Virginia moved past the point of closing all but essential businesses in May of last year. That conversation has not really been a reality in this country since the beginning: while total lockdowns have been used in other countries to differing levels of success, America has always been balancing the needs of commerce and public safety, a dangerous game that due to a lack of coordination from the federal government and inconsistent approaches across states cost hundreds of thousands of lives that could have been saved with a federally-organized and supported response to the virus. However, the reality is that the situation was what it was, and states, local governments, and businesses had to adapt to that scenario.
As a result, the question is not about essential/non-essential, but rather whether or not different businesses have done the work necessary to operate safely under the circumstances. Once data emerged to suggest that outdoor transmission of the virus was rare, and more difficult than indoor transmission, the amusement sector made its case for reopening: this didn't work in California, which has been amongst the strictest states, but it worked in much of the rest of the country because a combination of natural protections (large outdoor space where it's possible to distance) and proactive measures (mask mandates even in states that didn't have them, physical distancing markers, capacity restrictions on rides/attractions, etc.) by the parks represent a stronger argument than other venues where these factors may not be in place. And in the case of Virginia, the state initially placed more restrictions on the parks than in other jurisdictions by enforcing the 1000-person cap, which BGW chose to accept and developed the multiple timeslot approach to maximize revenue while nonetheless respecting the state's guidelines. This earned them the ability to expand capacity after operating for a little over three months with no evidence of virus transmission or "outbreak" events associated with the parks.
In my 14-ish visits to the park since last August, it is simply wrong to suggest that thousands of people are "together." While there may be isolated instances where people violate your personal space or where someone is not wearing a mask correctly or abusing the "except when eating and drinking" rule, the number of "close contact" moments created during a park visit even with an expanded capacity is incredibly small. Once the science became clearer on the importance of proximity and duration, and as the general public adapted to the mask mandate in more parts of their everyday life, and as the weather became cooler, visiting the park felt like a safe way to leverage the outdoor nature of the park during a time when few other entertainment options could be considered safe. This does not mean there was no risk, but there is nothing we can do right now without risk, and thus having the park open creates a chance for guests to make that choice for themselves.
Could BGW be doing more in terms of enforcing distancing or cracking down on abusers of the walking-and-drinking policy? Absolutely, and the way KD was running things when they were open in December made that abundantly clear. But we are through the figurative looking glass as to "businesses operating during the pandemic," and all available evidence suggests that while there are elements of the theme park experience that can still generate some anxiety, when you spread those thousands of people across an entire park with pretty consistently good mask compliance and an increasingly adaptive public to the social distancing elements of the experience, it separates itself from other amusements (most of which are also open, and much riskier if indoors).
