These are from Wrenfield's 2002 and 2015 visitor guides. Look at the dark fork halfway up the neck and the small pale notch underneath it.
Thirteen years, two different animals according to the captions, and they're still using the same pattern. I think we are looking at a covering that has been reused. I've circled the part I mean, not the entire animal.
Call it a similar pattern, then. I don't see why a picture is enough to identify the animal when the park prints it, but not when somebody compares it with another picture.
These are from Wrenfield's 2002 and 2015 visitor guides. Look at the dark fork halfway up the neck and the small pale notch underneath it.
Thirteen years, two different animals according to the captions, and they're still using the same pattern. I think we are looking at a covering that has been reused. I've circled the part I mean, not the entire animal.
−+Collapse or expand reply by vellum
Those are different photographs. The rail and the head position are different. That doesn't tell you whether the animals are different.
−+Collapse or expand reply by mothproof
You've picked one patch. The three little ones beside it don't match.
−+Collapse or expand reply by flatlander
They could change individual pieces without throwing the whole covering away.
−+Collapse or expand reply by rustred
Then what would count as a different animal to you?
−+Collapse or expand reply by flatlander
Different main pattern. Not every mark has to be identical for you to recognize it.
−+Collapse or expand reply by flatlander
Call it a similar pattern, then. I don't see why a picture is enough to identify the animal when the park prints it, but not when somebody compares it with another picture.
−+Collapse or expand reply by ribbedglass
I had that first guide. The giraffe got half a page and the toilets got an entire foldout.