SUNDAY CHARGES

Evening Post, Volume CIX, Issue 15, 18 January 1930, Page 10

SUNDAY CHARGES

WILL THE ZOO BENEFIT ?

POLICY NEVER MADE CLEAR

iWHAT VOTERS THOUGHT

In spit* of the broken weather so far j this summer tho zoo official? have no] complaints to make over attend-ances, for the gate;takings for the last three months or so have set a new standard, not only for Sundays—until this year , admission was free on Sundays—but for week days. The week day takings for December last year totalled £177, a considerable improvement on the £149 3s, for December of 1928, and with Sunday takings added the December total is 241. In January, 1929, the takings amounted to £•161, whereas for half the month this year, up to 15th, the shillings and sixpences had amounted up to £205, including Sundays. The aggregate for fifteen Sundays, 13th October to 12th January, is £177 7s 6d, which, though quite welcome, is still considerably below what was anticipated by some advocates of the Sunday charge when electors were being asked to authorise this charge last year. Then it was suggested that Sunday sixpences might bring in, on a basis of an attendance of three thousand, on the average per Sunday, £3900 per year, or £75 per Sunday. The takings for the fifteen Sundays so far average out at only £11 16s 6d per Sunday, and, even though tho weather has been so unfavourable as to keep a good many people away from the zoo, it does not seem likely that the optimistic £75 per Sunday can possibly be reached, this year, at auy rate. TO ZOO OR TO TREASURY. So far there is a distinct difference of opinion as to how these Sunday takings shall be utilised by the council, though there is not tho slightest doubt as to what the electors were given to understand- when they were asked to sanction the making of Sunday charges, and did so, by 14,067 votes to 8510. They understood definitely that the money taken at the gates was to be devoted to zoo purposes, and the latest City Year Book says very much the same thing in quite an official manner.

With a view to providing the necessary funds for zoo purposes and to relievo the taxpayers of an increasing burden on the rates, the council sub?aitted the question of Sunday charges o a poll of ratepayers. This was done on Ist May, 1929, with the result that the proposal was carried.

In the past the policy as regards zoo revenue has been that all takings should be paid into the city treasury, to the relief of the district fund, and though the amount voted for zoo purposes has remained in most years at about £5000, the actual charge upon rates revenuo has been round about £3000, the revenue working out at about £2000 for tlie last three years.

If'this policy is to bo followed in regard to Sunday charges also, as geems not at all unlikely, then the development of the zoo will not be speeded up as the electors thought itwould be when they sanctioned Sunday charges last May. So far therehas been no discussion at the council chamber upon the point, and each ■week the previous Sunday's takings have been paid over the treasury counter. MONEY BADLY NEEDED. If the zoo was all in apple-pie ordeir the Joss, of these Sunday sixpence/a would not be of so great moment to tiezoo, but unfortunately a great deal Domains to be done but cannot be done :if the finances are kept down to just abojjut bare bones. The main paths call ow.t loudly for some sort of sealing to keqp down the dust and to give a decent so rface underfoot. Much has been done in the improvement of cages and /enclosures, but there is still a lot ahqad, mates are wanted.for the polar bear and the black bear, the elephant ! deserves a bathing pool—at present', he stands up to the hose —the swan ])>ond still has that pea soup appearsmce (though it is not nearly as thick a:s it looks), the faco of the hill above the sea lion pond might bo terraced, the aquarium has fallen a long way b>ack, more ornamental beds would be an improvement, and those are only soiifie of the needs. All those improvements,wi'l cost .'money, and as the .Zoological Society has dissolved the council e.annot look to so many contributions of birds or animals as in the past. . Actually this year, unless tho . zoo is given the direct benefit of Sunday takings, the finances will be more sprained than ever, for the vote made lby the council when adopting the estimates was ■only £4979, whereas in past years the expenditure has been 1925, £42i»fl:; 1926 £4251; 1927, £5086; 1928, £76&1; and 1929, £5697; in some years thae actual ■expenditure exceeded the estimates.■

This point as to whether Sunday takings are to continue to be paid into the common fund or are to be devoted to zoo purposes is of particularl interest, not.only to those councillors who are keen for more rapid development of the zoo, but likewise to the electors who voted in favour of Sunday charges on the understanding that their sixpences would go directly for zoo improvement.