ZSL London Zoo ZSL London Zoo News 2010

S

Shirokuma

Well-Known Member
Things noticed today (first visit in a few weeks)

Yeboah is in with the female gorillas.

The baby colobus is developing adult colouring, currently has panda/racoon style black mask, very cute.

There is scafolding along the back of the paddock between the giraffe and okapi/zebra houses and that side entrance to the giraffe house is closed.

The otter pool's glass is smashed but not completely broken, the water level has been dropped but the otters are still in there.

The murals around the lions and tigers are visible and the concrete of the tiger enclosure is being painted blue but most dramatically there appear to be quite dramatic changes going on at the lion enclosure. Looks like new landscaping in the exhibit itself and the front wall and vegetation beds seem to be completely changed, not sure what the plan is but the whole area is fenced off and the bushes in front of the moat have all been pulled out as well as the glass screen viewing areas.
 
The new viewing areas for the lions make the exhibit much more accessible but are a bit untidy looking. The glass pannels have various facts written on them in script which I imagine is thought to look Indian.

The whole enclosure looks a bit odd with various patches of green turf and the same reddish rocks which are outside the Clore entrance. I guess the vegetation just needs to mature.

A mane is beginning to be visible on one of the cubs.

Both the lions and tigers have some nicely illustrated signage on panels my only issue is a picture of African lions hunting cape buffalo. The text gives context (comparing African and Asian lions) but it looks a bit confusing.
 
Shirokuma said:
The new viewing areas for the lions make the exhibit much more accessible but are a bit untidy looking. The glass pannels have various facts written on them in script which I imagine is thought to look Indian.
Presumably the moat is still there and the same or has that part of the Lion enclosure been altered as well?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Yes the moat is still in place as before but now there are glass panels in front of the concrete wall of the moat where before there were beds of plants with gaps for viewing.

It's a good idea but the combination of concrete and glass looks a bit messy. Looks very much like a stop-gap measure.
 
I wish they would fill in the Moat- would almost double the enclosure size.. They should have a high wall with(mostly) glass viewing panels instead, like Whipsnade's.
 
Pertinax said:
I wish they would fill in the Moat- would almost double the enclosure size.. They should have a high wall with(mostly) glass viewing panels instead, like Whipsnade's.
Click to expand...

I was thinking of you saying this whilst looking at the exhibit yesterday. I'm firmly on your bandwagon- the increase in size would be considerable.

Given London's past developments, and the amount of funding that will be available, there is very little chance of London scrapping everything and starting again, I would've said. Given that cat terrace redevelopments will probably use a fair amount of the exisiting structure how will it be done? Would it be possible to somehow remove most of the wire fencing to create one or two large exhibits? Looking at it yesterday I couldn't really see how they would do it without a lot of knocking stuff down. Any thoughts?
 
^Chris^ said:
I was thinking of you saying this whilst looking at the exhibit yesterday. I'm firmly on your bandwagon- the increase in size would be considerable.
Click to expand...

Whatever the species, watermoats invariably reduce the size of the area otherwise available to the animals. I'm hoping they will do similar to what they did with the Cotton Terrace paddock that now houses the Okapi- that originally had a watermoat too.

Big glass windows(as per Whipsnade) which the Lions could come right up to, would give this Lion Exhibit the 'oomph' factor without the need to rebuild it.

I don't like those smaller cages still being used for the Monkeys though- I think that needs a complete rethink.
 
Pertinax said:
Whatever the species, watermoats invariably reduce the size of the area otherwise available to the animals. I'm hoping they will do similar to what they did with the Cotton Terrace paddock that now houses the Okapi- that originally had a watermoat too.

Big glass windows(as per Whipsnade) which the Lions could come right up to, would give this Lion Exhibit the 'oomph' factor without the need to rebuild it.

I don't like those smaller cages still being used for the Monkeys though- I think that needs a complete rethink.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree, I don't like the primates in the little cages - particularly the sulawesi crested macaques. However, I was thinking when looking at them that the two big enclosures (lions and tigers) would probably make good primate enclosures, if they could be properly secured. The only problem would be where the big cat's then go.
 
To my knowledge, the requirement for a second tiger 'paddock' came about after an inspection where Sarah, the Dudley tigress, was housed, quite inadequately and for many months, in one of the old leopard cages next to the lion exhibit after unsuccessful introdutions to lumpur. As Sarah is back at Dudley and Raika has returned to London and can be housed most of the time on exhibit with Lumpur, this issue has in part been resolved from the point of view of ZSL. However, as long as both tigers remain alive at the Zoo, I believe they still have the obligation to create a second outdoor enclosure. If one of the animals dies, I would expect ZSL to leave the single remaining tiger to live out its natural life, while the zoo can delay making the necessary adjustments until such time as they attempt to establish a new, breeding pair.

The moat area of Three Island Pond I believe is listed, so it would be difficult for the tigers to expand into that area, plus it would displace two popular bird exhibits at the zoo, and I don't think housing the pelicans and flamingoes in the african bird safari or snowdon aviary year-round would really provide them with the same standard of habitat.
So I think its likely that the spider monkey and serval areas would be redeveloped for this purpose if the zoo was forced to go ahead with improvements before funding for a major new exhibit was ready.

The deadline set by the inspection was towards the end of 2010, but the director did publicly state in 2008 that ZSL wish to create something on a par with Gorilla Kingdom at similar cost, to include redevelopment of the lion enclosure. However, I am not aware of any public fundraising campaign so far, but then more effective fundraising is probably very focused on high quality supporter bases, rather than a widely-advertised campaign.
 
Last edited:
johnstoni said:
So I think its likely that the spider monkey and serval areas would be redeveloped for this purpose if the zoo was forced to go ahead with improvements before funding for a major new exhibit was ready.
Click to expand...

If they moved the Monkeys away from this area -which is very unsuitable for them anyway- they could make a second outdoor tiger exhibit at relatively low cost by just interconnecting these 'cages' into one larger, planted enclosure (like Bristol's Lion enclosure) and its done. Not a new enclosure, true, but it might fulfil the currect directive regarding the Tigers until something else is done.

I also hope they create an 'Asiatic Lion Kingdom' but by extending it and with proper landscaping they could still use the existing enclosure I feel.
 
I actually re-read my previous post and made a mistake - the requirement for a new enclosure was not as a result of the inspectors seeing Sarah in the leopard cage, in fact it was reported that one of the team noticed an injury to Sarah's leg during the inspection, so it is entirely possible that London was required to be seen to make immediate adjustments to address this and may have put Sarah in the smaller cage only as a result of the inspection. This would actually make sense to me becuase it seemed very inappropriate to house a tiger there, but if they were then waiting on Dudley to be able to coordinate the move back, this would explain why this situation continued for a while. It is possible that London would have allowed more time to attempt further introductions has this minor, albeit noticeable, injury not been spotted. I think it inconceivable that ZSL would not have been aware of any injuries incurred while introducing the two tigers, which suggests they had either deemed it appropriate to persevere, unless the situation was already that the two animals were on rotation and not able to be mixed, in which case the move to the old leopard cage would have actually been an improvement.

It would have been very frustrating if the injuries were not felt by the keeping team to be within the parameters of a normal introduction between two adult Sumatran tigers, as they would have been compelled to abandon efforts to integrate the two animals or be seen publicly to go against vetinary advice from an inspector. I do wonder how subjective the comments were from those on the inspection, as minor injuries are common when introducing large cats.

That said, if a fatality had been caused through fighting when introduced, this would have been a public relations disaster for ZSL.

As far as I can remember, Chessington does not have a separate outdoor enclosure for its tigers when they are breeding, is this correct?
 
johnstoni said:
The moat area of Three Island Pond I believe is listed, so it would be difficult for the tigers to expand into that area, plus it would displace two popular bird exhibits at the zoo...
Click to expand...

This is interesting, I'd wondered about that moat. There's a funny little well-like structure in the corner near B.U.G.S which I assumed must've only been preserved because they have to.

Like Pertinax mentions I would've though the cheapest thing would be to link all the concrete bits of the various cages around the tigers to form one big pen, but given it's irregular design this might look like a bit of a botched job and not really be that simple at all.
 
Sarah was only moved to the old leopard area when Lumpar became aggressive towards her and it was decided that the only solution would be for Sarah to be swapped back for Rakia. The return swap took place in Febuary 08, 4 months after the inspection.
 
I am aware of why Sarah was moved to the smaller enclosure, what I was discussing was whether the zoo would have felt this necessary had the inspectors not pointed out an injury on Sarah's leg, or whether she had already been moved to this location when the inspection took place.

I saw a tiger in that cage in March 08, and into the spring there were reports of a tiger still being held there. If you are correct then this animal would be Raika having returned from Dudely, but to my knowledge Raika was never held in this cage before being reintroduced to Lumpur. This however could be true, and might go some way to explaining why the animal I saw only paced the very narrow end of the enclosure nearest to the main exhibit where Lumpur was being held.
 
The news on Yeboahs death is now public:

Male gorilla dies in London Zoo after short illness

Yeboah's death is described as a "devastating blow" for London Zoo
London Zoo has suffered a "devastating blow" following the death of one of its male gorillas less than six months after he arrived.

Yeboah, who weighed 20 stone, arrived at the zoo in November from France to live with three female gorillas.

Despite repeated attempts to resuscitate him, he died.

The zoo's three female gorillas, Effie, Mjukuu and Zaire, will be monitored closely by keepers while they adjust to their loss.

The results of a post-mortem examination on Yeboah are expected to be revealed in a few weeks.

It is the second time in less than two years that the zoo has lost a young male gorilla to unexpected illness.

In December 2008, Bobby - a 25-year-old silverback - was found dead in his nest after a heart attack.

A spokesman said: "Yeboah's death has been a devastating blow to everyone here."

(Taken from BBC News London)
 
I think it's because they are off display due to veterinary treatment, there is a sign on their enclosure indicating this and the house has been closed for ages but thre absence from the map implies that they won't be on show for a while.
 
Shirokuma said:
I think it's because they are off display due to veterinary treatment, there is a sign on their enclosure indicating this and the house has been closed for ages but thre absence from the map implies that they won't be on show for a while.
Click to expand...

I see. The last couple of times I've been the house has been closed, so that makes sense. Do you know the nature of the treatment?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top