Let me reword what I meant because it’s being taken the way I didn’t intend it to:
Preservation vs Progress. When I’m talking about that I talking about the fact that I think it’s near impossible to keep the park as is from a preservation aspect while at the same time growing the attraction list.
Like
@Nicole, I get the point on the wild preserve, and the reason I feel the need to clarify some. I think it was incredibly short sighted to do away with the wild glen area. There was no progress made there and they didn’t preserve something.
But what I’m talking about preservation vs progress, I think preserving those trees in that area is not enough to say there can’t be progress made there.
To me, putting it in Italy or Oktoberfest means either you lose what little foliage theme elements there are left for a ride pad, or you lose a ride in that area.
I definitely think there’s a balance between the two that needs to be struck. Confining the park to its current structure and saying nothing else foliage wise can come out for new attractions is going to stunt progress to handeling bigger crowds and increasing guest enjoyment.
And I know if you gathered 100 different people; you would get 100 reasons why they love BGW and no consensus. I just think that the continual talk about what’s being removed isn’t looking at every factor (like the power that was brought up); but I do think that the sightlines that it opens up is a factor too. As
@WDWRLD brought up, it can make the Ireland bridge a great fireworks a viewing spot. I think that it’s also going to give an element to the actual ride that might have been replicated at one, maybe two other spots on property. I think that’s a huge part of the appeal to this location.