Will EE save AK?

[Lord Fantasius]

Just a curious thought, but since returning from my trip last week still am surprised how disappointed I was with AK. Now I have to admit there is some extraordinary detail that was put into designing and executing the park (not to mention, of course, the Tree of Life), but unless you go on/see one of the few rides/attractions, there really aren't that many animals there to see. And how really exciting is that if it's supposed to be an "animal park?"

I went on what would be considered a "slow" day and it still felt crowded every place we went; cant' imagine what it would be like when the parking lot is full! There really wasn't much place to relax as you either were standing in line or in front of a shop/food stand. And now Disney expects a single attraction to solve all these problems...hardly think so!

I know there were a no. of areas that were put on hold for future expansion, but seems the need for them is now...not another roller coaster. Since the park is more plants that animals anyways, why not make it a Wonders of Nature park and include the Living Seas and a Garden (can someone say "Butchart").

Imagine what the San Diego Zoo could do with the type of money Disney charges? Unfortunately, if AK was not on Disney property, I probably would not go out of my way to visit it, though I would gladly fly to San Diego for a weekend to see the SD Zoo and bring my daughter. Better yet, save up the money and take a real safari (they're really not as expensive as people think they are if you know how to plan it).

Also, does every spiel at AK need to be so PC...and include a pitch to contribute to the Disney Convservation Fund? We've already spent $40 - $60 to get into this 3/4-day park and now you want more money from us...how greedy is Disney? I truly don't think any more conservation is going on at Disney than at any other zoo (sorry, it's a zoo, period; but with really nice attention to detail, though maybe not for human comfort) I guess I'm also tired of hearing how bad modern man is for destroying so much of nature. Guess what, too bad!

O.k., a little cruel, but yes, I realize we have the responsibility to protect and nurture all of creation (oops, guess we can't say "creation," better use Mother Goddess Nature), but when it comes to my family, if we are hungry, I'm going to feed them, if they are cold, I'm going to warm them, and if they need protection, I'm going to protect them somehow...knowingly, of course, that it all comes at a cost!

Little promoted fact - it costs more and takes more natural resources, in the form of energy, to recycle a piece of paper than it does to produce one from new wood?

So, does anyone really believe a single E-ticket is going to redeem AK?

-R

 

[jackskellingtonsgirl]

Glad I read your post. From the title I was thinking "How on earth can Early Entry SAVE anything?"

Expedition Everest. Got it!

You know, our AK day was ruined by torrential rains. It rained and rained and rained (record setting rainfall, as a matter of fact) so I don't know what I really thought of it.

We liked the Safari, we liked Dinosaur. We didn't see the Tarzan show, the Pocahontas show, or ride Primeval Whirl. The coolest thing during our visit was that the gorillas were right against the glass. It was spectacular. The gorillas at our zoo are in a habitat but it is hard to see them. I have seen them on occasion at a distance, usually with their backs turned. Then of course there was the day last year that one of the Dallas gorillas got OUT and was killed by the police about two hours after we left the zoo! The AK gorillas were so close you could see the textue on their hands and feet - it was amazing.

The tigers weren't out because the communication system in that area was down, but that could have been cool, too.

I don't think AK in any way, shape, or form compares to the other 3 parks as far as value for your dollar. To charge the same admission is ludicrous. But we thought AK was nice and we would probably love it in good weather.

 

[the kabuki]

I enjoyed AK as much as the other parks, really there's lots more to do there than the safari ride, which coincedentally I agree with you on. Don't think much of that one. But really loved the rest of it, didn't feel any pressure to donate to any fund, matter of fact I don't remember seeing anything about this. To each his own I guess. Must be why Disney has 4 parks, something for everyone

 

[PrinceJohn]

I thought that was me posting until I saw your name on the left side there. Obviously, I agree - especially the part of protecting nature at the expense of us humans who sustain this planet.

 

[herprettiness]

Animal Kingdom is one our favorite parks and I believe there are others who really like it too. I think there are many animals. Did you go on the pangani forest trail - may be called something different now- or the jungle trek? I think the animals are tucked away to make a buffer between the animals and the crowds. They do have to be saught out. But it seamed to me like thay had pleanty to see.

 

[Lord Fantasius]

Cool about the gorillas, you got a special treat. But sorry to hear about the rain, it can put a damper on any of the theme parks so glad you were able to find some enjoyment regardless.

Yeah, I think it's more of a value-thing for me than it is that AK is actually bad. It is a nice park, just not worth the charge of the other three, especially in comparison to MK. My wife and DD (1 at the time) went to SD Zoo about six months ago and truly loved it so I was really expecting that type of experience with the Disney-magic on top (attention to detail, more natural setting, wide verandas to walk on, etc.), but then actually got there and kept tripping over people and running into stores all the time. In essence, it was a hard-to-see-the-forest-through-the-trees sort of experience.

I would love to see it become a showcase for world conservation for animals, fish, and plants, but am just hoping Disney isn't looking at a single attraction to correct what it has become. They should be smarter than this....

-R

 

[ead79]

I very much enjoy Animal Kingdom, so I don't think it needs "saving." The attendance numbers reflect that AK does very well. It's the 5th most visited theme park in the US (behind MK, DL, Epcot, and MGM), not too shabby. To me, AK is a park that's designed to be experienced, not a park where you jump from attraction to attraction. Plus, I'm not sure what you mean by lacking animal areas. The safari is incredible, plus there is the Pangani Forest Exploration Trail, the Maharaja Jungle Trek, and Conservation Station just to name some. While I think that Expedition Everest will be a popular attraction, I don't think it's needed to "save" AK.

 

[johnsonet]

I'm always surprised when people don't just RAVE about AK. But - "to each his own." I don't go on roller coasters and never will. I can't believe people find them enjoyable...
I think AK is an incredibly beautiful park - lush and beautifully themed. Have you ever walked through Maharajah Jungle Trek? We LOVE Kali River Rapids. I think the Tree of Life is the 8th wonder of The World!
I love taking my time enjoying the plants and animals and talking with the CMs who might be around... I think the safari ride is fantastic.
I think Disney has something for everyone and for me, AK is a joy.
I look at the Conservation thing as no more irritating than being asked at every Target, Old Navy, etc. whether I'd like to open a charge acct. and save 10%...they're a business trying to make as much money as possible. That's the way it goes...
I love Animal Kingdom

 

[foxfire]

I really enjoy AK. It takes us the entire day when we go & we don't get around to everything then. We take our time & explore pathways, nooks, & crannies. We stop & watch the animals. We look at the plants. We read the informational signs that are all around and we learn many new things each time. We have never had one boring moment there.

A lot of people don't enjoy this park, or not as much as the other three, but there are a lot of others who find the experience to be wonderful. I'm one of the latter.

 

[BethC1952]

"I love taking my time enjoying the plants and animals and talking with the CMs who might be around... I think the safari ride is fantastic."

ITA! AK is our second favorite park (after Epcot, and specifically, World Showcase). I love just wandering around, looking at the flora and fauna (no, not the fairies!), and talking to the CM's. I've learned so much from them! Last May we spent almost a half hour talking to one of the CM's in the tiger area. It was probably one of the best times of our vacation.

I'm another person who can't do thrill rides or any kind of "shaky" rides (the safari pushes the limit), so EE isn't going to change my visits to the AK.

Beth

 

[bigbabyblues]

We weren't crazy about AK either, but we're going to give it another shot on our next trip. It was so darn stinking hot that day, it was at the end of September, so it's going to be hot I know, but there was NO breeze whatsoever, just tons of heat. My kids were miserable, so we only stayed a few hours. I really did like the Lion King show tho.

 

[rob'n]

We loved AK and probably had our most relaxing day there. We saw so many animals there...two different treks, the safari and the Rafili Conservation station...we did all the shows and still did not get to see everything in the park. We spent 45 minutes with the gorillas because they were so entertaining!

I believe this park is cursed the same way California Adventure is out in CA...the theming itself is something to see...no, there are not tons of thrill rides but to me the ambiance and the detail put into everything is what makes AK one of our favorites. I am continually amazed at the Disney detail magic that is put into everything they do!!

Before we got married, DH spent 3 weeks in Africa on a safari. He couldn't believe how close AK was to what he saw on his safari...the train, the buildings, the savannahs, the paths, the animals!

We can't wait to go back.

 

[Lord Fantasius]

Yes, we did the trails, the treks, the conservation station, the train, saw butterflies, and rode the safari. This may sound strange, but I really just like to sit and watch the animals.

And that was probably what contributed to most of my annoyance...the paths were so narrow you couldn't get out of the way of the people to just watch the animals. Must of have a school field trip when I was there, but there were so many kids running back and forth in the conservation station it was hard to take anything in. And try to step out of the way on the paths, and somebody else was there trying to get through.

Maybe it's just a simple design feature, but felt like they really just wanted people to keep moving. If we are to appreciate nature, let us take it in at our own pace. Yeah, maybe I didn't "walk" it as much as I should have, but with the constricting pathways and few benches how is it possible? Unlike the MK where you can leisurely (well, relatively at least) stroll around the park, at AK you have to always go back to the center to get to the other side...not really a good design layout.

One big thing about the safari ride, no real safari driver would ever drive that quickly unless they were being pursued (doesn't really happen though). We were sped around the safari race track so quickly, I think the CM must be paid per rider per hour. Seriously, the only time she slowed down was on the bridge. And yes, I have been on a safari in Kenya and it has been one of the most spectacular events in my life, but to speed around the track like she did is not a typical safari experience (you scare and enrage the animals too much). And cut the "chasing poachers" dialogue, it was more distracting than anything...how about a little more knowledge about the animals seen in the safari.

Admittedly, the detail to the park is extraordinary, but like a master painting, the frame should be part of the whole grand complement to the picture and not the focus itself.

-R

P.S., Only Disney would know the demographics, but I doubt whether more than 10% of the people that go to AK pay a single day admission to see just that park. As a result, even if AK is the 5th most attended theme park, this is one instance where the park itself is helped by being on Disney property and not vice versa. If it were a stand-alone park, I doubt it would make the top ten.

P.P.S., Since I don't have to pay to get into Target, Old Navy, etc., I expect it as a matter of generating business; but after paying to enter a park, I don't need something hawked to me at the end of every ride/attraction as a a captive audience.

 

[beansmom]

I LOVE AK!!! If I had to forego one park, it wouldn't be this one. Understanding that everyone likes something different...perhaps your time is better spent at one of the other parks.

I loved it and only regret that rain cut our day short. This time, however, we're catching everything we missed! 11 days til Disney!!

 

[CPer'sMom]

(I, too, thought your "EE" was 'early entry' )

When we first visited AK the year it opened we were quite disappointed with it. I guess that was mostly because we were comparing it with the other WDW parks and not seeing it on its own merits. But over the years I've come to appreciate AK for the park it is ~~ not a visit to the World goes by that we don't spend part of a day or two at AK.

Yes, it is a smaller park so it seems more crowded than the others. That is something I don't like; there are times when it is just too crowded, especially if you're in the 'wrong' place after the parade!
We enjoy the safari ride, especially in the morning or an afternoon when it's cool. I don't think we've ever gone on one when we didn't see many, many animals ~ different ones at different times.

ITTBAB is still entertaining and it's fun to pick out the animals in the Tree of Life on the way into the show.

I feel that the Festival of the Lion King is one of the best live shows to be found at WDW. It's a 'must see'.

For us, AK is not an all day park though - it's a park-hopping day. We visit AK early and then go over to another park in the evening.
Just because it's different from the other parks doesn't mean it's still not worthy of a visit.

 

[goofy4tink]

While AK is not my favorite park at WDW, I will say...natazoo (or however it's spelled). Yes, it is called Animal Kingdom but I'm assuming that's because it is based on an 'animal' type park. There are plenty of 'zoos' if that's what you want to go to. But, I love going on the various 'treks'...unless it's mid-summer and then it's just too hot. It can make a nice 1/2-2/3 day park that let's you be a little more laid back and not feel that you have to rush to get to do/see everything. Of course, it doesn't feel too laid back when those gates open and everyone wants to be on the first safari truck!!! Move waaaay over to the side of the walkways!!

But, I think AK holds its own for what it is. I love the atmosphere there so much more than at a regular zoo. Yes, San Diego Zoo is a much better zoo, but AK isn't trying to outzoo anyplace. It is what it is...a park with animals, ride attractions, good shows and some really nice walks.

 

[26555]

Where are the tigers at AK? I don't remember them on either of 2 visits so I need to find them next time. Thanks.

 

[SyracuseWolvrine]

Where are the tigers at AK? I don't remember them on either of 2 visits so I need to find them next time. Thanks.

Maharajah Jungle Trek in Asia

 

[bobbiwoz]

Here's one family that was sorely disappointed in the SD zoo, we wondered what the hype was. We're members of the Cincinnati zoo, so we go there often.

We love AK, especially FTLK and the safari. I'm hoping we can do the sunrise safari someday.

Bobbi

 

[Leota]

The first time I went to AK, I was less than impressed - the second time, I enjoyed it more.....the third time it really started to grow on me - Now I really love it. I agree that part of the issue for me was comparing it to the other WDW Parks. Once I immersed myself in AK, I really came to appreciate it for what it is. I have spent full days in AK, easy to do as it closes so early.....

I never felt pressured in the least to give to the Conservation fund. I see that they have opportunities for folks to give to the cause, but I didn't see any high pressure associated with it. I would wager that there are folks who give a little cuz it's handy that wouldn't have otherwise sought out doing so. So, to me, it's a good thing. It's also a good thing to have reminders of the impact we make on our environment, as our environment is what sustains us. We need to nurture it so we can continue on this Planet. I don't think anyone is saying "Don't feed, clothe or shelter your family" I think the message is quite clearly "Do a little thing here & there that you can to keep our environment healthy & sustainable"

To each his or her own tho.....