Never say never. Long term plans show the zoo want to expand into areas that are either currently used as 'back of house' or car parking and also onto land that is not currently used at all. Almost doubling the size of the current zoo. That opens up all sorts of possibilities for the future.
Twycross Zoo Are breeding pairs a requirement?
- Thread starter J C
- Start date
Never say never. Long term plans show the zoo want to expand into areas that are either currently used as 'back of house' or car parking and also onto land that is not currently used at all. Almost doubling the size of the current zoo. That opens up all sorts of possibilities for the future.
Surely if they are planning a costly expansion they could have afforded to upgrade the elephant enclosure to house a bull? That's what I don't understand when zoos say they lack the funding to make improvements for a given species but then announce big expansion plans.
We do have to remember, those expansion plans are being delivered in the form of many smaller developments over many years (up until at least 2034). It’s not like they have £55m to drop in one go. Much of the later stages development will be funded by the extra revenue the early stuff is generating.
Also, whilst the zoo did call out the fact the current house couldn’t hold a bull. They never specifically said cost was a factor in not making this happen. Space may have been an issue too. There is room to expand the paddock, but little to no space around the house for expanding it.
zoogiraffe
Well-Known Member
I wasn't aware that any was prosecuted for abusing the Elephants although the zoo put out a statement and video around the time of the allegations,and the RSPCA got involved but they found nothing despite the zoo's claim.I suggest it had more to do with the zoo wanting to move to protected contact with the Elephants and the keepers NOT wanting to do,and trumping up abuse charges was a good way of getting rid of them!!
Do you really think publishing animal abuse was the zoos best cause of action to remove unwilling employees? Surely they could just sack them on insubordination grounds if they where unwilling to change. And if nothing was found to be wrong then won't the keepers have taken the zoo to court them selves, to clear there names for future employment causing more bad press for the zoo .
zoogiraffe
Well-Known Member
You are forgetting that these were the very dark days of Mrs Boardman being the zoo director,and yes I do as they couldn't just get rid of them for a change to their working conditions,this way it could be done with public backing and no questions asked because of what the keepers were accused of doing.Also I was more than a little involved with Twycross back at the time this happened so I know more than I am saying on here!!
Of course you could get rid of them for not doing as an employer request, a zoo is no different from any other work practice on employer / employee protocol if I was to do so,etching my boss didn't want me to to I would be up for the chop. This could be justified not as it has to be on health and safety grounds to the employee ( I have a vague memory of a keeper death with the elephants there in the eighties but not sure it was at twycross ) whilst in the public eye isn't protective contact being sold as a more natural way of raising the elephants.
Going over old ground here but if they did want to hold a bull there they could have doing, given what they are doing now with the rhino extension into two paddocks at the current house I would think putting a bull house on the lower paddock would not cost a lot more on top than the alterations on the current house required to house the rhino. Which would give them a cow paddock, bull paddock and breeding paddock.