I feel like when you consider the big ABC collection Vienna has with only 6 more acres than London, or what Bristol Zoo is able to accomplish with only a third of the space London has, it seems like the problem isn’t London Zoo not having enough space it’s a matter of how they’ve mismanaged what they have.
[QUOTE="Kifaru Bwana, It seems pretty soon something has gotta give at ZSL - London Regent's Park location. I am personally still of the opinion that it is / would be imperative to expand the current footprint of the London site into the park (which would require Royal intervention).[/QUOTE] I had read some years ago that London zoo do own 2-3 acres more land within regents park but never heard of why they never expanded into it!
I've thought a lot about whether to post this or not, particularly as I am no longer especially active on here but seeing lots of criticisms and people considering resigning their fellowship I thought I would share my recent experience. I am no longer a Fellow of ZSL. Just over a year ago, after a decade of supporting them as a member and then a Fellow, the time came around for me to renew. At the time my housing situation was somewhat precarious and I couldn't risk paying the (not insignificant) Fellowship fee at that time. I had to save every penny I could as I didn't know if I would have to move at short notice. If so I would need money for a deposit, removal costs, fees and rent which can add up to a huge amount in London. I contacted them explaining my situation and asking if I could pay in installments. I was told no, completely impossible. I reminded them that I had been a supporter for some time and had every intention to increase my support in the future when I would hopefully be in better circumstances. I was basically told computer says no. I felt completely rejected and that my previous support was not valued and they lost me forever at that point. I don't visit the ZSL zoos anymore and although my circumstances are somewhat more secure and I could now pay, I won't because I feel alienated. Perhaps I am cutting my nose to spite my face but that experience really impacted my relationship with ZSL and this isn't helped by the fact that I'm not very impressed with their recent developments - although I was often supportive of them on this site.
I think it's becoming increasingly, abundantly clear to those of us associated with ZSL (whether it be regular visitors,members, Fellows etc) that ZSL is sleepwalking into a crisis of it's own making. Where was the long-term vision for the Aquarium and Mappins? Was there ever one? The Council (perhaps the whole operation!) needs a root-and-branch makeover to oversee the future development of both sites and the Living Collections. If not, I truly fear for the future of both London and Whipsnade. In this age of multi-platform/social media, ZSL cannot simply trade on it's brand anymore. Both sites are falling behind the competitors, and fast! There's absolutely nothing at the moment that would make me want to visit either site. The departure of the anteaters merely strengthens that.
Those that currently operate ZSL should have the good of the two zoos at heart, not just think having “Zoological Society of London” looks good on their CV.
For several years myself and a small group of zoochat members have regularly criticised and questioned decisions made by ZSL. Whilst I find it ironic, it is also rather sad that potentially ZSL could be heading for problems, when those who have defended ZSL in the past arguments now seem to have seen the light and are also becoming equally disillusioned!
I'm as disappointed as anyone about the aquarium, but what else could the zoo have done? Serious question. It's easy to grumble vaguely about plans and problems. The truth is: until the critics offer a credible way of raising the tens of millions of £££s needed to restore the Mappins/Aquarium, what is there to listen to? Particularly as said critics tend to balk at the cost of every major exhibit that is built. *At recent events at London Zoo and the Institute of Zoology, I found their staff unfailingly accommodating. I'm sorry @Shirokuma had a bad experience.
Only part of my arguement! The other being the complete shambles that is the Aquarium and ex bear enclosures on top. Empty and an eyesore and certainly not Well cared for "cultural heritage"!
Perhaps I should’ve chosen my words more carefully, however the fact remains that the zoo could have handled the PR with the Aquarium a lot better-some of us only found out it was closing through these forums! Surely it doesn’t take much for HR to email a concise explanation to ZSL supporters? It the least we’re owed after years of supporting the Society. And don’t get me wrong, there’s plenty of staff at both sites that I know go above and beyond what they’re employed to do, but there are also some very bad eggs.
I'm afraid this is why people interested in the zoos become increasingly frustrated.. ZSL are far more interested in their scientific events and conservation efforts (fine for some people , I accept that and conservation is obviously important ) but this not OK for many of us who are more interested in the zoos they care about . Questions on the zoos were not welcome at the AGM , which was probably the reason for moving it to December We all have our own agenda I guess but I suspect ZSL is failing far more members and Fellows than it is encouraging to support it. I understand your position on this and am not suggesting that you are necessarily wrong, but I know many Fellows share my viewpoint too
I’d concur definitely, that’s what I’d call the mismanagement of the space available to them. Really I only jumped in because for a while I often felt like London’s problems would be fixed if they had a bigger chunk of Regent’s Park to work with, but in the grand scheme of things I don't think it really is THAT small as far as urban zoos go. Even if the zoos footprint was to gain another 10 or so acres I don't know how far I'd trust ZSL to make good use of it given the seemingly limitless space they have to work with at Whipsnade being left fallow. That's a good point of course, I'm certainly an armchair critic and I don't have an easy solution to the current aquarium situation. I'm glad that's not my job. What I do have are a lot of questions about what money was being spent where to allow the aquarium to fall into such a state of disrepair that only a cash injection of tens of millions could hope to restore it.
They are and it seems historically to have always been this way...the animal collections are almost regarded as an afterthought. This imbalance is also reflected in their annual reports, the zoos warrant just a page or so, usually at the end. Whereas in every other zoo in the country, it is the other way around.
No the Zoological Society of London do not own any land in Regent's Park. The London Zoo site is leased; it is not owned by the ZSL.
I know not many on here will be interested in the zoo gaining a new bird curator but I for one will be watching with interest.
New curator of birds? How long have they been without one? Plenty of work needed with the birds!! Any news of any "new" enclosures?
Can you explain what you mean here? The Mappin is Listed. It is in a poor condition, but so are many Listed Buildings. The prime responsibility lies with ZSL; they have the land on long lease and they built the thing. The local authority has limited powers and limited funding. Who do you feel should be taking the matter "forward in a positive fashion"? And in what way? And what do you mean by "forced privatisation"? This is not meant as a criticism. Just trying to understand what you're suggesting. I visited RP for the first time in years a few months ago. Very disappointed, and the area around the Mappin is just terrible.
Most of these are not difficult to source either. Just seems to be a total lack of interest trom management/ curators
