Some good news for SeaWorld

[sunshine1]

And then the whales will have a fantastic new life in the ocean... NOT!

A captive orca cant just be dumped back into the ocean and left to get on with it.

There are things called seapens. Where the captives be transferred into a netted area in the ocean and they would have much more space and learn to hunt again and also feel the ocean rhythms, etc.
The orca would still have human care takers and the orca could choose how much human interaction they would want.

There is a seapen waiting for Lolita the captive orca, who is at miami seaquarium. She still has all of her teeth so she could learn to hunt again plus her family is still around in the washington state area. Miami Seaquarium wont give her up though.

SeaWorld probably do good things for animals. Just keeping orca isnt good. A tank cant compare to the space of the ocean.

SeaWorld could come good out of this. If they agreed to change their business model and retire the current captives.

If the heat gets too much people are worried that SeaWorld could ship their captive orca to the far east/Russia.

It interesting times. Disney and Universal are doing fantastic but SeaWorld not so great.

 

[sunshine1]

Sea World is still in pretty bad shape. A 5% increase is great, but it is a whole lot worse after shedding thousands of guests in the first place. Also keep in mind that temporary pops in attendance due to price cuts/promotions don't represent a sustainable way of running a business. What happens when the initial group of interested locals have had their discounted fun? They stop going, or they go as usual. The novelty wears off and they keep declining.

Sea World is on a scary path that a new ride isn't going to solve...

The problem for SeaWorld is that 200 million people have seen Blackfish. People have looked behind the orca captivity curtain and dont like what they see.

Also for me, whale and dolphin shows seem so outdated now. When I watch them on youtube, it reminds me of the 1980's.

 

[sunshine1]

I find it hilarious you mention oil spills and clean up, as SeaWorld is one of the companies doing the most to help animals with the recent spill in California. But keep banging that evil company rhetoric. (Full disclosure, my wife works for SeaWorld, but obviously everything I am stating on here is my opinion only).

Also, no one really knows the true life span of Orcas in the wild. I remember reading a study recently that found a large population, one of the Orcas was estimated to be almost 90, and none of the others in the pod were past their 30s. It was really confusing and no one had a good explanation on why or how that would be. Also, while I care about killer whales in captivity, we are talking about SeaWorld. There are other parks that have whales, and none of them provide the care or expertise as SeaWorld does. So if ABC Marine Park in Brazil (complete made up company) has a killer whale that dies after 5 years, that doesn't really concern me as far as what SeaWorld is doing.

In peer-reviewed studies, scientists estimate that the average, or mean, life expectancy for a female is 30 years and a male is 19 years in the Pacific Northwest.[1] For whales in Southeastern Alaska, the maximum longevity appears to be in the 50s for females and late 30s for males.[2] So, in those two areas of the world, female killer whales live around 30 to 50 years and males live around 19 to 30 years.

SeaWorld has several killer whales in their 30s and one that is close to 50.

There is wild orca called Granny in the Washington State area. She is 103.

 

[peg110]

A tank cant compare to the space of the ocean.

You are right, there is no comparison as for the space available.

What I don't understand is why the same argument that people are making for Orcas isn't being made for fish in a fish tank, Hamsters in a cage, dogs in a kennel, Parrots in a cage, snakes in a tank, and any other animal in captivity? If you truly believe the argument about the captivity of Orcas why do we stop there?

Furthermore, how do we know these animals have a poor quality of life? In the wild they have to "FIGHT" for everything and that too can be cruel. As I type this I can't help but to think of 2 large bucks fighting and hitting their antlers against each other to try and show their dominance and this all for a DOE! (Yes women can have that effect )

In captivity, the Orcas are fed, get medical care (Where does an injured Orca go in the wild? ) and are protected.

I can already here the argument that a luxuries prison is still a prison, but I don't see it necessarily as cruel (at least from a Sea World perspective).

 

[Planogirl]

You are right, there is no comparison as for the space available.

What I don't understand is why the same argument that people are making for Orcas isn't being made for fish in a fish tank, Hamsters in a cage, dogs in a kennel, Parrots in a cage, snakes in a tank, and any other animal in captivity? If you truly believe the argument about the captivity of Orcas why do we stop there?

Furthermore, how do we know these animals have a poor quality of life? In the wild they have to "FIGHT" for everything and that too can be cruel. As I type this I can't help but to think of 2 large bucks fighting and hitting their antlers against each other to try and show their dominance and this all for a DOE! (Yes women can have that effect )

In captivity, the Orcas are fed, get medical care (Where does an injured Orca go in the wild? ) and are protected.

I can already here the argument that a luxuries prison is still a prison, but I don't see it necessarily as cruel (at least from a Sea World perspective).

I mentioned before that no one ever mentions sharks. The truth IMO is that orcas are seen as cute while animals such as sharks and other fish aren't.

It's a complicated issue that won't be resolved by sea pens and biased movies and ads.

 

[eXo]

Wow, people sure get fired up defending their whaley friends.

A couple of things crossed my mind while reading through this.

One major defense of those who think the whales should be freed is the fact they are "forced to perform tricks". There is a pretty large assumption here that requires blatantly assuming that it is against the whale's will. There are a couple of ways to look at this. The first is obvious, a whale has to eat. In the wild a whale hunts. In captivity, the whale jumps out of the water and splashes some people. Both of those actions lead to food. Arguably however, hunting requires prey, and prey isn't always available. There are always stands full of tourists though. Also, hunting carries risk. Whales can get injured, be hunted themselves, or simply not catch anything. There is no risk that splashing people won't carry a food reward. If all whales had the option to choose between these two options for a meal, what do you think the choices would be?

Now, I have gone and made the same assumption you did. I asked you to assume what a whale would think. That's not very fair of me, now is it? After all, you asked me to assume that whales dislike the "slavery" of trick performing and I in turn asked you if whales would rather do tricks or hunt based on the risk vs. reward system. Since we can't know this, let us instead look at other animals. Dogs probably aren't a good example as they have been domesticated. But just for the record, my dog sits in front of me doing ridiculous things in hopes that I'll get up and get him a treat. When Bears discover garbage bins, what do they do? They eat from them. This is much easier than hunting. They actively choose to eat the garbage rather than hunt "clean organic free range food". Imagine for 2 seconds that a bear in captivity was being fed garbage. Oh, imagine the backlash. The irony? Bears choose to eat garbage even when other food is available. Am I saying we should feed bears garbage? No. I'm saying you can't assume that just because it doesn't look good means it is bad for the animal and the animal wishes it could be different.

Basic survivalism states that an animal should always go for the easiest meal. So whether you agree with the size of the pens or not, do not presume to know what the Whale wants or whether the whale would be happier here or there or eating this or that.

That video above is also full of assumption. It shows a whale use a skill it uses in the wild to look over the barrier, and the article goes on to tell us what this MUST mean. The whale is "obviously" hunting the audience because it used a technique used in hunting to beach itself PRIOR to putting it's head over the wall.

Is the animal just curious? Did it smell or see something unique? Was it just screwing around because it was bored? NO! It was hunting. Why? Because the article said so. You know, my cat gets down and hides behind things before pouncing them. That is "hunting" behavior. Shall I assume it wants to eat my toes because it launched an attack on them last night as I walked through the kitchen? Have we forgotten that animals play? And that when they play they are using the same skills they use on a daily basis, which is to say, primarily hunting skills. When I play hide and seek with someone my end game is not to eat them, yet I use my "hunting skills" to find them or my "flight skills" to hide.

The biggest problem with all of this is it is predicated on huge assumptions about what whales think. What whales want. WWAWD? What would a whale do? I don't have to be Dr. Doolittle to tell you that an animal wants to eat and socialize (wink wink, nudge nudge, know what I mean guvner?). Apart from those two things, staying alive and protecting their herd/young is all we can say for sure that an animal "wants".

Does a whale ?want? to swim all over the ocean singing it's whale songs until the guys from Star Trek IV come and save it? Maybe. You or I can't say. Does a whale want to eat and not die? Yes. We know that is true. Does a whale eat and is it protected from many of the things that do kill whales when in captivity? Yes. Does the whale perform "tricks" while there? Some of them do. Are those tricks any more intensive, more difficult, or more time consuming than hunting down a meal? Hell no. Does nature have a record of showing that animals will always take the easiest route to a meal? Every. Single. Time.

edit:
Blackfish was propaganda people. Just like that video above. It shows an animal behavior and then TELLS you what to think about it. Getting our information from heavily biased sources isn't exactly the best way to convince others that we have a well-researched point of view.

 

[peg110]

@eXo VERY well said.

 

[Planogirl]

eXo, I agree - very well said.

You make some great points here. What do whales want indeed? What do any animals want? You can look at horses and cattle and really all kinds of creatures and it does seem a bit high-handed to just assume that you know what they want.

 

[sunshine1]

You are right, there is no comparison as for the space available.

What I don't understand is why the same argument that people are making for Orcas isn't being made for fish in a fish tank, Hamsters in a cage, dogs in a kennel, Parrots in a cage, snakes in a tank, and any other animal in captivity? If you truly believe the argument about the captivity of Orcas why do we stop there?

Furthermore, how do we know these animals have a poor quality of life? In the wild they have to "FIGHT" for everything and that too can be cruel. As I type this I can't help but to think of 2 large bucks fighting and hitting their antlers against each other to try and show their dominance and this all for a DOE! (Yes women can have that effect )

In captivity, the Orcas are fed, get medical care (Where does an injured Orca go in the wild? ) and are protected.

I can already here the argument that a luxuries prison is still a prison, but I don't see it necessarily as cruel (at least from a Sea World perspective).

You are right, there is no comparison as for the space available.

What I don't understand is why the same argument that people are making for Orcas isn't being made for fish in a fish tank, Hamsters in a cage, dogs in a kennel, Parrots in a cage, snakes in a tank, and any other animal in captivity? If you truly believe the argument about the captivity of Orcas why do we stop there?

Furthermore, how do we know these animals have a poor quality of life? In the wild they have to "FIGHT" for everything and that too can be cruel. As I type this I can't help but to think of 2 large bucks fighting and hitting their antlers against each other to try and show their dominance and this all for a DOE! (Yes women can have that effect )

In captivity, the Orcas are fed, get medical care (Where does an injured Orca go in the wild? ) and are protected.

I can already here the argument that a luxuries prison is still a prison, but I don't see it necessarily as cruel (at least from a Sea World perspective).

Yes the trainers at SeaWorld do love the whales, no denying that. But park goers dont see the whales teeth being taken out using a regular power drill, with no anasetic. The orcas out of boredom chew of the bars so their teeth get infected and have to be drilled down to the pulp.
How painful must that be? I cant imagine ever having a tooth taken out with no anasetic. (sorry about spelling).

The public also dont see the trainers stuffing the dead fish full of valium, benzos and anti biotics that the orca are given.

I have seen recent youtube videos of Tilikum and all he looks like is taxidermy with a heartbeat. A majestic animal like that reduced to that state.

It doesnt sit well with me.

SeaWorld is a great theme park, with amazing rollercoasters maybe if they retired the orca and carried on going down the coaster route they could be at the top of their game again.

 

[sunshine1]

eXo, I agree - very well said.

You make some great points here. What do whales want indeed? What do any animals want? You can look at horses and cattle and really all kinds of creatures and it does seem a bit high-handed to just assume that you know what they want.

They probably want to be left alone by humans and left to go about their business in peace.

I think most animals would be better off if humans were not around

 

[peg110]

They probably want to be left alone by humans and left to go about their business in peace.

I think most animals would be better off if humans were not around

Yet again, you are making assumptions of what the whale wants. Maybe they DO want to be left alone by humans. Maybe they don't. The fact is, just as much as you think they DO want to be left alone, there are many others that may think they DON'T.

Also, I have yet to see PROOF that these animals, on a regular basis, are being harmed or abused. At most there has been some anecdotal evidence that it MIGHT have occurred on occasion, NOT that it's continually occurring. While this may still be tragic, it is no more tragic than the person who commits child abuse. Forgive me for throwing "Religion" into this, but didn't the bible say that man had dominion over animals?

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
​

The animals don't appear abused. They appear to be happy. They seem to be well fed. They seem to be medically cared for. They also seem to help support larger causes. At this point, I don't see you or anyone else changing the minds of those of us who don't see this as an issue. Short of proof of continual abuse. An Orca with some sunburn is not proof of abuse. An orca getting dental treatment (with or without anesthesia) is not proof. (BTW, how do you know there was no anesthesia? Were you doing this? How do you know that they even feel pain the same way as we do?)

Even the "Limp" Dorsal fin story isn't proof of abuse. Does it cause them pain? Does it shorten their life? I don't know. I am not an expert, but to point out that their dorsal fin is limp as a result of years of not swimming in the open sea is proof that they are "Captive" not abused.

So please please please provide SOLID proof, not opinion, about abuse. According to https://www.childhelp.org/child-abuse-statistics/ every year more than 3 million reports of child abuse are made in the US alone. Involving more than 6 million children. To me that's a much greater cause to fight for and stop.

 

[Silock]

Forgive me for throwing "Religion" into this

No, I won't. This has NOTHING to do with religion. Even if you believe in God, having "dominion" over animals does NOT give you the right to do whatever the heck you WANT to or with them. I have dominion over my dogs? Shouldn't God allow me to keep it locked in a cage every day for 24 hours, only to get it out to perform tricks for me and then I put it back in? Of course not. That's cruelty, even IF the dog is still alive.

​

The animals don't appear abused.

Abuse takes many forms, and none of us are marine vets.

They appear to be happy.

Totally disagree.

Does it cause them pain? Does it shorten their life

If THIS is the yardstick, there are serious problems. Again, just because something doesn't cause outright harm doesn't make it OKAY.

To me that's a much greater cause to fight for and stop.

You say that as if it's an either/or situation when it is nothing of the sort. People can, and do, fight for multiple causes, and each can be worthy in their own way.

 

[Silock]

When Bears discover garbage bins, what do they do? They eat from them. This is much easier than hunting. They actively choose to eat the garbage rather than hunt "clean organic free range food".

And do you know what happens when those bins then run out of food? They hunt for more human food, which is often accompanied by humans. And when that food runs out, guess what food is left? Humans. That's why many national parks have severe restrictions on packing food in and out and using bear bags/boxes. It's not just for the protection of humans, but for the protection of the bears in the long-run.

Have we forgotten that animals play? And that when they play they are using the same skills they use on a daily basis, which is to say, primarily hunting skills. When I play hide and seek with someone my end game is not to eat them, yet I use my "hunting skills" to find them or my "flight skills" to hide.

To quote Jurassic Park, "When Pirates of the Caribbean breaks down, the pirates don't EAT the tourists." Using skills in play is something all animals do, but that doesn't mean that it's also not sometimes a dangerous thing. Especially when one animal wants to play, but the other doesn't. In the wild, the other can simply swim away. This isn't possible in a tiny enclosure. Things escalate, and they fight. The situation isn't exactly as you'd find in nature.

Getting our information from heavily biased sources isn't exactly the best way to convince others that we have a well-researched point of view.

No, it isn't. But then, assuming that just because we don't know exactly what a whale wants doesn't mean that we should continue the current methods, either. We know that right now, nature is the best place for these animals to live. Shouldn't that then be the default value?

 

[eXo]

They probably want to be left alone by humans and left to go about their business in peace.

I think most animals would be better off if humans were not around

I think you missed that post I made above. The one about assuming what animals want. You must have also missed all the examples I gave of animals using humans as a means to find food easier.

If you live near any sort of woods or a creek or anything like that, put some cat food outside. See how many animals come to eat it. Then, after a week, see how they show up before you even put the food outside, because they now expect it. Why do they do this? Because it's the easiest meal in the area. Animals don't care about being left alone. They care about eating. Humans seem to have forgotten about the struggles of hunting and gathering. Never look a gift meal in the mouth.

For the record, orca's get tooth abscesses in the wild too. The difference is those whales die from them. And you are incorrect. They don't "drill the tooth out". They drill out a section of the tooth that gets a pinhole in it. They then clean out that section three times a day to prevent it from getting infected. You are purposefully choosing wording in an attempt to get a visceral reaction.

Would animals be better off without humans? 5 mass extinctions and countless smaller regional extinctions would suggest that it's a dog eat dog world any way you slice it. It's only because of humans that certain animals still exist. I'm not saying humans don't have a negative impact (especially in the days before conservation was a thing), but to blatantly ignore all the good that people do is a incredible insult to all the time and effort they put into making the world a better place.

Blackfish created a bunch of couch activists that think because they saw one documentary they are enlightened as to the plight of whales.

I was actually listening to Fresh Air (NPR interview show) yesterday afternoon in which they spoke with former Sea World trainer John Hargrove who has become a vocal critic of the company. They also spoke with the head animal doctor and the director of operations at Sea World to provide counter points. When asked why Hargrove became a trainer he relayed a story about how the first time he ever attended Sea World he was amazed. The spectacle of this 8,000 pount ani,als in a stadium with 5,000 people. He said that after that day he went all the time to pester the trainer for info, to learn what was necessary to become a trainer himself. He essentially admitted that Sea World, all by itself, was 100% the reason he had found his calling in life. He then turns around and tells everyone they should never ever support the company and go there.

So what... it was ok for them to be around long enough for him to find his dream job, but kids these days don't deserve the same? Hypocrite. He wouldn't know enough to BE an activist against Sea World if they hadn't taught him and provided him the opportunities they did. He would never have gotten to work with Orca's if they didn't have them there and he never would have known what a passion it was for him if there was never a Shamu stadium to attend. It seems to me his concern should be how to help Sea World improve, not to try and tear down the only place in the United States that the general public can go to witness these amazing animals.

 

[eXo]

Silock - your point about the bears just supports my entire point. Animals look for the easiest meal. You just admitted as much. So to try and argue that whales are being "forced to perform tricks" and to try and pretend they would rather hunt sea lions is absurd. Basic animals behavior shows they will go for the easiest meal. So even if the whales were out in the coean, if there was an ocean side stadium and they could get free fish for swimming in and doing a flip, guess what - there would be a line of Orcas down the coast waiting for their turn to flip. JUST like there is a line of bears waiting around for the dumpsters to fill up.

If we are quoting Jurassic Park now, then Life... uh.. finds a way. So don't worry about the whales. They will "find a way". Movie logic cuts both ways.

 

[peg110]

forgive me for throwing "Religion" into this

No, I won't. This has NOTHING to do with religion. Even if you believe in God, having "dominion" over animals does NOT give you the right to do whatever the heck you WANT to or with them. I have dominion over my dogs? Shouldn't God allow me to keep it locked in a cage every day for 24 hours, only to get it out to perform tricks for me and then I put it back in? Of course not. That's cruelty, even IF the dog is still alive.

And yet people do this with their dogs all the time and I hear far less outcry about it.

The animals don't appear abused.

Abuse takes many forms, and none of us are marine vets.

Totally Agree on both accounts. Still not seeing the abuse. Apparently you have "Abuse Vision" that I don't. Congratulations on your enhanced vision.

They appear to be happy.

Totally disagree.

Your right. How do you tell?

Does it cause them pain? Does it shorten their life

If THIS is the yardstick, there are serious problems. Again, just because something doesn't cause outright harm doesn't make it OKAY.

But it's a pretty good place to start! "Hmm... I am not in pain but I am captive. This sucks!" or "I am being hurt and beaten while I am in captivity. This REALLY Sucks!" Maybe I am minimizing it but the lesser of 2 evils (IF one of them is really an evil) is always a better choice. Again, as previously been stated, none of us are Whale Mind readers. Oh wait... maybe some of you are?

To me that's a much greater cause to fight for and stop.

You say that as if it's an either/or situation when it is nothing of the sort. People can, and do, fight for multiple causes, and each can be worthy in their own way.

It is not an either or, but I hear far less outcry for a much bigger problem then I do for a relatively smaller problem. Perhaps the argument could be made that we are picking a "Smaller Battle" to work up to the bigger ones, but Personally, I feel that we need to take care of our OWN first.

Please don't misunderstand me. I am all for keeping our whales safe, but all the arguments I have heard about why the whales should be released are based more on opinion and less on fact. I don't doubt that some groups are more abusive than others. This thread is (or was) about Seaworld. I do not believe Seaworld is abusing these animals. I do believe that their works are far better for the Orcas and other animals that they have, both in their facilities and in the wild. It is not the same to read how majestic an animal is, how intelligent an animal is or how wonderful an animal is as opposed to seeing it. Seeing is believing.

 

[sunshine1]

I just read that John Crowe - the man who helped capture Tilikum died on Monday.

He appeared in Blackfish and expressed his remorse.

Imagine having to live with that.

 

[sunshine1]

I mentioned before that no one ever mentions sharks. The truth IMO is that orcas are seen as cute while animals such as sharks and other fish aren't.

It's a complicated issue that won't be resolved by sea pens and biased movies and ads.

I love sharks - Sharks are magnificent.

 

[Planogirl]

All of this comparison to dogs is interesting. Someone said that dogs shouldn't be put in cages but the truth is that they often are and I agree that that is sad. Of course there are people who believe that being locked up in a house or small yard is just another cage.

 

[Silock]

Silock - your point about the bears just supports my entire point. Animals look for the easiest meal.

Not always. The point about the bears is that human interference changes their natural pattern of behavior. Of COURSE the whales in SeaWorld are going to perform for food. Where else are they going to get it? I think you're confusing an "easy" meal with the "only" meal. It's not like the orcas can choose to hunt or stay in their tanks and perform for food. They don't have a CHOICE.

if there was an ocean side stadium and they could get free fish for swimming in and doing a flip, guess what - there would be a line of Orcas down the coast waiting for their turn to flip.

This is a fact not in evidence. Prove it.