Wales Ape & Monkey Sanctuary WAMS and Bili the Bonobo

They receive no government funding - I'm not entirely sure if this is because they don't qualify or it is just not available. I think it is the latter. Commercial / individual sponsoriship / donations etc are oviously still available if they can obtain them. Interesting to see Sainsbury are noted under the 'Gifts in Kind' section for donating food.

I don't think an average staff salary of £13,750 is at all unreasonable - and it seems very unlikely that you would be able to run the place with volunteers alone. To be fair - I think the sentiment behind the comment "every penny in goes to feed the animals" is more to say that it goes towards animal welfare (correct me if I am wrong @Zooreviewsuk)... which would include paying those taking care of the animals in my book. I think I've made my feeling about WAMS pretty clear on this thread - but I can't criticise them for paying themselves or their staff. We all have bills to pay after all!

 

Of course, on the day of my visit, 18 months ago, both of the chimps were outside....

 

I wonder if they'll be out when I visit

 

I personally messaged 5 other sanctuaries in England and Scotland to ask if they received government funding. The only reply so far said they are not entitled, which I imagine is the same across the board. WAMS stating it across their media and in interviews over the years almost makes it sound to me as if they are an isolated case. Maybe they are jsut making the point on behalf of all the sanctuaries, that they believe they are ethically superior to.

I knew someone would be more reasonable than me. I'm sure that the owners take a higher wage than the tea lady though

 

I would expect so... that's why I said 'average salary'...

 

which is why I included the
Although I can't remember which facebook account it was on, WAMS or their owner Jan did make a point of highlighting Wuppertal's salaries to further enrage their followers, so I thought i'd have a little dig of my own.

 

Do any sanctuaries receive government funding? I very much doubt it.

In which case suggesting that WAMS misses out by being in Wales is nonsense.

 

Whitby Wildlife Sanctuary
Yes we are able to apply for grants. We do not get lottery or government funding here. We have only ever received one grant of £1000 to be used for seabirds. We bought a seabird pool with the money. Grant was awarded by Sea-Changers

Isle of Wight Donkey Sanctuary
We are allowed to apply only for those grants for which animal charities can apply -and they are few and far between . Most government grants are distributed through the National Lottery and animal charities generally cannot apply for that money. There are some charitable trusts that support animal charities and we do make applications to those ,as well as making applications for small local grants for some of the work we do ( for example the training of volunteers , or our work with schools )

 

I'm not gonna comment anymore on this thread, but I do find it terribly sad that in what I would like to think is a group of animal lovers, that people appear to have vendetta's against a place which prevents death to animals.
I find that terribly sad.
The constant digs at the sanctuary, which openly admit their struggles and only want what's best for animal welfare is quite upsetting.

 

Quite a naive way of looking at it, but I for one will not be 'digging' anymore, after this one. Personally, seeing as the owner is an anti zoo 'activist' I don't think their poor establishment with a zoological licence and a superior attitude to other sanctuaries should be featured on this forum.

 

I agree. WAMS clearly has its faults but I can't hate a place that takes in unwanted animals and allows them to live!

And I disagree with this. Fair enough if you don't like the place, but if people want to talk about it here then they should be able to. David Gill used to slate other zoos and safari parks and South Lakes was the slum of the UK zoo scene but it was still discussed on here - and rightly so.

I do find that sometimes there is a difference between animal lovers and zoo enthusiasts, and I would place myself more in the former category.

 

Your reference to Davis Gill is an odd one as you'd struggle to find a positive word on this site in his favour.
As for WAMS there are two arguments being made, one is against their anti zoo rhetoric which should come as no surprise on a pro-zoo forum and second is the questioning of the animal welfare standards at the sanctuary. This too should come as no surprise because we zoo enthusiasts are concerned about animal welfare and seeing primates in unsuitable enclosures is upsetting.
There is the question of how these animals became homeless, I don't know their history but I don't think zoos should be euthanizing animals just because they no longer want them, even so, that doesn't put WAMS beyond criticism.

 

I'm not suggesting they not be talked about, but asking should they have a position in the drop down list of "zoos" which they do not want to be associated with.

 

I have no "vendetta" against WAMS. But, on the evidence of photos of some of their housing, I find it very difficult to think that any lone Bonobo would be better off there than at e.g. Wuppertal.

I also believe that, in some circumstances, euthanasia is preferable to being housed in certain conditions. (Whether WAMS falls into that category I have no way of knowing.)

One person's "constant digs" are another person's "valid questioning/criticism". It's easy to say that WAMS "only want what's best for animal welfare" but others might disagree.

 

WAMS have posted a kind of review of their stand for Bili. As well as the usual "we are not state funded, our animals are not exhibits, we are not a zoo" they have admitted really that a meeting was not pre-arranged with the zoo with a view to taking Bili away, when they turned up with 2 vans in February. They even refer to the euthanasia claim as being a possible mis-translation.
A friend of mine wanted to compile a report on this himself, as he and myself feel that WAMS have completely overstepped the mark here. Their libel claims, accusation of "dirty tricks" when the Zoo Wuppertal director did not appear at a meeting he didn't actually agree to, complete misunderstanding and ignorance of zoo organisations (EAZA, EEP, and WAZA) and encouraging personal abuse of the zoo director shouldn't just be accepted, but are they really worth the time? They seem to think that joining the Great Ape Project gives them power to do what they want.

>>>> News <<<<

 

Interesting article - I thought it seemed pretty reasonable. And I thought you weren't going to keep discussing this topic?

 

I said I wasn't going to keep making digs. Consider this an update?

 

It read like a dig to me personally.

I thought their update was fair. They may not be the best place to take the animal in question, but they are at least making themselves available. I dread to think what the anti zoo world will go like should the animal be attacked and killed at his current home, which is a concern to many. The anti's would have a field day if this happened, given the offers that have been made to the zoo, by a sanctuary.

 

Not at all. Regardless, it's just a 'news' item on an interesting subject. We obviously view it differently.