Seaworld & Circus's (what's the difference)

SabreToothAche

Active Member
I went to Seaworld out of curiosity and strongly believe that certain parts of it are archaic and basically cruelty to animals.

Putting intelligent mammals such as Orcas and Dolphins a big swimming pool is absolutely no different than putting Gorillas and Chimpanzees in a concrete room.

I have no problem with the "lifelike" exhibits such as sealion cove as there is stimuli, waves, current and underwater features which recreate natural environments. Therefore you see natural behaviours, territory protection, natural breeding etc.

Making 35 foot of whale jump for a fish or have a moronic American riding on its back is dated, circuslike and humiliating for the animal.

Shamu show - Circus, whats the difference??
 
Can one of the administrators please erase this thread.

Reasons: insults/assaults (not to say rassism) and a subject we have already thousands of threads in this chat and don't need another one.
 
Apology (ish)

I am very sorry if the use of the word American offended anyone, it really wasn't intended too and was only used because at the Seaworld I visited the moronic person riding the Whale happened to be American.

I'm English, my wife Portuguese and many of my friends are American, so please believe I am not Racist (by the way FYI it's spelt Racism) and I think playing that card is pretty sad in itself..

With regard to my comment already being "done" I believe I'm, within my rights to post an opinion and not be dictated too by anyone (other than the administrator); Who promotes freedom of speech more than the great nation who I am alledged to have "attacked"

Lets stick to debating our opinions and views on Zoo's and not be sidetracked by pettyness eh????

STA
 
Making 35 foot of whale jump for a fish or have a moronic American riding on its back is dated, circuslike and humiliating for the animal. Shamu show - Circus, whats the difference??

As far as I know Sea World don't have whales doing fish-jumps nor do they ride their whales at this current time. And even if they did, so what? As mentioned these kind of trolling AR posts directed at Sea World had been done to death.

There are considerably worse zoos and aquariums in the US than Sea World and in fairness to Sea World they have very standards of animal welfare and husbandry. Moreover, the care of captive cetaceans is regulated by the US government.

Public Display of Marine Mammals - Office of Protected Resources - NOAA Fisheries
 
Last edited:
OK

If you think a 25/30 foot intelligent mammal in a swimming pool with nothing reminicent of its natural environment other than the water and food that keeps it alive is OK then we have very differing views. A prisoner in a cell is well fed and looked after is that is the only criteria.

As for a subject done to death, not by me it hasn't been, so if you don't like the thread, don't get involved it it...simple really.
 
SabertoothAche is their a reason you're are trying to be so argumentative, you are only going to aggravate people this way.
 
Argumentative????

I'm just voicing my opinion and objecting to being told off for it.

I am new to this site and don't mean to offend.

I'll tone down if it means less controversy mate.

STA
 
If your talking monkeys in a cage and Orcas in a glorified paddling pool I agree.

If your talking conservation and a Crash of critically endangered White Rhino wandering hundreds of acres of grassland in family groups then I don't.

Good point though mate
 
If you think a 25/30 foot intelligent mammal in a swimming pool with nothing reminicent of its natural environment other than the water and food that keeps it alive is OK then we have very differing views. A prisoner in a cell is well fed and looked after is that is the only criteria.

As for a subject done to death, not by me it hasn't been, so if you don't like the thread, don't get involved it it...simple really.

I think you need to go away and do some research on the care and husbandry of cetaceans as there is a lot of information out there if you care to look and also look beyond the animal-rights propaganda.

A good place to start is the report commissioned into the welfare of dolphins and whales in captivity back in the mid-1980's in the UK:

Dr M Klinowska and Dr S Brown - A Review of Dolphinaria - 1986

As I stated Sea World don't have whales doing fish-jumps nor do they ride their whales at this current time so your observations at this basic level is in error. But even if they did why is this an issue and to be consider cruel?

The comparison of a prisoner in a cell is basically anthropomorphic and with respect very much animal-rights agenda trolling and not a true reflection of the situation. Your emotive use of the term "swimming pool" and "prison" are typical and unhelpful rhetoric.

Of Sea World 3 parks these hold 19 whales only 5 were caught from the wild (the last in 1983) the rest where born in captivity. Loro Park in Spain also have 4 whales born at Sea World. The fact that the animals breed and rear their young maybe not conclusive proof of well being but goes some way toward it.

If you are so concerned report Sea World to the US authorities as they have protective regulations for the care of the these animals in zoos and aquaria. I posted the link but you appear to have ignored that.

As far as "don't get involved" you decided to post and now I suspect you aren't happy that your position isn't fully supported.
 
Last edited:
I am very sorry if the use of the word American offended anyone, it really wasn't intended too and was only used because at the Seaworld I visited the moronic person riding the Whale happened to be American.
STA
It wasn't the use of the word American that was offensive but rather the use of "Moronic American". Maybe just simply '*****' would've been less offensive. However, as has already been stated, US Sea World parks are currently not even in the water with the whales other than the slide-out platform so your observation about some ***** riding a whale is inaccurate. If you were at the Australian Sea World, I've never been there so I don't know if they swim with the whales, but they are in no way associated with the US Sea World parks.

For the record? I'm not too fond of the whale and dolphin shows myself and do not watch them. I do, however, support the conservation they do. They are continually rescuing, rehabbing then releasing injured sea life all the time and for that they should be commended.
 
SabreToothAche said:
I went to Seaworld out of curiosity and strongly believe that certain parts of it are archaic and basically cruelty to animals.

Putting intelligent mammals such as Orcas and Dolphins a big swimming pool is absolutely no different than putting Gorillas and Chimpanzees in a concrete room.

I have no problem with the "lifelike" exhibits such as sealion cove as there is stimuli, waves, current and underwater features which recreate natural environments. Therefore you see natural behaviours, territory protection, natural breeding etc.

Making 35 foot of whale jump for a fish or have a moronic American riding on its back is dated, circuslike and humiliating for the animal.

Shamu show - Circus, whats the difference??
for the record, I wasn't offended by the term "moronic American" and I didn't think it was racist (Americans aren't actually a race after all, they are a nationality). I saw the wording simply as that the observed person was an American and the perception was that their activity was moronic.

I also didn't think the post above was trolling (in fact I'd add that John Dineley [no offence, just an observation] is always far too quick to call anyone with a negative opinion on captive dolphins an Animal Rights Activist or similar -- I personally dislike having cetaceans in captivity, am I a PETA supporter or anti-zoo nut or animal rights activist? [the correct answer is "no" ;)].)

The post above just seemed to me to be someone's opinion, and s/he wanted some feedback. And I'd rather agree with this sentence in particular: "Putting intelligent mammals such as Orcas and Dolphins a big swimming pool is absolutely no different than putting Gorillas and Chimpanzees in a concrete room." Whether they get enrichment or not, its still a big concrete box.
 
for the record, I wasn't offended by the term "moronic American" and I didn't think it was racist (Americans aren't actually a race after all, they are a nationality). I saw the wording simply as that the observed person was an American and the perception was that their activity was moronic.

I also didn't think the post above was trolling (in fact I'd add that John Dineley [no offence, just an observation] is always far too quick to call anyone with a negative opinion on captive dolphins an Animal Rights Activist or similar -- I personally dislike having cetaceans in captivity, am I a PETA supporter or anti-zoo nut or animal rights activist? [the correct answer is "no" ;)].)

The post above just seemed to me to be someone's opinion, and s/he wanted some feedback. And I'd rather agree with this sentence in particular: "Putting intelligent mammals such as Orcas and Dolphins a big swimming pool is absolutely no different than putting Gorillas and Chimpanzees in a concrete room." Whether they get enrichment or not, its still a big concrete box.

With all due respect Chlidonias, and I mean that sincerely, I'm not surprised the phrase "moronic American" didn't offend you as I'm sure I may not necessarily be offended by someone making an unflattering characterization about New Zealanders (and honestly, why would they? ;)).

However, the initial post was harsh in tone and full of mischaracterizations and inaccuracies, not the best way to start off a civil discussion. it also is fair to point out that since this is a drum the anti-captivity groups love to drum, it is easily escalated into a heated discussion. So let's all remember to keep it civil and courteous and maybe we can have an enlightening discussion.
 
Ituri said:
With all due respect Chlidonias, and I mean that sincerely, I'm not surprised the phrase "moronic American" didn't offend you as I'm sure I may not necessarily be offended by someone making an unflattering characterization about New Zealanders (and honestly, why would they? ).
yes I should really have phrased that "I didn't think the term "moronic American" was intended to be offensive to all Americans" or something like that. It was more intended as a comment on those members who thought it was offensive in a general sense. Of course I would not be offended personally by it ;)

Ituri said:
However, the initial post was harsh in tone and full of mischaracterizations and inaccuracies, not the best way to start off a civil discussion. it also is fair to point out that since this is a drum the anti-captivity groups love to drum, it is easily escalated into a heated discussion. So let's all remember to keep it civil and courteous and maybe we can have an enlightening discussion.
the posts and responses on this thread may be due to the fact that written text can be read in different ways by different people. I personally didn't think the initial post was harsh in tone, but I did think some of the responses were mildly aggressive (calling for the thread to be deleted etc). I just think we should give SabreToothAche a fair go, see where the thread goes before people just start blasting with all guns, and by all means "let's all remember to keep it civil and courteous and maybe we can have an enlightening discussion" :)
 
... (calling for the thread to be deleted etc)...

Although I am agree in general, I have to defend myself here: There is a saying in Switzerland, Germany and Austria:
"The way you shout into the forest, is the way it comes back"
 
yes I should really have phrased that "I didn't think the term "moronic American" was intended to be offensive to all Americans" or something like that. It was more intended as a comment on those members who thought it was offensive in a general sense. Of course I would not be offended personally by it.

I think perhaps what I meant to say is, as an American I may not recognize a slight directed at a New Zealander (or Australian, or Brit for that matter.) referring to the whale trainer as a moronic American felt to me to be perpetuating a stereotype. They did not need to point out the whale trainer was American as we all know we are talking about an establishment located in the USA. So had they said "***** riding the whale" rather than "moronic American" it would have been a different story.

Regarding the rest, we are in agreement.
 
Ituri said:
I think perhaps what I meant to say is, as an American I may not recognize a slight directed at a New Zealander (or Australian, or Brit for that matter.) referring to the whale trainer as a moronic American felt to me to be perpetuating a stereotype. They did not need to point out the whale trainer was American as we all know we are talking about an establishment located in the USA. So had they said "***** riding the whale" rather than "moronic American" it would have been a different story.
you may well be correct that that was the intent of the wording, and I do completely see your point
 
As already explained I meant no offence using the word American and have already apologised. I do however stand by the comment that anyone who rides an Orca in a swimming pool is a *****, second only to the crowds watching and cheering (its no way to educate kids either).

I may not be chewing on the same thesaurus, or be as educated as some of the guys on here, but I don't think you need a degree to see these Whales look sad, sometimes pale, limp dorsal etc.
I also think it must be somewhat frightening for them in that cauldron of sound at "showtime"
To my knowledge Orcas are not endangered (if i'm wrong im sure you'll enlighten me) so why are they bred in captivity, when the conditions aren't there to support them???
I also thought that Orcas are nomadic by nature, not much chance of that existance in a baron swimming pool. Watch the Orcas outside of showtime in the holding pools, doing basically nothing, becasue there's no enrichment.
I appreciate the few on here that have supported me (always welcome), but I can stand up for my own opinions and certainly won't be bullied.

I will be polite and never intended otherwise, but as the Swiss guy said, "something about forests"

Cheers all,

STA
 
Sabre, the conclusions you are drawing seem to be from very little information, not to mention as well as very little observation of the animals.
Now, you asked for others thoughts by making this thread and I don't want you to think I am coming after you. I fully understand where you are coming from. I used ot be against Sea World and other places that held cetaceans. Here are some facts you need to know.
Orcas, like other cetaceans, are nomadic IN nature. But there is a reason for this. They MUST travel to find food. Generally, most cetacean species, including orcas, will stick to a certain territory if it provides them with their needs. :) Traveling hundreds of miles a day is certainly not mandatory for a killer whale's health or wellbeing.
To say a whale looks sad is very anthropomorphic. I am not saying that I do not believe these animals can experience sadness, however, let's try to refrain from applying those traits right off the bat.
You say that sometimes the whales look pale. I have never heard this. But what you probably saw is shedding skin. Orcas, like all cetaceans, shed their skin. When it starts, it appears as pale patches, which are very prominent on the pecs, back and melon (head).
Many other animals are bred in captivity and are not endangered.
There is a lot of enrichment for Sea World's killer whales in and out of showtime. However you seem to be under the impression that a happy animal equals one that is constantly active. Cetaceans rest, just like other animals. AFTER a show, I would find it no surprise that the animals would be floating or doing slow laps. Shows themselves offer enrichment, both mental and physical. Shows are changed daily by using different whales for different segments and asking them to do different behaviours. Some tools used for "play" to stimulate the animals (in and out of shows) include: ice, hoses, "toys" like large floating discs, balls, bouys and barrels, interactions like rubdowns and mimic play, and training exercises. :)
You mention limp dorsals. The dorsal fin has nothing to do with how the animal may be feeling. It does not droop because an animal is "sad", but rather because of gravity. You see, the dorsal is made of cartilidge, like your nose and ears. There are some orcas that have flopped fins in the wild, but it's not very common. If the stiffness/droop of a killer whale's dorsal had something to do with their health (some activists are now saying it may be caused by dehydration), I would have some serious questions about that. For instance why was Oscar's (a Kamogawa SW whale) fin straight for such a long time before it began to droop? Or, why is Ulises' fin only curved at the top, while other Sea World males have completely flopped dorsals? Some females have flopped fins, like Katina. But Corky, another female whose fin stands nearly three to four feet, has a perfectly straight fin. Like people, the bodies of whales are different. Others' succumb to gravity much easier.
Orcas are extremely social as you may know. Recently I have been watching the Shamu Cam, and it is incredible to see the positive interaction between newly arrived Keet and a female, Orkid. Orcas in captivity interact with one another well, as long as they have a proper and stable pod dynamic, which needs a dominant female. Katina is the matriarch at Orlando, While Kasatka and Takara run the San Diego and San Antonio pods. A bad example is Loro Park, in Spain. They only have very young whales, and no matriach, so they have a bad dynamic.

I have included a screen cap I just took tonight of Keet and Orkid, in San Diego, interacting. They are the ones face to face. :D
 

Attachments

  • kiss.png
    kiss.png
    98.2 KB · Views: 8
Back
Top