To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
It’s all very well burying heads in the sand, but that doesn’t help anyone the
Share this:
From Jamie Barker.
JUDGING by the reaction to my letter (JEP, 21 January) it seems I was incorrect in my suggestion that the Zoo – sorry, the Wildlife Conservation Trust – was an expensive and boring place to visit.
That would explain why it’s doing so well. That was sarcasm. It’s not doing well, because it’s an expensive and boring place to visit, in many people’s eyes at any rate.
As I said, we are all very proud of Durrell and the fantastic work it does, but the fact is, and try as you might, you can’t ‘guilt’ people into going somewhere they don’t want to go.
That’s why the, ‘shame people only visit when it’s free’ spiel won’t work. I mean, that’s the reverse psychology you use on children to get them to eat horrible food.
It’s not about money. It’s about a visitor attraction without enough visitors or attractions, or perhaps they don’t want visitors any more so they can concentrate on conservation?
Don’t get me wrong, it’s wonderful that some people, like some angrier readers, seem to love visiting the place as it is, but the fact is there are more who don’t. And it’s all very well burying your head in the sand like one of those big bird things and saying the problem is with the people too mean to pay to visit. How does that help anybody?
You can’t blame people who don’t want to visit your establishment for the lack of visitors. Better, surely, to ask why do we not want to visit the place, even though we’re all rolling in money and at a loss for things to do at the weekend? I’ll give you a clue – we’re not visiting Durrell because it’s so very awesome and wonderful value for money, and it’s not because we want to see animals become extinct.
I love all animals (except for our cat) and, again, we’re proud of what they do, but why can’t we call it a zoo any more? Short for zoological park? Because they rebranded it? We would all love to visit it more, which in turn would help save endangered species and, like it or not, the best way to get us there is with awesome animals such as hippos or chimps, not with those things that are basically just horses.
To end on a positive note, I must just ‘big up’ the meerkats. Those little guys are totally awesome, they’re a step in the right direction. A few more exciting animals like that and I’ll be ripping the gates off the place to get in.
Related