ZSL London Zoo ZSL London Zoo News 2018

[Tim May]

....the current London Zoo is very substandard .....one can compare it to an old smelly, rotten piece of furniture

Whilst you are, of course, entitled to your own opinion, I think your criticism of London Zoo is much too severe and the above comments, in particular, extremely unfair.

Nowhere is perfect and there are certainly aspects of today’s London Zoo that I find frustrating and disappointing.

As has been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the north bank of the canal looks shabby and rundown although, hopefully that will be improved with the renovation of the Snowdon Aviary. I wish the collection, especially of small mammals, were more imaginative and comprehensive. And I intensely dislike the peripheral displays (e.g. the Indian Street Market) around the lion exhibit.

However there are plenty of fine exhibits too. The zoo is, sadly, no longer one of the world's greatest, but it definitely doesn't deserve to be described as "very substandard" or be compared to "a old, smelly, rotten piece of furniture".

 

[Pertinax]

I rather like the gorilla exhibit (even if the zoo seems to want to make it as difficult as possible to view the animals); the tiger area is excellent; what was once the Cotton Terraces has much to commend it. Aquarium, Reptile House, Invertebrate House - all pretty good. Penguins? Excellent.

I agree that the now nearly impossible viewing of the Gorillas indoors(where they spend most time) is a major flaw and something they really should address in a more effective way. I would rank the recent major exhibits (all of which apart from Penguins, incorporate some of the 'old' too) in order as follows; Tigers/Penguins- excellent, Gorillas- okay; Lions- not so good, with all the themed material. While the Mappins 'Australia' area just does not work IMO but as its not really specifically designed for anything, its an area that could house other species equally well perhaps.

 

[Panthera1981]

A thought regarding the Casson-what about rehousing the Francois langurs there when the pigs die out? They’ve been off show since the lion renovations.

 

[Kifaru Bwana]

A thought regarding the Casson-what about rehousing the Francois langurs there when the pigs die out? They’ve been off show since the lion renovations.

Are the gibbons not close by?

 

[gentle lemur]

Let's be clear: there's no need to argue about percentages or decimal points, but analysis of the problems that ZSL faces does matter. What is ZSL doing well? What should it do better? What should it do more of? What should it not bother to do at all? You can't find the right answers to these questions without a proper understanding of the current position. That's why I was worried by this:-

The decision is therefore taken to maintain a smaller collection, with the thinking being that visitors only care about tigers, lions and giraffes - small birds and small mammals get sidelined.

As I said, although this statement contains grains of truth, it distorts the facts: the number of large mammal species has been reduced by a greater proportion.
But we've got to try to see the whole picture. One of ZSL's strategic aims is

Inspiring our visitors through world-class animal exhibits linked to science and conservation

I largely agree with sooty managbey's views about the current main exhibits. I am afraid that the most recent ones do not inspire me: 'Land of the Lions' looks fine for the lions - but any conservation or science message is lost in the tacky window dressing and the other species are not well served. I don't think much of the lemur walk-through either, although the gibbon enclosure was under construction when I last visited, so I hope that it is satisfactory. I just hope that the colobus like the Snowdon Aviary and that something interesting can take their place in Gorilla Kingdom.
As well all know, the Mappins, the North Bank and the interior of the Casson are still disaster areas and justify some of Jurek7's comments. At least the tapirs make a show outside the Casson. If/when the bearded pigs go, it may be hard to replace them as there would be severe restrictions on modifications to the listed building: at least it would have to be a fairly large mammal (touch wood ).
We haven't mentioned Animal Adventure, the latest remodelling of the Children's Zoo. Does anyone know if that is just being repaired after the fire or will changes be made?

 

[Jurek7]

What is ZSL doing well?

It has a good collection of land invertebrates and small reptiles and amphibians. And apparently good zoology department. Problem is, neither defines a good zoo.

What should it do better?

About everything. London Zoo does not keep big animals, does not keep many small animals either, does not have especially rare species, does not produce convincing education, is not especially popular with visitors either.

I am surprised by positive comments of London Zoo. They sound like people magically forgot other zoos, and how far the standard of a current zoo progressed over London zoo.

Having about 8 species of large animals and 3 good exhibits fits a very small provincial zoo, not a zoo in a big city.

Or 32 million a year compared to Basel

Sad fact is, the zoo in Basel, population 530,000 has bigger attendance than 9,000,000 London which is also a major tourist destination. Whatever way to look at it, people don't want to visit London Zoo very much.

'Land of the Lions' looks fine for the lions - but any conservation or science message is lost in the tacky window dressing

Agreed, the zoo should stop playing with tackiness. It cannot even produce a good education message. Which is especially inexcusable is that few miles away are several famous London museums which are BOTH educative and popular but not tacky.

Gorilla Kingdom.

Standard design of a modern gorilla exhibit, and rather poorly executed. Tiny Jersey zoo built a better grassy, multi-species exhibit for gorillas 30 years before.

I would not wish to return to the old days.

1960s were half a century ago. Danger of closure over 20 years ago. By comparison: Paris in 5,5 years completely rebuilt its second, much larger zoo (Vincennes - currently Paris Zoological Park) - every single exibit.

 

[sooty mangabey]

Sad fact is, the zoo in Basel, population 530,000 has bigger attendance than 9,000,000 London which is also a major tourist destination. Whatever way to look at it, people don't want to visit London Zoo very much.

I don't want to cast myself as the defender of London Zoo - I get as frustrated and as disappointed by the place as anyone does - but I think this comparison is a little unfair.

At risk of offending my wonderful Swiss friends, I'm not sure that there is a huge amount of competition in Basle when it comes to people having a day out: I've just looked it up on that source of all tourist-related knowledge, TripAdvisor, and the number 1 attract in Basle is a boat ride on the river, followed by the Paper Mill Museum (!) and an old church or two. Number 12 on the list of attractions is the railway station. London, meanwhile, is possibly the greatest city in Europe in which to do stuff: a host of superb museums (free to enter), some of the world's greatest art collections (free to enter), great walks, great architecture - and several railways stations. So, yes, London may have a much larger population, and a much greater number of visitors than Basle, but the competition for those visitors is pretty intense.

In addition, the figure for London's population is possibly misleading. It is such a vast city, and travel around it can be so slow, that for many on the outer edges, a visit to Colchester or Howletts may be more straightforward than a trip to ZSL, which can be surprisingly fiddly to get to (driving in London is only for the insane; the nearest underground station is a good 20-30 minutes walk away).

To say no-one wants to visit it might be, to coin a phrase from earlier in this thread a little over the top! ALVA reports that it received 1,211,000 visitors in 2016, making it the 27th most visited 'attraction' in the UK. However, if those places where entry is free (or usually free) are excluded, London Zoo ranks 9th (Chester is 2nd). The much-lauded Eden Project only receives just over a million visitors (okay, Cornwall is less densely populated than London), and so too does Tate Britain, slap bang in the middle of London, highly regarded - and free to enter.

 

[Pertinax]

although the gibbon enclosure was under construction when I last visited, so I hope that it is satisfactory.

I was pleasantly surprised by the new Gibbon exhibit, bigger and higher than I expected from photos I'd already seen in the Gallery. Of course not really a major exhibit but it is fine IMO.

 

[Jurek7]

I'm not sure that there is a huge amount of competition in Basle when it comes to people having a day out:

18 other cities in Europe with more popular zoos, and X smaller towns with comparatively more popular zoos there:
Europe's Most Popular Zoos: Top 35
Do they all lack other attractions?

ZSL, which can be surprisingly fiddly to get to

I see it as another omission of London Zoo.

Many zoos succcessfully lobbied for a better public transport. For example, special zoo bus lines in weekends. Transport institutions are normally very happy about this obvious profit.

It will be my last comment about London zoo. I thought that I should not only criticize but offer solutions. As I said, the London zoo has potential which many more successful zoos could only dream of.

What one could hope for, is the zoo hiring an experienced zoo design firm, or maybe a local firm with success in developing exhibits in one of London's museum. Definitely not the ones which designed gorillas and lions exhibit.

The zoo should bring several more ABC species. Because, whatever one personally thinks, a major urban zoo is expected to have many big, charismatic mammals. Bears and another ape species are obvious possibilites. Mappin Terraces are obvious space for a bear species. However, many other arrangements are possible.

The design team should remodel parts of the zoo. It should not be shy of remodeling listed buildings as far as the plan allows. Pachyderm building need not hold 'shrinking' for wild pigs. It could be re-developed for many other animals, perhaps with expansion of outside exhibits to the surrounding space and rearranging inside space. Tens of city zoos in Europe radically redeveloped listed buildings while not breaking the rules of preservation of architecture. Exhibits which are protected but unfit for any animals by modern standards, like the (in)famous Lubetkin penguin pool, can be turned to vistor space, e.g. part of a playground, educational exhibit, or be incorporated as a part of a larger modern exhibit.

The zoo still wastes space. For example, steep banks of the canal could become good and popular exhibits for climbing mammals – monkey or carnivore species.

Many city zoos in Europe expanded on a part of a surrounding park. Regents park is very big and really will not miss few acres. The change from short-grass lawns which currently surround the zoo to exhibits with trees and bushes should enhance both recreation and oxygen production of the space. Dozens of zoos did it, last year for example Budapest – as long as a zoo can present a good plan what it wants to do with the new space.

Some changes – which should take years not decades, and London zoo might start resembling a good modern city zoo.

 

[FunkyGibbon]

@Jurek7 I really think there would be an outcry if ZSL London tried to acquire more land from Regents Park. That would not go over well with the British public, including most of the zoo-going portion of it.

 

[Regent]

18 other cities in Europe with more popular zoos, and X smaller towns with comparatively more popular zoos there:
Europe's Most Popular Zoos: Top 35
Do they all lack other attractions?



I see it as another omission of London Zoo.

Many zoos succcessfully lobbied for a better public transport. For example, special zoo bus lines in weekends. Transport institutions are normally very happy about this obvious profit.

It will be my last comment about London zoo. I thought that I should not only criticize but offer solutions. As I said, the London zoo has potential which many more successful zoos could only dream of.

What one could hope for, is the zoo hiring an experienced zoo design firm, or maybe a local firm with success in developing exhibits in one of London's museum. Definitely not the ones which designed gorillas and lions exhibit.

The zoo should bring several more ABC species. Because, whatever one personally thinks, a major urban zoo is expected to have many big, charismatic mammals. Bears and another ape species are obvious possibilites. Mappin Terraces are obvious space for a bear species. However, many other arrangements are possible.

The design team should remodel parts of the zoo. It should not be shy of remodeling listed buildings as far as the plan allows. Pachyderm building need not hold 'shrinking' for wild pigs. It could be re-developed for many other animals, perhaps with expansion of outside exhibits to the surrounding space and rearranging inside space. Tens of city zoos in Europe radically redeveloped listed buildings while not breaking the rules of preservation of architecture. Exhibits which are protected but unfit for any animals by modern standards, like the (in)famous Lubetkin penguin pool, can be turned to vistor space, e.g. part of a playground, educational exhibit, or be incorporated as a part of a larger modern exhibit.

The zoo still wastes space. For example, steep banks of the canal could become good and popular exhibits for climbing mammals – monkey or carnivore species.

Many city zoos in Europe expanded on a part of a surrounding park. Regents park is very big and really will not miss few acres. The change from short-grass lawns which currently surround the zoo to exhibits with trees and bushes should enhance both recreation and oxygen production of the space. Dozens of zoos did it, last year for example Budapest – as long as a zoo can present a good plan what it wants to do with the new space.

Some changes – which should take years not decades, and London zoo might start resembling a good modern city zoo.

Excuse my ignorance BUT where is the money coming from for all this zoo development. ZSL does not get any money from Mayor of London or the Government. All the changes you suggest would cost millions

 

[Kifaru Bwana]

@Jurek7 I really think there would be an outcry if ZSL London tried to acquire more land from Regents Park. That would not go over well with the British public, including most of the zoo-going portion of it.

Is this not THE real travesty!?!

It would not cost the Earth to re-approriate some greenfield RP parklands to ZSL. Is it not at the discretion of the British Crown (I seem to remember something about royal prerogative there)???

 

[grandelover1]

Guys don’t give Jurek the attention he is looking for. I personally have never been, but ZSL London Zoo looks amazing! They’re constantly upgrading and creating new amazing exhibits. Their animal care is exquisite. They keep and maintain such an amazing and unique collection.

 

[sooty mangabey]

Guys don’t give Jurek the attention he is looking for.

I don't think this is being fair to @jurek, who is a regular, long-standing and knowledgeable contributor. Here, though, I think he / she is being rather over-enthusiastic in condemning London Zoo. That said....

ZSL London Zoo looks amazing! They’re constantly upgrading and creating new amazing exhibits. Their animal care is exquisite. They keep and maintain such an amazing and unique collection.

...is, really, as divorced from reality as the claims it sought to contradict. I think it would be impossible to claim that London Zoo is "amazing" or that its various exhibits are "amazing" (although, strictly speaking, I will admit that I was amazed by Land or the Lions....) or that the animal collection is "unique".

TO the points made by @jurek...

Many zoos succcessfully lobbied for a better public transport. For example, special zoo bus lines in weekends. Transport institutions are normally very happy about this obvious profit.

Yes - but getting anywhere in London is a nightmare. I'm sure there are bus services heading to the zoo, but more visitors will use the tube - and the zoo cannot be blamed for Transport for London's failure to build a spur-line heading to the zoo's gates! The need to walk for 25 minutes through Regent's Park (very nice, if you have the time to do so) or through Camden (very nice, if you are an eighteen-year-old goth) will remain....

What one could hope for, is the zoo hiring an experienced zoo design firm, or maybe a local firm with success in developing exhibits in one of London's museum. Definitely not the ones which designed gorillas and lions exhibit.

This is possibly a little simplistic! I'm sure no-one at London would be in any doubt as to the need to develop and build. The problem is not a shortage of ideas. It's just that this stuff takes time, and until £30 million falls in to the zoo's lap, it is going to be piece-by-piece. I agree with the condemnation of the Lion exhibit, but feel the Gorilla thing could work pretty well - but these are matters of opinion. The are not objectively bad.

The zoo should bring several more ABC species. Because, whatever one personally thinks, a major urban zoo is expected to have many big, charismatic mammals. Bears and another ape species are obvious possibilites. Mappin Terraces are obvious space for a bear species. However, many other arrangements are possible.

Yes, of course - but the Mappins have been used for bears in the recent past (a partial success - but not really). I think it would be hard to argue anything other than that the zoo could do with a great deal more animals within it, though.

The design team should remodel parts of the zoo. It should not be shy of remodeling listed buildings as far as the plan allows.

I often feel I am critical of London Zoo, but this is something they have done, and continue to do. Pretty much all of the developments of the past 10 years have seen older structures incorporated into something new - there's been very little that has been wholly new. This will continue with the transformation of the Snowden Aviary into the Colobus exhibit.

The zoo still wastes space. For example, steep banks of the canal could become good and popular exhibits for climbing mammals – monkey or carnivore species.

Wholly agree - although, again, easier said than done. But yes - those canal banks are awful at the moment, and could, possibly, be hugely improved.

Many city zoos in Europe expanded on a part of a surrounding park. Regents park is very big and really will not miss few acres. The change from short-grass lawns which currently surround the zoo to exhibits with trees and bushes should enhance both recreation and oxygen production of the space. Dozens of zoos did it, last year for example Budapest – as long as a zoo can present a good plan what it wants to do with the new space.

Personally, I'd like to see all of Regent's Park turned into a zoo - of course - but, sadly, I think that what @FunkyGibbon wrote...

@Jurek7 I really think there would be an outcry if ZSL London tried to acquire more land from Regents Park. That would not go over well with the British public, including most of the zoo-going portion of it.

...is wholly true. There would be an outcry if London tried to 'steal' land from the park - and I think, possibly, the attitude towards such land in the UK is different to that elsewhere in Europe. This is a country where public footpaths and rights of way are zealously guarded. It would be a job of many years to win the argument to take over some land - and the zoo, at the moment, is in no position to start that argument.

Is this not THE real travesty!?!

It would not cost the Earth to re-approriate some greenfield RP parklands to ZSL. Is it not at the discretion of the British Crown (I seem to remember something about royal prerogative there)???

Maybe, maybe, maybe. But the 36 acres that already are within the zoo need to be sorted out first. Maybe in our lifetimes....

 

[Crowthorne]

The 274 bus route goes around the northwest edge of Regent's Park and stops very close to the Zoo, much closer than walking from Camden Town tube. It actually has London Zoo as one of the destinations on the side/front route display panels. It runs from Lancaster Gate to Angel Islington, via Baker Street and Primrose Hill. The few times I've used the 274 since moving it's been very-well used, especially by families with very young children for whom getting pushchairs on and off the tube can be very difficult if not impossible. However, the bus is best avoided at home-time, it gets jam-packed solid!

274 bus route

 

[dublinlion]

One possible factor re the decision by most zoos to reduce animal holdings, could well be the social media clamour ensueing whenever lists of animal deaths are published by mainstream media. No reasonable explanations of cause, such as short life spans or difficult births etc. are listened to or accepted. So it stands to reason that it is wiser for them to reduce stocks and therefore deaths. Elephants are also a key species for the anti zoo people so its not surprising to see more zoos moving on their elephants. There is a case to be made for the opinion that social media in general is bad for zoos. It is reported that peta has over 2 million followers and interestingly the gender ratio of animal rights membership is very skewed. Some reports as high as 80% female.
On a personal note I have no strong bias either way, just putting it up for discussion.

 

[tennisfan]

As for this discussion I find it extremely poor taste that given the sad event of the fire recently that forum several forum members choose to discuss and be critical the number of meerkat enclosures. Poor taste , insensitive in my opinion.

 

[TeaLovingDave]

As for this discussion I find it extremely poor taste that given the sad event of the fire recently that forum several forum members choose to discuss and be critical the number of meerkat enclosures. Poor taste , insensitive in my opinion.

Not at all, given the fact that the criticism of collections choosing to have several superfluous exhibits for the same species is *nothing* to do with the recent fire - unless you intend to suggest that the fire renders ZSL London immune from criticism?

 

[TriUK]

This is a ridiculous discussion.

 

[dublinlion]

The point I wished to make earlier was that modern zoos face new problems to add to the expected financial and husbandry issues. So the pr. and marketing departments in the larger zoos such as London, are strongly influencing the make up of the animal collection. For comparison, Dublin halved their animal collection and doubled their attendance and everyone loves the new modern and improved zoo. Other zoos can't have failed to notice the feat of halving the hassle while doubling the income. It's not as simple as this of course but its hard to escape the fact that most zoos are a business that have to attract the general public and are willing to potentially disappoint the commited zoo nerd. Even the smallest controversy nowadays attracts a hell storm, so a smaller collection with better housing keeps the show on the road.