They both did, yes - but I believe the move was actually one on the part of Cotswold Wildlife Park. Certainly the two groups went to entirely different locations, and belonged to different subspecies.
Thanks for that information@TeaLovingDave Well that is another reason to stick with my vote with RZSS. Such a terrible decision that both zoos made IMO.
Other particular highlights (part 1): L'Hoest's Guenon (Edinburgh) This rather large and spacious exhibit - formerly a Steller's Sea Eagle aviary, and more recently an enclosure for Barbary Macaque - holds a fairly decent-sized breeding group of this attractive and threatened species - another of those which occurs within the area of the Budongo Reserve. As can be seen, it provides plenty of climbing opportunities and - as a result of the fact it was once an aviary - it is open to the air albeit sheltered. Golden-cheeked Gibbon (Edinburgh) This exhibit is one of the best enclosures I have seen anywhere in Europe for gibbons, providing them with a vast amount of vertical and horizontal space, and plenty of climbing and brachiating opportunities: White-cheeked Saki and Goeldi's Monkey Walkthrough (Edinburgh) Magic Forest -Callitrichid and Douroucouli exhibits (Edinburgh) Similarly to the interior of the Budongo Trail exhibit complex, these enclosures are quite dimly lit and there are precious few photographs of their indoor exhibits, and none at all of the semi-offshow outdoor exhibits which the animals have access to via overhead tunnels. However, they are all quite pleasant and the outdoor exhibits are extremely thickly-vegetated and somewhat masked from public view by green webbing and mesh. The outdoor area can be somewhat seen in the reflection on glass within these photographs. There are, I believe, about five or six such exhibits within the Magic Forest. Giant Anteater (Edinburgh) This very large and pleasant exhibit at the top of the zoo - once comprising a mixed exhibit with Maned Wolf - contains a number of indoor sleeping areas for the anteaters (both on and offshow) along with a large outdoor enclosure which mostly comprises a combination of grassland and scrubby vegetation. The complex as a whole covers around 1,900 m². The largest indoor exhibit is viewed from above with the use of mirrors, and is very dimly lit, allowing a greater level of privacy. The inhabitants breed very regularly - I think nowhere else in the UK has such a good breeding record with the species.
I remember seeing the Stellar's sea eagles in this enclosure when I visited Edinburgh zoo in the early 2000's and I must say I really like how it looks now and how it has been repurposed for the L'Hoest's monkeys.
Lemur Walkthrough (Edinburgh) Chilean Flamingo (Edinburgh) This very large covered aviary close to the zoo entrance contains a sizeable flock of Chilean Flamingo, and provides the inhabitants with plenty of space both in terms of water, vegetation and indoor housing: Gelada (Edinburgh) This is another "best exhibit for the species in Europe" example - this massive enclosure (over 4,000 m²) contains a large and regularly breeding troop of Gelada; the steep hillside location and additional rockwork (both genuine and imitation) makes this a pretty good replication of their natural habitat. Vicuna (Edinburgh) Another large and pleasant hillside paddock - this area comprises three hoofstock paddocks, some or all of which contain vicuna at one point or another depending on the group size at any given time, and the hoofstock housing requirements elsewhere in the zoo. Vicuna (Highland Wildlife Park) Probably the largest exhibit for this species anywhere in Europe, the enclosure for Vicuna at HWP is part of the drive-through portion of the collection, but can also be viewed from the footbridge which passes through it en-route to one of the polar bear exhibits: Japanese Macaque (HWP) This exhibit - yet again one of the largest I have seen for the species at close to 10,000 m² - comprises a large natural lake, surrounded by lightly wooded and vegetated areas, with several heated shelters dotted throughout; the inhabitants make full use both of the lake and the trees, and breeding is regular:
For completion's sake, as I just found a photo of this aviary in my files..... Red-fronted Macaw aviary (Edinburgh) The final major plus-point within RZSS where the "South America etc" category is concerned is - as already discussed - the excellent penguin exhibit, depending on whether or not one counts the species within as relevant. Rather than raking over old ground, I quote here my copious discussion of said from a few months ago: ---- As has been noted by Pipaluk, there *are* a number of less-appealing exhibits within Edinburgh Zoo which are relevant to the categories at hand - almost entirely located within the old Monkey House, which is in the process of being decomissioned along with much else in that corner of the zoo. The exhibits here range from poor, to average at best. However, I would tend to suggest that several of the category-relevant exhibits at Cotswold Wildlife Park are just as poor or uninspiring - especially those for Siamang, the penguin pool and a number of the bird aviaries. Moreover, nothing at CWP comes close to approaching the excellence of the best that the two RZSS collections can offer in terms of exhibit quality and design, and involvement with conservation work..... particularly when one considers that whilst all of the conservation/research programmes which Cotswold is involved with are undertaken by outside organisations, two of the key conservation/research programmes I have discussed at RZSS are spearheaded BY RZSS. However, the key point which I hope to have conveyed can be summed up as follows: RZSS has more than enough quality to overcome the gross quantity presented by Cotswold Wildlife Park.
@TeaLovingDave I also remember the red fronted macaw aviary too and I remember a particular bird which was incredibly responsible to the visitors. In my memory I had assumed it was a "Catalina" macaw hybrid but now I am thinking that this bird could have been a red fronted macaw. Do you know how long this species has been kept in that particular aviary ?
A very nice exhibit indeed, but your size estimate goes past the barrier. In addition aren't the buildings included viewing buildings? Again, an excellent exhibit for short, although not in my opinion near the title of best for the species in Europe. I would put Zurich, perhaps even Besancon before it. I would not call the penguin exhibit poor - it holds many fewer penguins than, for example, the Edinburgh or London exhibits, and is adequate for its inhabitants in my opinion. The Siamang exhibit is small, but offers lots of climbing opportunities, and the bird aviaries are certainly on par with the few aviaries offered by Edinburgh. I would suggest that making poor exhibits for monkeys is also logically less acceptable than having poor exhibits for birds due to their greater intelligence and needs. Even so, RZSS do not seem to have any reply to, for example, the piping guan or Turkey vulture exhibits, only having 5 species of South American birds, all on relatively mediocre exhibits. Meanwhile, Cotswold have a huge variety of birds from all different sides and habitats of the continent, displayed in an almost entirely consistent manner, with some exhibits equaling the excellence at RZSS for some of their species as you say. The primate lineup for Cotswold WP is undeniably more impressive and interesting, with Crowned sifakas as you said yourself being 'the treasures of the collection', as well as two species of endangered bamboo lemur (with one of the conservation programmes to protect the Greater bamboo lemur in particular standing out), bushbabies and mouse lemurs. And while Living Links and the Budongo Trail are mightily impressive, Cotswolds clearly do not lose on primates as starkly as you would suggest - in fact I would question if they do at all. In terms of South American exhibits, Cotswolds in my opinion clearly wins it. They have 3 times more species, a much greater variety of species, more than 1 species of herp from the continent and some fantastic exhibits to house them all. While HWP's Vicuna exhibit is undoubtedly of high quality, it is, when stripped down to its essence, is just a field. Cotswold make do with what they have - and, despite having much less space, are able to cater to appropriately house far more species than RZSS in this category. In terms of conservation, the efforts that RZSS have undeniably gone to to save some of the most charismatic species on the planet (chimpanzees, armadillos, anteaters) are admirable and clear-cut. However, Cotswold has an income of £115,000 every year - contrast that with RZSS's income of over £16 million. That is over a hundredfold the revenue of Cotswold - yet they have a comparable conservation output? IN my opinion, the focus that Cotswold offers on these two categories and their obvious commitment to funding conservation efforts worldwide should garner them credit, and while it is clear that RZSS cares very much about the animals in their care and those they work with in situ, Cotswold WP, is, in relative terms, doing more.
It doesn't actually - the thing you can see to the right is a separation paddock for when they breed. And the viewing buildings are on top of the indoor housing (with viewing looking down into part of the indoor quarters) as already noted, so do count as enclosure space. It's about the same size as the drill and Diana monkey exhibits in the Edinburgh monkey house, with even smaller indoors as I recall - and it's newer than either exhibit at Edinburgh, too - see your remarks about "making poor exhibits for monkeys is also logically less acceptable than having poor exhibits for birds" you're comparing 1960s exhibits with a early 2000s one which has correspondingly less excuse. Read again - I said none of the CWP exhibits equal the excellence at RZSS I didn't say that either in fact your post just now is the first time the word "treasure" was used in the thread So, HWP make do with what they have (mountainous fields and pasture), and it's a negative, whilst when Cotswold does it that's a positive? Short of having the figures on conservation expenditure I don't think you can say they DO have anywhere near comparable conservation output - unless you're claiming RZSS spends less than £115,000 on conservation?
Crowned Sifaka (Propithecus coronatus) at Cotswold Wildlife Park - 19 April - ZooChat When do they do it? What I'm saying is that Cotswold's projects are much more impressive than those at Edinburgh when you factor in their revenue and similar maintenance fees given their zoos are of a similar size. I was saying that you said some of the RZSS exhibits were excellent, not that the CWP exhibits equal it. However, I do believe the latter
People on here regularly complain that the strengths of Highland Wildlife Park are merely them making the best of the geographical and environmental conditions they have to work with - in this case, in the very quote I replied to you dismissed the vicuna exhibit because "it is, when stripped down to its essence, is just a field". I still reckon that supporting several projects *and* running two projects *and* producing several scientific papers on conservation and zoological research to the tune of £millions in total is far more impressive than merely supporting several projects to the tune of perhaps £10,000 one could just as easily flip your argument around and say that if the zoos are of similar size and maintenance fees, the fact that RZSS has significantly higher revenue and spends significantly more on conservation means they have the edge. Fire away then - which category exhibits at Cotswold Wildlife Park are the equal of Budongo or Living Links?
I would suggest a 4-1 judgement overall is very harsh on Cotswold. There are 2 categories here, one of which they should win by 3-2 certainly. To justify a 4-1 overall, Edinburgh would have to have good or better enclosures for all primates and Cotswold have virtually nothing for the category or poor enclosures to allow Edinburgh a 5-0 win on primates. As there isn't much difference on species and the lemur walk through and Sifaka must be worth something for the category it can't be more than 4-1 Edinburgh on primates. Losing the Americas category has to dull that down to 3-2 overall surely?
I would certainly say that the Blue throated piping guan exhibit is one of the best of its kind in Europe. Furthermore the Crowned sifaka exhibit is probably the best of its kind in Europe and the Lemur Walkthrough is very nice as well. The turkey vulture and flamingo exhibits are both also excellent. So this is the question. Should a zoo with a far better species list and generally average exhibits (some substandard, some excellent) lose 4-1 to a zoo that has a far inferior species list but a few outstanding exhibits along with some poor ones as well? I would urge those who have voted 4-1 to reconsider, as, given the wildly differing species count and comparable enclosures, I do not see any grounds for voting 4-1. That score suggests that one of the zoos is far better than the other - that it has ‘smashed’ it to use OC’s wording. I very much disagree that that is the situation at hand, and think that Cotswold has enough quality to flip the tie were a competent debater fighting it’s corner.
Originally went for a 3:2 to RZSS for this one, undoubtedly it wins on Primates, but Cotswold still deserves a point for this category with some nice enclosures and nice species, and it outright wins the geographical category for me with the balanced collection. This is rather tough as the exhibit quality in RZSS is excellent and overall surpasses Cotswold's on average, as well as having a much bigger conservation output, but it isn't enough to overturn the much more substantial geographical display in Cotswold so I've changed my score in favour of Cotswold. This is phenomenally tough as a match, and I am surprised at the number of 4:1 votes, but some of those voting for that score have given excellent justifications for their score which is fair enough!
I just wish people had participated this eagerly throughout rather than sitting the whole thing out I strongly suspect some of the final rankings would shape up differently had we been getting turnout of 12-16 people per match throughout!
There are still 6 4-1 votes for Edinburgh which I really think people need to reconsider given what has been said. Edinburgh wins yes, but 4-1? No
Well, I must say that agree or disagree with their views, @amur leopard has certainly made an impact in this one!
Those photos of the monkey house at Edinburgh should really be enough to prevent 4-1! Open your eyes 4-1 voters, this is not a walkover, that house is like something London demolished nearly 50 years ago!!
What does the buffy headed capuchin enclosure look like at Edinburgh ? I can't remember if these were there when I visited.
