I too think that the wild dog enclosure is pretty good. It does not look fantastic from the visitors point of view, with fake rocks and all that, but I like it. Also some enclosures that are as good for their inhabitants as the ones mentioned above:
- Japanese serow exhibit
- Red kangaroo exhibit
- Warthog exhibit
- Giant anteater exhibit
- Condor aviary
@Sun Wukong: there are over 400 photos from the zoo here at ZooChat, plus many books and other images that can be seen by anyone who wishes to see the zoo without actually paying admission. Why don't you show me the top 2-3 habitats at the zoo, because I can certainly show you numerous carnivore, primate, bear and hoofstock enclosures that are merely adequate at best. The animal collection is staggering, but where is the world class exhibitry? Name 2-3 top class exhibits.
I remember someone writing this in the Omaha Zoo thread:
'I firmly believe that if someone has not visited a particular zoo then they cannot honestly rank it in comparison to ones that they have spent half a day walking around in. An individual can read a hundred books on a place but actually being there in the flesh is a whole different ballgame.' Does that ring a bell?
Instead of you (rather impolitely, I dare to say) demanding from me to present you 'top habitats'-why don't you go to Berlin's two zoos in person? We could also meet there vis-a-vis...
This is a slightly old thread, but late night insomnia drew me to it and I am staggered by some of the comments here - really staggered, and that despite having seen many such staggering comments on Zoo Chat over the past years.
Snowleopard seems like an intelligent and caring sort of a chap, and I have communicated with him a fair amount and found him to be so. I just do not undertsand how he can say of one of the most historically significant zoos in the world that "at least 50% of the exhibits are terrible and should be discarded". This is just piffle, of the very highest order! Every corner of Berlin Zoo is packed with superb exhbits and cages (not 'habitats', please!) in which animals of extraordinary diversity can be clearly seen - and, and here's the rub, those animals look to be doing very well indeed! They don't seem to be too bothered by the fact that their enclosures are 'small' and lacking in 'naturalism'. Instead, they thrive.
This call for some Maoist style Cultural Revolution, a return to Year Zero where all that has gone before is torn up and called "bad" is just ridiculous.
World class exhibits?
1. The Swine House
2. the Birds of Prey Aviaries
3. the Bird House
4. the Hippo House
5. The zoo extension
6. the Carnivore House
7. The Monkey House
8. The aquarium
9. The rock for sheep and goats
10. the giraffe house
...and others too.
As for the claim that there are many 'crappy' exhibits at Berlin - it's a nonsense. There are a couple that are less good than others - the elephant house, for example - but 'crappy'? No way.
I hope that Berlin will continue its policy of maintaining a huge collection of interesting species, species which so often can't be seen elsewhere, in stunning buildings. the ambition of the place has been and continues to be stunning. It is, without doubt, one of the four or five greatest zoos in the world (and how lucky that another place worthy of such an accolade can be found just a few miles to the east).
Give me Berlin over some soulless, identikit zoo any day.
@sooty mangabey: this is indeed an old photo thread, but since you mentioned my ZooChat name I feel compelled to respond. We have emailed each other a number of times in the past year and so we feel confident in making comments on our respective opinions...and I'm sure that you know that I have never actually been to the Berlin Zoo. To be honest I have refrained from criticizing this zoo for quite some time now as it tends to divide fellow ZooChatters into two different camps, but it all comes back to aesthetics and what an individual looks for in a zoological collection.
I know that you see nothing wrong with the sun bear cages at the Berlin Zoo, while they look absolutely horrible to me. Comparing the ugly metal box cages for gorillas at Howletts to the magnificent jungle exhibits at Disney's Animal Kingdom or Bronx's Congo Gorilla Forest are no-brainers for me, but again I know that you and many others are supportive of the Howletts approach. The sun bears and gorillas at those two zoos have some of the ugliest cages I've ever seen photographed, but both have their defenders and so I've often let "sleeping dogs lie". I prefer naturalism, and this is one of the reasons why I laud the Woodland Park Zoo in Seattle and the Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum in Tucson. Both of those establishments (other than a couple of exceptions) would not be caught dead showcasing animals in metal boxes. Naturalistic, spacious exhibits are what I look for, and the Berlin Zoo has always been a famous postage stamp collection without the stunning natural vistas that invoke images of the wild. Some of the photos of the Berlin Zoo show copious amounts of tile, metal, wire, concrete and other non-natural fibers, and it sends shivers down my spine. Where is the realism?
I just spent some time wading through the more than 500 photos that constitute the Berlin Zoo gallery on this website, and to be honest the zoo is a thousand times better than it ever used to be. However, many of the bear grottoes, primate cages, indoor viewing areas and even the carnivore and swine houses (while all showcasing a remarkable variety of animal species) all still have their weak points. Even a few photos of the hippo house created quite a debate amongst ZooChatters that had visited the zoo, and the small amount of land given to a handful of hippos is shocking. One day I'll have to visit, but until that time comes I'll remain one of hundreds on ZooChat who comment on zoos that they've never been to. At least I've conquered most of Canada, the U.S.A and Australia in terms of zoo and aquarium visits...Europe will be next if I ever win the lottery!
This is how it should be, a healthy vigorous discussion on the merits of 21st century zoos, by two well informed and well travelled enthusiasts, not a spitting, scratching cock fight that some threads have been reduced to.
I respect both opinions here of two great zoobeaters, but as a zoo enthusiast, emphasis on the zoo part, i am inclined to follow and agree with John, as an enthusiast, who has never visited Berlin, this place would be a mecca for me and the attraction for me is unfashionable, but yes that massive collection of animals in one place!
Some exhibits, certainly are no NYC Congo rainforest or lied jungles, but are suitable for each species housed, just not measured in acres like SDWAP.
BTW snowleopard, the sunbears in those cages are at the Tierpark, not the zoo, and i do agree with you they LOOK awful, yet the bears breed here!!!!!!!
@kiang: thanks for the compliments, as sooty and I are rational, intelligent and yet still up for a good zoo debate. I've heard about the breeding success of the sun bears at the Tierpark (which is not always conducive to pleasant surroundings in captivity), and is it the Tierpark that has the ancient carnivore house that is full of tile and concrete?
@snowleopard: There's one question one could ask: how does the indoor gorilla exhibit at Bronx Zoo look like? I think Zooplantman mentioned that once... Probably not much more naturalistic than the sun bear exhibits at the Tierpark Berlin (which btw happened to be Great Ape enclosures once...).
Unfortunately, as we all have discussed before, naturalistic appearance and practical use can only rarely be completely combined, especially when wild animal husbandry is involved. However, there are also some exhibits in both Tierpark and Zoo in Berlin that could qualify for being called "naturalistic", too.
There's the old saying: "Seeing is believing". Before you honestly judge a zoo (may it be Berlin or wherever), based on 5, 500 or 5000 photos, better go there in person, and maybe try to peek behind the scenes. It's more helpful, for all involved. Therefore: good luck at playing the lottery
Comparing the ugly metal box cages for gorillas at Howletts to the magnificent jungle exhibits at Disney's Animal Kingdom or Bronx's Congo Gorilla Forest are no-brainers for me, but again I know that you and many others are supportive of the Howletts approach... I prefer naturalism, and this is one of the reasons why I laud the Woodland Park Zoo in Seattle and the Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum in Tucson. Both of those establishments (other than a couple of exceptions) would not be caught dead showcasing animals in metal boxes. Naturalistic, spacious exhibits are what I look for, and the Berlin Zoo has always been a famous postage stamp collection without the stunning natural vistas that invoke images of the wild... Where is the realism?
I just spent some time wading through the more than 500 photos that constitute the Berlin Zoo gallery on this website, and to be honest the zoo is a thousand times better than it ever used to be.
It's been said often before, but wjile, for example, the Bronx's gorilla thing looks wonderful, and is wonderful fo rmuch of the year, it's possibly not so good while the animals are confined inside during the winter. I really did love it when I went there, and would rank it as one of the best single exhibits in the world, but is it really natural? Does one really feel as if one is in the jungles of central Africa as one walks through this small slice of New York? In my case, no. I was surrounded by wailing New Yorkers, calling everything 'cute', banging on the glass. It was no more like the Congo than, for example, Berlin's Ape House (ie, not at all).
The Berlin Zoo is a thousand times better than it ever used to be? Hmmm. I'd like to go back to the 1930s when, obvious political concerns aside, I think the zoo would have been pretty splendiferous. And the 1970s, too. It's still great now, of course. Kiang: get there! You can get a cheapish flight from Scotland, there's plenty of reasonably priced hotels nearby, Berlin is one of the leats expensive cities in germany. there is no excuse!
