It may be naturalistic but it certainly doesn't rest easy on the eye. It looks like piles of rock(scree) have been dumped in a grass enclosure and then just left. The poles and logs I'm not clear what they are for or if that is a finished exhibit? It doesn't look like it.
You have summarized my own impression of this hodge-podge of a zoo. Aesthetically it appears that every single exhibit in the establishment is plain ugly, with poles, chain-link fence and piles of rocks in more than one enclosure. Even if one were to overlook the capybara in the Australian walk-through section, or the reindeer on the African Savanna (and those things are extremely difficult for me to overlook) the overall impression is one of a ramshackle farm that is in need of repair. Zurich Zoo's snow leopard habitat is so manifestly greater than what is in South Lakes that a debate on the merits of each is a mute point.
Going through the thousands of posts on this website that relate to British zoos there is often a complaint about aesthetics in relation to Marwell, Twycross, Noah's Ark, South Lakes, Howletts, Port Lympne, etc, as so many English zoos have paddocks surrounded by chain-link fencing or really do resemble rundown farms with immersion a word that is not in the dictionary. Do zoos really have to immerse visitors into a different world other than the rainy British countryside? Of course not, but it would be nice to see some money splashed out on some half-decent looking exhibits. Compared to the great Dutch, German and American zoos I feel sorry for folks who have 160+ zoos in England and maybe only a few of them are really any good.
Then there is Colchester, a beloved zoo by many with a great collection but again there are criticisms due to the mock-rock overkill. What does that leave England with? London Zoo is a legendary zoo that is steeped in history and Chester Zoo stands proudly as perhaps the only facility that has a strong conservation focus, great educational components (but an awful map!), a world-class animal collection AND exhibits that are aesthetically pleasing to the eye. Places like South Lakes are a total joke.
(I say all of this as a man who proudly cheers on England in every World Cup and while I was born in Canada almost my entire ancestry links back to England. I have a tattoo of the 3 lions on my arm and while I love many aspects of England I get bored of glancing through photos of ugly zoos.)
What???? Bronx Zoo's Himalayan Highlands is superb! Utah's Hogle Zoo has an amazing big cat complex! Roger Williams Park Zoo? Philadelphia Zoo? Those are 4 zoos just off the top of my head that have far more impressive exhibits for snow leopards.
I should also point out that as a Canadian I live in the world's second largest nation and yet there really are only a couple of half-decent zoos here. Calgary and Toronto are both worth visiting, Vancouver Aquarium is one of the 10 best aquariums in North America, but after that it is slim pickings. There are many farmyard-style zoos that are just as crappy as the innumerable dodgy English zoos that seem to sprout up in the countryside like bemused Muggles. Compared to the great zoo nations like the United States, Germany and The Netherlands we Canadian and English zoo nerds have to sift through the awful mess of zoological facilities in order to locate a Chester or Calgary amongst the chain-link crap.
What???? Bronx Zoo's Himalayan Highlands is superb! Utah's Hogle Zoo has an amazing big cat complex! Roger Williams Park Zoo? Philadelphia Zoo? Those are 4 zoos just off the top of my head that have far more impressive exhibits for snow leopards.
Of course, if one goes by population - which is probably more pertinent when one is discussing the number of zoological institutions found within a country - you are in 37th place
I should also point out that as a Canadian I live in the world's second largest nation and yet there really are only a couple of half-decent zoos here. Calgary and Toronto are both worth visiting, Vancouver Aquarium is one of the 10 best aquariums in North America, but after that it is slim pickings. There are many farmyard-style zoos that are just as crappy as the innumerable dodgy English zoos that seem to sprout up in the countryside like bemused Muggles. Compared to the great zoo nations like the United States, Germany and The Netherlands we Canadian and English zoo nerds have to sift through the awful mess of zoological facilities in order to locate a Chester or Calgary amongst the chain-link crap.
I can honestly say that Chester is not all that great, and Colchester, really??
The fencing was woefully weak, enclosure are old and dated at both places and having been to all the UK zoo's/collections at least south lakes are trying, it might not be aesthetically pleasing but it's better than Tywcross's and Colchester's amur leopard enclosures.
I can honestly say that Chester is not all that great, and Colchester, really??
The fencing was woefully weak, enclosure are old and dated at both places and having been to all the UK zoo's/collections at least south lakes are trying, it might not be aesthetically pleasing but it's better than Tywcross's and Colchester's amur leopard enclosures.
This is a very odd post! I'm certainly not blind to some of Chester's faults - I'd put an uninspiring collection and some pretty agricultural architecture at the top of the list - but to suggest that the "fencing was woefully weak" there is puzzling. And what are these old and dated enclosures at Chester and Colchester? The latter does not have anything which is more than 20 years old, afaik, and most if its buildings are newer even than that. At Chester there are one or two older structures, but nothing genuinely archaic, and a great deal that has been built in the past decade.
By all means criticise, but not for invalid reasons!
