South Lakes Wild Animal Park Zoo Sale

I greatly admire Durrell, and it is my profound regret that I did not meet him before his untimely death. I have a somewhat more muted admiration of Aspinall, but none at all for Mr Gill.

My loyalty as always remains with Mr John Knowles as the founder and former owner of 'my' zoo-Marwell.
 
zoogiraffe said:
He actually set it up after he had started South Lakes.
Click to expand...

Ahh, didn't know that. Do you think that Mr Gill will sell up or do you think he'll get over his little temper? What would you like to see, him stay in charge or sell it on?
 
Javan Rhino said:
Ahh, didn't know that. Do you think that Mr Gill will sell up or do you think he'll get over his little temper? What would you like to see, him stay in charge or sell it on?
Click to expand...
What I think he will do doesn`t matter and,I`m not going to speculate and guess at what he will do,as there are enough people on here that will do that any way.So I think we should all just wait and see what he decideds to do.
 
As long as the animal collection does not suffer and they continue with the breeding of their animals, does it matter if he sells or not. Owners come and go, it's the visitors that keep places open.
 
zoogiraffe said:
What I think he will do doesn`t matter and,I`m not going to speculate and guess at what he will do,as there are enough people on here that will do that any way.So I think we should all just wait and see what he decideds to do.
Click to expand...

Good point, we'll just have to wait and see. There is a generally negative opinion on here, and if I haven't seen a zoo personally (or not seen it for a good few years) I go by a general opinion on here. For example, opinions on here have really put me off Noah's Ark. I remember enjoying South Lakes, and I think the main complaint is the amount of escapes and the, shall we say unusual, mixed exhibits. I would definately go again, just to remind myself of what it is like, though I think Mr. Gill is more of a commercialist than conservationist from what I've heard (ideally, a zoo should be a mix in my opinion, like Chester has many 'attractions,' like the mini-golf/monorail etc, but it focuses on conservation).
 
Unless you have met the man in person or know someone that works for him and have met him then all this GOSSIP about his past is a non fact.
Unless you meet and speek to a person personnally about a subject then I feel we can all have an opinion on the matter but to put someone down (so to speak)without knowing all the facts is a little out of order.
All that matters is the animals are safe and very well looked after

PS (If it's in the papers it must be true)??????
 
adrian1963 said:
Unless you have met the man in person or know someone that works for him and have met him then all this GOSSIP about his past is a non fact.
Unless you meet and speek to a person personnally about a subject then I feel we can all have an opinion on the matter but to put someone down (so to speak)without knowing all the facts is a little out of order.
All that matters is the animals are safe and very well looked after

PS (If it's in the papers it must be true)??????
Click to expand...

That's the point though, are the animals safe? Tapirs in with bears (and the enclosure doesn't look thrilling from phtographs)? I heard from somebody on here that the tapirs were scarred and that they always cowered away at one end of the enclosure. Anyway, this is what I've heard on here. Sure, one paper can be wrong but lets have a look at the variety of negative stories:
In October last year Mr Gill was fined $10,000 in absentia for three breaches relating to the escape of a cheetah, the escape of a lemur and the unreported death of a lemur.
Click to expand...
Taken from: Australia Zoo - About Us - In The Media - 11 - 2005

There are also these stories:
Council Rapped Over Rhino Escape (From The Westmorland Gazette)

Whitehaven News | News | Thirty lemurs burned to death in fire at South Lakes wildlife park

In all fairness, and taking the bad with the good (yes, there are two sides), he himself braved the flames to rescue what animals he could. However, the point is that he was using faulty equiptment (he may not have known, but it is his job as owner to know).
Anyway, as I have said there are two sides and for everything bad reported there is so much good not reported. My main problem is that he breached laws and got into a massive amount of debt, then thinking it would be a good idea to just fly off and 'try again.'
So, I am in two minds. He obviously cares about the animals he keeps if he will brave the flames for them, however I think he makes mis-informed decisions (such as mixing potential predator and prey in the infamous example). Even if it is debated that tapirs are prey to spectacled bears, he shouldn't be taking the risk.
 
An old man told me once you can do a hundred good deeds and one bad one, guess which one everybody remembers
 
adrian1963 said:
An old man told me once you can do a hundred good deeds and one bad one, guess which one everybody remembers
Click to expand...

The bad ones, of course. But that is because people are expected to do good. It's like you can get punished for comitting a crime, but you don't get rewarded for not breaking the law.

I have highlighted some good points of Mr. Gill, however as a 'responsible' zoo owner he should be expected to be doing good anyway, therefore only the bad stuff is remembered. It is a bad world when a few mistakes characterise peoples opinions of you, but it is the way the world works. If, say, I stole something and went to court for it, would they let me off if I had given money to charities/saved somebody's life etc?

I agree that he has done many things, but the fact that he has done these good things does not excuse the bad things that he has done.
 
Javan Rhino said:
The bad ones, of course. But that is because people are expected to do good. It's like you can get punished for comitting a crime, but you don't get rewarded for not breaking the law.

I have highlighted some good points of Mr. Gill, however as a 'responsible' zoo owner he should be expected to be doing good anyway, therefore only the bad stuff is remembered. It is a bad world when a few mistakes characterise peoples opinions of you, but it is the way the world works. If, say, I stole something and went to court for it, would they let me off if I had given money to charities/saved somebody's life etc?

I agree that he has done many things, but the fact that he has done these good things does not excuse the bad things that he has done.
Click to expand...

Everybody makes mistakes. Its only human, and to be honest I think you should visit the zoo to see for yourself, see as you have so many opinion on it. Not to be blunt on the subject though.
 
Paix said:
Everybody makes mistakes. Its only human, and to be honest I think you should visit the zoo to see for yourself, see as you have so many opinion on it. Not to be blunt on the subject though.
Click to expand...

I seem to remember that it was good the last time I went, but that was about 7-8 years ago. Since I cannot readily get to the zoo to check it out myself, my opinion is formulated on what others say/news regarding the zoo. I cannot see, however, how mixing tapirs and bears is a good idea. The bears may not be harming them, however this was not known at the time. I can let him off with this 'mistake,' however from what I've heard from others that have seen the enclosure/mix, the tapirs are always hidden away and they have been seen with scars on them. If the tapirs are at risk from being attacked, why does Mr. Gill not move them out into a different paddock (instead of lavishing money on a £3.6 million development, he should seriously think about what exhibits are working).
As I have said, these opinions are based on what I have read and I could be missing some points, but there seems to be alot of negativity towards it both on here and in the press. This has to come from somewhere (I could understand if it was one source or one negative story).
I hope to visit again if I am in that area though (my opinion is mixed, since I have seen some good things about it). I think the only thing is the mixed exhibits, if these are sorted out to be safer for the animals then I would have no real fault from what else I've heard.
 
tetrapod said:
It probably stems from the rumours/stories of rhinos on motorways, parrots and lemurs on the loose (outside the perimeter fence), risky mixed exhibits, and high turnovers of some individual species such as macropods. Add to that the legal problems relating to pregnant staff and an equally high turnover of staff. Not making a personal comment about the park as I haven't visited for 8 years, but I've heard plenty of the stories.

Also I wouldn't put Gill in the same category as Durrell, unless you are including all private zoo owners. Gill has done alot of good work raising money for in-situ programs, but has managed to piss off alot of the zoo community at the same time. Durrell was no saint, but definitely in a different category.
Click to expand...

Furthermore, the rare white rhino escaped from its enclosure at the beginning of May 1999, blundered into an open car park and ended in a ravine where it had to be shot. Six months later Mr Gill had a total of £10,000 in fines and costs to pay, after being found guilty in court of endangering the public and failing to have adequate barriers.

The reason BIAZA suspended its membership because of breach of rules.


tetrapod said:
Add to that the legal problems relating to pregnant staff
Click to expand...

Zoo boss 'told worker to end her pregnancy' - Telegraph
 
Gentle Giant said:
Furthermore, the rare white rhino escaped from its enclosure at the beginning of May 1999, blundered into an open car park and ended in a ravine where it had to be shot. Six months later Mr Gill had a total of £10,000 in fines and costs to pay, after being found guilty in court of endangering the public and failing to have adequate barriers.

The reason BIAZA suspended its membership because of breach of rules.




Zoo boss 'told worker to end her pregnancy' - Telegraph
Click to expand...

That is disgusting if it's 100% accurate (no reason it shouldn't be). There is absolutely no excuse for that.
 
On the subject of the pregant keeper. If this is true, then Mr.Gill is obviously a total wackjob, and it wouldnt suprise me he was slighty unhinged. Although, if the animals are well cared for, which MOST of them seem to be, I am unsure of what to say.
 
I see your point on this, it is unfair to say that it is a bad zoo when 90% of it isn't. I love the idea of the tigers/lions having to work for their food (I don't know how well this works, but I would imagine that it keeps them active) and it is a brilliant collection that I would love to see again.
I am going to assume that the story about the pregnant woman is true, simply because she would not get any compensation if she were making it up. Also, with the amount of negative press around Mr. Gill's past it is easy enough to believe.
 
adrian1963 said:
Unless you have met the man in person or know someone that works for him and have met him then all this GOSSIP about his past is a non fact.
Unless you meet and speek to a person personnally about a subject then I feel we can all have an opinion on the matter but to put someone down (so to speak)without knowing all the facts is a little out of order.
All that matters is the animals are safe and very well looked after

PS (If it's in the papers it must be true)??????
Click to expand...

You make a gross assumption that anybody responding on this forum has not talked with the man in question, or talked to past employees, or talked to people from other zoos that have dealt with South Lakes. You'll have to take my word for it but I have done all three - so there are alot of facts that have been mentioned on this thread. As I commented before I don't wish to express my private opinion about him or how he runs the zoo.

As has been also mentioned Mr Gill and South Lakes features regularly in the media, and usually not for the right reasons. I don't see any particular reason why you should doubt the allegations. Yes they often sound quite wild, but in this case I think you will find more then a kernal of truth.

On the subject of Mr Gill selling South Lakes, this seems to crop up every so often, possibly as a result of his on-going spat with the local council. I think the reason that he was never able to sell was due to price. I don't expect that to change soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top