ZSL Whipsnade Zoo ZSL Whipsnade Zoo 2019

Brum said:
Even if those figures are correct surely ZSL would have a higher amount of costs than Chester any way? I mean they're running two sites, which (surely) means a larger staff and higher wages, not to mention the higher cost of living in London which would add more to a basic salary. Then there's the feeding bill for a (presumably) larger collection over two sites, more expenditure on bills, again over two sites... I'm no ZSL apologist but even with an extra £20 million per year it's not going to go as far as it would up North.

I'm willing to be corrected on any of the above, but I think it's logical speculation.
Click to expand...

Just a comment on these huge numbers, which look even bigger if you write down all the zeros..!
I have to admit total ignorance of ZSL finances or staffing levels, but if say the organisation had 500 staff (?) on an average of £30,000 (say roughly twice the 'living wage'), that equals £15m, leaving quite a lot left? Salaries are much the highest expenditure of any zoo after taxes; but maybe they pay people a lot more than this?
 
monster said:
what is upsetting or hurtful anout saying that most of the enclosures are poor? because that is what I have done. your last post is quite true, about the good work zsl does, but is nothing to do with the enclosures at WZ. my point about zsl spending money unwusely is also true, and whatever rlse rhey may support oversras or in research it is plain to anyonr that the zoos have been neglected where others have progressed. zsl earned 7omillion last year, 20million more than chester, yet compare the zoos. i rest my case
Click to expand...

Whipsnade has in my opinion some of the very best enclosures in the country. Again I'm sorry to say but you obviously have a thing against both locations and that does not make fair argument.

It's upsetting when everyone here who is so passionate about animals and conservation see someone undermine the fact that the animals have a great quality of life in a fantastic setting. It's not about spending loads on exhibits, multi million pound enclosures don't always work (land of the lions will be brought up...fair it's not perfect at all). It's upsetting for someone who Whipsnade is such a part of their life, that these comments undermine. I do have facts, and I don't say all of this as I'm bias, it's because I believe in Whipsnade, London and ZSL. It's how I honestly feel.
 
ajmcwhipsnade said:
Whipsnade has in my opinion some of the very best enclosures in the country. Again I'm sorry to say but you obviously have a thing against both locations and that does not make fair argument.

It's upsetting when everyone here who is so passionate about animals and conservation see someone undermine the fact that the animals have a great quality of life in a fantastic setting. It's not about spending loads on exhibits, multi million pound enclosures don't always work (land of the lions will be brought up...fair it's not perfect at all). It's upsetting for someone who Whipsnade is such a part of their life, that these comments undermine. I do have facts, and I don't say all of this as I'm bias, it's because I believe in Whipsnade, London and ZSL. It's how I honestly feel.
Click to expand...
nothing about mlilion pound enclosures, just animals being able to lie in a warm dry bed in the cold winter. the paddocks are fine on summer but how doyou think the tropical or desert animals fare in the wetter months? ever seen a camel with rotten feet from standing in mud too much? its not pretty.
 
Most of the animals have been born over here and are used to the weather. Besides the animals are not cruelly treated at all. The Camel would have been seen too.

I'm sorry but I really don't see how you are being helpful, and I'll bring myself into this as well.

For the sake I think we both need to move on. I'm up for constructive debate but the these all seem like attacks on a wonderful zoo.
 
I'd be very interested to hear more about what monster has to say I think there's some interesting insight to be gained from the back of house perspective whether the reader chooses to dismiss it as subjective opinion or not. That's the beauty of the forum the real world stakes here aren't serious enough to warrant getting bent out of shape over
 
My concern is that for people who haven't been to Whipsnade will get a completely false idea of the zoo.

There are more people increasingly debating if zoos are out dated and we do not need this kind of chat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zia
I think you don't to worry about the zoochat crowd calling the validity of zoos into question. What's this website for if we aren't able to have a frank conversation about the strengths and weaknesses of a collection?

I love Whipsnade, it is my favourite place in the world full stop. I don't anyone can fault the spaces available to the animals is largely unmatched. I also don't think anyone can deny many of the facilities are old - whether or not you believe they are no longer fit for purpose. I don't have the experience necessary to give an informed opinion all I can over is my visitors impression. I also don't think anyone can deny that the collection has shrunk, even in my own relatively short lifetime of visiting the zoo and I think if you do love Whipsnade I think it's important to ask these kinds of questions.
 
BillEel said:
New I think you don't to worry about the zoochat crowd calling the validity of zoos into question
Click to expand...

It's worth noting that we do have anti-zoo campaigners occasionally registering as users and either lurking or actively trying to solicit "dirt" on collections :p along with the occasional disgruntled ex-employee with an axe to grind against the industry.
 
BillEel said:
I think you don't to worry about the zoochat crowd calling the validity of zoos into question. What's this website for if we aren't able to have a frank conversation about the strengths and weaknesses of a collection?

I love Whipsnade, it is my favourite place in the world full stop. I don't anyone can fault the spaces available to the animals is largely unmatched. I also don't think anyone can deny many of the facilities are old - whether or not you believe they are no longer fit for purpose. I don't have the experience necessary to give an informed opinion all I can over is my visitors impression. I also don't think anyone can deny that the collection has shrunk, even in my own relatively short lifetime of visiting the zoo and I think if you do love Whipsnade I think it's important to ask these kinds of questions.
Click to expand...

I'm all for asking questions, and I think you are right it is important. The collection is smaller but then I would suggest most zoos have less animals these days due to animals needing more space.

I'm sorry if I have come across as heated just when you are passionate about a place you do get clued up and you do know what you are talking about.

I have been to zoos where I don't think the enclosures were fit for purpose. When I went to Central Park zoo the polar bear enclosure was too small for example. I maybe would also argue the lions at Bristol should probably move but I do honestly believe no zoo would not look after animals in the best way they could.
 
TeaLovingDave said:
It's worth noting that we do have anti-zoo campaigners occasionally registering as users and either lurking or actively trying to solicit "dirt" on collections :p along with the occasional disgruntled ex-employee with an axe to grind against the industry.
Click to expand...

Can I maybe send you a message?
 
BillEel said:
I love Whipsnade, it is my favourite place in the world full stop. I don't anyone can fault the spaces available to the animals is largely unmatched. I also don't think anyone can deny many of the facilities are old - whether or not you believe they are no longer fit for purpose. I don't have the experience necessary to give an informed opinion all I can over is my visitors impression. I also don't think anyone can deny that the collection has shrunk, even in my own relatively short lifetime of visiting the zoo and I think if you do love Whipsnade I think it's important to ask these kinds of questions.
Click to expand...

Agree. One could probably argue that the collection at London has been on the decline from the early 1990's onwards but I too have now noticed an alarmingly recent decline in stock and standards at Whipsnade. Obviously this could be attributed to age or studbook recommendations but, with ZSL fast approaching it's bicentennary, it's coming to a head where serious sustainability questions need to be asked.

As Ive said before on previous posts, I truly dont believe ZSL knows what to do with Whipsnade, and hasnt done for many years. There are far too many "suits" in positions of authority who see an empty enclosure as a business opportunity/crazy golf site or fill it with non-descript tat.

My personal opinion is that the longterm future of ZSL lies with Whipsnade - it remains very much a 'blank canvas' and is not hamstrung with a multitude of Listed buildings. And lets not forget that the current site sits on only a QUARTER of the land that ZSL owns.

As much as it pains me to say it, let London deal with the 'little brown things,' theres no shame in that. ZSL's very future may very well lie in Dunstable.
 
TeaLovingDave said:
It's worth noting that we do have anti-zoo campaigners occasionally registering as users and either lurking or actively trying to solicit "dirt" on collections :p along with the occasional disgruntled ex-employee with an axe to grind against the industry.
Click to expand...


Yes. Many people within the zoo world have information and opinions which we certainly would not vent here. Looking at this thread, there could well be some other underlying issues.
However, looking at the opinions of SM and others, it does appear, from the outside at least, that the organisation is generating considerable funds, which would and should go a long way (a very long way) if spent properly.
 
ajmcwhipsnade said:
Most of the animals have been born over here and are used to the weather. Besides the animals are not cruelly treated at all. The Camel would have been seen too.

I'm sorry but I really don't see how you are being helpful, and I'll bring myself into this as well.

For the sake I think we both need to move on. I'm up for constructive debate but the these all seem like attacks on a wonderful zoo.
Click to expand...
cruelty? where did that comefrom ? and of course the camel woyld be treated but why woyld you allow ityo live in such conditions that itgotthat way inrhe first place?
look if you dont want to have this discussion thats fine, but believe me I have no particular desire to attack WZ, just to illustrate how it isnt such a bed of roses as people believe. if everyone says its fine it will never change. wecan instigatechange from the outside but only if we are realistic and accept the need for it.
i have said manytimes, if zoos were to police themselves properly, animal rights nutters would be out of a job. their opportunities depend on zoo failings
 
I don't think it comes down to zoos policing themselves properly, I think most good zoos do.

With the came, it would not have been on purpose. And besides, what happens if it gets that in the wild? it wont have a good keeper or vet staff to help it. Its not about letting it live in 'such conditions', its just an unfortunate incident.

This conversation is going around in circles so probably for the best lets leave it.
 
I visited Whipsnade today on a mild winter day, on looking back at my records I was surprised to find that it was my first visit since June and only the 5th of 2019. This is the least number of visits I have made in a year in a decade when I have visited 8-12 times a year. I love Whipsnade and it is possibly still my favourite zoo, but lately I leave every time feeling a bit more disappointed, another species or two has disappeared, to be replaced by duplicate surplus stock of species seen elsewhere in the zoo.
This year I have visited Hamerton 5 times, it is slightly nearer than Whipsnade, but I usually only visit 2-3 times a year (it costs me £15 a time whereas ZSL is paid for!). There is a reason for this, Hamerton always excites, Whipsnade (like several other zoos) usually disappoints!
I'm afraid I can't support @ajmcwhipsnade's total positivity regarding Whipsnade but I want it to improve rather than continue to stagnate or decline as appears to have happened over the last few years.
This is just a quick summary of my thoughts, I will try to give more details on the negatives and a few (but many less) positives.
 
In the wild, the camel would just move to a dry place and stay healthy. It is the responsabilty of a zoo to provide its animals with the possibility to get out of the mud in muddy weather!!!

Pretty much all enclosures in Whipsnade are very spacious, but its not all about space. Animals need space, but they also need other things.

I personally like Whipsnade a lot, ist has amazing potential but some things need to be improved, and it definately needs more animals. There is so much much unused space....
 
I will admit it would be a real shame if it went down the marwell route. I visited Marwell quite a few years ago now and really loved it, It's a shame to read its current state.

I do not think my positivity is misplaced, I just enjoy being there and watching so many beautiful species.

On a side note, Hamerton is on my to visit list!
 
Yassa said:
I personally like Whipsnade a lot, ist has amazing potential but some things need to be improved, and it definately needs more animals. There is so much much unused space....
Click to expand...
Agree 100% with this, Whipsnade should have so many more animals! How many enclosures and new species could have been built with the£6m wasted on the lion exhibit at London zoo?!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top