European (Tea)Cup - League E - Paris Zoo & Menagerie vs Burgers

[TeaLovingDave]

This one should be an interesting one, I reckon - the Parisian duo have had distinctly mixed fortunes in the Cup thus far, whilst Burgers has enjoyed a fairly strong streak... however, the fact that the latter collection is relatively specialised strikes me as something which could prove tricky when a category as broad as GRASSLANDS AND DESERTS crops up!

As such, I think both contenders have a decent shot at success this time round.... but it is up to you lot to decide.

 

[TeaLovingDave]

This is another tricky one which could go either way!

Burgers naturally has the excellent Desert in its corner.... but not all that much else where this category is concerned, to the best of my recollection. Conversely, I cannot think of any exhibits at the Parisian pair which excel to the heights of the aforementioned Burgers exhibit, but they definitely contain a fair *number* of category exhibits, mostly at a reasonably good level of quality.

As such, pending further discussion and debate, I think a 3-2 vote for the Paris duo is a good place to start.

 

[Philipine eagle]

I'm leaning towards Burgers. Even without Bobcat and California Bighorn sheep Burgers' Desert is one of the finest exhibits you can find in Europe. Even 30 years after its opening, it still looks stunning, and no zoo in Europe has managed to match it. Moreover, it is full of small rarely shown animals: Mojave Desert tortoise, Cactus Deer mouse, Hispid Cotton rat, Merriam's Kangaroo rat, Ring-tailed cat, American Goldfinch, Black-headed Grossbeak, Blue-winged teal, Common Ground-dove, Gambell's quail, Greater Roadrunner, Montezuma quail, Orange-breasted bunting, Painted bunting, Yellow Grosbeak, Socorra pigeon, Rosy-bellied bunting. That's an impressive list that will be hard to beat by Paris.

And while I like the savanna exhibits in Paris , I think the one in Burger's is better: it is bigger and more varied, and the Kopje terraces provide a stunning vantage point.

 

[remar]

I haven't been to any of these collections, so one question. Paris' biggest asset here are the bustards, right? Of course the Asian houbara, but also the little bustards.

 

[Philipine eagle]

I haven't been to any of these collections, so one question. Paris' biggest asset here are the bustards, right? Of course the Asian houbara, but also the little bustards.

Absolutely. And Large-billed Seed-finch, Pin-tailed Sandgrouse and Black-headed Grossbeak (both Burgers and Vincennes are the only holders of this species in Europe). .

Both Paris zoos have other interesting bird species like Lazuli bunting and Burnished-buff tanager which may count for this contest.

 

[Kalaw]

Burgers naturally has the excellent Desert in its corner.... but not all that much else where this category is concerned, to the best of my recollection

Arguably the best mixed-species savannah in Europe?

But yes, as a whole, Burgers' does have very little to offer, and there is a lot that is very good at Paris.

While Paris hasn't got as many notable birds or as good a savannah, it isn't far behind in either aspect. And (though here we are really entering subjective territory) I much preferred the overall feel of the savannah zone at Paris. Backdropped by the Great Rock, open enough to feel like a savannah compared to the rather out-of-place woodland at the Burgers' Safari, but never too sparse or exposed. The hoofstock paddocks at the Menagerie have an antique charm of sorts exceeding anything at Burgers', but their quality isn't exactly the highest.

This may seem to be leaning far too much into personal bias, but what fun are contests like this if not just a little subjective? While I admit there is a technical mastery to the Desert and a ground-breaking element to the Safari, I personally found them to be the weakest of the eco-displays at Burgers'.

Fresh out of the Bush, the relative cold of the Desert was immersion-killing and it felt far more sparse. Another aspect in which it really suffered from comparison with the Bush was the rather linear structure, compared to its predecessor with a myriad of wonderful trails. I was captivated by the landscaping (managing to design a desert, a notoriously open environment, in such a way that there were no poor sightlines or cross-viewing) was a tremendous achievement and I loved all the lifeticks, but I felt a little underwhelmed. Similarly, the exhibit quality of the Safari was incredible, but again I felt as though the very clearly European woodland rendered it impossible to actually believe I was on a savannah. Of course you never really believe that at Paris either, but tonally, I felt more immersed. There are of course some who lament the overuse of mock rock, but I found the thematic elements to be subtle yet effective.

And the sheer bulk of offerings at Paris, including some really noteworthy animals (Chilean Pumas, melanistic jaguars, the bustards, the gaur) as well as the charm throughout is quite hard to beat.

All in all, having visited all three relative sites and basing this on how much I personally enjoyed their relevant offerings, a narrow 3-2 to Paris for me.

@vogelcommando - part of the main savannah.

@SivatheriumGuy - another view of said savannah with quite the backdrop.

@amur leopard - a smaller, but still large, 'secondary' savannah with rhinos, zebras and lechwe, as well as (unfortunately) pinioned ground hornbills. A structurally fascinating exhibit with all the sectioned off areas of vegetation for the lechwe and hornbills. Excellent for them, offering shelter and shade, and I imagine the added complexity helps out the rhinos quite a bit too by forcing them to move around their space more elaborately.

@vogelcommando - not as good as the one at Burgers', but the Paris lion enclosure is really good. Very big for a city zoo and nicely landscaped.

@twilighter - Puma enclosure. This is a really noteworthy species, being subspecies-pure Chilean Pumas imported directly from Chile. From what I know, the population of pumas in Europe is heavily hybridised, so these animals (the only genetically pure Chileans known in Europe) are very valuable and interesting.

@amur leopard - a massive mixed-species South American exhibit. Fairly standard species selection, only it's massive, with the above photo showing nowhere near the entirety.

@amur leopard - not sure if Jaguars count, but if they do, Paris has a really solid enclosure for a pair, including a melanistic individual.

@ralph - a really good Iberian Wolf enclosure. You can just about see at the back that this spacious and wooded paddock stretches back quite some distance beyond the photo. Again, though, a little dubious as to whether this species should count.

Now moving to the Menagerie...

]
@duskylory - showcasing a fair portion (far from the entirety) of the decent Indian Gaur paddock, with some very charming stables behind. Paris is the studbook holder for the species.

@Buldeo - a rather good Arabian Oryx enclosure, albeit miles inferior to what the oryxes at Burgers' have on the savannah.

@Austin the Sengi - a sandy Przewalski's Horse yard. Nothing remarkable in fairness, but not bad.

@duskylory - solid Southern Cassowary enclosure, with a very large building behind (not sure how much of that space is devoted to the animals, of course, and muntjacs share the same building for their indoor space).

@twilighter - famous Houbarra Bustard aviary. Really annoyingly, I have no memory of the bustards from my visit, so I can't comment on whether the Little Bustards are also kept in this bizarre structure.

@ralph - the Bennett's Wallaby enclosure that is literally detached from the rest of the zoo and located across a path from it, elsewhere in the Jardin des Plantes. A touch that I adored in my time in Paris. It's also probably one of the largest and grassiest enclosures at the zoo!

In summary, I feel as though the immense bulk of the Parisian offerings relative to what Burgers' has, coupled with the many species and enclosures of serious notes, just about wins this for them, but I fully admit that my personal enjoyment of these exhibits on my sole visits may be playing a factor.

 

[amur leopard]

@duskylory - solid Southern Cassowary enclosure, with a very large building behind (not sure how much of that space is devoted to the animals, of course, and muntjacs share the same building for their indoor space).

Maybe worth mentioning that this exhibit looks far better now with way more foliage - somewhat unrecognisably so. Having said this I think maybe the species might be pushing the category limits slightly...

@twilighter - famous Houbarra Bustard aviary. Really annoyingly, I have no memory of the bustards from my visit, so I can't comment on whether the Little Bustards are also kept in this bizarre structure.

Little bustard is kept in an enclosure around the more standard aviary block. In this enclosure with the Houbaras are thick knees and turtle doves.

But agreed in general about Paris's offerings maybe being slightly better in this category, though I have not visited Burgers'. Could also undoubtedly count the Caracals at the menagerie.

 

[TeaLovingDave]

Arguably the best mixed-species savannah in Europe?

That would be the same savannah exhibit which left so little impression on me during my first (and only) visit in 2018 that without checking my photographs or the gallery I'd be entirely unable to remember what it looked like, and where every single occupant was locked inside and only visible from within the indoor viewing area adjacent to Bush?

The Vincennes exhibit beats it hands down, methinks, and even *that* isn't anywhere in the running for the best mixed-species savannah exhibit I've seen!

I feel as though the immense bulk of the Parisian offerings relative to what Burgers' has, coupled with the many species and enclosures of serious notes, just about wins this for them

That's basically what it comes down to for me, too - this is another one where if a true 2.5-2.5 split vote were possible I'd be tempted to go that direction, giving Burgers a full 2 points for Desert and a half-point for the handful of other relevant exhibits, and giving the Parisian pair 2.5 points for the large number of relevant exhibits and generally-high standard throughout, but absent this option the line has to be drawn *somewhere* or other certainly I think that the 4-1 vote from @Haasje is pretty hard to defend!

Little bustard is kept in an enclosure around the more standard aviary block. In this enclosure with the Houbaras are thick knees and turtle doves.

When I visited in April 2024, Little Bustard were actually mixed with the Houbara *and* present in the other aviary you mention!

 

[amur leopard]

When I visited in April 2024, Little Bustard were actually mixed with the Houbara *and* present in the other aviary you mention!

I'm fairly certain that's no longer the case, as I only remember seeing three species signed and seen in the houbara aviary, but if that is indeed still the case, fantastic!

Very much agreed that a 4-1 vote in either direction is unfair though; I highly doubt the Desert largely in and of itself overwhelms all of the above from Paris to that extent despite never having visited...

 

[CrashMegaraptor]

I've only been to Burgers (so I can't vote), and it was several years ago now... and whilst I remember really liking the Desert house (this was back when the bobcat was still there), the savannah exhibit was... solid, but I wouldn't say THE best, unless you're considering size (and this was back when the hartebeest was still there too).

 

[TeaLovingDave]

I've only been to Burgers (so I can't vote), and it was several years ago now... and whilst I remember really liking the Desert house (this was back when the bobcat was still there), the savannah exhibit was... solid, but I wouldn't say THE best, unless you're considering size (and this was back when the hartebeest was still there too).

Well, as I've remarked on several occasions in the past, one need not hold off on voting merely because they haven't visited both collections in any given match - and even if one doesn't feel comfortable voting, they should still post any/all questions they may have about the collections in question in order to prompt further posts and information

 

[Philipine eagle]

Arguably the best mixed-species savannah in Europe?

Fresh out of the Bush, the relative cold of the Desert was immersion-killing and it felt far more sparse. Another aspect in which it really suffered from comparison with the Bush was the rather linear structure, compared to its predecessor with a myriad of wonderful trails. I was captivated by the landscaping (managing to design a desert, a notoriously open environment, in such a way that there were no poor sightlines or cross-viewing) was a tremendous achievement and I loved all the lifeticks, but I felt a little underwhelmed.

Here's a simple solution : reverse the order of visits. With more than 50 visits to Burgers, I don't think I ever visited the Bush first. Start at the top of the canyon, in the relative coolness of the desert, descend to the underground section and then arrive in the humid steaming heat of the Bush: it makes so much more sense. I guess you visit the Bush first as birds tend to be more active in the morning, which is true of course, but from my experience bird activity in the Bush mostly depends more on visitor numbers than heat. Ideal hours are mornings (true), but late afternoon equals to that.

Similarly, the exhibit quality of the Safari was incredible, but again I felt as though the very clearly European woodland rendered it impossible to actually believe I was on a savannah. Of course you never really believe that at Paris either, but tonally, I felt more immersed. There are of course some who lament the overuse of mock rock, but I found the thematic elements to be subtle yet effective.

I definitely agree that the European-looking background in Burgers' safari is a turn-off somehow. And that the enclosures in Paris make a nice aesthetic with the big rock as a background. Paris is in that sense a feast for the eyes.

And the sheer bulk of offerings at Paris, including some really noteworthy animals (Chilean Pumas, melanistic jaguars, the bustards, the gaur) as well as the charm throughout is quite hard to beat.

I did not take into account puma, jaguar and gaur. (but could be wrong on that). These are all found in grasslands, but dense cover is essential for them - whether through vegetation or landscape - and none of them is a true grassland specialist.

 

[Baringogiraffe12]

@twilighter - Puma enclosure. This is a really noteworthy species, being subspecies-pure Chilean Pumas imported directly from Chile. From what I know, the population of pumas in Europe is heavily hybridised, so these animals (the only genetically pure Chileans known in Europe) are very valuable and interesting.

Sadly, I believe the on-show pumas at Paris are zoo-generic individuals, the zoo hold 0,1 off-show which is pure-bred Chilean.

 

[Kalaw]

That would be the same savannah exhibit which left so little impression on me during my first (and only) visit in 2018 that without checking my photographs or the gallery I'd be entirely unable to remember what it looked like, and where every single occupant was locked inside and only visible from within the indoor viewing area adjacent to Bush?

The Vincennes exhibit beats it hands down, methinks, and even *that* isn't anywhere in the running for the best mixed-species savannah exhibit I've seen!

Fair enough then! Like I say, I found it similarly underwhelming, with the blatantly European woodland and the fact that most of the inhabitants (other than the wildebeest who were in a separate paddock due to a recently born calf) were at some distance making it very forgettable. I too prefer Vincennes by some margin, but given the Safari is triple the size of both the Parisian ones (giraffes and rhinos) combined, so it definitely deserves some credit in this discussion. It wouldn't make my top three favourite mixed-species savannahs either, but I did feel as though your suggestion that Burgers' only has the Desert and 'not all that much else' was being a little unfair to it.

I too would love to hear from @Haasje on why they think Burgers' is so overwhelmingly superior. Especially now that without it, the score would be tied up, it is a little unfortunate to have no explanation for said vote.

Here's a simple solution : reverse the order of visits. With more than 50 visits to Burgers, I don't think I ever visited the Bush first. Start at the top of the canyon, in the relative coolness of the desert, descend to the underground section and then arrive in the humid steaming heat of the Bush: it makes so much more sense. I guess you visit the Bush first as birds tend to be more active in the morning, which is true of course, but from my experience bird activity in the Bush mostly depends more on visitor numbers than heat. Ideal hours are mornings (true), but late afternoon equals to that.

I must admit that my reasons for visiting the Bush first weren't quite as calculated as that! I simply wanted to save what I expected to be the 'best' (that big conglomeration of Bush, Ocean and Desert) for last, therefore doing the outdoor areas plus the Mangrove first. As a result, I ended up in the Safari around midday, had my lunch in the restaurant that overlooked the Bush, and at that point couldn't resist doing the Bush first! Certainly, if I return to Burgers' (which I feel as though I inevitably will one day), I will start with the Desert.

I did not take into account puma, jaguar and gaur. (but could be wrong on that). These are all found in grasslands, but dense cover is essential for them - whether through vegetation or landscape - and none of them is a true grassland specialist.

Very true that they are not specialists, but a significant portion of the Jaguar's range is the Brazilian Cerrardo (a savannah) and Pumas are known to reside in some deserts. If not being a specialist is the criteria, then some of the Desert inhabtants, such as the porcupines, would also not count. That said, I would be inclined to agree with you on gaur having looked into it a little further. It indeed appears they would not count.

Which reminds me of the Guinea Baboons at Paris. I would probably say they're category-relevant, but they are another one wherein the savannah comprises a significant portion of their range, but not all of it as they can also be found in forests.

 

[Haasje]

I don't feel I need to defend myself, @TeaLovingDave and I'm perfectly free to make my own choices and decide what I think about things, just like anyone else. That said, I'd like to briefly explain my point of view.

I reckon the Burgers' Desert is the best desert exhibit in the world. Honestly, I haven't come across another building that even comes close to recreating this ecosystem on such a scale. Perhaps a few parks that are actually located in a real desert might compare.

On the other hand, I find the enclosures in Burgers' Safari less aesthetically pleasing and not as beautifully designed architecturally as those in Paris. However, they are significantly larger, and more animals are mixed together, which I genuinely see as a big plus, even though the collection in Paris is certainly interesting. I should point out that nothing particularly new or remarkable springs to mind from the Menagerie in Paris, onlty the Sahel area in the Zoo de Vincennes comes to mind i this category. After visiting both last year. .

While the scenery in Burgers' Safari could do with some improvement (I'd absolutely love it if a big storm blew down a lot of those trees, so they could be replaced with some lovely grasses, acacias, and other suitable planting), it's ok and still offers cracking views, particularly over the main plain. Especially from the Safari terrace at Burgers' and the 'Kopjes' section, you can really see the massive potential Burgers' has for its Safari area in the long run. Even so, it's not quite good enough yet to completely blow Paris out of the water.

To sum up, I definitely think Burgers' Desert deserves a solid 3-0 in terms of the 'desert' aspect. For the 'savannah' experience, I'd call it a draw, let's say 1-1 between the two parks, with perhaps a slight preference for Paris. Ideally, I'd vote 4-2, but that's not an option. So, I'm leaning more towards 4-1 then 3-2. Otherwise, I genuinely believe you'd be underselling just how good the Burgers' Desert really is.

 

[Kalaw]

Could also undoubtedly count the Caracals at the menagerie.

A very good point! And also a good point that the cassowaries may be a stretch.

The Caracals at the Menagerie are kept in the Fauverie, a very beloved exhibit in this forum due to its antique ambience. It is an absolutely gorgeous building from the inside, and the design of the cages add a grandiose feel that is quite hard to come by with modern zoo architecture. The fact that the indoor areas for all the cats are wire-walled, therefore allowing visitors to hear and smell the cats in close quarters, is another real treat for enthusiasts that few places these days offer.

Admittedly, for the big cats it is now too small, but for the Caracals (the only species relevant in this category) it isn't. In fact, the outdoor area is far larger than many far more modern enclosures at other zoos:

@lintworm - interior view of the Fauverie.

@Juancho - external view

Of course, its up to the individual voter to judge whether they want to take into account the whole charm of the Fauverie on the basis of just one category-relevant species, or if you solely want to look at the Caracal enclosure. But I personally do, because it makes for a more spectacular visitor viewing experience of Caracal than any other zoo that I know of!

@duskylory - the Caracal outdoor enclosure, which as the photo demonstrates is rather large and offers a lot of height. Also note that this photo is both eight years old and from winter - if the condition of the neighbouring cages, which are better-documented in the gallery, is anything to go by, then it will look a lot denser now.

Also, note that the Caracals have more space than just this and one of the indoor stalls pictured above, as between the two is a second offshow indoor area. I'm not sure how big it is, but it's large enough for some of the caracals to spend a very long time in there as I learnt the hard way on my visit, with a mother and her newborn cubs not venturing outside said area.

And labouring under the assumption that the Guinea Baboons at Vincennes do count for this category, I would say their enclosure, also using the stunning backdrop of the Great Rock, is one of the better examples of the slowly dying 'baboon rock' concept that I know of. It is larger, with more natural substrate than other such exhibits, and with more than the rocks themselves to offer in terms of climbing thanks to the various branches throughout, which the baboons do repeatedly make good use of. I anticipate that some people will take issue with the (admittedly awful) mock rock, but for me this is a good enclosure.

@amur leopard - lengthways view.

@twilighter - an alternate angle that makes it more appreciable how well the thing fades into the Great Rock behind, something that is all the more impressive when one considers that this enclosure is only a decade or so old and the Rock is close to a century old. Everything behind the moss-covered back wall was pre-existing and I think that is very impressive from a landscaping standpoint. But yes, that mock rock looks terrible.

So even correcting my earlier stance and excluding the gaur and cassowaries (which having looked further into their habitat, I was probably being way too generous including), Paris still has a very wide array of very good offerings.

 

[TeaLovingDave]

I don't feel I need to defend myself, @TeaLovingDave and I'm perfectly free to make my own choices and decide what I think about things, just like anyone else. That said, I'd like to briefly explain my point of view.

You don't *need* to defend and explain your vote, no.

But that doesn't mean that it isn't worthwhile hoping that you would do so - this is by no means the first (nor, I imagine, last) time that an extreme outlier vote has been queried by myself or other forum members - given the fact that getting an explanation for someone's thoughts and opinions and having them make the case for a particular collection is one of the very best ways to encourage other individuals to change their vote or indeed vote full stop. In fact, I'd rather like it if more people discussed and explained their personal reasoning whether they were an outlier or not, as *any* participation in the discussion tends to increase overall vote numbers!

The current result of this very match is a pretty good example - until @Kalaw and myself actively explained the thought process behind our votes, the Paris collections were lagging far, far behind. Now, things are much closer thanks to a combination of switched votes and new voters.

Maybe your post will turn the tide back in the other direction, maybe not - but the overall quality of the discussion has been improved by your contribution and I hope it might attract further votes in either direction, as this has been a relatively slow match in that regard!

 

[CrashMegaraptor]

Well, as I've remarked on several occasions in the past, one need not hold off on voting merely because they haven't visited both collections in any given match - and even if one doesn't feel comfortable voting, they should still post any/all questions they may have about the collections in question in order to prompt further posts and information

Understood, but I'd rather not let personal bias get in the way of voting against a zoo I haven't been to just because I haven't been to it. Of course, I'm always happy to learn about zoos I've never been to, but I'd still rather not take a risk of second-guessing or sticking with a zoo I have been to.

For example, the Cologne vs Beauval Primate round (the super-close round), it didn't feel right for me to vote for Cologne just because that's the only one of the two I've been to. Maybe a vote could have been swung in a tad unfair manner, y'know?

 

[lintworm]

I am very surprised Paris is ahead in this contest and it seems as if it is framed as if Burgers' only has a Desert hall and a dusty large safari paddock on offer, which is something of an understatement...

The Desert itself is significant, being the largest indoor desert in the world with high level of landscaping. The collection is also significant, not only does it contain a lot of species hardly found elsewhere in Europe, but breeding success for most of the rarities is very impressive too. From greater roadrunners to Merriam's kangaroo rats and painted bunting to Montezuma quail etcetera, Burgers' is easily Europe's most successful zoo with them. E.g. It is nice that Paris has a singe black-breasted grosbeak, but Burgers' has a breeding group (first chicks hatched this year, while the parents only arrived less than 10 months ago). Just comparing species lists is ignoring husbandry successes, which is an oversimplification

The Safari area in Burgers' is less aesthetically pleasing than Paris, but it offers the animals (both the hoofstock and the lions and cheetahs) far more space. And importantly Paris still keeps pinioned birds mixed with hoofstock in multiple enclosures, while this is generally considered bad practice....

Apart from those 2 areas there are several other enclosures that count in the rest of Burgers' zoo. For starters there is a large meerkat enclosure, far superior to the one Paris has to offer. And seeing forest - grassland species count too, there are swamp wallaby, Asian elephant, hog deer, banteng and aardvark in enclosures that are generally far better structured than the ones in the menagerie in particular. So when it comes to species counts both zoos aren't that far apart, but when it comes to exhibitry and hisbandry success, there is no real competition imo.

The Desert alone would justify 2 out of 5 points and there is plenty on offer, without obvious weaknesses, to justify at least 3-2 for Burgers'.

 

[TeaLovingDave]

I am very surprised Paris is ahead in this contest

They've not been ahead at any point, as a matter of fact thanks to the 4-1 vote from Haasje, Burgers have maintained a lead throughout, even if it's grown slimmer over time... and as it appears your post has convinced @Penshet to change their vote to 4-1 as well, the gap has widened again!