London or Paris?

[amur leopard]

Comparing Paris and London's Natural History establishments and zoos/menageries

Paris Menagerie:

Established in 1793 during the French Revolution, the Menagerie is located inside Le Jardin des Plantes, a large establishment in the South-East of Paris. It is part of the association that governs the Natural History Museum and all associated establishments (Grande Galerie de L'evolution, Musee d'Anatomie Comparee et de Paleontologie, Musee de L'homme, La Bibliotheque du jardin des Plantes,), as well as a few small botanical establishments in the South of France, a couple of oceanariums, La Reserve de L'Haute-Touche and of course Le Jardin des Plantes. It was for a long time the largest exotic animal collection in the world until it ran out of space. Recently, it has been converting its old exhibits for larger animals into more modern exhibits for smaller animals (elephants -> Galapagos tortoises, Lions and tigers -> Snow leopards and North Chinese leopards). However, this still means that some of the exhibits are on the small side, and some of the carnivore exhibits especially are on the verge of unacceptable. However, the Reptile is really nice. It has all the old structures surviving but modern terrariums house the reptiles. This theme of extremely old building repurposed to exhibit smaller animals can be found throughout the zoo. The zoo has lots of nice rarities and the architecture is magnificent, making it a must visit.

Zoo de Vincennes:

This zoo is much more recent, especially since it had a complete makeover for six year between 2008 and 2014. Only the massive troop of Kordofan giraffes stayed on site during this time and none of the animals exhibited now saw the old zoo apart from the giraffes, Guinea baboons and flamingos. Rarities include Chilean pumas, Antillean manatees, Red-backed bearded sakis, Bush dogs, Crowned sifakas, woolly monkeys and many more. The zoo's emblem is the great rock, a massive Matterhorn-like mock rock mountain. It hides a large Water Tower which is still in use today. All areas of the zoo are very well-done, probably what you'd expect from a zoo with such a recent regeneration. A mini version of Masoala covers part of Madagascar and part of Guyana.

Zoo de Thoiry:

A bit of stretch, but here goes. This zoo is half safari, half walkthrough zoo, and is only really possible with a car. However, it remains a very good zoo with some nice rarities, Tonkean macaques being at the top of that list. It has very pleasant enclosures, a nice 'ark' building for herps and inverts and a massive swimming pool for their capybaras. I will post a few more photos of the zoo because it is underdocumented on the media pages, but worth a thought if you are visiting with a car. Sadly, because it is a large zoo, it cannot be visited in the same day as Versailles even though it is nearby, but it is perhaps an hour's drive from the city depending on where one is staying. Really quite a pleasant zoo and I would recommend it wholeheartedly, although impossible without a car.

London - ZSL London zoo:

London zoo is the world's oldest scientific zoo as opposed to a menagerie. However, only a few buildings remain dating back to anywhere near its opening in 1828, most located near the entrance. The zoo is not larger, although I still spend an entire day there when I visit. The zoo has some nice exhibits, with BUGS, the Blackburn Pavilion, the Reptile House and the Rainforest/Night Life buildings being my favourites. It is probably a must visit for Zoochatters coming to London, but I wouldn't prioritise it over seeing the sights, since most of the zoo is nothing special really, although some may beg to differ. The zoo has not done such a good job as Vienna in converting old buildings into modern enclosures, and is therefore fast running out of space, although a few large lawns in the centre of the zoo still remain. Rarities include the Northern Dry Zone Slender loris, the Potto and many more.

Whipsnade and others:

Whipsnade is quite far out of London and a lengthy two hour trip is needed to get there without a car. However, I would say that it is worth it if you are staying in London for longer than a week. It is a large zoo, with generally spacious enclosures and a good species list. Other zoo mentioned by TLD in the area are Paradise Wildlife Park (very hard to get to by public transport), Chessington (also very hard to reach by public transport), and the Longon Wetland Centre, which isn't a zoo per se but more of a safe area for migrants, especially members of the Anatidae.

Overall, in terms of zoos, I would rather visit Paris. However, if you can get to Whipsnade, it is a really nice visit, although I personally preferred Thoiry. London has some nice places to offer but only London Zoo is easy to get to, whereas Pairs offers two top-notch collections in the city centre. Natural History Museums coming up next, and then transport systems

 

[TeaLovingDave]

(My daughter was objectively a very cute baby back then - golden locked hair, blue eyes, always friendly and smiling)

While my daughter was still a very cute and charming toddler, the New Yorkers reacted at best indifferently.

The question is, is the emphasis placed on the past tense because all cuteness has now faded?

 

[TeaLovingDave]

London has some nice places to offer but only London Zoo is easy to get to,

As already noted, both Cedars and Battersea are also easy to get to

 

[amur leopard]

Natural History Museum, London:

This massive establishment is situated South of Hyde Park in Kensington. The closest tube station is South Kensington, which has a handy tunnel that takes you right to it. Always enter via the side entrance - lines are much shorter. The Museum is one of the best in the world, but doesn't actually have that many specimens on show. Highlights are held in a small gallery above the Hintze Hall, including a Barbary lion skull, a Dodo skeleton, a Great Auk specimen, some of Darwin's pigeons and a copy of the most expensive book in the world, Audubon's Birds of North America. Its dinosaur section is the most visited area of the Museum and allows visitors to observe mounted skeletons from an elevated walkway. Then they pass an animatronic T-rex and then into the main area of the exhibit. Here, interactive displays make it an enjoyable exhibition. The mammal hall includes a long gallery full of faded specimens of the different orders, which leads into the main hall where the ungulate, cetaceans and the large Blue whale model is found. There is also the bird gallery, a newish exhibit focused on humans and their evolution, a very nice exhibition on the Earth and tectonics. Essentially, the museum is very good although some of the specimens are really old and in need of replacing.

Grant Museum of Zoology:

This place is essentially the Natural History Museum of University College London, which is still open to the public. There are some nice specimens, including a quagga skeleton. It is really quite small but its walls are covered with specimens, especially bones. It is a really nice Museum, probably not top of the list unless you are an anatomy fanatic, but still worth visiting if you have time and it is possible to combine it with the British Museum, which is nearby.

Grande Galerie de L'Evolution:

This massive hall in the heart of Le Jardin des Plantes in Paris is where the animal taxidermies are displayed. They are grouped into biomes on the ground and lower ground floors, with the Amazon, the African savanna, the Congo rainforest, the Sahara desert, the Antarctic and the ocean ecosystems all displayed, and more. The taxidermies are all very well made and look in good shape, which cannot be said all the time for the London NHM as mentioned earlier. The gallery also has several floors above, where the extinct and very endangered specimens are kept and other displays are located. All in all, the gallery is very nice, but of course not nearly as complete as the London NHM. However, the Paris Museum of Natural history is split over several buildings and locations around Paris, which means that visiting only one is likely to give a slightly warped experience.

Les Galeries D'Anatomie Comparee et de Paleontologie:

This part of the Museum is also located in the Jardin des Plantes just around the corner from La Galerie de l'Evolution. It essentially holds the museum's collection of bones. One floor deals with modern animals, the other with prehistory and dinosaurs. In terms of dinosaurs, I would much rather visit the London NHM because of its interactive displays with lots of information on each display, while the Paris NHM has a name tag and that's about it. This allows them to pack large numbers of species into the museum, but means that it is a less enjoyable visit for children especially. The modern animal collection is very large and broad, including species like African manatees, Javan tigers and other rarely seen specimens.

Musee de L'Homme:

Contrasting with the previous gallery, this museum is very interactive. Recently renovated just like the Zoo de Vincennes, this Museum is located in North West Paris and home to a large collection of artefacts. Its highly interactive displays allow the visitors to learn more about evolution and different cultures. Not strictly a Natural history establishment, it only half belongs on this list but I have included it nonetheless.
There is also a gallery of Mineralogy in the Jardin des Plantes which covers that area of Natural History.

Overall, comparing the two cities in this category is difficult. They both have very good establishments, with beautiful exhibits and great collections, although Paris has more to offer in terms of species, while London is arguably better in terms of interactivity and ease of visiting, given it is almost all in one building. However, I would rather visit the Paris NHM because of the greater species diversity on show and the focus on extinction in the Grande Galerie De L'Evolution, although I would argue that it is more fun for children in the London NHM due to the high level of interactivity throughout, and one learns more. I find it difficult to choose though.

 

[amur leopard]

The transport systems in both cities are good. However, London wins almost hands down in this category. Despite being a much larger city, the ease of access around the city makes it the winner. Its tube system is vastly superior to that of Paris, and the combined web of bus and tube services cover almost the entire city, meaning it is possible to easily reach one point from another. The bus services are more frequent and more numerous. Recently implemented cycle superhighways in London make cycling around the city also quite easy. However, I would say that I reckon they are both equally pedestrian-friendly, although Paris is a lot smaller so easy to navigate on foot. Of course, transport is an import factor when considering where to stay, especially when one cannot use public transport. My family do not own a car, yet we have managed to live in London for over 20 years without one, always able to get wherever we wanted with public transport.

As an extra note to TLD: I would not use the tube to get to BPCZ - Battersea is the only area where the tube is no good. No lines go anywhere near the park, and the zoo is right in the middle of the park pushed up against the Thames, making it even harder to access. Having said that, it is relatively Central so even walking it would be an option if one is staying anywhere near. An Overground service does go within maybe a kilometre, but otherwise, no trains. In fact, a new branch to the Northern line is being constructed to serve Battersea and surrounds to coincide with the development of the power station into a sort of mall with accommodation, which shoud make it easier to get there by public transport

 

[Zoofan15]

When we visited NYC in the following year, the situation was completely different. While my daughter was still a very cute and charming toddler, the New Yorkers reacted at best indifferently.

That’s interesting how the child didn’t test well in a different market.

 

[TeaLovingDave]

As an extra note to TLD: I would not use the tube to get to BPCZ - Battersea is the only area where the tube is no good. No lines go anywhere near the park, and the zoo is right in the middle of the park pushed up against the Thames, making it even harder to access. Having said that, it is relatively Central so even walking it would be an option if one is staying anywhere near. An Overground service does go within maybe a kilometre

Yes - I was referring to the Overground service I *have* been there in the past, which is why I know it is easy to reach!

As a matter of fact, BPCZ is closer to that Overground station than London Zoo is to *any* Tube station

 

[Tim May]

.....Paradise Wildlife Park (very hard to get to by public transport), Chessington (also very hard to reach by public transport), and the Longon Wetland Centre, which isn't a zoo per se but more of a safe area for migrants...

Paradise Wildlife Park isn't really hard to reach by public transport. If you phone the park when you arrive at Broxbourne railway station they will send a minibus to drive you to the zoo.

Chessington is definitely not difficult to reach by public transport; it is only about a ten minute walk from Chessington South railway station.

Although you mention that the London Wetland Centre isn't a zoo it should be noted that it has a captive collection of exotic waterfowl (and otters too). Incidentally that is also easy to reach by public transport; it's only a fifteen minute walk from Barnes railway station.

On the subject of zoological collections in London, I don't think you've mentioned the small aquarium at the Horniman Museum or the London Sea Life Centre.

 

[Batto]

The question is, is the emphasis placed on the past tense because all cuteness has now faded?

As her father, I might not be the most objective judge, but based on the reactions of others, she's still a beautiful child. She just isn't a baby anymore

That’s interesting how the child didn’t test well in a different market.

In this and other regards, NYC is quite similar to Berlin.

 

[amur leopard]

Paradise Wildlife Park isn't really hard to reach by public transport. If you phone the park when you arrive at Broxbourne railway station they will send a minibus to drive you to the zoo.

Chessington is definitely not difficult to reach by public transport; it is only about a ten minute walk from Chessington South railway station.

Although you mention that the London Wetland Centre isn't a zoo it should be noted that it has a captive collection of exotic waterfowl (and otters too). Incidentally that is also easy to reach by public transport; it's only a fifteen minute walk from Barnes railway station.

On the subject of zoological collections in London, I don't think you've mentioned the small aquarium at the Horniman Museum or the London Sea Life Centre.

PWP and Chessington are both still a good hour and a half's journey away, and that's if you live on the side of London closest to them and know exactly where you are going, so not that easy.

The Horniman is another nice museum, yes. I think it is free but you have to pay to see the aquarium. I somehow forgot about Sealife, but if you have visited a mid-sized aquarium before, it isn't really worth it

 

[Batto]

It essentially holds the museum's collection of bones.

That's a bit simplified; it holds a wonderful and diverse array of assembled skeletons (including one of the few remaining ones of a Steller's sea cow) as well as a great collection of fossils, including an Archaeoindris skull or the mighty Sarcosuchus imperator. Sure, the presentation is old-fashioned, but that adds to the charm. Besides, there's plenty of modern education elements in the other parts of the museum complex. I could have stayed there all day long. ^^

 

[amur leopard]

That's a bit simplified; it holds a wonderful and diverse array of assembled skeletons (including one of the few remaining ones of a Steller's sea cow) as well as a great collection of fossils, including an Archaeoindris skull or the mighty Sarcosuchus imperator. Sure, the presentation is old-fashioned, but that adds to the charm. Besides, there's plenty of modern education elements in the other parts of the museum complex. I could have stayed there all day long. ^^

Of course it's simplistic but if I were to write in detail about every museum I'd be on my computer all day! When I visit, I spend at least two days at the Jardin des Plantes as a whole! It's just I haven't got around to a species list, which will be the objective of my visit hopefully next Winter. Of course I love it, it's just - it isn't the most enthralling place for someone who doesn't like looking at skeletons

 

[boro745]

For me it's London all the way. I have never been to Paris, but I loved London when I visited it 3 years ago

 

[Batto]

For me it's London all the way. I have never been to Paris, but I loved London when I visited it 3 years ago

Based on this logic, I would have to prefer Duisburg over French Polynesia, because I've been to Duisburg, but not to French Polynesia...
Strangely, I feel more inclined to visit French Polynesia than re-visit Duisburg (river dolphin or not).

 

[TZDugong]

A couple of points.

In this respect, London covers more of a spectrum than Paris, which doesn't really have a modern art museum.

The Centre Pompidou is a modern art museum.

Le Louvre is arguably the best Art Museum in the world, rivalled only by the Met, the Vatican Museums and to a lesser extent perhaps the British Museum.

With respect to the Met and the Vatican Museums, both of which I liked a lot, I'd say that the Louvre is the "greatest" art museum in the world. That doesn't mean it's my favourite, it's not even my favourite art museum in Paris (Musee D'Orsay), but the Louvre is undeniably impressive.

Ah - there's a way to do that without having a tiny child though - go in through a side entrance! There is never a very big line there, and although you don't get to go in through the famous glass pyramid, it can save you hours of queues. Every time I've been I've always bought my tickets in advance though, so I'm not sure if it is possible to go in through the side without pre-booked tickets. At any rate, it's a lot easier

I did this too; saved me around 2 hours in lines. I'd definitely recommend going through a side entrance.

Not any more thankfully. The Louvre has 10.2 million annual visitors in 2018 compared to Disneyland at 9.84. However, it is true that this used to be the case, somewhat embarrassingly I must admit

Why is that embarassing?

The majority are held in very good exhibits, and a highlight is the mini-Masoala under which the Madagascar and part of the Guyana exhibit are located.

While I liked the Guyana House quite a bit, I wouldn't describe any of it as a "mini-Masaola". I'm not sure it's fair to compare any zoo exhibit to Masaola (except maybe Burger's Bush).

 

[TeaLovingDave]

PWP and Chessington are both still a good hour and a half's journey away, and that's if you live on the side of London closest to them and know exactly where you are going, so not that easy.

Still much easier than Whipsnade even if you assume the timings provided by yourself are accurate (which they are not); and of course, you cited Zoo de Thoiry despite it being (as you say) impossible without a car.

Shifting goalposts methinks

 

[amur leopard]

Why is that embarassing?

Because the biggest attraction in Europe is based on something essentially installed by Americans... i.e. it isn't European at all.

While I liked the Guyana House quite a bit, I wouldn't describe any of it as a "mini-Masaola". I'm not sure it's fair to compare any zoo exhibit to Masaola (except maybe Burger's Bush).

I just said that because it looks a bit like Masoala. It isn't really very similar and I would agree with you about tropical houses, although I did really like Gondwanaland in Leipzig.

The Centre Pompidou is a modern art museum.

Sorry, forgot about it. Never been as I'm not a great fan of modern art. Thanks for pointing that out, my mistake.

With respect to the Met and the Vatican Museums, both of which I liked a lot, I'd say that the Louvre is the "greatest" art museum in the world. That doesn't mean it's my favourite, it's not even my favourite art museum in Paris (Musee D'Orsay), but the Louvre is undeniably impressive.

I always find it hard to say which I like more between le Musee d'Orsay and le Louvre. I would agree with your opinion in terms of greatest art museum though, I was just trying to avoid people being offended

Still much easier than Whipsnade even if you assume the timings provided by yourself are accurate (which they are not); and of course, you cited Zoo de Thoiry despite it being (as you say) impossible without a car.

Shifting goalposts methinks

Fair enough, I guess my idea of how far they all are is warped because in Paris we have a car at our disposal whereas we don't in London, which means it's quicker to get to places in Paris than it is in London, giving a somewhat warped illusion. My mistake. (Damn I seem to be making a lot of mistakes given these are the two cities I know best. I'm disappointed with myself )

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

Because the biggest attraction in Europe is based on something essentially installed by Americans... i.e. it isn't European at all.

Hahaha , good point ! and very true !

 

[Sarus Crane]

I picked Paris because I really want to go back to the Muséum National D'Histoire Naturelle. I want to see Siam again in the La Grande Galerie de L'Evolution, get a lot of 360's and also I want to see the Galerie De Paléontologie Et D’Anatomie Comparée. I was about to visit it after I went to the natural history museum but it was a separate ticket so I had to take a pass on it. Also I want to see Zoo Vincennes where Siam was in addition to the Ménagerie, Le Zoo Du Jardin Des Plantes because they have Gaur. I'd like to see more of Paris as a whole. I didn't get to see the Louvre last time so that's a definite along with a day trip to Zoo Cerza. I'm also not going to forget about all the amazing food especially the cheese!!!!

Next time I go back in Britain I'm going to Whipsnade. It's my number 1 since I've already seen London Zoo. I'd also like to see the Natural History Museum at Tring. They have so much antique, historic taxidermy there! In addition, I was briefly in St. James Park, but had no idea they had pelicans! Lastly, I want to see WWT Slimbridge because of their fantastic flamingo collection!

 

[ZooBinh]

I picked Paris for these two reasons: shopping and food. Although I like the scenery of Paris as well, but when I go travel, food and shopping are probably my main interests (along with visiting zoos). Though London is better zoo-wise and would definitely go there to just visit the zoos.