ZooChat Cup finals: Plzen vs Zurich

[FunkyGibbon]

I disagree! Seeing animals in the wild can be wonderful. Seeing them in a zoo can be wonderful. Neither is intrinsically better than the other - although they’re certainly different.

To compare to other areas of life in which I am passionately interested: is it better to see a musician live, or to listen to their recordings? To watch a play on the stage, or a film on a screen? A football match on TV or in the flesh at a stadium full of fellow supporters?

Personally, I don’t much go for the idea of zoos imitating the experience of seeing animals in the wild. If I do settle down to watch Match of the Day on TV, I don’t want it to be the same as the experience of visiting Fratton Park, where my view is impeded, the traffic is appalling, it’s usually cold, and I’m surrounded by deeply irritating fellow supporters.

There are certainly advantages and disadvantages to both. I've seen orangutans in the wild, and in terms of actually 'seeing' them I much prefer the zoo experience, where views will likely be much closer, unimpeded and less fleeting.

And yet.

There is something about the day and a half that I spent walking in Danum trying to find them and mostly failing (having been unlucky the previous year at the Kinabatangan) that made the eventual moment far more special, coming as it did when I had almost given up hope. It's not just the thrill of discovery, it's the uniqueness of the occasion (barely spoiled by said orangutan deciding to urinate on me from 40 metres up). It's a symphony of distance travelled, of a childhood dreaming of this moment, of the smells and sounds and heat around you.

To borrow from your own analogy, one may well prefer to listen to the single in order to appreciate the song as art, and yet bands will also put out live albums, acknowledging that there is something about a stadium of screaming fans that has value even if it's diluted into your own living room.

Masoala is the live album of a Madagascan rainforest. Of course it's not the real thing, but most people can't afford tickets to that. At this point I must have seen thousands of aviaries in zoos all around the world, but that huge half cylinder of steel and plastic towers above all of them, by an almost farcical margin, as the best zoo experience of my life.

My love for this exhibit is not entirely bird-based, although it did grant me stunning views of the only ground roller in Europe. The forest itself is the star and to some extent it overshadows the inhabitants. I am one of those who looks askance at Plzen's failings (whilst still enjoying my visits) and it doesn't trouble me much to give Zurich the win here. If the opponent was Walsrode I would be much more anguished trying to pick apart the various merits of offering a 'wild' experience vs actually showcasing birds.

 

[TeaLovingDave]

Possibly because I erred towards brevity and clarity, you're rather misrepresenting my position

Saying "one bad exhibit stains the whole zoo" is pretty hard to misrepresent, to be fair

Plzen's issues arose from collect-o-mania and were fundamentally avoidable. As you've acknowledged, new exhibits and reducing the inventory have improved things.

To some extent, anyhow - I think the poor owl aviary quality has nothing to do with collect-o-mania to be honest, but rather is down to an unsuitable species pick. Had they gone with Siberian Chipmunk or another boreal rodent it would be great, and would fit the overall exhibit area too.

And disagreeing that we shouldn't shrug off unnecessary suffering is itself shrugging off unnecessary suffering.

You miss my point I suspect - the disagreement is not whether we should or should not "shrug off unnecessary suffering" at all; neither of us think we should.

Rather the disagreement is whether its necessary/fair to reject all the positive aspects of a collection (no matter how many) in order not to be deemed to shrug off unnecessary suffering if it also has negative aspects, and by extension whether anyone who thinks the good outweighs the bad is condoning unnecessary suffering.

 

[TZDugong]

This has been a very interesting debate so far, so I thought I'd give my opinion as someone who hasn't visited either facility.

For now, I'm voting 2-1 Zurich. I'll freely admit that I'm not a "bird person", I do like seeing them but not to the same extent as mammals, reptiles or fish. With that in mind, what I mostly look for in a zoos bird facilities are excellent, creative exhibits. Masaola seems to fit that billing to a tee, and while Plzen does have an excellent collection that just isn't what I look for bird-wise.

 

[TeaLovingDave]

. I am one of those looks askance at Plzen's failings (whilst still enjoying my visits) and it doesn't trouble me much to give Zurich the win here. If the opponent was Walsrode I would be much more anguished trying to pick apart the various merits of offering a 'wild

See, this I have no problem with given it acknowledges the failings of Plzen without the implication that enjoying or liking the zoo means approving of or dismissing these failings.

I think Walsrode would be an interesting one to compare to Plzen sometime - it's got a tropical walkthrough unlike Plzen, but I think it may actually have more poor exhibits than Plzen (along with plenty of great exhibits of course).

 

[FunkyGibbon]

See, this I have no problem with given it acknowledges the failings of Plzen without the implication that enjoying or liking the zoo means approving of or dismissing these failings.

I don't think that is what @Giant Panda is doing though:

I realise that, for us visitors, bad exhibits represent only a brief episode in an otherwise enjoyable day.

The point being made is not that one should not enjoy Plzen, but that one should not evaluate one's enjoyment of it as outweighing one's perceptions of its welfare situation. And, given that we are quantifying these factors and we have very little wriggle room to play with there isn't much room for subtlety.

Note that I don't fully agree with GP, at least within the confines of this game. I would pick Plzen over a zoo with no welfare concerns but a very humdrum bird collection and merely adequate to good exhibitry. Zurich is neither of those things.

 

[TeaLovingDave]

The point being made is not that one should not enjoy Plzen, but that one should not evaluate one's enjoyment of it as outweighing one's perceptions of its welfare situation.

And that, in his opinion, giving any credit to the positive aspects (in this case, arguing that the richly diverse collection and the largely good exhibits merit recognition) comprises condoning the negative aspects by "shrugging them off". As I said, I've no problem with anyone favouring Zurich on the grounds it has fewer welfare lapses and a single exceptional exhibit; my contention is with the idea that either collection merits no credit whatsoever. In my opinion, it's an extremely close match.

But in any case, I'm on an actual computer now rather than a tablet/phone, so I can start actually formulating my pro-Plzen argument, which will largely be aimed at demonstrating that although it doesn't have anything as superlative as Masaola, it does have many very good exhibits - including some which I feel certainly fufill the desire for excellence and creativity cited by @TZDugong

 

[sooty mangabey]

I love @FunkyGibbon ’s description of Masaola as the live album of a Madagascan rain forest....

To pursue this analogy further than is possibly wise...

I saw Johnny Cash in concert on five occasions* and, each time, it was astonishingly good - as good, I suspect, as being urinated on by a wild Orang-Utan (pace FG’s comments above).

But I have been able to listen to his recorded output pretty much endlessly since first realising the genius of the Man in Black, sometime in the late 1980s.

And those recordings give something that the live shows couldn’t: for a start, much as I love the greatest hits, I want to hear songs other than Ring of Fire and I Walk The Line and the other numbers that dominated his concerts. And I want to be right up close to the music, not sitting 75 feet away. And I want to be able to return again and again to the songs.

The same is true - with a bit of wiggling - of animals. Wild encounters are often astonishingly good. But so too is the very different experience of seeing animals in a zoo...

*There is a zoo link here. The first time I saw the great man was in about 1990, at the less-than-glamorous location of Butlin’s Holiday Camp in Bognor Regis - where once, many years ago, there was a zoo.....

 

[TeaLovingDave]

I'm going to try to throw in a few new photographs in this lot, rather than solely using images I have previously dug up, but obviously much of what follows will be recycled from previous discussions!

Malagasy Aviary

One of two aviaries - the second is not pictured and is rather more thickly vegetated - which some on the site have criticised in the past for being particularly over-crowded. This situation has thankfully been rectified, with a total of 13 species (primarily waterfowl, ibises and herons) exhibited across the two aviaries.

Siberian Walkthrough Aviary

One of the hidden little gems of the collection, a walkthrough aviary containing a number of birds native to the Siberian taiga forests:

The following species list is, I think, accurate:

Siberian goldfinch Carduelis carduelis frigoris
Siberian Rubythroat Calliope calliope
European siskin Carduelis spinus
European linnet Carduelis cannabina cannabina
Yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella
Hawfinch Coccothraustes coccothraustes coccothraustes
Red crossbill Loxia curvirostra curvirostra
Black-breasted thrush Turdus dissimilis
Mistle thrush Turdus viscivorus
Fieldfare Turdus pilaris
Common starling Sturnus vulgaris vulgaris
Stock pigeon Columba oenas
Wood pigeon Columba palumbus
Eurasian turtle dove Streptopelia turtur turtur
Great spotted woodpecker Dendrocopos major pinetorum
Black grouse Lyrurus tetrix
Siberian thrush Zoothera sibirica


Aviary for Griffon Vulture and other Eurasian woodland/mountain species

This attractive and spacious aviary currently holds the following species:

Waldrapp (Geronticus eremita)
Eurasian Griffon Vulture (Gyps fulvus fulvus)
Garganey (Anas querquedula)
Lesser White-fronted Goose (Anser erythropus)
Rock Pigeon (Columba livia livia)
Marbled Teal (Marmaronetta angustirostris)
Common Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus)

Greater Spotted Eagle

African Wetland Aviary

This large aviary contains a number of wetland birds; as the name suggests, it primarily focuses on African taxa but it does contain a number of taxa from further afield; moreover, in the winter months it is used as a holding aviary for many of the European waterfowl species which are scattered throughout the collection in various aviaries and on exhibit moats during the more clement months of the year. As such this provides a fairly good look at one of the winter waterfowl exhibits which @Malawi was so disdainful of upthread.

African Aviaries in/around Hippo House

This one - which extends indoors - contains a number of smaller wetland birds such as Collared Pratincole and Golden Plover, along with species such as Red-throated Bee-eater indoors.

Pelican Exhibit

The system of moats and ponds surrounding the Angolan Colobus exhibit serves as the exhibit for several of the pelican taxa displayed at the zoo:

Swan Exhibit

This enclosure (containing Tundra Swan) comprises the moat for a Reeve's Muntjac exhibit; this, along with the above pelican exhibit, demonstrates rather well the way in which waterfowl are displayed throughout the collection in the spring, summer and autumn months. Many of the moats and ponds throughout Plzen contain at least one or two waterfowl species in this fashion.



Central American Aviary

A very large and pleasantly-designed aviary containing a number of Central American birds of prey and other species, located along from the Sonora House.

Red-tailed Hawk

Located outside the Sonora House - a pretty large and spacious aviary for the species, methinks.

 

[TeaLovingDave]

Aviaries found in Dinopark, Asian Garden and elsewhere in the zoo

The zoo contains a large number of smaller aviaries; these aviaries can be divided into roughly three categories - the hexagonal "bird islands" which I have discussed in previous Zoochat Cup threads pertaining to Plzen, waterfowl ponds and larger aviaries for cranes and other such species. As noted above, the days where each aviary contained a dozen species are largely a thing of the past, thanks to both a reduction in collection and the construction of several new aviaries throughout the zoo. These newer aviaries are built to the same general design but obviously benefit from being recent constructions, and from what I could tell tended to be a little larger. The only downside to them is that if you are kneeling down in an attempt to get a photograph of a pheasant skulking in the undergrowth it is possible for your elbow to knock against the brand-new hotwire at the base of the aviary and give you a nasty surprise or is that just me?

Australian Waterfowl Aviary

About half of the aviary is visible here.

Mixed Australasian Exhibit

This large mixed exhibit contains Emu, several Australasian waterfowl species and other aquatic birds, among other non-category species- along with the preceding aviary, this exhibit again counters the claims made upthread that the waterfowl in the collection are confined to tiny concrete bowls!

Penguin Exhibit

As previously discussed, recently refurbished and covered over to allow the addition of Inca Terns and Patagonian Crested Duck.

Flamingo and Waterfowl Exhibit




Examples of exterior aviaries in Tropical Pavillion

These primarily contain smaller birds native to the Philippines and Sundas. Note from the signage that no aviaries are particularly overloaded with species; I think from memory the most heavily populated aviary contained five species; Coleto, Nicobar Pigeon, Luzon Bleeding-heart, Palawan Peacock-pheasant and Red Turtle Dove. Each aviary also has an indoor area.

Canary Island Greenhouses

One of the newest additions (c.2018), these small greenhouse aviaries contain a number of reptile and bird species and subspecies native to the aforementioned islands.

 

[TeaLovingDave]

Short of posting a photograph for every single aviary in the Dinopark, Asian Garden and the many other small clusters of aviaries found throughout the zoo, I think I've given a pretty comprehensive summary of the bird exhibits at Plzen now; I would suggest I've demonstrated that the exhibit quality (other than the previously discussed enclosure for Central European Barn Owl) is now pretty good overall, generally ranging from average to very good (with the New World and Old World vulture aviaries and the Siberian Walkthrough being particular highlights) and the issue of overcrowding is rapidly improving all the time.

Moreover, I think I have also demonstrated that the claims about the waterfowl exhibitry at Plzen being particularly poor are entirely ungrounded - and in this case, I would aver that even at the time of my 2017 visit (when the crowding issue was somewhat more apparent) this was the case; in the name of fairness I've actually gone through my photographs to find the smallest pond I can within one of the hexagonal aviaries, and found this one; from memory this is about half of the pond, but I'm not certain. As the signage notes, the two semi-aquatic species within this aviary were Black-winged Stilt and Marbled Duck.



So..... Plzen has nothing in the realm of Masoala exhibit-wise, but I reckon it's pretty solid and improving all the time - and flicking through the Zurich gallery, with the exception of Masoala the aviaries at that collection are no better than anything at Plzen, and some of the Plzen aviaries are a lot better. Moreover, barring the various Malagasy oddities within Masoala, the bird collection at Zurich is pretty prosaic so there is little in that regard to counter the rich diversity at Plzen.

---

For the record, as it was directly mentioned and I was trawling the gallery anyhow, here is the Burrowing Owl and Plains Viscacha exhibit at Zurich:

In comparison, the (I think) former Burrowing Owl exhibit at Plzen (which if my memory serves me correctly with regards to their departure now contains American Kestrel)

 

[twilighter]

This is indeed a very close matchup, which Zurich's immersive experience wins, imo. As not an avid bird enthusiast, I felt much more captivated from the Avian fauna in Masoala and Bush than any other zoos have ever been. The Siberian aviary in Plzen is a hidden treasure and remember was comparing it to the new Rákos' House in Prague I visited the day before, but there are very few players in a Masoala's league. Truly liked the ungulate collections in Plzen, but was not very impressed by the way the birds are handled.

In addition, there's is a Bird show in Plzen and Penguin parade in Zurich, which can also tilt the scales in different direction, but result 2:1 seems more appropriate than 3:0 for any of the two, I feel.

 

[pipaluk]

So, @TeaLovingDave has given an excellent summary of what Plzen has to offer. I am delaying my vote until someone can make a case for Zurich, including something other than Masaola, an exhibit we all know plenty about now!

 

[TeaLovingDave]

So, @TeaLovingDave has given an excellent summary of what Plzen has to offer. I am delaying my vote until someone can make a case for Zurich, including something other than Masaola, an exhibit we all know plenty about now!

Somehow it looks like my argument for Plzen has actually caused a few Plzen voters to flip to Zurich a tad disappointed by that!

On another note, your voting habits are getting a little more complex it seems in prior matches you've traditionally gone with pure numbers and stated you have no interest in voting for a collection with fewer species, even if it has one or more nicer exhibits; Prague v Chester comes to mind.

All to the good methinks; I think it's a LOT more fun to discuss/debate/compare multiple factors than always knowing how people will vote

---

On another, another note.... any feedback from @Malawi on the evidence I've presented with regards to waterfowl?

 

[pipaluk]

Somehow it looks like my argument for Plzen has actually caused a few Plzen voters to flip to Zurich a tad disappointed by that!

On another note, your voting habits are getting a little more complex it seems in prior matches you've traditionally gone with pure numbers and stated you have no interest in voting for a collection with fewer species, even if it has one or more nicer exhibits; Prague v Chester comes to mind.

All to the good methinks; I think it's a LOT more fun to discuss/debate/compare multiple factors than always knowing how people will vote

---

On another, another note.... any feedback from @Malawi on the evidence I've presented with regards to waterfowl?

To be honest, I am still more of a 'species' person, but would be interested to know what other species (and their enclosures) Zurich has apart from Masaola.

 

[Jogy]

...I'm honestly not sure which one to vote for - normally I'd also consider myself slightly more as a 'species person' - unless the enclosures are really bad.

In this regard the pictures from Pilzen didn't 100% convince me - on the other hand when having a closer look into Zürich I've to agree that their bird collection is really small and therefore I've changed my vote back to Pilzen again (I cannot guarantee that I'll not shift back to Zürich however...)

 

[antonmuster]

having a closer look into Zürich I've to agree that their bird collection is really small

With 100 species, give or take, and a quite diverse collection, I find that assertion rather extreme/unwarranted. Also important to mention that the bird collection - and exhibits - certainly amount to more than 'just' Masoala. The zoo ofc cannot compete with the sheer number of species at Plzen. But then, the zoo expressly does not intend to. Instead, the zoo emphasizes education, close and personal encounters with animals (where possible), and exhibiting species in such a way, so as to facilitate experiencing the zoo's creatures in their natural behaviors and in as natural surrounds as possible. The goal is to foster an appreciation, as well as concern for wild animals. The zoo does this with Masoala, with their breeding colony of white storks spread throughout the zoo, with the free roaming peacocks, with the emu walk-through, the diverse bird collection in the exotarium, as well as, notably, with its free-flight hall, with the penguin parade, the Selenga wetland parkscape, the parakeet aviary (with occasional opportunities for supervised feeding), as well as to a lesser degree with multiple, mostly generously sized aviaries dotted around the zoo and/or birds integrated into multi-species enclosures/developments such as Pantanal or Semien. This is not to say all birds at Zurich are excellently exhibited and at the cutting edge of innovation. Notably, since Masoala, the zoo's new developments have been predominantly mammal focused (Australia being the exception). The absence of free flying birds in the elephant house (though wild sparrows have in the meantime filled this gap), the Australia house, and, presumably, also in the soon to open giraffe and rhino house, are imo a missed opportunity - especially considering the zoo did precisely this successfully for decades in the old Africa, now Australia, house. But I do feel, also for birds, there is a clear emphasis on creating diverse, educational, and touching experiences for visitors that runs throughout the zoo. The zoo for example, has no less than five no-barrier bird experiences (Masoala, Exotarium free flight hall, Australia walk-through, parakeet aviary, Selenga), six if you count the free-roaming peafowl, and yet another walk-through aviary is due to open this Easter. Furthermore, with the upcoming transformation of the entire Pantanal into an aviary, the zoo will remediate its (imo) currently worst blemish regarding birds, flightless macaws, in the near future and, I'm sure, have yet more unique 'bird experiences' to offer.

I understand that one can see many birds at Plzen. But I wonder, (how) can one experience them there?

 

[Malawi]

On another, another note.... any feedback from @Malawi on the evidence I've presented with regards to waterfowl?

Well, some waterfowl are well provided with swimming space, but others are really not. While Plzen has some fine aviaria - of which I would call the Siberian one a gem - on a scale from "1" (tied down owls) to "10" (Masoala), there are simply too many in the "3-4" bracket. I find their average level of exhibitry better for ungulates, predators and herps. As I mentioned in my first post, I have little idea how this affects the birds.

 

[pipaluk]

Well, some waterfowl are well provided with swimming space, but others are really not. While Plzen has some fine aviaria - of which I would call the Siberian one a gem - on a scale from "1" (tied down owls) to "10" (Masoala), there are simply too many in the "3-4" bracket. I find their average level of exhibitry better for ungulates, predators and herps. As I mentioned in my first post, I have little idea how this affects the birds.

According to @antonmuster's previous post, Zurich have flightless macaws? Surely a serious blemish and a 1 out of 10?!

 

[Andrew Swales]

According to @antonmuster's previous post, Zurich have flightless macaws? Surely a serious blemish and a 1 out of 10?!

Does making a Macaw flightless, cause 'unnecessary chronic suffering'....?

 

[pipaluk]

Does making a Macaw flightless, cause 'unnecessary chronic suffering'....?

I have no idea, I didn't say it did! The point is the barn owls at Plzen is being held up as shocking but Zurich does the same with Macaws! You are targeting the wrong person here, I am not the one who quotes animal welfare, I am just trying to bring some equality to the contest!