise there is not a huge amount to say.
Meanwhile, the otter exhibit is also very large and well-suited to the species. It also has large viewing windows.
I agree again, it's a good exhibit.
And lastly, probably the best and most striking red panda exhibit I have ever seen, it reflects the red panda's mountainous home, while being based around Nepalese trees and the dense foliage reflets the thick tops of the trees of the Nepalese mountain forests in which they live. the photo only shows part of the enclosure. The exhibit is also built on a natural slant, which also allows visitors to view from above and below.
If this is the case you need to see far more red panda exhibits. This is a perfectly good, but still fundamentally unremarkable enclosure.
I have not.
However, I do plan to visit in a few years' time after the San Diego and Monterey trip and Berlin, Leipzig, Chester and a few other places. I have however visited Chester before, and after looking through the whole Prague gallery I can assure you that I do know what the enclosures look like.
From your comments I am not at all sure that you do understand the enclosures, since you are routinely overestimating their size
OK Prague is one of the only zoos in the world with brown hyenas, and they don't house them in meagre accommodation either. This immense exhibit is basically devoted to the species. They have isolation areas, connecting areas and containment areas. It is truly immense.
It is NOT truly immense. It is a normal hyaena exhibit, with exciting inhabitants.
This massive cheetah exhibit is very suitable for the species. Probably one of the best enclosures for the species in the world apart from Beauval's.
It would never occur to me to describe this exhibit as one of the best in the world. But it is large, and the elevation is hopefully enjoyed by visitors and cats.
This is another large enclosure and lots of places to hide (for Asiatic lions) I know you can't see the enclosure very well, but it is good in other photos.
It's an exhibit with a large moat. It is not a large exhibit.
An average enclosure for Javan leopards. Could do with a little more space but enough places to hide.
This is exactly the same size as the neighbouring jaguarundi exhibit. It is woefully undersized for a big cat, and along with Berlin TP's offering allows Pairi Daiza to say they have the best Javan leopard exhibit on the continent.
This is the Malayan tiger exhibit and I genuinely think it is a good enclosure. It has cover, it has a massive pool for these water-loving cats and it is far enough away to give the cats some privacy.
Like the lion exhibit, this has a large moat, and not all that much land.
This is a massive exhibit for maned wolves. Very nice exhibit overall, representing the Pampas well.
I agree it is a good exhibit. I think it's probably fair to say it represents Czech woodland more than it does the Pantanal.
The Siberian tiger exhibit is also very nice, simulating the Russian taiga. Although you can't really see the exhibit, it is large and spacious.
To be honest, I wouldn't like to comment too definitively on the size of this exhibit, since I skipped it on my most recent trip (I've therefore only seen it twice in the flesh). But again, I think words like average are far more suitable than anything more superlative.
3 subspecies of tiger, 2 of leopard, brown hyenas... what more can you ask for?
This is the question isn't it? Against Chester, the answer is great exhibitry. I like Prague more than I like Chester, and on several categories it would have a chance to really wipe the floor here, but carnivores is its Achilles heel. The Cat House would be 'fine' in most zoos in Europe, but not Prague, and
certainly not Chester. It's a similar picture across the collection; so little of what Prague offers is exceptional, whereas Chester has a few thoroughly outstanding enclosures and an average that is far higher than Prague's. I don't really have an issue with people preferring Prague's collection over Chester's style, it's a personal choice and many of Prague's weaknesses are not disqualifying. However, they shouldn't do so based on your analysis. It's quite hard sometimes to have reasonable communication online; I genuinely don't want to attack you. But I think you are wrong about these exhibits and I think you are equally wrong to think you could form these opinions based just on photos from the gallery. When I haven't visited a zoo I will always rely primarily on the testimony of those who have, especially those I trust. No doubt some will think my personal analysis is too harsh, just as some will find it too kind, but what they won't dispute is that I have spent several minutes at each exhibit over several visits, and that typically I will have walked the entire accessible perimeter and enjoyed all possible vantage points.
.
