This should prove controversial! Thoughts on what makes a good guidebook; what makes good labelling. My two all-time favourite guidebooks are: Regents Park c.1964 - more of a text book than a guidebook but taught me an awful lot about the principles of taxonomy, which is a good starting point for any understanding of the natural world. Edinburgh c.late 80s (I think) - combined descriptions of species (and the threats they faced) accompanied by outlines of how they were managed at Edinburgh. A good combination of species description together with what you would see on the day. What don't I like? The guidebook which is basically "some colour photos of some ABC animals we may - or may not - have, captioned with Name; Scientific Name; Diet; Number of young; Gestation" or similar. Has anybody ever been inspired to a lifetime interest by a childhood discovery that the gestation length of species A is 76 days, but only 64 days for species B? Thought not ... I'll turn to labelling in a separate post.
P.S. I also had a fondness for the old Chester arrangement of a traditional guidebook allied to a monthly Zoo News containing ... news ... and a couple of feature articles.
I just want a good guide book from Chester! I only have the Cotswold and Whipsnade guide books so something along the lines of them would be nice but I think Cotswold's book with it's talk about the history of the zoo mixed with a more modern style could work greatly for Chester!
