Chester Zoo Chester Zoo Annual Report 2009

Paulkarli08

Paulkarli08

Well-Known Member
The Chester Zoo 2009 annual report is up on the website. Some interesting items on it. However, the appendices, which includes species holdings, and other stuff like section news etc is on a CD available only to members. Can any member upload the species holdings/news, would be extremely grateful...?
 
Very interseting inventory. I am amazed at how many species they are planning to phase out for example, Green anaconda, snowy owl, 8 species of ducks, 3 species of geese, black necked swans, red junglefowl, 3 species of pigeon, st lucia amazon parrots, blue-throated conures, 4 species of poison dart frog, several species of cichlid, angelfish, ratsnakes and Rhinocerous Iguanas to name a few. Are they trying to keep the species which will fit best into the Natural vision development?
 
Most of the species that the zoo is phasing out are all relatively common,so I`m not surprised to see them go,because given time they will be replaced by more endangered species within the zoo.As like every zoo Chester can only keep a certain number of species so it makes sense for them to phase out the more common ones,and ones that cannot be used in a educational role within the zoo,in favour of bring in more endangered species over the longer term.
 
zoogiraffe said:
As like every zoo Chester can only keep a certain number of species so it makes sense for them to phase out the more common ones,and ones that cannot be used in a educational role within the zoo,in favour of bring in more endangered species over the longer term.
Click to expand...
That, and the fact that enclosure size is increasing in relation to occupants, so the "collection" automatically decreases in number.

Only this morning I was reading a guide from 1971 that details a holding of twenty (20!) leopards - including four Amur Panthera pardus orientalis and three "black" - plus ten puma, almost all of which were bred at the zoo. Just think of the scale of the modern-day enclosures needed to house a collection of that size.

Having said that, I always have a tinge of regret whenever the bird collection decreases, regardless of how common the species are.
 
SMR said:
That, and the fact that enclosure size is increasing in relation to occupants, so the "collection" automatically decreases in number.

Only this morning I was reading a guide from 1971 that details a holding of twenty (20!) leopards - including four Amur Panthera pardus orientalis and three "black" - plus ten puma, almost all of which were bred at the zoo. Just think of the scale of the modern-day enclosures needed to house a collection of that size.

Having said that, I always have a tinge of regret whenever the bird collection decreases, regardless of how common the species are.
Click to expand...
Very true it is a shame but the species that stay are getting much better enclosures,which can only be for the good for them.I would love to see the old Cat House with all the species it had in it but the size it would have to be to meet todays standards would make it massive.
 
Just had a quick glance down the the mammals list. Unusually error-filled (use of 'Northern Babirusa' suggests they're using the 'split' taxonomy but the species is given as B. babyrussa when the zoo population is B. celebensis; a few duplicated lines; 'Cricetomys gambius'; a few species roles left blank despite being specified in the Primary Role column). It is interesting to see the reasoning behind each species; surely that 'general education' column could be used to justify any species though?
 
Maguari said:
It is interesting to see the reasoning behind each species; surely that 'general education' column could be used to justify any species though?
Click to expand...
Not just species, just about anything could be described as having some educational value. Really strange to see those errors, duplicate lines being the most obvious.

I notice on the bird list that the black-headed weaver are being "phased out", does anyone recall which aviary they were/are in?
 
They were in the old bird house, a different subspecies to the Tsavo aviary ones.
 
That's what I thought.

this is what Chester Zoo say

'for the previous years annual reports, each appendix is listed separately, but we have decided not to do this for the 2009 ones, instead they are displayed all together in a PDF format.

hover over the words “CLICK HERE” to get the link to activate.'

Tried that and still got nothing.
 
They might have uploaded an incorrect version; although the images aren't high-resolution, the print trims and colour calibration references give that impression.

The version I get from that link was created 26/04/2010, is 30 pages and 3.65MB. No appendices.
 
Sorry to drag up an old topic, but I'm trying to collate as much info about Chester Zoo as possible for a project I'm attempting to start (including the annual report stock lists for every year since opening :eek: [if they exist, I don't know if they did any of the formalities in days gone by]). It also includes a timeline of key events, and animal births, deaths, departures and arrivals for some of the larger species, and some not so larger species.

Anyway, on-topic: I'm looking through the mammal section of the stock list, and it mentions that at the end of 2008, the zoo had 0.7.0 Red-necked wallaby. However, it states that there were no deaths, and only 0.4.0 'disposals' (does that mean departures, since there isn't any section for that. Anyway, my question is what happened to the other 0.3.0, since it says that at the end of 2009 the zoo had 0? I'm just wondering since they aren't mentioned.

Just trying to grasp a better understanding :D
 
Stock lists first appeared in 1978. Mistakes sometimes occur which I expect is the case with the wallabies. Disposals does mean departures.

The missing wallabies probably died but were not included in the list, either because of a printing error or because the data supplied by the zoo was wrong.

Entire species data is sometimes missing, as was the case in 2008 for Boelen's Pythons and Indochinese Box Turtles, 1.1 and 1.2.5 arrived respectively. Both appeared in the 2009 list.
 
bongorob said:
Stock lists first appeared in 1978. Mistakes sometimes occur which I expect is the case with the wallabies. Disposals does mean departures.

The missing wallabies probably died but were not included in the list, either because of a printing error or because the data supplied by the zoo was wrong.

Entire species data is sometimes missing, as was the case in 2008 for Boelen's Pythons and Indochinese Box Turtles, 1.1 and 1.2.5 arrived respectively. Both appeared in the 2009 list.
Click to expand...

Ahh cool, thanks for the info :).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top