Whilst it's a natural instinct and always provides useful insight to consider how a zoo has changed (for the better or worse) and how we might wish it would change in the future I feel that heavily focussing on these aspects can sometimes lead to a loss of appreciation on some of the positive aspects of what a place currently offers to visitors. It's with this in mind, following a visit to Marwell three weeks ago, that I thought it a useful exercise to try to consider the place from a few different perspectives.
Imagine if Marwell had never existed
Consider if a new zoo appeared in an area without an abundance of zoos, at a location with the next nearest “serious sized” zoos over 50 miles away. The zoo is in a country estate type of location with a hall at it's centre. The place is well spaced out with vast paddocks, giving a great sensation of truly being in countryside and lacks an excess of some of the more over-bearing type of constructions and enclosures which feature in many other zoos. What's more the hoofstock species list is fantastic from a zoo enthusiast's perspective: Okapi, Roan and Sable antelope, Dorcas Gazelle, Arabian Oryx, Scimitar-horned Oryx, Addax, Congo Buffalo, Pygmy Hippo, Somali Wild Ass, a herd of Giraffe in double figures and all three species of Zebra! In addition to the hoofstock there's a reasonable selection of other mammals too: Fossa, a reasonable spread of bigger cats (Tiger, Amur Leopard, Snow Leopard, Cheetah) and a nice selection of smaller primates (including Dourouculli). There's also the standard selection of fillers/crowd pleasers (Meerkats, Asian Short-clawed Otters, Bennett's Wallabies, Coatis) that enthusiasts groan at and the non-mammal collection is nothing to get too excited about but that can be said about many a respected collection. Ignoring the species recently and imminent to be lost (I know that's difficult), the place still holds a solid collection that we'd all be making plans to visit if it appeared from nowhere overnight (absurd concept I know, but hopefully you'll get I'm trying to make a point). I suppose it's ultimately down to perspective -I'd choose to see the bottle as three-quarters full (admittedly with flaws, coming later) rather than a quarter empty.
Joe Public Perspective
Personally I think the place offers a pretty good offering to Joe Public though I can also see some legitimate scope for complaints.
As mentioned above, Marwell does benefit from the great feeling of open space and it is fantastic walking inside and seeing a large group of Giraffes on the hill. I can however also see how the large space can be a little detrimental -it leads to large walks between enclosures which I'd imagine become hard work as the day progresses and could possibly plant a seed of “there's not many animals” (I think Paignton suffers something similar, to me personally anyway). This could be a major problem for the little legs and short-attention spans of some youngsters (though the playground at the far end may ameliorate this a little). Additionally the two (land and rail) trains help transport visitors round the place (and always seem popular) but I do wonder if they don't add to the impression of “we've been all the around and not seen much) -I personally think Marwell needs to be trekked around to get the best of it.
Marwell does in actuality have a good spread of “ABC” animals with only Lions, Bears, Elephants, Pinnipeds and Anthropoid Apes missing (cue a smarty pants to name a species I overlooked). Whilst this might seem a sizable list, it seems only fair to point out that fewer major zoos seems to bother with Pinnipeds nowadays -I think the cost of doing it “properly” is prohibitive. Similarly the cost of housing Elephants and Anthropoid Apes well would probably be prohibitive for a collection of Marwell's size taking up many years' improvement budgets -again this is a general zoo situation, not just Marwell -as demonstrated, Noah's aside, by the lack of anyone going into these species in recent years. All said, and per Sooty's recent Trip Advisor snapshot, visitors do complain about the lack of animals at Marwell. Personally, except for the absence of Lions, I think the criticism is a little misguided and do wonder if people get lost or fail to investigate the zoo thoroughly and miss quite a few species (I can imagine, given the layout of the place, it'd be quite easy to miss a fair number of species if you weren't paying attention). Nevertheless, and regardless or my opinion, I think this is a bit of a tightrope that Marwell will need to negotiate in the near-future. I doubt bringing in (or retaining?) a large selection of hoofstock, as preferred by many zoo enthusiasts, will solve the public's perception and realistically bringing in Lions (likely) and Bears (my fantasy) might be the relatively “cheap” options. Additionally it might be a very cheap option to provide maps with suggested routes and ticklists of species to all visitors, I'd imagine having stamping posts around the zoo where youngsters get a stamp to complete a card in exchange for which they get a medal, or similar, on leaving would ensure that people get to see most of the species on offer (I've seen these schemes effectively done at a number of places).
The other complaint I've seen for Marwell (and a number of other zoos) is that it's expensive. Whilst I'd argue that compared to theme parks, the cinema and sporting events the minutes per £1 ratio is superior (for Marwell and most zoos, aquariums are a different tank of fish) it's ultimately hard for me to judge this (I got in on reciprocal privileges anyway). The prices seem a little (but only a little) steep if you're comparing to what places like Chester and Colchester offer for “ballpark similar” prices but good value if you're comparing to smaller places (say “nearby” Isle of Wight Zoo which is £10 for about 20 species) -but Isle of Wight is on the doorstep and Chester and Colchester aren't. Additionally, you have to consider the location -no nearby substantial competition and down south where prices (for attractions everywhere) imply pockets are deeper. Maybe solving the “problems” outlined in the previous paragraph would in turn eliminate most rumblings about costs. Finally I would point out that the zoo does offer reasonable discounts for nuclear families (two adults, two children) which is great unless you're a single parent or have chosen to have more or less children. Personally I'd rather have the same, hopefully slightly lower, price for all adults and all children as I (perhaps) grumpily don't like the idea that as a childless adult (maybe that should be adult-aged child) I'm subsidising someone else's children (I don't eat in places where “kids eat free” for this reason).
(Returning) Zoo Enthusiast View
As my general views are covered in previous and later sections I thought it easiest to abandon narrative and just make bullet points for this section:
Pros:
1.Still a sizeable and varied hoofstock selection;
2.Eleven Giraffe herd makes impressive viewing however you want to look at it;
3.The new walk-through aviary is good including a nice pond and a good variety of species;
4.The visitors here were impressively well behaved (children being told off, quickly, by parents was common occurrence);
5.Heresy I know, but I quite liked the “Desert House” having Dwarf Mongoose one side and Yellow Mongoose the other - like the taxonomic displays of yesteryear.
Cons:
1.The big “African Plain” exhibit doesn't work, it never looks more than very sparsely populated and, as more time passes, it's seeming more like a complete white elephant;
2.The Siamang enclosure still doesn't work for the species (very few brachiating opportunities like the opposite, otter, side though;
3.Too many empty (“to be filled shortly”) reptile and amphibian tanks around the zoo;
4.“Cartoony” animal graphics on a par with those on Chester's map (same artist?);
5.The “Outback” area still not working for me -the old walk-through primate (I forget which) enclosure is now not a walk through and the reptile selection is dull.
Not sure:
1.New Coati enclosure -looks reasonably good (loved the nearby Coati topiary) and functional but didn't see any animals using it so hard to conclude. Perosnally, I liked the old Coati enclosure and never really considered changing it a necessity/problem.
Conclusion
As alluded to before I think Marwell, as does every zoo, needs to walk a tightrope to please Joe Public and keep themselves on an even keel financially. Hopefully this will then enable them to continue to keep most, if not all, of what remains an impressive and varied hoofstock collection -this assumes that the current trustees/management have this intent (I'd sincerely hope so but have no idea on this).
From a hoofstock perspective Marwell still remains a very good collection and from a general zoo perspective it's solid enough and, I would hope, a valued asset/attraction to the area. Yes, the collection is not as impressive compared with what's been held in the (fairly recent) past but that is true of pretty much all zoos nowadays. The reality is that collection sizes and variety are, with very few exceptions, shrinking to some extent everywhere -it's arguable considering these trends and looking at the species still held, that Marwell is doing very well to retain the variety of hoofstock it currently does (there only seems to be Whipsnade in the UK that is similarly trying).
I think what's striking with Marwell, and probably the source of much criticism, is that other collections have perhaps shrunk naturally, as animals died out, over ten or so years whereas Marwell's has shrunk fairly rapidly and largely through planned transfers to go out of species (perhaps some at the behest of ESB's and EEP's). Whilst this is distressing to see it might be for the best -why continue to hold an animal you know you're not committed to long term (it just takes up resources and may hinder rejuvenation)? Personally, there's part of me that wishes Twycross had reduced their species (which they've now done) quicker than they had -it might have enabled them to be in a better position now than they currently are. Unlike Twycross, Marwell is currently in a financially stable position and for all I know part of the reason for these changes is to ensure that this continues. All things considered I'd say I'm happy to judge Marwell's current management in five years time and, in the meantime, continue to appreciate what still remains one of the very best hoofstock collections in the UK.
Right, excuse bad spelling/grammar - a little rushing as I'm off to Twycross now (it needs the support
).
Imagine if Marwell had never existed
Consider if a new zoo appeared in an area without an abundance of zoos, at a location with the next nearest “serious sized” zoos over 50 miles away. The zoo is in a country estate type of location with a hall at it's centre. The place is well spaced out with vast paddocks, giving a great sensation of truly being in countryside and lacks an excess of some of the more over-bearing type of constructions and enclosures which feature in many other zoos. What's more the hoofstock species list is fantastic from a zoo enthusiast's perspective: Okapi, Roan and Sable antelope, Dorcas Gazelle, Arabian Oryx, Scimitar-horned Oryx, Addax, Congo Buffalo, Pygmy Hippo, Somali Wild Ass, a herd of Giraffe in double figures and all three species of Zebra! In addition to the hoofstock there's a reasonable selection of other mammals too: Fossa, a reasonable spread of bigger cats (Tiger, Amur Leopard, Snow Leopard, Cheetah) and a nice selection of smaller primates (including Dourouculli). There's also the standard selection of fillers/crowd pleasers (Meerkats, Asian Short-clawed Otters, Bennett's Wallabies, Coatis) that enthusiasts groan at and the non-mammal collection is nothing to get too excited about but that can be said about many a respected collection. Ignoring the species recently and imminent to be lost (I know that's difficult), the place still holds a solid collection that we'd all be making plans to visit if it appeared from nowhere overnight (absurd concept I know, but hopefully you'll get I'm trying to make a point). I suppose it's ultimately down to perspective -I'd choose to see the bottle as three-quarters full (admittedly with flaws, coming later) rather than a quarter empty.
Joe Public Perspective
Personally I think the place offers a pretty good offering to Joe Public though I can also see some legitimate scope for complaints.
As mentioned above, Marwell does benefit from the great feeling of open space and it is fantastic walking inside and seeing a large group of Giraffes on the hill. I can however also see how the large space can be a little detrimental -it leads to large walks between enclosures which I'd imagine become hard work as the day progresses and could possibly plant a seed of “there's not many animals” (I think Paignton suffers something similar, to me personally anyway). This could be a major problem for the little legs and short-attention spans of some youngsters (though the playground at the far end may ameliorate this a little). Additionally the two (land and rail) trains help transport visitors round the place (and always seem popular) but I do wonder if they don't add to the impression of “we've been all the around and not seen much) -I personally think Marwell needs to be trekked around to get the best of it.
Marwell does in actuality have a good spread of “ABC” animals with only Lions, Bears, Elephants, Pinnipeds and Anthropoid Apes missing (cue a smarty pants to name a species I overlooked). Whilst this might seem a sizable list, it seems only fair to point out that fewer major zoos seems to bother with Pinnipeds nowadays -I think the cost of doing it “properly” is prohibitive. Similarly the cost of housing Elephants and Anthropoid Apes well would probably be prohibitive for a collection of Marwell's size taking up many years' improvement budgets -again this is a general zoo situation, not just Marwell -as demonstrated, Noah's aside, by the lack of anyone going into these species in recent years. All said, and per Sooty's recent Trip Advisor snapshot, visitors do complain about the lack of animals at Marwell. Personally, except for the absence of Lions, I think the criticism is a little misguided and do wonder if people get lost or fail to investigate the zoo thoroughly and miss quite a few species (I can imagine, given the layout of the place, it'd be quite easy to miss a fair number of species if you weren't paying attention). Nevertheless, and regardless or my opinion, I think this is a bit of a tightrope that Marwell will need to negotiate in the near-future. I doubt bringing in (or retaining?) a large selection of hoofstock, as preferred by many zoo enthusiasts, will solve the public's perception and realistically bringing in Lions (likely) and Bears (my fantasy) might be the relatively “cheap” options. Additionally it might be a very cheap option to provide maps with suggested routes and ticklists of species to all visitors, I'd imagine having stamping posts around the zoo where youngsters get a stamp to complete a card in exchange for which they get a medal, or similar, on leaving would ensure that people get to see most of the species on offer (I've seen these schemes effectively done at a number of places).
The other complaint I've seen for Marwell (and a number of other zoos) is that it's expensive. Whilst I'd argue that compared to theme parks, the cinema and sporting events the minutes per £1 ratio is superior (for Marwell and most zoos, aquariums are a different tank of fish) it's ultimately hard for me to judge this (I got in on reciprocal privileges anyway). The prices seem a little (but only a little) steep if you're comparing to what places like Chester and Colchester offer for “ballpark similar” prices but good value if you're comparing to smaller places (say “nearby” Isle of Wight Zoo which is £10 for about 20 species) -but Isle of Wight is on the doorstep and Chester and Colchester aren't. Additionally, you have to consider the location -no nearby substantial competition and down south where prices (for attractions everywhere) imply pockets are deeper. Maybe solving the “problems” outlined in the previous paragraph would in turn eliminate most rumblings about costs. Finally I would point out that the zoo does offer reasonable discounts for nuclear families (two adults, two children) which is great unless you're a single parent or have chosen to have more or less children. Personally I'd rather have the same, hopefully slightly lower, price for all adults and all children as I (perhaps) grumpily don't like the idea that as a childless adult (maybe that should be adult-aged child) I'm subsidising someone else's children (I don't eat in places where “kids eat free” for this reason).
(Returning) Zoo Enthusiast View
As my general views are covered in previous and later sections I thought it easiest to abandon narrative and just make bullet points for this section:
Pros:
1.Still a sizeable and varied hoofstock selection;
2.Eleven Giraffe herd makes impressive viewing however you want to look at it;
3.The new walk-through aviary is good including a nice pond and a good variety of species;
4.The visitors here were impressively well behaved (children being told off, quickly, by parents was common occurrence);
5.Heresy I know, but I quite liked the “Desert House” having Dwarf Mongoose one side and Yellow Mongoose the other - like the taxonomic displays of yesteryear.
Cons:
1.The big “African Plain” exhibit doesn't work, it never looks more than very sparsely populated and, as more time passes, it's seeming more like a complete white elephant;
2.The Siamang enclosure still doesn't work for the species (very few brachiating opportunities like the opposite, otter, side though;
3.Too many empty (“to be filled shortly”) reptile and amphibian tanks around the zoo;
4.“Cartoony” animal graphics on a par with those on Chester's map (same artist?);
5.The “Outback” area still not working for me -the old walk-through primate (I forget which) enclosure is now not a walk through and the reptile selection is dull.
Not sure:
1.New Coati enclosure -looks reasonably good (loved the nearby Coati topiary) and functional but didn't see any animals using it so hard to conclude. Perosnally, I liked the old Coati enclosure and never really considered changing it a necessity/problem.
Conclusion
As alluded to before I think Marwell, as does every zoo, needs to walk a tightrope to please Joe Public and keep themselves on an even keel financially. Hopefully this will then enable them to continue to keep most, if not all, of what remains an impressive and varied hoofstock collection -this assumes that the current trustees/management have this intent (I'd sincerely hope so but have no idea on this).
From a hoofstock perspective Marwell still remains a very good collection and from a general zoo perspective it's solid enough and, I would hope, a valued asset/attraction to the area. Yes, the collection is not as impressive compared with what's been held in the (fairly recent) past but that is true of pretty much all zoos nowadays. The reality is that collection sizes and variety are, with very few exceptions, shrinking to some extent everywhere -it's arguable considering these trends and looking at the species still held, that Marwell is doing very well to retain the variety of hoofstock it currently does (there only seems to be Whipsnade in the UK that is similarly trying).
I think what's striking with Marwell, and probably the source of much criticism, is that other collections have perhaps shrunk naturally, as animals died out, over ten or so years whereas Marwell's has shrunk fairly rapidly and largely through planned transfers to go out of species (perhaps some at the behest of ESB's and EEP's). Whilst this is distressing to see it might be for the best -why continue to hold an animal you know you're not committed to long term (it just takes up resources and may hinder rejuvenation)? Personally, there's part of me that wishes Twycross had reduced their species (which they've now done) quicker than they had -it might have enabled them to be in a better position now than they currently are. Unlike Twycross, Marwell is currently in a financially stable position and for all I know part of the reason for these changes is to ensure that this continues. All things considered I'd say I'm happy to judge Marwell's current management in five years time and, in the meantime, continue to appreciate what still remains one of the very best hoofstock collections in the UK.
Right, excuse bad spelling/grammar - a little rushing as I'm off to Twycross now (it needs the support
).
Last edited:
