@NZ Jeremy and Chlidonias: both of you guys love aquariums, and you are each very knowledgeable when it comes to all types of aquatic institutions. I know that Childonias works in an aquarium, and that Jeremy wants to either work in an aquarium or work specifically for a firm that designs aquarium exhibits. I respect your views here at ZooBeat, but also want to clarify my own thoughts towards Melbourne Aquarium.
The problem with ranking or discussing aquariums is that an individual's opinion is based on subjectivity, meaning that what one person thinks is terrific another might be disappointed with. My wife and I are toying with the idea of even moving to Melbourne, as we would love to live in Australia and she has family there. I would like nothing better than for that amazing city to have a world-class aquarium, but there's no way that I personally believe the present one is even close.
I have the visitor guide/map in front of me, and just spent 15 minutes going through the Melbourne Aquarium's website, and there is absolutely nothing world-class about the place whatsoever. But perhaps myself and others have been a little harsh in our short reviews, as there are a number of decent exhibits that were good but not spectacular. After spending hours in Monterey Bay Aquarium, visiting Seattle Aquarium twice, going to Vancouver Aquarium at least 8 times in my life, seeing the wonders of San Diego's Seaworld, and also spending time in other aquariums then it's difficult to even compare Melbourne's with anywhere else. Even Sydney, with the spectacular acryclic tunnel passage, seal habitat, platypus, crocodile, and other exhibits is far superior to Melbourne's decent but not great set of tanks.
The ground floor level at Melbourne Aquarium has lots of visitor amenities, and the Tattersall, Sink or Swim and Coral Atoll set of tanks are all well done. I give this as faint praise, but I've seen everything there done bigger and better in other establishments. Level one has the excellent Mangrove tank, which in hindsight is actually quite pleasing and a worthwhile exhibit. The Billabong tank is also a highlight, but the rock pools and Victoria's hidden treasures sections are good but average. I quite liked the Creepy Cave and thinking back now might give that section more praise, and this floor was definitely my favourite of the three levels.
The Ocean Down Under is done well but again is unspectacular. The diversity of fish in the tank is intriguing, but divers going in to feed these denizens of the deep is nothing new and pretty much every major aquarium around the world has similar shows. The 12 Apostles Lookout section was a waste of space, and having actually visited the 12 Apostles beforehand I felt that this area could have been replaced with a large tank. There is definitely a little bit of room there for something new and exciting.
Overall Melbourne Aquarium is still quite small, and that perhaps is the biggest complaint that people have of the place. It is a fairly new aquarium, and there are several exhibits (Mangrove and Billabong being #1 and #2 in my opinion) that are perhaps worthy of acclaim. But for someone who has been to some of the big boys, and who plans to visit John G. Shedd in Chicago and Georgia Aquarium this summer) then Melbourne's is rather disappointing.
My goal is not to offend anyone with this review, as everyone has different guidelines of excellence in judging zoos and aquariums. Some zoos I've visited have been very small, and yet quality over quantity is a wonderful trait in an establishment. If I had only been to a series of smaller aquariums around North America then I'm sure I would have been thrilled to visit Melbourne, but it lacks that killer, knockout exhibit. As it is the larger, more innovative aquariums are eye-catching and stunning, and Melbourne for me was a major letdown.
Bring on the penguins!! For $20 million there should be an awesome exhibit opening later on in 2008, and next time I visit the aquarium I'm sure that I'll grant it a kinder review.
