Popularity of British Zoos

[devilfish]

I was going to turn this into three separate threads, but the topics are linked so it might be best to keep it all here.

My first topic:

Number of likes on facebook.
I found comparing different zoos' followings on facebook quite interesting. I've got a number of tables, but here's a selected list of the number of 'likes' UK zoos have to the nearest 100. I haven't included any aquaria, zoos where theme parks are a significant attraction, or any zoos outside the UK. I have only taken figures from the zoos' single main pages, and haven't included counts from subsets, charities or associated zoo pages.

Chester 93,200
Edinburgh 49,100
Colchester 35,800
Dudley Zoo 26,800
Twycross 22,500
London 19,800
Blackpool 19,800
Bristol 16,300
Marwell 14,600
Durrell (Jersey) 13,400
Longleat 13,000
South Lakes 12,300
Yorkshire WP 12,200
Paignton 11,800
Wingham 9,700
Whipsnade 9,200
Cotswold Wildlife Park 8,200
Highland Wildlife Park 8,100
Howletts 5,600
Banham 5,000
Port Lympne 5,000
Newquay 4,600
Africa Alive 3,700
Living Coasts 2,700
Slimbridge 2,200
Birmingham Nature Centre 2,145
Blackbrook 2,000
Welsh Mountain Zoo 1,800
Linton 1,700
RSCC 800
Birdland 600

This leads me nicely to topics 2 & 3, which have been on my mind for a while but are nicely illustrated by this table. They've been touched on the forum many times but I don't remember coming across wide enough explanations to cover these figures.

Just on a demographic picture, without talking about how good any collection is or how poorly a collection might be performing (don't forget we're talking mostly about members of the public)...

Topic 2:

Why does Chester have such a significant (and loyal) following? From the content on facebook and zoochat (e.g. 149 posts so far on the '2013 news' thread), Chester far overtakes any other zoo in the country. There are more zoochatters in that area of the country than anywhere else (cause or effect?) and even the smallest news seems to be of interest to a large number of people. For a good zoo which would probably sit comfortably among those of mainland Europe, (other European facebook likes include Leipzig -58,000; Berlin -11,000; Rotterdam - 14,800; Vienna - 14,200; Madrid - 12,900; Zurich - 6,500) Chester's following seems to be disproportionate to expectations on paper. Can anyone explain why?


Topic 3:

Conversely, London's position is a bit of a surprise, particularly that it is overtaken on facebook by Twycross & Dudley. Although many have said that it's slipped in recent years; London's following is disproportionately small. Only 18 posts on the '2013 news' thread, and most of them stem from observations from visits, press releases and their follow-up. News of reasonable interest (e.g. new species on display, or no longer on display) tends to come from observations of visits. There's also much less discussion about the zoo outside of personal masterplans.


Another topic:

Perhaps Twycross should come in for balance. Again, lots of news. Again, some is not of great interest to general enthusiasts. Lots of discussion too and a significant following.


Sorry for the ramble. I hope I've not offended anyone. Ultimately the discrepancy is much bigger than I had expected and I'd be interested to know why.

 

[Johnny Morris.]

I'm a " Liker " of a few of these Zoo's pages, and must say The Birdland one is my particular favourite. I love their weekly updates of what is involved in running their collection.

 

[Jana]

I personally think that number of fb likes doesn´t say much about actual zoo popularity. It is more about the team who keeps the fb site actualized regularly and answers the questions from public, so that people like it and return.
(Good example is Prague Zoo fb with +120.000 likes, it doesn´t mean it is a more popular or better zoo then Berlin, Vienna, Zurich, Chester or Rotterdam. It just shows there is a good PR department behind it.)

 

[pipaluk]

I don't take facebook numbers too seriously, but it's no surprise to me that Chester and Edinburgh are the top 2. I would suggest that is largely due to location & the fact that they face little competition locally. I dont just mean distance of other zoos from Chester, but from northern cities e.g Manchester & Liverpool for start.
London relies heavily on tourists for it's high visitor numbers and has several large or medium sized collections within an hours journey. How does that explain Colchester's lofty position? I would say it confirms what i have often suggested here- that the majority of the public consider Colchester a better zoo than London!

 

[Pertinax]

How does that explain Colchester's lofty position?

I doubt people travel out of London to visit Colchester- I think they would automatically go to ZSL as the nearest Zoo.

But Essex and surrounding areas is well populated, while Colchester is the only large Zoo in the region plus it is quite easily accessed from all the surrounding towns plus it has a first rate animal collection. I think all those factors combine to explain its popularity.

 

[pipaluk]

I doubt people travel out of London to visit Colchester- I think they would automatically go to ZSL as the nearest Zoo.

Agreed, but people living north of London & roughly equidistant from both would now usually choose Colchester, whereas 20 or 30 years ago there was no doubt London was much the better option!

 

[CiaranDUK]

Colchester is the only large Zoo in the region.

This is of course true, and I know several people who would rather the trek to Colchester from as far as North Norfolk, Peterborough, Cambridge, etc., than spend the day at any of the zoos in between. Norfolk for one is littered with animal collections, and yet some people would rather travel the 1.5-2 hours journey to Colchester and spend the day there than at any Norfolk zoo!

 

[pipaluk]

This is of course true, and I know several people who would rather the trek to Colchester from as far as North Norfolk, Peterborough, Cambridge, etc., than spend the day at any of the zoos in between. Norfolk for one is littered with animal collections, and yet some people would rather travel the 1.5-2 hours journey to Colchester and spend the day there than at any Norfolk zoo!

You have illustrated my point about Colchester perfectly. As Pertinax pointed out, the public may not travel from inner London to Colchester, but from outer London boroughs, Essex, Cambridgeshire, Hertfordshire, where 30 years ago they would probably have gone to London, as 'The Zoo' , when Colchester was poor by comparison, now they flock to Colchester instead.
Apart from Chester (whipsnade maybe), I can't think of an equal to Colchester from a general public visitor perspective, it has everything people would 'expect' to see at a zoo, London sadly doesn't from those visitors point of view!

 

[Ajkwba]

I'm a " Liker " of a few of these Zoo's pages, and must say The Birdland one is my particular favourite. I love their weekly updates of what is involved in running their collection.

Thank you, let me know if there is any particular topic you would like to see covered

 

[dean]

Part of London's Loss could be the cost of traveling to get there, from here to London for 2 people it is over £50 off peak,then the entrance fee and a bite to eat, it all adds up plus the hassle of bus/tube etc I noticed the more popular zoos are away on the whole from big cities so easy access and egress is possibly a factor.
Also London hasn't pushed itself as much. colchester and Chester have involved them selves in children's TV shows which are bound to increase awareness, of course they have all the mega fauna too which are shown in more naturalistic settings and mixed species exhibits which please people or fool people more depending on your point of view.
London has far far more attractions too than just the zoo.
Just my 2p worth.

 

[pipaluk]

Part of London's Loss could be the cost of traveling to get there, from here to London for 2 people it is over £50 off peak,then the entrance fee and a bite to eat, it all adds up plus the hassle of bus/tube etc I noticed the more popular zoos are away on the whole from big cities so easy access and egress is possibly a factor.
Also London hasn't pushed itself as much. colchester and Chester have involved them selves in children's TV shows which are bound to increase awareness, of course they have all the mega fauna too which are shown in more naturalistic settings and mixed species exhibits which please people or fool people more depending on your point of view.
London has far far more attractions too than just the zoo.
Just my 2p worth.

You are right, higher public transport costs to London, plus improved road links do make Colchester even more attractive now. It's marketing/publicity is also better.
But for me, the fact remains that its collection is now far more of a draw for the general public. I doubt the new tiger exhibit will bring them back to London, developing the Mappins for Pandas or polar bears (as per masterplans of 20 years ago) might be a different story though!

 

[Tim Brown]

To be honest pipaluk is right-Facebook,website hits etc are of little importance[and possibly even reflect those leading a virtual life instead of waking up and smelling the coffee].I remember the director of Glasgow Zoo telling me how many millions of people visited their website...I rest my case!As for comparing visitor numbers between Colchester and London-am i missing the point here or does London not get over double the amount of visitors that the Essex zoo get?.Mind you the quite idiotic congestion charge is enough to put anyone off going into our capital city...and the person that came up with it might just be interested in standing for Council at the ZSL!

 

[Tim Brown]

And another thing, its all very well marketing via the internet[a very viable method,if not a necessity now] BUT its not as if zoo attendances[Chester excepted] have soared through the roof since the internet kicked in is it?

 

[pipaluk]

I decided not to post this on the main London Zoo thread, as i think it probably sits better here and don't want it to look like i'm having a go at London again. I echo my earlier comments that facebook figures and the like shouldn't be taken too seriously, but someone suggested London was 2nd only to Chester amongst UK zoos- something i can't agree with & i have stated several times before that the public perception of London is not that great, so here we go...
Whilst googling Linton zoo earlier today i noticed a review score of 20/30, just out of interest i looked what London scored...... 18 !! I dont think this implies that Linton is better, more a case of what people expect from a capital city zoo & their 25 pound entrance.
Out of further interest i looked at a few others: Howletts 24, Whipsnade 25 and Colchester a massive 28! Sorry, much as i love London, it's certainly not 2nd in the publics eyes as i've tried to argue many times.
Having looked a bit further, Chester gets 25 and my favourite collection , Edinburgh only scores 18 too, so i must have bad taste too!

 

[Badgerman91]

Maybe because Colchester is my local zoo I really don't understand why some people on this site really don't seem to like the zoo?

I believe the "facebook like" figures don't really mean alot about the quailty or actual popularity of the zoo but shows that the zoo has a good PR team.

However I think the one of the problems UK zoo's face is that people seem to view them as places for families with small children & also a lot of the public would prefer to spend their disposable income at Shopping Malls or Theme Parks such as Thorpe Park or Alton Towers rather than "walking around a zoo looking at sleeping animals" (is what I have been told when I have suggested going to a zoo to some of my friends.) The public like to be involved & touch rather than look at from a distance...perhaps this is why more & more "walk-through" & Lorikeet feeding enclosures have opened in UK zoo's over the past few years. So maybe that’s why I think some zoos receive low review scores on sites as the general public see there are more "exciting" things they could be spending their time & money doing perhaps???? Just my opinion would be interesting to see if people agree or disagree with it.

 

[IanRRobinson]

Dare I say it, we have a problem in the UK, which might be succinctly described as "dumbing down".

Whether this is driven from the bottom or the top (personally I think it's the latter), more amd more zoos seem to acting on their marketing departments' brief, rather than having the self-confidence to know what they're doing and instruct the marketing accordingly.

 

[dean]

Dare I say it, we have a problem in the UK, which might be succinctly described as "dumbing down"..

This is true to a very large extent with all collections whether it is Fauna, Flora or anything else, we live in a world where every thing must be instant, and gratifying at the same time, then be hyped to hell.

I think, Partly down to the huge choice of TV stations and Internet sites Etc. where we can view almost anything non stop We are loosing the ability to think for our selves and also to have the patience to stand and watch. "what's the tiger doing? not much move on"

The overdrive in PR and marketing at the zoo can i think also lead to disappointment for today's children who live in this instant and virtual world.
As I type I can see an old Howletts leaflet on my desk it states "Lets get up close and Personal" it has a baby elephant and a gorilla on the cover. Just how close to either animals can you get, never mind be personal with?

There is also the added need in animal collections to have to justify keeping the animals on view, as if it is wrong to breed things and encourage others in the keeping of species for the pleasure and satisfaction of doing so. There is a guilt trip associated with animals here and that is wrong, PETA and Animal Aid RSPCA etc are given to much time and space to air their personal agendas, with out questions asked. zoo publicity should be countering it head on rather than semi acquiescing to them.

Every year since I was a child -A long time ago now I'm nearly 52-I raise tadpoles into frogs and then return them to the garden It helps make sure that more survive than would normally. I do the same with caterpillars raise them predator free and release the adults back into the "WILD" in fact i have a box of over wintering Peacock butterflies in the garage as I type, and if spring ever does come, they will be the oldest butterflies in the world! but they will fly off to breed not end up in a spiders Web in an old l shed which is were I found them. It is possibly illegal to do this now, but the satisfaction I get in doing my bit to help out ways the risk. I wonder how many of today's children will be doing that in the decades to come?
We have a hands off don't touch approach to the world about us in this country, like the zoo staff who are led by office workers, the nation is lead by degrees and theory rather than hands on practical experience.

I'm sorry if i have gone off topic and may even have ranted a bit ...