LIKE many others, I was dismayed by the news that Durrell has felt the need to cut 14 jobs, most of those in this Island.

Like many others, as a child I read steadily through all of Gerald Durrell’s books, longed to visit the Corfu of My Family and Other Animals, was inspired to look more closely at creatures I had hitherto disregarded, and began – as many of his readers undoubtedly have – to take an abiding interest in living things of all kinds.

Of course tourism ain’t what it used to be and no doubt people have been cutting back on excursions and so on because of the recession. And we should never be surprised if, when push comes to shove, worthy causes are among the first to suffer cutbacks.

Even so, with climate change and conservation so much in the daily news and featuring highly on TV entertainment schedules, I would have thought that interest in the work of the trust would have at least have been maintained, or even escalated.

We don’t yet know what Durrell’s end-of-year accounts will reveal – and they are not due to be made public until at least April. But at the end of 2008 incoming resources – including £3.5 million of voluntary income – totalled £6.3 million. Outgoings, which included £3 million on the animal collection and £1.3 million on conservation science – totalled £6.6 million. The annual report expressed the hope that 2009 – the trust’s 50th anniversary year – would bring success, despite declining visitor numbers. Sadly this seems not to have been the case.

I do have some sympathy with the writer of a letter to the editor of this paper who said that the entrance fee was expensive. For a family of four the entrance alone will not give much change out of a £50 note and, naturally, children will expect refreshments and gift shop trophies as well.

However, as Jersey residents we get a better deal. A single annual membership will pay for itself over three visits – not much to ask when you consider that Durrell is open every weekend, all year round.

In fact, I have found visits during the winter months to be more enjoyable because, without the poking and prying of hundreds of visitors, the animals tend to be out and about. In addition, you can have the keeper talks almost to yourself, ask all the questions you can think of – and even the most unpromising-looking creatures, I find, reveal entertaining idiosyncrasies. Judge not by appearances.

The grounds are worth a visit in themselves, with the spring magnolia, rhododendron walks and blossom absolute stunners. Even on winter days a stroll with a camera or sketch book is a delight.

We should also remember that these animals are not living in Trinity because they like the countryside or the tax breaks. They would probably prefer to spend their days in their natural environment. But our fellow homo sapiens have hunted them for fur or meat and cut down their food sources and habitats. They are among the last survivors of their kind and, for this alone, they deserve our interest and respect.

It is true, however, that some of the caging has not been upgraded since I was a youngster and personally I think the gift shop has lost its way in recent years. Certainly I came away empty handed from a pre-Christmas forage.

Nevertheless, we are privileged to have these animals on our doorstep and to have access to not only best practice, but also knowledge that others can glean only from TV programmes. It is probably no exaggeration to say that it would be a disaster if Durrell felt the need to move elsewhere because of our lack of support.

The least I can do is to renew my subscription and my acquaintance with the animals that generations to come may never have the chance to encounter.

I also want to wish the staff who have lost their jobs the very best – particularly those intrepid enough to take part in the Durrell pantomime being staged this weekend.

Bigger. But any better?
I WAS amused to read a few weeks ago that double-decker buses might be reintroduced in the island.

This doesn’t seem a very sensible idea in the light of the bus company’s inability to provide a service during the snow and ice. Living close to town, I rarely have occasion to use public transport – but I would have been absolutely furious if I had been among those left stranded on the recent Friday evening when all bus services were suspended.
Contrary to popular misconception, not all of us have access to a 4×4 chariot.

Connex have outlined all their arguments and, no doubt, their decision was based on rational calculation in terms of both safety and cost.

But they are subsidised by the States – and it has to be said that the folk who come from less sunnier climes, where snow is not unknown to last for three months or more, find our lack of practical ability to deal with these weather conditions completely incongruous.

Perhaps we should get some advice about how they manage to keep schools functioning and bus services running, even at high altitudes and in much worse conditions than we’ve had here.

As for double-deckers, I’m against them. There are enough big lorries on our roads already – and they seem to be getting taller by the minute. You only have to watch them lopping the base branches off overhanging trees (which, after all, are a characteristic of Jersey roads) to imagine the damage they might do. And an even more important question – could the drivers handle them?

Why not introduce smaller buses – as they have in Devon and Cornwall – which are compact enough to negotiate the narrower roads, niftier in poor weather, and probably less expensive to run?

Why does bigger necessarily mean better?

Members of the States – and the Business Party
I WAS not entirely surprised that the States turned down the chance to save Plémont for posterity.

The Members who voted in favour of condemning this stunning landscape to housing are, in fact, following a well-worn path. They will be the same people who have voted to allow J-category workers to buy and rent whatever is on the market, who approve wholeheartedly the latest eyesore down at the Waterfront – Castle Quay, I think they call it – and who favour a super-yacht marina in the Harbour.

Although they might deny it, they belong to a political party. It is underground, subversive and, for want of a better name, we could call it the Business Party. This party has two sub-groups – the Financial Services Party and the Construction Industry Party, and both have been lobbying hard at every conceivable corporate breakfast, lunch and dinner to persuade key States Members to follow their lead.

How foolish are the States Members who have blindly followed? We will find out only when it is too late to do anything about it.