Mammal wise I think it was agouti was last species to join, when I volunteered there keepers wanted a canine species but funding was a big problem
I personally don't find this a defence for having small enclosures. I personally feel whilst some of the enclosures may have been acceptable in the past, that you certainly wouldn't build exhibits to that standard now, and therefore if you were unable to maintain exhibits to reach modern day standards, than the animals should be moved to collections that can, and the exhibits should hold more suitable animals. They in my opinion spent a lot of money developing the exhibit for Flamingo's which realistically was not a primary concern. I can't be the only one who looks at the Sea Lion Pool and thinks that it's not much bigger than a paddling pool. The Snow Leopard changes are a welcome improvement, but the fact it's taken 9/10 years doesn't inspire confidence that other smaller enclosures will get improvements anytime soon.
Can I just ask - and I want to stress that I'm not meaning this to be an attack on you personally or on your positions on animal welfare - but why is the above indefensible and yet you are in almost the same breath defending WAMS for their (from photos) atrociously small and plain caging?
Hi, you are entitled to this comment and I will gladly answer. The WAMS are not all cages, and the majority of animals there have indoor and outdoor access, they also are preventing animals from being PTS and therefore looking after them, if animals were looked after better in mainly foreign establishments then their would not even need to be places like WAMS. However Welsh Mountain Zoo is not a sanctuary and many of their animals are actively breeding. They also take in fundraising and sponsorship and at the end of the day they are a zoo. The majority of their animals will be on a stud book and therefore could be placed within other collections. If I go to a sanctuary I appreciate that the animals there are well cared for and prevented from death. However when I go to a Zoo or Wildlife Park I would not expect to see animals held in small exhibits, which may have once been acceptable they certainly wouldn't be now.
But why is it relevant whether one is a "zoo" and the other a "sanctuary"? You literally just said earlier about the Welsh Mountain Zoo that "you certainly wouldn't build exhibits to that standard now, and therefore if you were unable to maintain exhibits to reach modern day standards, than the animals should be moved to collections that can, and the exhibits should hold more suitable animals" - why is it okay to make excuses for a "sanctuary" to build the cages of the sort that WAMS possesses and house animals in them but those same cages in a "zoo" would not be excusable? Regardless of whether the visitor gets warm-fuzzies, the animal is still stuck in the same tiny space. I find it a very strange double-standard. (Also, again curious over this because you said it in one of the other threads too, what is the "WAMS have indoor and outdoor access for their animal enclosures" all about? That is standard for almost any animal enclosure.)
Those images posted about WAMS are actually misleading. The animals are far from in cramp tight cages. There are a couple of smaller exhibits which house smaller primates but I'm not going to get into an argument about it. There is a difference in my opinion, because the animals that end up at WAMS, it's a last chance for them, it's either they help them or they get PTS. WAMS do not build cages, the latest build was a Gibbon enclosure which is rather big and is really really nice. What someone has labelled as European Wolf exhibit is factually wrong, they are not European Wolves, and the enclosure they are in are as big as you would find at any large kennels / rescue centre ie Battersea. They are not Wolves, so no they don't need a woodland and loads of things, they have a good run, with toys and shelters and indoor area. They also get taken for walks by the keepers, as do the other dogs there. Have you been to Wams ? Have you seen their enclosures, and have you seen their animals ? If not , how can you call them cages and so on.
No I have never been there - I specifically said before that I was commenting on the photos of the place. But the reason I call them cages is because they are cages. I have no axe to grind against WAMS in particular, I just don't understand why two identical cages (in a hypothetical situation) would be treated differently by the same person according to whether the place that builds it calls itself a "sanctuary" or a "zoo".
I think maybe you might want to see what goes on into building an exhibit, moving an animal/species in or out and why things can’t just be done over night and do take time to build rather than commenting! Reading this from an outside point of view, you are probably one of the most negative people on this forum and maybe if you ever worked in it around a zoo, you’d know not to be so critical!!!
I’m far from a negative person ! I was the person defending the enclosures at WAMS , it was the other poster calling them cages. I merely pointed out they are no different to half the UK zoos primate enclosures I have praised many many zoos for enclosure design and exhibits but at WMZ there is very little to praise and it’s outdated .
I think the first sentence here demonstrates precisely why there seems to be an insurmountable gulf between yourself and others on this point, as it shows that you view the term "cage" as automatically negative. The gibbon exhibit at WAMS is certainly one of the better ones at the collection judging by photographs, but it IS a cage. As you note, it isn't all that dissimilar to other primate exhibits in the UK either.... but this is precisely because it is one of the better ones at the collection. It would be entirely untrue to say the mandrill exhibit, for instance, is the same standard as 50% of other such exhibits. This said, the old gibbon exhibit at WMZ truly is terrible.
The Mandrill enclosure/cage looks adequately floored and furnished etc but it is extremely small for one of this species. Does anyone know where the male Mandrill(is it Titch?) came from?
I wouldn't disagree that the WMZ gibbon cage is poor, but from what I've seen from photos , the majority of WAMS 'exhibits' are worse!
They've had bears for longer than that. I went on a couple of school trips there back in the '80s, and they had them then. Back then, they were in one of those very old-fashioned bear pits.
Visited last week & heard from a keeper that a couple of male chimps are due to leave the collection in around a week's time. They also mentioned that they were hoping to start breeding the chimps again to improve group dynamics & fingers are crossed for one individual that looks to be pregnant but this is only an observation from the keeper
Don't think this has been picked up on yet, can't see any ref on this thread but found a tv program the other night, Rhod Gilbert's, work experience series 3 episode 2 It's on the channel Dave but I found it on sky's on demand don't know where else you can get it It's all based around the Welsh mountain zoo as the comedian tries to be a keeper worth half an hours watching
I recently visited the WMZ I was very saddened that little hadn't changed in 25 years since my last visit. On the positive side! The bears were no longer in pits but the enclosure looked rather dated. The Gibbon enclosure again looked as if it needed work. The tropical house still had bubble wrap as a roof- how do the animals survive a Welsh winter? I was concerned a family of Agouti were in with the condors! The signage and direction signs were very confusing! However the views and woodland was magnificent! Funding is clearly an issue throughout the Zoo. The new. Lemur and Himalayas area have been done on a low budget however the new wallaby house and enclosure were much better! Considering it is the National Zoo of Wales I felt it should have been much better and moved with the times? It is over an hour away from Chester Zoo and has a good catchment area and tourists coming to this area?
