Quantity does not always equal quality

as I intended to convey with the statement "
given what BWCP achieves despite its small size and relatively unknown nature" my preference is based on the feeling that a collection which is small, council-run and doesn't get much publicity managing to be as good as BWCP - in terms of general feel, value for money and species selection - is worthy of accolade.
You can't really compare a big collection like Wingham to a small one like BWCP on the level of "The bigger collection has more species of primate/carnivore/bird/reptile ergo it is better", or else you'd be able to argue that - say - Living Coasts is a worse collection than South Lakes; as such the only fair way to compare them is along these more emotional and esoteric lines.
Put another way, it's easy to be as good as Wingham when you have the money and publicity. I very much enjoyed Wingham when I visited last year - even if the dinosaur park there is quite literally the worst I have
ever seen, in a fun-to-heckle way - but I enjoyed BWCP more on the three occasions I have visited thus far.
Which isn't to say you are wrong, or that I am right, just that other opinions are available and that in this case (recommending whether or not BWCP is worth visiting) I felt it worth highlighting the fact that my recommendation is the opposite of yours