Slick

Never say never, but practically no chance on planet earth. There's been so much urban development since the last series was at Dreamworld - the piece of land the house was on was isolated, now it's next door to a massive Westfield. Also all of production (from the edit suites to staging live shows) was on-site and heavily leveraged the Amphitheatre which was neglected and then subsequently bulldozed, which means a lot of infrastructure that was originally there would have to be rebuilt.

They don’t perform, they don’t do tricks, and they’re not in the circus. They were at one point a global leader in tiger conservation, and as such none of that language would ever fly front of house or back of house. Again, from literal first hand experience I can very confidently say all of the handlers there have a profound respect for the animals, and suffice to say as a result I don’t think a single one of them is happy to see the end of their hands-on relationship with these creatures.

Sorry mate, but this right here tells me you have no idea.

Is Kansco a new thing or extracted from Wizard of Oz lore?

Tiger Island's renovation was largely applauded by us all and is considered the best themed animal exhibit and one of the best themed areas in any Aussie park. Just one of that reasons for that was the consideration of sight lines. As an example Atomiq had placed a Thai temple top on the Bazaar building to give the space additional depth as you approached the main entrance. No one had done stuff like that so well in yeaaaaars. The tin shed exhibit with a painted facade that was added at the end of Tiger Island was then unequivocally panned as a giant mis-step because it was the total opposite to what came just months before, and was in no way immersive aesthetically in keeping with the brand. If it's a green tin shed on the Tiger Island side, I'll get it, it's a big space that isn't the bit that most people will see, but it'll be shit. One of the park's premiere events spaces is elevated and will be largely exposed to whatever they build over there. So if they do nothing and it's just tin shed, it'll really ruin the theme of what was previously an extremely profitable event space. Within the context of all of that, I can totally understand why people are getting the shits on how it ruins Tiger Island, especially when Dreamworld are selling it as the most themed, most immersive, most wackadoo thing ever. Sometimes I feel like it's one step forward, two steps back.

Eight slides closed (excluding Wedgie) is a vibe.

All a matter of perspective. From a capital expenditure perspective perspective, these are a drop in the bucket in the business plan compared to other investments, and it's money spent on assets that were either being poorly utilised or were on the verge of falling over completely. I'd argue it's more prudent business practice to add to the asset list than it is a show of hand to suggest there's a proactive wildlife strategy at play. Hot reminder, you're making sweeping huge assumptions about how the organisation works based on what happened before and after the current CEO came along whilst forgetting the same majority shareholders have been proactively involved throughout. In this case, the board members throughout the last 7-8 years have contributed greatly a number of these calls. I'd therefore be mindful of drawing the correlation or insinuation that those who have since left care less about the wildlife. In fact, I'd argue the opposite was true, which was reflected in the business plan post incident. Which bits weren't up to current standards? Nah, the revenue generated from Tiger Island post-incident was essentially one of the very few profit houses keeping Dreamworld alive. Back of house tours at Polar Bear Shores is a tiny revenue stream comparatively. You're making sweeping statements with very little to back it up here. I've done interviews with wildlife heads which you can find online, and there's plenty of research that shows that the better the interaction is between animal and guest leads to a raft of better outcomes, including individual engagement in conservation plus revenue contributions towards park top-line and conservation donations. I even think I had the former head of life sciences at Sea World almost say a version of that, too. It's not the same in no-contact environments. And it's ultimately an early death knoll for Tiger Island as a whole - I have no doubt in five years someone might go "Jesus, it's not that popular anymore hey" and assume it's just waining popularity and not any of the other changes made and close it entirely.

FYI, the shows aren't the sole moment of enrichment for tigers throughout the day, which is what you're inferring there. Bit my tongue for a hot minute there, will keep it short and brief: 1) Tigers can be as equally as enriched in a no contact environment as they can be with hands-on environment, it just takes a lot more effort. 2) Risk appetite and the current business plan are the two dictators for hands-on vs no-contact. This current Dreamworld has a low appetite for risk from both a comms and workplace safety perspective. The current Dreamworld hasn't placed animal exhibits high in their current business plan, hence why so many high-profile names have since left. Ergo, the transition to no-contact was inevitable. 3) I'd say 90% of folks out there get the handler/animal relationship and the inherent risk in the same way if you sign up for the Army you might anticipate being shot at. It comes with the occupation. There's a lot of benefits to that relationship, it's easier to enrich the animals (for example, animals can go beyond enclosures in a controlled setting, it also exposes them to foreign noises, smells, different environments and makes them more manageable), fostering litters is far easier, opens up opportunities for additional revenue for the program (photos etc.) which then in turn raises additional exposure in market to the cause, etc. etc. My belief is that it's too much risk mitigation, and the money spent transforming an entire compound that was never designed for no-contact would've been better spent in better PR and more education/comms about the benefits of the program and what DWF was doing for conservation. That money would've generated an ROI.

You can do way, way better. Firstly it'd be a good idea to let us know how many days total you've got up your sleeve, how big your group is, what the mix is (all enthusiasts etc.) and where you're travelling. If you go to Japan just for theme parks you're doing yourself a disservice - it's one of the most gorgeous places in the world in terms of landscapes, people, culture etc. and if you were to go to Hirakata Park over spending a day in Kyoto you'd be doing Japan dead wrong. Secondly, it's not all about coasters. Don't be a credit-whore, it'll become a disservice to your trip because stats don't matter, experiences DO, and Tokyo Disney Resort is one of the best experiences you'll ever have in your life. DisneySea in particular is the best theme park in the world and I'll happily die on that hill. If you're an enthusiast and you don't go to DisneySea, you're not an enthusiast, it's that simple. You can do one day at each Disney park and be very satisfied. Again, take the "there needs to be credits" hat off and put the "I love great experiences, especially at theme parks hat on" and I promise you your trip will get a ton better as a whole. If you can't take the credit hat off and you need to do something that's not USJ/TDS/TDL, the two heavy hitters are Nagashima Spa Land and Fuji-Q Highlands. The beauty about the former is that it's on the way between Tokyo and Osaka, so if you're committed or on a tight schedule you can make it work as you travel from port to port. With the latter, it's next to some sublime natural beauty (Mount Fuji, Fujiyoshida, Fuji five lakes etc.) and is also home to Eejanaika, which should be the #1 coaster to get whenever you visit Japan. Not doing Eejanaika and going to Hirakata Park would be a crime. Again, this is all depends on how long you've got, but think of the above as your "first time must-do's". If you have more time, or come back again on a second trip, Parque Espana (beautiful place in the world, Pyrenees is there too), Tobu Zoo (Intamin Megalite with t-bars, 10/10), Studio Ghibil Park (stunning and gorgeous), Yomiuiriland (near Tokyo and filled with classics) and Yokohama Cosmoworld (good vibes) are probably all parks I'd consider visiting before Hirakata Park. You've also got Thunder Dolphin at Tokyo Dome and Gekion Live Coaster at Joypolis to checkout whilst in Tokyo too.

Hopefully the primer dries soon so they can finish painting it.

No wonder it’s taken them years to do, it’s a lot of dirt for one man and a shovel.

Cougars haven’t been around for many years now.

What’s the shake out when it comes to major attractions?

It’s missing a ton of golden trim and paint to elevate all those blue windows.

The film they showed there was insanely high quality in terms of production value (and no, I didn’t make it).