Why did Bristol Zoological Society recently declare a financial crisis?
Bristol Zoological Society recently declared a financial crisis and announced redundancies, attributing these issues to £300,000 in legal costs incurred while defending its housing plans for Bristol Zoo Gardens in a Judicial Review case. However, when looking at the numbers taken from the zoo’s own accounts, £300,000 is less than 10% of what the charity spent on governance between 2019 and 2022, (£3.252 million) and just 2.38% of what was spent on governance and Capex between 2019 and 2022 (£12.589 million). Therefore, the claim that £300,000 has precipitated a financial crisis and many staff redundancies for the Society does not stand up to serious scrutiny. When will the Society stop blaming other people for its problems and start taking responsibility for its own actions?
Bristol Zoo Gardens closed over 3 years ago; why should I still care?
Many people saw Bristol Zoological Gardens as our city’s crown jewels. Those crown jewels are currently in the process of being sold to the highest bidder to become a private housing estate. The closure of Bristol Zoo Gardens should matter to you because something completely unique and irreplaceable that gave so much to so many for so long has been taken away from all of us and contrary to what you might believe, it still isn’t too late to get a reimagined Bristol Zoo Gardens back, for all of us.
Bristol’s Crown Jewels for almost two centuries
Why do you want a reimagined Bristol Zoo Gardens to reopen?
Bristol Zoological Gardens is unique. The hallowed ground of its walled gardens provided a sanctuary for the people of Bristol for almost two centuries. Bristol Zoo Gardens did not need to close. There is no objective truth, nor ever was there, that Bristol Zoo Gardens needed to close its doors to the public after being open for 186 years, surviving two World Wars and welcoming over 90 million visitors in its remarkable history as the world’s 5th oldest Zoo.
Bristol Zoological Society has lost almost half a million annual visitors since it closed Bristol Zoo Gardens in 2022. There is no evidence to suggest most of those visitors will ever return and the evidence suggests that this is the real reason the Society is in what it recently described as a "crisis." Fewer visitors means less public engagement and education. Fewer visitors also means fewer resources which ultimately will result in less money for conservation. Reopening Bristol Zoo Gardens alongside Bristol Zoo Project is a pathway out of the Society's self-declared "crisis." The two attractions were always mutually complementary, not mutually exclusive. Reverting to a two-site strategy would lead to higher visitor numbers and consequently, more income. This in turn means more public engagement and education and more money to spend on global conservation projects.
The hallowed ground of Bristol Zoo’s walled gardens provided a sanctuary for the people of Bristol for almost two centuries.
Why do you care so much about this?
Bristol Zoological Gardens was and still is, hallowed ground in this city; a walled garden and sanctuary that has contributed positively to so many peoples’ mental health and wellbeing over the past two centuries. There is an intangible magic that you feel when you move around the gardens; almost 200 years of the natural world, history and collective memories contained within a 12-acre site in the heart of a city. Spaces in the city which give diverse groups of people of all ages from different backgrounds and cultures a reason to be in the same place at the same time are few and far between, but Bristol Zoo Gardens was one of very few that existed in Bristol and since its closure in 2022, we have all lost out. Once it is sold off to a private developer to be turned into housing, it is gone forever and not coming back. Would we accept Clifton Suspension Bridge being permanently closed and sold off the back of one KPMG report during a global pandemic? What would posses anyone - let alone Bristol Zoological Society itself - to destroy the world’s 5th oldest zoo, a walled botanical Zoological Garden in the middle of Bristol with an internationally renowned reputation for conservation to become a private housing estate, and then use the money to build everything it already has again from scratch at Cribbs Causeway, centring around a new gorilla enclosure and a new café?
Ultimately though, this is about injustice. Bristol Zoo Gardens didn’t need to close. Under new leadership, a reimagined Bristol Zoo Gardens can reopen.
Laura Robertson's picture perfectly illustrates how Bristol Zoo Gardens is literally, part of the city.
Isn’t it too late to save Bristol Zoo Gardens - hasn't it been sold?
The short answer is no, Bristol Zoo Gardens has not yet been sold, but time is runing out and fast. Bristol Zoo Gardens is frozen in time; it still exists behind closed doors. Until the money has changed hands and the keys have been handed over to a developer, it is not too late to save Bristol Zoo Gardens and get our zoo back.
Bristol Zoological Society says its private housing development will increase biodiversity on its historic site, despite the plans requiring the felling of 150 trees as well as many other plants.
Didn’t Bristol Zoo Gardens close because it was losing money?
Financial failing was given as a reason for the closure of Bristol Zoo Gardens, with Bristol Zoological Society claiming in 2020 that it made an operating loss in four of the last six years prior to closure. According to the Society's own accounts, these figures exclude voluntary income and donations as well as investment and rental income. When these figures are included, the accounts show an operating loss in only one of the previous nine years. In 2019, Bristol Zoological Society's own accounts declared an "increase in profitability of £2.5m" The accounts from the past few years also reveal an astonishing 864% increase in spending on ‘governance’ in the three years under the new leadership, from £110,000 in 2018 to £1.06 million in 2021. BZS accounts also show that the Wild Place Project/Bristol Zoo Project on its own terms, has never been profitable. See Section 4 of The Report.
In 2019, Bristol Zoological Society's own accounts declared an increase in profitability of £2.5m.
Weren’t visitor numbers at Bristol Zoo Gardens declining?
Declining visitor numbers are regularly cited as a reason for closure. However, pre-closure, visitor numbers at Bristol Zoo Gardens were very healthy, above half a million visitors every year until Covid. In 2019, Bristol Zoological Society attracted 829,965 visitors across its two sites, making it one of the most popular zoological attractions in the UK. 512,934 of these visits took place at Bristol Zoo Gardens and 317,031 at Wild Place Project. Bristol Zoo Gardens alone, was consistently ranked among the Top 10 most visited zoos in the UK each year up until its closure. Bristol Zoo Gardens compared very favourably to London and Dublin Zoos when looking at ‘visits per resident’ in each of the three cities. See Section 5 of The Report.
Bristol Zoo Garden’s visitor numbers were strong and stable from 2005 all the way up until the pandemic.
Didn’t Covid force Bristol Zoo Gardens to close?
Covid has also been given as a reason for closure of Bristol Zoo Gardens, with Bristol Zoological Society claiming in 2020 that “the impact of Covid-19 has caused us to radically rethink our plans about the future.” However, what was not mentioned was that Bristol Zoological Society benefited from a business interruption insurance pay-out of £2.5m to compensate it for its Covid-19 related losses, which almost no other zoo in the country received. Did any other major charitable conservation zoo in the UK close following Covid? No. Did Covid have an impact on Bristol Zoo Gardens? Yes. Was it enough of an impact to cause it to close after being open for almost 200 years having survived two World Wars and welcomed over 90 million visitors in its remarkable history as the world’s 5th oldest zoo? No.
Bristol Zoological Society benefited from a business interruption insurance pay-out of £2.5m to compensate it for its Covid-19 related losses.
Weren’t the enclosures at Bristol Zoo Gardens too small?
Improved animal welfare has been cited as a reason to move animals from Clifton to Cribbs Causeway. In reality, almost all of Bristol Zoo Garden’s animals moved to other zoos very similar to Bristol Zoo Gardens, whether that be Exmoor Zoo, Jersey Zoo, Cotswold Wildlife Park or Flamingo Land amongst many others. Only two mammals have made the trip directly from Bristol Zoo Gardens to Bristol Zoo Project - the blue-eyed black lemurs and very recently, the gorillas. However, the relative size of the enclosures at Cribbs Causeway - blue-eyed black lemurs, meerkats and red pandas for example - are very similar in size to those at Bristol Zoo Gardens. In fact, Bristol Zoo Garden's Inspection Report carried out by DEFRA in 2018 and obtained by a Freedom of Information request, gave a glowing review of BZG. See Section 2 of The Report.
Some people object to any type of zoo and they are entirely entitled to hold that point of view. However, if you like and value zoos and the conservation and education work that they do, then it’s fair to say that Bristol Zoo Gardens was one of the very best. Yes, it was on a Victorian site but the actual enclosures and infrastructure were good. Bristol Zoo Gardens consistently did very well in DEFRA and EAZA inspections and the space provision was comparable to many other respected zoos across the UK.
Bristol Zoo Gardens always did very well in its zoo inspections.
Isn’t Bristol Zoo Project (formerly Wild Place Project) much bigger than Bristol Zoo Gardens?
Bristol Zoological Society rarely misses an opportunity to talk about its "136-acre site" at Cribbs Causeway. The Society repeatedly uses this figure to justify the move from Clifton to South Gloucestershire. However, once you have excluded all restrictions, car parking, existing exhibits, back of house and staff areas, approximately 25 acres of useable space remains to build actual animal exhibits. That is 110 acres smaller than the 136-acre figure used by BZS at every available opportunity.
In addition to this, despite constantly using the “136 acre” phrase to justify selling Bristol Zoo Gardens and moving to the larger Cribbs Causeway site, according to publicly available documents, since 2019, Bristol Zoological Society has been planning to sell 41 acres of its Cribbs Causeway site for a housing development. See Section 11 of The Report.
Bristol Zoological Society has been planning to sell off 41 acres of its Cribbs Causeway site off for a housing development since 2019.
Haven’t all the animals gone to Bristol Zoo Project (formerly the Wild Place Project) which is much bigger?
Simple answer - no!Almost all of Bristol Zoo Garden’s animals moved to other zoos very similar to Bristol Zoo Gardens, whether that be Exmoor Zoo, Jersey Zoo, Cotswold Wildlife Park or Flamingo Land amongst many others. Only two mammals - the blue-eyed black lemurs - and very recently the gorillas - have made the trip to Bristol Zoo Project.
And as explained in the previous question, the site at Cribbs Causeway is nowhere near as big as Bristol Zoological Society like to publicly claim.
Won’t building a new Zoo at Cribbs Causeway be better for conservation?
Selling Bristol Zoo Gardens ultimately, is happening in the name of conservation. Bristol Zoological Society takes every opportunity to tell us how its new Zoo will be a “cutting-edge conservation Zoo” or a “progressive conservation Zoo.” For the avoidance of doubt, Bristol Zoo Gardens was already a 1st class and internationally renowned conservation Zoo. This is demonstrably shown in the external DEFRA inspection report that Bristol Zoo Gardens received at the end of 2018, obtained by FOI for the SBZG campaign. (See Section 2 of The Report.) The report included the phrases:
“Bristol Zoological Society is involved in many meaningful and important conservation projects, designed to research, learn, educate and preserve biodiversity of wildlife on all continents of the globe.”
“In particular their conservation and education commitment and achievements are applauded.”
“The inspection team were delighted to have the opportunity to visit this great, well managed collection, who through their good work, achieve a great deal to preserve biodiversity of wildlife populations, as well as inspiring and educating the public (young and old) in the marvels of the natural world.”
Almost everything Bristol Zoological Society says it is going to do with its “new” “cutting edge” “innovative” and “progressive” plan was already happening at Bristol Zoo Gardens with a very good and proven track record. The new gorilla enclosure is not innovative, it’s a standard zoo design with a big wide path for visitors and the gorillas a long way away on the other side of a moat.
In terms of the more progressive conservation impact a zoo can have by focusing some its attention on influencingthebehaviour of its visitors, up until 2020, when it was announced that Bristol Zoo Gardens was closing, Bristol Zoological Society was leading the way on this work in the UK. Pilot schemes aiming to raise awareness about sustainable palm oil for example, have since been scrapped as the people who were pioneering this work left the Society when BZG closed.
It is very hard to see when looking at the evidence, how closing Bristol Zoo Gardens will be better for conservation. In 2019 Bristol Zoological Society said, "Our visitors are our greatest potential source of conservation action.” Far fewer visitor numbers as a result of closing BZG means fewer resources to spend on conservation projects. By spending a minimum of £69.4m to create facilities from scratch that it already has at BZG but is planning to demolish - among them lecture theatres, classrooms, breeding labs, and a good gorilla enclosure - it is easy to make the case that Bristol Zoological Society will have far less of an impact on conservation should it continue with its current strategy.
Conservation like most other things in life, comes down to money. It also comes down to skills. Since closing Bristol Zoo Gardens, BZS has a lot less money and has also lost a lot of highly skilled staff. None of this is better for conservation.
Reopening Bristol Zoo Gardens alongside Bristol Zoo Project is a pathway back to Bristol Zoological Society being a serious player once again in conservation and European Zoos. The two attractions were always mutually complementary, not mutually exclusive. Reverting to a two-site strategy would lead to higher visitor numbers and consequently, more income. This in turn means more public engagement and education and more money to spend on global conservation projects. See Section 7 of The Report.
Visitor numbers were steadily rising for Bristol Zoological Society across its two mutually complementary attractions until it took the decision to close Bristol Zoo Gardens in 2020. Since BZG closed in September 2022, total visitor numbers for the Society have significantly dropped, meaning much less income for the Society.
Doesn’t Bristol Zoological Society need the money for its new zoo?
Bristol Zoological Society has always presented its decision to close and sell Bristol Zoo Gardens as very close to objective fact, saying it was “forced” to close, leaving it no choice. In fact, there was always a choice and more to the point, it still does have a choice. Bristol Zoological Society doesn't need the money for Bristol Zoo Project at Cribbs Causeway, it wants the money for Bristol Zoo Project. Whatever the ambitions of the current leadership, Bristol Zoo Project can never and will never be Chester Zoo or Whipsnade Zoo. Bristol Zoological Society is making some curious decisions around species selection, appropriate exhibit types for its rural site and the overall commercial viability of its visitor offering. There was and still is, an option to develop the Cribbs Causeway site much more slowly and sustainably and run Bristol Zoo Gardens and Bristol Zoo Project alongside each other as two contrasting and complementary attractions, as many other Zoological Societies do. For example, the approach the Royal Zoological Society of Scotland has taken with its city zoo in Edinburgh and the rural Highland Wildlife Park which keeps appropriate animals for its climate.
Highland Wildlife Park is Edinburgh Zoo's very successful and complementary rural sister site, which keeps appropriate animals for its climate.
Why don’t you think Bristol Zoo Project will be successful?
Whilst no one can predict the future, all the evidence as outlined in the report on this website, suggests that Bristol Zoo Project is destined to end in failure, at least judged by the very high standards that Bristol Zoological Society has set for itself. Since Bristol Zoo Gardens closed in September 2022, Bristol Zoological Society has lost almost half a million annual visitors, with no sign of the majority of those visitors ever coming back as long as it runs only one site. Bristol Zoological Society’s visitor number projections - 810,000 visitors in 2026/2027 (it achieved 347,389 visitors in 2024) are without precedent as the Society needs a 133% increase in visitor numbers from 2024 to 2026/2027. According to available evidence, no other comparable UK or Irish zoo has experienced even close to this level of growth in that period of time. Bristol Zoological Society’s financial projections are predicated on achieving these visitor numbers, which makes its financial projections also without foundation or precedent. (See Section 5 of The Report). Far from safeguarding its future, a threat now exists for the long-term existence of Bristol Zoological Society in its current form, if it continues with its strategy of investing all of its assets and capital into Cribbs Causeway.
Bristol Zoological Society’s visitor number projections are without precedent.
Who owns Bristol Zoological Gardens?
Bristol Zoological Gardens does not belong to the City of Bristol or to Bristol City Council. It belongs to the Bristol, Clifton and West of England Zoological Society Ltd - a limited company and a charity. The Society was formed in 1835 when Bristol Zoological Gardens was conceived and began its life. The Society consists of 202 shareholders who hold 250 shares in total. The shareholders have no financial stake in the Society and do not stand to benefit financially from any sale of Bristol Zoo Gardens. However, their consent was required via a vote in order for Bristol Zoological Society to sell Bristol Zoo Gardens.
Why did Bristol Zoological Society’s Shareholders vote to sell Bristol Zoo Gardens?
On November 27th 2020, BristolZoological Society shareholders were told at their AGM, which took place on Zoom and just hours before it was announced to the world, but three weeks before shareholders were allowed to vote on the decision which needed their legal consent, that “the only option that would provide sufficient income for the next 25 years and be commercially viable was to relocate Bristol Zoo Gardens to Wild Place Project and create a new, world-class, Bristol Zoo.” We now understand that if Bristol Zoological Society is successful and sells Bristol Zoo Gardens for its proposed housing development, the money raised will be spent in the next few years and certainly not across the next 25 years. It is also very clear that this was not the only option the Society had in front of it as the CEO has since admitted that KPMG provided the executive and trustees with 7-8 options to consider before deciding to sell Bristol Zoo Gardens. Considering everything outlined in the newly published report on this website, to state that selling Bristol Zoo Gardens was the only option that was commercially viable for the Society has been proved to be without any credible foundation and was a curious statement to make to shareholders. BZS did not try to find any extra sources of funding before recommending to trustees to sell Bristol Zoo Gardens. Some shareholders have since described feeling "pressured" and "misled" when being asked to vote to sell Bristol Zoo Gardens by senior figures within BZS. See Section 13 of The Report.
Shareholders were led to believe they had no choice but to vote for the sale of Bristol Zoo Gardens.
Who is in charge of Bristol Zoological Society?
Bristol Zoological Society is run by the Chief Executive, Justin Morris, and his Executive Team in partnership with a board of (up to) twelve Trustees and its Chair, David Esam. See Section 9 & 10 of The Report.
Why has Bristol Zoological Society spent so much money on governance since 2019?
A very good question. Bristol Zoological Society’s current CEO, Dr. Justin Morris – began work on 1st August 2018, and 2019 was his first full year in charge. In 2018, Bristol Zoological Society spent £110,000 on governance. In 2019, BZS spent £656,000 on governance. That is a rise of 496% in one year. 2020’s governance spend was £572,000 and in 2021 it was £1.06 million. Within three years, governance spending rose an astonishing 864%.
Between 2019 and 2022, Bristol Zoological Society’s aggregated governance costs were £3.252m and within that period, 7.52% of BZS income was spent on governance. At Bristol Zoological Society’s pre-2019 rate of spending on governance, it would have taken almost 30 years to spend the same amount of money on governance as it did between 2019-2022.
Between 2019 and 2022, Bristol Zoo’s spending on governance as a proportion of income was on average, 15 times higher than other UK charitable zoos.
Between 2019 and 2022, Bristol Zoological Society spent £500,000 more on governance than on field and conservation projects: £2.752 million vs £3.252 million. As a useful comparison with other zoos,if you aggregate the 2019-2022 conservation and governance spend of Bristol Zoological Society, Zoological Society of London and Wild Planet Trust and then compare the proportion they spent on each category, ZSL spent just 0.74% on governance compared to 99.26% on conservation, Wild Planet Trust spent just 3.55% on governance compared to 96.45% on conservation. Bristol Zoological Society spent 54.1% on governance, versus 46.9% on its conservation projects. When looking at other zoos' figures, they are broadly speaking, far more closely aligned to ZSL and WPT’s proportions than to BZS’s. See Section 8 of The Report.
Bristol Zoological Society's spending on governance spiked sharply in 2019.
Why do you think you know more than the people in charge of Bristol Zoo Gardens?
Everything written on this website and in the new report sets out the position Bristol Zoological Society was in before it announced the closure of Bristol Zoo Gardens as well as the position the Society is in today, based on evidence taken from BZS’s own published charitable accounts and strategic documents as well as many other UK and Irish zoos’ published accounts and strategic documents. SBZG's campaign and arguments are based on evidence, obtained by thousands of hours of reading, writing and conversations with zoological professionals from across the country and many ex-employees of BZS who had huge experience and knowledge of Bristol Zoo Gardens and Bristol Zoological Society.
Why does Bristol Zoological Society want to sell its Clifton site and what will the money be used for?
Bristol Zoological Society wants to raise £30-40 million to invest in Bristol Zoo Project (previously the Wild Place Project) in South Gloucestershire to become a “world class, fit for the 21st-Century Zoo”. In reality, there is a genuine possibility that a lot of the money raised from the sale of the world’s 5th oldest zoo could be swallowed by constructing very basic infrastructure at Cribbs Causeway such as a very large car park and basic drainage. There is no evidence to suggest that the proceeds from the sale of Bristol Zoo Gardens can come remotely close to creating a “world-class” zoo at Cribbs Causeway.
The Bristol Zoo Project site (formerly Wild Place) has always posed significant drainage challenges. Constructing a moat for the gorilla enclosure which will retain crystal clear water will be highly challenging and very expensive.
Why over five years after announcing the closure, would Bristol Zoological Society now change its mind and reopen Bristol Zoo Gardens?
Trustees will no doubt feel deeply uncomfortable about changing their minds because human nature mostly perceives a u-turn as a sign of weakness, but it would show strength to do so. Trustees have done this before, when in 2020 they switched from their previously agreed ‘Strategy To 2025’ which was fully committed to operating both Bristol Zoo Gardens and the Wild Place Project. They changed strategy because at the time of the decision, they believed the circumstances had changed. The new report on this website provides huge amounts of new evidence which should inform a reconsideration of their current strategy to sell Bristol Zoo Gardens and invest everything into the Bristol Zoo Project. There is a huge amount of new evidence showing in great detail that it is very questionable that the interests, charitable objects and strategic goals of Bristol Zoological Society are best served by the current one-site strategy.
Bristol Zoo Gardens is by far the Society’s greatest asset and everything that its history and reputation is built upon. Bristol Zoological Society proudly states that the new Central African Forest enclosure will be home to cherry-crowned mangabey monkeys and slender snouted crocodiles. If Bristol Zoological Society wanted to start looking after cherry-crowned mangabey monkeys, it was never necessary to spend upwards of £10 million on an enclosure for them, and certainly not necessary to spend (at least) £70 million to build a whole new zoo.
Bristol Zoological Society recently declared it is suffering a "crisis" and attributed this to £300,00 of legal costs spent defending the Judicial Review case brought against Bristol City Council. The facts are that visitor numbers have plummeted at the same time as the Society has been borrowing large amounts of money. Evidence suggests that reopening a reimagined Bristol Zoo Gardens alongside Bristol Zoo Project is a pathway back to Bristol Zoological Society being a serious player in conservation and European Zoos. The two attractions were always mutually complementary, not mutually exclusive. Reverting to a two-site strategy would lead to higher visitor numbers and consequently, more income. This in turn means more public engagement and education and more money to spend on global conservation projects.
Evidence points to the fact that trustees are steering the Society into uncharted waters, whilst risking the entire assets of the Society in the process. Risks the Society is facing include spiralling infrastructure costs and construction timelines and a significant reputational hit as the wider public eventually wake up to the felling of 150 trees and the bulldozing of the Herbaceous Border and the very real possibility that in time, BZG will become a fully private gated housing estate, as well as the fact that the Bristol Zoo Project is not what was originally promised to justify the sale of BZG. But above all, the financial risk - the self-predicted success is predicated on financial projections and visitor numbers that are unprecedented and consequently, extremely optimistic.
Trustees must look deep inside themselves, carefully consider the facts and consequently, have the courage to stand up to the executive team and revert back to the original two-site strategy. Loyalty to the current executive and loyalty to the Society are two entirely different things. Whilst there is much to be said for collective responsibility, on this occasion it appears to be doing great harm to the Society.
Visitor number projections for Bristol Zoo Project at Cribbs Causeway are unprecedented. Evidence suggests that reopening a reimagined Bristol Zoo Gardens would almost certainly change the fortunes of the Society.
Why did Bristol Zoological Society describe Bristol Zoo Gardens as “not fit for purpose”?
Bristol Zoological Society's public statements pre and post-closure announcement are somewhat contrasting. As outlined on this website, pre-November 27th 2020, Bristol Zoological Society is on record numerous times eulogising about Bristol Zoo Gardens and the Society's many achievements. Post 27th November 2020, it very suddenly painted a new picture where its only option was to create a “new conservation Zoo” and fund it by selling Bristol Zoo Gardens.
It appears that the Society’s strategy once it had decided to close, was to begin to criticise its own incredibly strong and successful brand and frame its subsequent public language to make everyone suddenly believe that Bristol Zoo Gardens was a bad zoo – trying to erase everything positive that had gone before in order to justify the shock announcement to close. As outlined in The Report and elsewhere on this website, based on actual evidence, Bristol Zoo Gardens was a very good zoo. See Section 2, 3, 7, 9 & 10 of The Report.
Bristol Zoo Garden's inspection report from DEFRA at the end of 2018 was highly complimentary.
If Bristol Zoo Gardens was as successful as you say, why did tourism bosses back the closure in 2021?
In a letter published in November 2021 by 'Tourism Leaders' backing Bristol Zoological Society's plans to move out of Clifton, four of the signatories were people who worked for organisations where Bristol Zoological Society’s CEO and two of its trustees have very direct links. Justin Morris ( BZS CEO) was a Non-Executive Director of Destination Bristol / Visit West between 2018 and 2025. Peaches Golding and Chris Booy (current BZS trustees) are both ex-trustees of the SS-Great Britain. In response to the letter, Bristol Zoological Society subsequently said it "welcomed and appreciated" the vote of confidence.
Just a few years earlier in 2017, Destination Bristol said Bristol Zoo Gardens was “one of the most critical elements of Bristol’s Visitor Economy” and that “the success of BZG is a critical part of the success of Bristol”.
Destination Bristol eulogised about Bristol Zoo Gardens in 2017 saying BZG was a “critical part of the success of Bristol as one of the UK’s leading visitor destinations and it would be a devastating blow to the city and region to lose an internationally significant icon, both economically and reputationally.” Just four years later, Destination Bristol backed the move to close Bristol Zoo Gardens. Did that much change in four years?
Doesn’t Bristol need more housing?
Yes. But building expensive flats and houses as part of an exclusive private development does little to solve Bristol's need for more housing and it is also quite possible that the small amount of social and affordable housing may never be built. Furthermore, if more homes are so necessary in Clifton and Bristol, why not start building on the Downs as well? How about turning Clifton Observatory into someone’s home with wonderful views or even putting up some flats on the Suspension Bridge? Our city parks? Where do we draw the line? When do you start undoing what makes the city what it is? London needs more housing. Kew Gardens is a botanical garden with a lot of space but is anyone seriously suggesting building homes on Kew Gardens?
Surely we can all agree that some places are just too important and valuable - in a strictly uneconomic sense – to be turned into housing estates? These spaces are great assets to all of our mental health, they help us find perspective in the busyness of modern life. Do we want housing developers whose primary motivation is profit to get their hands on these spaces that belong to all of us?
If profit was the only motive, many of these Bristol institutions could be sold off to private developers. Is that what we want for our city and other cities?
Do trustees feel comfortable selling Bristol Zoo Gardens to a housing developer that until very recently was listed with a warning on the FCA website?
Bristol Zoological Society's current leadership are currently proposing selling Bristol Zoo Gardens to Acorn Property Group, a housing developer that until very recently was listed on the Financial Conduct Authority's websitewith a warning that said:
"This firm may be providing or promoting financial services or products without our permission. You should avoid dealing with this firm and beware of scams. Almost all firms and individuals must be authorised or registered by us to carry out or promote financial services in the UK. This firm is not authorised by us and may be targeting people in the UK."
In light of this warning that was published on 9th December 2025, do trustees feel comfortable selling the world's 5th oldest zoo to Acorn Property Group?
Isn’t Bristol Zoological Society a conservation charity? Why is it proposing chopping down 150 of its own mature trees and bulldozing the herbaceous border?
A very good question which only the trustees can answer as ultimately, it is the trustees who are legally responsible for the Society’s governance, decision making and strategy. If current plans do go ahead, Bristol Zoological Society’s trustees are sanctioning the destruction of 150 trees as well as the bulldozing of the herbaceous border where generations of shareholders’ families have scattered ashes of loved ones to become multi-million pound homes. Would anyone have scattered ashes there if they had ever believed there was even a chance that the gardens would one day be sold and partially destroyed?
Bristol Zoo Garden’s own website (until the page was deleted) described its gardens as “one of the UK’s most important collections of plants” and “170 years of nurture and gardening artistry.” Why have Bristol Zoological Society trustees signed off on the irreversible destruction of this historic and heritage site? Only they can answer that question. So far, they have not answered it.
Bristol Zoological Society’s Trustees have approved plans to chop down 150 trees and bulldoze the iconic herbaceous border, where many generations have scattered ashes of loved ones.
But Bristol Zoological Society says 470 new trees will be planted to replace the trees it is chopping down, that’s even better isn’t it?
Bristol Zoological Society says 470 new trees will be planted to replace the trees that will be chopped down but firstly, it is unclear if there is enough space to plant 470 new trees inside the 12-acre site. Secondly, replacing mature and established trees with new trees is not like for like. It is, as Professor Mary Hagen of Swansea University describes, like “me offering you two 1p coins in exchange for a £1 coin and telling you that you end up with more money. We need to stop falling for it”.
Charles Harvey, a professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology who studies carbon storage in forests says you get more bang for your buck by focusing on preserving existing trees, rather than prioritising new growth to offset emissions:
“Planting trees where they've been lost is often a good idea…..but a much more efficient thing to do, to have a larger effect for the same effort, is to stop cutting down trees. It's almost silly to think about planting a huge number of new trees while we're just burning and destroying them everywhere, releasing carbon at rates that are much higher than what new growth would take up.”
This is Bristol Zoological Society’s own tree removal plan. Everything in pink will be chopped down.
Won't the proposed housing development on the Bristol Zoo Gardens site be free and open to the public?
If you look at Bristol Zoological Society’s plans for its private housing development, only a relatively small area of the site will be available to the public. You will have to pass through gates which will be locked out of hours and there will inevitably be signs everywhere warning of private, residents’ areas. There will be ‘buffer’ zones between the public and the private spaces. The six storey buildings will tower over the site and it is hard to imagine feeling overly welcome in what will surely feel like a private garden. Why would anyone choose to go and walk around someone else’s private garden, especially if you live on the other side of the city?
Additionally, this public access and the maintenance of the gardens is to be funded by a charge on the residents who may very well in time object to funding a public amenity. There is no credible plan backing up the promise of free public access and after five years, a developer can apply to have the condition of public access removed on the grounds of security or privacy.
And whilst whatever public access is heralded as a huge achievement by Society and the council, the reality is that a large part of what made Bristol Zoo Gardens so special was the fact that it was a walled garden; completely enclosed providing a genuine sanctuary and oasis. This essential essence will be completely lost under BZS’s plans. See Section 18 & 19 of The Report.
The completely enclosed walled botanical gardens of Bristol Zoo provided a sanctuary and oasis for the people of Bristol for almost 200 years. In years to come, these gardens could become completely private if existing plans go ahead.
Isn’t operating two sites too difficult for Bristol Zoological Society?
There are many Zoological Societies and organisations in the world that successfully operate two sites, as Bristol Zoologically Society did successfully between 2013-2022, until it closed Bristol Zoo Gardens. These include:
ZSL - London Zoo and Whipsnade Zoo. Whipsnade was opened in 1931 and slowly and sustainably developed – 32.6 miles apart.
RZSS – Edinburgh Zoo and Highland Wildlife Park. Highland Wildlife Park was opened in 1972 and slowly and sustainably developed – 116 miles apart.
ZSI – Dublin Zoo and Fota Wildlife Park. FOTA opened in 1983 and was slowly and sustainably developed – 161 miles apart.
Libéma – Paignton Zoo and Newquay Zoo – 76 miles apart.
ZSEA - Banham Zoo and Africa Alive – 40 miles apart.
Zoo Berlin (Germany) - Berlin Zoo and Tierpark Berlin – 9.8 miles apart.
Mandai Wildlife Group (Singapore) - Singapore Zoo - ‘Night Safari’ - ‘River Wonders’ and ‘Bird Paradise’
BZS – Bristol Zoo and Wild Place Project – up until 2022 – 5.4 miles apart.
Whilst there are geographical variations in the distances between two sites belonging to the same Zoological Society, these are eleven concrete examples of how a Zoological Society can commercially run two successful separate zoo sites. BZS’s (pre-Covid) 2019 visitor numbers perfectly demonstrate this. See Section 16 of The Report.
Can you still have zoos in residential areas?
There is a huge amount of evidence to demonstrate that good zoos that have evolved over time and are located in residential areas continue to thrive, as Bristol Zoo Gardens had been doing for almost two centuries. (See Section 17 of The Report.) Examples include:
Bristol Zoo Gardens
London Zoo
Dublin Zoo
Edinburgh Zoo
Paignton Zoo
Berlin Zoo
Paris Zoo
Vienna Zoo
Sydney Zoo
Bronx Zoo
What about the parking issue in Clifton?
This is a long and complex legal issue which is explained in much greater detail in Section 15 of the full report. The North Car Park is the main car park in front of Bristol Zoo which was used for the main, day-to-day zoo parking. Bristol Zoological Society lost the right to use that car park because of a case that almost went to the High Court in 2021. The case was brought by Downs for People who objected to Bristol Zoo using Ladies Mile for zoo parking. The North Car Park was caught up in the settlement as an unintended consequence as the North Car Park is Downs Land. SBZG has since obtained a statement from Downs for People stating that it would not object to BZS using the North Car Park for zoo parking in the future, should a way be found to make it lawful again. All the legal experts SBZG has so far talked to, can see no theoretical reason why it would not be possible to make it lawful so long as all the relevant parties – Bristol Zoological Society, Downs for People and the Downs Committee – were supportive. There does not appear to be good reason, legal or otherwise, why parking can be used as justification for a reimagined Bristol Zoo Gardens not being able to operate in the future.
Downs for People provided this statement to SBZG, stating it would not oppose the North Car Park being used for Bristol Zoo parking in the future, if a way could be found to make it lawful.
Why did Bristol Zoological Society recently declare a financial crisis?
Bristol Zoological Society recently declared a financial crisis and announced redundancies, attributing these issues to £300,000 in legal costs incurred while defending its housing plans for Bristol Zoo Gardens in a Judicial Review case. However, when looking at the numbers taken from the zoo’s own accounts, £300,000 is less than 10% of what the charity spent on governance between 2019 and 2022, (£3.252 million) and just 2.38% of what was spent on governance and Capex between 2019 and 2022 (£12.589 million). Therefore, the claim that £300,000 has precipitated a financial crisis and many staff redundancies for the Society does not stand up to serious scrutiny. When will the Society stop blaming other people for its problems and start taking responsibility for its own actions?
Bristol Zoo Gardens closed over 3 years ago; why should I still care?
Many people saw Bristol Zoological Gardens as our city’s crown jewels. Those crown jewels are currently in the process of being sold to the highest bidder to become a private housing estate. The closure of Bristol Zoo Gardens should matter to you because something completely unique and irreplaceable that gave so much to so many for so long has been taken away from all of us and contrary to what you might believe, it still isn’t too late to get a reimagined Bristol Zoo Gardens back, for all of us.
Why do you want a reimagined Bristol Zoo Gardens to reopen?
Bristol Zoological Gardens is unique. The hallowed ground of its walled gardens provided a sanctuary for the people of Bristol for almost two centuries. Bristol Zoo Gardens did not need to close. There is no objective truth, nor ever was there, that Bristol Zoo Gardens needed to close its doors to the public after being open for 186 years, surviving two World Wars and welcoming over 90 million visitors in its remarkable history as the world’s 5th oldest Zoo.
Bristol Zoological Society has lost almost half a million annual visitors since it closed Bristol Zoo Gardens in 2022. There is no evidence to suggest most of those visitors will ever return and the evidence suggests that this is the real reason the Society is in what it recently described as a "crisis." Fewer visitors means less public engagement and education. Fewer visitors also means fewer resources which ultimately will result in less money for conservation. Reopening Bristol Zoo Gardens alongside Bristol Zoo Project is a pathway out of the Society's self-declared "crisis." The two attractions were always mutually complementary, not mutually exclusive. Reverting to a two-site strategy would lead to higher visitor numbers and consequently, more income. This in turn means more public engagement and education and more money to spend on global conservation projects.
Why do you care so much about this?
Bristol Zoological Gardens was and still is, hallowed ground in this city; a walled garden and sanctuary that has contributed positively to so many peoples’ mental health and wellbeing over the past two centuries. There is an intangible magic that you feel when you move around the gardens; almost 200 years of the natural world, history and collective memories contained within a 12-acre site in the heart of a city. Spaces in the city which give diverse groups of people of all ages from different backgrounds and cultures a reason to be in the same place at the same time are few and far between, but Bristol Zoo Gardens was one of very few that existed in Bristol and since its closure in 2022, we have all lost out. Once it is sold off to a private developer to be turned into housing, it is gone forever and not coming back. Would we accept Clifton Suspension Bridge being permanently closed and sold off the back of one KPMG report during a global pandemic? What would posses anyone - let alone Bristol Zoological Society itself - to destroy the world’s 5th oldest zoo, a walled botanical Zoological Garden in the middle of Bristol with an internationally renowned reputation for conservation to become a private housing estate, and then use the money to build everything it already has again from scratch at Cribbs Causeway, centring around a new gorilla enclosure and a new café?
Ultimately though, this is about injustice. Bristol Zoo Gardens didn’t need to close. Under new leadership, a reimagined Bristol Zoo Gardens can reopen.
Isn’t it too late to save Bristol Zoo Gardens - hasn't it been sold?
The short answer is no, Bristol Zoo Gardens has not yet been sold, but time is runing out and fast. Bristol Zoo Gardens is frozen in time; it still exists behind closed doors. Until the money has changed hands and the keys have been handed over to a developer, it is not too late to save Bristol Zoo Gardens and get our zoo back.
Didn’t Bristol Zoo Gardens close because it was losing money?
Financial failing was given as a reason for the closure of Bristol Zoo Gardens, with Bristol Zoological Society claiming in 2020 that it made an operating loss in four of the last six years prior to closure. According to the Society's own accounts, these figures exclude voluntary income and donations as well as investment and rental income. When these figures are included, the accounts show an operating loss in only one of the previous nine years. In 2019, Bristol Zoological Society's own accounts declared an "increase in profitability of £2.5m" The accounts from the past few years also reveal an astonishing 864% increase in spending on ‘governance’ in the three years under the new leadership, from £110,000 in 2018 to £1.06 million in 2021. BZS accounts also show that the Wild Place Project/Bristol Zoo Project on its own terms, has never been profitable. See Section 4 of The Report.
Weren’t visitor numbers at Bristol Zoo Gardens declining?
Declining visitor numbers are regularly cited as a reason for closure. However, pre-closure, visitor numbers at Bristol Zoo Gardens were very healthy, above half a million visitors every year until Covid. In 2019, Bristol Zoological Society attracted 829,965 visitors across its two sites, making it one of the most popular zoological attractions in the UK. 512,934 of these visits took place at Bristol Zoo Gardens and 317,031 at Wild Place Project. Bristol Zoo Gardens alone, was consistently ranked among the Top 10 most visited zoos in the UK each year up until its closure. Bristol Zoo Gardens compared very favourably to London and Dublin Zoos when looking at ‘visits per resident’ in each of the three cities. See Section 5 of The Report.
Didn’t Covid force Bristol Zoo Gardens to close?
Covid has also been given as a reason for closure of Bristol Zoo Gardens, with Bristol Zoological Society claiming in 2020 that “the impact of Covid-19 has caused us to radically rethink our plans about the future.” However, what was not mentioned was that Bristol Zoological Society benefited from a business interruption insurance pay-out of £2.5m to compensate it for its Covid-19 related losses, which almost no other zoo in the country received. Did any other major charitable conservation zoo in the UK close following Covid? No. Did Covid have an impact on Bristol Zoo Gardens? Yes. Was it enough of an impact to cause it to close after being open for almost 200 years having survived two World Wars and welcomed over 90 million visitors in its remarkable history as the world’s 5th oldest zoo? No.
Weren’t the enclosures at Bristol Zoo Gardens too small?
Improved animal welfare has been cited as a reason to move animals from Clifton to Cribbs Causeway. In reality, almost all of Bristol Zoo Garden’s animals moved to other zoos very similar to Bristol Zoo Gardens, whether that be Exmoor Zoo, Jersey Zoo, Cotswold Wildlife Park or Flamingo Land amongst many others. Only two mammals have made the trip directly from Bristol Zoo Gardens to Bristol Zoo Project - the blue-eyed black lemurs and very recently, the gorillas. However, the relative size of the enclosures at Cribbs Causeway - blue-eyed black lemurs, meerkats and red pandas for example - are very similar in size to those at Bristol Zoo Gardens. In fact, Bristol Zoo Garden's Inspection Report carried out by DEFRA in 2018 and obtained by a Freedom of Information request, gave a glowing review of BZG. See Section 2 of The Report.
Some people object to any type of zoo and they are entirely entitled to hold that point of view. However, if you like and value zoos and the conservation and education work that they do, then it’s fair to say that Bristol Zoo Gardens was one of the very best. Yes, it was on a Victorian site but the actual enclosures and infrastructure were good. Bristol Zoo Gardens consistently did very well in DEFRA and EAZA inspections and the space provision was comparable to many other respected zoos across the UK.
Isn’t Bristol Zoo Project (formerly Wild Place Project) much bigger than Bristol Zoo Gardens?
Bristol Zoological Society rarely misses an opportunity to talk about its "136-acre site" at Cribbs Causeway. The Society repeatedly uses this figure to justify the move from Clifton to South Gloucestershire. However, once you have excluded all restrictions, car parking, existing exhibits, back of house and staff areas, approximately 25 acres of useable space remains to build actual animal exhibits. That is 110 acres smaller than the 136-acre figure used by BZS at every available opportunity.
In addition to this, despite constantly using the “136 acre” phrase to justify selling Bristol Zoo Gardens and moving to the larger Cribbs Causeway site, according to publicly available documents, since 2019, Bristol Zoological Society has been planning to sell 41 acres of its Cribbs Causeway site for a housing development. See Section 11 of The Report.
Haven’t all the animals gone to Bristol Zoo Project (formerly the Wild Place Project) which is much bigger?
Simple answer - no! Almost all of Bristol Zoo Garden’s animals moved to other zoos very similar to Bristol Zoo Gardens, whether that be Exmoor Zoo, Jersey Zoo, Cotswold Wildlife Park or Flamingo Land amongst many others. Only two mammals - the blue-eyed black lemurs - and very recently the gorillas - have made the trip to Bristol Zoo Project.
And as explained in the previous question, the site at Cribbs Causeway is nowhere near as big as Bristol Zoological Society like to publicly claim.
Won’t building a new Zoo at Cribbs Causeway be better for conservation?
Selling Bristol Zoo Gardens ultimately, is happening in the name of conservation. Bristol Zoological Society takes every opportunity to tell us how its new Zoo will be a “cutting-edge conservation Zoo” or a “progressive conservation Zoo.” For the avoidance of doubt, Bristol Zoo Gardens was already a 1st class and internationally renowned conservation Zoo. This is demonstrably shown in the external DEFRA inspection report that Bristol Zoo Gardens received at the end of 2018, obtained by FOI for the SBZG campaign. (See Section 2 of The Report.) The report included the phrases:
“Bristol Zoological Society is involved in many meaningful and important conservation projects, designed to research, learn, educate and preserve biodiversity of wildlife on all continents of the globe.”
“In particular their conservation and education commitment and achievements are applauded.”
“The inspection team were delighted to have the opportunity to visit this great, well managed collection, who through their good work, achieve a great deal to preserve biodiversity of wildlife populations, as well as inspiring and educating the public (young and old) in the marvels of the natural world.”
Almost everything Bristol Zoological Society says it is going to do with its “new” “cutting edge” “innovative” and “progressive” plan was already happening at Bristol Zoo Gardens with a very good and proven track record. The new gorilla enclosure is not innovative, it’s a standard zoo design with a big wide path for visitors and the gorillas a long way away on the other side of a moat.
In terms of the more progressive conservation impact a zoo can have by focusing some its attention on influencing the behaviour of its visitors, up until 2020, when it was announced that Bristol Zoo Gardens was closing, Bristol Zoological Society was leading the way on this work in the UK. Pilot schemes aiming to raise awareness about sustainable palm oil for example, have since been scrapped as the people who were pioneering this work left the Society when BZG closed.
It is very hard to see when looking at the evidence, how closing Bristol Zoo Gardens will be better for conservation. In 2019 Bristol Zoological Society said, "Our visitors are our greatest potential source of conservation action.” Far fewer visitor numbers as a result of closing BZG means fewer resources to spend on conservation projects. By spending a minimum of £69.4m to create facilities from scratch that it already has at BZG but is planning to demolish - among them lecture theatres, classrooms, breeding labs, and a good gorilla enclosure - it is easy to make the case that Bristol Zoological Society will have far less of an impact on conservation should it continue with its current strategy.
Conservation like most other things in life, comes down to money. It also comes down to skills. Since closing Bristol Zoo Gardens, BZS has a lot less money and has also lost a lot of highly skilled staff. None of this is better for conservation.
Reopening Bristol Zoo Gardens alongside Bristol Zoo Project is a pathway back to Bristol Zoological Society being a serious player once again in conservation and European Zoos. The two attractions were always mutually complementary, not mutually exclusive. Reverting to a two-site strategy would lead to higher visitor numbers and consequently, more income. This in turn means more public engagement and education and more money to spend on global conservation projects. See Section 7 of The Report.
Doesn’t Bristol Zoological Society need the money for its new zoo?
Bristol Zoological Society has always presented its decision to close and sell Bristol Zoo Gardens as very close to objective fact, saying it was “forced” to close, leaving it no choice. In fact, there was always a choice and more to the point, it still does have a choice. Bristol Zoological Society doesn't need the money for Bristol Zoo Project at Cribbs Causeway, it wants the money for Bristol Zoo Project. Whatever the ambitions of the current leadership, Bristol Zoo Project can never and will never be Chester Zoo or Whipsnade Zoo. Bristol Zoological Society is making some curious decisions around species selection, appropriate exhibit types for its rural site and the overall commercial viability of its visitor offering. There was and still is, an option to develop the Cribbs Causeway site much more slowly and sustainably and run Bristol Zoo Gardens and Bristol Zoo Project alongside each other as two contrasting and complementary attractions, as many other Zoological Societies do. For example, the approach the Royal Zoological Society of Scotland has taken with its city zoo in Edinburgh and the rural Highland Wildlife Park which keeps appropriate animals for its climate.
Why don’t you think Bristol Zoo Project will be successful?
Whilst no one can predict the future, all the evidence as outlined in the report on this website, suggests that Bristol Zoo Project is destined to end in failure, at least judged by the very high standards that Bristol Zoological Society has set for itself. Since Bristol Zoo Gardens closed in September 2022, Bristol Zoological Society has lost almost half a million annual visitors, with no sign of the majority of those visitors ever coming back as long as it runs only one site. Bristol Zoological Society’s visitor number projections - 810,000 visitors in 2026/2027 (it achieved 347,389 visitors in 2024) are without precedent as the Society needs a 133% increase in visitor numbers from 2024 to 2026/2027. According to available evidence, no other comparable UK or Irish zoo has experienced even close to this level of growth in that period of time. Bristol Zoological Society’s financial projections are predicated on achieving these visitor numbers, which makes its financial projections also without foundation or precedent. (See Section 5 of The Report). Far from safeguarding its future, a threat now exists for the long-term existence of Bristol Zoological Society in its current form, if it continues with its strategy of investing all of its assets and capital into Cribbs Causeway.
Who owns Bristol Zoological Gardens?
Bristol Zoological Gardens does not belong to the City of Bristol or to Bristol City Council. It belongs to the Bristol, Clifton and West of England Zoological Society Ltd - a limited company and a charity. The Society was formed in 1835 when Bristol Zoological Gardens was conceived and began its life. The Society consists of 202 shareholders who hold 250 shares in total. The shareholders have no financial stake in the Society and do not stand to benefit financially from any sale of Bristol Zoo Gardens. However, their consent was required via a vote in order for Bristol Zoological Society to sell Bristol Zoo Gardens.
Why did Bristol Zoological Society’s Shareholders vote to sell Bristol Zoo Gardens?
On November 27th 2020, Bristol Zoological Society shareholders were told at their AGM, which took place on Zoom and just hours before it was announced to the world, but three weeks before shareholders were allowed to vote on the decision which needed their legal consent, that “the only option that would provide sufficient income for the next 25 years and be commercially viable was to relocate Bristol Zoo Gardens to Wild Place Project and create a new, world-class, Bristol Zoo.” We now understand that if Bristol Zoological Society is successful and sells Bristol Zoo Gardens for its proposed housing development, the money raised will be spent in the next few years and certainly not across the next 25 years. It is also very clear that this was not the only option the Society had in front of it as the CEO has since admitted that KPMG provided the executive and trustees with 7-8 options to consider before deciding to sell Bristol Zoo Gardens. Considering everything outlined in the newly published report on this website, to state that selling Bristol Zoo Gardens was the only option that was commercially viable for the Society has been proved to be without any credible foundation and was a curious statement to make to shareholders. BZS did not try to find any extra sources of funding before recommending to trustees to sell Bristol Zoo Gardens. Some shareholders have since described feeling "pressured" and "misled" when being asked to vote to sell Bristol Zoo Gardens by senior figures within BZS. See Section 13 of The Report.
Who is in charge of Bristol Zoological Society?
Bristol Zoological Society is run by the Chief Executive, Justin Morris, and his Executive Team in partnership with a board of (up to) twelve Trustees and its Chair, David Esam. See Section 9 & 10 of The Report.
Why has Bristol Zoological Society spent so much money on governance since 2019?
A very good question. Bristol Zoological Society’s current CEO, Dr. Justin Morris – began work on 1st August 2018, and 2019 was his first full year in charge. In 2018, Bristol Zoological Society spent £110,000 on governance. In 2019, BZS spent £656,000 on governance. That is a rise of 496% in one year. 2020’s governance spend was £572,000 and in 2021 it was £1.06 million. Within three years, governance spending rose an astonishing 864%.
Between 2019 and 2022, Bristol Zoological Society’s aggregated governance costs were £3.252m and within that period, 7.52% of BZS income was spent on governance. At Bristol Zoological Society’s pre-2019 rate of spending on governance, it would have taken almost 30 years to spend the same amount of money on governance as it did between 2019-2022.
Between 2019 and 2022, Bristol Zoo’s spending on governance as a proportion of income was on average, 15 times higher than other UK charitable zoos.
Between 2019 and 2022, Bristol Zoological Society spent £500,000 more on governance than on field and conservation projects: £2.752 million vs £3.252 million. As a useful comparison with other zoos, if you aggregate the 2019-2022 conservation and governance spend of Bristol Zoological Society, Zoological Society of London and Wild Planet Trust and then compare the proportion they spent on each category, ZSL spent just 0.74% on governance compared to 99.26% on conservation, Wild Planet Trust spent just 3.55% on governance compared to 96.45% on conservation. Bristol Zoological Society spent 54.1% on governance, versus 46.9% on its conservation projects. When looking at other zoos' figures, they are broadly speaking, far more closely aligned to ZSL and WPT’s proportions than to BZS’s. See Section 8 of The Report.
Why do you think you know more than the people in charge of Bristol Zoo Gardens?
Everything written on this website and in the new report sets out the position Bristol Zoological Society was in before it announced the closure of Bristol Zoo Gardens as well as the position the Society is in today, based on evidence taken from BZS’s own published charitable accounts and strategic documents as well as many other UK and Irish zoos’ published accounts and strategic documents. SBZG's campaign and arguments are based on evidence, obtained by thousands of hours of reading, writing and conversations with zoological professionals from across the country and many ex-employees of BZS who had huge experience and knowledge of Bristol Zoo Gardens and Bristol Zoological Society.
Why does Bristol Zoological Society want to sell its Clifton site and what will the money be used for?
Bristol Zoological Society wants to raise £30-40 million to invest in Bristol Zoo Project (previously the Wild Place Project) in South Gloucestershire to become a “world class, fit for the 21st-Century Zoo”. In reality, there is a genuine possibility that a lot of the money raised from the sale of the world’s 5th oldest zoo could be swallowed by constructing very basic infrastructure at Cribbs Causeway such as a very large car park and basic drainage. There is no evidence to suggest that the proceeds from the sale of Bristol Zoo Gardens can come remotely close to creating a “world-class” zoo at Cribbs Causeway.
Why over five years after announcing the closure, would Bristol Zoological Society now change its mind and reopen Bristol Zoo Gardens?
Trustees will no doubt feel deeply uncomfortable about changing their minds because human nature mostly perceives a u-turn as a sign of weakness, but it would show strength to do so. Trustees have done this before, when in 2020 they switched from their previously agreed ‘Strategy To 2025’ which was fully committed to operating both Bristol Zoo Gardens and the Wild Place Project. They changed strategy because at the time of the decision, they believed the circumstances had changed. The new report on this website provides huge amounts of new evidence which should inform a reconsideration of their current strategy to sell Bristol Zoo Gardens and invest everything into the Bristol Zoo Project. There is a huge amount of new evidence showing in great detail that it is very questionable that the interests, charitable objects and strategic goals of Bristol Zoological Society are best served by the current one-site strategy.
Bristol Zoo Gardens is by far the Society’s greatest asset and everything that its history and reputation is built upon. Bristol Zoological Society proudly states that the new Central African Forest enclosure will be home to cherry-crowned mangabey monkeys and slender snouted crocodiles. If Bristol Zoological Society wanted to start looking after cherry-crowned mangabey monkeys, it was never necessary to spend upwards of £10 million on an enclosure for them, and certainly not necessary to spend (at least) £70 million to build a whole new zoo.
Bristol Zoological Society recently declared it is suffering a "crisis" and attributed this to £300,00 of legal costs spent defending the Judicial Review case brought against Bristol City Council. The facts are that visitor numbers have plummeted at the same time as the Society has been borrowing large amounts of money. Evidence suggests that reopening a reimagined Bristol Zoo Gardens alongside Bristol Zoo Project is a pathway back to Bristol Zoological Society being a serious player in conservation and European Zoos. The two attractions were always mutually complementary, not mutually exclusive. Reverting to a two-site strategy would lead to higher visitor numbers and consequently, more income. This in turn means more public engagement and education and more money to spend on global conservation projects.
Evidence points to the fact that trustees are steering the Society into uncharted waters, whilst risking the entire assets of the Society in the process. Risks the Society is facing include spiralling infrastructure costs and construction timelines and a significant reputational hit as the wider public eventually wake up to the felling of 150 trees and the bulldozing of the Herbaceous Border and the very real possibility that in time, BZG will become a fully private gated housing estate, as well as the fact that the Bristol Zoo Project is not what was originally promised to justify the sale of BZG. But above all, the financial risk - the self-predicted success is predicated on financial projections and visitor numbers that are unprecedented and consequently, extremely optimistic.
Trustees must look deep inside themselves, carefully consider the facts and consequently, have the courage to stand up to the executive team and revert back to the original two-site strategy. Loyalty to the current executive and loyalty to the Society are two entirely different things. Whilst there is much to be said for collective responsibility, on this occasion it appears to be doing great harm to the Society.
Why did Bristol Zoological Society describe Bristol Zoo Gardens as “not fit for purpose”?
Bristol Zoological Society's public statements pre and post-closure announcement are somewhat contrasting. As outlined on this website, pre-November 27th 2020, Bristol Zoological Society is on record numerous times eulogising about Bristol Zoo Gardens and the Society's many achievements. Post 27th November 2020, it very suddenly painted a new picture where its only option was to create a “new conservation Zoo” and fund it by selling Bristol Zoo Gardens.
It appears that the Society’s strategy once it had decided to close, was to begin to criticise its own incredibly strong and successful brand and frame its subsequent public language to make everyone suddenly believe that Bristol Zoo Gardens was a bad zoo – trying to erase everything positive that had gone before in order to justify the shock announcement to close. As outlined in The Report and elsewhere on this website, based on actual evidence, Bristol Zoo Gardens was a very good zoo. See Section 2, 3, 7, 9 & 10 of The Report.
If Bristol Zoo Gardens was as successful as you say, why did tourism bosses back the closure in 2021?
In a letter published in November 2021 by 'Tourism Leaders' backing Bristol Zoological Society's plans to move out of Clifton, four of the signatories were people who worked for organisations where Bristol Zoological Society’s CEO and two of its trustees have very direct links. Justin Morris ( BZS CEO) was a Non-Executive Director of Destination Bristol / Visit West between 2018 and 2025. Peaches Golding and Chris Booy (current BZS trustees) are both ex-trustees of the SS-Great Britain. In response to the letter, Bristol Zoological Society subsequently said it "welcomed and appreciated" the vote of confidence.
Just a few years earlier in 2017, Destination Bristol said Bristol Zoo Gardens was “one of the most critical elements of Bristol’s Visitor Economy” and that “the success of BZG is a critical part of the success of Bristol”.
Doesn’t Bristol need more housing?
Yes. But building expensive flats and houses as part of an exclusive private development does little to solve Bristol's need for more housing and it is also quite possible that the small amount of social and affordable housing may never be built. Furthermore, if more homes are so necessary in Clifton and Bristol, why not start building on the Downs as well? How about turning Clifton Observatory into someone’s home with wonderful views or even putting up some flats on the Suspension Bridge? Our city parks? Where do we draw the line? When do you start undoing what makes the city what it is? London needs more housing. Kew Gardens is a botanical garden with a lot of space but is anyone seriously suggesting building homes on Kew Gardens?
Surely we can all agree that some places are just too important and valuable - in a strictly uneconomic sense – to be turned into housing estates? These spaces are great assets to all of our mental health, they help us find perspective in the busyness of modern life. Do we want housing developers whose primary motivation is profit to get their hands on these spaces that belong to all of us?
Do trustees feel comfortable selling Bristol Zoo Gardens to a housing developer that until very recently was listed with a warning on the FCA website?
Bristol Zoological Society's current leadership are currently proposing selling Bristol Zoo Gardens to Acorn Property Group, a housing developer that until very recently was listed on the Financial Conduct Authority's website with a warning that said:
"This firm may be providing or promoting financial services or products without our permission. You should avoid dealing with this firm and beware of scams. Almost all firms and individuals must be authorised or registered by us to carry out or promote financial services in the UK. This firm is not authorised by us and may be targeting people in the UK."
In light of this warning that was published on 9th December 2025, do trustees feel comfortable selling the world's 5th oldest zoo to Acorn Property Group?
Isn’t Bristol Zoological Society a conservation charity? Why is it proposing chopping down 150 of its own mature trees and bulldozing the herbaceous border?
A very good question which only the trustees can answer as ultimately, it is the trustees who are legally responsible for the Society’s governance, decision making and strategy. If current plans do go ahead, Bristol Zoological Society’s trustees are sanctioning the destruction of 150 trees as well as the bulldozing of the herbaceous border where generations of shareholders’ families have scattered ashes of loved ones to become multi-million pound homes. Would anyone have scattered ashes there if they had ever believed there was even a chance that the gardens would one day be sold and partially destroyed?
Bristol Zoo Garden’s own website (until the page was deleted) described its gardens as “one of the UK’s most important collections of plants” and “170 years of nurture and gardening artistry.” Why have Bristol Zoological Society trustees signed off on the irreversible destruction of this historic and heritage site? Only they can answer that question. So far, they have not answered it.
But Bristol Zoological Society says 470 new trees will be planted to replace the trees it is chopping down, that’s even better isn’t it?
Bristol Zoological Society says 470 new trees will be planted to replace the trees that will be chopped down but firstly, it is unclear if there is enough space to plant 470 new trees inside the 12-acre site. Secondly, replacing mature and established trees with new trees is not like for like. It is, as Professor Mary Hagen of Swansea University describes, like “me offering you two 1p coins in exchange for a £1 coin and telling you that you end up with more money. We need to stop falling for it”.
Charles Harvey, a professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology who studies carbon storage in forests says you get more bang for your buck by focusing on preserving existing trees, rather than prioritising new growth to offset emissions:
“Planting trees where they've been lost is often a good idea…..but a much more efficient thing to do, to have a larger effect for the same effort, is to stop cutting down trees. It's almost silly to think about planting a huge number of new trees while we're just burning and destroying them everywhere, releasing carbon at rates that are much higher than what new growth would take up.”
Won't the proposed housing development on the Bristol Zoo Gardens site be free and open to the public?
If you look at Bristol Zoological Society’s plans for its private housing development, only a relatively small area of the site will be available to the public. You will have to pass through gates which will be locked out of hours and there will inevitably be signs everywhere warning of private, residents’ areas. There will be ‘buffer’ zones between the public and the private spaces. The six storey buildings will tower over the site and it is hard to imagine feeling overly welcome in what will surely feel like a private garden. Why would anyone choose to go and walk around someone else’s private garden, especially if you live on the other side of the city?
Additionally, this public access and the maintenance of the gardens is to be funded by a charge on the residents who may very well in time object to funding a public amenity. There is no credible plan backing up the promise of free public access and after five years, a developer can apply to have the condition of public access removed on the grounds of security or privacy.
And whilst whatever public access is heralded as a huge achievement by Society and the council, the reality is that a large part of what made Bristol Zoo Gardens so special was the fact that it was a walled garden; completely enclosed providing a genuine sanctuary and oasis. This essential essence will be completely lost under BZS’s plans. See Section 18 & 19 of The Report.
Isn’t operating two sites too difficult for Bristol Zoological Society?
There are many Zoological Societies and organisations in the world that successfully operate two sites, as Bristol Zoologically Society did successfully between 2013-2022, until it closed Bristol Zoo Gardens. These include:
Whilst there are geographical variations in the distances between two sites belonging to the same Zoological Society, these are eleven concrete examples of how a Zoological Society can commercially run two successful separate zoo sites. BZS’s (pre-Covid) 2019 visitor numbers perfectly demonstrate this. See Section 16 of The Report.
Can you still have zoos in residential areas?
There is a huge amount of evidence to demonstrate that good zoos that have evolved over time and are located in residential areas continue to thrive, as Bristol Zoo Gardens had been doing for almost two centuries. (See Section 17 of The Report.) Examples include:
What about the parking issue in Clifton?
This is a long and complex legal issue which is explained in much greater detail in Section 15 of the full report. The North Car Park is the main car park in front of Bristol Zoo which was used for the main, day-to-day zoo parking. Bristol Zoological Society lost the right to use that car park because of a case that almost went to the High Court in 2021. The case was brought by Downs for People who objected to Bristol Zoo using Ladies Mile for zoo parking. The North Car Park was caught up in the settlement as an unintended consequence as the North Car Park is Downs Land. SBZG has since obtained a statement from Downs for People stating that it would not object to BZS using the North Car Park for zoo parking in the future, should a way be found to make it lawful again. All the legal experts SBZG has so far talked to, can see no theoretical reason why it would not be possible to make it lawful so long as all the relevant parties – Bristol Zoological Society, Downs for People and the Downs Committee – were supportive. There does not appear to be good reason, legal or otherwise, why parking can be used as justification for a reimagined Bristol Zoo Gardens not being able to operate in the future.