Blackfish

[NStarz]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Has anyone seen the movie? What do you think? Let's have a calm, civil, collegial discussion 🙂

 

[orca2011]

I saw it and should be able to discuss once exams are over.

 

[onisteverina]

I just saw it a couple days ago and I'm interested to hear what people have to say about it. I went to Marine World for the first time as an adult approx. a year ago (group outing for work) and was pretty disturbed by the shows, but didn't think much about it afterward. Watching the documentary just reignited my disgust for the whole thing..

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

Animals that intelligent have no business in pools. Period.

 

[Frozenshades]

Animals that intelligent have no business in pools. Period.

👍

About as succinct as it can be said. Haven't watched it yet, but would definitely like to soon.

 

[Lab Vet]

I saw it opening weekend here in Utah back in August (had been waiting for it's premiere). I thought that it was an excellent documentary, although it obviously had an agenda (similar to a Michael Moore film). I would like to have seen the opposite side included, which the director made a valiant effort to obtain. Sea World declined time and time again to have the park's voice heard in the film. 'Blackfish' and 'The Cove' (another excellent documentary, discussing the annual dolphin slaughter/capture in Taiji, Japan) should be required viewing for folks contemplating a visit to view cetaceans in captivity. That being said, I myself have visited Sea World, albeit not recently. Seeing the magnificent animals up close certainly inspired me. If I had known when I was younger that the animals I was viewing had been separated from their families (not even to mention the other talking points of the film), I would have felt differently. Highly recommended.

 

[ChittyBang]

Animals that intelligent have no business in pools. Period.

This.

Sea World's stock has been dropping since the doc came out. Maybe more people will go whale watching now.

 

[CanHardlyWait]

I haven't seen Blackfish, but I will look into it. I regularly watch documentaries.
Similar topic- I just saw an interesting mini documentary on PBS's Nature about the problem with parrots and other long lived, intelligent birds as pets. They can live up to 80 years and have really intense socialization needs. I don't know much about birds, it was really eye opening. I don't plan on an avian practice, but seems like an important topic for aspiring vets to be educated on, in case clients ask our advice or opinion.

 

[LetItSnow]

What about 'intelligent' animals that for one reason or another would not survive in the wild, WTF? Is your take on it: "they should either be free [if they can] or euthanized [if they can't]?" Hehe. Live free or die? 🙂

It's not a leading question; genuinely curious. I'm not exactly sure how I feel about it.

 

[DVMDream]

I went and found it and watched it. I thought it was fairly good...

And I have to agree with WTF here, but I have believed this since before I saw the documentary:

Animals that intelligent have no business in pools. Period.

I saw it opening weekend here in Utah back in August (had been waiting for it's premiere). I thought that it was an excellent documentary, although it obviously had an agenda (similar to a Michael Moore film).

I also agree with this. Especially when they start spouting off things like, "there have been no recorded attacks by orcas in the wild on humans." Ok, well, how many humans do you have swimming with orcas in the wild? It is like comparing apples to oranges; really not a good comparison. There were a few other points similar to this in the documentary. Overall, it was good. Definitely got its point across and most definitely extremely biased (though not sure that was any fault of their own, as they seemed to try to get Sea World's take/opinion). They used emotional tactics to pull in an audience then kept their attention by continuing to go back to an emotional pull after some more "scientific facts"; it is a great tactic and one that is used often.

I agree with most of the documentary and for the general public that didn't know a lot about what goes on, it is good. It just didn't change my viewpoint or add anything insightful for me... you can't keep dolphins/whales/most of marine life in what is basically a large swimming pool.

 

[DVMDream]

What about 'intelligent' animals that for one reason or another would not survive in the wild, WTF? Is your take on it: "they should either be free [if they can] or euthanized [if they can't]?" Hehe. Live free or die? 🙂

It's not a leading question; genuinely curious. I'm not exactly sure how I feel about it.

The problem is that these animals in Sea World were "living free in the wild" when they were taken. Granted that now most of them have been breed from those that were captured, but still the first few initial orcas were captured from the wild and brought into captivity. I know, too late to take them back, but they shouldn't keep breeding them when they can't give them an even somewhat adequate home.

 

[TooLove]

Animals that intelligent have no business in pools. Period.

This.

I did lots of behavioral research with orcas, belugas, and dolphins in a captive environment and you simply cannot replicate the ocean. Even if every effort is made to keep those animals happy (and I wouldn't say that happened where I was), it's still not adequate. Let's be honest, even of it was feasible, what member of the paying public wants to go look at a tank of water so large you can't see what you paid to come look at?

I didn't watch Blackfish, and I'm not sure if I want to.

 

[TooLove]

I haven't seen Blackfish, but I will look into it. I regularly watch documentaries.
Similar topic- I just saw an interesting mini documentary on PBS's Nature about the problem with parrots and other long lived, intelligent birds as pets. They can live up to 80 years and have really intense socialization needs. I don't know much about birds, it was really eye opening. I don't plan on an avian practice, but seems like an important topic for aspiring vets to be educated on, in case clients ask our advice or opinion.

This too. Not to hijack the thread, but it is so true. I work in an avian practice and this happens all. the. time. Anytime anyone remotely hints at wanting a parrot I try to discourage them. And I have one.

 

[EdinBelle]

What about 'intelligent' animals that for one reason or another would not survive in the wild, WTF? Is your take on it: "they should either be free [if they can] or euthanized [if they can't]?" Hehe. Live free or die? 🙂

It's not a leading question; genuinely curious. I'm not exactly sure how I feel about it.

I'm not opposed to rescue and rehabilitation. Even if it meant that an animal cannot be returned back into the wild, and I do acknowledge and support SeaWorlds efforts to do things like this.

However, it is a completely different discussion when you talk about rescued cetaceans staying in captivity vs. cetaceans that are specifically bred in captivity to perform in these SeaWorld shows. They are purposely being born to act as a cash cow for tourists and it's disgusting. I've realized through conversations with some peers that this is a huge misconception about SeaWorld. Many people think that it's okay that these animals are performing because they were rescued from the wild, can't return, and perform in order to keep them mentally stimulated. They have no idea..

On the other hand, I think that it's important to mention that a high majority of SeaWorld's whales have been fathered or grandfathered by Tillikum, the whale who controversially killed Dawn Brancheau. SeaWorld did not have a male breeder in their organization after the death of their stud in the late 80s early 90s; so they had the choice between Tillikum and Keiko, the killer whale who played Willy in Free Willy (thank god they chose Tillikum, I couldn't imagine what could've happened if a 13 year old boy jumped in the pool with Tillikum to film a movie). And many of Tillikums offspring have reported incidents of "aggressive" or "stressed" behavior. One of Tillikums sons was even single handed kt responsible for the death of Alexis Martinez, at Loro Parque in Spain, only months before Dawn Brancheau's death. Now I don't know too much about genetics, but I do know that it's never recommended to breed an "aggressive" German Shepherd, so why would it be any different with a killer whale?

Researching killer whales has always been a passion of mine. Recently, I read the book "Death at SeaWorld" and it has seriously rekindled a fire inside of me. For anyone who has the time over Thanksgiving break and is interested in learning some of the heinous facts about cetaceans in captivity.. I highly recommend it.

 

[Escalla]

Someone is giving a presentation about this in my Behaviour and Welfare class. Looking forward to hearing their opinion....

I'll have to check this out!

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

What about 'intelligent' animals that for one reason or another would not survive in the wild, WTF? Is your take on it: "they should either be free [if they can] or euthanized [if they can't]?" Hehe. Live free or die? 🙂

It's not a leading question; genuinely curious. I'm not exactly sure how I feel about it.

EdinBelle said it well. But even then a line should be drawn somewhere. If they could provide adequate space and stimulation for whatever intelligent species that couldn't be returned to the wild, sure. But I really question the facilities for orcas, or at least the ones I know of. I actually don't even have a problem even with zoos and the like, given the aforementioned space and stimulation criteria needed for that species is provided. But orcas are simply too big. Like keeping a lame elephant in a pony ride paddock its whole life. It might almost be better to humanely euthanize the poor thing.

I'm not opposed to rescue and rehabilitation. Even if it meant that an animal cannot be returned back into the wild, and I do acknowledge and support SeaWorlds efforts to do things like this.

However, it is a completely different discussion when you talk about rescued cetaceans staying in captivity vs. cetaceans that are specifically bred in captivity to perform in these SeaWorld shows. They are purposely being born to act as a cash cow for tourists and it's disgusting. I've realized through conversations with some peers that this is a huge misconception about SeaWorld. Many people think that it's okay that these animals are performing because they were rescued from the wild, can't return, and perform in order to keep them mentally stimulated. They have no idea..

On the other hand, I think that it's important to mention that a high majority of SeaWorld's whales have been fathered or grandfathered by Tillikum, the whale who controversially killed Dawn Brancheau. SeaWorld did not have a male breeder in their organization after the death of their stud in the late 80s early 90s; so they had the choice between Tillikum and Keiko, the killer whale who played Willy in Free Willy (thank god they chose Tillikum, I couldn't imagine what could've happened if a 13 year old boy jumped in the pool with Tillikum to film a movie). And many of Tillikums offspring have reported incidents of "aggressive" or "stressed" behavior. One of Tillikums sons was even single handed kt responsible for the death of Alexis Martinez, at Loro Parque in Spain, only months before Dawn Brancheau's death. Now I don't know too much about genetics, but I do know that it's never recommended to breed an "aggressive" German Shepherd, so why would it be any different with a killer whale?

Researching killer whales has always been a passion of mine. Recently, I read the book "Death at SeaWorld" and it has seriously rekindled a fire inside of me. For anyone who has the time over Thanksgiving break and is interested in learning some of the heinous facts about cetaceans in captivity.. I highly recommend it.

 

[twelvetigers]

My problem is like 30% with their captivity situation and 70% the fact that they are trained to do stupid tricks for fish for the entertainment of others. It's not a zoo, then - it's a circus.

 

[TooLove]

My problem is like 30% with their captivity situation and 70% the fact that they are trained to do stupid tricks for fish for the entertainment of others. It's not a zoo, then - it's a circus.

I agree with this to some extent, however, you can also argue that this type of mental stimulation is very enriching to them. They are, after all, highly intelligent animals so a lack of training could lead to a lot of unwanted and stereotypical behaviors. Most husbandry behaviors have to be trained as well, such as presenting for blood draws, so training is definitely needed as long as they are in captivity.

In terms of performing for the public, if it can be worked in for educational purposes I'm okay with it. The majority of people aren't going to sit around to listen to you preach about conservation and environment preservation if it's just you blabbing away. Add a whale doing some jumps and stuff and you have a better chance of grabbing an audience and getting your point across. I have however, seen the circus type shows you referred to as well and I agree that it's not appropriate and it can be misleading to the general public.

 

[LetItSnow]

EdinBelle said it well. But even then a line should be drawn somewhere. If they could provide adequate space and stimulation for whatever intelligent species that couldn't be returned to the wild, sure. But I really question the facilities for orcas, or at least the ones I know of. I actually don't even have a problem even with zoos and the like, given the aforementioned space and stimulation criteria needed for that species is provided. But orcas are simply too big. Like keeping a lame elephant in a pony ride paddock its whole life. It might almost be better to humanely euthanize the poor thing.

Yeah. I dunno. If someone came up to me and put a gun against my chest and said: "Life in captivity in a jail cell [6' x 9' here in MN] or die right now"... I'd probably take life in the cell. So I'm hard-pressed to jump right to "let's euthanize if we can't provide an environment that duplicates their natural environment." I feel like there's probably a reasonable middle ground where the captive environment isn't perfect but it's 'good enough'. And I agree that some animals are probably just too big to provide a reasonable captive environment. Maybe.

Not disagreeing with you outright. Just saying .... that I don't know, I guess.

To the other peeps that replied to me, I respect your position. And I wasn't just thinking of Sea World when I threw out the query about animals that couldn't survive in the wild (because I haven't seen the documentary the thread was started about). I was thinking of some specific animals here in local zoos, as well.

 

[DVMDream]

Yeah. I dunno. If someone came up to me and put a gun against my chest and said: "Life in captivity in a jail cell [6' x 9' here in MN] or die right now"... I'd probably take life in the cell. So I'm hard-pressed to jump right to "let's euthanize if we can't provide an environment that duplicates their natural environment." I feel like there's probably a reasonable middle ground where the captive environment isn't perfect but it's 'good enough'. And I agree that some animals are probably just too big to provide a reasonable captive environment. Maybe.

Not disagreeing with you outright. Just saying .... that I don't know, I guess.

To the other peeps that replied to me, I respect your position. And I wasn't just thinking of Sea World when I threw out the query about animals that couldn't survive in the wild (because I haven't seen the documentary the thread was started about). I was thinking of some specific animals here in local zoos, as well.

We went to the zoo here for a class thing last year and one of the big cats was just pacing back and forth, back and forth in the front of its enclosure (of which was actually quite small for a cat that size). It was kind of heart-breaking to be honest. And I am not completely against zoos, but it was obvious that cat was distressed and uncomfortable.

 

[LetItSnow]

We went to the zoo here for a class thing last year and one of the big cats was just pacing back and forth, back and forth in the front of its enclosure (of which was actually quite small for a cat that size). It was kind of heart-breaking to be honest. And I am not completely against zoos, but it was obvious that cat was distressed and uncomfortable.

Yup. Our Como Zoo here (a smallish local St. Paul zoo) has polar bears. They used to have a HORRIBLE environment - just a big cement area with a small pool. One of them would swim up to the glass, do a flip, swim 10' away, come back, do a flip, etc. Over and over and over and over. Heart-breaking is a good way to put it.

They did, however completely redo that habitat. Now they have a cave, a 'tundra-like' area, a larger pool with fish, a decent modern training/medical area ... it's still distressingly small for a large animal that naturally would roam so much, but it doesn't seem quite as... I dunno... inhumane, I guess.

 

[DVMDream]

Yup. Our Como Zoo here (a smallish local St. Paul zoo) has polar bears. They used to have a HORRIBLE environment - just a big cement area with a small pool. One of them would swim up to the glass, do a flip, swim 10' away, come back, do a flip, etc. Over and over and over and over. Heart-breaking is a good way to put it.

They did, however completely redo that habitat. Now they have a cave, a 'tundra-like' area, a larger pool with fish, a decent modern training/medical area ... it's still distressingly small for a large animal that naturally would roam so much, but it doesn't seem quite as... I dunno... inhumane, I guess.

Yeah, this cat's exhibit (I want to say it was a leopard) was all enclosed, there was a back area which it looked is where they kept the cat when they needed to clean the enclosure. But it was literally in a box, with a mesh type roof, some trees, a rope hammock, and a small area in front on the ground which was dirt. There were some fake "mountains" (more like ledges made of cement designed to look like mountains) and that was it. I would have been uncomfortable in that space, let alone the big cat that was living in there.

 

[TooLove]

We went to the zoo here for a class thing last year and one of the big cats was just pacing back and forth, back and forth in the front of its enclosure (of which was actually quite small for a cat that size). It was kind of heart-breaking to be honest. And I am not completely against zoos, but it was obvious that cat was distressed and uncomfortable.

Not disagreeing with you about that particular cat, but sometimes natural behaviors can come across as stereotypies in a captive environment. Take polar bears for example: Wild polar bears travel significant distances in a single day. What happens when you take an animal that is used to traveling miles and miles and plop it in a 100 foot enclosure? Pacing. It's not that it's definitely stereotypical behavior, just that they are carrying out a natural behavior as best they can in their given environment. I'm not saying that pacing is not indicative of stress or poor welfare, but it can depend greatly on the situation. At our local zoo, we have a herd of reindeer. Every spring and fall, they "migrate". In their exhibit, this means that they line up and walk laps around the perimeter for 1-2 weeks straight until whoever is leading feels like they've reached their destination. Now, someone visiting the zoo during this time might be inclined to say that the reindeer were exhibiting a stereotypy. The same goes for the whales I used to work with. You have a group of animals that swims long distances daily put into essentially a big swimming pool, so the only way they can still carry out that behavior is by swimming in circles.

Again, not saying that animals don't develop stereotypies in captivity. If you have a pacing animal that doesn't acknowledge a novel item that you put in their normal pacing route, that's a problem. But it's important to determine whether a certain behavior is abnormal or if it's a method of coping, because trying to extinguish a coping behavior can lead to serious behavioral problems.

 

[DVMDream]

Not disagreeing with you about that particular cat, but sometimes natural behaviors can come across as stereotypies in a captive environment. Take polar bears for example: Wild polar bears travel significant distances in a single day. What happens when you take an animal that is used to traveling miles and miles and plop it in a 100 foot enclosure? Pacing. It's not that it's definitely stereotypical behavior, just that they are carrying out a natural behavior as best they can in their given environment. I'm not saying that pacing is not indicative of stress or poor welfare, but it can depend greatly on the situation. At our local zoo, we have a herd of reindeer. Every spring and fall, they "migrate". In their exhibit, this means that they line up and walk laps around the perimeter for 1-2 weeks straight until whoever is leading feels like they've reached their destination. Now, someone visiting the zoo during this time might be inclined to say that the reindeer were exhibiting a stereotypy. The same goes for the whales I used to work with. You have a group of animals that swims long distances daily put into essentially a big swimming pool, so the only way they can still carry out that behavior is by swimming in circles.

Again, not saying that animals don't develop stereotypies in captivity. If you have a pacing animal that doesn't acknowledge a novel item that you put in their normal pacing route, that's a problem. But it's important to determine whether a certain behavior is abnormal or if it's a method of coping, because trying to extinguish a coping behavior can lead to serious behavioral problems.

According to all the animal welfare classes we have had on zoo animals in vet school, pacing is always considered a stereotypy and is indicative of not having enough mental or physical stimulation and is a sign of distress.

 

[BlackDog17]

According to all the animal welfare classes we have had on zoo animals in vet school, pacing is always considered a stereotypy and is indicative of not having enough mental or physical stimulation and is a sign of distress.

I have to agree with TooLove that pacing, while certainly a sign of boredom or stress in some situations, is not problematic 100% of the time. At one of the zoos I worked for, the lions and tigers were fed promptly at 6pm every single day. So what happened at 5pm every day? Pacing in anticipation of dinner. The rest of the time they displayed normal behaviors - sleeping, chasing each other around, swimming in their pools, lazing in the sun, etc. So to say that they were suddenly lacking in mental stimulation at 5pm every day would be a bit of a stretch.

 

[DVMDream]

I have to agree with TooLove that pacing, while certainly a sign of boredom or stress in some situations, is not problematic 100% of the time. At one of the zoos I worked for, the lions and tigers were fed promptly at 6pm every single day. So what happened at 5pm every day? Pacing in anticipation of dinner. The rest of the time they displayed normal behaviors - sleeping, chasing each other around, swimming in their pools, lazing in the sun, etc. So to say that they were suddenly lacking in mental stimulation at 5pm every day would be a bit of a stretch.

Obviously, but this wasn't a pacing waiting for food. There were no other animals in the exhibit with it (jaguars are usually solitary so makes sense). There was food in the exhibit but it was untouched and the jaguar was pacing up and down in the front of the enclosure, from one end to the other, oblivious to everything around it and just going back and forth. It is and was a sign of distress. I am not dumb; I wouldn't say it was if I didn't think it was. I didn't have any problems with any of the other animals at that zoo, but that one cat was exhibiting signs and symptoms (of which I learned in vet school) of mental distress, anxiety and a stereotypy. I have worked in a zoo before, so I am not without experience.

 

[LetItSnow]

Um.

I'm pretty sure DVMD could recognize the difference between a cat pacing in anticipation of food versus a cat pacing out of utter boredom. C'mon peeps.

But, you know, thx for the bombastic rhetoric.

 

[BlackDog17]

Obviously, but this wasn't a pacing waiting for food. There were no other animals in the exhibit with it (jaguars are usually solitary so makes sense). There was food in the exhibit but it was untouched and the jaguar was pacing up and down in the front of the enclosure, from one end to the other, oblivious to everything around it and just going back and forth. It is and was a sign of distress. I am not dumb; I wouldn't say it was if I didn't think it was. I didn't have any problems with any of the other animals at that zoo, but that one cat was exhibiting signs and symptoms (of which I learned in vet school) of mental distress, anxiety and a stereotypy. I have worked in a zoo before, so I am not without experience.

I never said you were dumb or that pacing is not a sign of distress. You're completely skewing my words. I'm not questioning your ability to recognize an animal in distress, I'm speaking generally about pacing behavior in captive animals. My point was that to claim:

According to all the animal welfare classes we have had on zoo animals in vet school, pacing is always considered a stereotypy and is indicative of not having enough mental or physical stimulation and is a sign of distress.

is a bit much. As we've already said, my example of cats pacing at dinner time is not a sign of distress. Similarly, TL's example of the deer pacing 1-2 weeks of the year is not a stereotypy but an attempt at manifesting a normal behavior in a captive environment. So to say that pacing is 100% without a doubt unquestionably indicative of distress is not really correct. It certainly IS a sign of distress more often than not, you're right about that. But the point that TL and I were both making is that, in certain specific situations, pacing does not always equal stress or lack of stimulation. Not everything is a personal attack on you. 🙄

 

[TooLove]

Obviously, but this wasn't a pacing waiting for food. There were no other animals in the exhibit with it (jaguars are usually solitary so makes sense). There was food in the exhibit but it was untouched and the jaguar was pacing up and down in the front of the enclosure, from one end to the other, oblivious to everything around it and just going back and forth. It is and was a sign of distress. I am not dumb; I wouldn't say it was if I didn't think it was. I didn't have any problems with any of the other animals at that zoo, but that one cat was exhibiting signs and symptoms (of which I learned in vet school) of mental distress, anxiety and a stereotypy. I have worked in a zoo before, so I am not without experience.

Like I said before, I wasn't saying that the cat you saw wasn't showing stereotypical behavior. My point is that pacing or other behaviors that could potentially be labeled as stereotypies actually might not be. BD made a good point as well about the anticipatory behaviors. We are all smart people here, and I'm sure we could recognize the difference. I just don't agree with a blanket statement that all pacing is bad, and I think that less educated members of the public might take that and run with it. Take the lions and tigers that BD mentioned. If most people spend about 5 minutes at each exhibit and they are told that all pacing animals are distressed, the majority of the people checking out the big cats between 5 and 6 are left with the impression that the lions and tigers are unhappy. Basically, most people only see a small snapshot of the behavior of zoo animals and it may not be representative of their overall welfare.

 

[DVMDream]

I never said you were dumb or that pacing is not a sign of distress. You're completely skewing my words. I'm not questioning your ability to recognize an animal in distress, I'm speaking generally about pacing behavior in captive animals. My point was that to claim:



is a bit much. As we've already said, my example of cats pacing at dinner time is not a sign of distress. Similarly, TL's example of the deer pacing 1-2 weeks of the year is not a stereotypy but an attempt at manifesting a normal behavior in a captive environment. So to say that pacing is 100% without a doubt unquestionably indicative of distress is not really correct. It certainly IS a sign of distress more often than not, you're right about that. But the point that TL and I were both making is that, in certain specific situations, pacing does not always equal stress or lack of stimulation. Not everything is a personal attack on you. 🙄

Well, considering that the information I posted is from research done by the animal welfare and behaviour institute here, I think I will stick with the researchers. Obviously, there are going to be other signs with the pacing but still pacing is NOT a normal behaviour in any animal. I also would not consider the deer as pacing, walking around the entire enclosure, is not pacing. I also guarantee those animals reacted to external stimuli and did not do that straight for 1-2 weeks non-stop as they don't even do that in the wild when they migrate and if they really did do that non-stop without responding to anything else, that is a sign that something is wrong. Your food example isn't real "pacing", that is a response to a stimulus, the cats will still show signs of being mentally bright, alert, responsive, etc. They will also be in the area where they are typically fed, or nearby it.

I am posting the information we were given by people who research animal welfare and behaviour in zoos and otherwise; pacing isn't a good sign in captive animals.

 

[BlackDog17]

So we'll split hairs on the definition of "real" pacing so we can argue just for the sake of argument. Okay then.

 

[DVMDream]

So we'll split hairs on the definition of "real" pacing so we can argue just for the sake of argument. Okay then.

Yes, being able to distinguish various levels of behavior is important to determining if an animal is mentally distressed. It is something they went over with us thoroughly. That is why I said pacing is bad, real pacing by what a behaviorist would consider pacing is bad. They don't consider an animal responding to a stimulus as pacing and pacing is considered one of the top stereotypies of boredom in captive animals, similar to a horse that is swaying in a stall. It isn't splitting hairs; it is recognizing two different behaviours: response to feeding vs. pacing from boredom.

 

[TooLove]

Yes, being able to distinguish various levels of behavior is important to determining if an animal is mentally distressed. It is something they went over with us thoroughly. That is why I said pacing is bad, real pacing by what a behaviorist would consider pacing is bad. They don't consider an animal responding to a stimulus as pacing and pacing is considered one of the top stereotypies of boredom in captive animals, similar to a horse that is swaying in a stall. It isn't splitting hairs; it is recognizing two different behaviours: response to feeding vs. pacing from boredom.

I still disagree. I wasn't referring to pacing exclusively but stereotypical behavior in general. But pacing, at a fundamental level, is the act of walking in a repetitive pattern. I would argue that response to feeding is pacing, but not stereotypical pacing. It's a single behavior that can occur for more than one reason. The majority of my undergraduate career focused on animal behavior, welfare, and zoo animal management, and the great thing about animal behavior and welfare is that it's pretty subjective, so no one person gets to say what is or isn't. Looks like we just have to agree to disagree. 🙂

 

[EdinBelle]

Okay, so we've all come to the conclusion that it's potentially a split decision when it comes to quality of life in captivity vs euthanasia.

But is it right to actively and knowingly breed an animal into a captive environment where it is clearly not optimal for them? I feel that it's one thing when animals are being bred on a reserve or in an area where there is clearly enough space for them to carry out a normal life. But is it humane to purposely breed an animal knowing that it will not be able to live a natural life; whether it be for the preservation of a species in captivity, or for a circus performance (such as killer whales)?

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

Okay, so we've all come to the conclusion that it's potentially a split decision when it comes to quality of life in captivity vs euthanasia.

But is it right to actively and knowingly breed an animal into a captive environment where it is clearly not optimal for them? I feel that it's one thing when animals are being bred on a reserve or in an area where there is clearly enough space for them to carry out a normal life. But is it humane to purposely breed an animal knowing that it will not be able to live a natural life; whether it be for the preservation of a species in captivity, or for a circus performance (such as killer whales)?

Most people would say no.

Yet we have hundreds of purpose-bred dogs who live out their short lives in runs at veterinary schools as teaching and research dogs. Which in my mind, is just as questionable even though they are technically more "useful" than circus animals.

Yeah, yeah, I opened that can of worms. It is a raw spot in my heart from an ex-teaching beagle I fostered recently. He was a husk of a dog. No idea how to function in the real world (and I consider "real world" for domesticate dogs to be the average pet, not running around wild with the wolves or anything)..

I understand we need animals in research. Our lab kills mice almost weekly for our projects. It is necessary and I will always support it for advancing health. But purpose-bred dogs for teaching purposes make me heartsick.

/end slightly off-topic rant

 

[belugal]

I am not handling “The Wait” very well so I figured I might as well join in on the conversation. I have very mixed feelings about Blackfish but it is definitely the most thought provoking documentary I have seen in awhile. The information (some true, some spin) was not shocking, but it does bring up some things I haven’t thought deeply about before. I visited SeaWorld Orlando about a month after watching Blackfish.

Should the whales have been taken out of wild to begin with and put in tiny rooms? My initial feeling is NO! I am thankful that taking animals out of the wild is a heavily restricted practice now, although there should be better enforcement in certain areas of the world. Then I think about the embarrassing history of capturing wild animals for royal gardens or Roman circuses. It has taken a long time to develop respectable zoological parks and conservation facilities. Do modern zoos make up for the millions of animals that suffered in captivity? I argue that they do make up for it with benefits of education, research, conservation, and advancements in animal health. It is obvious that humans were not prepared to care for species such as orcas in captivity just as they were not able to provide great living areas for animals in the original zoos. You may call me a dreamer, but I believe with human innovation we could create habitats suitable for larger cetaceans in captivity (or ocean enclosure type things). Obviously we cannot recreate the ocean, but no captive animal will have the same opportunities as wild animals. I hope that SeaWorld continues to make changes to improve the welfare of all animals in their care. They have certainly come a long way from where they were. Although I do not agree with the overall message of Blackfish, the documentary helps keep all zoos, aquariums and parks accountable for animal welfare.

Sidenote/complaint -While I agree that there were a lot of unanswered questions by SeaWorld about the death of Dawn Brancheau, I do question the appropriateness of sensationalizing her death. I sympathize with her family and friends and hope that the film has not caused excessive/additional mourning. I got the impression at times that they were using her death to make money. It is just my opinion and I am sure that filmmakers were not trying to cause additional pain to her family and friends.

I support the shows as enrichment and physical stimulation. No one cares more for the animals than their trainers and daily care givers, so I do not question the care these animals are given. I do wonder about whether sound has any impact on the animals, especially during rock shows. I don’t think they are necessary for SeaWorld to make a profit and question if causes extra stress on the animals. I will not deny that SeaWorld uses the shows to make money, however I don’t think have negative impacts on the orcas.

By no means do I think SeaWorld is perfect. I think they should spend less on rides and more on improving animal enclosures. I my recent visit to SeaWorld, I saw the new penguin exhibit and was a little disappointed by how much space was used for a cheesy ride. I do understand that they have to make choices to stay in business in order to do so many rescue and conservation activities. I just wish some of their exhibits were more focused on the animals. There are many reasons I cannot lead this successful company including my urge to require children to be on leashes and remove roller-coasters or kiddy games to expand animal exhibits.

I also think that the welfare of Tilikum should be considered separately from the welfare of the other orcas owned by SW. He has highly limited interaction with other whales and trainers. I agree that as an aggressive animal he should not be bred. After seeing him during my last visit, I seriously question SW for not euthanizing him. However, the rest of the orcas did not appear to be overly stressed and were interacting with each other as well as the public through the window. I don’t deny that orcas in the wild are healthier and have better lives, but I believe that these captive orcas serve as great representatives for their wild counterparts. SeaWorld touches millions of guests and I don’t think they would be able to reach so many people without the unique shows. Unfortunately, a lot of people aren’t interested in viewing animals in their natural habitat or even looking at a bear sleeping at zoo.

Second side-note/complaint – Ending with PETA images completely distracted me and put a bad taste in my mouth. I realize that I am highly biased but just wanted to mention that.

This is a very complex issue and it is worth discussing. However, there are larger issues facing cetaceans and other marine animals in the wild.

This article did not surprise me but it saddens me: http://wtvr.com/2013/10/22/fishermen-chop-up-live-dolphins-for-shark-bait/

Thanks to anyone with enough patience to read my long, rambling post!

“In the end, we will conserve only what we love. We only love what we understand. We only understand what we are taught.” – Babie Dioum

 

[willbvet]

I didn't watch the movie. I knew it would make me very sad.

 

[ESD_2029]

I'm watching it right now and it's making me so sad... But the trainers do kind of what we do in some scenarios, we try to make a difference for the animals. So do they, the trainers (as portrayed here) and they had no idea how dangerous their job was because they were misinformed.

 

[Trematode]

I saw Black Fish too, shortly after it was released. Since then, I have questioned if animals like this should be kept alive in captivity, even if they cannot be re-released back into the wild. I had read an article about Winter the dolphin with the prostetic limb. The rehabilitation centre that she is living as has essentially turned into a zoo, complete with stuffed animals and a small viewing tank instead of an ocean pen. Someone had caught her on video experiencing signs of stress in her tank. If these signs of stress are a regular occurence then it's incredibly irresponsible and cruel to continue to keep her in her current situation.

I've watched wild cats (cougars and bobcats) pace their cage in wildlife parks. People use the excuse "This is the best thing for them. If they were put back in the wild, they wouldn't survive." I don't agree that a 30' x 15' pen with a few trees and a rock cave for the rest of the animal's life is better than humane euthanasia. I would hope that most vets would push humane euthanasia on a dog or cat that was experiencing stress due to medical conditions or environment when all other options to improve health, enrichment, environment and behaviour failed. What makes wild animals any different?

 

[Trematode]

Conicidentally, this was on my Facebook wall this morning: http://fc00.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2013/306/9/4/the_forgotten_shamu_poster_by_okura-d6ssrsq.png

 

[MysteryCat]

Animals that intelligent have no business in pools. Period.

👍 this.

 

[CanHardlyWait]

Finally saw Blackfish...really sad. The only new thing I have to add to the conversation: It seems like the trainers interviewed were taken advantage of and kind of duped into treating the animals badly, putting themselves in danger and perpetrating the misinformation that Sea World wants the public to believe about marine mammals. I mean, not the most egregious part of the story, but something not mentioned above. I guess it's really money driven that Sea World hires young people that haven't had obtained education on marine biology, animal behavior etc... but I found that part really shocking. I guess I assumed that Sea World trainers were marine biologists or professional (certified in some way) animal trainers or something. Turns out they are just good swimmers who read scripts. Hmm....I'm really uncomfortable with that. I feel like more educated trainers would be better advocates for the animals and would have their education to stand on when they report welfare concerns to management, rather than just being told that there are tons of other young, eager kids willing to fill their job. With all of the money involved here, it is pretty unlikely that Sea World will ever be shut down (unfortunately), but at least a better educated and trained animal care/training staff could work to improve conditions dramatically.

 

[TooLove]

I thought this was an appropriate place to post this.
http://wildlifenews.co.uk/2014/orcas-captured-to-entertain-the-olympic-crowds-petition/

 

[belugal]

 

[twelvetigers]

All due respect, but I'm not sure how much credit I can give to this guy:

 

[Philliab]

Just a heads up for those who might want to see it...CNN is running Blackfish all night.

 

[Philliab]

Did anyone see this proposed CA bill? http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/07/us/california-bill-orca-killer-whale-seaworld/

 

[WildZoo]

Did anyone see this proposed CA bill? http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/07/us/california-bill-orca-killer-whale-seaworld/

Just from reading the article really quickly, I agree with what the proposal is going for. I don't know anything about how sustainable or practical the ideas they put forth are, but it aligns with thoughts I've had before. I cringe at PETA's involvement, though.

 

[battie]

I've seen bits and pieces of Blackfish and the only thing I want to bring up is how SeaWorld refused to be involved in the making of the documentary. I completely understand why they wouldn't want to be. My family owns pet stores and my grandfather used to be fine with talking to reporters right in our stores while going through it, front to back, including all our isolation rooms and such. Then my grandpa did a three hour interview with a reporter, oh, twenty-five or so years ago. The entire thing was truncated to about fifteen minutes where the reporter made it sound as if my grandpa was admitting that we purposely abuse our animals. Since then, we will only respond to reporters in written letters with a note that says that if the letter is not printed or shown in it's entirety, we will go to the rival news station to show them the entire letter and allow them to do a story themselves. We know a lot of people who have experienced the same thing. The breeder where my boyfriend's mom got their new puppy won't let anyone onto her property until after meeting them in person at a different location. One time, a more extreme animal rights activist tried open all of her outdoor paddocks and releasing her dogs in the middle of nowhere Colorado. Thankfully none of the dogs went farther than the house, but still.

People on the "entertainment/profit" side of animals are getting super weary of things like Blackfish. Unless you're helping to edit the documentary too, you never know how things are going to be edited or used. SW understood what the purpose of the documentary was and didn't think it was "safe" to become involved in it.

Not saying that I don't entirely agree with most of you. I haven't seen enough of Blackfish in order to give a true opinion of the documentary as a whole, but I do feel that cetaceans as a whole are one of those groups of animals that are hard to care for, no matter what you do or why you're doing it. On the other hand, I agree that humans may get to the point where we can create exposures that are humane for these animals, considering how far we've gotten now. If I were to watch it, I would also retain my opinion until getting a closer look at the opposite side. As some one who comes from a pet store family, I understand what it feels like to not have people hear your side of the story.

Sorry for another long post on this thread. lol.

 

[gugoodoll]

I'm curious, what is the other side to a pet shop owner's story? No ethical breeder would sell their puppies through a store; otherwise you're pretty much using puppy mills. I'm hard pressed to find any good coming from a store that sells puppies...

I've seen bits and pieces of Blackfish and the only thing I want to bring up is how SeaWorld refused to be involved in the making of the documentary. I completely understand why they wouldn't want to be. My family owns pet stores and my grandfather used to be fine with talking to reporters right in our stores while going through it, front to back, including all our isolation rooms and such. Then my grandpa did a three hour interview with a reporter, oh, twenty-five or so years ago. The entire thing was truncated to about fifteen minutes where the reporter made it sound as if my grandpa was admitting that we purposely abuse our animals. Since then, we will only respond to reporters in written letters with a note that says that if the letter is not printed or shown in it's entirety, we will go to the rival news station to show them the entire letter and allow them to do a story themselves. We know a lot of people who have experienced the same thing. The breeder where my boyfriend's mom got their new puppy won't let anyone onto her property until after meeting them in person at a different location. One time, a more extreme animal rights activist tried open all of her outdoor paddocks and releasing her dogs in the middle of nowhere Colorado. Thankfully none of the dogs went farther than the house, but still.

People on the "entertainment/profit" side of animals are getting super weary of things like Blackfish. Unless you're helping to edit the documentary too, you never know how things are going to be edited or used. SW understood what the purpose of the documentary was and didn't think it was "safe" to become involved in it.

Not saying that I don't entirely agree with most of you. I haven't seen enough of Blackfish in order to give a true opinion of the documentary as a whole, but I do feel that cetaceans as a whole are one of those groups of animals that are hard to care for, no matter what you do or why you're doing it. On the other hand, I agree that humans may get to the point where we can create exposures that are humane for these animals, considering how far we've gotten now. If I were to watch it, I would also retain my opinion until getting a closer look at the opposite side. As some one who comes from a pet store family, I understand what it feels like to not have people hear your side of the story.

Sorry for another long post on this thread. lol.