National Aquarium in Baltimore Ending the Dolphin Exhibit?
- Thread starter wensleydale
- Start date
No, I did not insist against @Snowleopard on being proper (I'm very sorry if that was the impression). I just wondered what his source was (and that the fact about the breeding results must have been wrong - or at least different - according to my source).
I apologize for using the word "authorities" in a wrong context. I didn't had the right term in my mind so I was using the next best in hope that I was understood the right way (please remember that English isn't my native tongue). However, IF(!) I understood yours and @Shellhearts posts correctly, SeaWorld was stopped. Instead of having green light to built the exhibit they had to go to the court first.
To make clear another point: I'm only against the "general ending of keeping cetaceans". That means, if there isn't any chance for a REAL improvement of a current exhibit/tank or no space for a new one (as @Zooplantman wrote for Baltimore for example), then indeed it is better to stop keeping those animals. But then "stop" means for me to sent the dolphins to an institution with better conditions and where they are able to show as much as possible from their natural behaviour (and breeding is an important one of that).
In my opinion(!), zoos, marine parks and aquarias boggle the controversy/dispute with animal right activists and their fellows to much. So my fears are that @snowleopard will be right and Brookfield Zoo and Indianapolis will end keeping dolphins rather sooner then later. I don't know the situation at Indianapolis but Brookfield has at least the space (on the current ground or somewhere else in the zoo) to built a new and better exhibit - if they got the chance and the money as well as the will to do so of course.
Zoomaniac, when I mentioned about the insistence on snowleopard being proper, I was referring to Shellheart's post (which picked on some minutiae but was in and of itself inaccurate). As to the Sea World issue, the CCC did not actually stop Sea World from its orca project, but approved it with the condition that Sea World stop its orca breeding program. As Sea World would likely never have considered upgrading its orca habitats without continuing breeding, this effectively stopped Sea World, leading it to file suit (until Sea World's later decision to cease breeding altogether).
Given the older state of Brookfield's dolphin facility and prevailing trends, I would agree with snowleopard that it's likely the dolphins will not be around too much longer there (also, the more liberal political climate in Chicago may play some part). As for Indianapolis, the dolphin facility is newer and the overall collection is smaller - dolphins are a bigger deal to Indianapolis than they are to Brooklyn - so I would not be surprised to see dolphins remain at Indianapolis for a lot longer. Of course, the aquaria that still keep cetaceans are (outside of NAIB) likely to keep cetacean programs for much longer - in addition to Sea World, I can't imagine Atlanta or Shedd, for instance, phasing out cetaceans in the very near future.
jibster, I did not scroll enough, my fault.
But I guess you mean "Brookfield" and not "Brooklyn"...
As for the SeaWorld case: I think we are riding on the paragraphs (german saying) here. It is like saying: Yes, you can built a pool, but you are not allowed to fill it with water. That makes absolutely no sense and so it is like if it is forbitten (although not in the words of the law).
But I guess you mean "Brookfield" and not "Brooklyn"...
As for the SeaWorld case: I think we are riding on the paragraphs (german saying) here. It is like saying: Yes, you can built a pool, but you are not allowed to fill it with water. That makes absolutely no sense and so it is like if it is forbitten (although not in the words of the law).
I have visited this aquarium recently and was overall impressed by it. If the aquarium dies choose to eliminate dolphins, I am not opposed, yet I feel appeasing anti-captivity groups is the wrong reason. Zoos and aquariums do have to make difficult desicions relating to limited space, and it would be interesting if the dolphin area was transformed into a world class area for sea lions or penguins.
A delay of the dolphin transfer won't see them out of Pier 4 before 2020 as originally planned. Securing a location has been difficult managing costs, local input, and environmental issues.
National Aquarium's plan to relocate dolphins from Baltimore by 2020 is delayed by climate change, pollution
National Aquarium's plan to relocate dolphins from Baltimore by 2020 is delayed by climate change, pollution
A recent article addressing the move of the dolphin pod out of Baltimore. Originally, the Florida Keys were a promising location, but sights are now being set on the Caribbean:
National Aquarium looking past Keys for dolphin site – Keys News
National Aquarium looking past Keys for dolphin site – Keys News
The Aquarium has posted an article describing the on-going National Dolphin Sanctuary project. The Aquarium has partnered with the Sea Life Trust (the organization behind the beluga whale sanctuary in Iceland) as well as the Whale Sanctuary Project to develop a series of standards for marine mammal sanctuaries. The Aquarium has also announced that ten other dolphin-holding institutions (home to 66 total individuals) have been in contact about potential space for their pods once a site is selected. No site has been announced publicly, nor any public timeline been released.
Sanctuary State
*This has been re-copied from the thread, 'National Aquarium, Baltimore Updates and Events': National Aquarium, Baltimore Updates and Events [National Aquarium in Baltimore]
Sanctuary State
*This has been re-copied from the thread, 'National Aquarium, Baltimore Updates and Events': National Aquarium, Baltimore Updates and Events [National Aquarium in Baltimore]
King of Komodo Dragons
Well-Known Member
Very disappointing to hear them and apparently others complying with anti-zoo scumbags, potentially losing 66 dolphins from the AZA population would be a major blow and the complete opposite trend I hoped we would never see. The AZA did publicly defend cetaceans in managed care back in 2021 so hopefully this isn't the end of cetaceans in the US, we need more facilities with modern cetacean habitats not less
I will state that the Aquarium's decision to move their dolphins to a sanctuary was not in response to any 'anti-zoo scumbags' or animal rights activists. These conversations have evolved over the last 15 years or so internally from the Aquarium staff, management, and the board of directors on what an aquarium in the 21st Century should look like and how best to utilize the assets of the Aquarium to promote a conservation message.
I will also say that those ten facilities mentioned in the article do not indicate any affiliations with AZA or specify institutions or their location.
King of Komodo Dragons
Well-Known Member
I see, that's my bad for making assumptions without all the information, sorry.
I will respectfully disagree with you and say that this was Racanelli's agenda and that the narrative really is playing towards the emotions and not the actual welfare of animals. Sanctuaries have yet to be proven successful (the belugas of SeaLife Trust are great example here, and apparently something the NAIB aspires to be?). This is an experiment, and the dolphins will suffer if this is carried out.
Sanctuaries are talked about left and right but very little success ever seems to happen. Talks go on for years and things keep happening that stall plans til anyone's guess. These planned sanctuaries are expensive to setup and are subject to numerous environmental regulations as well as open to environmental factors - I forget which one it was that actually accidentally polluted their sanctuary area shortly before animals were due to arrive and had to cancel the import. Realistically the expense of building and then upkeeping the facility will be immense - especially if housing nearly 70 Dolphins that very likely will not all be compatible together in a limited space. I really don't see that ocean pen sanctuaries are the future of NA's cetacean management between all the hurdles. Not to mention if one sanctuary becomes even half successful, anywhere keeping cetaceans is going to be hammered on by the antis using that sanctuary as example. It's bad enough already, look at the push with Seaquarium's Lolita. The intentions by reputable facilities are good, but I just don't see it working very well.
Racanelli has never been a fan of cetaceans in general, but the board of directors were already having these conversations before he was hired in 2011 and before the high profile dolphin calf deaths that same year. The board making Racanelli CEO charged the Aquarium towards this path for sure, but they would have moved away from cetaceans with or without him.
BlobfishBoy
Well-Known Member
After reading the article on their sanctuary update, it surprised me that they partnered with the Whale Sanctuary Project. Considering they heavily criticize SeaWorld, which runs fellow AZA accredited facilities, I didn't expect them to "forge a relationship" with them. Would this not be a good look for them? I hope other AZA cetacean holders don't follow suit.
Frankly, I do not understand why the AZA just reaccredited the National Aquarium when they are using their dolphins in this "experiment" which has yet to show positive outcomes. Quite the opposite actually.....
A public commitment to the National Dolphin Sanctuary. The dolphins will move by 2026 to one of three potential locations: one in the US Virgin Islands and two in Puerto Rico. The cost will total around $15-20 million with an annual upkeep of around $2-$2.5 million a year (very similar costs currently).
Caribbean or bust by 2026 for National Aquarium dolphins
Note: also posted in the main news thread
Caribbean or bust by 2026 for National Aquarium dolphins
Note: also posted in the main news thread
Last edited:
PantheraLeoMelanochaita
Well-Known Member
What a strangely written article. I can't stand how this situation is being presented as some sort of massive, unprecedented innovation for dolphins that will revolutionize the way we care for these animals, when in reality these dolphins will basically be in the same situation as the dolphins in the sea pen facilities around the world that already exist, such as the Dolphin Research Center. Existing sea pen facilities don't market themselves as sanctuaries, but the general public seems incapable of understanding that what the place calls itself doesn't matter to the animals and that a nice-sounding word like "sanctuary" doesn't mean the place will actually be some magical safe haven with no welfare issues. If anything, the dolphins' welfare will probably be worse for a while because of the stress of the move and of adapting to a whole new way of living. If the dolphins were moving to a sea pen from some truly deplorable situation like the Miami Seaquarium, I'd be supportive of it, because the stress of the move would be justified by the better welfare they'd have once they'd acclimated. But the National Aquarium's dolphin exhibit is fine as it is, so this is just a tremendous waste of time and money that could be better invested in improving the aquarium in other ways or helping wild dolphins. The inconsistency and emptiness of their rhetoric upon closer inspection is maddening— why is keeping dolphins "exploitation", but keeping other animals (some of whom, such as sharks, have even more welfare problems in captivity than dolphins) "education"? Why is being "entertained" by an animal in captivity bad, and where is the line drawn between "education" and "entertainment"? Are somber educational displays with nothing enjoyable about them really the only ethical way to keep animals in captivity? If they really want to get out of keeping cetaceans, I'd respect them a lot more if they just transferred their dolphins to a preexisting sea pen facility and called it a day, but their partnership with anti-science organizations like the Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries (which calls for an end to all farm animal agriculture) and the Whale Sanctuary Project (which states clearly on its website that it wants to put an end to the keeping of all wildlife in human care, not just cetaceans) and continued attempts to market itself as the *only* aquarium that truly cares about dolphin welfare come off as shameless and disrespectful to their fellow AZA institutions. It's pretty ironic that they cited the Beluga Whale Sanctuary as an example of a successful cetacean sanctuary, when they've had to move their belugas back indoors multiple times because of how stressed out they got in the sea pen... I know I'm just preaching to the choir here, but it just makes me so frustrated to see the general public falling for this.
Last edited:
Agree 100%, it’s all smoke and mirrors and the agenda of Racanelli. It’s not about the remaining dolphins welfare. And they should not have received AZA reaccreditation given their associations with organizations that stand for the opposite of what the AZA strives for.
Agree 100%, you wrote what I have been feeling but had not put into words.