South Lakes Wild Animal Park Safari Zoo 2017 news

But compare SL to zoos the same size and it is a huge amount. I think it is very unfair to compare anyone to be in the same league as Chester or ZSL.

Most small UK charities such as the Sumatran Tiger Trust are funders for overseas projects where the money is donated to them. In this case STT donates money to a project in Way Kambas (the name I cannot remember) which naturally will have different financial set ups and not UK charity registered status. Many of these UK charities will not hold money for long before it is donated etc as they work as funders.

So in this case the money spent will be the money donated towards conservation. £300,000 as an average 5 year sum would seem kind of correct.
 
gentle lemur said:
The Council have to consider whether the recent record of SLWAP/SZ, as revealed in the Zoo Inspectors' reports and various legal cases, makes it reasonable to issue a new licence. .
Click to expand...

According to this thread, the most recent inspection was on January 17th, less than a month ago. Presumably the outcome of that will be taken into account with all the other representations that have been made, such as the latest (reformed) application, with regard to the Council's ultimate decision.
 
Would it be too cynical of me to forecast yet another ( reformed ) application or 3 or 4, yet to come ? :-) And I wonder how long this ( Reforming ) of applications can go on for? :-)
 
Farmer said:
Would it be too cynical of me to forecast yet another ( reformed ) application or 3 or 4, yet to come ? :) And I wonder how long this ( Reforming ) of applications can go on for? :)
Click to expand...

Presumably the reformed application was because the original one didn't have a suitable animal director or vet surgeon- for which posts vacancies were then advertised. Success of the latest application might depend, at least to an extent, on whether they have identified potentially suitable applicants for these posts, apart from the other considerations- e.g. outcome of inspection etc..
 
Tau said:
I know that SL also operate another charity so I dont know if that also adds. Either way even if it is not that figure... £146,000 in one year is still a very impressive amount for a reasonably small collection.
Click to expand...
that depends on which way you look at it , if the money was actually spent on the safety improvements that are required by the council perhaps the zoo would still have a license to operate with
 
In my opinion, what bothers me in this is, most professional run businesses actually create sites to gain feedback and threads and opinions on there are looked at and analysed by businesses to help them see how to improve their product. what we see here on the site run by the zoo is TOTAL and absolute filtration of negative comments and although there are sites out there that cannot be filtered by the people running the zoo and you do get hundreds of negative views and opinions, most professional and successful businesses would pick up on these and alter the faults and complaints where necessary. As we can see on the latest link on the Evening Mail forum, the reaction is to argue all of the negative points some comments being of a very personal nature indeed on media sites. These negative comments and points are a brilliant source of information to a professional company and would be welcomed and acted upon. The negative comments should be looked upon as helpful.
 
The 'Safari Zoo Nature Foundation' has now changed it's name to 'The Rivera Schreiber-Gill Conservation Foundation' "to reflect its total independence from its previous ties to Safari Zoo."
 
Total independence from it's previous ties, despite the 'Gill' in it's name? Interesting.
 
Visited today for the first time since July 2014...the zoo has changed a great deal in such a short space of time, I'm not sure all of it has been for the better. Animals wise we seen everything with the exception of the Giant Otters and Pygmy Hippo. The 3 Giraffe's in the old Africa paddock were locked inside with a notice advising the paddock was waterlogged...didn't appear to be water logged and the camels certainly weren't bothered by it if it was, keeping them indoors did however make it very easy for all the visitors to hand feed them at regular intervals throughout the day...I hasten to add we did not take part. At the new Africa paddock every single animal was locked inside...with no reason being provided for this...except that it cost £1 per person to go into the barn to see the Giraffe, Wildebeest, Nyala, Zebra and Rhino. Giraffe had a decent amount of space to wander around inside, 1 female rhino and her calf had another large area to roam around, every other individual animal...with the exception of 1 rhino which was allowed outside on the hard standing, was locked in an individual pen. All the old wooden walkways above the enclosures have been removed, they have created roofs on them to make them look like covered walkways from below but you can still see the remnants of what used to be. As has been previously mentioned the parrot aviary has been fenced off and is no longer accessible from the zoo. This place has so much potential...I can only hope one day it's realised.
 
If the name had truly genuinely been changed as claimed by D G then surely this should be reflected in the official records at the charities comission data base and given that both charities The Safari Zoo Nature Foundation and The Sumatran Tiger Trust are overdue and are still in existence with no record of any new Shriever and Gill foundation charity this seems odd and possibly a diversionary tactic to try to distance Gill yet further in advance of the new license application by KB. If D G has genuinely leased the Zoo to K B then legally D G has to withdraw his license application so why is it still live and pending. This is very confusing.
 
EUREKA..... Just sat there before talking to someone and this topic was mentioned and as I talked the real issue became totally clear like a clearing of dust after an explosion :) Here we all are, Discussing D G and the Zoo and how he is changing the name not registered it yet with the charities commission, going to these lengths when we know, and he knows he cant get the licence so why was he doing this? , etc etc etc and I realised yep, this is a diversionary tactic like a sort of " slight of hand" manoeuvre, None of this is anything to do with D G, whilst in the background a group of people have " leased" the zoo off D G, ( believe that? ) and the licence is to be given to them and yes.... D G in an underhanded way has still got the licence. and yes, as we know both are about to be discussed, but I know where my money is on.
 
Curious, but not in a confrontational way.

Farmer, do you have any interest in zoos outside of your obsession with South Lakes? It's just I can't remember you ever posting on anything but. Do you ever visit any/other zoos or are you too busy digging through the minutiae of South Lakes & Gill (interesting though that sometimes is)?
 
Just an addition to my last post, The next meeting for the licence of D G is on the 3rd of March and followed a few weeks later by the application by K B we wait with interest. :-) :-)
 
They left the Jaguar cubs (now over 2 years old) in with mum and dad. Dad and son had a fight and Dad lost
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top