Planning a Tentative European Zoo Trip - Fall 2024/Spring 2025

I have never been to London but I believe that the London Zoo might be the better choice. While Hellabrunn was a zoo I was thankful for being my local zoo during my stay in Munich, I don’t think there’s anything there that will knock your socks off in terms of both species (I am going to assume that you have already seen agile wallabies and mustached guenons in the past) and exhibits.
 
I have never been to London but I believe that the London Zoo might be the better choice. While Hellabrunn was a zoo I was thankful for being my local zoo during my stay in Munich, I don’t think there’s anything there that will knock your socks off in terms of both species (I am going to assume that you have already seen agile wallabies and mustached guenons in the past) and exhibits.
The mustached guenon would actually be new for me! As would the Alpine chamois and the Javan gibbons (which I missed at Prague last year). For London, the main draws would be the mongoose, some of the herps and birds, and the overall history of the facility.
 
I have never been to London but I believe that the London Zoo might be the better choice. While Hellabrunn was a zoo I was thankful for being my local zoo during my stay in Munich, I don’t think there’s anything there that will knock your socks off in terms of both species (I am going to assume that you have already seen agile wallabies and mustached guenons in the past) and exhibits.
That's the sad thing about both Zoo Hellabrunn (Munich) and Zoo Hellbrunn (Salzburg) from a native / long-term resident's pov: Both aren't bad zoos, but unlike, say, Arnheim, Berlin, Prague or Vienna, they are not zoos I would passionately advise a zoo fan to visit as a "must-see" zoological institution.o_O
 
That's the sad thing about both Zoo Hellabrunn (Munich) and Zoo Hellbrunn (Salzburg) from a native / long-term resident's pov: Both aren't bad zoos, but unlike, say, Arnheim, Berlin, Prague or Vienna, they are not zoos I would passionately advise a zoo fan to visit as a "must-see" zoological institution.o_O

With one minor caveat; that Hellabrunn is more of a must-see for anyone with a particular interest in zoological history, given its status as one of the pioneers of the "geo-zoo" concept.
 
With one minor caveat; that Hellabrunn is more of a must-see for anyone with a particular interest in zoological history, given its status as one of the pioneers of the "geo-zoo" concept.

You might be able to debate vs. Arnhem or Prague, but Hellabrunn as more of a must-see for a zoo history lover than London, Berlin, or Vienna? Surely not!
 
given its status as one of the pioneers of the "geo-zoo" concept.
...which Hellbrunn tried as well, but has muddled even more so than Hellabrunn.

As for zoological history, Hellbrunn at least can still offer to the interested zoo nerd a bit of former zoo director Heinrich Windischbauer's legacy, like the free-ranging griffon vulture colony, as well as other local historical facets, like the 1972 orang utan scandal, locally prominent lions such as "Sugar" & "Stinki" or brown / polar bear hybrids.
 
Last edited:
That's the sad thing about both Zoo Hellabrunn (Munich) and Zoo Hellbrunn (Salzburg) from a native / long-term resident's pov: Both aren't bad zoos, but unlike, say, Arnheim, Berlin, Prague or Vienna, they are not zoos I would passionately advise a zoo fan to visit as a "must-see" zoological institution.o_O

Having (as you know!) recently toured the area - I think this is a very fair take. They're both good (very good in places) but neither is specifically exciting compared to other zoos.
 
You might be able to debate vs. Arnhem or Prague, but Hellabrunn as more of a must-see for a zoo history lover than London, Berlin, or Vienna? Surely not!

A slight misreading of my post - I meant "as Batto said, it's not a must-see for most zoo fans, but it's more of a must-see for zoo historians" rather than "it's more of a must-see for zoo historians than the must-see collections cited by Batto" :)
 
A slight misreading of my post - I meant "as Batto said, it's not a must-see for most zoo fans, but it's more of a must-see for zoo historians" rather than "it's more of a must-see for zoo historians than the must-see collections cited by Batto" :)

Which at least reassures me you've not lost perspective completely. :D

I'm still not really sure it's much of a historical must-see though. At London, Berlin, and Vienna the historical significance is obvious and visible - not sure how much that is true at Hellabrunn - so it's more a pilgrimage-type affair than a sightseeing one.
 
so it's more a pilgrimage-type affair than a sightseeing one.

Same category as Hagenbeck really, with the difference that Hellabrunn is still a pretty enjoyable and value-for-money visit beyond the pilgrimage aspect :D which sadly is no longer the case for Hagenbeck in my opinion.
 
not sure how much that is true at Hellabrunn
The elephant house, part of the original primate complex and the aquarium could be considered zoo-historically relevant buildings in Hellabrunn. Other original constructions I still remember seeing as a child, like the old lion exhibit with its columns, have been gone for quite a while, while others, dating back from the 1980s-1990s, like the walkthrough aviary or the mhorr gazelle exhibit, might or might not be considered "zoo - historically relevant" by now. Which somehow makes me feel old...
 
The flights are finally booked, and I will be officially visiting the London Zoo on the 7th of December! I carved an extra day into my schedule to squeeze the zoo in this time around — arriving in London a little past noon on the 6th and flying out again at 9:00pm on the 7th. With that, I would appreciate any and all advice anyone has for a first time visit to the London Zoo (how long to expect to be there, preferred routes, how not to miss out on anything) and on anything else to do with the rest of my time in London before and after the Zoo. Thank you all in advance! :)
 
Back
Top