ZooChat Cup finals: Plzen vs Zurich

Plzen vs Zurich: Birds


  • Total voters
    37
  • Poll closed .
Finding a leaf-tailed gecko or chameleon in the undergrowth there is such a rush! But I would expect that with the lower number of species fewer voters would find it as decisive as it has been in this match.

I have a feeling the reptile species count isn't all that low - and in any case, as you note the lemurs were pretty influential previously, with only 3 species of those!
 
So apart from the key factor than pushes most people to support it the
However I do not believe any exhibit no matter how great can not compare to multiple good exhibits
Some of it is awful, as has been repeatedly stated and never been denied by thread participants.
This is more of a personal opinion I meant to say in my eyes the exhibits all look fairly average or even above so
 
Problem is, Masoala is so good (and deeply loved) that to some extent any discussion where Zurich is involved would have to put it aside to discuss the merits of the place otherwise

Just for the record: I and others have attempted to engage this request constructively and have at length argued the merits of Zurich in this competition, Masoala aside. Such arguments however, imo, were largely ignored and inundated by a selective focus on Zurich's weakest spots alone, in sum creating, again imo, a rather distorted picture.

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.
 
However I do not believe any exhibit no matter how great can not compare to multiple good exhibits
It's pointless to think of Masoala as "one exhibit", indeed thinking of it as an "exhibit" in the first place defies what it is and what it does with visitors. It's as close a recreation of a living, breathing ecosystem as I have ever seen.
 
Such arguments however, imo, were largely ignored and inundated by a selective focus on Zurich's weakest spots alone

One could just as easily suggest that some people (not merely in this thread) historically have had a "selective focus on Plzen's weakest spots alone" of course :p it's worth noting that your above-quoted summary of the Zurich collection came more than 24 hours into the discussion and was the first time anyone posted anything in-depth regarding anything beyond Masoala; equally, no discussion of Zurich's low points took place until after that point. Conversely discussion of Plzen in terms of negative points started pretty much immediately!
 
Well, not always :) as I've said, I neither expected not hoped for Plzen to get this far! So it's doing pretty damn well.....

Of course ;) I don't know if @Rayane intended it that way, but the way I understood it was, that whenever is the matchup as close as this one, it is always Plzen on the losing side :D
 
Of course ;) I don't know if @Rayane intended it that way, but the way I understood it was, that whenever is the matchup as close as this one, it is always Plzen on the losing side :D

I feel like the debate is pretty much always how bad is the bad at Plzen, while no one cares about how good the good is as well.

Edit : 442 species/subspecies listed on ZTL for Plzen against 93 in Zürich, come on...
And the quality vs quantity isn't so true as Plzen isn't just the Lemur house...
 
I feel like the debate is pretty much always how bad is the bad at Plzen, while no one cares about how good the good is as well.

Edit : 442 species/subspecies listed on ZTL for Plzen against 93 in Zürich, come on...
And the quality vs quantity isn't so true as Plzen isn't just the Lemur house...

To put it bluntly is that the good enclosures of Plzen don't reach the highest level the other zoos in this competition reach. Compared to other zoos in this final round Plzen has more weak enclosures and very few outstanding ones. Plzen mainly relies on the strength of its collection, which nobody here criticizes. As pointed out before it is pretty impressive they reached the final at all.
 
To put it bluntly is that the good enclosures of Plzen don't reach the highest level the other zoos in this competition reach. Compared to other zoos in this final round Plzen has more weak enclosures and very few outstanding ones. Plzen mainly relies on the strength of its collection, which nobody here criticizes. As pointed out before it is pretty impressive they reached the final at all.

Of course, I'm not saying Plzen belongs this far, but for this match up, Zürich - except Masoala - doesn't blow out Plzen quality wise enough to narrow down the 300+ species gap. In my opinion, of course.
 
Zürich with Masoala does blow out Plzen quality-wise though, so I don't know what your argument is. Should we not count the Masoala hall?
 
Zürich with Masoala does blow out Plzen quality-wise though, so I don't know what your argument is. Should we not count the Masoala hall?

Not sure this is the right translatation for the word condescendant in french, but it's what I found : patronizing. Why being so patronizing ?
Still not enough to blow out a 300+ species lead in my opinion.
 
Zürich with Masoala does blow out Plzen quality-wise though, so I don't know what your argument is. Should we not count the Masoala hall?

@Rayane's argument is quite simply that Plzen has such an advantage in species exhibited (4.5 times that of Zurich's), that Masoala's brilliance cannot close this gap. The fact is only a small fraction of Zurich's bird species actually live in Masoala, so surely it cannot be simply used as Zurich's whole argument, especially if Zurich also has poor exhibits in combination.

Plzen's collection is supremely impressive and crammed with rarities - no-one can deny that. On the other hand, Masoala is the best indoor rainforest in the world - almost nobody can deny that. This results in a standoff between not only a fantastic collection and fantastic exhibits but also between the other exhibits in Zurich and the quality of exhibitry in Plzen. Apart from Masoala, Zurich only has a handful of exhibits, mostly smallish glass fronted aviaries, including a few let-down ones. On the other hand, Plzen has good exhibitry for all its species save the Barn owl.

The fact that a zoo with a comparative shortage of funds has been able to exhibit so many beautiful, unknown rarities in mostly good -> fantastic exhibits highlights the importance of birds in Plzen, whereas when I visited Zurich, I felt birds were not held up in the same light as mammals or herps and hence seemed to have less importance in the context of the zoo as a whole.
 
This was one of the debates, together with Chester vs Prague, that most of the voters participated in.Seems like we all start missing the Cup, before it even finished...
 
I hope @Coelacanth18 not going to vote at 21:59 :)

Only a few minutes left for @Coelacanth18 to give Zurich fans a scare ;)

Good thing my name wasn't uttered a third time; otherwise, who knows what mayhem could have ensued... ;)

For the record, it has been common for me to wait until the second or third day to vote; I think people just didn't notice until recently :D I often don't vote at all, even if I keep up with the discussion or participate. My sole venture into the nebulous and fractured discussion this turned out to be was simply to question an assumption about animal welfare that had yet to be substantiated by evidence. Otherwise, I lost the main thread of this discussion a while back, and will simply say that the close margin seems fair and that even if I had felt compelled to choose a side it would not have been a game-altering 3-0 vote.
 
Wowie, another close one that came down to one vote or we may have a different result! On another note, @amur leopard got me curious. How much of Zurich's bird collection is actually held in Masoala? Does anyone have a percentage or number to compare with the 93 @Rayane cited Zurich having in total?
 
Back
Top