ZooChat Cup finals: Plzen vs Zurich

Plzen vs Zurich: Birds

  • Total voters
    37
  • Poll closed .
I do not see how I implied that the owls at Plzen were tied down. It was an example of the worst exhibitry I could imagine.

No photos from Plzen, and my point was that the majority of the species were kept in below average aviaries, with absolutely ridiculously small swimming space for some waterfowl.
 
Given there haven't been many actual arguments in favour of Zurich's aviaries and bird collection beyond "Masoala" and "It isn't Plzen" I thought I'd continue rooting through the gallery to see if I could find any decent shots of aviaries which are either notably better than anything at Plzen, or notably worse, and I found something that surprised me a bit:

Giant Panda said:
one bad exhibit stains the whole zoo (e.g. Plzen's barn owls*).
Click to expand...

Giant Panda said:
For the inhabitants of a bad exhibit, that's their whole existence. You're shrugging off unnecessary chronic suffering as a blip. I won't do that.
Click to expand...

Giant Panda said:
, so I'll vote for one animal kept well over nine animals kept well and one badly (all else being equal). Suffering outweighs good lives, which should be the standard (all else being equal).
Click to expand...

Given all of the above, where would you fall on the subject of an exhibit for King Penguin being a) far too small and crowded for the 14 individuals they hold and b) mixing the species with a prey animal (to wit, Brown Trout)?

Because that appears to be what Zurich has.

full


full
 
Andrew Swales said:
I actually agree with you - and was not targeting you..! I high-lighted the phrase, as I did, because knowing staff at both of these zoos, it is not a phrase I would personally have associated with either. My point about owls (and other raptors) being tied to perches, flightless for much of their lives, was intended to illustrate the general way these birds are kept and accepted at many 'falconry centres' and behind the scenes at many 'free flight ' displays.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant but interesting... Do you support tethering owls?
 
Malawi said:
the majority of the species were kept in below average aviaries, with absolutely ridiculously small swimming space for some waterfowl.
Click to expand...

Still no photographs of these below-average aviaries with ridiculously-small pools then?
 
TeaLovingDave said:
Given there haven't been many actual arguments in favour of Zurich's aviaries and bird collection beyond "Masoala" and "It isn't Plzen" I thought I'd continue rooting through the gallery to see if I could find any decent shots of aviaries which are either notably better than anything at Plzen, or notably worse, and I found something that surprised me a bit:







Given all of the above, where would you fall on the subject of an exhibit for King Penguin being a) far too small and crowded for the 14 individuals they hold and b) mixing the species with a prey animal (to wit, Brown Trout)?

Because that appears to be what Zurich has.

full


full
Click to expand...

Sorry, saw this after switching votes.

Yeah, I agree. I'm amazed this exhibit is still there after the Exotarium renovation.

Edit: The trout are an interesting point; we may need a ruling from@CGSwans on their relevance to the bird round.
 
Having visited Zurich Zoo in October 2003, mere months after the opening of the grandiose Masoala Hall, I can still vividly recall the amazement at what was then a breath-taking, ground-breaking exhibit. Now that almost 17 years has gone by, I expect that 'Masoala' is perhaps much better now as the vegetation will have grown to extraordinary levels. How many zoos have such a spectacular tropical house? One flaw is that, much like Burgers' Bush in Arnhem, I would like to see more animals present, but that is nit-picking what is truly a revolutionary zoo exhibit.

There are plenty of images of Plzen's numerous aviaries in the ZooChat gallery, but how many of those enclosures are more than basic, standard exhibits found at hundreds upon hundreds of zoos all over the world? The bird collection is phenomenal, but the same goes for San Antonio Zoo. That establishment in Texas has one of the best bird collections in North America and is visited by many zoo nerds, but how many of those aviaries are terrific exhibits? Any of them? I found the aviaries at San Antonio to be forgettable and dull. Plzen seems more impressive than its Texas counterpart, but I agree with the enthusiasts who have been supportive of Zurich and I'm voting 3-0 for the Swiss zoo.
 
It's worth noting that this discussion is really making me regret the fact that Zurich isn't *quite* doable as a daytrip from Munich, given the fact I will be visiting Bavaria in a few weeks..... much as I am arguing in favour of Plzen for this match, I very, very much want to visit Zurich someday and think it probably would end up a lot closer to the top spot in my overall zoo rankings than the Czech collection is.

Looked into it and due to the train schedules I would only have about 5 hours at the zoo if I tried it, which I doubt would be enough.
 
There are more specks in Zurich's eye than the flightless macaws and the indoor penguin exhibit (which is neither as bad as it looks nor as good as it should be) for those intent to find them. I fail to see how such an approach would lead to an appropriate appraisal of the zoo though.
 
Malawi said:
Nope
Click to expand...

A very convincing counterargument. I’ll be sure to ignore the photographic evidence and intricate arguments put forward for both sides and vote against Plzen based on this :rolleyes:

(for the record, having visited Plzen recently, and not being massively keen on a few of their exhibits as @ThylacineAlive can attest, not a single one of the waterfowl aviaries from memory conform to Malawi’s description)
 
snowleopard said:
Having visited Zurich Zoo in October 2003, mere months after the opening of the grandiose Masoala Hall, I can still vividly recall the amazement at what was then a breath-taking, ground-breaking exhibit. Now that almost 17 years has gone by, I expect that 'Masoala' is perhaps much better now as the vegetation will have grown to extraordinary levels. How many zoos have such a spectacular tropical house? One flaw is that, much like Burgers' Bush in Arnhem, I would like to see more animals present, but that is nit-picking what is truly a revolutionary zoo exhibit.

There are plenty of images of Plzen's numerous aviaries in the ZooChat gallery, but how many of those enclosures are more than basic, standard exhibits found at hundreds upon hundreds of zoos all over the world? The bird collection is phenomenal, but the same goes for San Antonio Zoo. That establishment in Texas has one of the best bird collections in North America and is visited by many zoo nerds, but how many of those aviaries are terrific exhibits? Any of them? I found the aviaries at San Antonio to be forgettable and dull. Plzen seems more impressive than its Texas counterpart, but I agree with the enthusiasts who have been supportive of Zurich and I'm voting 3-0 for the Swiss zoo.
Click to expand...

So, despite the bird collection being "phenomenal" and the zoo being "more impressive" than "one of the best bird collections in North America", because it lacks anything on the scale of Masoala Plzen deserves zero points whatsoever in your eyes....?

~Thylo
 
Last edited:
snowleopard said:
but how many of those enclosures are more than basic, standard exhibits found at hundreds upon hundreds of zoos all over the world?
Click to expand...

There are four or five extremely good exhibits, as I've noted above. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on some of them, and whether you genuinely believe they are no better than "hundreds upon hundreds" of other exhibits :p

antonmuster said:
I fail to see how such an approach would lead to an appropriate appraisal of the zoo though.
Click to expand...

The key point is that if the general argument comes down to whether "one fantastic exhibit, a bunch of average-to-good exhibits, and a mid-level collection" beats "a few very good exhibits, lots of average-to-good exhibits, one indisputably bad exhibit and a massively diverse collection", then the first category *also* including indisputably bad exhibits is relevant.

antonmuster said:
?

https://www.zoochat.com/community/attachments/p1310138-jpg.430504/

https://www.zoochat.com/community/attachments/p1310172-jpg.425131/
Click to expand...

Neither of those are below-average in aviary size, and they *certainly* don't contain pools which are only 20cm larger than a Stilt is high, as Malawi claims the majority of Plzen's waterfowl exhibits have.

Note once again that *most* of the waterfowl at Plzen is displayed on the moats and ponds throughout the collection, so this claim basically suggests these are also only 20cm deep and 50cm on a side.
 
I am not a photographer and would anyhow not have taken photos of the weaker exhibits. Regarding ”below average”, I find that to be the correct description for many of the aviaries.
 
I haven't been to either (I hope to change that within the next few years), but I think I'd prefer Plzen if my only purpose was seeing birds.

It reminds me of the slightly controversial cup debate I remember participating in where Cologne and Pairi Daiza also met each other in a showdown of birds. The consensus seemed to be that Cologne was probably a tad better for bird nerds with its large pheasantry and many waterfowl ponds, while Pairi Daiza - with its more iconic exhibits - was better at peaking the interest of those who were less keen on birds.

This match seems very similar, with Plzen being the new Cologne and Zurich being the new PD. As someone who's a big bird enthusiast, I'll vote for Plzen. But Masoala is a grandiose exhibit, so I don't think either side deserves a 3-0. 2-1 to Plzen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top