Chester Zoo Chester Zoo Discussion, Speculation & Questions 2019

The bill you pay to the local water company also covers sewage which, I believe, is the majority of the cost. Whilst tap water isn't free neither is the water that is flushed down the toilets every time they're used but how far do you take this argument? some people use the toilet more than others, are the rest of us are subsidising them? And what about those who drink lots of 'free' tap water and then flush gallons of water down the pan because they need to wee a lot?
Well, enough of that, I'm off to Waitrose to get my free coffee, I get one every day when I spend 12p on a banana. I then use their loo before walking home.

 

No - it doesn't.
We have no mains sewerage and have to deal with all the waste ourselves, so there is obviously no charge for a service we don't receive.
This has no connection to the cost of water, and we pay the local water authority (per cubic metre) for every drop of mains water the site consumes.
Run-off from buildings, ditches etc is subject to another fee, paid to the Environment Agency.

 

It is not a 'free' coffee. Even though it is of no cost to you, SOMEONE has paid for the cup, the coffee, the water, the business rates, the labour to make and serve it - the list goes on and on, every stage of which costs real money. It is a subsidised coffee...

 

Okay, if you're not on the mains sewerage then I guess you wouldn't pay for it. I don't suppose you use rain water for flushing loos but if you do that's great.

 

I paid for the cup, it's reusable but I was only joking, I know there's a cost but like many other people, I do most of my shopping elsewhere then take advantage of the rich people who shop in Waitrose.

 

While you're arguing about the zoo's water, it might be worth doing a bit of research. For example, the zoo has a number of wells on site, and water is sourced from them for many uses. Then there are the tariffs, determining whether they're paying a standing charge or a volumetric rate. All very fascinating, and I'm sure best continued in a separate thread.

 

My original point still stands. If the primary role of the zoo is conservation and preservation of the planet then there should be free water dispensers (as there were in the 60s, 70s and early 80s).
If the purpose of the zoo is more commercial, then sale of drinks in plastic is more important. It says a lot when Merseyrail is beating a conservation organisation in their quest to reduce single use plastic and CO2!

It is easy to say that bottles will be filled on request. As can be seen from this thread many people feel too awkward and unable to 'ask'. After all, image if visitors had to 'ask' to use the toilet! or indeed to pay to use a toilet in the zoo.

By the way, Chester water tastes really good, and the machines as pictured also filter.

As an aside, Chester Zoo does have a sewerage treatment plant and multiple access points to an artesian well for filling ponds, pools, moats etc (eg. the supply to the original sealion - Giant otter waterfall / Polar bear pool / Indoor Hippo pool / canals etc.) But this water is not recommended untreated for human consumption. The zoo also pays for mains water and mains sewerage services.

 

Weather permitting, 23rd October. Although if travelling far to see I'd recommend waiting until the first week of November just to be sure.
I understand that for the average visitor, likelihood of being able to see lions is estimated at 20%. [1 in 5 chance in each 15 minute window]
****Members, regular visitors etc, I know if you sit, wait and watch you will see them. What I refer to here is day visitors, who want to maximise their visit and see as much of the zoo as possible, possibly with small kids and who don't have the luxury of time to sit and wait.

 

Chester state that in 2018 they removed the vast majority of single use plastic items for sale, reduced their food & beverage deliveries by 30%, changed their bags for life and pens to be made from recycled plastic, changed the packaging of sweets to be compostable, installed electric car charging ports, moved to 100% of their electrical energy being generated by renewable and sustainable sources (i.e. wind / solar), installed water saving devices in the toilets, and invested in energy efficient led lighting and high efficiency boilers.

They have colaborated with other businesses, restaurants, schools and manufacturers to make Chester the first to be named the worlds first sustainable palm oil city. They also subsidise bus travel and offer a discount to cyclists.

I feel like Chester are doing their part.

I don't think it is too much to ask guests to play their part too by simply asking for a refill of water. Granted, it would be more convenient to have fountains. I agree it is a good idea. But for the majority of guests asking for a refill is also a perfectly reasonable option.

 

There is, or at least was a water refill station in the jaguar picnic area when this subject was covered before. I'd have thought there were more by now.

 

I will answer as you have asked, but am conscious this has nothing whatsoever to do with 'Chester Zoo Discussion, Speculations and Questions, 2019'. No we do not use rain-water for flushing loss, as most visitors come when it is not raining and there-fore there would be no water. As no bore-hole water is available in this area we have no alternative other than to use the mains. We have looked in detail into the infrastructure needed to store the large volume of rain-water needed for flushing toilets - huge fibre-glass and/or concrete holding tanks, pumping plants and chemical treatment, plus of course mains back-up as we can hardly put up signs saying 'no working toilets because it has been a drought' - is not only enormous and of huge cost, but of uncertain environmental credentials in its own right. If you have put in the investment to save and use rain water to flush your own toilets at home, you will know the exact costs and impact. .

 

Thanks, I wasn't suggesting you should use rain water but was thinking toilet flushes must make up the majority of the water that the visiting public use but anyway back to Chester.

 

New lion enclosure opens tomorrow, apperenlty a 2.8million pound development.

 

What did they spend £2.8m on?? I came away underwhelmed, indoor bit is obviously bigger and better but the indoor viewing will be time share with a small mammal...why this was not a separate enclosure by its self with access to the indoor?

Outdoor is an empty field...might mature nicely but atm it looks barren for a "forest"

Best bit the raised viewing but I think they should but a covering over it.

Lastly if they are going down this theming route else where, where is it for this? Its just not in keeping with recent developments.

They could have built an indoor house on that playground by the original enclosure....

 

Hopefully someone will soon post some photos of this new enclosure that show the whole area, which isn't really evident in the publicity video.

 

You'll find plenty of photos in the gallery now, from both myself and @MagpieGoose

I haven't been wowed by a new Chester enclosure for some time, which depending on one's expectations can be quite disappointing.

On the plus side, the lions seemed to have settled really well and were showing brilliantly, which is a testament to the staff. While there were large crowds at the viewing windows, small children loved being eye-to-eye with a fully-grown lion, and that's got to be a good thing. The indoor and off-show areas are much better, and the old house now looks really inadequate comparison. The raised viewing is good too, but as @taun says, it needs a cover and somewhere to sit.

Negatives? Time will definitely help, but currently the whole area looks barren, "an empty field" is fairly apt, but I'd add the word "muddy" to that description. The drainage has been a huge issue throughout the build. Then there's what I felt was a complete disconnect with the rest of the zoo. It's like walking out to a different zoo entirely and then back in again (only one path, so another bottleneck). The enclosure itself doesn't strike one as being huge, but there is a really large dead area between the exhibit and the zoo itself and that really doesn't help. I'll need to revisit the plans to see if it's because of some sort of 'safe' area under the 132,000 volt wires.

 

2.8 million I think the contractor saw them coming on this one twycross got the new tiger exhibit for a third of the price and doesn’t look a third cheaper by any means

 

They only thing I can think off that may have added a huge chunk to the build is moving the perimeter fence....its seems it wasn't just amended to around the lions...but cannot remember where is went too

 

There may well be some sort of "wayleave" requirement to allow access to the pylons and wiring.

 

There will most certainly be a safe zone around them, not just for construction but for permanent features.

Not much they can do about it and it would be very costly to bury them that the zoo would probably have to fit the bill for.

Tbh the whole thing would be better with 3/4 side exhibits.....feel a bit more like a new little area.