River Country

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks for posting the video of the good memories. Something I didn't recall was that many of the water attractions relied on lake water. So that's why RC was shut down, deadly amoebas that breed in warm still water and normally enter human victims via the nose, mouth or ears and devour the brain, really. Sounds like one of those net-lore sci-fi fabrications, but a Dutch friend's 8-year-old son was infected and killed by an amoeba after playing in warm lake water in the Netherlands some years ago. Once infected, there is no cure for victims of amoebas.
 
Thanks for posting the video of the good memories. Something I didn't recall was that many of the water attractions relied on lake water. So that's why RC was shut down, deadly amoebas that breed in warm still water and normally enter human victims via the nose, mouth or ears and devour the brain, really. Sounds like one of those net-lore sci-fi fabrications, but a Dutch friend's 8-year-old son was infected and killed by an amoeba after playing in warm lake water in the Netherlands some years ago. Once infected, there is no cure for victims of amoebas.

This has been the standard company line for many years. BUT my contention is if this is true then why are exceptions made for the Ironman and other similar events where participants swim in Bay Lake as part of the competition. I think Disney should come clean and admit they made a financial decision when Typhoon Lagoon and Blizzard Beach opened. RC was smaller, harder to get to which caused attendance to lag and it had become more expensive to maintain due to its age. Just my humble opinion which of course combined with $5.00 might get a cup of coffee. :surfweb:
 
What I have read over the year of living in Florida that the amoebas only affect kids it does not affect adults that how Disney can have the competitions in Bay Lake.
 


What I have read over the year of living in Florida that the amoebas only affect kids it does not affect adults that how Disney can have the competitions in Bay Lake.

I would be willing to bet that it also has something to do with the brackish water and the inability to see someone if they are struggling to swim. The likelyhood that you could find a drowning victim in the dark water is considerably less than pool water.
 
What I have read over the year of living in Florida that the amoebas only affect kids it does not affect adults that how Disney can have the competitions in Bay Lake.

Also all the "Swimming" competitions are in cooler months. The amoeba I think lives in the mud and likes water over a certain temp.

So you don't have to worry about getting dunked into the middle of the lake while para sailing . Just don't stir up the bottom near shore where the water is warmer.

Better yet "Stay out of the dam lakes". :goodvibes
 


so sad to see it in such a state. me and my husband went in 2008 with our son. We went to check out the old river country and it was wide open, I could have just walked right in...I didn't. I'm a boring 'follow the rules' type. I so wish I would have gone in.
As a side note I went to river country in 1998, when I was 17. I thought it was fun...until I rode the upstream plunge. As soon as i hit the water the top half of my bathing suit was nearly up around my neck! At least I gave the lifeguards something to talk about.
 
aww, I found this thread because my mom kept talking about the water park we went to at Disney in 1988, and I kept thinking that TL wasn't open yet, so WTH was she talking about....

I remember the slides that only go halfway down the cliff! I was so scared to ride them but they were awesome! I'll see if I have pics at my parents to post.

Thanks for posting these!!
 
Let's think outside the box. I'm sure Disney could think of a way to block off the lake water and use only filtered water. The water would be clearer, cleaner, and free of the dreaded amoebas. In fact, it would look more like a lagoon and they could theme it around Peter Pan's mermaids.
 
You would think with all of the talented Disney Imagineers, they could have come up with something. Many of us have had great ideas, but maybe it's because we have the degree in common sense and not some higher level of learning. I guess we will have to bombard them with our ideas and see what happens. I'll see what contact information for the higher ups I can find.:mickeybar:mickeybar
 
You would think with all of the talented Disney Imagineers, they could have come up with something. Many of us have had great ideas, but maybe it's because we have the degree in common sense and not some higher level of learning. I guess we will have to bombard them with our ideas and see what happens. I'll see what contact information for the higher ups I can find.:mickeybar:mickeybar

I don't think it's fair to blame the Imagineers. We know all too well that the green light on projects comes from the "top". If the suits aren't interested in revamping RC, then it wouldn't matter how many great ideas the imagineers had.
 
You do have a point. I have had many castmembers tell me that the higherups listen to the guests before the castmembers. Kind of sad isn't it. It's the castmembers that talk to the guests and get their imput on the Disney experience.
Just like The Fort. The higherups thought converting almost all the loops to premium sites was the thing do because of all the big rigs. Did they ever walk around the loops and talke to the guests. Considering the outcome, probably not.
Who knows, maybe something good with come out of River Country. I certainly hope so. It was alot of fun.::MinnieMopluto::smickey:
 
You would think with all of the talented Disney Imagineers, they could have come up with something. Many of us have had great ideas, but maybe it's because we have the degree in common sense and not some higher level of learning. I guess we will have to bombard them with our ideas and see what happens. I'll see what contact information for the higher ups I can find.:mickeybar:mickeybar

I agree it has nothing to do with talent.

Any upgrade/rebuild is going to cost a fair amount of money. The CPA's will do a return on investment (ROI) analysis and determine if its worth it.

I'm not a CPA but I'm fairly certain its not worth it.

When RC first opened it was right in the middle of everything and was a quick boat ride from any Disney hotel or a short tram ride in the the campground.

It was also very unique being a themed water park.

Well now there are two other much larger themed water parks on property and two others in the area.

RC is now at the edge of WDW and many people would find it hard to get to. If you told then its near the Fort Wilderness Campground, most people would look at you funny and say "There's a campground on property?:confused3"

Its now just a hunk of land with no use. If Disney was going to build anything new, there are much better lots to build on with better access.

Also the only way its going to be another water park is if they bulldoze it down and rebuild. No matter how nostalgic it is, its was a badly designed park.

Even the regular pool would be an insurance nightmare today. Its way too deep and there are rocks along the edge to dive off of. WHAT WERE THEY THINKING? :scared1:

Also the body slides dumped you into over 6 feet of water.

Just like all those really cool casinos in Las Vegas that Dino and the Rat Pack hung out in, its time has come and gone you just have to live with it.
 
Well now there are two other much larger themed water parks on property and two others in the area.

I think this is the key. As long as those two parks are raking in the money. There's no need to invest in another water park. Perhaps if attendance at those two parks were consistently at capacity.... But the water parks are pretty seasonal, so a high investment in something that really won't be popular year round....

Anyway. Because there are two water parks, I personally don't want another one. I'd much rather see Disney invest in something completely new and different.

1970s: Magic Kingdom
1980s: EPCOT Center
1990s: MGM Studios
2000s: Animal Kingdom (actually 1998, but who's counting)
2010s: ????

It's about time for that 5th major theme park.
 
I think this is the key. As long as those two parks are raking in the money. There's no need to invest in another water park. Perhaps if attendance at those two parks were consistently at capacity.... But the water parks are pretty seasonal, so a high investment in something that really won't be popular year round....

Anyway. Because there are two water parks, I personally don't want another one. I'd much rather see Disney invest in something completely new and different.

1970s: Magic Kingdom
1980s: EPCOT Center
1990s: MGM Studios
2000s: Animal Kingdom (actually 1998, but who's counting)
2010s: ????

It's about time for that 5th major theme park.

Of course the water parks are seasonal. Regardless of how outsiders view Florida, we really don't swim down here in the winter months. Disney knows this and closes the water parks for refurb during this time.

Another water park is not necessary. But they most certainly can do something else productive with the land.
 
Of course the water parks are seasonal. Regardless of how outsiders view Florida, we really don't swim down here in the winter months. Disney knows this and closes the water parks for refurb during this time.

Another water park is not necessary. But they most certainly can do something else productive with the land.

They certainly can but it has to tie in with the campground. One of the current rumors is that it will be turned into expensive water front campsites. Maybe even DVC. That would make sense. Putting another destination type area (the new Pleasure Island??) doesn't sense becuase the area is so hard to get to.

More campsites have minimal investment and upkeep with greater returns.

You are treating this area like its hallowed ground and something has to go there. They have scores of other places to build stuff.*

Of course it didn't help that they basically just let River Country just rot in place. If they torn it down right after they decided to close it for good we wouldn't be having this conversation.

*Re-read this sentence sorry I wasn't trying to be so harsh.
 
...If they torn it down right after they decided to close it for good we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Sure seems like Disney's legal beagles would have urged that the site be razed to eliminate it from becoming an attractive nuisance. I think there'd be one heck of a liability if a curious person (especially a child) were to get injured or killed while exploring RC.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!











facebook twitter
Top