South Lakes Wild Animal Park South Lakes discussion thread

The results of the most recent zoo inspection, in November 2015, have now been released. Possibly the most important point is that the recommendation that the zoo should not be granted a new licence to operate when the current one expires in June 2016.

An excerpt from the linked news article is below:



For more information, including a list of the key failings and observations, there is an article on the matter here:

Public 'in danger' at Dalton zoo - government inspectors

If I locate the actual report I will edit this post to add a link.

I can`t say that I am surprised.
It is an indication that the authorities are, at last, taking action against a zoo owner that has been playing stupid games for far too long, and disregarding the law.
However, if their licence is refused, it will be a disaster for the rest of the staff and animals caught up in the pantomime that is South Lakes!
 
That is exactly the issue I remain worried about! Zoo licensing is fine and necessary, but its penultimate goal should not be shutting down a zoo and letting the staff and animals who are not part and parcel of this dispute become the obvious victims of ....!

Once more let it be known: I am not a fan of the shenanigans of DG, but neither do I subscribe to the politically correctness of bureaucracy or administration.
 
That is exactly the issue I remain worried about! Zoo licensing is fine and necessary, but its penultimate goal should not be shutting down a zoo and letting the staff and animals who are not part and parcel of this dispute become the obvious victims of ....!

Once more let it be known: I am not a fan of the shenanigans of DG, but neither do I subscribe to the politically correctness of bureaucracy or administration.

Revoking a zoo licence is very much a last resort, and is rare. (Other than Knaresborough how many others have been revoked?)

But ultimately how can you have a licensing system without having the power to revoke/ refuse licences?

I certainly don't want to go back to the pre-Zoo Licensing Act days when there were some truly awful collections out there!
 
Revoking a zoo licence is very much a last resort, and is rare. (Other than Knaresborough how many others have been revoked?

Wetheriggs and Tweddle Zoo Farm are two others, both in my neck of the woods.
 
Indeed, you should not worry about the animals that could become victims of a closure (most or all will find a good new place), but of the animals that are victim when living is substandard situations. And that is the case in South Lakes.
So I hope that the system is used to improve the situation; I am sure that the directors (whoever they are) do not want to close the zoo, as it would cost them too much money.
 
Wow,interesting reading to say the least!!

I may be naïve but a 10% mortality rate sounds unbelievably high. Or shouldn't I be surprised with smaller animals maybe having only a 8-10 year life span,then I suppose natural lifespans are going to account for a lot of animals.
I hope that the droppings found in the food prep area were referring to the food for the animals and not for human consumption.:eek:
The "breed then cull policy" sounds a pretty horrid way to do things.I suppose the majority of paying public just want to see cute babies and don't really consider the effects of that.:(
One of the worse things I saw when I attended was the filthy and cramped "winter quarters" the baboons were kept in. Looks like that hasn't been addressed.:mad:
I hope this report gives them the kick up the backside they need in quite a few areas.
 
I may be naïve but a 10% mortality rate sounds unbelievably high. Or shouldn't I be surprised with smaller animals maybe having only a 8-10 year life span,then I suppose natural lifespans are going to account for a lot of animals.

A 10% mortality rate is more understandable for a collection with a lot of small mammals, birds and lower vertebrates - but SLWAP doesn't actually have all that many species fitting this description; certainly a lot fewer than the vast majority of collections its size. As such, if one was able to look at the "large mammal" mortality rate alone, and compare it to another collection of a similar size, I suspect the figure would be a lot higher than "usual".
 
What a poorly written advert!

Who is the 'director' with whom this Curator is to liaise?

Is it wise to combine the roles of vet and curator?

It is a little odd, but I don't tend to look at job adverts these days. Pictures on a job advert? Maybe they have more formal job criteria???

Not hard to work out who the director is likely to be...

Also not unusual to have a combined zoo curator/vet position in smaller zoos, but with 18 staff and the collection they have at SL it would be full on. Most smaller zoos sub-contract out their veterinary requirements to a local vet practice with exotic experience. Maybe some of the curatorial duties are carried out by someone else at the zoo...?
 
It is a little odd, but I don't tend to look at job adverts these days. Pictures on a job advert? Maybe they have more formal job criteria???

Not hard to work out who the director is likely to be...

Also not unusual to have a combined zoo curator/vet position in smaller zoos, but with 18 staff and the collection they have at SL it would be full on. Most smaller zoos sub-contract out their veterinary requirements to a local vet practice with exotic experience. Maybe some of the curatorial duties are carried out by someone else at the zoo...?

Directorship of South Lakes will not be Dave Gill or his wife, that has been made very clear within the zoo inspection reports and council meetings regarding the licence. To have a vet work as curator is not seen as wide within UK animal and zoo collections, to combine both as the same is seen as not complicit with zoo licensing. A vet is a vet and a curator is a curator, both being different and both covering different areas of a zoo and its duties. There is an issue of conflict with South Lakes regarding the present set up as stated within all the reports. Likewise, with Karen Brewer (Marketing and Development Manager)
Ms Christina Fischer (Animal Manager). Karen Brewer who is a Director of David Gill's Conservation arm has been noted by the council and inspection team, Fischer who was a Director and then removed due to various issues (see reports). DG has been told that he cannot pass it onto these two and that of DA, it has to be someone without conflict, without any current dealings with the zoo and has no dealings financially or personally with Dave Gill and his wife, who is not qualified or experienced to be acting as a vet and as a Director of the zoo.

It is worth reading the reports of the meetings held on 23rd, 24th February and 2nd March, 2016 where Dave Gill tried to stop the public and press from being at such meetings. Pages 5 to 7 "bench marking" lays it bare as to dispel the nonsense that Dave Gill ranted on about how he is being chased and persecuted by the local council, as the report shows that is not the case. Pages 8 to 72 again dispels and rubbishes Dave Gills comments and gives its thoughts and reasons. Furthermore, the Appendix of the report shows various licences from other zoos as examples to dispel David Gill's nonsense. I was lambasted by various people about my comments about Dave Gill and the South Lake conditions, yet here we are with the council showing and backing up areas that I mentioned. The old addage goes; Don't shoot the messenger!"
 
Last edited:
Safari Zoo is very proud to be one of the most innovative and modern Zoos in the world with many "firsts" in zoo experience either in the UK or Europe. One of the areas we excel is in enclosure design and mixing species along with immersion. Over the past 22 years David Gill's mind has produced some amazing features that have now become "standard" in many zoos. His ideas continue to flow at a steady and prolific rate... and this year will be no different in that you will get to experience new and unique opportunities. Whilst David took a back seat in the day to day operations a long time ago, his ideas for future developments and new facilities will keep us busy bringing you "wow" factor for years to come. Features like our "World Wide Safari" that gives you a wonderful chance to walk freely with hundreds of animals including over 100 primates from all over the world , kangaroos and birds.... no cages , moats or fences and a chance for you to learn so much all about the World Wide Need for Conservation . The Illescas Aviary and Tambopata Aviaries are huge free flight areas so big one of the largest flying birds in the world soars around your head ! SAFARI ZOO is leading the way.... with the best interactive experiences, best photographic experience and without a doubt the best Family education and fun your money can buy... as All Kids come in for FREE all year round. The Most Family Friendly Zoo in Europe. Get ready for 2016 at SAFARI ZOO because we aim to send you home smiling !!
From South Lakes Safari Zoo Facebook page.
 
As I said I'm newish but..., am I missing something here? If that quote by Bigcat is accurate..... Isn't what is stated there ALL of the things David Gill has been warned and cautioned about?... D Gill has done exactly what he threatons to do in that quote for TWENTY years and has gotten away with it each and every time. I also think that piece quoted is written by D Gill himself. After reading numerous peices by him I have become able to spot the tell tale signs of his writing style somewhat. Will he get away with it now?... The term red rag to a bull springs to mind �� Very very interesting to say the least ☺
 
Barrow BC - Licensing Regulatory Committee

44 – Zoo Licensing Act 1981 (as amended) - Zoo Licence for South Lakes
Safari Zoo Ltd – Direction Order - Public Wooden Walkways and
Platforms

The Principal Environmental Health Officer (Commercial) reported that Mr David
Stanley Gill held a Zoo licence issued on 8th June, 2010 to operate a Zoo at
premises known as South Lakes Safari Zoo Ltd, Crossgates, Dalton-in-Furness,
Cumbria.

On 13th August, 2015 the Licensing Regulatory Committee had considered a report
outlining the results of a number of special inspections undertaken since November
2014. The existing condition relating to walkways was amended requiring a report on
the design and construction of the wooden walkways/platforms to be produced by
13th November addressing 6 specific issues.

A periodical/renewal inspection had taken place at the Zoo on 17th and 18th
November, 2015. On 17th December, 2015 it was reported to Members that the
report had not met the requirements of the condition. Members had resolved to
elevate the condition to a Direction Order requiring compliance within 28 days and
that all wooden walkways/platforms be closed to the public until the Direction Order
was revoked.

Members noted that the closure only became necessary after the effective date of
the Direction Order (19th January, 2016) and this was also the date when the 28
days for compliance started in relation to the report.

On 19th January, 2016 the Zoo had submitted an incomplete report as it did not
cover all the wooden walkways/platforms. The Zoo also informed the Council that 5
of the 7 wooden walkways/platforms originally in existence were to be taken down or
remodeled.

On 20th January 2016, Council Officers had visited the Zoo and noted that all
wooden walkways/platforms were closed.

It was fundamental to public safety that the elevated walkways, viewing platforms,
and other similar structures had been designed to the correct standard, but were
also subject to the correct level of inspection and preventative maintenance. A failure
of a walkway or a platform would cause members of the public to fall from height and
may place them in close proximity to dangerous animals that may then hamper
rescue operations.

At the Committee meeting on 17th December, 2015, Ms Karen Brewer, representing
the Zoo, stated that the report on the wooden walkways/platforms should be
complete by the end of the following week (25th December) but early in January the
Council had not received the report. An email had been sent to the Zoo requesting
an update. A report was submitted by the Zoo written by RG Parkins and Partners
Ltd dated 18th January, 2016 and given reference K32719/AR, a copy of which was
attached as an Appendix to the Principal Environmental Health Officer’s report.
At para 2.2 of the report it stated that the original scope of the report was to include
the structural appraisal of the following walkways and viewing platforms:-

a) Tiger/aerial walkway;
b) Snow leopard/Wolf access ramp & viewing platform;
c) Giraffe viewing platform;
d) Anteater viewing platform;
e) Lemur walkway;
f) Bear/Worldwide Safari walkway; and
g) Restaurant balcony.
It added that “during the process of assessing the above walkways, extensive
investigation works had to be undertaken. During this time the scope of the report
was reduced with five of the seven timber structures omitted, however reference to
them still appeared in some of the supporting document. The appraisal included in
this report therefore focused only on the following structures:-

1) Snow Leopard/Wolf access ramp only (viewing platform to be closed); and
2) Bear/Worldwide Safari walkway”.
At para 3.1 of the report referred to a strength grading report to be provided by
CATG Ltd. That report was not included in the main report but Parkins summarised it
by stating:-

• A significant number of the timber components used could not be stress graded
and were therefore unsuitable for use in a structural capacity.
• The timbers that were suitable for use in a structural capacity were of the
lowest structural strength grade used in the UK (except on the Snow
Leopard/Wolf access ramp, which were slightly higher).

On 21st December, 2015 Parkins’ had dug 20 trial pits to assess the state of the
timbers and foundations and summarised the findings in their report.
The report provided a structural appraisal for the Snow Leopard access ramp and
Bear walkway and stated that the findings of the two structures were common across
all seven of the structures.

As the report covered only two of the seven wooden walkways/platforms, Officers
had advised the Zoo that the Direction Order had not been complied with and that
the Zoo would be visited on the morning of 20th January to ensure that all the
wooden walkways/platforms were closed.

The results of that visit were as follows:-
a) Tiger/aerial walkway – the walkway had been removed. The framework
remained as it was being covered to form a roof for the path below. In forming
the roof several posts adjacent to the main walkway would be removed in order
to negate the vehicle impact risk identified at point (3) of the Direction Order.
b) (i) Snow leopard/Wolf access ramp – This area was currently closed. The
walkway would be the second project after (f) below that would undergo works
according to drawing K32719/A3/SK2 of the report. This was the access ramp
to the snow leopard and wolf enclosure. The works would not impact on the
structural integrity of any other structure.

(ii) Snow Leopard/Wolf Viewing Platform - the viewing platform itself would
remain closed. It was due to be dismantled as the Zoo wished to remodel the
viewing experience.
c) Giraffe viewing platform – the platform remained intact with a barrier across the
entrance to prevent public access. The intention was to remove this platform
entirely and create more space for the feeding experience and negate a pinch
point in the walkways.
d) Anteater viewing platform - the platform remained intact with a barrier across
the entrance to prevent public access. The intention was to remove this
platform but possibly leave the frame and transform it into a covered picnic
area.
e) Lemur walkway – only the framework remained as all the walk boards had been
removed. This framework was due to be removed and the area remodelled.
f) Bear/Worldwide Safari walkways – This walkway was closed. The works had
started to introduce the strengthening as detailed in the report. The additional
bearers had been installed but there was work needed to install the cross
bracing and the extra joists. This was drawing K32719/A3/SK1 A of the report.
The Worldwide Safari was an isolated walkway so works to it did not affect any
other structure.
g) Restaurant balcony – this area remained with a temporary barrier to prevent
public access as was typical for the winter months when the Zoo did not use
the area. The Zoo had expressed their desire to replace the platform with a new
structure ready for Spring 2016 but could not provide further details.
An email dated 19th January, 2016 was attached as an appendix to report stating
when and why the decision was made to remove some of the wooden
walkways/platforms.

Ms Karen Brewer, representative from the Zoo attended the meeting and made
representations to the Committee. A report, including images of the walkways was
submitted by South Lakes Safari Zoo to the Environmental Health Department on
2nd February, 2016. Members had received copies and agreed to accept the report
and consider the items contained within it.

Ms Brewer had respectively requested that delegated authority be given to the
Environmental Health Manager to allow each walkway/platform to be released from
the Direction Order as and when they were completed. She stated that the Bear
Walkway was now completed and Parkins would write to the Local Authority
confirming the standards and therefore requested that this item be released from the
Direction Order.

The Snow Leopard/Wolf Access Ramp was almost complete.

The Principal Environmental Health Officer confirmed that he would be happy for the
Direction Order to be varied enabling each platform/walkway be released as and
when completed along with reports ensuring their standard.

As a result of plans to demolish/remodel a number of the wooden
walkways/platforms, recommendations were put before Members for consideration.
All recommendations had been discussed in detail and each of the parties
concerned had been given the opportunity to make representations and ask
questions.

During the course of the meeting, at relevant points, all parties with the
exception of the Committee Members, Paul O’Donnell (Solicitor), Jane Holden
(Acting Principal Legal Officer) and Keely Fisher (Democratic Services Officer)
withdrew and were re-admitted to the meeting following the Committee’s
deliberations.

The recommendations were as follows:-

Recommendation 1
The Zoo be required to confirm that the public wooden walkways/platforms (b)(i) and
(f) as stated above, comply with the six points in the Direction Order. Therefore an
addendum to the current Parkins’ report was required to confirm the remedial works
stated in the report had been undertaken to the required standard.
Recommendation 2

In relation to the wooden walkways/platforms listed as (a),(b)(ii),(c),(d),(e), and (g) if
any framework of the walkways/platforms were to remain in place a report was
required to certify that they were suitable for such use and the points to be
addressed were 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Direction Order.
Recommendation 3
That the compliance deadline for the reports detailed in Recommendation 1 and 2
(currently 16th February, 2016) be extended by agreement with the Zoo to allow for
remedial works and subsequent reports to be completed.
It was moved by Councillor Seward and duly seconded that the compliance deadline
be extended to 31st May, 2016. The motion was voted upon and unanimously
agreed.

Recommendation 4
The Environmental Health Manager be given delegated authority to revoke the
Direction Order once the points specified in it had been complied with.
It was moved by Councillor Sweeney and duly seconded that the recommendation
be amended and that the following wording be added at the end of the
recommendation:
“and vary the extent of the Direction Order once acceptable evidence has been
supplied for any walkways/platforms listed (a) to (g) in RG Parkins’ report of 18th
January, 2016”.

The amendment was voted upon and unanimously agreed.

Recommendation 5
That all wooden walkways/platforms remain closed until the Direction Order is
revoked.
It was moved by Councillor Derbyshire and duly seconded that the wording of the
Recommendation be amended to add “or varied” to the end of the recommendation.
The amendment was voted upon and unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED:-

1. That the Zoo be required to confirm that the public wooden
walkways/platforms (b)(i) and (f) as stated above, comply with the six points in
the Direction Order. Therefore an addendum to the current Parkins’ report
was required to confirm the remedial works stated in the report had been
undertaken to the required standard;

2. That it be agreed that in relation to the wooden walkways/platforms listed as
(a),(b)(ii),(c),(d),(e), and (g) if any framework of the walkways/platforms were
to remain in place a report was required to certify that they were suitable for
such use and the points to be addressed were 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Direction
Order;

3. That it be agreed that the compliance deadline for the reports detail in
Recommendations 1 and 2 (currently 16th February, 2016) be extended to
31st May, 2016 by agreement with the Zoo to allow for remedial works and
subsequent reports to be completed;
4. That the Environmental Health Manager be given delegated authority to
revoke the Direction Order once the points specified in it had been complied
with and vary the extent of the Direction Order once acceptable evidence had
been supplied for any walkway/platforms listed (a) to (g) in RG Parkins’ report
of 18th January, 2016; and
5. That all wooden walkways/platforms remain closed until the Direction Order
was revoked or varied.
 
keep noticing on safari zoo,s facebook page that they claim, that we are officially the most family friendly zoo in the uk
does anyone know how this official statement is arrived at or is it just another of Gill,s fantasies?
 
Back
Top