Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust Durrell management

[Lafone]

I am surprised that given the biographies above, there would be any expectation that any of the above would be known beyond Britian.

Attenborough may be famous today, but as a child I knew him from two volumes of Zoo Quest in the local library. I found him less engaging than Durrell.

Scott I knew of through reading Durrell, and from reading about Slimbridge in various zoo books.

I was aware of the Norfolk Wildlife Park and the Pheasant Trust (I kept pheasants) and given the context Wayre's name is familiar.

Yes, now you mention it, I have seen Keeling mentioned around here, but not in threads I have followed intensively.

The others are completely new to me. Not that they don't sound like interesting characters.

For me growing up it was names like Fleay, Worrell, Serventy, Pizzey and Butler, amongst others, who thrilled and inspired me. At various times, they would all have been household names in Australia. Not, of course, that I would have expected you to be aware of any of them.

I would be surprised if some of them were known in the U.K. except among people with particular interest in this as a subject, though no doubt they did good and indeed influential things.

With TV channels being far more limited in the past than now some people of an age would have a recognition of some programme on Anglia TV (a regional channel) but even then it would be fairly niche.

I’m also a fan of the equestrian sport of eventing and could name amazingly influential people in the sport (men and women) that despite Olympic medals and an degree of global attention I doubt people would have heard of. Attenborough and Scott scale up to a level lots of regional people don’t. But the regional people are still influential it just shouldn’t be a shock few people know about them.

If you have an interest in these things they would be more known of course but even then someone running a local trust and commenting on sheep herding isn’t really a global thing. If you’re an age to have known about ‘one man and his dog’ then more so but even then I’d suspect not many people would be able to name the commentators.

You certainly see more about Scott at the WWT venues themselves particularly Slimbridge where there are free tours of his house and lots of interesting signage about his tower bird hide etc. But the trust spends as much and more time talking about the environment and wetlands and the amazing wildlife and it’s importance - in my mind rightly so. The organisation is more than its founder. Or it would have died with him.

On the wider subject of this thread there’s a reason Jersey zoo rebranded and that’s because Durrell as a personality cannot be the only thing used to appeal to a modern audience. Not to discount his contribution of course. Given it did so in 2017 it seems a bit strange to be still debating it or suggesting it’s novel to have done it.

There isn’t such a hard link between his personality and attraction in the case of the zoo any more and there’s a bit of ‘not like in my day’ going on to imagine it would be a driver. And it’s true it isn’t like it was but to carry on it needs to make itself a modern attraction. If there aren’t enough tourists (and let’s face it they are also not going to make a great deal of money from fans of zoos and Durrell who haven’t visited for 10 years) then there’s probably a fundamental question on how they make the zoo pay as a local destination and whether that’s achievable. That’s the task facing the management team. I don’t think the Durrell name alone cuts through, though the conservation message is fantastic.

Most zoos make a lot of their money from people with kids going for a day out. And that’s who they need to get through the gates in the right volume. Obviously zoos have lots of missions but they can’t do them without funding. There are also corporates and sponsors and supporters etc and for them the Durrell name probably still has rightly strong associations that drive funding in and that’s a good thing (and a source many zoos don’t have) but it won’t be the first reason most people take their kids.

 

[Tetzoo Quizzer]

As a Brit I certainly know Fleay, Serventy and Pizzey (as well as Drabble and Wayre).

 

[ZooNews2024]

I am surprised that given the biographies above, there would be any expectation that any of the above would be known beyond Britian.

For me growing up it was names like Fleay, Worrell, Serventy, Pizzey and Butler, amongst others, who thrilled and inspired me. At various times, they would all have been household names in Australia. Not, of course, that I would have expected you to be aware of any of them.

Your expectations would appear misplaced then, as though admittedly I had to Google two, the work of Fleay, Worrell and Butler had even reached East Anglia, maybe perhaps some of the rest of Britain too...

 

[ZooNews2024]

Tourism has died on Jersey. Visitor numbers are a fraction of those a few decades ago as it is cheaper to go to places where the weather is pretty much guaranteed to be more favourable and your money will stretch further. Whether this will continue to be true as air travel (travel in general) becomes more expensive remains to be seen.
Many hotels have closed. There is very little night life (no shows as there once was) and many attractions have closed.
There is still plenty to do, but its not appealing to the same demographic. Its still a very beautiful Island with a lot of historical/heritage sites etc that can be visited.
This being the case, if 20-25% of the visitors we still get go to the zoo, then I think thats a pretty good percentage, but its a percentage of a much lower number of visitors.
Visitors entry fees only contribute about 10% to the overall income so lets not get bogged down or focused too much on that aspect anyway.
The issue that I see personally, is that long-term supporters and members are expressing concerns over the running of the trust (with the zoo as the figurehead) and as they are regular contributors (some of us have supported the trust for decades) they represent a more stable and long-term income and their loss will be felt more than just a decline in visitor numbers which fluctuates anyway.
As a long-term member I am not alone in being concerned about many things that have happened recently (the recent EGM was an indication of this). Not everything can be blamed on covid.
Its interesting that they are advertising for a CEO and new trustees. Whether this means the incumbents will be stepping down and this is an attempt to inject new life into the senior management, I dont yet know.
It used to be an exciting and interesting place to visit, whether your first visit or a regular. You felt that you were witnessing conservation in action. There is a now whiff of failure about the place, which must be turned around as a matter of urgency.

Mike - I didnt ask about your first sentence; but was this not always the case? The last time I visited was to see both Jersey and Guernsey Zoos when James Thomas was at Guernsey - so you can tell how long ago that was! 1990-something. Even back then connections were few and far between and all form of travel very expensive; we took a high-speed catamaran and a hydrofoil between the islands and hired cars on both. It was all so dear, and flights even worse. Was there ever mass tourism to the CI? It all looked pretty low key and exclusive to us.

 

[Tim Brown]

so far as I know, Cansdale's family still owns Skegness Natureland today.

The Yeadon family own Skegness Natureland,but somehow i have a hunch that there is a Cansdale link.

 

[MRJ]

(our friends at Born Free found that out).

I would be fascinated to find out what our friends at BF found out. Any chance of a link to an article, or perhaps a short explanation?

 

[jtrbmvcq]

Jersey Zoo/Durrell has always had a fair share of more common zoo species, to pretend that they were once an exclusive endangered only collection is futile. Bringing in a couple of popular least concern species doesn’t diminish their work with the host of other more threatened species they hold. According to the EAZA website as of April 2024 Jersey Zoo manages 18 international and European studbooks including: ploughshare tortoise, lesser Antillian iguana, Meller’s duck, Madagascar pochard, Madagascar teal, gentle lemur, aye-aye, Madagascan giant jumping rat, black lion tamarin, pied tamarin and Livingstone’s fruit bat. Not forgetting other endangered species they’ve bred for decades like gorilla and Sumatran orangutan to name just two large mammals. I’d say for the size of the zoo it packs a punch still! I look forward to visiting later this Summer and seeing the changes.

 

[Pertinax]

It was all so dear, and flights even worse. Was there ever mass tourism to the CI? It all looked pretty low key and exclusive to us.

I think it has always been that way and no, there has never been mass tourism there due to those very reasons. I've always thought since its inception that GD's choice for his zoo (or should I say second choice after Upton House at Poole) wasn't the best for that very factor, but possibly he overlooked it at the time.

Its presumably for that reason I've always noticed on my visits how visitor numbers are thin and with few families or children (though maybe I've always visited in non- schoolholiday periods). It feels more rather like visiting a National Trust property than a typical zoo.

 

[Mike Aubert]

Mike - I didnt ask about your first sentence; but was this not always the case? The last time I visited was to see both Jersey and Guernsey Zoos when James Thomas was at Guernsey - so you can tell how long ago that was! 1990-something. Even back then connections were few and far between and all form of travel very expensive; we took a high-speed catamaran and a hydrofoil between the islands and hired cars on both. It was all so dear, and flights even worse. Was there ever mass tourism to the CI? It all looked pretty low key and exclusive to us.

Tourism used to be a major industry in Jersey after the war and before cheap package holidays to foreign destinations became a better option. It had probably already started to decline by the 90's but I can remember there being a huge influx of tourists in the 70's and 80s (possibly well before that too but Im not old enough to remember!).
File:J24KingStreet30July1976.png - Jerripedia

There has been a steady decline since the millennium and it certainly hasnt yet recovered from Covid
Government of Jersey

 

[Mike Aubert]

A bit of information re visitor numbers for recent years is on P3 of the 2022 Annual Report;
https://www.durrell.org/media/cr3ggahf/durrell-wildlife-conservation-trust-annual-report-2022.pdf

 

[Richard Ellis]

{Note from mods - this thread split from here: Durrell news [Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust]}



[It seems the new guy] is fixing things that haven't been fixed in a while and getting the team into shape. I think that's a sign of good things. Durrell has a long history but needs a good shake up otherwise it won't ever achieve it's mission. It's been poorly financially managed for years and stuck in an ideology that it's better than everyone else. People leave organisations. It's not a bad thing. Fresh blood, fresh ideas, chances for people to grow. It's healthy for organisations to have change, but it's true people don't like change.

I'm a regular visitor and I can see nothing but good changes. I talk to the keepers and the entrance staff and they all like the changes. Not to mention the growth of the organisation. I see no evidence of a one man army. The whole site is buzzing. Higher standards of welfare, better exhibits, more conservation, more staff and a more professional organisation. Yes there are a few well known names left. If they are truly great they will easily walk into another zoo and do the same amazing work there. If they aren't and are just unhappy with change then they will get a job somewhere else. No big loss to Durrell.

I love the changes. Some don't but that's ok not everyone has to like change, but the world is changing and we need to adapt to it as well.

Perhaps naively, I thought trustees were nominated and elected at an AGM.
I didnt know they could be recruited.
So, the membership have very little say in who the trustees are?
Who appoints them?

Join the team at Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust | Durrell

I hope you’re right that does the trick.

What’s the Facebook group? surely the meetings happened and that’s that now?

 

[Richard Ellis]

The next Durrell AGM is scheduled for 5th December, and there will be voting for a new board

The AGM documents have not been sent to members yet, but we know that the We Love The Zoo group, who were instrumental in calling for the EGM back in May, will be recommending candidates they believe are very well qualified.

Most of these candidates will not be receiving the board’s support, though they will be on the ballot papers

WLTZ now have a website: https://www.welovethezoo.org

To be kept in touch with developments, you can visit the website and complete the on-line form.

 

[jersey_insider]

The We Love The Zoo group failed to get any of its candidates on the board.

In other news, Paul Masterton is criticising the Trust permitting deer stalking on a rewilding project in Scotland:

Jersey's Durrell Wildlife Trust accused of enabling hunting

Paul Masterton, Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust member, said the trust had "travelled so far from its roots and its values".

It comes after it began a rewilding project on Dalnacardoch Estate in Perthshire, Scotland, while allowing deer stalking.

Matthew Hatchwell, the chairman of the board of trustees, said the charity was taking a "pragmatic view" on stalking at the estate.

Mr Masterton said he and other members could not understand Durrell's stance on the practice.

He said: "My immediate concern is that Durrell is enabling hunting to continue on this estate they are now leasing.

"I'm not talking about culling, which is a sometimes sad but very necessary tool for wildlife management. I'm talking about trophy hunting and blood sport where people pay a licence fee where they stalk and kill animals.

"I just don't understand how that can be part of Durrell and fit with their values."

Mr Masterson was formerly chief executive of Durrell before stepping down from the role in 2012.

He then ran for election to the board of trustees in October but failed to be elected.

Mr Hatchwell said: "Deer stalking is part of the Scottish culture, so, rather than just going in as a conservation organisation and saying no more stalking, we're taking a very pragmatic view.

"For the future that may be the plan, but we're not at that stage yet."

 

[Jpbirds]

The We Love The Zoo group failed to get any of its candidates on the board.

In other news, Paul Masterton is criticising the Trust permitting deer stalking on a rewilding project in Scotland:

Jersey's Durrell Wildlife Trust accused of enabling hunting

Legitimate question, is it possible to resuscitate a landscape as depleted as the Scottish Highlands, without managing deer populations? If I remember correctly this site has always be a shooting estate. Would a consistent revenue stream of people doing a job that needs doing not be better than regular culls?
I find it assuming how quickly this has happened following the AGM

 

[jersey_insider]

I find it assuming how quickly this has happened following the AGM

This has been something that has been boiling for a long time, it's not them attacking the Trust after losing the AGM. Re: culling vs. hunting, the attitude is that hunting is antithetical to the principle that culling be conducted in the most humane manner possible.

 

[Will Bennett]

None of the candidates supported by "We Love the Zoo" were elected. The incumbent Trustees had seen fit to include a "Quick Vote" button at the top of the election form, to allow people to vote for all the "recommended" candidates at once. These candidates had more supporting text on the form than the "self nominated" candidates, and did not have their considerable expertise listed alongside their name as the "recommended candidates" did. Given that the Trustees had access to the whole membership database, whereas "We Love the Zoo" had to rely on social media to put their case, it is perhaps surprising that their best vote total (for Glyn Young) was as high as 383 votes, while the winning "recommended" candidate (Andrew Cunningham) received 774 votes. Let's hope the newly elected Trustees have a greater sense of responsibility, and more moral fibre, than the ones who have presided so smugly over the chaos and distress of recent years.

 

[Will Bennett]

Legitimate question, is it possible to resuscitate a landscape as depleted as the Scottish Highlands, without managing deer populations? If I remember correctly this site has always be a shooting estate. Would a consistent revenue stream of people doing a job that needs doing not be better than regular culls?
I find it assuming how quickly this has happened following the AGM

If deer must be "culled", it should be done professionally and efficiently. Or they could try contraception.

As for the speed with which the story came out - it's almost as though media outlets were waiting until it could NOT affect the result of the Trustee elections and AGM. Media coverage has been poor at best, with information on the candidates only appearing in the Bailiwick Express after all Trustee votes had been cast.

 

[lintworm]

Legitimate question, is it possible to resuscitate a landscape as depleted as the Scottish Highlands, without managing deer populations? If I remember correctly this site has always be a shooting estate. Would a consistent revenue stream of people doing a job that needs doing not be better than regular culls?

If the goal is to restore (something that looks reminiscently like) a forest, yes deer management is going to be an integral part of it, until there are enough natural predators (wolves & bears). Red deer love to browse young saplings, even with deer management you are probably going have to fence off young trees until they have reached above deer browsing levels.

Whether culling as management strategy or canned hunting is the better option is something that I cannot determine, that all depends on the conditions surrounding the hunting permits. Both methods will be looking for as little animal suffering as possible. But if canned hunting comes with additional feedings in winter time, it will artificially inflate numbers, meaning it is meaningless as a conservation tool. If the people who are paying big bucks also demand to shoot big bucks, hunting is also not the preferred option in terms of population management (far more efficient to bring down numbers by killing young females...). But who knows the exact rules and if hunting permits/concessions have been granted for long term periods, there is also no stopping now... At least hunting brings in additional funding, which would fall away when it becomes purely population management...

If deer must be "culled", it should be done professionally and efficiently. Or they could try contraception.

Contraception in such populations is basically never a viable option...

As for the speed with which the story came out - it's almost as though media outlets were waiting until it could NOT affect the result of the Trustee elections and AGM. Media coverage has been poor at best, with information on the candidates only appearing in the Bailiwick Express after all Trustee votes had been cast.

Or the other way around, after unfavourable results in the trustees election, some extra dirt throwing...

 

[Lafone]

Deer culling is a necessary aspect of population management and either you make estate owners / farmers etc do it for a few pence a kilo or you manage it as a business and get people to stalk and kill the deer for money. Money that then goes into the management of the land and the space that protects wild populations of animals such as deer. The population doesn’t have to be bred to be stalked - there aren’t enough people consuming shoots to warrant it - this isn’t a captive shoot things ranches experience.

It’s unfortunately naive to think deer don’t have to be managed - they have no natural predators and they breed well - this is true of all deer from muntjac to red. They can’t use contraception.

I don’t shoot deer myself as it’s not my thing but I do spend time on an estate which stalks CWD, fallow and Muntjac who live wild and choose to do that (they aren’t fed). Either the population gets out of control eating the young trees and crops as well as getting killed on the road, inbreeding and causing issues or they are culled in a well managed way.

At 30p a kilo for just shooting them it’s hardly surprising it’s monetised and stalking is managed, supervised by experts and produced meat for (among other things) zoos. The money return wouldn’t pay for the cartridges and I don’t see a queue of people offering to fund it for their principles (what a surprise).

Watching the deer closely this year in particular they are in my opinion having a better life and a better end than most animals farmed industrially for meat. It’s a shame to target managed population control when there are better targets.

The aspect in the Highlands which is more contentious is actually game bird production which you could argue is a population bred only for the gun that creates habitats that are less natural and restricts access. People generate far more income from game bird shooting in the Highlands than deer culling / stalking. And they will be shooting birds adjacent to these conservation areas (as duck shooting goes on just outside RSPB sites like RSPB Framptpn advertising how cool it is to shoot widgeon for example so not just a. Scottish thing). Perhaps deer are cuddlier.

These anti Jersey management people have to say something to get into the media - Bambi works.

 

[ZooNews2024]

Deer culling is a necessary aspect of population management and either you make estate owners / farmers etc do it for a few pence a kilo or you manage it as a business and get people to stalk and kill the deer for money. Money that then goes into the management of the land and the space that protects wild populations of animals such as deer. The population doesn’t have to be bred to be stalked - there aren’t enough people consuming shoots to warrant it - this isn’t a captive shoot things ranches experience.

It’s unfortunately naive to think deer don’t have to be managed - they have no natural predators and they breed well - this is true of all deer from muntjac to red. They can’t use contraception.

I don’t shoot deer myself as it’s not my thing but I do spend time on an estate which stalks CWD, fallow and Muntjac who live wild and choose to do that (they aren’t fed). Either the population gets out of control eating the young trees and crops as well as getting killed on the road, inbreeding and causing issues or they are culled in a well managed way.

At 30p a kilo for just shooting them it’s hardly surprising it’s monetised and stalking is managed, supervised by experts and produced meat for (among other things) zoos. The money return wouldn’t pay for the cartridges and I don’t see a queue of people offering to fund it for their principles (what a surprise).

Watching the deer closely this year in particular they are in my opinion having a better life and a better end than most animals farmed industrially for meat. It’s a shame to target managed population control when there are better targets.

The aspect in the Highlands which is more contentious is actually game bird production which you could argue is a population bred only for the gun that creates habitats that are less natural and restricts access. People generate far more income from game bird shooting in the Highlands than deer culling / stalking. And they will be shooting birds adjacent to these conservation areas (as duck shooting goes on just outside RSPB sites like RSPB Framptpn advertising how cool it is to shoot widgeon for example so not just a. Scottish thing). Perhaps deer are cuddlier.

These anti Jersey management people have to say something to get into the media - Bambi works.

This is a well argued point which I agree with, until the second last paragraph at least - except to mention that wild shot venison is costing the zoos in my area FAR more than 30p per kilo. If you know of sources at that price, I am sure the local zoos would appreciate the contact.
edit - a second point is that cartridges (ie from a shot-gun) would not normally be used on deer, and if they were a zoo would not be able to take the result due to the contamination. Deer are usually rifle shot.