I see the bears maybe two out of three visits these days, usually without making any particular effort. There's luck involved, of course, but I don't think they're as hard to see now as they were with some of the earlier individuals.
Chester Zoo Chester Zoo Discussion, Speculation & Questions 2018
- Thread starter JoeDK14
- Start date
While I have failed to see the Spectacled bears on two previous visits, I did see all three on my last visit. The mother and cub were up seperate trees and fully visible. The male in Spirit of the Jaguar was active and pacing continually both times I went there (I think he's still stressed by his move there but as a result you can see him very easily.) I think formerly when they couldn't be seen more often than not, it was more to do with their nature and individual status, rather than to do with shortcomings in the enclosure.
My copy came on Thursday Sand Cat. It's also on the wbsite. If you do not receive one,get in touch with the Adoptions Office.
clouded leopards were kept at Chester in 1965-1966; 1969-1978; 1984-1986, It will be a very long time before they return, the zoo wants a large nocturnal exhibit for them, inorder to shw them properly to the public.
"It's high time Chester housed large bears again, imagine what a fantastic draw they would be, certainly tip visitor numbers over 2 Million!"
As would killer whales, dolphins would draw in numbers (which I agree are better left in the wild). I for one would certainly not like to see any animal brought to a zoo just to attracted the crowd. In the 21st century zoos should stand by their mantra of "in the cause of conservation". Housing large bears as suggested would require vast enclosures, look at the ones in YWP and HWP for instance.
As would killer whales, dolphins would draw in numbers (which I agree are better left in the wild). I for one would certainly not like to see any animal brought to a zoo just to attracted the crowd. In the 21st century zoos should stand by their mantra of "in the cause of conservation". Housing large bears as suggested would require vast enclosures, look at the ones in YWP and HWP for instance.
I easily see at least one of each bear species on every visit.
When the sun bears were in the old tiger enclosure, I always saw both Toni and Milli on every single visit. Since their move to the new Islands enclosure, I’ve only actually seen Milli once, but have seen Toni on every visit.
As for the spectacled bears, Bernie and Lima are both way less elusive than Franka was. On my first visit to Chester in 2013 after I was just starting to get into visiting zoos, it was soon after Sangay had passed away and Franka was living there alone. I didn’t see her on that visit. However, I think there may have only been one or two visits in all the time since when I haven’t ever seen a single spectacled bear at all. Bernie has always been quite visible anyway, and since her cub was born, Lima has become much more so.
I agree, I have visited Chester very little in recent years but had excellent views of both Spectacled Bears on my last visit (this was before Madidi was born), maybe I was extremely lucky but I doubt they are that elusive. And even if they are, I'd say that the enclosure is doing its job well for a cub to have been raised - its not unheard of for certain species to be rarely seen out in a zoo anyway.
Personally I applaud the move towards smaller bear species in UK zoos, and I don't feel that Chester needs to get another bear species just to satisfy some visitors.
As an aside, I enjoyed Britain's Polar Bear Cub AND also enjoy Secret Life of the Zoo, I especially like that neither have a visible presenter and instead allow the keepers to do most of the talking.
I always say any animal in the right exhibit and design like it should be in real life will always not be easy to see (are they easy to see in the wild?)
I'm bringing this info into this thread before the discussion gets out of hand and it gets moved...
Maybe I'm missing something here but I find it weird that the Giant Tortoise area would be redeveloped, as I'd assumed they had left partly due to the future plans to demolish the Tropical Realm? It seems a bit odd to me to move another species in when we all know that its only likely to last a few years, if that. I would have guessed that the space might just be used as temporary housing for another species but of course that's purely guesswork. And if they bring in a new tortoise species, then that seems doubly strange to me, though I'm sure there would be some sort of reasoning behind it!
Oooh, is this confirmed?
Also about the giant tortoises and new enclosures in the Tropical Realm. Demolition is still a few years away and there have been other new additions lately such as the mouse-deer.
On the subject of bears, the Andean bears are much more visible now than they ever were before. Also, is Bernie moving back or not? Wasn't it meant to be once Madidi was 11 months old? I think Chester has possibilities to house another species of bear in the future. I hope Chester goes all out Indian themed when the new lion exhibit is constructed, maybe then we will see sloth bears if we are lucky.
I'm not suggesting obtaining stock simply to attract crowds. I made mention of 2 Million as that figure is a regular conversation point in this discussion [above].
Yes I have seen the Polar Bears in YWP and HWP. Both of which have absolutely fabulous spacious enclosures. Don't forget that Chester still has in the region of 500 undeveloped acres.
I've been a big fan of Chester Zoo for 5 decades, of course animal welfare is paramount. However sometimes I get the feeling that the zoo has very much forgotten about its customers. Consider the monkey islands. Yes, there should be thick mature foliage but not at the very front creating an impenetrable barrier obscuring all views beyond! And in both ROTRA and Monsoon Forest, a few extra viewing gallery windows would have had no impact on animal welfare but would have massively improved visitor's Orangutan watching experience! (windows could even have been covered if necessary with 'one way film'.
Last edited:
"Next to nil"? And what difference does being a member make? I reckon I've seen the Spectacled Bears on 50% of visits (which is a lot more than "next to nil"). It may need a bit of patience - but that's something a lot of zoo visitors lack.
I also used to see the Echidna on most visits. Didn't see it doing much, but saw it!
And the secret with the beavers was to visit Ellesmere Port ...
I think the number of species which can add significantly to zoo attendances is pretty limited.
If a collection hasn't already got them then my list would be: elephants, great apes, bears, giraffe ... any more? Apologies to the ornithophiles but I can't think of any birds which would have such an effect (hummingbirds perhaps?) other than penguins. And Komodo Dragon and - perhaps - a large crocodilian might do it among reptiles.
Frankly the only things which would have such an impact at Chester would be Giant Panda or a Whale! Neither of which is likely...
[Not claiming the above is exhaustive. Just making the point that it's hard to think of anything else which would draw a significant number of people who wouldn't already be visiting.]
If a collection hasn't already got them then my list would be: elephants, great apes, bears, giraffe ... any more? Apologies to the ornithophiles but I can't think of any birds which would have such an effect (hummingbirds perhaps?) other than penguins. And Komodo Dragon and - perhaps - a large crocodilian might do it among reptiles.
Frankly the only things which would have such an impact at Chester would be Giant Panda or a Whale! Neither of which is likely...
[Not claiming the above is exhaustive. Just making the point that it's hard to think of anything else which would draw a significant number of people who wouldn't already be visiting.]
"Next to nil"? And what difference does being a member make? I reckon I've seen the Spectacled Bears on 50% of visits (which is a lot more than "next to nil"). It may need a bit of patience - but that's something a lot of zoo visitors lack.
I also used to see the Echidna on most visits. Didn't see it doing much, but saw it!
And the secret with the beavers was to visit Ellesmere Port ...
I sense some hostility from fellow zoochatters! Sit down, take a few deep breaths and remember this is a discussion forum.
It's a fact that the Nocturnal Echidnas never ventured out in the day, not even for food when housed in their Tropical House enclosure (now a planted border) but they were clearly visible after 1983 when housed in the Small Mammal House (Nocturnal House).
Let me answer your question, I make reference to being a member because this is important to my argument. As a member, you've made a conscious and social investment in the zoo. You love the zoo and know it well. You might go in the pouring rain, you might go just to look at the new penguin pool or for 20 minutes with the elephants. In this case it really doesn't matter if you don't get to see any particular animal on any particular visit.
BUT if you are a paying customer, with a small family, perhaps on minimum wage of £7.05 an hour then the Summer Time entrance price of £115.75 is astronomical. Their visit to the zoo may be a bi-annual highlight, or a once in a lifetime experience. In which case of course they lack patience, they can't afford to invest in the waiting time on the off chance that a favourite animal might ultimately appear at the expense of lost opportunity to see other animals. Especially as the zoo no longer remains open 'til dusk. I've just looked on tripadvisor and found this from 2015 which illustrates my point "Visited yesterday and came away disappointed. Costing us £107 to get in for a family. Wow! Not only this, most animals were nowhere to be seen".
The zoo can not survive on members alone.
I’m not a member of any zoo, and a large majority of my zoo visits probably really are once in a lifetime. But I have always come away having seen almost absolutely everything I had wanted to see (within reason of course; animals taken off show for enclosure renovations or whatever obviously just can’t be helped). Despite being on a relatively high salary, especially for my age, I don’t actually have a huge amount of disposable income due to my outgoings also being quite high, so every penny really matters to me. My zoo visits are much more limited than I would ideally like them to be. You just have to ensure that you prioritise in those situations. If you really want to see a particular animal, it doesn’t take much to do your research prior to visiting, perhaps contact the zoo to find out when they are most likely to be active (as I have often done previously), or ask other visitors via social media about their experiences (which to be fair I do see quite a lot online). If I knew I may only get one chance to see what I wanted to see, I would definitely invest proper time and preparation when planning my trip. Stating that ‘most animals were nowhere to be seen’ at Chester has got to be a gross exaggeration - it has certainly never been my experience on any of my previous visits. Complaining about the entrance price seems a little pointless to me, too, as for the size of the attraction and the length of time one would generally spend there, it is very much in line with what I would expect to have to pay . . . but I won’t go there, as my views on things like this can tend to be a little extreme at times 
!
!Whilst I understand the validity of some of the points you're making I think you're getting a bit desperate to underline your view here.
1. Everything on TripAdvisor, no matter how good, will have some naysayers and the above is hardly typical (the fact it's two, maybe three, years old might also be illustrative);
2. Per TripAdvisor, only 3% of 11,000 plus visits are rated as below average with 91% above average (including 70% at the highest possible rating);
3. If this is typical of all, non-member, visitors I'd say Chester don't really seem to have much of a problem in giving the public what they want.
Disclaimer's -I'm not saying Chester is beneath improvement and I'm not saying TripAdvisor is "gospel" (though it's a pretty good bellwether for Joe Public's opinions).
I wouldn't say the response to your posts has been any more hostile than your comments on Chester Zoo itself! Obviously the zoo is not perfect (but closer than most!) and there's nothing wrong with some constructive criticism, but you do seem to be overly negative and with some of the wording you've chosen (appalling, astronomical) I'm not surprised that some people have responded with passion. Its less of a personal attack, and more defense of a much loved zoo.
As much as zoos should be places that carry out conservation work, to Joe Public they are a day out, fair enough. However, in context against other entertainment I think a day out at Chester Zoo is fair value for money. The rise in concert prices in recent years, for example, has been far worse; to go and see Ed Sheeran perform for 90 minutes would set you back about £80, for example, and he has no trouble selling out massive venues. I would far rather pay a high price for the privilege of seeing some of the world's rarest exotic wild animals than to make a rich man even richer! Compared with £80 for a 90 minute show, £28 or whatever for a full day out seems good to me.
Zoos really can't win these days, I remember seeing a review on TripAdvisor about Yorkshire Wildlife Park which complained that most of the animals were too far away and couldn't be viewed properly, and also moaning that the giraffes didn't have enough space. I would prefer animals to be given plenty of room and privacy, and have to go back later if I don't see them on the first attempt.