Blackfish Backlash: Future of the Orca in Captivity

Blackfish Backlash: Future of the Orca in Captivity

One of the largest issues in the world of captive animals today is the issue of the orca in captivity. Animal rights groups have long condemned marine mammal parks and how they train killer whales, dolphins, sea lions, and other marine mammals for shows. I have since written two articles on the Blackfish issue since the issue still remains as large as it did when Blackfish was released in 2013. The Blackfish issue still rages over the Internet, but it seems like the critics of Sea World seem to be winning the war. Sea World reported a declining profit margin for the year and plans to cut back costs. In addition to this, Sea World announced the Blue World Project, a massive multimillion dollar expansion of the orca habitats to be implemented in all Sea World parks, beginning with Sea World San Diego. However, the arguments still remain in effect. What's the big deal? I'll tell you...

In my opinion, people fall into three categories about orcas in captivity: that they should be set free and breeding programs should be halted, that orcas are fine in captivity, or just indifferent/uncaring about the issue. This is not about Blackfish or Sea World, although certain peoples' biases affect their judgment about the orcas in captivity. Simply watching the movie Blackfish or visiting Sea World once is not enough to become an expert. Unfortunately, I am not an expert in this nor do I claim to do so, so I will admit their is a margin of error on my part. The people who have been afforded a full frontal view of the orca in captivity are very few indeed, Sea World employees who benefit from seeing the animals on an almost daily basis while facing the severe criticism from activists and animal lovers alike.

There are five main issues that people have with killer whales being in captivity:
The killer whales breeding program
The fact that Sea World breeds and trades its captive killer whales is a big issue. Since capturing marine mammals from the wild has been illegal since 1972, most of the twenty nine killer whales Sea World cares for are captive bred. Only five remain wild-caught, including the infamous Tilikum who was responsible for the death of senior killer whale trainer Dawn Brancheau. The breeding program also remains controversial as killer whales are not endangered in the wild, so breeding killer whales in captivity is purely for Sea World's use for entertainment or genetics.

The separation of calves from mothers
According to the movie Blackfish, killer whale calves are often viciously ripped away from their mothers at a young age and shipped to other Sea World parks. While this remains controversial, Blackfish has blurred the lines. Despite statements that female calves stay with their mothers for life, this is untrue as their are exceptions where the calf needs to be separated from the mother for her own good. In addition to this, Blackfish sensationalized the calf and mother bond, while in reality, the calf was much older than it was implied. However, I still do not condone treating the killer whales like items, to be traded throughout the Sea World parks like rides or shows.

The size of the killer whale tanks
Probably one of the largest issues people have with Sea World, it has become clear that despite our advanced technology and intelligence, we cannot hope to replicate even a fraction of the habitat that killer whales call home in the wild. I remember visiting Sea World San Diego in 2007 and wondering how they were able to cram six killer whales in small tanks.

Killer whales performing
Another large issue about killer whales in captivity is Sea World's killer whale shows. Since killer whales are highly trainable due to their intelligence and compliance with trainers, Sea World implemented shows, where killer whales jump, flip, and dive much to the awe of many customers. However, many people feel that killer whales performing are not natural and should not be forced to perform tricks for entertainment.

The safety of the killer whale trainers




Since the death of Dawn Brancheau, an experienced killer whale trainer, the safety of the killer whale trainers have come into question. Sea World has been banned from placing their trainers in the water with the killer whales and have implemented safety protocols to prevent further incidents. However, if you think about it, one fatality in over forty years is a pretty good track record, considering that killer whales are top predators. The death of Dawn Brancheau was tragic and unnecessary, but she and hundreds of other trainers had interacted with the killer whales thousands of times before with little problem. There was little reason for the killer whale to "lash out" at her. Many blame that Tilikum had been driven insane from captivity, but if that was the case, wouldn't there be more incidents? Tiger and elephant trainers know the risk of their job, so do killer whale trainers.

I'm not saying on any level that the death of Dawn Brancheau was justified or okay. The fact that she died from a killer whale is enough for most to stop going to Sea World. However, I am saying that most likely, she believed that Tilikum would not harm her until the moment he did. For now, Tilikum remains performing at Sea World Orlando, where he will probably remain for the rest of his life.

Modern day example: Lolita and the Miami Seaquarium
Lolita is a 20 ft, 3.5 ton killer whale who lives a solitary life at the Miami Seaquarium in a small tank, only 60 by 80  foot by 20 ft. deep. She was caught from the wild in 1970 and has lived at the aquarium ever since. She has been the source of controversy and criticism from animals rights activists and animal lovers alike. Due to her advanced age, it is unlikely that she will be transferred to another facility or her tank be renovated. Lolita is an example of how, despite heavy criticism, the killer whale remains in captivity. While her trainers argue that Lolita remains happy and healthy, many wonder how a predator used to swimming for miles can be happy in a bathtub.

What lies in the future of the killer whale in captivity? Killer whales are Sea World's biggest asset and their greatest liability. Think about other theme parks in Orlando, Disney World and Universal Studios. While the two theme parks have evolved with a Harry Potter themed world and Frozen themed fireworks, what does Sea World have? A bigger tank for killer whales and a revamped sea lion show. Sea World must change its vision if it needs to survive in the hostile theme park competition. It can no longer rely on killer whale shows to bring in visitors. Sea World must evolve again, otherwise they will lose their most prized animals forever.

Author's Note:
Sea World is not an evil institution. The Sea World team rescues thousands of sea lions, seals, turtles, manatees, dolphins, and other marine life and returns them to the wild. They are the most prominent marine life research institutions, having some of the largest marine facilities in the world. However, it has become clear that something must change with their killer whales. An increasing number of people do not condone keeping the large predators in captivity. Public opinion toward Sea World has turned black, a Sea World rescue team was even allegedly bullied and taunted while trying to save a sea lion. There are two possible outcomes for the orca in captivity. One, and the most likely, will be that public opinion toward Sea World will turn so much, that Sea World will voluntarily release its killer whales back into sea pens and halt their breeding program. Or Sea World will evolve, as Disney and Universal parks have done so many times, and bull their way through the criticism and suspicion. Only time will tell for what the marine giant will decide.

Circus Animals: Amusement or Abusement?

Circus Animals: Amusement or Abusement?

Is it fair to make animals perform for this? I touched on circus elephants before because they seem to get the most press of abusing. If you google "Ringling Bros. elephants", you will be first directed to the Ringling Bros. Center for Elephant Conservation home page. But scroll below and multiple websites, videos, and images of humans torturing elephants pop up. Animal rights groups have long battled circuses to ban live animal performances, chiefly elephants, but have extended to other animals. This post will attempt to see both sides between the long-powerful circus and the growing power of animal rights groups.

 

If you think about it, the circus industry is quite powerful. Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus, the most powerful and influential American circus is owned by Feld Entertainment, a $1 billion company that also owns Disney on Ice and Monster Jam. That's not even including the other permanent and travelling circuses scattered across the United States. And circuses around the world are still traditional going strong, including the formidable Russian circuses that specialize in tiger and bear training. However, there have been steps in banning live animal entertainment, including Mexico who recently banned all live animal performances.

 

Animals have long been a source of entertainment under the big top. Circuses would have a travelling menagerie of which they exhibited beasts of all kings designed to dazzle the public. However, breakthroughs in animal training allowed animals to perform tricks. However, the circus had to be careful about which animals they chose. Some animals like the giraffe were too hard to train, others like chimpanzees had to be retired early, and rhinos and hippos proved to be difficult to transport and hard to procure. Circus animals had to be easily trainable, readily available, and easy to transport. Also, most importantly for circuses, animals that were loved by the public had to be chosen. Core animals like Asian elephants (African elephants proved to be more difficult to train), tigers, lions, horses, llamas, and dogs made up of most of the live animal entertainment, although leopards, bears, camels, pot-bellied pigs, kangaroos, orangutans, and chimpanzees were used to an lesser extent.

Okay, I'll start out with the bad things about live animal entertainment in circuses. Trust me, there's a lot to cover:

1. Animals should not be made to do silly tricks

The foremost argument for animals not to be in entertainment is that animals should not be forced to perform silly tricks in front of people. The circus disagrees, arguing that they exhibit animals performing natural behaviors. To an extent this is true, elephants can stand on their hinds legs (as can dogs, tigers, and lions) and horses can gallop in a circle. But they're definitely not "natural", as natural behaviors can be usually boring and the circus strives to be anything but boring. But the question most people ask is whether the animals are beaten to do tricks which leads us to:

 

2. Animals should not be beaten to perform tricks

Animal rights groups maintain that circus elephants (not to mention other animals) are beaten so that their morale is broken and the trainer can easily direct the animals without incident. The area around animal training is murky at this point. In the past, animals were beaten and abused so that they could perform without harm to the trainer. However, the circus argues that it only uses positive reinforcement to train their animals. It's hard to believe when abuse videos and pictures pop up all the time on the Internet.

 

3. Animals should not be confined in small cages

Most people can agree that animals should not be in cages. However, according to recent data, tigers and lions in circuses spend anywhere from 60%-90% of their time in small cages when not performing. When taking account that elephants are chained for long periods of time, horses and llamas tethered, and bears muzzled, not a lot going for them.

 

Ok, we've talked about the disadvantages of the circus. Most people would stop right there. But I believe there are two sides of every story, so I'll delve into the circus' arguments for live animal entertainment. For every accusation hurled at the circus, true or not, the circus has always retaliated with a big

 

1. We love them and they love us. We use only positive reinforcement in our training.

It's hard to believe that the animal trainers who dedicate their lives to training and caring for animals would abuse them mercilessly. It has happened in the past and their are still animal trainers out there who use negative reinforcement. But since then, the circus has come a long way in forgoing the traditional circus training tools of whips and muzzles, such as big cat trainer Alexander Lacey who uses two guides to communicate with his beloved cats. However, it's worth noting that the circus still uses bullhooks (they prefer to use the word "guide") in training their elephants.

 

2. We spend money on them. A LOT of money.

As Asian elephants are quite rare in the United States, Ringling Bros. is probably motivated to take care of their 48 strong herd, a multi-million dollar investment. With the construction of the $200 million Center for Elephant Conservation and many more millions poured into the research, breeding, and retirement facility for elephants, its doubtful the circus spent a lot of money just to poke them with sharp tools. The circus has also contributed a lot to research on elephants, something very valuable to research scientists.

 

3. We take great care of them.

Also a long argument for circuses, animal trainers spend almost all of their day caring for their animals and making sure they're comfortable. After all, abused and sick animals can't perform. Also a unique argument for the circus is that circus animals, unlike other animals, have a job to do. It's an interesting thing to consider, that the circus animals have something to strive for, something to do every day.

 

Well, that pretty much summarizes the circus animal debate raging across the United States. There are unfortunately two sides in this argument, either you believe that circus animals are abused or they are simply beautiful ambassadors in a not-ideal situation. What do you believe?

Animal Medical Testing: A Necessary Evil?

Animal Medical Testing: A Necessary evil?

 

Is animal medical testing a truly ethical acceptable practice? In my mind, no. Experimentation on living beings can never being ethical and most people would hopefully agree. Animal medical testing is one of the most controversial practices in the issue of animals in captivity because of this. Does the advantages of animal medical testing truly outweigh the costs?

According to this poll, most people agree that animal research is necessary for the progress in human health. However, animal rights groups such as PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) have long opposed the use of animals in medical testing, arguing that testing on animals could not compare to human physiology. How can a pig's intestines be compared to a human's?

I'll be the first to admit that animal medical testing has some pretty heavy costs for its benefits. Over the past hundred years, less ethical scientists have performed numerous harmful experiments on monkeys, chimpanzees, dogs, horses, chickens, and other various animals. Multiple videos and pictures of animal abuse while being experimented on have surfaced. Animal medical testing is definitely not as ethical as some people would have you believe.

Animal medical research is slowly shifting in a positive path. The United States government recently announced that they were retiring 400 our of the 450 chimpanzees used for medical testing. In addition, the industry is slowly changing from experimenting on monkeys and dogs and other animals that are popular with the public. Now, most animal medical testing is mostly limited to genetically modified rats and mice. New technology has allowed scientists to also work with embryos, which would allow the retirement of animals in medical research.

 

Bryan's Notes: Personally, I think that animal medical testing is okay, partly because it helps saves countless human lives. We have cured diseases, manufactured vaccines, and helped stop viruses with animal experimentation. When dealing with animals, there will always be controversy. But if the animals are helping to save human lives, isn't it worth it? I love animals, but if I had to save a hundred chimpanzees or my own mother, who do you think I should pick?

 

 

 

Blackfish Part II: Impact of the Orca

Blackfish Part II: Impact of the Orca

Blackfish. The documentary that shook the world of animal rights, marine mammal parks, and zoological institutions. With the question of whether killer whales should be in captivity, we ask ourselves the questions: is it ethically acceptable to keep such intelligent mammals in captivity?

This blog post will examine the effect of the critically acclaimed documentary Blackfish on the American public, Sea World, and zoological institutions in general.

 

Ok, everyone loves orcas. They're beautiful, with their black and white marks so pure and clean. They're lovable, powerful in motion, wonders of the water. And they're gentle giants, as most people are led to assume. But wait! The other name for the orca: killer whale. KILLER whale. Killer whales are actually quite vicious in the wild, tearing apart seals and other prey with ease. Most people point toward the fact that no human has ever been killed by a wild orca. Hmmm, how about because most humans don't interact with killer whales 24/7. Oh wait, NO HUMAN does that. Animal rights groups are trying to capitalize on the fact that killer whales are crazed from captivity. But if they were, wouldn't there be more deaths in their forty year history of Sea World? It makes no sense. But while I personally don't agree with some of the tactics of the animal rights groups, I agree that it has opened the issue of whether humans should have killer whales in captivity.

Let's look at the basic impact of Blackfish. The most obvious impact of Blackfish is the corporation that the film attacks: Sea World, who owns three marine mammal theme parks: Sea World Orlando, Sea World San Diego, and Sea World San Antonio. Sea World Orlando is most infamous for the death of experience killer whale trainer Dawn Brancheau. Sea World has been affected GREATLY by the film, whatever their press representatives say. Sea World's attendance hasn't had a drastic fall, but they've certainly lost business over the thousands of people who lobby for Sea World to retire their orca breeding program and shows. Their revenue actually increased last year, but was due to raised prices and more spending inside the parks.

With the death of Dawn, Sea World has now implemented dozens of safety protocols and procedures in order to prevent another event, such as portable oxygen for their trainers and safety bars. However, Sea World lobbied the government to return trainers to work on a close-hand basis with the orcas and get in the water. Sea World was refused and a California lawmaker later proposed a bill that would halt the killer whale breeding program in California and force Sea World San Diego to close their orca shows.  The bill was postponed, with both sides reloading. Sea World argues that closing the orca shows would cause Sea World San Diego to collapse and the San Diego economy would be greatly affected by the park's demise. Also, Sea World could simply get around the law by sending its orcas to one of its other parks.

Sea World has fought back bitterly to the numerous accusations of PETA and other animal rights organizations, as well as animal lovers around the world. They've dedicated an entire website to "clear up" the accusations. Both sides have hurled multiple claims toward each other.

 

To what end? That is the real question of the impact of Blackfish. It focuses on three main questions:

 

Will Sea World end their orca shows willingly?

Highly doubtful. Sea World's flagship species and arguably most beautiful and largest animals are the key for bringing in revenue and while Sea World is a for-profit company, it ain't cheap to take care of those massive behemoths. Sea World has fought tirelessly to keep its killer whales and will pour many millions into keeping the beloved animals by almost any means necessary.

 

If Sea World was to end their orca shows, would Sea World close?

That question is a little tricky to interpret. There is no doubt that Sea World relies on their orcas for a majority of their revenue as their flagship species. With the closure of the orca shows, suddenly visitors just lost about half an hour of their time and orca merchandise plummets. However, Sea World spends millions of dollars each year on maintaining the orca facilities, and would not have to spend money on trainers, tanks, shows, food, or veterinary care. Still, when major exhibits close in a zoological institution, people start to leave.

 

Is it ethically acceptable to have killer whales in captivity?

It depends on what you believe in. If you believe that killer whales are meant to be in the wild, then you will have none of this nonsense. But if you say that Sea World contributes to scientific research and are convinced that Sea World provides the best care for their orcas, then Sea World is justified. The decision to end orca shows will come eventually and it may be phased out inevitably with everyone being so ethical these days. Do you believe orcas are okay in captivity?

 

Author's Note:

Let me be the first one to commend Sea World for their work with smaller marine animals like manatees, walruses, and dolphins. While some complain that the tanks are still too small and unfit for the wild, Sea World has been instrumental for the rescue and rehabilitation of countless marine animals. If Sea World was to close, then all that research and rescue would be gone. Sea World is one of the world's juggernauts of marine mammal science and research, and without them, marine mammal research would be practically gone. Sea World still has a long way to go and I don't condone with keeping such massive animals in small conditions. But the killer whales at Sea World are such great ambassadors for marine mammals. Under normal circumstances, I would say that captivity could be justified. But killer whales aren't endangered and are unlikely to as humans normally don't interfere with their habitat or hunt them regularly. Both Sea World and Blackfish fanatics have used methods that I don't agree with, but I would side with Sea World for their research and rescue and Blackfish for their ability to raise public awareness on an issue.