When I was a kid we had a pet dog. She was the friendliest dog in the world, yet when the neighborhood kids would ask "Does she bite?" My dad would reply "She has teeth, doesn't she?"
Printable View
When I was a kid we had a pet dog. She was the friendliest dog in the world, yet when the neighborhood kids would ask "Does she bite?" My dad would reply "She has teeth, doesn't she?"
...Quote:
Originally Posted by Vortexxx
That related to this conversation in no way whatsoever. Unless you count that both the dog and the whale are animals...
Lol, yes, the trainers knew the whale had teeth and that it could kill. No need to kill it for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vortexxx
Actually Joe, your comment is less pertinent to the convoQuote:
Originally Posted by joemanf
... I still don't understand... What the heck does a dog have to do with a whale?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Arumen
Absolutely nothing, except that some people think they can treat them the same way because they are both "animals". (as opposed to us "humans" who are not "animals" because we are so ****ing smart.)Quote:
Originally Posted by joemanf
Completely agree, killing this whale for doing what essentially is a backlash at being separated from their family and kept in a white concrete room, where occasionally they are taken out in to a bigger room where they do jumping jacks four times per day, for people that find them "interesting".Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Arumen
Imagine knowing you were going to live the rest of your life like that!
Thank you, I thought when I was posting the comment would go over the head of some.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Arumen
Hello and good evening.
In my personal viewpoint, there is only one thing that is infinite in the whole framework of the cosmos: human stupidity.
I believe that in numerous aspects, humans are inferior to other animals and creatures. Human beings are the only creatures who inflict self-harm on themselves intentionally, subjugate others for "glory" and "truth", engage in lascivious acts for mere enjoyment and indulge in other perverse activities.
I am bold to say that humanity in its collective representation or the "common herd of man" excluding the great men and women of history is a cluster of bestial creatures filled with elemental savagery. If regular/average humans were portrayed by their moral beliefs and values on the exterior framework, humans would crawl on all fours and groan in their cacophonous or dissonant cries and bellows, and engage in putrid and vile passions.
It is a tragedy to see that there are many who view a state of subservience and obeisance [in captivity or bound to a closed and confined space] with a small degree of safety [regarding both animals and humans] as satisfactory. Such individuals deserve neither autonomy/liberty nor safety!
...This is the perfect example of someone who reads the title of the thread and probably doesn't even read the Op.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadBrit2
And for conrad, I will have a response to your post when I'm done looking up half the words in your post! =P
...But thank you for sharing your wisdom in my thread.
My two pence;
Yes, the whale killed. Yes, there are people who feel that captivity is wrong. Yes there are people that think that the whale acted out due to captivity. Yes, there are people who believe that it should be put down. Yes, there are people who believe that it should be released. And finally yes, there are people who feel it should stay in SeaWorld and carry on its daily life.
The only sentence above with a definitive answer is the first one, stating that it killed a trainer. There are arguments for and against all of the other statements.
1. Captivity is wrong.
I completely agree that limiting the living space of a wild animal is not ideal. It can be considered as cruel in some aspects whilst in others people turn a blind eye due to the benefits. Some animals are placed in captivity for attraction, some to ensure the continuation of the species. Some are disgracefully mistreated. My personal view in this case is that the animals are treated well enough to warrant their purpose in captivity. From what I have seen at SeaWorld, the animals seem to enjoy the human company, but there is no way of knowing for sure if this is generally the case or not. The following quote is one of the benefits I believe to outweigh the detriment of captivity;
2. The whale acted out as a response to captivity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rota
There is no way to tell if this is the case, and its completely naive to think so. To base an argument on this just isn?t smart. I understand that these creatures are considered intelligent enough to plan an event like this based on their living situation, and this may well be true. If this was the case however, wouldn?t you think that there would have been more than four deaths in the last twenty two years?(see citation). Has anyone considered that this animal, with comparable intelligence to humans, may have a comparable personality? Maybe a bad mood, or a bad day?
Citation; (No, I have not researched this myself, I?ll take his word for it. If this information proves to be incorrect, please let me know. (Love the comparison, sounds like something I?d come out with, +rep for you :D))
3. Putting the whale down / humane termination.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aramis
Under extreme circumstances, animals should be put down. However I feel only in cases where the animal provides a continual risk, or liklihood of further human harm. If the animal can be placed in an acceptable environment where causation of harm to humans is removed from the equation, I believe this is the best cause. With regard to this point, there are a number of options which remove any possibility of harm to humans and avoid ending the creature?s life. Due to this, I find this course of action to be wholly unacceptable.
4. The whale should be released.
In an ideal world I would back up this argument wholeheartedly. This, however is not an ideal world. The factors preventing this are in most cases insurmountable. To release an animal after so long in captivity produces the following problems;
i. Feeding. Quite often when animals are released, they have become so dependant on humans in their daily life, that they are unable to survive on their own. Regardless of the fact that Axer?s point on Keiko starving was incorrect, it still happens, just not in this case.
ii. Disease. Whilst in human captivity, we are able to provide innoculation and other medical assistance. Without which, the animal would be crippled and/or killed in the wild.
Citation; (corrected your spelling too, aren?t I kind?)
iii. Reintegration. When animals are released, especially animals which require external contact, they can often have problems reintegrating with their own species. Whilst in captivity they have the communication with any other captive whales, and their trainers, in the wild they require communication and co-operation with their own species (see citation). Whilst I cannot assuredly say whether or not this would apply to whales, not being a marine biologist, it is certainly a thought to be consideredQuote:
Originally Posted by Violation_s51
Citation;
5. The whale should be kept.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rodri
This is the argument that I most strongly support. If the whale is considered to be a danger to humans by thos who make the decisions, I believe it should be removed from close human interaction, and kept in a similar way to the more dangerous animals we see at marine zoological parks. Maintain the interactions with human trainers, but not to an extent where future harm is possible. That animal will still be looked after more than adequately, like all the others in these situations, yet will pos no future risk.
My personal views
To conclude, I feel that the whale should be kept at the park, looked after and removed from situations exposing risk of human harm. This is entirely possible to do whilst maintaining its current quality of life. Releasing it to the wild, I think, hold the probability of doing more harm than good. Mainly due to the issues of sustenance, reintegration and disease which I have highlighted previously. Ending the animal?s life, a definite no, in my book.
I know there are people here who will agree with some of these points, maybe even all. I also know that there are thos of you who won?t. I will accept all points made, but I do ask that you do so civily, as I have put a fair amount of time into this, and I get annoyed easily :D
Thanks all, and be nice!
The Orca Whales have a "Range" Of thousands of Miles in the ocean. Some of them go from British Columbia and then meander their way down to the Argentine Patagonia. So Rodri is right. Off Topic but there was the small Great White captured and held in Monterey Bay Aquarium. After a bit the thing got agitated, kept running into the walls and started trying to eat the Sun Fish (Which would have made me cry, the Sunfish is creepy awesome) Anyways, they put the shark back in the wild and tracked it all the way to South Africa.
Now, Orcas are extremely intelligent, social creatures. The issue is whether the Orcas, if all released into the wild would be able to either A) Find their original Pod (Or gander or Book club or whatever a group of them is called) Or B) the ones bred in captivity will find any new group that would accept them.
In the end this is an issue about whether to allow the orca to keep performing, or to keep it in some back pen and used for studding which is what it normally does.
My Opinion may be skewed because i think ALL Animals should be fitted with Guns and Lasers, and we will see who rules this world.
they should set the whale free it should be in the wild
i love animals myself and pittbulls are considered to be a dangerous animals bcse of dogfights and that isnt true at all .pittbulls are good dogs i should know bcse i had taken care of five pitts and dogs that are mean are raised that way and it depends on the way that you raise em.to get a good loving dog,you must raise it that way.if you want a mean dog you must raise it to be that way.all kinds of animals have their own risks.if someone was to own a snake then you must know the risks of having one.As the late Steve Irwin said "Dont Muck with Them".
lol it is as i said it :) all kinds of animals have their own risks
I think we may be drifting a bit from the OP. In the end, good or bad; Humans want to see animals do slightly demeaming things for our enjoyment. I am not an Orca, but as a huge fat man I would much rather be fed and hang in a nicely maintained heated enclosure and wear a hat then out in the wild where the other Orcas would mock me for my fashion sense. Many, many of the animals in Aquariums/zoos would never be able to survive on their own in the wild. And also there is a lot of scientific research that happens, research that helps the animals kin out in the wild that places like Sea World and the Zoos rarely advertise.
Oceanic animals, as well as the exotic Lions and Lemurs and the very rare Empathetic Evony Customer Service Reps are super popular to watch exactly because we people have little or no chance to see them in the wild.
I was taking a Ferry from Port Angeles Wash to Victoria Island, and I was able to see some of the Orcas play in the heated water behind the Ferry propellers. A few also breahed. Now, that was amazing. It was more amazing then seeing the Orcas at Sea World as a kid because these creatures were free; were playing around- and I also knew that it was a spectacle few people will ever see.
But once again I was fairly certain if i fell in the water the Orcas would have used me as a rag doll or worse; a concubine.
Right!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsubasa
Ownership implies responsibility for maintenance and upkeep. Clearly we are renters. :D And horrid tenants, at that.
In the end we are not going to kill the planet. We might make it unlivable for humankind and most of the current living species. But, mother nature will continue unabated long after we are extinct. ;)
It takes a helluva strong ego to think that anything we puny humans do will end this planet.
Gaia will simply adapt to ANYTHING we do.
i do know for a fact that none of the pittbulls that i had taken care of have .never had harmed anybody.they all was too sweet and loving to do so.their names are Jada,Sid,Pancho,Chaos,Sabbath.Sid died as a puppy and an older dog grabbed him by his throat :( he never played rough with me.Jada is very sweet and loving.and the others never had hurted me or my family.
Scarlet. The conversation about Pit Bulls should be in another thread. Those animals(and all dogs) Have been Bred for a specific purpose. We are talking about the idea of a Wild Animal put in captivity, and after it killed someone should said animal be allowed to still perform. If a Pitbull killed someone, would the dog be allowed to go back performing "The Swan Princess on Ice" Over in Culver City?
Lets all be honest; the fact Tilikum killed someone will be forgotten fairly soon. At least until some other accident happens that causes us to fret about these issues.
Historically Humans have always had animals perform. I am just waiting for the Monkey People to rise up and start making us as pets.
alright and i have given up animals because i had to move :( and it was Jada that i had to give up :(.she was special to me because she thought i was her person.
This whole episode could be compared to a rodeo.Wild horses have been captured for years.Bred for their showmanship and then put on display for human entertainment.
Orca are much larger,more social and intelligent animals.I have known some pretty smart horses.I would be insane to get into a pen with them though.Having a pair of rear hooves purposely aimed at your head with a lot of punch behind them is unhealthy.
The whole thing can be used as a learning exp.I was raised in Puget Sound and have been in close contact with Orca.Once while fishing for Salmon I had one actually bump/slap the side of the kayak.I felt it was on purpose.I was in their waters.I don't do this anymore.That would be tempting fate.
I think this Orca could be returned to the wild.I would hope that If they chose to do this they would include a few members of his species and social group.
The slap probably was on purpose. Dolphins will touch boats to see what they are. Also, can you add spaces after the ends of sentences? It makes your posts a bit more difficult to read without them. If you can not, that is fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eutopeus
Well think about it Arumen. They Guy was fishing, catching the Orcas food. We can go on land and snag a cow, the Orca is stuck with the Chicken of the Sea. I would have flipped the kayak and licked the fisherman to say "Now Now; I am not above eating you"
Kind of like when I am at the Buffet, and a little kid is in my way. After a moment or two there comes a time when you have to stiff Arm little Billy so you can get to the Chicken Dumplings.
I think in the end everyone has to realize when you have Animals; wild or not- and add human interaction there is always the chance for disaster. That is why I fear squirrels. They are like rats with better PR
Lol Aramis, your posts entertain me to no end. Not that you do not have a valid point, I just think that the Orca's are not THAT intelligent
In all seriousness; Orcas have intelligence that could be put on par with pigs and Human toddlers. No joke. There has been instances they show amazing ability to communicate, plan and execute fairly decent strategies.
In British Columbia there there is a beach where the pebbles are super smooth, and the whales would thrust themselves up and wiggle around and thrash about; either to get rid of parasites or whatever but also cause it probably feels good. There was a researcher who would get in the water and record the sounds they make. Well; the guy had a heart attack, and died in the water. The whales sounds turned to concern and the whales pushed him onto shore.
The Orcas, like most pinnipeds are very maternal, social creatures that stick together. Now, are they building stuff and making math formulas? Course not, they have no thumbs. But since we are on top of the mental food chain we as humans like to make sure every other creature is considered inferior so it allows us to sleep a bit better.
This will probably increase tourist activity. They'll probably not let it go unless they have to.
I've been reading a lot of different reports on this, and my opinion would be leave him as is but take the necessary precautions.
"Re-introducing Tilikum to the wild would be costly, would include serious risks for the animal and would not guarantee his survival. There is absolutely a risk in keeping him where he is," said Naomi Rose, a marine-mammal scientist for the Humane Society of the United States.
Killer whales in general are highly intelligent species with their own unique personalities. They've also been provent to suffer (as we do) from depression, boredom, anxiety, etc. Stress is a factor too and can harm them physcially as it would us.
Removing him from shows can also heighten his boredom and lead to random fits of rage. I don't believe in putting it down myself, they knew the risks going when they capture/breed/use such large animals.
KILLERS OF EDEN
The incredible true story of the killer whales of Twofold Bay
from the site: http://www.killersofeden.com/
For thousands of years, killer whales have hunted the great baleen whales in every ocean on earth, yet only in one place have they ever co-operated with humans to hunt whales, and then largely only with one family, the Davidsons. "Killers of Eden" is the extraordinary story of the contract between man and one of nature's most powerful and intelligent creatures.
Each year for more than a century on Australia?s far south east coast, autumn moved into winter and the killer whales would return to Eden from the Antarctic and lie in wait. Their prey were the baleen whales journeying to and from their breeding grounds hundreds of kilometers up the coast. Three generations of the Davidson family worked with the killer whales, often invited by the killers and led out to sea to join in the hunts. A few members of the pod of orcas would swim right into the mouth of the kiah river where the Davidsons had their two isolated houses on the opposite side of the bay from the township of Eden. They would then breach or thrash their tails on the water surface untill the whalers emerged and rowed their boats out to meet them. The Davidsons called this behaviour "flop-tailing". No other Eden whalers were ever visited in this manner. On cloudy moonless nights, the Davidson crews would follow the glowing bioluminescent trails of the orcas which would light up the sea.
When the whale was dead, the Davidsons would simply row home after tying an anchor and small buoy to it, leaving first spoils to the killers. Just like orcas elsewhere in the world, the Eden killers only ate the tongue and lips and discarded the rest.
After a few days the whale would float to the surface and the Eden whalers would row out and tow the remains for "trying out" at their tiny whaling station on the banks of the Kiah river in Twofold bay. The whalers called this arrangement "the law of the tongue" and as a result, far less of the whale was wasted than if the Orcas had hunted alone.
The relationship became so close that the whalers would attempt to rescue the killers if they became entangled in ropes and the killers would protect the humans from sharks if the flimsy green whaleboats were smashed. As a result, few fatalities occured amongst the crews, despite regular serious accidents.
The killers could easily differentiate between the Davidson's green row boats and competitors boats of other colours. Captive orcas in aquariums have no trouble recognising individual humans, distinguishing between others wearing identical clothing such as wetsuits. so the Eden killers could likely have recognised individuals amongst the Davidson crews. The Davidson boats? green colour was based on the green of the traditional Scottish Davidson tartan.
The Davidsons never used motor boats to catch whales. Only rowboats. Sometimes motor launches were offered for use as pick-up boats in case of accidents or to tow whales to shore. In the final decade of whaling in the 1920s the Davidsons? neighbour J.R. Logan would occasionally give the row boats a tow out to a chase with his yacht the "White Heather", but no bomb-gun or harpoon was ever fired from a motor boat in twofold bay. The Davidsons avoided using explosive "bomb-guns" to catch whales because the concussive noise greatly distressed the killers and discouraged them from co-operating.
Using modern technology is not traditional, and is not "cultural whaling".
Subsistence huntingThe Davidsons would rarely catch more than 8 whales a year in their subsistence level operation and likely had minimal impact on whale numbers. They mostly only caught what the killer whales were hunting naturally. The orcas did regularly attack southern right whales which became very rare.
By comparison, Tangalooma whaling station in Queensland took over 700 whales each year in the 1950s, devastating humback numbers at a much faster rate than they could possibly reproduce.
Modern day Japanese and Nordic whalers, in defiance of scientific and world opinion and ignoring a worldwide moratorium on commercial whaling, kill more whales in a single year than most Eden whalers took in a whole lifetime.
If you are interested in direct intervention against the poaching of whales, then you may wish to read about and support the Sea Shepherd Organisation.
The Killers DeclineIn 1900 the killer pack numbered over 15 individuals untill a vagrant named Harry Silks knifed the killer Jackson to death on Aslings beach. Other sources state the killer Typee was killed. Immediately the killer pack left the bay for the remainder of the season and the following season only six returned. Whilst it has been suggested that the disappearance of the killers was a result of dwindling food supply, large scale hunting of eastern coast humpback populations did not actually occur untill the 1950s, a whole half century after Jackson's killing and the Eden pack spliting in two. The population of humpbacks at the time of Jackson's 1900 killing and splitting of the pod has been estimated by pacific whale foundation scientists as being the same as its pre-european settlement population.
The Davidsons became aware that the killers were being deliberately shot and killed by Norwegian whalers working from Jervis Bay who were oblivious to their non-competetive assistance to the Eden whalers.
Old Tom himself passed away in 1930, 30 years after Jackson yet still 20 years before large scale whaling for humpbacks in Australia.
The skeleton of "Old Tom", the last of the Eden Killers is preserved to this day in the Eden Killer Whale Museum and bears testament to the extraordinary tales told about him. Tom's death in 1930 brought the 100 year period of whaling in Eden to a close.
100+ years of documentationNo mere myth or the recollections of foggy memories, whilst it was occuring, the Eden story was documented in a hundred years worth of Australian newspapers, police records, court transcripts, diaries, postcards, Australian Government Hansard, journals, and books and for an additional 75 years of oral history accounts and tape and video recordings. The events were viewed by hundreds of eyewitnesses, members of government, leaders of industry, priests and ministers, knights of the realm. It was most fortunately also documented in hundreds of photographs by two full time photographers over a 40+ year period and was filmed by a 35 mm Prestwick movie camera in one of the world's first documentaries in 1910. It was first shown publicly in the "Lycic Picture Palace" in Redfern, Sydney in 1912.
Many of the photos were taken by C.E. Wellings or W.T. Hall and have been collected by Rene Davidson, grandson of master whaler George Davidson. Many of these photographs are represented by original glass negatives.
Copies of the 1910 movie film were destroyed by a fire, probably caused by the nitrate film-stock itself, in the Bega bank in 1913 and only a few frames have survived. If anyone has information on any other surviving copies or negatives please contact the website author.
Inter-species InteractionSome people find it difficult to believe that over a 100+ year period of inter-species contact, encompassing many generations and with the mutual rewards of greater efficiency and food , orcas and humans could develop a co-operative relationship whilst hunting the same prey. Yet those same people have no trouble accepting that with no prior contact with humans, wild orcas placed in aquariums within months will interact with humans, eventually allowing them to ride on their backs or perform huge leaps with humans standing on their snouts. Orcas are intelligent and curious and will even intently study books about whales as has been documented by Dr John Ford of Vancouver aquarium. Doubters may care to view video footage of this behaviour.
Personally I think it's well past time that we stopped keeping these creatures in confinement for whatever purpose. We basically have no right to do so. What happens to those that are already confined and perhaps would suffer if released? I don't know. I just know that it is wrong to keep captive an intelligent species when there is no need to do so.
But you must also realize this is a point. We don't know what will happen if they are released. If they have been hand feed their entire life, They will not be able to survive if released.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rodri
Wouldn't that be more harmful to them then keeping them in confinement, Yet taking good care of them?
...Could you please stop trolling my thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Knuckles
I don't know what to do with the captives. I didn't ask anyone to keep them captive and I would never participate in any activity that involved treating these creatures in that way. I don't like the shows they put on for the tourists and I don't think scientists can learn much in these situations either. We live in an age of high tech. equipment that could be used to gather information in the wild with minimal impact on the life of the subject. Creatures (including humans) behave differently when they are held in captivity to when they are free to do as they please.
[EDIT] If it is a question of how much it would cost and how difficult it would be to release these animals into the wild and rehabilitate them, I don't care how much it costs or how hard it is. That is no excuse to continue with the mistreatment of these animals while profiting from their misfortune. [/EDIT]
Thanks for contributing to this discussion!:cheer:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alzar
(And Nooo, You have yet to see snappy).
It's human nature to enjoy these kind of show's, No matter how they affect the creature in the show.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rodri
Asking to stop these shows is asking to stop human nature.
Once upon a time it was human nature to hold public executions for entertainment and it was human nature to put disabled people into freak shows for public amusement. We don't do those things anymore (at least in our western society) so there is no reason why we should continue to demean marine mammals in shows either.
I heard a report on NPR today. There has been a massive increase in witchcraft accusations against children in the Congo. The penalty for this accusation (not proof) is to be stoned to death, burned to death, or just plain beaten to death. The increase is resulting hundreds of children more than normal being killed. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Rodri
... "more than normal"
That means there has been an acceptable "average" number of children wildly accused of witchcraft up 'til now. :confused:
One girl was just playing with her friend in a cemetery, so she was accused of raising the dead.
Is that JUST "human nature?" :modedit:
can a mod please handle this troll...Quote:
Originally Posted by Knuckles
Anywho... I'm glad to see some people have given good arguements against not releasing him... instead of "bleh bleh bleh they cant eat alone." It's true it is not easy to teach animals how to hunt for their own food... BUT, I am SURE that no one here will argue with the fact they're smart enough to learn how to chase a moving fish instead of letting it come to them... even a dog can be tought to catch / catch'n'release food for themselves and their trainers... I'm sure we can do the same for an orca.
I would like to comment on one thing said that they get bored. I actually forgot that until you mentioned it. That's a good point about not taking him out of the show. I remember actually reading about some of the studies done on them when I was a kid and it said orca's will actually show bordom and toss things back and forth from time between eachother when they're bored... like people playing catch in the street... I remember wanting to see that... completely had forgotten until you mentioned it... I think I'll look up a youtube to see if I can find anything on it.
Good point and I like seeing a solid reason that benefits both us and them.
Human nature=Not normal-Not equal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rota