South Lakes Wild Animal Park South Lakes to Close to the Public

Other mods are in agreement on this.

 

I shall refrain and keep the harmony of the topic

 

I see on the zoo's Facebook page they are putting a plan together to place all the animals hopefully within 6months!

 

Two statements on the future of SLWAP:

 

Exchange on Facebook further clarifying matters:

 

how can the management team close the zoo,surely that is a decision for the owner.as for meeting with the council gill and his team fail to do this even when invited,at the last planning meeting no representative from the zoo attended, there appears to be only one agenda and that is that everything must be done his way or he creates a media storm,facebook has been a godsend to this guy

 

Facebook page has been taken down today. Don't understand why the management would want to make their staff and themselves redundant?

Plus there are loans in place to find the new extension.

 

Indeed, the Facebook page of the safari zoo is down: "Sorry, this content isn't available right now. The link you followed may have expired, or the page may only be visible to an audience you're not in." It is noted that the Facebook page came back on and is now up again.

Dave Gill has said that the zoo is to close but the zoo staff are telling the public otherwise; see Do NOT close Dalton Zoo https://www.facebook.com/savedaltonzoo/?fref=ts &

 

Surprise surprise The facebook page is back online again...

 

The safari zoo facebook page ie Dave Gill has posted the following:

Is Dave Gill/safari zoo referring to Pro. Anna Meredith? If he/they are then sadly he/they are wide off the mark and misinformed. Anna is a great vet and has bags of experience, have helped her many times with many exotic animals from Asiatic Black bears to southern white rhino, cheetah and tigers. There are many others who will also say the same as he is widely experienced and looked upon.

Personal Chair: Anna Meredith | The University of Edinburgh

 

If Gill wants to retire and play no further part in the zoo's management then surely what he needs to do is transfer ownership to a Trust?

 

That's why I said "transfer ownership to a trust".

He would then be free to walk away, enjoy his retirement, save mankind and all the other things he says he wants to do.

He says he wants to do.

 

There is clearly no future for the zoo whilst Gill and the council carry on their feud. I think too much water has passed under the bridge for the two sides to mend it now. The only way forward, in saving the zoo, would be if Gill left and the remaining staff manage to repair the situation with the council. I think Gill`s position at the zoo has become largely untenable.
For him to casually close the zoo and claim that he can re-house the animals within six months indicates his total lack of commitment to the zoo, it`s animals and it`s staff. It is a great shame that others have to suffer from the actions of one idiot.

 

This was my thought too, and with the closure of RSCC it seams that private zoos can be run on the whim of the owner, I know others are doing well Colchester for example, and if the owner maybe can't have it all his own way or in the case of RSCC seams to loose interest, every thing goes out with the bath water.

I don't know the inns and outs, of this zoo, having only visited twice, but looking at photos of packed walkways that are claimed to be unsafe and part of his troubles I for one would rather fix them than have to pay £££'s in compensation if they gave way and injured a lot of people. probably out of my own pocket as my insurance company would no doubt wash their hands with me for failing to keep the structures sound.

I also wonder how feasible it could be to suddenly but a lot of animals in to the limited space of the zoo world?

 

It is feasible to disperse animals from a zoo, many have done it before and with the exceptions of those animal stock deemed to sick to move, then there is a very good success rate. Although it is heart breaking doing it, letting go the animals that you have cared for is a very upsetting time. found it very difficult and I am sure others have also found it so.

Dave Gill has not had a Zoo Closure ordered upon him, even if he did, he has to comply with the Zoo Licence Act 1981 [https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa..._data/file/69595/zoo-licensing-act-guide.pdf] Dave Gill has been served with a Section (19A) of the Act or Section 30 of the document, in relation to making good the reports findings however,there is no zoo closure order mentioned or put in place. Section 18 of the Act mentions the due regard of Appeal, thus far Dave Gill has not made any attempt of an Appeal, albeit with his verbal rants posted on the safari zoos Facebook page and his own page. There has been no Section 16 of the Act ordered upon the zoo therefore Dave Gill has either erred on fact or, he is playing the sympathy card vote in order to make out that he is the greater victim. However, by doing so, he is alienating not just the public but also the zoo park staff and the rest of the UK zoo community. The crying of "poor me, look at me, I am the victim here" may work for some and may work for children, but not here.

The easy answer and reply to all of this is to comply with the order, fix the problems as stated within the report. We must remember hat Dave Gill has a huge habit of not complying, of shouting out and for his tantrums as well as noting that every time the council, be it here in the UK or elsewhere such as in Australia, he has always made a mountain out of a molehill and spat his dummy out.

With the court case looming for Dave Gill, with a high probability of being found guilty, the current childish rants and blame game, could be seen at an attempt to divert attention away from him or, to give ammunition for his court case. Either way, the public grow tired as do the zoo community of his behaviour. It is very odd and virtually unseen for an employer and such being in the zoo community in the UK, to act and behave in such a manner and doing o by using social media. There are employers who do use social media for many reasons and some have been known to use the forum to fire staff and lay bold claims, but this is a new thing, by that I mean that the internet and social media is new as compared to more traditional methods. Dave Gill has stated he is to "retire" from his zoo, and I use the term "his zoo". Previously he has jumped up and down and lay claim to passing the reins onto others, to that of giving up his directorship. Remember, this is his park, he owns it as does his wife, who also sits as a director and as chief vet. Gill is a power hungry and power driven person who enjoys control. It is very unlikely he will run away from his beloved zoo, which also sits on prime ground, planning permission and stock. We have not heard the end of Dave Gill yet...

 

I'm sure that the RSCC closed not because of interest from the owner, remember he still keeps animals privately but because of the amount of money the place was loosing, it wasn't viable to keep building and putting money into a project that wasn't making enough back.

SL does seem to follow your thoughts though, as a place that has hundreds of thousands of visitors a year I imagine they are at least breaking even ! So this seems exactly like an owner becoming bored and loosing interest in a place that keeps having council problem after council problem.

 

Without studying media reports and press cuttings from over the years it would seem that the council problems are caused in house by an attitude of the park knows best and an inherant philosophy not to comply with what they are basically being asked to do...... dont think they are being asked to do anything more than any other animal park is asked to from their local authorityl
It's all on the parks terms and if it is forced to do it then it implodes into spoilt brat mode, plays the victim and cries for attention from its followers.

I remember the council took a pasting and a heavy fine when the rhino escaped and even back then it was a case of "well the council didnt tell me i was doing wrong" from the park and its probably back from then where the distrust started from the councils point of view... to be honest, its all rather tedious isn't it ??

If another zoo in the northwest can build what is in effect another zoo as an extension inside its ground s and comply to what it is asked to do, then why is it so much trouble for this place to move a large pile of s**t effectively ??