New construction at Disney's Animal Kingdom?

[ToTBellHop]

I belive EPCOT could do with a new thrill ride before the otheer parks

Really? Epcot has received three thrill rides in the last 8 years: Test Track in 1999, Mission: SPACE in 2003, Soarin' in 2005. Magic Kingdom is the park that should get the next E-Ticket since MGM already has one under construction.

As for a rainforest-themed land...most of Animal Kingdom is already rainforest themed...that's why it's about twice as muggy there as any of the other parks. I'd rather see Australia although a Central/South American land similar to Lost River Delta at Tokyo DisneySea might be nifty. Of course the coolest idea is the European-themed Beastly Kingdom...we'd all love to see something come of that...

 

[marni1971]

..the proposed Beastly Kingdom would not be going in this large open land parcel but it would rather be replacing Camp Minnie Mickey. Not only would it use the current land of CMM, there is a piece of land further behind it between the rear of Festival of the Lion King and the Rainforest Cafe access road that doubles CMM's size..

The CMM land, and behind the Rainforest Cafe, is exactly where Beastly Kingdomme was planned to go. CMM was planned as a temporary area almost as an afterthought when BK was mothballed - with no BK the original park was lacking even more than when opened, and there was no central Meet`n`Greet area.

I hypothosise the cleared space behind Kali was originally cleared during construction for the much larger Tiger River Run rapids, until it was scaled down and became Kali. It appears this would have been part of a much larger travelled-by-water `Asian Safari` - the large cleared parcel in the NE corner of the park, as seen in the original park concept aerials. Here`s a rough idea of what was planned - a lot bigger than the final result, and taking in all the cleared land:

 

[ToTBellHop]

yeah...I remember in the 1998 Birnbaum's book that previewed DAK, they had info on "Tiger Rapids Run" detailing how you would see Siberian Tigers on the ride...how incredible would that have been? Too bad they had to cut back. It woulda been a stunning ride experience instead of the well-themed but too-short ride we got...

 

[Master Yoda]

I belive EPCOT could do with a new thrill ride before the otheer parks

New thrill rides at WDW since 1998

MK-0
MGM-1 RnRC
AK-1 E:E
Epcot-3 TT,M:S and Soarin

Looking at the new thrill ride score card since 1998 I think Epcot has received enough thrill rides and it is time to spread the wealth around the other three parks MGM and AK in particular.

 

[marni1971]

Epcot`s still not finished with it`s rehabs yet - there`s more to come!

Same for the MK. In 18 months if all goes well all the pre-1980 attractions will be up to modern standards.

MGM needs to decide what it is - and sort out the is-it-isn`t-it "backstage" tour and other areas of neglect. Midway will take up some of the slack, but as addressed elsewhere it`s just the tip of the iceberg.

DAK needs to build on the popularity of Everest and not rest on it`s laurels. One more E ride and a D ride (dark ride anyone?) in a new-style BK would push it towards a full day park for the majority of guests - and then we could have regular night safaris and the Steve Davidson production too. Even Noah`s Ark could fit theme-wise. It`d be better here than on Crescent Lake!

 

[ToTBellHop]

Epcot`s still not finished with it`s rehabs yet - there`s more to come!

Same for the MK. In 18 months if all goes well all the pre-1980 attractions will be up to modern standards.

MGM needs to decide what it is - and sort out the is-it-isn`t-it "backstage" tour and other areas of neglect. Midway will take up some of the slack, but as addressed elsewhere it`s just the tip of the iceberg.

DAK needs to build on the popularity of Everest and not rest on it`s laurels. One more E ride and a D ride (dark ride anyone?) in a new-style BK would push it towards a full day park for the majority of guests - and then we could have regular night safaris and the Steve Davidson production too. Even Noah`s Ark could fit theme-wise. It`d be better here than on Crescent Lake!

really you hit the nail on the head there. One other thing they need is some more sit-down restaurants--people need somewhere to sit down for dinner and a nighttime show is KEY. Put in some fireworks and people will stay. DAK truly is beautiful at night. Night safaris create a particular challenge both for the safety of the animals and the enjoyment of the guests. How about Rockin' Kilimanjaro Safaris??? The Red Hot Chilli Peppers can fix anything. Just kidding. But, truthfully, they'd have to add something at night. Not sure what...

 

[RSoxNo1]

A water based show could conceivably work as a night time show at the animal kingdom.

As for new attractions, Australia doesn't make sense to me as a separate land, but I do think that the addition of Australian animals would make sense to add to Rafiki's Planet Watch. I'm guessing that the proposed changes we are likely to see in the next calender year at the AK are as follows:

Opening of the Asian restaurant
Tusker House format changed to sit down restaurant
Walking path to Rafiki's Planet watch

 

[ToTBellHop]

A water based show could conceivably work as a night time show at the animal kingdom.

As for new attractions, Australia doesn't make sense to me as a separate land, but I do think that the addition of Australian animals would make sense to add to Rafiki's Planet Watch. I'm guessing that the proposed changes we are likely to see in the next calender year at the AK are as follows:

Opening of the Asian restaurant
Tusker House format changed to sit down restaurant
Walking path to Rafiki's Planet watch

why are you hating on Australia? It's as much a continent as Africa and Asia. The Great Barrier Reef, alone, could be a land. Then you have the Outback, something AK has nothing similar to. And add New Zealand's scenery and you could have a gorgeous land...there's a reason most of the "epic" films of late have been taped in New Zealand. That huge plot of land behind Asia has long been rumored as the area reserved for Australia.

 

[S.E.A.]

why are you hating on Australia? It's as much a continent as Africa and Asia. The Great Barrier Reef, alone, could be a land. Then you have the Outback, something AK has nothing similar to. And add New Zealand's scenery and you could have a gorgeous land...there's a reason most of the "epic" films of late have been taped in New Zealand. That huge plot of land behind Asia has long been rumored as the area reserved for Australia.

DAK is not about continents, it's about animals.

The animals in Australia are too small and demure to really warrant their own land. Sure you can have the Great Barrier Reef, but just that, not the entire continent. besides, they already have "The Seas" at Epcot.

there are a lot of other better land possibilities than "Australia"...like Beastlie Kingdomme (classical mythical beasts) or even The Amazon (south american animals, birds and insects.)

 

[ToTBellHop]

DAK is not about continents, it's about animals.

The animals in Australia are too small and demure to really warrant their own land. Sure you can have the Great Barrier Reef, but just that, not the entire continent. besides, they already have "The Seas" at Epcot.

there are a lot of other better land possibilities than "Australia"...like Beastlie Kingdomme (classical mythical beasts) or even The Amazon (south american animals, birds and insects.)

From Wikipedia:

Although most of Australia is semi-arid or desert, it covers a diverse range of habitats, from alpine heaths to tropical rainforests. Because of the great age and consequent low levels of fertility of the continent, its extremely variable weather patterns, and its long-term geographic isolation, much of Australia's biota is unique and diverse. About 85% of flowering plants, 84% of mammals, more than 45% of birds, and 89% of in-shore, temperate-zone fish are endemic.[14] Many of Australia's ecoregions, and the species within those regions, are threatened by human activities and introduced plant and animal species. The federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 is a legal framework used for the protection of threatened species. Numerous protected areas have been created under the country's Biodiversity Action Plan to protect and preserve Australia's unique ecosystems, 64 wetlands are registered under the Ramsar Convention, and 16 World Heritage Sites have been established. Australia was ranked thirteenth in the World on the 2005 Environmental Sustainability Index.

Most Australian woody plant species are evergreen and many are adapted to fire and drought, including many eucalyptus and acacias. Australia has a rich variety of endemic legume species that thrive in nutrient-poor soils because of their symbiosis with Rhizobia bacteria and mycorrhizal fungi. Well-known Australian fauna include monotremes (the platypus and echidna); a host of marsupials, including the kangaroo, koala, wombat; and birds such as the emu, and kookaburra. The dingo was introduced by Austronesian people that traded with Indigenous Australians around 4000 BCE. Many plant and animal species became extinct soon after human settlement, including the Australian megafauna; others have become extinct since European settlement, among them the Thylacine.

Kangaroos, wombats, koalas, tazmanian devils, emus, the platypus, echidna, plus a whole host of poisonous snakes, scorpions, tarantulas, the ability to have a Great Barrier Reef Exhibit, the famous New Zealand kiwi bird. Tons of species throughout Australia and New Zealand are endangered with many many many species having gone extinct in recent years. Sounds like a perfect match to Disney's message of conservation. Australia is also home to incredibly diverse ecosystems from the reefs to the outback to temperate mountains and tropical rainforests. Suggesting that the place where Steve Irwin got his start is home to demure animals is a bit much...some of the most dangerous animals in the world come from Australia.

 

[S.E.A.]

From Wikipedia:

Although most of Australia is semi-arid or desert, it covers a diverse range of habitats, from alpine heaths to tropical rainforests. Because of the great age and consequent low levels of fertility of the continent, its extremely variable weather patterns, and its long-term geographic isolation, much of Australia's biota is unique and diverse. About 85% of flowering plants, 84% of mammals, more than 45% of birds, and 89% of in-shore, temperate-zone fish are endemic.[14] Many of Australia's ecoregions, and the species within those regions, are threatened by human activities and introduced plant and animal species. The federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 is a legal framework used for the protection of threatened species. Numerous protected areas have been created under the country's Biodiversity Action Plan to protect and preserve Australia's unique ecosystems, 64 wetlands are registered under the Ramsar Convention, and 16 World Heritage Sites have been established. Australia was ranked thirteenth in the World on the 2005 Environmental Sustainability Index.

Most Australian woody plant species are evergreen and many are adapted to fire and drought, including many eucalyptus and acacias. Australia has a rich variety of endemic legume species that thrive in nutrient-poor soils because of their symbiosis with Rhizobia bacteria and mycorrhizal fungi. Well-known Australian fauna include monotremes (the platypus and echidna); a host of marsupials, including the kangaroo, koala, wombat; and birds such as the emu, and kookaburra. The dingo was introduced by Austronesian people that traded with Indigenous Australians around 4000 BCE. Many plant and animal species became extinct soon after human settlement, including the Australian megafauna; others have become extinct since European settlement, among them the Thylacine.

Kangaroos, wombats, koalas, tazmanian devils, emus, the platypus, echidna, plus a whole host of poisonous snakes, scorpions, tarantulas, the ability to have a Great Barrier Reef Exhibit, the famous New Zealand kiwi bird. Tons of species throughout Australia and New Zealand are endangered with many many many species having gone extinct in recent years. Sounds like a perfect match to Disney's message of conservation. Australia is also home to incredibly diverse ecosystems from the reefs to the outback to temperate mountains and tropical rainforests. Suggesting that the place where Steve Irwin got his start is home to demure animals is a bit much...some of the most dangerous animals in the world come from Australia.

the fact that you have to do that much research even furthers the fact that Australian animals are not epic enough to warrant a land of its own for Disney's Animal Kingdom. The ecosystems are too diverse to really focus on one specific area that would represent the whole thing unlike the african savannah, or the jungles of asia or even the amazon river basin. You have to learn to stop thinking of the lands in AK in a continent-based system and start seeing it as an homage to the animals that have shaped the culture and imagination of the world.

 

[ToTBellHop]

the fact that you have to do that much research even furthers the fact that Australian animals are not epic enough to warrant a land of its own for Disney's Animal Kingdom. The ecosystems are too diverse to really focus on one specific area that would represent the whole thing unlike the african savannah, or the jungles of asia or even the amazon river basin. You have to learn to stop thinking of the lands in AK in a continent-based system and start seeing it as an homage to the animals that have shaped the culture and imagination of the world.

A park who's main lands are called Africa, Asia, and Dinoland, USA isn't continent-based? Uh-huh. WDI has considered Australia as a land at Animal Kingdom. That's a fact. And I wasn't doing any research. I was supporting my claims. That's how you make an argument. You are suggesting that the ecosystems in Asia are not diverse? The land has a southeast Asian jungle adjacent to Mount Everest. That's diverse and they manage it. You don't have to lecture me on the theme of Animal Kingdom. I am more than aware of it.

 

[Mecha Figment]

um people. Animal kingdom already has the big Kangaroos. they live around the tree.

and Animal Kingdom will never do safaris into the late night. they have animal rights groups constantly hounding them. and the animals need sleep too. they don't live out on the savanah, they have their own padocks in the back. I don't think there will be any safaris after sundown.

 

[ToTBellHop]

um people. Animal kingdom already has the big Kangaroos. they live around the tree.

and Animal Kingdom will never do safaris into the late night. they have animal rights groups constantly hounding them. and the animals need sleep too. they don't live out on the savanah, they have their own padocks in the back. I don't think there will be any safaris after sundown.

Nighttime safaris were offered for New Years several years back. Some of the animals can stay out at night (they do at Animal Kingdom Lodge, for example), though you are right that many have separate backstage enclosures. Animals do need sleep but A) not all animals sleep at night and B) in the wild they sleep on the grass so they can do that in Central Florida. The fact that animals tend to not prance around at night is why people didn't see many animals during the night safaris, but there were SOME out.

And yes there are kangaroos, but there are also South American and Central American animals b/t the Oasis and Discovery Island. They could be moved to any new land.

 

[RSoxNo1]

It has been said by imagineers in the past that the reason why they don't have an australia land is the size of the animals. I think it's more likely to see australian animals mixed into the exhibits that aren't within a particular land. We already see this with the Kangaroos. The fact of the matter is, there isn't a signature animal that would be a centerpiece of an australian addition.

Additionally, it's been said that there wouldn't be a South American addition to the park because "most zoos already have that". I don't particularly like that excuse, and is far weaker than the Australian reasoning. With all that said, I think an Asian Safari/walk through is the next likely animal addition. I also voiced over a year ago that a possible arctic land would be a nice addition for polar bears, and penguins, but I don't see that happening either.

 

[Rosso11]

I still think Disney should try as hard as they can the get some pandas into Asia. They have the connections with the Chinese government. This is a park based on animals and as far as animals are concerned they would be the ultimate E-ticket animal exhibit.

 

[Mecha Figment]

yes perhaps. But the chinesse are very very particular about the pandas.

 

[Waldo.Pepper]

Some how I think...

I don't know...maybe it is just me being silly, but I don't think that AK's permanent guests would be more than annoyed by the thought of a fireworks display over the TOL. However the natural effects of the potential wildfire on the savannah might be even more alarming to them.

What they all might be interested in is another sit down restaurant...

 

[ToTBellHop]

It has been said by imagineers in the past that the reason why they don't have an australia land is the size of the animals. I think it's more likely to see australian animals mixed into the exhibits that aren't within a particular land. We already see this with the Kangaroos. The fact of the matter is, there isn't a signature animal that would be a centerpiece of an australian addition.

Additionally, it's been said that there wouldn't be a South American addition to the park because "most zoos already have that". I don't particularly like that excuse, and is far weaker than the Australian reasoning. With all that said, I think an Asian Safari/walk through is the next likely animal addition. I also voiced over a year ago that a possible arctic land would be a nice addition for polar bears, and penguins, but I don't see that happening either.

A. Penguins don't life in the arctic. They live in the Antarctic--where polar bears don't live. There is no land that can put penguins and polar bears together.

Alaska would be a cool area for a land b/c you could have polar bears, arctic wolves, and sea lions, but it would be very expensive since it would have to have incredibly powerful a/c to be authentic. Leaving polar bears outside in the Florida heat would be a little cruel. Local zoos might do that but I'd expect more from Disney, and I just can't see them forking over the change to have an entire land enclosed outside of Tokyo.

A particularly cool area would be the Galápagos Islands, for obvious reasons. It would be better than the more cliched S. American land that all parks have, and the wildlife diversity there is incredible...and it's hot and muggy down there so they could keep it outside.

 

[JML42691]

I don't know...maybe it is just me being silly, but I don't think that AK's permanent guests would be more than annoyed by the thought of a fireworks display over the TOL. However the natural effects of the potential wildfire on the savannah might be even more alarming to them.

What they all might be interested in is another sit down restaurant...

I think that an appropriate show area that could be held at night could take place in the center of the large open area of Discovery River (I believe that this area is called Discovery Bay). A show that would not use many firework blasts but rather a few small shots (roman candles, spark fountains, and the air launch system used at the biggining of Illuminations would not create a large ammount of sound as they would not be high altitude blasts). They could be shot from the center of the bay as this would greatly reduce the fire risk. The show could be a show more like Fantasmic with built in fountains and have an acted out show on an island that could be built in the center of the bay. But this is just a thought of mine.