$95 million support package for Australian Zoos
- Thread starter Sunbear12
- Start date
Frankly, not really. But the stupid thing is that we are allowed to sit them all in our cafe, IE there is no difference to the numbers outside as against inside. I guess it would be feasible in that we are small but would it be worthwhile economically? But how could say Melbourne Zoo do that?
We could however do night tours.
There’s no prospect of Melbourne opening in stage 2 and maybe not even in stage 3.
Maybe day tours, rather than people wandering about on their own? That gives you the pretext you need to send people out once the tour is done. You could perhaps have 3 tours through the day, then along with a night tour you would get up to 80 people through the gates.
Yes that is being considered but the irony here is that it means 20 people are walking around in a tight group against a larger number of people randomly distributed over a large area. We also have to consider the OH&S of the guide.
By the way most evening tours have a maximum of 16 participants and we reduced that to 12 over the period prior to closure as a preventive action.
Which leave me hopeful they will use their political power to have those numbers increased at State level, as allowed.
Australia has a federal constitutional structure and most of the relevant policy areas - health, education, law enforcement, retail licensing etc - are state responsibilities. It is what it is.
Andrew Swales
Well-Known Member
I replied to this item when it was posted in another thread, and asked pretty much the same questions.
20 people is very elitist and provides almost a private zoo visit - could this be 'sold' as a Government forced private-visit period for a massively enlarged entry fee..?
Does a zoo have to open through set phases, or can it jump from stage 1 to stage 3, or even stage 1 to stage 4...?
I guess the length of time each stage runs for is up to the State Govt..?
The UK Government is ignoring what is happening in NL, US, CZ, DE and FR - and up to now also in AUS. We hope that this last Aussie announcement is ignored too! Not that this would be of immediate relevance as it looks as though we expecting another 3 weeks of lock-down...
20 people is very elitist and provides almost a private zoo visit - could this be 'sold' as a Government forced private-visit period for a massively enlarged entry fee..?
Does a zoo have to open through set phases, or can it jump from stage 1 to stage 3, or even stage 1 to stage 4...?
I guess the length of time each stage runs for is up to the State Govt..?
The UK Government is ignoring what is happening in NL, US, CZ, DE and FR - and up to now also in AUS. We hope that this last Aussie announcement is ignored too! Not that this would be of immediate relevance as it looks as though we expecting another 3 weeks of lock-down...
Yes, the timing of each move is up to the respective state governments. NT, Tasmania and SA, which may have already functionally eliminated the virus, will move first. Victoria is likely to be last: our government has been the most aggressive in trying to stamp it out, but we are also dealing with at least one and possibly up to three local clusters.
I doubt Moonlit or other leisure businesses will be forced to open progressively at each stage. I think it’s possible these numbers weren’t set with zoos specifically in kind: it might be that they are for a broader category that includes museums, galleries etc and that the nuance of zoos being large, outdoor campuses hasn’t been factored in. If so, there is time to revise that thinking.
I am quite sure 20 people isn’t intended to be “elitist”: it’s cautious, while they see if relaxing restrictions causes a spike in cases. It’s also intended to be a relatively brief transitory step towards the more viable 100 people at a time limit, given the nationally-agreed target is to be at stage 3 in July.
I doubt Moonlit or other leisure businesses will be forced to open progressively at each stage. I think it’s possible these numbers weren’t set with zoos specifically in kind: it might be that they are for a broader category that includes museums, galleries etc and that the nuance of zoos being large, outdoor campuses hasn’t been factored in. If so, there is time to revise that thinking.
I am quite sure 20 people isn’t intended to be “elitist”: it’s cautious, while they see if relaxing restrictions causes a spike in cases. It’s also intended to be a relatively brief transitory step towards the more viable 100 people at a time limit, given the nationally-agreed target is to be at stage 3 in July.
Andrew Swales
Well-Known Member
I didn't say that 20 was intended to be elitist - I said it was elitist; and I wondered if MRJ's visitors would be prepared to pay extra to have the zoo almost to themselves, as little more crowded than a private visit. This in itself would be a unique experience and (hopefully) unlikely to be repeated.
At Hamerton we have had private individual/family visits during the closure period, with the written approval of the Police and Government.
At Hamerton we have had private individual/family visits during the closure period, with the written approval of the Police and Government.
Last edited:
Zoos are included in a group of businesses that include museums, amusement parks and brothels. I think the regulators were more focused on the indoor businesses and I am reasonably hopeful that the State government will increase these limits for zoos, as zoos they own have over 80% of the market in this state, so it is to their advantage. (In case you are interested, brothels are required to remain closed till all limits are lifted). You can find a complete breakdown here:
https://prod.static9.net.au/fs/e8cb19bb-ca0b-48e7-82b2-b644786124e3
The start and end of each stage is set by each State. A zoo in the Northern Territory (again owned by the Government) has already opened. However the Northern Territory no longer has any active cases, and never had a single community transmission (IE everybody infected came in from outside).
Of course we are not obliged to open and this is not about how we run the business or the measures we are taking, it is just about limiting transmission and suppressing the virus to the point where it is virtually non-existent. We will certainly start up our evening tours just as soon as we can, what we do in Stage 2 for daytime visitors is under discussion. We have a bit of time, I'm not sure we here in Victoria will be going into even stage 1 for a week or two yet.
Another thing is we are going into winter so we are not talking about losing a lot of visitation for the next few months anyway.
Other than possibly New Zealand, nobody is talking about international travel either in or out resuming till some time next year.
Last edited:
Andrew Swales
Well-Known Member
How is it elitist?
Andrew Swales
Well-Known Member
I have to admit, I assumed that Moonlit's attendance was normally considerably more than the 20 of those who would be now allowed to visit at any one time, under the second phase restrictions. You probably know more than I do, as most people seem to, so I apologise if I was wrong.
But my question was "How is it elitist?" - allowing a maximum number of people in at one time due to health concerns isn't elitist.
@Kifaru Bwana unlike what is happening in some other parts of the world, for the most part our Australian states have been working closely together in conjunction with the federal government to plan their response to the pandemic.
They've been having weekly "national cabinet" meetings (sometimes multiple meetings per week) - the cabinet comprises the prime minister and all state and territory premiers and chief ministers. They negotiate what they believe should be the appropriate next steps in managing the crisis.
There are some differences in the implementation approach taken in each state - but mostly due to their local situation more than ideology or anything else.
In general, the federal government has done a good job of setting the agenda and then leaving it up to the states to implement at their local level based on their own requirements.
There has been very little "politics" coming through in the decision making process - I'm sure there's plenty of debate and dissent behind closed door, but for the most part - once the decisions are made, they are largely supported by the states.
The only real source of tension has been in the education space with some key differences in when and how to reopen schools.
Given that most of the state borders remain closed, it is now possible for the states to implement reopening using their own approaches - since there isn't much mixing of population between states. That means Victoria and NSW can take a more conservative approach given their active clusters - while SA and WA can be more relaxed given they have practically eradicated the virus - no new locally sourced cases in the past 10-14 days.
No doubt, we'll see quite different responses to reopening zoos as well - I would be concerned if NSW and Victoria started reopening zoos at this point, while I am confident that SA and WA are in a good position to move soon.
Hello Simon, thanks for your response and comments.
I wish we - in Europe would be acting on a similarly unified European policy and response to COVID19. However, it seems to be - very much - every country for itself with some good examples (Germany, Spain, Sweden) and a lot mediocre ones (Italy, Belgium, France) and those in shambles (Netherlands ... YUP, UK, Poland, Hungary). Too much politics and populisms around here!
I wish we - in Europe would be acting on a similarly unified European policy and response to COVID19. However, it seems to be - very much - every country for itself with some good examples (Germany, Spain, Sweden) and a lot mediocre ones (Italy, Belgium, France) and those in shambles (Netherlands ... YUP, UK, Poland, Hungary). Too much politics and populisms around here!
Sounds like the EU is not one big happy family?
My fellow Australasian and other esteemed forumsters do not get me wrong .... nor take offence for my open hearted and minded response.
I am all for an unified Europe and a common European policy to weigh into the big powers that be Russia-US-China. We could be part of that equilibrium to make sensible and sustainable policies for our common and world future and a speak up for and over independent nations as well as the South-North divide.
Alas, as it stands and given the level of populism in the world globally at the moment - and I do mean in NA and Canada, Australasia, Africa and South America too - we are not immune to that disease. If only combined as a global population through the UN and beyond with NGO's we could change that dire state of socio-economic political affairisms.
At the moment, I think not ..., but I remain an optimist at heart with a healthy degree of science rationale and scepticism -. Perhaps, I could become a stoic, but I think my fiery and impassionate nature do prevent / preclude that from (ever) happening.
Andrew Swales
Well-Known Member
It never has been, Zorro. It cant agree on whether a zoo can keep Coatis, and now it cant agree on how close 'social distancing' should be, it cant even agree on how to collate and distribute data - what hope it there for anything bigger...