How am I damaging it? Explain.
And my speculation was clearly that, so there was no harm. It's not like I was bashing the place. Are you connected with it by any chance? I've done nothing but defend this zoo, how comes I'm getting stick?
Tell you what - I'll 'calm down' when you stop speculating about the RSCC, accounts, sources of animals, ethics, husbandry, management and whatever else is on here!
Don't you realise you are potentially damaging a charity?
Where did I say he was slagging it off? I said he was speculating.
Potentially damaging? Hmm lets see, all the negative comments across the board (not only on this thread). You know what they say it takes years to build up a good reputation and a second to destroy it! It's a new zoo, so things aren't going to be perfect, and as an avid animal keeper myself I KNOW enclosures are NEVER finished! I'll never be happy with my enclosures for as long as they're there and I have some pride in what I'm doing.
The zoo needs to grow, yea, not denying that, it's not perfect, not denying that either, but I don't think it deserves the slating it's getting on this forum.
No I'm not associated with the zoo - I live 4 hours away, but because I 'know' the zoo and visit when I can I kind of feel loyal to it shall we say and if all the issues on here were FACT then fine, I'd be taking a closer look, but they're not fact.
You said that me personally was potentially damaging the charity and yet I've never said anything negative. You even admit that in your last post, If you have a problem then take it to the people who have been saying bad stuff about the place.
Okay, I'd just thought i'd interupt this rather heated debate with my own, and what i see as 'fair', observations. (having not been there of course this is purely from photos, reviews and other sources of information)
1 - in terms of Finance, I think it is clear the owner has indeed invested into the zoo from his own pocket. (most of the developments, enclosures, animals etc would not be achievable without investment) but now perhaps the zoo has indeed ran out of the money.
2 - the pumas and clouded leopards, okay i see what they were doing to start with, but now with the only one cloudy and because the visitors can't see them any way, i think the cloudy should be relocated to another zoo and so allow the puma's the enclosure full time. I dont think the enclosure is particularly bad but could just do with a spruce.
3 - authenticity, it seems the zoo should have gone all out for authenticity or abandoned the idea, rather then have this middle ground. The area specific trees are nice but serve little pratical purpose and the same aesthetic effect could be acheived with normal trees/plants
4 - The expansion of the zoo is really needed but not so more animals can be brought in, but so enclosures can be expanded. The reason i get the idea that this is a 'collectors' zoo; is that if it wasn't they would have waited for the expansion, built less enclosures before the expansion so that the same number of animals can be maintained but in a larger space
Overall I think my judgements are fair and just. I'm not giving the place 'stick' but neither am I going to ignore the flaws.
I think that's fair
I do think that they could maybe just give the enclosure to the pumas, or better still to the fishing cat as they'd go with the Asian theaming of that specific area. At least those "ornamental" trees provide them with some shade. Have you seen recent pics of the cloudie enclosure? It's had a lot more branches put in and more bamboo and the like. Not awesome but it's fine.
I think that's fair
I do think that they could maybe just give the enclosure to the pumas, or better still to the fishing cat as they'd go with the Asian theaming of that specific area. At least those "ornamental" trees provide them with some shade. Have you seen recent pics of the cloudie enclosure? It's had a lot more branches put in and more bamboo and the like. Not awesome but it's fine.
yeah I have , the point I was trying to make was that they didn't need the area specific trees. The enclosure is fine, but i dont like the walls and would prefer a mural or bottle green colour than the grey (but then thats being picky)
1 - in terms of Finance, I think it is clear the owner has indeed invested into the zoo from his own pocket. (most of the developments, enclosures, animals etc would not be achievable without investment) but now perhaps the zoo has indeed ran out of the money.
Whether the owner has pumped in a bunch of his own money or not, the simple fact is that he's not on the Times Rich List. At some point, the funds that he's willing and capable of putting in will be limited.
2 - the pumas and clouded leopards, okay i see what they were doing to start with, but now with the only one cloudy and because the visitors can't see them any way, i think the cloudy should be relocated to another zoo and so allow the puma's the enclosure full time. I dont think the enclosure is particularly bad but could just do with a spruce.
Just as a question, have you ever tried to place a "killer male" Clouded Leopard that shows no signs of diurnal activity? The male will never be allowed into a mating situation again, and has no exhibition value. What other zoo are you thinking of that would want a specimen that can't mate and will never be on show?
3 - authenticity, it seems the zoo should have gone all out for authenticity or abandoned the idea, rather then have this middle ground. The area specific trees are nice but serve little pratical purpose and the same aesthetic effect could be acheived with normal trees/plants
"normal"? What's "normal"? I've seen the site for a long time, and when RSCC took it over it was completely barren and had virtually no plants in it. So plants had to be put in, and they chose to put in area-specific ones rather than UK native species.
Personally, I like it, and it follows a long tradition of combined zoological and botanical gardens. Are all the plant species in Budapest zoo native? Heck no. And that's one of the reasons it works: you can see plants you wouldn't see wandering around the countryside with animals you wouldn't see wandering around the countryside.
4 - The expansion of the zoo is really needed but not so more animals can be brought in, but so enclosures can be expanded. The reason i get the idea that this is a 'collectors' zoo; is that if it wasn't they would have waited for the expansion, built less enclosures before the expansion so that the same number of animals can be maintained but in a larger space
This is a point that I think is by someone who doesn't understand bootstrapping a zoo. Todd's finances are going to be limited in some form, so there's only so much he can put in day 1. People want to see lots of animals when they go to a zoo. In order for the zoo to have the money to be able to expand, it has to have people coming in the door and paying money, meaning that you have to have a collection that they want to see.
People seem to be slating RSCC and saying "they should have waited." The problem is that if they had waited, they never would have gotten the critical mass of people coming through the door that would have allowed the facility to have the money to be able to expand properly.
Also, I've been to Howletts and Port Lympne quite a few times. Lots of "normal" (e.g. non-zoochat) people actually complain about going around them because they're too big.
Yes they could of waited, just look at bristol zoo (okay it was aready an established zoo) or newquay zoo both sucessful zoos with fewer large specialised species than RSPCC and yet larger grounds. No one is saying he has got loads of money to throw at the centre however the money could of been spent more wisely on fewer but better enclosures for the inhabitants. For the clouded leopard I dare say a few establishments would want to have such a beautiful and rare species rather than have shown in such manner as it is being shown currently. It would be better for both species (pumas and clouded leopards) for one of the species to leave the enclosure so as there is a more stable enclosure for one species, as there is a single clouded leopard who currently is off show it would make sense for the cloudy to be moved rather than the pumas.
I thought my evaluation of the centre was fair and just. it is by no means the perfect zoo but a good little collection with a few flaws. There is nothing wrong with the size of the zoo just the amount of animals kept in such size.
Reduakari, please learn the facts before accusing, your negative attitude - on subjects which you know nothing about - is really starting to annoy me.
As we were some of the first visitors into the park, they were just demonstrating to a new keeper how to move the pair of (juvenile) puma from their night quarters to day area. As such, they had spent a little longer than normal so the puma were on the visitor pathway when we arrived. However, after we got in, it was around a minute before the puma were in their enclosure.
I don't mind criticism where it is well founded, but here it is not.
oh dear the usual narrowminded posts by reduakari , not limited to attacking Howletts and John Aspinall it now seems he is embarking on a new spate of criticisms on another zoological garden in the united kingdom
