ZSL London Zoo ZSL London Zoo News 2021

[Regent]

Thanks. Have they changed the plans again or are they still the same?.

The plans have changed on a number of occasions since the initial presentation. With the zoo being closed, I’ve not been able to visit and ask any of the staff about new plans

 

[Panthera1981]

BUGS is to be renamed as “Tiny Giants, Minibeasts and Coral Reefs.” Personally I preferred its original name “Web of Life.”

Of interest, the zoo also states that this along with the new tortoise exhibit was given the go-ahead because they are “urgently required for our animals.” Is the current Giant tortoise accommodation that bad? I thought it was adequate enough.

 

[ShonenJake13]

BUGS is to be renamed as “Tiny Giants, Minibeasts and Coral Reefs.” Personally I preferred its original name “Web of Life.”

Of interest, the zoo also states that this along with the new tortoise exhibit was given the go-ahead because they are “urgently required for our animals.” Is the current Giant tortoise accommodation that bad? I thought it was adequate enough.

The house isn’t energy efficient enough, and from what I hear the staff accessibility is a slight issue as well. The new house should hopefully rectify issues that they have with the current build, and allow for potential breeding.

One wonders if they’d try going for Aldabra tortoises in the old house...? Would be interesting to have both ‘species’ of giant tortoise (said between inverted commas due to the majority of captive Galapagos tortoises being hybrids of the different island species).

 

[Jedd Cullinan]

Would love to hear some update on the mini / crazy golf too

okay I'll see what I can do

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

okay I'll see what I can do

I expect a three page report

 

[Dassie rat]

Do you hope the report will be below par?

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

Do you hope the report will be below par?

Well it is a report from ZSL London so I wouldn't expect anything less than below par and certainly not an ace

 

[Dassie rat]

I'd prefer to see an albatross

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

I'd prefer to see an albatross

Now that is a birdie and a half to see.

 

[Pacu]

If you search Westminster planning applications, put in London Zoo!!
Very impressive plans I must say!
The old reptile house must be in a terrible state, always my favourite place, although the collection is somewhat diminished these days, used to love that you could see green and black mambas along with the king cobra!!

I don't believe for one minute that the reptile house is in a terrible state. It is a political decision to change the display of reptiles and the reduction to 29 species is not good.

London Zoo's current Reptile House dates from 1927.

Actually it is not a listed building but it is a historically important one, so I am pleased it is not being demolished.

So am I but I have serious reservations about the reports that it is no longer suitable for housing reptiles...

I wholeheartedly agree with "Pipaluk" that people visit zoos to see live animals and most people wouldn't pay £35 to see a zoo museum. Of course, the living collections must take priority.

Nevertheless I also agree with "Oflory" that London Zoo has a fascinating story to tell so should have a museum showcasing its history.

The two points of view are not mutually exclusive; there is room for both.

It won't cost much to put some displays in there.

According to this list around a third of the new reptile house will be occupied by amphibians, could the current reptile house not be "renovated/transformed' into some sort of amphibian conservation building? The exhibits would be spacious enough for amphibians, right?

It currently holds quite a few amphibians.

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

I don't believe for one minute that the reptile house is in a terrible state. It is a political decision to change the display of reptiles and the reduction to 29 species is not good.

A political decision based on what do you think ?

 

[Pacu]

Just a thought here if the current Reptile House is too expensive to run then why will it not be to expensive to run as a museum as if posters/paintings and other paper items are going to be used then the heating as to be constant not just for the small current exhibits but for the whole building if turned into a museum.
If someone to explain then I would be grateful thank you in advance.

It's entirely different. Current costs are for individual vivaria, not public space which is largely unlit and unheated. The central arrangement for safe access to venomous species was world class when it was made and is still, in my view significantly better than what most collections have. I think this is really about the concept of a 'reptile house' along with cost saving. I'm sure the replacement will be good but what a loss...

 

[Pacu]

Yes it's a pretty good film, filmed in Durrell Wildlife Park unless I'm mistaken.

Mostly filmed at Marwell, possibly some filming at Jesrsey too?

I can visualise it but sadly no photos. Its interesting how the indoor Antelope stalls in the Cotton Terraces(below the Giraffe building) were similarly open to the public initially, and then later closed off.

I would love to go back down there but maybe stay further back now the hunting dogs live there!

The current group are all hybrid giraffe, therefore no breeding is planned.

I am not sure if expansion of the giraffe yard would be advisable. This would only be at the expense of okapi and pygmy hippo.

Possibly only zebra.

 

[Pacu]

A political decision based on what do you think ?

Current views about taxa specific housing.

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

Current views about taxa specific housing.

Not sure I follow but oh well, thank you

 

[Pacu]

Not sure I follow but oh well, thank you

Political as in responding to current fashions & pressures on zoological collections and the fear of being compared to a menagerie. Whilst I accept that a new building could be more energy efficient than a 1920s building upgraded to modern standards, I think it is a decision is to move away from a large 'house for reptiles' as this is now viewed as old fashioned. It seems to me that with the aquarium closed. the repltile house is the last 'old fashioned' part of the zoo and therefore it has been the vicitm of a politcal landscape, which is also convenient for reducing the number of species. If it does become a zoo history exhibit (and I am very much in favour of those) I hope that some living creatures remain on display in there as the two things would not need to be exclusive of each other, perhaps they could choose species that would do well in some of the laregest vivaria and focus on the history of that species in captivity, or have a decent freshwater awuarium in the section where they cover the first fish house or opening of the recently closed aquarium.

 

[Zia]

As much as I would love to see Okapi at Whipsnade, I can’t see London ever giving them up. Considering the circumstances under which the species was discovered/described, they’re probably deemed one of London’s “crown jewel” species, so they’d be loathe to let them leave.

I tend to agree - and maybe I'm a lone voice here but I would be quite happy for ZSL to go out of giraffe at London. Whipsnade is far better suited for larger species and the Okapi seem to do well at London. I certainly would not want to lose to Okapi to Whipsnade for the sake of a mixed giraffe / ostrich / zebra exhibit at London.

It would be interesting to know to what extent the giraffe really would be a 'selling point' to the average visitor. Based on tripadvisor reviews the main complaint I see for almost all zoo's is 'not enough animals' - which is why I think penguins / meerkats seem to be a family favourite. They are a pretty safe bet to be a) seen and b) doing something fun to watch. Obviously giraffe are pretty visible given their size - but are they really be a must see favourite?

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

Political as in responding to current fashions & pressures on zoological collections and the fear of being compared to a menagerie. Whilst I accept that a new building could be more energy efficient than a 1920s building upgraded to modern standards, I think it is a decision is to move away from a large 'house for reptiles' as this is now viewed as old fashioned. It seems to me that with the aquarium closed. the repltile house is the last 'old fashioned' part of the zoo and therefore it has been the vicitm of a politcal landscape, which is also convenient for reducing the number of species. If it does become a zoo history exhibit (and I am very much in favour of those) I hope that some living creatures remain on display in there as the two things would not need to be exclusive of each other, perhaps they could choose species that would do well in some of the laregest vivaria and focus on the history of that species in captivity, or have a decent freshwater awuarium in the section where they cover the first fish house or opening of the recently closed aquarium.

Interesting analysis, thanks for sharing !

I think maybe you are right about the fear of being compared to an old school menagerie / zoo as London zoo seems to sort of have that reputation amongst members of the public and I do think it is sort of in an odd position of being trapped by its history.

 

[Pacu]

I tend to agree - and maybe I'm a lone voice here but I would be quite happy for ZSL to go out of giraffe at London. Whipsnade is far better suited for larger species and the Okapi seem to do well at London. I certainly would not want to lose to Okapi to Whipsnade for the sake of a mixed giraffe / ostrich / zebra exhibit at London.

It would be interesting to know to what extent the giraffe really would be a 'selling point' to the average visitor. Based on tripadvisor reviews the main complaint I see for almost all zoo's is 'not enough animals' - which is why I think penguins / meerkats seem to be a family favourite. They are a pretty safe bet to be a) seen and b) doing something fun to watch. Obviously giraffe are pretty visible given their size - but are they really be a must see favourite?

I think they are 100% a must see favourite for zoogoers at a zoo with no elephant, rhino, hippo or bears. Okapi do well and should be at London but the loss of giraffe would be a disaster. Recent mixing involving zebra hasn't worked that well, although they were often mixed in the 1970s and just adding ostrich doesn't really seem worth it. they need to keep the rear isolation paddock but there are some small, further extensions that could be made to the outdoor space, which, as you know is often criticised for being too small.

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

I think they are 100% a must see favourite for zoogoers at a zoo with no elephant, rhino, hippo or bears. Okapi do well and should be at London but the loss of giraffe would be a disaster. Recent mixing involving zebra hasn't worked that well, although they were often mixed in the 1970s and just adding ostrich doesn't really seem worth it. they need to keep the rear isolation paddock but there are some small, further extensions that could be made to the outdoor space, which, as you know is often criticised for being too small.

I agree with @Zia, I personally think that giraffes would do far better at Whipsnade and I would rather see these go from London rather than the okapi.

That said, I think you are absolutely right about the popularity and iconic status of the London giraffes and that these animals being moved might translate into visitor complaints.