GeeZee
Well-Known Member
Citation needed.
That’s just my own opinion lol
Bristol Zoo (Closed) Bristol Zoo historical items for auction
- Thread starter polarbear
- Start date
That’s just my own opinion lol
It'd nonetheless be interesting to hear the "many ways" that you feel Wild Place qualifies as "miles better" than Clifton was
A new bust could e created using the death mask should they wish to do so. The purchaser of the original bust (I am curious to know who it was - we may never know) is likely to preserve it, so it is not lost to history.
The last place was by the entrance / exit to the gorilla house (former elephant house). As you exited the house on the gibbon island side of the building, it was on the right.
ZooNews2024
Well-Known Member
I liked Bristol very much, but have not felt the need to visit Wild Place.It'd nonetheless be interesting to hear the "many ways" that you feel Wild Place qualifies as "miles better" than Clifton was
But, based on second-hand information, I would be really surprised if it is miles better in many ways.
I have visited what was Wild Place a couple of times in the past but not since it became the BZP and Bristol's 'new' zoo.
Each time I found it disappointing with only a small range of species and a random form of layout. But the potential is there and hopefully things will improve as more stock arrives, but the delay in the sale of the old site seems to be compromising that.
The completion of the new Gorilla enclosure will certainly help but that is now not scheduled to open until 2026. Until then I think the other Bristol Zoo-Noah's Ark, with its simple collection of larger species, will still have the edge for many local people.
Each time I found it disappointing with only a small range of species and a random form of layout. But the potential is there and hopefully things will improve as more stock arrives, but the delay in the sale of the old site seems to be compromising that.
The completion of the new Gorilla enclosure will certainly help but that is now not scheduled to open until 2026. Until then I think the other Bristol Zoo-Noah's Ark, with its simple collection of larger species, will still have the edge for many local people.
Last edited:
I've visited Wild Place a few times - including prior to the official opening, as part of the 2013 Zoohistorica held in Bristol - but my last visit was before Bristol Zoo closed down, so my experiences are *slightly* out of date. I always rather liked it and thought it held a lot of promise, although much of this sentiment was based on the then-current plan to retain both collections, with WP focusing on larger species which required more space, and BZ focusing on groups such as reptiles, amphibians and invertebrates (which were among the biggest strengths of Bristol in recent decades) with only a few larger taxa.
Given the fact that it has been made fairly clear that the future direction for Wild Place as the Bristol Zoo Project is one which abandons these strengths for the most part, with very few lower vertebrates or invertebrates intended to be part of the collection in future, I see little scope for the collection to become "miles better [than Bristol Zoo] in many ways" anytime soon, let alone already being so.
Moreover, I have heard on the grapevine from a number of individuals who *have* visited the collection since the rebrand that a sentiment of "we are not a zoo, we are a showcase for conservation projects" has started to become the party line... which for me provokes further concern about the future, and makes me wonder how much zoological history was auctioned-off due to bald financial necessity, and how much was auctioned-off because it was seen as superfluous to such a "showcase".
GeeZee
Well-Known Member
It'd nonetheless be interesting to hear the "many ways" that you feel Wild Place qualifies as "miles better" than Clifton was
Don't get me wrong, I truly loved the old Bristol Zoo - I was devastated when it closed down and it had been the first Zoo (at least that I can remember) that I ever visited, I have many good memories there, and I do agree - initially we were led to believe that both sites may be retained and I personally (as I've said before) feel that they could of kept the old site, in some form but to do that would involve a major investment, and in any case it would be at the expense of the other.
Maybe you disagree on the broader point, but I do personally agree with what many in the Bristol Zoological Society state themselves in that the new BZP is more reflective of what a modern Zoo would look like. Clifton in retrospective was rather small, particularly the lion enclosure (and in the recent past, polar bears), In general - the old site was looking rather tired and in general the old style 'city zoos' are rather dated.
Compare to this the bear wood enclosure which is one of the best exhibits I have seen (and I believe the only one where bears/wolves share a large combined area, which would have historically been the case in the wild). I also really did like the Giraffe enclosure mixing in with the Zebra's and the relevant themes around it in a similar fashion to bear wood, these sorts of exhibits would be impossible in the old BZ.
BZP is very much still an ambitious work in progress, and for sure, there is a lot of work to still be done, but already this year they have the new Red Panda enclosure and they are working on developing the area where the tower is (Tower meadow) to develop it into a central african themed exhibit which will house , gorillas , crocodiles and several species of fish to name a few, BZP have mentioned about preserving amphibians as part of their mission - so perhaps in due course these will be included too, so I don't think it is entirely going to abandon all of that.
The whole conservation showcase thing , I do understand where they are coming from, I think they are trying to build a modern consensus and attract a wider scope of people who may not necessarily like or agree with zoos, but may well be impressed with some of the work BZP has been undertaking.
While yes, they could of done a bit more when it comes to reflecting on the old site (such as keeping a few of the statues/busts etc for some sort of collection/display), I do really appreciate that they have renamed it Bristol Zoo Project (rather than wild place) as a nod to its historic site, presumably in future it will just be known as 'Bristol Zoo' going forwards, overall I feel that looking through a 21st century lense, the old site was, unfortunately, not fit for purpose in its current state - to put it into context I believe that the entire zoo was only 1/3 bigger than the bear wood exhibit alone at BZP.
The point being that in the last 30 years or so, the vast majority of the zoo had shifted strongly away from keeping large megafauna which required large amounts of space and towards keeping precisely the sort of smaller taxa which made Bristol so good, and which BZP has all-but-abandoned both at present and with regards to their future masterplan. For all intents and purposes, by the final decades of Bristol Zoo the only remaining megafauna taxa were the gorillas (whose exhibit was very good, I would argue), and the lions and pygmy hippopotamus, both of which *were* in rather poor exhibits but which equally were originally intended to be eventually phased out from the collection and moved over to Wild Place anyway.
The polar bears which you cite as further proof of your point left the collection over thirty years ago
so comparing that exhibit to a bear exhibit constructed in modern times as proof that Wild Place is "miles better" than Bristol is both ridiculous and unfair.There are literally dozens of exhibits across Europe which mix bears and wolves, as a matter of fact.
If sheer size of a zoo is the determining factor in whether it is "fit for purpose", other zoological collections which would fall foul of this description would include Shaldon, Lakeland Wildlife Oasis and Newquay, all of which are significantly smaller than Bristol was
the key thing is the use to which the available space is put, and I would argue that at the point in time closure was announced, the vast majority of the available space was being used for purposes for which it was well-suited.Pandering to the anti-zoo lobby in the hope they will lend their support is a dangerous game indeed, and if (as I fear) they have consciously scattered much of the historical and zoological legacy of Bristol Zoo to the seven winds in the belief this will strengthen their kudos with the anti-zoo lobby, a very short-sighted game too.
GeeZee
Well-Known Member
To the above, I’m not saying the old site was particularly bad per say (aside from the fact that some of the exhibits weren’t fit for purpose & in general the site was very dated) , but I do feel - personally, that the new site is much better and crucially, has significantly more potential.
Out of interest, which zoos have a large area which mixes wolves and bears together? Certainly not in the UK at least anyway.
Another point I’d like to raise is that I feel that BZP appears to do a lot more for the community, and I know some people don’t think much of these things but I think it’s good that the BZP hold various events (I’ve been to a few) and educational workshops, as well as partnerships with universities/schools - I know the old site did a bit of this and I could be wrong, but I don’t remember them doing it on the scale that BZP seems to do, also whenever I go there (and I’ve said this before) they seem to have a lot more volunteers teaching the public etc, I really don’t remember much of that in the old site other than the keeper talks.
Size isn’t everything of course, but I do highlight again that the fact that bear wood is 2/3 the size of the entire old site which isn’t an insignificant comparison when compared to some of the old exhibits.
I too am no friend of the anti zoo lobby, some of those people will never like zoos no matter what form and often get a lot of their information from dubious and sensationalist media articles, but I do feel it’s important to try and have a modern positive image of what a zoo should be like and highlight the importance of conservation and making a difference, Edinburgh Zoo are going a similar way with their “2030 Strategy” and reversing the decline of 50 species, which is a bit like the “2035 vision” for BZP, again in my view, not a bad thing.
If you don’t mind me asking, what would you have done if it was your decision? Would you have kept both sites open how they were, if that was even a viable option? Or do you feel that BZP was overpriotised?
Out of interest, which zoos have a large area which mixes wolves and bears together? Certainly not in the UK at least anyway.
Another point I’d like to raise is that I feel that BZP appears to do a lot more for the community, and I know some people don’t think much of these things but I think it’s good that the BZP hold various events (I’ve been to a few) and educational workshops, as well as partnerships with universities/schools - I know the old site did a bit of this and I could be wrong, but I don’t remember them doing it on the scale that BZP seems to do, also whenever I go there (and I’ve said this before) they seem to have a lot more volunteers teaching the public etc, I really don’t remember much of that in the old site other than the keeper talks.
Size isn’t everything of course, but I do highlight again that the fact that bear wood is 2/3 the size of the entire old site which isn’t an insignificant comparison when compared to some of the old exhibits.
I too am no friend of the anti zoo lobby, some of those people will never like zoos no matter what form and often get a lot of their information from dubious and sensationalist media articles, but I do feel it’s important to try and have a modern positive image of what a zoo should be like and highlight the importance of conservation and making a difference, Edinburgh Zoo are going a similar way with their “2030 Strategy” and reversing the decline of 50 species, which is a bit like the “2035 vision” for BZP, again in my view, not a bad thing.
If you don’t mind me asking, what would you have done if it was your decision? Would you have kept both sites open how they were, if that was even a viable option? Or do you feel that BZP was overpriotised?
Paira Daiza is one such, though the area is probably not as big as Bear Wood is described as being. There were about six bears and two wolves when I went last year.
Of course though Bears and Wolves inhabit the same forests, its not quite the same as being confined together where more contact is likely to be the norm. I don't know how wolves in particular feel about that.
I was always a bit puzzled about this choice of exhibit at Wild Place, it now seems rather at odds with the heavy 'conservation park/endangered species' theme of BZP, plus the bears are a non-exhibit at this time of year for a few months. It is also a pity IMO that species like the Pygmy Hippos and Lions did not make the transfer from the old zoo. They do need some more high profile species there( that's apart from the Gorilla exhibit which is still some way off anyway).
GeeZee
Well-Known Member
Yes that was one thing that was a bit disappointing, when the old site closed - it would have seemed that at least some of the animals from there were going to be moved to the new site, but that seems to have not been the case, perhaps some of this was misleading media reporting but still.
GeeZee
Well-Known Member
Out of genuine interest , I'd still like to at least know some of these other zoos that have a mixture of bears and wolves in the same exhibit (aside from Paira Daiza which has been mentioned).
Just off the top of my head....
Wildpark Luneberger Heide (Grey Wolf and Brown Bear)
Dierenpark Ouwehands (Grey Wolf and Brown Bear)
Tierpark Goldau (Grey Wolf and Brown Bear)
Zoo Schwerin (Grey Wolf and Brown Bear)
Wildpark Grunau (Grey Wolf and Brown Bear)
Yaroslavl Zoo (Grey Wolf and Brown Bear)
Tierpark Stadt Haag (Grey Wolf and Brown Bear)
Tierpark Dählhölzli (Grey Wolf and Brown Bear)
Woburn Safari Park (Grey Wolf and American Black Bear)
Naturzoo Rheine (Sloth Bear and Golden Jackal, formerly also African Wolf)
Zoo Olomouc (American Black Bear and Coyote, formerly Timber Wolf instead of Coyote)
And to stretch the definition of wolf a little further....
Allwetterzoo Muenster (Sloth Bear and Dhole)
GeeZee
Well-Known Member
Thanks for that list & for specifying which animals are where etc! That’s really helpful.
Im actually visiting Germany next year in April & perhaps, Austria too so I will try and visit one of those if possible.