Animal welfare concerns at South Lakes Safari Zoo in Cumbria have prompted a call for immediate action from vets, campaigners, and actors, urging local authorities to revoke the zoo’s licence.
The latest wave of scrutiny follows an investigation that aired in October, which highlighted allegations of avoidable animal deaths, welfare issues, and a bullying culture among staff at the facility.
Westmorland and Furness Council has stated that while it has a responsibility to ensure the zoo complies with the terms of its licence, it lacks the legal power to revoke it.
In response to the allegations, the zoo’s management has denied any wrongdoing, claiming that animal welfare remains a top priority.
The BBC’s investigation, which included testimony from former zoo employees, revealed disturbing images and videos allegedly depicting injuries and fatalities to animals.
These included photographs of a capybara with deep cuts to its hindquarters and a giraffe with head injuries.
The former employees also described a toxic working environment, claiming that staff members were often “completely broken” and “in tears” due to the pressure and mistreatment they faced.
South Lakes Safari Zoo, operated by Cumbria Zoo Company Limited (CZCL), vehemently denied the allegations, asserting that it had never engaged in practices that resulted in harm to animals.
In a statement, the zoo said it “wholly denied and disputed” any claims of animal abuse, calling the accusations part of a broader “hard-line anti-captivity agenda” promoted by the group Freedom for Animals.
The zoo’s reputation has been under the microscope since earlier this year, when the Westmorland and Furness Council conducted an unannounced inspection in March.
The inspection reportedly revealed that rhinos had been confined indoors for over 17 hours, raising serious concerns about the animals’ welfare.
A subsequent inspection in April flagged “grave concerns” about a drop in standards over the past three years. However, by June, the council reported that the zoo had addressed 26 out of 28 improvement directives.
Despite these efforts, a group of 33 animal protection organizations, including prominent figures like actors Peter Egan and Carol Royale, have urged the council to take stronger action.
In a letter led by Freedom for Animals, the group called on the council to permanently revoke the zoo’s licence and transfer the animals to accredited sanctuaries.
According to the council, changes in the law in 2003 transferred the power to revoke or suspend zoo licences from local authorities to central government.
However, councils still maintain the authority to close zoos if they fail to make necessary improvements or if there are severe violations, such as criminal convictions.
Zoo management, led by Karen Brewer, maintains that it complies fully with all regulations. Brewer reiterated that the zoo had passed three council inspections in the past year, during which its veterinary program was praised. She emphasized the zoo’s commitment to improving conditions to meet the licensing requirements.
Despite the zoo’s claims, the call for stronger intervention continues, with campaigners urging that the welfare of the animals should be the primary concern.
As the situation unfolds, the pressure on both the zoo and local authorities to address these concerns will likely intensify.
