I liked this zoo from what I can remember from my 2014 visit, and I found it was easily in the top 5 in France. However, hasn't it lost its EAZA accreditation due to its tiger show and general disregard to regulations in order to boost visitor numbers?
I agree that it is in the top 5 for the diversity of species, and the design of the enclosures (especially the vegetation). Some enclosures are small but still well appointed.
The tiger show is a mistake in my opinion that placed the zoo in a difficult situation (debt and bad publicity).
But I saw the show, there is still a strong educational message on the conservation of the tiger.
Tiger exhibit are visible at the back of TigerWorld. They are correct and do not look like circus trucks
There is also an educational room about this feline.
It seems that we don't have the same definition for "correct" ...
Tiger show must be banned, no matter the message given. This zoo isn't too bad, but don't deserve to be ranked in any "top 5 french zoos" because of this show.
I would argue if we are judging the zoo and its exhibits alone, it is certainly in the top 5, if not in the top 3. We may not agree with the tiger show (I don't, I find it a blatant disregard for EAZA's regulations which are there to help the animals), but if it doesn't impede the other enclosures from being as good as they are, then it can still be classed as a good zoo.
I respect your opinion and I repeat that I think it was a mistake the zoo made.
For information, do you think it’s more shocking than a sea lion or parrot show, no matter the message given ?
But I confirm FOR ME, the zoo in general has been in the high level for a long time before TigerWorld.
There have been administrative changes this winter, let's wait to see more ...
I strongly disagree with shows that implied to have bad off-shows conditions : falconry, parrots show, tigers shows are 3 examples in Amnéville.
And I don't think that you can't judge a whole zoo because of one installation : we are talking about a brand new 20M€ circus area opened in 2015 with tigers (hybrids and white) that lives in small outside quarters. This is the marginal philosophy of this zoo, given by it's owner, so why should we say "except this the zoo is good" ? Yes it isn't so bad (there is still some defects) but it certainly don't deserve to enter as a top zoos of my country.
The former owner stays in the zoo despite this administrative change, he's now responsible of the conservation part (maybe also the animal collection).
