Having just visited Colchester for the first time in about 7 years, instead of a full review, here's a few of my impressions;
Good points;
Playa Patagonia(underwater sealion display)- excellent.
New Amur tiger exhibit-excellent viewing- spacious & planted with bamboo but it could do with a bit more topography e.g. platforms and perhaps some planted birch/ pine trees etc?
Mangabey forest- good display.
Mandrill enclosure-much improved with growth of trees and complexes of climbing poles- making it now one of Colchester's very best exhibits.
New 'Edge of Africa' enclosures- Cheetahs, RR Hogs, colobus, warthogs etc. All good and easy to view. A lot of walking and 'backtracking' though.
Wolf pack & enclosure- really impressive group seen through glass windows - excellent.
The several indoor 'mixed' exhibits which include fish, reptile and mammal exhibits in one building e.g. 'Out of Africa' and several others.
The glass viewing windows incorporated into many exhibits- make viewing and photography so much better. Plenty of undercover viewing for wet days.
The informative & educational notices on display everywhere.
The great diversity of animal species on show- this is a first class collection in terms of animal species nowadays.
The L'Hoests Guenon group with 3 young in the Chimp area.
Bad points;
'Orangutan Forest' - exactly as I expected from all the photos in the gallery. Indoors is okay, outside is VERY ugly(but spacious) A typical Colchester design.
Gelada baboon enclosure- ugly wooden platforms to replicate 'cliffs'- piles of rock would be far preferable- I really hated this enclosure.
The many paths and tortuous routes which seem to double back on each other- not an easy zoo to walk around in a straightforward fashion. (Families with small children must get exhausted!)
The 'fake' rockwork and ugly enclosures(not all) for which Colchester is so famous. Calling exhibits descriptively e.g. a 'forest' also in some cases exaggerates the reality the visitors then see but I can understand the (marketing) reasons for this.
The 'piped' music which plays incessantly.
The automatic doors leading into many exhibits- I found continually pressing buttons, to get in and out, got to be a real nuisance after a while.
I hope I have not offended any 'Colchester regulars' Overall I think the good points of Colchester do considerably outweigh the bad, but it is strange to see things you like AND dislike about a zoo present in such abundance in the one location. But for me, Colchester has always been like that.
Good points;
Playa Patagonia(underwater sealion display)- excellent.
New Amur tiger exhibit-excellent viewing- spacious & planted with bamboo but it could do with a bit more topography e.g. platforms and perhaps some planted birch/ pine trees etc?
Mangabey forest- good display.
Mandrill enclosure-much improved with growth of trees and complexes of climbing poles- making it now one of Colchester's very best exhibits.
New 'Edge of Africa' enclosures- Cheetahs, RR Hogs, colobus, warthogs etc. All good and easy to view. A lot of walking and 'backtracking' though.
Wolf pack & enclosure- really impressive group seen through glass windows - excellent.
The several indoor 'mixed' exhibits which include fish, reptile and mammal exhibits in one building e.g. 'Out of Africa' and several others.
The glass viewing windows incorporated into many exhibits- make viewing and photography so much better. Plenty of undercover viewing for wet days.
The informative & educational notices on display everywhere.
The great diversity of animal species on show- this is a first class collection in terms of animal species nowadays.
The L'Hoests Guenon group with 3 young in the Chimp area.
Bad points;
'Orangutan Forest' - exactly as I expected from all the photos in the gallery. Indoors is okay, outside is VERY ugly(but spacious) A typical Colchester design.
Gelada baboon enclosure- ugly wooden platforms to replicate 'cliffs'- piles of rock would be far preferable- I really hated this enclosure.
The many paths and tortuous routes which seem to double back on each other- not an easy zoo to walk around in a straightforward fashion. (Families with small children must get exhausted!)
The 'fake' rockwork and ugly enclosures(not all) for which Colchester is so famous. Calling exhibits descriptively e.g. a 'forest' also in some cases exaggerates the reality the visitors then see but I can understand the (marketing) reasons for this.
The 'piped' music which plays incessantly.
The automatic doors leading into many exhibits- I found continually pressing buttons, to get in and out, got to be a real nuisance after a while.
I hope I have not offended any 'Colchester regulars' Overall I think the good points of Colchester do considerably outweigh the bad, but it is strange to see things you like AND dislike about a zoo present in such abundance in the one location. But for me, Colchester has always been like that.
Last edited: