I havent seen mention of it here, but have on FB, that Tiger Island will also be getting a refurb/remodelling as the park moves away from keeper interaction with the tigers - i.e no longer doing presentations etc.

If that is the case, and its basically set to be become a zoo exhibit, then for mine they may as well get rid of it. Tiger Island since day one was about the interaction between tigers and handlers visible to the public, about understanding their natural instincts and behaviours in the wild (as much as possible in a controlled setting). 

If what we are getting is just a couple of tigers sitting in a smaller location than what is current, i'd be done with it and use the land for better purpose  -  and thats coming from someone who LOVES tigers.

Stopping performance is one thing (a very stupid thing, but it's a thing), taking the people off Tiger Island all together? Someone is seriously smoking something out there.

Why do tigers need a performance though, as opposed to other animals?

Eg if it was Lion Island or Rhino Island, you wouldn't expect that right?

Edited November 24, 20223 yr by Gazza

Personally I think straying away from animal presentations is always a positive thing. Also who knows what has been going on behind the scenes regarding the tigers and trainers interactions.. Didn’t the main tiger handler just resign this year? 

Edited November 24, 20223 yr by kujotess

Do you remember the first time you went to Tiger Island and saw people out there. Remember how much that blew your mind that you could have people interact with Tigers like that? Remember having full access to talk to a tiger handler about anything you wanted to know? That is seriously awesome, and makes you really understand and learn for them. It makes you want to stay and be immersed. Without that it just doesn't have the same impact. Also what do you think is better for the animals? Having someone to interact with or just being left out there on their own?

 

The presentations to me form part of environmental enrichment. It's more interesting for them to be engaged with an activity, the sorts of things you do in the presentations are you'd want to do that sort of thing even without a crowd if you cared about keeping them mentally stimulated. It's a real obstacle when you can't interact directly in the same way, it's why so much effort was put into enrichment in the exhibit design for Polar Bears because you lose something when you can't have that. For DW to have it, and then throw it away is insane.

Thread split lost this, so just copy pasting this from my post in the other thread to continue the relevant discussion:

42 minutes ago, Brad2912 said:

I havent seen mention of it here, but have on FB, that Tiger Island will also be getting a refurb/remodelling as the park moves away from keeper interaction with the tigers - i.e no longer doing presentations etc.

If that is the case, and its basically set to be become a zoo exhibit, then for mine they may as well get rid of it. Tiger Island since day one was about the interaction between tigers and handlers visible to the public, about understanding their natural instincts and behaviours in the wild (as much as possible in a controlled setting). 

If what we are getting is just a couple of tigers sitting in a smaller location than what is current, i'd be done with it and use the land for better purpose  -  and thats coming from someone who LOVES tigers.

I don't disagree with you, but when I read this, my impression was:

They've just lost Patrick, and without his level of experience, they need time to rework things. Without the Alpha (patrick) maybe the other trainers were less confident \ having issues with the ongoing interactions, and they've pared back their offering to a straight up exhibit to minimise the risk of potential incidents while they re-group.

25 minutes ago, Gazza said:

Why do tigers need a performance though, as opposed to other animals?

Eg if it was Lion Island or Rhino Island, you wouldn't expect that right?

I think because they always have. It's a continuation expectation. nothing more.

Just crazy speculation on my half but maybe they lost Patrick because he was not in favour of this new direction.

22 minutes ago, Gazza said:

Why do tigers need a performance though, as opposed to other animals?

Eg if it was Lion Island or Rhino Island, you wouldn't expect that right?

It was never about performances. The whole concept of TI was that you could see these wild animals interacting safely with their human counterparts, the relationships built between the handlers and the tigers, that you could ask questions and get information, see the conservation message firsthand etc.

That was what set TI apart from a zoo exhibit you'd see at Taronga or Melbourne.

If that appeal and point of difference is going, then IMO, so should the tigers. 

Also, these animals are normally lazy so the presentation displays what they can do on a regular timetable, rather than someone seeing from pure luck. just like sea world with their dolphin and seal shows.

 

Edit: Australia Zoo do this also, and for this reason, a show of their behaviours and information session.

Edited November 24, 20223 yr by Naazon

Just found this in the GCB article:

One of the biggest changes coming for the park will be on its renowned Tiger Island, where direct contact between tigers and handlers is set to be phased out within 18 months as public amid shifting public sentiment around performing animals.

Despite the change, Dreamworld said Tiger Island would remain a fixture at the park, with guests still able to view them, and that it would continue to support tiger conservation projects in the field via Wildcats Conservation Alliance.

 

Doesn't fly for me. You're either all in or all out. The tigers got enrichment interacting with the handlers on the island, they've been raised with it and accustomed to it. Without handlers on the island, i also believe it limits the amount of tigers that can be on the island at once as there is no-one to "manage" the behaviours or immediately react if the tigers decide to go at it. So the tiger island we used to see with 4-5-6 tigers out with 2-3 handlers will now become what i saw on Saturday which was 2 tigers out, no handlers, and therefore no people taking any notice.

This is from a Facebook page, I'm not allowed to mention but that have sought further clarification from DW.

 

“Tigers are an incredibly important element of the Dreamworld experience, first being introduced in 1995, offering a unique experience in which handlers interact directly with tigers. Having undergone significant review and consideration, in 12 – 18 months, Dreamworld’s Tiger Island will transition to an environment in which tigers and handlers do not interact directly.

Dreamworld’s Tiger Island remains committed to providing the best possible care for the welfare of their tigers and will work closely with both our expert team and external specialists to ensure a smooth transition.

An accredited member of the Zoo and Aquarium Association Australasia (ZAA), Dreamworld’s transition keeps pace with developments in animal welfare science and aims to meet community expectations in relation to caring for exotic animals.

Tiger Island remains a critical part of the experience at Dreamworld, and guests will continue seeing tigers on exhibit into the future. Educational presentations about the importance of tiger conservation will also continue to take place, and the business will continue investing in Tiger Island.

Dreamworld remains committed to conservation and makes meaningful change via the Dreamworld Wildlife Foundation, which has supported tiger conservation projects in the field via Wildcats Conservation Alliance. “

Edited November 24, 20223 yr by New display name

This explains why they got rid of the LED screen then.

I mean, Tiger shows caused backlash due to society thinking it’s inhumane to make the animals do that, so getting rid of that element while keeping the animals in hopefully a more interactive exhibit really is a smart move if you really think about it.

You don't think the same people who want to stop interaction want tigers in captivity full stop?   More to it here than DW is telling us.

1 hour ago, New display name said:

You don't think the same people who want to stop interaction want tigers in captivity full stop?   More to it here than DW is telling us.

there more lenient towards captivity alone with good care then they are with captivity and forcing the animals to do routine shows which causes them stress. It’s just how society works now and they’re adapting to the times.

@Rivals really think you should sit this one out. Really, I mean this in a crazy respectful way, but you don't know these people. They are not against *just this one aspect*. DW are also irresponsible by feeding into the nonsense by suggesting changing attitudes are the reason. I don't want to go into it because what I don't want to do is slag anyone off in a way that can be taken out of context (I deleted a critical post of mine because I worry about nutters taking it, removing crucial context and spinning it.

 

All I'll say, is anyone who cares about animal welfare, should not and as a rule do not take advice from people who care about animal rights. Animal right people can, and do advocate for animal cruelty, and celebrate their success when they achieve it. I've met and worked with many people who work in and care about animal welfare. Not a single one has ever advocated cruelty. Theme parks and zoos are in the animal welfare business.

1 hour ago, Rivals said:

forcing the animals to do routine shows which causes them stress

They're never forced.. if they didn't want to do the show they'd just sit in the sun and enjoy the view.

Two interviews with Greg talk about changes to Tiger Island. Linked these on the main thread but adding for context here.

https://fb.watch/g-3ro6BzFo/
https://fb.watch/g-3xQ1BdXv/
 

Greg touches on the following reasons:

• Having adequate trained staff to perform the interactions.
• Changes enhances safety
• Changing from 'full contact environment' to 'protected contact environment'
• There will still be tiger presentations, but different as tigers and handlers will be in different spaces.

I guess I'm a little more optimistic, maybe they'll add in platforms for the trainers to stand on, kinda like how some parks do crocodile shows etc.

29 minutes ago, franky said:

I guess I'm a little more optimistic, maybe they'll add in platforms for the trainers to stand on, kinda like how some parks do crocodile shows etc.

They’ll stand in the “reserved” seating area no doubt, and likely just be a paid staff member (not a handler) giving a 5min spiel on tiger facts and conservation “tigers are the largest big cats, they are endangered, there’s a box over there for cash donations”.
 

Give it 12 months and it will be “an audio presentation occurs every hour at tiger island” and what was a unique and memorable experience will be replaced by a $500 Bose speaker with a loop track 

It really sounds like its a setup for a dead end peter out.

Greg's reply in his news-pieces was about how difficult labour was to source and the risk factor.

1) The talent is readily available, Ardent just made the talent redundant. It's literally Ardent's strategic misdirection that has caused this. The rationale is literally a meme.

 

2) Handler/Wildlife interaction is one of the most single important keys to reducing risk. It's just plain facts. You can't exercise or enrich the animals to anywhere near the level you can when handlers have a relationship with the animal.

 

22 hours ago, Brad2912 said:

direct contact between tigers and handlers is set to be phased out within 18 months as public amid shifting public sentiment around performing animals

This quote, but keep in mind they're still doing to presentations. There is nothing wrong with presentations, but that double speak is really not cool.

Edited November 25, 20223 yr by joz

Sometimes DW make announcements just to make an announcement because Village made one. 

Village: “We are building a hotel”

DW: “We want to build a hotel too”

Is there a reason for DW to tell us they are taking away what people love about tiger island? Because the negative reaction I have seen online is not what you want when you are promoting your future.  This tiger announcement feels like Wipeout shade sails all over again.

they might as well get rid of it than. in fact get rid of all the animals and build more rides that's what they should do

2 hours ago, bladex said:

get rid of all the animals and build more rides that's what they should do

Disagree with that. The wildlife area is a drawcard for families with children, and international tourists. It also provides a decent crowd draw away from rides, as well as offering a bigger area to disperse people over.