Chester Zoo Chester Zoo Discussion, Speculation & Questions 2018

[Zia]

Chester's Spectacled / Andean Bear enclosure is awful. The chances of a non-member, a day visitor actually seeing them is next to nil [a distinction historically only reserved at Chester for the Beavers and the Skunk] [& the echidna when housed in the Tropical House]. The Chester Spectacled Bear enclosure has been designed with no consideration what so ever for the visitor. ​

This just isn't true - we are very infrequent visitors as live near London, and we have seen the andean bears on every single visit we have had to Chester. We have also nearly always seen them doing something interesting like climbing a tree or wading about in their water. I think their enclosure is great and provides a good amount of enrichment for them. It may take a couple of passes by their enclosure or a bit of planning in terms of when they are likely to be active - but as a day visitor to Chester I think you either have to prioritise who you want to see and have some patience, or accept that you will have some misses if you are going to try to get round the whole place and only linger at each for a few minutes.

 

[North Entrance]

I wouldn't say the response to your posts has been any more hostile than your comments on Chester Zoo itself! Obviously the zoo is not perfect (but closer than most!) and there's nothing wrong with some constructive criticism, but you do seem to be overly negative and with some of the wording you've chosen (appalling, astronomical) I'm not surprised that some people have responded with passion. Its less of a personal attack, and more defense of a much loved zoo.

As much as zoos should be places that carry out conservation work, to Joe Public they are a day out, fair enough. However, in context against other entertainment I think a day out at Chester Zoo is fair value for money. The rise in concert prices in recent years, for example, has been far worse; to go and see Ed Sheeran perform for 90 minutes would set you back about £80, for example, and he has no trouble selling out massive venues. I would far rather pay a high price for the privilege of seeing some of the world's rarest exotic wild animals than to make a rich man even richer! Compared with £80 for a 90 minute show, £28 or whatever for a full day out seems good to me.

Zoos really can't win these days, I remember seeing a review on TripAdvisor about Yorkshire Wildlife Park which complained that most of the animals were too far away and couldn't be viewed properly, and also moaning that the giraffes didn't have enough space. I would prefer animals to be given plenty of room and privacy, and have to go back later if I don't see them on the first attempt.

Come on, play fair. I didn’t use the word appalling at all. I’m appalled that you’ve made that appalling suggestion!

I live locally to Chester zoo, I love the zoo, am a long-term member and have been a very regular visitor for 5 decades.

I started by saying I think Chester Zoo should once again house larger bears and ultimately not forget about their visitors.

A well designed enclosure must be designed and built with full cognisance of animal welfare and wellbeing. It should also be designed with the visitor in mind.

A well maintained enclosure would include such matters as cleaning windows, repairing walls and cutting back any significantly overgrown foliage.

I’m not a fan of Ed Sheeran although I suspect that Chester Zoo is likely to sell proportionately more family tickets than are sold for his concerts?

I used the word ‘astronomical’ with reference to the entrance price because it is! I could have chosen considerable, monumental, sizeable, or any other word to illustrate ‘expensive’. Because I say Chester Zoo is expensive doesn’t make me a bad person or, diminish my lifelong love of the zoo. Merlin Entertainment and the National Trust began the tourist attraction price hikes in the UK over recent decades. It is sad that other UK attractions then followed suite. The Child Poverty Action Group, say that Families with two parents working full time on the ‘national living wage’ are 12% short of the basic amount needed for a minimum standard of living, a gap of £50 per week. So yes, for them and families with one working parent on minimum wage, £115.75 is astronomical.

The natural catchment area of Chester Zoo, includes some of the most socially deprived areas in the UK. As such the zoo and it's associated conservation messages, with current pricing structure is sadly out of reach of many families. I grew up in the 1970’s when visiting the zoo was certainly not an activity reserved for the richest 2/3 percentile of economic society.

I appreciate too that tripadvisor is subjective. But Chester Zoo has been citing it with pride being the 'Number 1 Zoo in the UK'. Certainly a great achievement, although at number 5, in terms of votes, Folly Farm Adventure Park and Zoo is not too far behind. Who knows if Chester’s prices continue to rise, their gardens continue to disappear and the shrubs in the animal enclosures continue to obscure, then perhaps Chester and Folly Farm might switch in the rankings?

 

[Sand Cat]

Come on, play fair. I didn’t use the word appalling at all. I’m appalled that you’ve made that appalling suggestion!

I live locally to Chester zoo, I love the zoo, am a long-term member and have been a very regular visitor for 5 decades.

I started by saying I think Chester Zoo should once again house larger bears and ultimately not forget about their visitors.

A well designed enclosure must be designed and built with full cognisance of animal welfare and wellbeing. It should also be designed with the visitor in mind.

A well maintained enclosure would include such matters as cleaning windows, repairing walls and cutting back any significantly overgrown foliage.

I’m not a fan of Ed Sheeran although I suspect that Chester Zoo is likely to sell proportionately more family tickets than are sold for his concerts?

I used the word ‘astronomical’ with reference to the entrance price because it is! I could have chosen considerable, monumental, sizeable, or any other word to illustrate ‘expensive’. Because I say Chester Zoo is expensive doesn’t make me a bad person or, diminish my lifelong love of the zoo. Merlin Entertainment and the National Trust began the tourist attraction price hikes in the UK over recent decades. It is sad that other UK attractions then followed suite. The Child Poverty Action Group, say that Families with two parents working full time on the ‘national living wage’ are 12% short of the basic amount needed for a minimum standard of living, a gap of £50 per week. So yes, for them and families with one working parent on minimum wage, £115.75 is astronomical.

The natural catchment area of Chester Zoo, includes some of the most socially deprived areas in the UK. As such the zoo and it's associated conservation messages, with current pricing structure is sadly out of reach of many families. I grew up in the 1970’s when visiting the zoo was certainly not an activity reserved for the richest 2/3 percentile of economic society.

I appreciate too that tripadvisor is subjective. But Chester Zoo has been citing it with pride being the 'Number 1 Zoo in the UK'. Certainly a great achievement, although at number 5, in terms of votes, Folly Farm Adventure Park and Zoo is not too far behind. Who knows if Chester’s prices continue to rise, their gardens continue to disappear and the shrubs in the animal enclosures continue to obscure, then perhaps Chester and Folly Farm might switch in the rankings?

Sorry for the mix-up re: exact wording, but I stand by everything else I've said.

I don't like Ed Sheeran either, but was using him as a comparison in terms of value for a day or night out. I heard of someone whose young child wanted to see him in concert, but was too young to go unaccompanied, so a parent would have to go too... with fees added on that would make it about £200, effectively for one child to watch a singer play a 90 minute show. Ridiculously expensive and that makes 6 hours at Chester Zoo look like a bargain!

I don't get why you suggest that Chester Zoo might forget about its visitors. Yes, perhaps some viewing areas could be better, but you make it sound so much worse than it is and your views on the bear enclosure seem somewhat unusual. I also find it a bit odd that you criticise The Secret Life of the Zoo for not being 'more adult and less anthropomorphic', yet seem to want the zoo itself to appeal to the casual visitors who expect animals to be presented to them for their entertainment with minimal effort. I'd actually suggest that the TV series is a good way for people to see and learn about any species they may have missed on a visit - although obviously its always better to see the real thing in person!

 

[agnmeln]

I think it’s all entirely subjective. What is ‘astronomical’ to one person is merely ‘pennies’ to another. The zoo is located in an area that includes both very wealthy communities and very poor communities, so there is a real mix of visitors.

It all depends massively on personal priorities, too . . . I really don’t mean to be nasty, but you truly can’t be working for £7.50 per hour and expect to be able to maintain a decent standard of living, including being able to fund additional luxuries such as recreational activities. In that situation, you have to either change your job or change your expectations. It applies to pretty much most recreational activities these days; cinemas, bowling alleys, theme parks, restaurants, concerts, whatever you may choose to do in your spare time . . if you look at the average price per hour based on how much time one would generally expect to spend there, then it’s all probably much of a muchness, really.

 

[SHAVINGTONZOO]

I started by saying I think Chester Zoo should once again house larger bears and ultimately not forget about their visitors.

A well designed enclosure must be designed and built with full cognisance of animal welfare and wellbeing. It should also be designed with the visitor in mind.

The natural catchment area of Chester Zoo, includes some of the most socially deprived areas in the UK. As such the zoo and it's associated conservation messages, with current pricing structure is sadly out of reach of many families. I grew up in the 1970’s when visiting the zoo was certainly not an activity reserved for the richest 2/3 percentile of economic society.

I actually agree with you that visitor viewing should be a higher priority in enclosure design. I just don't think the Spectacled Bear enclosure is too bad. There are at least two enclosures in Monsoon Forest which are far worse (Orangs and Gharial).

And I'm not quite sure what you mean by the "richest 2/3 percentile". Do you mean the richest 2-3%, or the richest two-thirds i.e. the wealthier 67th percentile?

Compare total attendances today against what they were in the 1970s and there doesn't seem to be evidence of customer resistance.

 

[SHAVINGTONZOO]

I used the word ‘astronomical’ with reference to the entrance price because it is! I could have chosen considerable, monumental, sizeable, or any other word to illustrate ‘expensive’. Because I say Chester Zoo is expensive doesn’t make me a bad person or, diminish my lifelong love of the zoo. Merlin Entertainment and the National Trust began the tourist attraction price hikes in the UK over recent decades. It is sad that other UK attractions then followed suite. The Child Poverty Action Group, say that Families with two parents working full time on the ‘national living wage’ are 12% short of the basic amount needed for a minimum standard of living, a gap of £50 per week. So yes, for them and families with one working parent on minimum wage, £115.75 is astronomical.

For many of the families I see at Chester Zoo the competition/ alternative attraction would be places like Alton Towers. Take a look at their prices ...

Especially if you want to avoid spending half the day standing in a queue.

(On the day adult admission + fastrack on all rides = £155 per adult!

 

[FunkyGibbon]

It all depends massively on personal priorities, too . . . I really don’t mean to be nasty, but you truly can’t be working for £7.50 per hour and expect to be able to maintain a decent standard of living, including being able to fund additional luxuries such as recreational activities. In that situation, you have to either change your job or change your expectations.

If only someone had told poor people this before! I'm all for personal responsibility but aren't a quarter of all jobs in the UK at minimum wage these days? It's not Chester's fault that a true 'living wage' exceeds the current minimum wage, but I think North Entrance makes a reasonable point. Chester is a charity, and although it doesn't include some sentiment towards this in its charitable aims, acting as a social good for lower income families would be a very charitable thing to do.

As an fyi for any young zoo nerds reading, don't worry, it's totally possible to regularly visit zoos on a minimum wage in the UK!

 

[Fallax]

As an fyi for any young zoo nerds reading, don't worry, it's totally possible to regularly visit zoos on a minimum wage in the UK!

I'm sure me and a few others will be happy to hear that

 

[agnmeln]

If only someone had told poor people this before! I'm all for personal responsibility but aren't a quarter of all jobs in the UK at minimum wage these days? It's not Chester's fault that a true 'living wage' exceeds the current minimum wage, but I think North Entrance makes a reasonable point. Chester is a charity, and although it doesn't include some sentiment towards this in its charitable aims, acting as a social good for lower income families would be a very charitable thing to do.

As an fyi for any young zoo nerds reading, don't worry, it's totally possible to regularly visit zoos on a minimum wage in the UK!

As somebody who worked for many years with the long term unemployed / underemployed in a previous life, I can safely say that you might actually be quite surprised by the unrealistic expectations of some of those on the lowest possible of incomes such as means tested benefits and minimum wage (and the sheer sense of entitlement many of them possess) . . . I have no idea about the current statistics, but personal responsibility and personal choice are absolutely everything as far as I’m concerned. Minimum wage jobs serve a purpose, as a first job, or as a stepping stone. They shouldn’t be a long term life choice, and most definitely not a means by which to support a family. I don’t see why any other party (least of all a charity like Chester Zoo, which is established for entirely separate purposes) should have to bail people out. I definitely wouldn’t be too happy to think that the 10% donation that I pay added on to my ticket price every time I go might be funding that instead of biodiversity and conservation projects, so in that case I’d definitely stop paying it.

 

[Sand Cat]

The other argument with living costs and wages is, of course, that the zoo needs to pay its own staff a decent wage - and there are lots of them! I wouldn't want to think that people in skilled jobs were being underpaid just so that we can have a cheap day out. How else are zookeepers going to be able to afford the occasional box of Ferrero Rocher?

I also agree with beccasunbear about the zoo's charitable aims, in fact I'd use that as an argument for admission charges being higher, not lower! Its more important to finance projects helping to protect critically endangered species, than offer a cheap day out to Joe Public. I would assume they will do good deals on school trips to satisfy their educational remit of course.

 

[agnmeln]

The other argument with living costs and wages is, of course, that the zoo needs to pay its own staff a decent wage - and there are lots of them! I wouldn't want to think that people in skilled jobs were being underpaid just so that we can have a cheap day out. How else are zookeepers going to be able to afford the occasional box of Ferrero Rocher?

I also agree with beccasunbear about the zoo's charitable aims, in fact I'd use that as an argument for admission charges being higher, not lower! Its more important to finance projects helping to protect critically endangered species, than offer a cheap day out to Joe Public. I would assume they will do good deals on school trips to satisfy their educational remit of course.

Generally speaking, they do seem to offer quite competitive salaries for most of their roles in comparison to other UK zoos. It’s interesting, as some of their jobs actually don’t pay too badly at all. There are a couple advertised at the moment for around £43,000. Obviously there are also a couple at the other end of the scale too, offering £8.84 per hour. But I do believe that other zoos would probably have all of these jobs out for quite a fair bit less.

 

[FunkyGibbon]

I think I let my politics muddy my argument a bit!

Let's restate the situation and say there are families in Chester's 'catchment area' who find the zoo prohibitively expensive (not the same as can't afford it). Instead of asking why those families are in that position let's only consider Chester's possible actions.

Chester has chosen to make conservation their responsibility. Part of that is obviously generating enough revenue to fund programs throughout the world, as well as operating the zoo as a going concern. I assume they have priced the tickets to maximise revenue, and given visitor numbers I have no problem with this. I'm certainly not arguing they should lower the cost of general admission.

Needless to say, another part of conservation work is education. The more people you can reach the better, and the more demographics the better as well. Without considering other factors, it seems obvious that if Chester could encourage more lower income families to visit that would be good for both the zoo's conservation goals, and for the families themselves.

I suspect legally there would be issues with offering reduced admission for locals only. But I'm sure there would be a way to do it and I think it would be a good choice for the zoo. If it led to overcrowding then you could look at restrictions to such a program.

I'm not convinced that school trips are enough to satisfy an educational remit. That to me seems a little like arguing that parents don't need to read with their children in the evenings because they have English class at school.

 

[Welsh Zootographer]

I suspect legally there would be issues with offering reduced admission for locals only. But I'm sure there would be a way to do it and I think it would be a good choice for the zoo. If it led to overcrowding then you could look at restrictions to such a program.

I don't believe there is, Heritage Steam Railways have been doing this for years.

 

[Welsh Zootographer]

Chester also gives discount entry to certain groups of workers such as the NHS, my brother gets discount as an employee of the Airbus factory nearby.

 

[jde7582]

I think distance plays a part, with the amount of disposable income we have as a family, I would struggle to pay around £100 for 1 day at the zoo (we use Xmas money to buy membership, which gives us unlimited days out all year, for no real cost) but we have paid nearly that to go to lego land, as this was more of a special day out.

A lot of local people, most of the people on mine or my other half facebook, have zoo memberships.

 

[agnmeln]

Chester also gives discount entry to certain groups of workers such as the NHS, my brother gets discount as an employee of the Airbus factory nearby.

Is that so? That’s very interesting news to me, as I just accepted a Senior Management position in the NHS last week and am due to start very soon!

 

[agnmeln]

I think I let my politics muddy my argument a bit!

Let's restate the situation and say there are families in Chester's 'catchment area' who find the zoo prohibitively expensive (not the same as can't afford it). Instead of asking why those families are in that position let's only consider Chester's possible actions.

Chester has chosen to make conservation their responsibility. Part of that is obviously generating enough revenue to fund programs throughout the world, as well as operating the zoo as a going concern. I assume they have priced the tickets to maximise revenue, and given visitor numbers I have no problem with this. I'm certainly not arguing they should lower the cost of general admission.

Needless to say, another part of conservation work is education. The more people you can reach the better, and the more demographics the better as well. Without considering other factors, it seems obvious that if Chester could encourage more lower income families to visit that would be good for both the zoo's conservation goals, and for the families themselves.

I suspect legally there would be issues with offering reduced admission for locals only. But I'm sure there would be a way to do it and I think it would be a good choice for the zoo. If it led to overcrowding then you could look at restrictions to such a program.

I'm not convinced that school trips are enough to satisfy an educational remit. That to me seems a little like arguing that parents don't need to read with their children in the evenings because they have English class at school.

Blackpool Zoo are currently offering half price admission for all attendees who live within certain postcode areas (I think ten postcode areas are included), so this is definitely achievable. Although I’m not too sure how it would work for Chester - I think they’d likely have to include an awful lot more postcode areas in order to reach the poorest local communities.

The other thing to note about satisfying an educational remit is that Chester Zoo has also delivered outreach programmes which involved drop in visits to local primary schools. So aside from family visits and school trips, if schools are interested enough in this type of education, it’s something that they are able to sign up to. I know that they have been doing a programme around the illegal songbird trade recently.

 

[Pertinax]

I actually agree with you that visitor viewing should be a higher priority in enclosure design. I just don't think the Spectacled Bear enclosure is too bad. There are at least two enclosures in Monsoon Forest which are far worse (Orangs and Gharial).

I've always liked Chester's Spectacled/Andean bear enclosure, its spacious and has a long visitor frontage. I don't think whether the bears are visible or not has anything to do with the design of the enclosure or dense overplanting etc- as I said previously its down to the Bears' individual activity patterns. The cub is obviously very active stimulating her mother too and so making the mother/cub pair far more visible. Franka was an old animal and we know old animals sleep increasinging amounts of their time away, hence why she was so often invisible I think.

I also agree about the Orangs(and Gharial)- these have far more compromises to good viewing than the Bears' enclosure, which is an example of the simpler 'older style' exhibit in some ways. Monsoon forest/orangs and the themed approach is where I think attention to visitor viewing starts to suffer.

 

[Pertinax]

It is NOT awful, it is a very good enclosure and much better than any Andean bear enclosure that i have seen. Just because you cannot see the bears easily does not make it an awful enclosure.

As I've said above, the bears' activity(or lack of it) patterns are(IMO) governed by other factors rather the enclosure. E.g. whether its an old or younger bear, whether there is a cub present etc.

 

[Pertinax]

However sometimes I get the feeling that the zoo has very much forgotten about its customers. Consider the monkey islands. Yes, there should be thick mature foliage but not at the very front creating an impenetrable barrier obscuring all views beyond! And in both ROTRA and Monsoon Forest, a few extra viewing gallery windows would have had no impact on animal welfare but would have massively improved visitor's Orangutan watching experience! (windows could even have been covered if necessary with 'one way film'.

I do think the foliage on the Monkey Islands is much too dense now and does impede the views across those enclosures. Some selective thinning it a bit would solve that problem while keeping the feel of foliage among the climbing structures. I think in that case the aspect for visitor viewing was fine previously but with the foliage growth it has been rather forgotten about.

But heartily agree about the more serious shortcomings of the design of viewing windows for the Orangs, but particularly in the Monsoon Forest which IMO is much worse than ROTRA- only one small main window- riduculous. Then if they are not visible a long walk around to the outside, where only parts of the enclosures are visible. Its fine giving them areas where they can move out of sight but the outsides have large 'blind' areas that are totally invisible from the public viewing points. The Sulawesi macaques indoors on the other hand( which people tend not to linger at) has an enormous viewing window. I think its in here that detail to public viewing is being sidelined.