Chester Zoo Demise of Chester Zoo Gardens

Hello all, long-time lurker but this is my first post, partially prompted by a friend who is a lifetime supporter of Chester Zoo but who is going a bit nuts over what they're doing to the gardens.

A few weeks ago when I visited, they'd replaced the rose beds outside the chimps with something that looks like a load of bark and a few bushes, now I'm told and just read here that they're not going to have any more flowers. According to my friend, the bed in front of Oakfield Manor is going in addition to all the flowers around the Fountain shop.

What's the general consensus of the board, bad idea or good? Everyone in the pub last night thought it was a serious loss, especially as the zoo heavily promote the gardens as a major part of the attraction. I'm looking now at a huge advert on the back of the Cheshire Gardens of Distinction magazine promoting their spring and summer bedding displays.

But aside from all that, my wife and I love the gardens, it's a big part of our visits! What the heck are they thinking of?

 

I totally agree, they are not completely getting rid of the gardens mostly replacing them. The summer flower bed is being replaced by a hardy display but not as big (which is the worst thing they could do in my book).

All I can think of is that they are trying to save costs with high maintenance gardens.

 

or possibly promote more sustainable low water need gardens?

i know thats certainly the trend in australia.

 

I am sad that Chester will not maintain its long tradition of impressive spring and summer bedding displays . Although primarily an animal-lover I do appreciate a good 'Zoological Garden' - the gardens at Bristol and Cotswold WP being favourites of mine . I think Chester might lose out through this move by alienating some of its regular long-term supporters .

 

I've only been to Chester once as it's a 4 hour drive and therefore depsite the fact I love gardens, I didn't really stop to look at them properly as I wanted to concentrate the time I had on the animals. However, from what I've read before visiting, and since, the gardens have always been heavily promoted as an additional attraction and in view of this it seems a shame if they are been downsized, or replaced with less spectacular displays.

Now, as I said, I didn't actually look at them so can't really comment on the aesthetics but I personally don't like the 'traditional style' of regimented bedding displays much beloved of municipal parks and small town roundabouts ..... I don't know if Chester is like this or not ? If they are, then being replaced, for example, by herbaceous perennials instead would not necessarily be a bad thing as planted properly, such a scheme can look stunning and of course, they don't die at the end of the season necessitating removal and replacement - costing both time and money. Perennials would need to be divided every so often, creating new plants for free, and cut back etc, but I still don't think they'd involve as much work as annual bedding.

However ...... if the overall size of the garden is being reduced that's a real shame. Likewise, if flowers are being replaced by shrubs, albeit that you can get some flowering shrubs, it's still not quite the same. I love zoos where you can take a break for lunch or a drink amongst a decent garden. Obviously, a lot of zoos don't have the space to create gardens at all.

 

This is what I believe is happening. It was nice to have a picnic on the lawns provided surround by such an impressive display.

 

Chester had a good mixture of gardens - it was a zoological garden - but there were always flowers everywhere. The area around the Fountain shop was formal bedding, but it too was a good mix, including tall flowers like dahlias and lilies and flowering vines up frames. It was well beyond what you'd see on a village green or even a large town park, and let's face it, it was why the zoo always wins the Britain in bloom competition. You really had to see it, it was quite spectacular.

I agree that a herbaceous border can look lovely, but it's just as much work as annuals to maintain and that's not what the zoo have planted elsewhere. In fact, come to think of it, they used to have a herbaceous border next to where the otters used to be, and that was dug up years ago.

The area behind Islands in Danger used to be flowers too, but it's now a nondescript area of bushes. I'm sure they're really interesting if you're a botanist, but most people just walk past. Likewise what were the rose beds. If the area around the Fountains shop goes the same way then there'll be a lot of disappointed visitors come the spring and the zoo will have to stop boasting about their flowers if they don't have any.

Attached is the ad on the back of the Chester Gardens of Distinction book, summer 2009 to spring 2010.

 

I think I'd be happier if they'd turned the area into an animal enclosure. A long time ago it used to be lions, and their dens were up the Islands in Danger end.

Maybe, save costs but lose how many visitors? Besides, when the zoo was struggling they had vastly more high maintenance gardens than they do now and yet they managed somehow.

The watering angle might be a factor, but they're already using lots of drought resistant plants and we haven't had a water shortage in years. The zoo also uses water in huge quantities in other areas.

Smaller is bad too (hey, it goes from bad to worse), I totally agree with you there. I suppose that means that most people will have to go to the Arara lawn for their picnics... I seem to remember that being called the Rainbow lawn and it too being surrounded by flowers?

 

I shall miss this:

 

You are not the only one, it looks really bare at the moment as they are half way through completing the changes

 

'Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.'
Are formal arrangements of bedding plants and roses going out of fashion? I hope so.
I like trees and shrubs, I like the alpine garden beside the red pandas and the grasses beside the canal. I even like the exotics between Islands in Danger and the flamingoes. I'm not so sure about the Roman garden (but I like the idea) or the Mare's Nest, which has always been a bit of an eyesore. I would hate Chester to reduce the total area of plants, but I'm all in favour of lawns, perennials and shrubs - far more restful, more interesting and more appropriate in the modern era, in my humble opinion.

Alan

 

I have no argument with this, although I don't believe in "fashions" in gardening and nature, but I don't agree, which just means that when we go to the zoo, we enjoy different bits of it. And that's the whole beauty of the thing, I like the flowers - and the grasses at this time of year, the rockery and the Roman garden (which never looks particularly cared for and will be bulldozed too as part of the Oakfield development) - whereas the exotics behind Islands in Danger leave me completely cold.

Surely variety is the key, and a predominance of one thing or the other isn't beneficial, especially when there's a reduction in the planted areas? With the flowers around the Fountain shop there was a good balance for everyone, now, not so much. Well, not at all actually.

Which bit is the Mare's Nest?

 

I don't disagree with you very much, and I certainly want plenty of variety, including lots of flowers, but I won't miss those bedding plants.
The Mare's Nest is the sunken area and pool, opposite the sea lions, with the statue of Noah in the middle.

Alan

 

I'm not a plant expert, but a lot of the bedding this year was much taller than before and not as traditional. I was just looking at this photo from the Bronx Zoo and that's really stuffy, whereas Chester's beds were curved and expressive.

But anyway!

What I want to know now is how it got that name!? The bear pits used to be in that area, and raccoons I think, what's the connection?

I agree with you though, it does look uncared for now and every time I go the waterfalls have been turned off which doesn't help. I'm always tempted to scoop up some of the coins people throw in!

 

Surely changes in planting are all about changing the image? Aren't formal arrangements of annuals and rosebushes just a bit too old school? I think that kind of gardening in a zoo is associated with the old days of 'stamp-collecting' species, riding the elephants and chimpanzee tea parties. I would've thought these new changes are moving towards a new type of zoo- in line with the big immersive exhibits that have the hope of creating a more 'wild' feel.

 

I don't agree, because I can't make the connection between a menagerie-style collection and flowers. Chester was never a menagerie zoo, never had tea parties and the last elephant rides were fifty (or more?) years ago, so I don't think anyone is likely to assume that the presence of rose bushes will equate to bear pits. Bristol is a different kettle of fish, because to put it politely, the layout of the zoo was never really on a par with Chester.

If we were to equate flowers with a stately-home style of gardening, then I don't think there's anything wrong with that either! Since when did a beautiful garden of any type or style become a bad thing?

By-the-way, my friend visited today and I think I've persuaded him to join Zoo Chat, so we should have some photos soon.

 

Just to put an end to the speculation about what is mainly being planted around the Fountain Lawns, the answer is... nothing, so you're out of luck if you like flowers or bushes.

In a nutshell, many of the stone edges have been removed, the large exotic trees dug up, some of the paths have been removed (mainly at the northern end) and the majority of planting areas grassed over. A few beds remain; both circular beds and the ones in front of the shop. The area around the fountain itself still has its summer bedding. It remains to be seen if any of these will be kept as the zoo are currently busy turfing a few areas, including where the otters used to be, so they may not be finished yet.

I have uploaded a bunch of images into the Chester Zoo gallery. Here are a couple, sorry if they break the page as the embed function doesn't seem to be working.





I'll be surprised if anyone thinks that's an improvement, unless you fancy a game of football!

Thanks Jal, I'll remember that.

 

As I said before, I do (and I don't want a game of football, or crazy golf, in the zoo thank you).
I always thought of Bristol as the zoo with too much space devoted to lawns, in such a small total area. I am glad they are being used more now. I think the older part of Chester will look good with extended lawns, although I will miss the old Oakfield aviaries in particular.
By the way, the name Mare's Nest probably came about because it's a pretty useless space. No animals have been kept there since I have been visiting the zoo. The old bear enclosures were a little further along, you can still see some remnants in the shrubbery opposite the snowy owls; the smaller mammals were opposite, where now there is planting against the stone wall of the walkway around the Europe aviary (previously polar bear enclosure). I think I remember porcupines rather raccoons there, but I may be wrong.

Alan

 

There Is A New Type Of Gardening Now A Days, Gardening That Suits The Young, Teenagers Do Not Want To See Flowers, They Want To See Something Exotic And Educational, Anyway, Chester Zoo Is Amazing, ]

So Dont Diss Lol