Yes it does. People using England as a casual short hand for the UK is offensive and inaccurate.
UK zoos & lockdown going forward...
- Thread starter TriUK
- Start date
Yes it does. People using England as a casual short hand for the UK is offensive and inaccurate.
Andrew Swales
Well-Known Member
Please do not be offensive either - I was not using it as 'casual short-hand for the UK', I was using it carefully to differentiate the 'separation' of England from the 3 other countries of the UK, which have representation not only in UK Parliament but in their own devolved assemblies too - which England lacks.
Andrew Swales
Well-Known Member
Interesting - and quite similar to a suggestion some years ago that we sell guide books at £30 each and give the buyers complimentary family entry, because books are zero rated for VAT and entry tickets attract 20% tax. That one didnt wash, due to the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion.. Not sure the grass-seed one would either - pity (perhaps)?
In this instance I think we must take it on the chin and tread water - at least it means our staff are the safest they possibly can be, which ultimately is so much more important than our plans for the next few years...
This is the last I will say on the matter - England does not have a government. That is a matter of fact. It is the UK government.
Andrew Swales
Well-Known Member
I am sorry that you do not seem to have understood my explanation, but of course accept you would like to leave it there.
Courts tend to take a dim view of such blunt and blatant attempts to sidestep regulations.
If government doesn't want zoos to open, it is very easy for it to impose a regulation saying that facilities with zoo licenses are unable to open, however many plants the zoo shop sells.
If government doesn't want zoos to open, it is very easy for it to impose a regulation saying that facilities with zoo licenses are unable to open, however many plants the zoo shop sells.
Will zoo's open again this year?
Andrew Swales
Well-Known Member
Most of our staff are convinced it will be in a few weeks, but personally, I am not so sure... Colchester have already said they will close in the autumn if not open before then. The Government (UK and England) is deferring problems for 3 months, which will soon be up; and we see that the job subsidy (furlough) scheme which is not applicable for zoos, has now been extended to August.
I have already posted on here about the internal tourism surveys which were asking questions about re-opening in June, September and December; so all must have been in discussion at some higher level.
All the financial holidays/deferrals are very short-term and do not look as though they will be extended. If Zoos cannot earn some funds in the summer (we take almost 1/3 of our annual income in August), then Colchester could well be right...
Remember that this closure came at the end of the worst winter on record, almost on the day it stopped raining. Here it started on 21st September and wiped out most of autumn/winter income.
Andrew Swales
Well-Known Member
Given our Governments written confirmation that zoos have never been asked/ordered/requested to close and could have stayed open all along, that would be surprise move - even for the UK.
I have written and asked for clarification of the 50 page document from Monday - as we are in the situation now where UK zoos were NOT closed at the start and could have been open all the way through, but have now been closed on 11 May - when other sectors are beginning to be relaxed!
I've used the word 'bizarre' before, and will stick with it for the moment - even though it is criticised every time on here...
Thanks for all of your fascinating and useful posts. One thing I would like to query though, is the bit in bold above; I assume you mean that zoo staff cannot be furloughed because they are needed to keep feeding the animals etc. Is it possible to furlough some staff and not others? I'm aware of at least one collection where the owners are running the place entirely by themselves and have furloughed all of their staff, which I assume is OK - although clearly not an option for all but the smallest of zoos! I know Chester (and presumably others) have asked some staff, such as those with pre-existing medical conditions, not to work; I wonder if they can furlough these whilst continuing to pay those who are OK to keep working?
There are so many issues and questions in this situation, and I get the impression zoos are no more than an afterthought for the ones making the big decisions - sad, but perhaps not that surprising. I certainly hope that they can salvage something of a summer season!
Andrew Swales
Well-Known Member
Yes of course SC. I am always conscious of any post being too wordy, so have abbreviated where possible.
The 'furlough' scheme has turned out to be an 80% Government subsidy (up to a wage threshold) to send people home. Despite what we were told at the beginning it is not possible for those so treated to volunteer for the zoo, even if they produce no income for the zoo. Other sectors (like agriculture) have successfully lobbied for a change in the rules to benefit their industry, but this has not happened for zoos.
So, using our example, we have several categories of staff - animal keepers of varying experience and levels, shop and reception staff, a secretary, and myself as 'director'. Our shop/reception staff are all on zero hours contracts, so if they not working they are not paid = hence no 'furlough'.
The others are on standard contracts. Our secretary is working from home because she has school age children, but because she is doing work for the zoo = no furlough. I have taken no wage since this started = no furlough.
This leaves our animal staff. We have a tight team of long-term animal keepers with minimal turnover. None are not needed. We need the team we have to look after our collection to the standard required, both physically and legally. This team is needed today, last year, next month; there is no difference = no furlough. The collection has not been reduced, so the work involved in looking after it has not reduced. The only way we could furlough animal staff is to have either employed more than we needed before this started (which we didn't), or to compromise our standards of animal care and potentially animal, public and staff safety (which we haven't). There is no-one to furlough, even though yes it is technically possible. I forgot our handy-man and van driver, who is collecting supermarket and public donations = no furlough.
I guess other zoos who employ more people, could be different - I can only comment from our own experience.
Wordy - sorry...
Last edited:
littleRedPanda
Well-Known Member
Howletts are selling advance tickets for July 1st onwards, so they are optimistic.
Are you still allowing your volunteers/students to work? I know some zoos have gladly continued to accept the help, whereas some collections have decided to stick with paid staff only
Andrew Swales
Well-Known Member
We have two such volunteers/students who had been with us for some time before this started. Along with our permanent team, they have been fantastic. Our permanent staff made the joint decision to ask them to stay. Our team know each other personally, socialise outside work, know each others personal and family circumstances well - and trust each other. We have politely and thankfully declined the many outside offers of help from 'strangers' whose circumstances were not known - and I use the word generally only to describe anyone outside our tight circle. Keeping our staff as safe as we could, at work, was always our first priority. Everyone has been very kind and understood our reasons.Are you still allowing your volunteers/students to work? I know some zoos have gladly continued to accept the help, whereas some collections have decided to stick with paid staff only
Last edited:
Andrew Swales
Well-Known Member
Mmmm... perhaps they know something lesser mortals don't..?
Don't worry about it being wordy - proper answers often need to be! Your answer confirms what I already suspected - and Hamerton has always struck me as being a zoo that only employed the number of staff it needs to run. That might sound obvious, but quite a few places seem to have staff who you are almost tripping over when you walk round!
Re: Howletts, I wouldn't read too much into it, I suspect they're just trying to keep some cash coming in. Yorkshire Wildlife Park only recently cancelled an event at the end of this month which many had pre-booked to attend, and haven't directly offered refunds, only to swap the entry ticket for another, non-event date. I'm afraid a fair few shows seem to be doing likewise - I know of one that has rescheduled twice already, presumably to try and hang on to the money they have in the pot.
I've just seen on Exmoor Zoo's Facebook page that they have been awarded a Government grant to keep the zoo operating until the end of July. They state that the fund exists only to support zoos that are within six weeks of closing.
Security Check Required
Security Check Required
Andrew Swales
Well-Known Member
Must be the start of the zoo fund... We are still working through the paperwork. 'Severe financial stress' has to be proven, but no mention of six weeks...
I'm assuming the 6 weeks must relate to the second bullet point below. They don't put a time period on 'immediate risk' in anything I have read but they must have some way to quantify this.
