ZSL London Zoo ZSL London Zoo News 2012

[Dassie rat]

Suggestions of excessive negativity? I am not suggesting at all you are negative in your opinions of London Zoo, I am telling you that you are negative in your views, in fact very negative as I cannot recall anything you have posted at all regarding London Zoo developments which could be described as positive, you would much prefer to reminisce what was on the cattle sheds circa 1968. I understand that you have worked at Regents Park in a volunteer capacity and you are also a fellow of the society, well I am not surprised that London Zoo found themselves almost up the creek without a paddle twenty years ago if they had people with similar attitudes on the books, indeed it causes me to wonder if you have the correct attitude to be a fellow of the society, as all you appear to want to do is ridicule any recent improvements made and compare this with what would have happened forty years ago.

Hello Tarzan

You and Ian Robinson are entitled to your opinions, but I feel that Ian isn't obliged to agree with current and future zoo developments. At present, there is a big debate about the future of the NHS. Some people want to see change, while others are opposed to any change at all and want a return to 1948 (or whichever date they were happiest with the NHS), regardless of cost. While some people agree with the current plans for London Zoo, there are others who don't. I accept that the plans are going to go ahead, regardless, but that doesn't mean that Ian or I have to agree with them. Similarly, in 1992, most of the ZSL Council were prepared for the zoo to be closed. John Edwards was the maverick then and persuaded the others that the zoo could be saved. Not every member of the Council agreed to raising money for an expensive new tiger enclosure and, as others have said, the current enclosure could have been enlarged by connecting it to one of the adjoining enclosures, probably the one currently housing Farnacois' langurs, although I don't know if this was even considered.

I was volunteering yesterday and I realise that the zoo has probably changed more in the last 10 years than in any previous decade since my first visit in 1965. It does look better and I suspect that the display of corals in the Aquarium must be one of the best in the world. There have also been improvements in the Reptile House.

Despite this, I worry about the zoo prioritising appearance over substance and in not having staff who can check basic information. I was looking at the new books that have been produced by ZSL. One stated that the emu is a member of the ostrich family. This should have been proofread. 'The emu is distantly related to the ostrich' would have been a fairer comment.

The zoo has several banners stating that the tiger may become extinct in our lifetime. Unless zoos close down, I consider this statement to be highly unlikely. It wouldn't surprise if tigers became extinct in the wild, but this doesn't mean that I saw extinct animals when I saw Pere David's deer at London Zoo in the 1960s. These animals were very much alive and this would be the case with captive tigers if tigers became extinct in the wild.

Basically, Tarzan, it is important to debate contentious issues and not accept things just because they have been agreed by managers.

P.S. Apologies to Shorts for my earlier mistake and thank you for being so understanding.

 

[mark77]

Whenever comparing visitor numbers you have to consider the admission charges.

Taking the football view. The owner of a football club would much rather have have a 3/4 full stadium paying £40 per ticket than a full stadium paying £20 per ticket. More revenue, less expense.

Also see the below list of leading in terms of visitor numbers attraction. How many are free entry, how many are subsidised by tax payers.

1. British Museum 5.57m (-6.1%)
2. National Gallery 4.78m (+9%)
3. Tate Modern 4.75m (-2%)
4. Natural History Museum 4.11m (+9.8%)
5. Science Museum 2.79m (+3%)
6. Tower of London 2.39m (+11%)
7. National Maritime Museum 2.37m (+15%)
8. Victoria and Albert Museum 2.27m (+10%)
9. National Portrait Gallery 1.96m (+6.4%)
10. St Paul's Cathedral 1.82m (+8%)
Visitor numbers in 2009 (change on previous year in brackets). Source: Association of Leading Visitor Attractions

 

[Shirokuma]

Hello Tarzan

and in not having staff who can check basic information. I was looking at the new books that have been produced by ZSL. One stated that the emu is a member of the ostrich family. This should have been proofread. 'The emu is distantly related to the ostrich' would have been a fairer comment.

I agree with you on this, I have been very critical of repeated mistakes in signs and publications and a dumbing down of publications in general.

 

[TARZAN]

Hello Tarzan

You and Ian Robinson are entitled to your opinions, but I feel that Ian isn't obliged to agree with current and future zoo developments. At present, there is a big debate about the future of the NHS. Some people want to see change, while others are opposed to any change at all and want a return to 1948 (or whichever date they were happiest with the NHS), regardless of cost. While some people agree with the current plans for London Zoo, there are others who don't. I accept that the plans are going to go ahead, regardless, but that doesn't mean that Ian or I have to agree with them. Similarly, in 1992, most of the ZSL Council were prepared for the zoo to be closed. John Edwards was the maverick then and persuaded the others that the zoo could be saved. Not every member of the Council agreed to raising money for an expensive new tiger enclosure and, as others have said, the current enclosure could have been enlarged by connecting it to one of the adjoining enclosures, probably the one currently housing Farnacois' langurs, although I don't know if this was even considered.

I was volunteering yesterday and I realise that the zoo has probably changed more in the last 10 years than in any previous decade since my first visit in 1965. It does look better and I suspect that the display of corals in the Aquarium must be one of the best in the world. There have also been improvements in the Reptile House.

Despite this, I worry about the zoo prioritising appearance over substance and in not having staff who can check basic information. I was looking at the new books that have been produced by ZSL. One stated that the emu is a member of the ostrich family. This should have been proofread. 'The emu is distantly related to the ostrich' would have been a fairer comment.

The zoo has several banners stating that the tiger may become extinct in our lifetime. Unless zoos close down, I consider this statement to be highly unlikely. It wouldn't surprise if tigers became extinct in the wild, but this doesn't mean that I saw extinct animals when I saw Pere David's deer at London Zoo in the 1960s. These animals were very much alive and this would be the case with captive tigers if tigers became extinct in the wild.

Basically, Tarzan, it is important to debate contentious issues and not accept things just because they have been agreed by managers.

P.S. Apologies to Shorts for my earlier mistake and thank you for being so understanding.

Hello Dassie Rat, no of coarse it is not correct to agree with decisions made by zoo management just for the sake of it, you may have noticed that I have been highly critical of management decisions at two other zoos that I am fond of and take an interest in, although neither will never be in same class as good old Regents Park. In fairness to these two other zoos I have by the same token given them credit when I have thought it was due. The fact is that I agree with London's decision to build gorilla Kingdom, Penguin Beach and now the new tiger exhibit because I personally agree with these exhibits myself, not because I have been told it is the thing to do by zoo management, I do think it is correct to debate what is happening at London by people who have an interest in it, if they have an interest in it that can only be a good thing, I sometimes wonder though if a certain posters good idea to raise attendance figures at London would be to purchase a young African bull elephant, take him for walks around the park with children on his back and when he gets too difficult to handle, sell him to a circus in America which would certainly capture the public's imagination,and just sit back and watch the crowds roll up when they come to take one last look

 

[IanRRobinson]

Tarzan, I have got better things to do with my life than indulge in vulgar slanging matches. If you'd bothered to read previous posts, you'd understand why I made the comments about the Deer & Cattle Sheds:-

No-one can understand the present without reference to the past, and if you know where you've been, you are in a better position to work out where to go to.

(post 153).

And I certainly have NEVER been nostalgic for the London Zoo that I knew:-

On a more personal note: at no stage have I EVER said that I want London to go back to how it was thirty years ago. Personally I feel that the elephants should have gone in the mid 1970s, that the Sobells should never have had more than two species of Great Ape after Guy's demise in 1978, and that the Lion Terraces would have worked better if built to house only three species of big cat, rather than the original five.

It is not being "negative" to criticise and suggest that the present policies of management may not be the best way forward. Anyone who's looked at my posts will see that they're overloaded with suggestions for exhibit ideas at Regent's Park, and for that matter Whipsnade; planning within ZSL is surely best accomplished on the basis of "one collection, two sites". This may be the hallmark of an overactive mind, but I don't see that it's that of a negative one..

(post 160).

a certain posters good idea to raise attendance figures at London would be to purchase a young African bull elephant, take him for walks around the park with children on his back and when he gets too difficult to handle, sell him to a circus in America which would certainly capture the public's imagination,and just sit back and watch the crowds roll up when they come to take one last look

Wrong. Totally unnecessary, and frankly uncalled for.

Shorts, you've shown respect, if not agreement! Personally, I think your analogy with L**ds (confession time: I am a lifelong and unapologetic Chelsea supporter)! is quite a striking one, although Leeds had a proud record of underachievement until the 1960s. But I agree, they should be established firmly in the top half of the Premiership. That's what I'd like for London.

 

[Dassie rat]

Hello Dassie Rat, no of coarse it is not correct to agree with decisions made by zoo management just for the sake of it, you may have noticed that I have been highly critical of management decisions at two other zoos that I am fond of and take an interest in, although neither will never be in same class as good old Regents Park. In fairness to these two other zoos I have by the same token given them credit when I have thought it was due. The fact is that I agree with London's decision to build gorilla Kingdom, Penguin Beach and now the new tiger exhibit because I personally agree with these exhibits myself, not because I have been told it is the thing to do by zoo management, I do think it is correct to debate what is happening at London by people who have an interest in it, if they have an interest in it that can only be a good thing, I sometimes wonder though if a certain posters good idea to raise attendance figures at London would be to purchase a young African bull elephant, take him for walks around the park with children on his back and when he gets too difficult to handle, sell him to a circus in America which would certainly capture the public's imagination,and just sit back and watch the crowds roll up when they come to take one last look

Thanks Tarzan. I was at the zoo yesterday and there were quite a few people there, despite the cold weather. I had one person asking about the elephants and I seemed to attract butterflies when I wore the ZSL anorak, which made a change. You are entitled to your views about the new developments and I think a lot of visitors would agree with you. I can remember the zoo when there were many species represented by a single individual in a cramped, concrete enclosure, which often had bars at the front, so the animals were hard to photograph. It defintely looks better now, although I miss some of the species that could be kept at the zoo, but had their enclosures replaced by a large enclosure for fewer species. I wonder if it was really worthwhile to remove the Southern Aviary, which was used by several species of birds and replacing it with the Komodo dragon enclosure, especially as this species of monitor is becoming more common in zoos (222 individuals, according to ISIS).

I also accept that you can't please all the people all the time. There are people who would want a return to pounds, shillings and pence or to have nothing to do with metric measurements. I also suspect that long ago, there were people who were critical of the person who discovered how to make fire or a wheel, but how many of us would really want to go back that far? I think it's a case of having a balance and trying to interest visitors in non-ABC animals when they visit a zoo. As an example, there's good display about deep sea life just inside the entrance to the Aquarium. It includes examples of what would happen to a polystyrene head at different depths, as well as specimens of different animals. I'd like to see similar exhibitions at other zoos. One of the best exhibits at London Zoo had a collection of extinct animals called 'The Lost Ark' in 1994, if I remember correctly. Zoos should try and show their interest in conservation and exhibits like these should be used to show what could happen if various specis became extinct.

 

[TARZAN]

Thanks Tarzan. I was at the zoo yesterday and there were quite a few people there, despite the cold weather. I had one person asking about the elephants and I seemed to attract butterflies when I wore the ZSL anorak, which made a change. You are entitled to your views about the new developments and I think a lot of visitors would agree with you. I can remember the zoo when there were many species represented by a single individual in a cramped, concrete enclosure, which often had bars at the front, so the animals were hard to photograph. It defintely looks better now, although I miss some of the species that could be kept at the zoo, but had their enclosures replaced by a large enclosure for fewer species. I wonder if it was really worthwhile to remove the Southern Aviary, which was used by several species of birds and replacing it with the Komodo dragon enclosure, especially as this species of monitor is becoming more common in zoos (222 individuals, according to ISIS).

I also accept that you can't please all the people all the time. There are people who would want a return to pounds, shillings and pence or to have nothing to do with metric measurements. I also suspect that long ago, there were people who were critical of the person who discovered how to make fire or a wheel, but how many of us would really want to go back that far? I think it's a case of having a balance and trying to interest visitors in non-ABC animals when they visit a zoo. As an example, there's good display about deep sea life just inside the entrance to the Aquarium. It includes examples of what would happen to a polystyrene head at different depths, as well as specimens of different animals. I'd like to see similar exhibitions at other zoos. One of the best exhibits at London Zoo had a collection of extinct animals called 'The Lost Ark' in 1994, if I remember correctly. Zoos should try and show their interest in conservation and exhibits like these should be used to show what could happen if various specis became extinct.

Quite agree with the what you say about the Southern Aviary being demolished with its lovely willow trees, I commented on this on another thread elsewhere, I know it was an old exhibit but was still up to the job, always liked to sit there to have a breather.

 

[IanRRobinson]

I think that the Southern Aviary had had its day, and its structure certainly had. The keepers certainly didn't enjoy having to catch anything up in there; they were reduced to throwing brooms at any birds they needed to move.

Komodo dragons may be getting commoner in zoos, but the male at London is arguably the most impressive beast on site. This is a nice exhibit, and an improvement IMHO. We'll have to agree to disagree on this, dassierat!

 

[TARZAN]

I think that the Southern Aviary had had its day, and its structure certainly had. The keepers certainly didn't enjoy having to catch anything up in there; they were reduced to throwing brooms at any birds they needed to move.

Komodo dragons may be getting commoner in zoos, but the male at London is arguably the most impressive beast on site. This is a nice exhibit, and an improvement IMHO. We'll have to agree to disagree on this, dassierat!

So why are you so against Gorilla Kingdom and the new tiger exhibit but very much in favour of the Southern aviary being demolished to build an expensive exhibit for komodo dragons, strange, I cannot recall any mention of a komodo dragon house in the plans from twenty years ago?

 

[IanRRobinson]

TBH, Tarzan, I would like an apology from you after your previous, needlessly personal attack, but I will answer your question.

• Gorilla Kingdom. Nobody by the early 1990s thought much of the Ape block in the Sobells; left unchanged they would have been better used by larger monkeys, together with being softened up. However, the decision was taken to do otherwise. I do think insufficient space was utilised, but my main criticism is simply choice of species. I would have preferred Sumatran Orangs to be kept, or Bonobos. The latter is the great ape I'd prefer at London now; the present Western Gorilla group will not produce young and their species is more than adequately represented in the UK, certainly in SE England.

• Tiger Territory. £3 million is a hell of a lot of money to house Sumatran Tigers. The Lion Terraces were opened in 1976, and ideas change; they're due a revamp. What seems to be in mind - a very large, immersive exhibit (insofar as the Stork and Ostrich House and the Sealion viewing stand allow for Indonesian theming) seems to me, quite simply, OTT.

• "Dragons of Komodo". Unlike the Sobell Pavilions and the Lion Terraces, the Southern Aviary was old (1905), and as stated earlier was labour intensive. There is also the fact that Komodo Dragons represented an additional high-profile species for the collection. There is a world of difference in seeking to do this and spending a lot of unnecessary money (IMO) on a species already in the collection (eg Tiger) or on upgrading exhibits for (again, IMO) the wrong species of great ape (eg Western Gorilla).

 

[TARZAN]

,

TBH, Tarzan, I would like an apology from you after your previous, needlessly personal attack, but I will answer your question.

• Gorilla Kingdom. Nobody by the early 1990s thought much of the Ape block in the Sobells; left unchanged they would have been better used by larger monkeys, together with being softened up. However, the decision was taken to do otherwise. I do think insufficient space was utilised, but my main criticism is simply choice of species. I would have preferred Sumatran Orangs to be kept, or Bonobos. The latter is the great ape I'd prefer at London now; the present Western Gorilla group will not produce young and their species is more than adequately represented in the UK, certainly in SE England.

• Tiger Territory. £3 million is a hell of a lot of money to house Sumatran Tigers. The Lion Terraces were opened in 1976, and ideas change; they're due a revamp. What seems to be in mind - a very large, immersive exhibit (insofar as the Stork and Ostrich House and the Sealion viewing stand allow for Indonesian theming) seems to me, quite simply, OTT.

• "Dragons of Komodo". Unlike the Sobell Pavilions and the Lion Terraces, the Southern Aviary was old (1905), and as stated earlier was labour intensive. There is also the fact that Komodo Dragons represented an additional high-profile species for the collection. There is a world of difference in seeking to do this and spending a lot of unnecessary money (IMO) on a species already in the collection (eg Tiger) or on upgrading exhibits for (again, IMO) the wrong species of great ape (eg Western Gorilla).

Ian, thank you for your opinions of Dragons of Komodo etc., fair comment. Regarding an apology, I am afraid there will be none forthcoming, Am I not allowed to attempt to inject a little light hearted humour into the discussion on a thread which I think has now become rather repetitive, we are just going over the same things regarding the new tiger exhibit etc, with the same people giving their views for and against this, all my life I have associated London Zoo with happy times, I am sorry to say that this current thread has started to become depressing so therefore I will not be participating in it in the future as it has started to sour my thoughts of London Zoo. You suggest I am aggressive, well arrogant loud mouthed and self opinionated yes, aggressive no, never in my life, and if you note my previous postings when I have become outspoken you will find it is usually connected with the needless culling of healthy young animals, the bullying and ridiculing of a junior member of this site etc, incidentally it has not gone unnoticed that when I have taken someone to task for bullying on here certain other posters then immediately jump to the bully's defence, what sort of people are they?. It would appear to me that discussion forum is not at times a happy place to be, I participate in two other discussion forums with people who have the same interest as myself, not once have I had a crossed word with any of them,disagreements, yes, leg pulling and having a joke yes, but no unpleasantness, perhaps the fact that I actually know several of the people who participate personally, some for many years has something to do with it, unlike on here where as far as I know I know nobody personally.

 

[Pertinax]

I think perhaps now is the time to put this interesting thread to rest as its pretty much exhausted itself.

 

[kiang]

Starting the year of (again!), with a review of last year.

 

[mazfc]

Thank you. A really nice link.

 

[pipaluk]

Yes, nice link. I think whoever chose the tiger enclosure impressions as the header must study this site & have a sense of humour though!

 

[Shirokuma]

I was at the zoo today (thought it would be nice and quiet, didn't realise it was half term). A couple of things to report:

The African Safari aviary was closed and, I think, empty of birds - is this related to preparations for Tiger Territory?

Couldn't see pelicans anywhere (unless I missed them and they were in the Snowdon).

There is a black and white mural of a giraffe eating leaves and a tree branch in the giraffe house. It's on the wall dividing the main house from the side stalls on the zebra side and is actually rather well done.

But what really got my interest... in the Clore, the block behind the rain forest (to the left of the yellow mongoose or to the right of the rain forest hall as you enter it) there appears to be an enclosure (with labling in current fonts and branding) for Alaotran lemur - this at the mongoose end, and peering through the doors at the other end there was what looked like another rat enclosure. Does anyone know what is going on here?

Downstairs in the nocturnal area a couple of enclosures (one between the cloud rats and Australian water rats and the cave fish enclosure) were gone completely with signs saying they were under rennovation.

So it seems like something is going on in the Clore.

 

[pipaluk]

Sorry if it has already been posted elsewhere, but I haven't seen it! Are the sealions still at London, & if so for how much longer? Thanks

 

[volvox]

The sealions went yesterday, I'm afraid, back to their renovated enclosure at Whipsnade. The whole area is now being fenced off for the Tiger Territory building work to start (um, I think we've covered that subject elsewhere, perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned it!). The African Safari aviary is now closed and the birds moved elsewhere (sorry, don't know where), also for the duration of the building of Tiger Territory, as the building noise and disruption behind the aviary would be too stressful for the birds.

Now, the Clore: the enclosure where Shirokuma saw the Aloatran gentle lemurs is nothing new and always houses something. These particular lemurs have always been in the zoo but for some reason they get moved about. The enclosure is nothing secret – it's on the way to the education area – so although it says "no entry" at the door, in fact school groups are taken through there for their rainforest education sessions. It's a nice enclosure with an indoor bedroom and a semi-outdoor bit too – plants and sunlight. But nothing new or exciting!

Downstairs in nightlife I believe they are constructing a way of seeing the Australian water rats actually under water, which explains the disruption there. in the meantime, one of the inhabitants, a potoroo, has been moved upstairs and is sharing the first enclosure on the left as you enter the Rainforest, the home of the goeldi's monkey (who ignore it). It looked a bit shell-shocked at first but quite happy and relaxed this week, pottering around on the floor, and nice for visitors to see up close and in daylight conditions.

 

[Pertinax]

The sealions went yesterday, I'm afraid, back to their renovated enclosure at Whipsnade. The whole area is now being fenced off for the Tiger Territory building work to start (um, I think we've covered that subject elsewhere, perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned it!).

Sorry to hear the Sealions brief sojourn at London is now over- that was a little bit of History repeating itself!

So Tiger Territory is starting to happen. But we should stay off debating the why's and wherefore's now I think!

 

[IanRRobinson]

Now, the Clore: the enclosure where Shirokuma saw the Aloatran gentle lemurs is nothing new and always houses something. These particular lemurs have always been in the zoo but for some reason they get moved about. The enclosure is nothing secret – it's on the way to the education area – so although it says "no entry" at the door, in fact school groups are taken through there for their rainforest education sessions. It's a nice enclosure with an indoor bedroom and a semi-outdoor bit too – plants and sunlight. But nothing new or exciting!

Those three original courtyard enclosures in the Clore really ought to have something done with them. There was talk of howler monkeys 12-15 years ago; the three could easily be linked together for a mixed species exhibit.

To have half of the ground floor closed to the public really isn't on, IMO; off exhibit species could so easily be done at Whipsnade.