European (Tea)Cup - League F - Prague vs Stuttgart

Prague vs Stuttgart - MOUNTAINS AND POLES

  • Prague 5/0 Stuttgart

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Stuttgart 4/1 Prague

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Stuttgart 5/0 Prague

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    17
  • Poll closed .

TeaLovingDave

Moderator
Staff member
15+ year member
This should be an interesting match, I reckon, as two of my favourite zoological collections come face-to-face within the category of MOUNTAINS AND POLES - discuss the relative strengths and weaknesses of the collections in question, argue your positions, and vote for the collection which you believe should be victorious!
 
Stuttgart has Gelada, Alpine ibex, Spectacled bear, bongo, barbary sheep, markhor and snow leopard, but I don't know Stuttgart that well so somebody else can probably list their collection better and more extensively. Prague has barbary macaques and Barbary sheep, Tahr and Tur in amazing cliffside enclosures. Prague also has bongo in a nice enclosure. However, the polar bear enclosure at Prague is simply bad. They are building a new one so at least they work to fix it but the current situation is dire. I don't know yet how to vote for this one, as I've never seen the Stuttgart enclosures and I also didn't list birds reptiles etc as I am not sure which birds belong to this category and what birds don't.
 
Both zoos have strengths and weaknesses in this category, but the Prague cliffs are more impressive and more natural for their inhabitants.
The collection in Prague is also stronger and they deserve the win 3:2.
 
The Wilhelma (Stuttgart) also keeps Griffon Vulture, Waldrapp, Striated Caracara, Kea, Arabian Stone Patridge, Rock Cavy and Chilean Tinamou and Vicuña.

I don't know whether the Sichuan House in Praha belongs to this category.
If it is so, then I would vote for Prague with 3:2.
 
Both zoos feature a variety of excellent enclosures, some of which are truly outstanding in design. Stuttgart, for example, boasts the Spectacled Bear and Snow Leopard exhibits, which are particularly well executed. In Prague, the Barbary Sheep, Himalayan Tahr, and Tur are housed in stunning cliffside enclosures, truly something special.

That said, I must admit that, during my visits, I mostly observed these animals lingering at the lower sections of their habitats, rarely making use of the steep climbing areas, which was a bit disappointing but hopefully next time i will be more lucky. Still, it's certainly a strong point in Prague’s favour.

However, when it comes to the polar bears in Prague, I have to be honest: in my opinion, their current enclosure is no longer acceptable. Not now and not for the last 20 years. Personally, this counts as one, possibly even two, penalty points.

It’s good to hear that new enclosures are reportedly under construction, but unfortunately, they do not yet exist and therefore cannot be taken into account at this stage. I should add that while the concept art for the new polar bear facilities looks appealing, I remain concerned about the actual size of the future habitats. The bears will undoubtedly benefit from the upgrade in due time, but by how much? That remains an open question.

In contrast, Stuttgart presents itself as a strong contender in this category. Overall, both zoos are quite evenly matched in many respects, but based on the current situation, and especially due to the shortcomings regarding the polar bear enclosure in Prague, I feel compelled to conclude that Stuttgart must be considered the winner here.
 
The polar bear exhibit is an major eyesore at Prague. The mountain ungulate exhibits are impressive but i would say that Wilhelmas exhibits for alpine ibex and markhor are also large and pretty good for their inhabitants. The snow leopard exhibit at Stuttgart is also excellent.

What Stuttgart is missing here, is something outstanding. Nothing at Stuttgart comes even close to Pragues giant salamander house.

Actually it's another match where one could argue in both directions for a win, mostly thanks to Pragues polar bears. I will start with a small favor for the german collection for now, but open to be convinced the other way.
 
For the first time this tournament, it seems as though Prague may have some really serious competition as opposed to the walkover wins that they have been accustomed to. This is an interesting category for them as it encompasses possibly the absolute best (mountain goats) and the absolute worst (polar bears) of the zoo.

Here is a little photographic overview of Prague, which I hope demonstrates their overall excellence here asides from the obvious low point that is the bears. I will be voting 3-2 Prague for now and feel fairly confident in that verdict, but again could more than happily be convinced otherwise by an overview of what Stuttgart has to offer.

Getting the worst of the way...

Polar Bears:

full

@Robaque - a pair of sparse grottos with little in the way of enrichment or decoration other than a pool which only barely allows for full submersion. As future plans can't be taken into account for cup threads, it is quite difficult to overlook the enormous black mark which is this enclosure.

Africa Up Close:

Although no photos of their enclosure exist in the gallery, I am fairly certain that the Garnett's Greater Bushbaby, one of Prague's most interesting rarities, would count for this category. They inhabit a sizeable diurnal enclosure shared with Dwarf Mongooses, viewable from a café.

Across the Continents:

full

@vogelcommando - a rather good Guanaco paddock.

Not quite sure if the Eastern Wallaroos would count, but if they do then that is another bragging point in terms of rarities.

Northern Forest:

full

@Baldur - the Eurasian Grey Wolf enclosure, one of Prague's most underrated.

full

@Kalaw - a portion of the European Forest Reindeer enclosure, a wonderful species especially given the prevalence of the domestic reindeers in Europe.

full

@lintworm - Bharal enclosure.

Also in this area are Chinese Goral whose enclosure is not depicted in the gallery, but is rather good and sloping. Combining this with Plains, you have a really extensive series of mostly attractive enclosures, enhanced by their setting in mature woodland, for several interesting hoofstock. A very charming area of the zoo that few other urban zoos can quite recreate as far as ungulates are concerned.

Plains:

full

@Kalaw - Mishmi Takin enclosure, nothing oustanding but definitely rather good.

Gobi:

Operating under the belief that the Mongolian Steppe is high enough above sea level to be considered mountainous, the newest exhibit at Prague would also count for this category. And it's really good. With a lot of impressive educational material depicting Prague's extensive in situ conservation work with the Przewalski's Horse without ever coming across as distasteful or excessive, with a wonderful modern, clean feel to it all. There is a Przewalski's Horse enclosure that is one of the very few to provide sand substrate rather than concrete or grass, and a series of noteworthy reptiles and small mammals indoors ranging from Steppe Lemming to Tartar Sand Boa (the species that inspired the myth of the 'Mongolian death worm') and the only Mongolian Sunwatcher Agamas in Europe.

full

@Kalaw - Przewalski's Horse enclosure.

full

@linteworm - the terraria, with reptiles above, and some scorpions and cockroaches in the smaller ones below.

Rock Outcrop:

Perhaps Prague's most widely-beloved enclosures on this forum, and some of the very best exhibits anywhere in Europe, can be found on the stunning, near-vertical cliff that splits the zoo in half. One holds Himalayan Tahr, another holds West Caucasian Tur, and the largest features a mix of Barbary Sheep and Barbary Macaques.

full

@Kalaw - the Himalayan Tahr enclosure. The smallest of the three by area, but the tallest.

full

@Swedish Zoo Fan - showing how surprisingly forested these steep enclosures are. This one holds the sheep and macaques.

full

@Kalaw - the view from above, and baring in mind that this is the least tall of the three!

full

@Kalaw - a repurposed bear grotto that now serves as an excellent Red Panda enclosure.

full

@cuckooduck - the famous Great Aviary embedded into said cliff face, holding such mountainous birds as Cinereous Vulture.

Giant Salamander Pavilion (Velemlokarium):

When I visited Prague Zoo, I said that I thought this, not the mountain goats, was the best part of the entire collection. Giant salamanders are a fascinating species but so often overlooked and inactive in zoos as they are crammed into the corner of the reptile house. That couldn't be further from the truth at Prague where they have a network of dimly lit tanks, connected by a water cascade, that makes them the true centre of attention. There are five onshow tanks, with close to ten more allegedly offshow. One encourages you to climb underneath the salamanders and look up to a glass-bottom tank to see them. Another two appear to be open-topped and terrify many visitors who fear they may nearly fall in, but actually have a thin pane of glass just below the surface, a clever optical illusion. The salamanders share with some unsigned fish, and elsewhere in the building are Mangshan Pitviper and Impressed Tortoise, both also from the Chinese mountains.

full

@Nasua - the house with daylight illumination, which it has for half of the day before entering a night cycle.

full

@Nasua - a close-up of one of the tanks.

Sichuan Pavilion:

Another one of Prague's most-beloved exhibits, although one that left me just a tad underwhelmed due to the occasional inaccuracies in vegetation that were ever so slightly immersion-killing. However, for the most part, there is no arguing that this is one of the best representations in Europe of a very underrepresented region: the mountains of central China, and the birds that inhabit it. There are several rarities in here, particularly where laughingthrushes are concerned, and I believe most of the inhabitants are geographically accurate and would count here.

full

@lintworm - overview of the hall.

full

@Kalaw - a new, and very good, outdoor aviary adjacent to it.

Pheasantry:

Several more rare laughingthrushes are kept here, as well as:

full

@vogelcommando - the zoo's Pel's Fishing-owl aviary. Last year Prague became the first public collection to ever breed the genus, an enormous achievement.

Rakos' Pavilion:

full

@lintworm - the highland New Guinea aviary, holding four rarities: Pesquet's Parrot, Raggiana Bird-of-paradise, King Bird-of-paradise and Cinnamon Ground Dove.

That is everything I could think of, although I may well have forgotten some things.

Overall it is clear that this is a serious strength for Prague. Arguably the zoo's three best exhibits (cliffside paddocks, Velemlokarium and Sichuan) all count here, as do several of its most interesting rarities (Pel's Fishing-owl, Garnett's Greater Bushbaby, Mongolian Sunwatcher etc). I suppose the question then is what does Stuttgart have to offer, as well as how badly does the Polar Bear grotto weigh it down. Personally, I feel confident in a 3-2 Prague vote, perhaps even 4-1, but look forward to hearing more about the German side's offerings.
 
I ditto what twiligher said, plus I wish Wilhelma didn’t get rid of Rocky Mountain goats, but that’s just me and doesn’t affect my vote by much.
 
@Kalaw i think you are way to generous with your inclusions. Gobi clearly presents a desert and not a mountain. Grey wolves live in mountain areas, but for me they are clearly no typical mountain species (this subject has been discussed already elsewhere, as white rhinos also occur at a 2000 meter high. And also the Sichuan house is imo at least questionable. There is a warning sign at the entrance with 25 degree and not all of the birds kept there are mountain species.
 
@Kalaw i think you are way to generous with your inclusions. Gobi clearly presents a desert and not a mountain. Grey wolves live in mountain areas, but for me they are clearly no typical mountain species (this subject has been discussed already elsewhere, as white rhinos also occur at a 2000 meter high. And also the Sichuan house is imo at least questionable. There is a warning sign at the entrance with 25 degree and not all of the birds kept there are mountain species.

But wolves DO live in polar regions and the category is for Mountains AND Poles, not just mountains.

Besides, Prague needs some good Pole rep outside their terrible Polar Bear exhibit.
 
@Kalaw i think you are way to generous with your inclusions. Gobi clearly presents a desert and not a mountain. Grey wolves live in mountain areas, but for me they are clearly no typical mountain species (this subject has been discussed already elsewhere, as white rhinos also occur at a 2000 meter high. And also the Sichuan house is imo at least questionable. There is a warning sign at the entrance with 25 degree and not all of the birds kept there are mountain species.
As @CrashMegaraptor said, the wolves, along with the reindeer, qualified due to ‘poles’ not ‘mountains.’

Regarding Sichuan and Gobi, I will allow TLD to rule on that as it’s his competition. The Gobi Plateau is predominantly at a greater elevation than 1,000 metres which is surely a mountain. The average elevation in the Sichuan province is supposedly between 2,000 and 3,500 metres (and that is the entire province, not just the western parts on the Tibetan Plateau). Why do you think these should count, but the giant salamanders (which are usually found between 300 and 800 metres and are surely more appropriate in ‘water’) do count?
 
Funnily enough, I've been trying to decide whether or not the Gobi exhibit would count for the category - and have still not come to a solid conclusion either way. I'll think over the matter a little more.

The Sichaun Pavillion is an easier decision - it definitely counts.
 
The key point for me is that Stuttgart a) doesn't have all that many category exhibits and b) none of them are anything particularly special or noteworthy, whilst Prague has the following:

  • The best exhibits for mountain caprines anywhere in Europe - and I say this as someone who is extremely fond of both Innsbruck Alpenzoo and Tierpark Berlin, two collections which are definitely heavy-hitters in this regard themselves.
  • The best exhibit complex for an amphibian species anywhere in Europe by a long shot, with no real competition in this regard - and the species in question (Chinese Giant Salamander) definitely falls within the purview of this category.
  • Numerous excellent aviary exhibits for species falling within the purview of this category, including but not limited to the Sichuan Pavilion, sections of the Rakos Pavilion, and various exhibits within the Pheasantry and nearby bird of prey aviaries.
...along with a wide variety of other highlights already discussed by @Kalaw . I am still weighing up whether the Gobi exhibit - being based on a high plateau area adjacent to the Altai and Tien Shan ranges - falls within the purview of this category.

The other factor which needs to be mentioned is, of course, the polar bear exhibit which some have highlighted as a reason to discount *all* of the above and give the win to Stuttgart despite its relative weakness in this category. I would tend to argue that although this exhibit is indisputably bad and the planned replacement is sorely required (and that it represents one of the worst exhibits at the zoo full stop) it is nowhere near as bad as the worst exhibits for the species I have seen elsewhere in Europe, and the contrast presented by the excellence elsewhere in the zoo somewhat skews matters. I don't feel it is warranted whatsoever to suggest that the poor quality visible within this enclosure even comes close to expunging the quality of the other category exhibits at Prague and rendering them of less value than the meagre offerings at Stuttgart.

I shall endeavour to provide a pictorial summary of the latter in the morning - they more or less come down to three exhibits within one corner of the zoo, all reasonably good but none special or noteworthy.
 
@Kalaw I agree with you about the Sichuan area at China of course. But a bunch of the species within the Sichuan house aren't real mountain birds (for instance the pheasants). Therefore my personal opinion on this topic is, that you can't take the whole house within this category. And with a warning sign at the door, that you will face 26° and a humidity of 80% doesn't help to create mountain vibes.

I think for the wolves the subspecies rule doesn't apply, as they aren't kept in an arctic setting.

I guess mountain is also up to some personal experience. As Austrian i have to admit that i will probably consider different things as a mountain than e.g. a Dutsch.

  • The best exhibits for mountain caprines anywhere in Europe - and I say this as someone who is extremely fond of both Innsbruck Alpenzoo and Tierpark Berlin, two collections which are definitely heavy-hitters in this regard themselves.
Only if you limit yourself to major zoos. There are places within the alps with at least equally good exhibits for native mountain ungulates. Regarding the polar bears, which exhibit still in use would you consider worse than Prague? (Not match related, but i'm curious about that)
 
There are places within the alps with at least equally good exhibits for native mountain ungulates.

As someone with a strong soft spot for native mountain ungulates, I'd be interested to hear your recommendations re: collections with caprine exhibits better than those at Alpenzoo? :)

egarding the polar bears, which exhibit still in use would you consider worse than Prague?

The exhibit at Tierpark Hagenbeck is worse on several levels - most egregiously the fact that it is relatively new (having been built in 2012) and as such there is no excuse for it being so poor.

The exhibit at Zoo Brno is even worse than the Hagenbeck one, and comes close to being one of the worst bear exhibits I've seen full-stop.

Another exhibit which (thankfully) is no longer in use which would have fallen into this category as well is the one at Zoo Warszawa - which coincidentally is the former home of the individuals currently at Prague.

There's also a handful of polar bear exhibits which I think are only marginally better than the one at Prague, and which have aspects which are worse balanced out by aspects that are better - the main ones which occur to me at the present moment are the ones at Ouwehands and Tierpark Hellabrunn.
 
First, i haven't visited all collections here, so there is the possibility that i miss something. Probably the most impressing one, very similar to Prague is the alpin ibex exhibit at the "Weißer Zoo & Kameltheater Kernhof". It is most likely larger as the largest single exhibit of Pragues mountain ungulates exhibits and there is more height difference. Wildpark Ernstbrunn also has very good cliff exhibits for alpine ibex and chamois. Although from a visitor perspective they aren't as interesting, as there is quite a large meadow between visitor path and the mountain. At Cumberland Wildpark Grünau there is another example of a stunning alpine ibex exhibit, but less impressive. (In generell that's the Wildpark at Austria to visit if you are interested in native species). There are a bunch of other interesting and very large exhibits, but they have way less (impressive) rocks.

Regarding the polar bears. I agree with you. I have to admit that i haven't thought of Brno since the exhibit is currently not visible for visitors.
 
I shall endeavour to provide a pictorial summary of the latter in the morning - they more or less come down to three exhibits within one corner of the zoo, all reasonably good but none special or noteworthy.

As promised, the small handful of exhibits at Wilhelma which fit the category at hand:

Snow Leopard

full


full


Spectacled Bear

full


Markhor

full


Alpine Ibex

full


All of these are located in one corner of the zoo, and more-or-less serve as a single exhibit complex (which also contains several non-category species which have been placed within vacant exhibits, such as cheetah). As previously noted, none are anywhere near as bad as the polar bear exhibit at Prague, but neither do *any* of them even come close to the best that Prague has to offer, in quality nor sheer quantity and scope - as such, I stand by my position that it would be egregiously unfair to give Stuttgart the win within this category, and moreover contend that if it were not for the presence of the polar bear exhibit at Prague and the generally decent quality of what little Stuttgart has to offer, a pretty strong case could be made for a 5-0 score for the Czech collection.

Overall, both zoos are quite evenly matched in many respects, but based on the current situation, and especially due to the shortcomings regarding the polar bear enclosure in Prague, I feel compelled to conclude that Stuttgart must be considered the winner here.

Given you imply that you believe the two collections are evenly matched, and that the polar bear exhibit acts as a tie-breaker of sorts, I'd be interested to hear your arguments relating to how the small handful of exhibits I've highlighted above for Stuttgart are equal to the large number of exhibits highlighted by myself and @Kalaw for Prague?

I'd also be interested to hear the thoughts of @Lafone regarding her 3-2 vote for Stuttgart :)
 
I've upped my vote to Prague 4-1 Stuttgart. Right now there isn't much of a compelling case for the German zoo here as the arguments for Stuttgart largely hinge on the Czech zoo having one bad exhibit, while largely ignoring everything else Prague has to offer in this category by comparison to Stuttgart. While I agree exhibit quality is important, collection also should play a role here and Stuttgart just doesn't have enough to compete (based on what has been said so far).

In the hopes it will maybe get more people to participate and share their insights on zoos through this competition, I'll also add this: Something @TeaLovingDave said in the Chester vs. Beauval Islands matchup resonated with me. There was pretty much a complete lack of argument on the Beauval side of things, but I kept my vote at Chester 3-2 Beauval largely because we just never saw what Beauval had to offer and I felt I knew enough to keep it at 3-2 and feel comfortable there. Dave pointed out the distinct possibility that Beauval's defenders were staying quiet for this exact reason and avoid more people switching their vote to a Chester 4-1. We even saw this play out a bit as immediately after the match was over, one of the adamant Beauval defenders all of sudden had a lot to say and even insinuated the competition/draw was rigged against Beauval. While I think this is absolutely a valid strategy from these voters, I wish I wouldn't have rewarded the lack of info about Beauval in the thread by sticking to a 3-2 vote.

Essentially, I don't think a lack of argument/information should keep people from voting more heavily a certain way. Right now, I feel like there is a lack of true argument for Stuttgart in this competition and will be upping my vote in favor of the Czech zoo accordingly. I'm also not trying to distort this and punish the German zoo, but it truly feels like they don't have much to offer so I need more of a reason than what has been given to award them two points here.

EDIT: Also for those who would point out I don't participate much in the discussions while saying others should more, this is a valid point to some extent. However, I truly don't have much to add to the conversation as I have only been to 1/2 a competitor in the competition (who is now out of it). I am also not someone who has time to do a ton of my own research/deep dive into what zoos have to offer. If I had visited more of these zoos, I would happily give my opinion on them. I just haven't, as I'm US based.
 
Last edited:
This is actually a very valid point. In the early rounds, every thread was full of discussions and descriptions, often with lots of photos, of everything both contenders had in their collection regarding their selected category, but this seems to have dwindled as the matches have gone on. Chester vs Beauval was a pretty bad low for this and I feel it kinda suffered as a result.

Now, as I stated, I've never been to Beauval, and so all I can confidently do in this situation is state my opinion on Chester and where it stands. I still stand by my belief that, of all the zoos in League E, Chester is probably the best contender for the "Islands" category, and whilst I may not have been to all seven zoos in League E, I can confidently say it beats both Berlin and Burgers, handily. But that's the thing... I HAVEN'T been to all the zoos, and as someone on the outside looking in, I would genuinely like to know a little more about them. Sure I can look up animal lists on ZTL, but I do like actually seeing exhibit examples and learning more about what a zoo's strengths and weaknesses are. I'm sure Beauval has some great enclosures for its Island representatives, but not getting the chance to actually see them was, for lack of a better word, unfortunate.

Don't get me wrong, I probably still wouldn't have voted due to my own personal bias that I've been trying to avoid (even though it'd be super easy to do because, again, it's Chester in "Islands" we're talking about here), but I'd still love to see what it's playing against. And obviously for people who aren't following my own guidelines, that may sway votes one way or another.

That's why I ultimately appreciate where this particular match-up is going, because at least here we have a solid collection of descriptions and photos to base things off of. If I wasn't so stubborn with my own rule-set, based on this alone, I'd probably give a 4-1 victory to Prague. It's certainly not a 5-0 thanks to that converted swimming pool masquerading as a Polar Bear exhibit, but the other exhibits, not to mention the sheer variety, just look far more interesting than Stuttgart's does for the most part. Not to mention Stuttgart's Markhor exhibit frankly doesn't look any better.
 
Last edited:
Given remarks by Lintworm elsewhere on the forum that he feels that I have been unfair towards Stuttgart in my post upthread - and the indication that he believes I have been letting unconscious bias creep into my posts - I have reduced my vote down to 3-2 Prague and suggest that others do so as well until he (hopefully) replies to my private message asking for feedback on what further information I should provide relating to Stuttgart.

In the early rounds, every thread was full of discussions and descriptions, often with lots of photos, of everything both contenders had in their collection regarding their selected category, but this seems to have dwindled as the matches have gone on. Chester vs Beauval was a pretty bad low for this and I feel it kinda suffered as a result.

...and I think that this is precisely why unconscious bias has been creeping into my posts - increasingly it has been left to me to post what each collection has to offer, rather than other individuals doing so and discussing what has been posted!

Between the continuing decrease in participation, the fact that if I am causing offence to others in my posts it is no longer fun, and the fact that I find maintaining my mental "spoons" tricky at the best of times, I think that I will be somewhat abbreviating my plans for how the remainder of the Cup will work.

In the meantime, I'll be entirely ceasing all active participation in the threads (or overt commentary) in order to prevent further bias creeping in :)

EDIT: Also for those who would point out I don't participate much in the discussions while saying others should more, this is a valid point to some extent. However, I truly don't have much to add to the conversation as I have only been to 1/2 a competitor in the competition (who is now out of it). I am also not someone who has time to do a ton of my own research/deep dive into what zoos have to offer. If I had visited more of these zoos, I would happily give my opinion on them. I just haven't, as I'm US based.

Don't get me wrong, I probably still wouldn't have voted due to my own personal bias that I've been trying to avoid (even though it'd be super easy to do because, again, it's Chester in "Islands" we're talking about here), but I'd still love to see what it's playing against. And obviously for people who aren't following my own guidelines, that may sway votes one way or another.

As I've mentioned several times, even if people don't feel comfortable voting or taking a pro-active role in discussions due to their own experience or lack of it, they can still 100% make valuable contribution by asking questions about the category, the contenders and so forth, thereby providing jumping-off points for others to participate.
 
Back
Top