stacey101
Well-Known Member
AI (?) That'd be great! Cetaceans are my favorite so any news or information is fab
Your line in the sand?
- Thread starter lee456
- Start date
AI (?) That'd be great! Cetaceans are my favorite so any news or information is fab
AI is short for Artificial Insemination. It's when you take sperm from a male that could be half way around the world from the female and use it to get the female pregnant. In the last few years we have had more and more success with it. Indian Rhinos have been breed for the first time with it, it has been attempted on Polar Bears but I don't know if it worked, here at Connecticut's Beardsley Zoo we've had three Brazilian Ocelot births using the method (we had the first of a small wild cat for conservational purposes) and we've recently attempted it on our female Amur Tiger although I don't know if it worked yet. I don't know if it works with cetaceans though.
Mystic Aquarium Gallery
Mystic Aquarium Gallery. Some nice pictures of their magnificent Beluga Whale exhibit. Mystic's whale exhibit was rated 2nd best by snowleopard of the ones he's seen. He's traveled all over North America so I guess we can take his word for it. He rated Vancouver as the best since they have more gallons for the great white whales as he calls them.
Mystic Aquarium Gallery. Some nice pictures of their magnificent Beluga Whale exhibit. Mystic's whale exhibit was rated 2nd best by snowleopard of the ones he's seen. He's traveled all over North America so I guess we can take his word for it. He rated Vancouver as the best since they have more gallons for the great white whales as he calls them.
barisax235
Active Member
First: I support the work done by SeaShepards in many of its endeavors such as efforts to end the Japanese whaling in the Southern Ocean and the effort to end world-wide drive fisheries as such activities are very destructive and should no longer occur.
Second: I enjoy engaging in healthy debate as I feel such debates are critical to forming personal viewpoints that are accurate and not misinformed. My comments below are done with the hope of omitting any emotional bias, but this, I cannot guarantee, as the subject tends to be emotional.
Third: I do support captive facilities that excel in the husbandry of cetaceans. I do, however, feel that there could be significant improvement by generating more naturalistic exhibits and development of environmental enrichment.
Now on to comments of previous posts:
Is this not supposed to be a healthy debate? Just because an individual has a current stance does not mean that one cannot change a point of view. In addition, why does being an individual who supports instances of cetacean captivity mean that they will not understand the arguments presented. If such is the case, how is a lay individual supposed to understand?
If raking is not a result of aggression in the wild, then why does it occur? I agree that raking occurs both in captivity and in the wild. As indicated by a 2004 study in Shark Bay, Australia, raking is a common occurrence. Of 285 individuals of Tursiops sp., 83.1% had rake marks somewhere on the body and 100% of the juvenile males had rake marks. The researchers found a correlation between the presence of rake marks and the instances of aggression. (“Aggression in bottlenose dolphins: evidence for sexual coercion, male-male competition, and female tolerance through analysis of tooth-rake marks and behavior” by Scott et al., 2004)
Again, I ask, how is captivity still a ‘LARGE’ part of the slaughter? (See my previous post). In addition, U.S. marine mammal facilities have spoken out against the drive fisheries and governing organizations such as the AZA, IMATA, and AMMPA have all released statements condemning the events which can be found on their respective websites.
I have never heard of this before, so if you could provide a source, that would be much appreciated. Regardless, I find it difficult to comprehend that such actions take place. One reason for this difficulty is sourced to the recent petition by the Georgia Aquarium to import captive beluga whales. Some of these cetaceans may possibly be housed at SeaWorld which calls into question your statement, for if what you said is true, then would it not be simpler for SeaWorld to share the collected sperm rather than go through the money, time, and arguments for the several years of field research and generation of a petition for the importation? Again, a source for your statement would be much appreciated; I am just having difficulty understanding.
As far as I can tell from the AZA and other sites, there are no current SSPs for cetaceans. There is, however, a marine mammal Taxon Advisory Group which urges the generation of SSPs. Hopefully, SSPs will soon be made.
There has been some success with members of Orcinus Orca and Tursiops species. However, there is much work being conducted with other species (especially belugas and pacific white-sided dolphins) but I do not believe that there have been any successful attempts (I am aware of failed attempts). AI for cetaceans is still relatively new as much of the research to date has been done to learn more about the reproductive behavior. There is hope among the scientific community that such efforts will help generate methods to conduct AI in the field. (Source: CRC Handbook of Marine Mammal Medicine: Health, Disease and Rehabilitation)
The presence of captive cetaceans has permitted many positive advances to be made in terms of cetacean conservation. Due to physiological research, organizations are able to successfully rescue and rehabilitate sick or injured wild cetaceans and, if necessary, provide adequate long term care for individuals unable to be released. In addition, captive research has provided the data that indicates the intelligence of cetaceans which has led to the increased awareness of cetacean related issues in the general public and has introduced a wave of marine conservationists.
A recent Harris Poll found that:
- 40 percent of Americans (about 125 million people) have visited a marine park, aquarium or zoo in the last 12 months, including 56 percent of households with children (about 20 million households).
- 90 percent agree that species in the wild benefit when their biology and physiology is studied in marine life parks, aquariums and zoos.
- 94 percent agree that marine life parks provide valuable information about the importance of oceans, waters and the animals that live there.
- 94 percent agree that children specifically are more likely to be concerned about animals if they learn about them at marine life parks
- 89 percent agree that one can learn more about marine mammals at a marine life park, aquarium or zoo than in a school classroom.
- 88 percent agree that one can learn about animals at marine life parks, aquariums and zoos in a way that can't be replicated by watching film or TV programs.
Back to the issue of Morgan the orca, it was recently found that she has hearing loss (Morgan). For an animal reliant upon auditory senses, such impairment would most likely spell death for her if she was to be released.
I want to reiterate that while I do support some captive institutions, I do believe that there could and should be improvements in the manner in which care occurs. There have been significant advances over the years such as training (which has improved both the psychological and physical welfare) and veterinary care (which has extended the lifespan of cetaceans). Compared to other species in captivity, cetaceans are relatively new and thus, the industry is still advancing. Other species did not start with exemplary care, yet now several species that exhibit similar social and psychological needs have begun to succeed in captivity (i.e. Chimpanzees and Bonobos).
Second: I enjoy engaging in healthy debate as I feel such debates are critical to forming personal viewpoints that are accurate and not misinformed. My comments below are done with the hope of omitting any emotional bias, but this, I cannot guarantee, as the subject tends to be emotional.
Third: I do support captive facilities that excel in the husbandry of cetaceans. I do, however, feel that there could be significant improvement by generating more naturalistic exhibits and development of environmental enrichment.
Now on to comments of previous posts:
Is this not supposed to be a healthy debate? Just because an individual has a current stance does not mean that one cannot change a point of view. In addition, why does being an individual who supports instances of cetacean captivity mean that they will not understand the arguments presented. If such is the case, how is a lay individual supposed to understand?
If raking is not a result of aggression in the wild, then why does it occur? I agree that raking occurs both in captivity and in the wild. As indicated by a 2004 study in Shark Bay, Australia, raking is a common occurrence. Of 285 individuals of Tursiops sp., 83.1% had rake marks somewhere on the body and 100% of the juvenile males had rake marks. The researchers found a correlation between the presence of rake marks and the instances of aggression. (“Aggression in bottlenose dolphins: evidence for sexual coercion, male-male competition, and female tolerance through analysis of tooth-rake marks and behavior” by Scott et al., 2004)
Again, I ask, how is captivity still a ‘LARGE’ part of the slaughter? (See my previous post). In addition, U.S. marine mammal facilities have spoken out against the drive fisheries and governing organizations such as the AZA, IMATA, and AMMPA have all released statements condemning the events which can be found on their respective websites.
I have never heard of this before, so if you could provide a source, that would be much appreciated. Regardless, I find it difficult to comprehend that such actions take place. One reason for this difficulty is sourced to the recent petition by the Georgia Aquarium to import captive beluga whales. Some of these cetaceans may possibly be housed at SeaWorld which calls into question your statement, for if what you said is true, then would it not be simpler for SeaWorld to share the collected sperm rather than go through the money, time, and arguments for the several years of field research and generation of a petition for the importation? Again, a source for your statement would be much appreciated; I am just having difficulty understanding.
As far as I can tell from the AZA and other sites, there are no current SSPs for cetaceans. There is, however, a marine mammal Taxon Advisory Group which urges the generation of SSPs. Hopefully, SSPs will soon be made.
There has been some success with members of Orcinus Orca and Tursiops species. However, there is much work being conducted with other species (especially belugas and pacific white-sided dolphins) but I do not believe that there have been any successful attempts (I am aware of failed attempts). AI for cetaceans is still relatively new as much of the research to date has been done to learn more about the reproductive behavior. There is hope among the scientific community that such efforts will help generate methods to conduct AI in the field. (Source: CRC Handbook of Marine Mammal Medicine: Health, Disease and Rehabilitation)
The presence of captive cetaceans has permitted many positive advances to be made in terms of cetacean conservation. Due to physiological research, organizations are able to successfully rescue and rehabilitate sick or injured wild cetaceans and, if necessary, provide adequate long term care for individuals unable to be released. In addition, captive research has provided the data that indicates the intelligence of cetaceans which has led to the increased awareness of cetacean related issues in the general public and has introduced a wave of marine conservationists.
A recent Harris Poll found that:
- 40 percent of Americans (about 125 million people) have visited a marine park, aquarium or zoo in the last 12 months, including 56 percent of households with children (about 20 million households).
- 90 percent agree that species in the wild benefit when their biology and physiology is studied in marine life parks, aquariums and zoos.
- 94 percent agree that marine life parks provide valuable information about the importance of oceans, waters and the animals that live there.
- 94 percent agree that children specifically are more likely to be concerned about animals if they learn about them at marine life parks
- 89 percent agree that one can learn more about marine mammals at a marine life park, aquarium or zoo than in a school classroom.
- 88 percent agree that one can learn about animals at marine life parks, aquariums and zoos in a way that can't be replicated by watching film or TV programs.
Back to the issue of Morgan the orca, it was recently found that she has hearing loss (Morgan). For an animal reliant upon auditory senses, such impairment would most likely spell death for her if she was to be released.
I want to reiterate that while I do support some captive institutions, I do believe that there could and should be improvements in the manner in which care occurs. There have been significant advances over the years such as training (which has improved both the psychological and physical welfare) and veterinary care (which has extended the lifespan of cetaceans). Compared to other species in captivity, cetaceans are relatively new and thus, the industry is still advancing. Other species did not start with exemplary care, yet now several species that exhibit similar social and psychological needs have begun to succeed in captivity (i.e. Chimpanzees and Bonobos).
stacey101 said:
stacey101 said:
SeaWorld doesn't go out hunting beluga to take their sperm. The beluga in question are part of a native subsistence hunt in Alaska (i.e. for food): they are killed regardless of whether scientists are there to take samples or not. There's no secrecy about it, and there have been several scientific papers published about the collection of the material and what it is used for. I don't know what the big deal is supposed to be about it.barisax235 said:
@barisax235: Very well said (written).
@stacey101: Can you tell us the source about the point that SeaWorld does "harvest the sperm from the males, kill them and bring back the 'goodies' to the lab to preserve them to expand the gene pool."
Generall: I always wonder (not to say: it annoys me), when people of the anti captive cetacean side bring up the term "such intelligent animals". What is intelligence? We mostly compare it with our skills, but not with the skills the animal specie needs. So why should be another animal - say a lizard - be less intelligent then a killer whale? The first just simply needs less (or different) skills then the later. So intelligence isn't an argument if an animal specie should be or should not be kept in captivity.
@stacey101: Can you tell us the source about the point that SeaWorld does "harvest the sperm from the males, kill them and bring back the 'goodies' to the lab to preserve them to expand the gene pool."
Generall: I always wonder (not to say: it annoys me), when people of the anti captive cetacean side bring up the term "such intelligent animals". What is intelligence? We mostly compare it with our skills, but not with the skills the animal specie needs. So why should be another animal - say a lizard - be less intelligent then a killer whale? The first just simply needs less (or different) skills then the later. So intelligence isn't an argument if an animal specie should be or should not be kept in captivity.
HyakkoShachi
Well-Known Member
The idea that pools amplify sound is a fabrication. The inside of a pool is no worse than the inside of any room of a house, this varies from pool to pool of course like any room, and it depends on whether there is anything to disturb the sound waves. Beyond communication, whales and dolphins in captivity don't need to use sound as much as their wild counterparts but they do vocalize a lot in captivity, even if the human ear can't always hear it. When it comes to language, this isn't so much an issue. As previously stated, languages change on their own over time, and orcas from different areas learn each other's dialects with little issue. Aggression is part of life both in captivity and in the wild, You don't see it as clearly on a wild whale, but they too are covered in scratches and scars from dominance struggles, disagreements and the like. Also, of course, when an orca dies, sometimes it may be doe to a fight, usually it's disease but it's hard to say. Dead bodies usually sink after all, so we don't usually know the cause of death in wild animals, so they seemingly just disappear.
Cetaceans certainly are highly intelligent and highly complex, but probably not more than us. I'd put them more on par with elephants and the great apes personally. It's hard to say of course, we can't even figure out how the human brain works or exactly measure human intelligence. How can we expect to measure animal intelligence? Not only that, but human intelligence and human ways of thinking are very likely not to be the only way of thinking. Having developed in the ocean, it's very likely that cetaceans have very different ideas than humanity does. Consider how different human cultures are already. Imagine how much different entirely different species must think.
Of course some places are less stimulating than others in how the pools are built and the varieties of enrichment. However, from time to time wild whales or dolphins may be forced to travel the open sea alone or in very small groups to find a new source of food. The open oceans are vast mostly empty, travelling this too would be called sensory deprivation to a human. Cetaceans may have some sort of coping mechanism for such an environment.
In captivity there can just as many enriching things as the ocean, not just balls but all sorts of toys, every interaction with another living thing, be it human, dolphin, or gull is different and the value of these should not be underestimated. Captive cetaceans can certainly be given too currents and waves, depending on the complexity of the pool. New sounds are also easily found for a dolphin to listen to.
The US Navy has only one whale from Taiji, captured in the 80's. The rest are either captive born or where caught around the same time or earlier from US waters. The recent pilot whale import from Japan was an animal which was stranded at a young age and had to be rescued. Just because Japan is a whaling nation doesn't mean there aren't any facilities that take in rescued animals. The hunt in Taiji is mainly about pest control and would continue on even if there was no live captures. In fact Taiji is just one of a few towns in Japan that still practice the drive hunt. It is only targeted because it also sells live animals.
Not quite. They have been doing tests and such on the possibility of acquiring semen from deceased animals for use in artificial insemination. Some of these tests have involved collection from recently killed belugas from sustenance hunts in Alaska. A recently deceased animal is more likely to still have some viable sperm, all Seaworld is doing is using an unused resource from animals that will be killed one way or the other due to northern politics.
stacey101
Well-Known Member
I would just like to say im sorry for sounding so agressive at some points here ( so use to dealing with people on Youtube 
)
They are traveling to the hunt, getting the sperm
Its on page 2 this is in Sea Worlds words too, so they aren't shy about hiding it...
http://www.comparativepsychology.org/ijcp-2010-3/02.obrien_robeck__FINAL.pdf
Supporting SW yet they are joining these hunts in the slaughter of endangered belugas?
Yes, they would possibly still be killing the same number of whales but it doesnt make it right to be apart of the declining species. If your not apart of the solution, your apart of the problem.
) They are traveling to the hunt, getting the sperm
Its on page 2 this is in Sea Worlds words too, so they aren't shy about hiding it...
http://www.comparativepsychology.org/ijcp-2010-3/02.obrien_robeck__FINAL.pdf
Supporting SW yet they are joining these hunts in the slaughter of endangered belugas?
Yes, they would possibly still be killing the same number of whales but it doesnt make it right to be apart of the declining species. If your not apart of the solution, your apart of the problem.
I would just like to say im sorry for sounding so agressive at some points here ( so use to dealing with people on Youtube
They are traveling to the hunt, getting the sperm
Its on page 2 this is in Sea Worlds words too, so they aren't shy about hiding it...
http://www.comparativepsychology.org/ijcp-2010-3/02.obrien_robeck__FINAL.pdf
Supporting SW yet they are joining these hunts in the slaughter of endangered belugas?
Yes, they would possibly still be killing the same number of whales but it doesnt make it right to be apart of the declining species. If your not apart of the solution, your apart of the problem.
First: Thank you for name the source. This indeed makes it very trustfull as it comes from SW itself.
But your last phrase of this post really irritates me (as far as I understand it correctly): "If your not apart of the solution, your apart of the problem". That sounds like a phrase that countries with totalitary political systems use ("Who's not sharing our opinion is against us"). Isn't that a little simple and unfair?
stacey101
Well-Known Member
haha sorry, I was using that in reference to the cetacean slaughter
Considering they are an endangered species.
HyakkoShachi
Well-Known Member
They are traveling to the hunt, getting the sperm
Its on page 2 this is in Sea Worlds words too, so they aren't shy about hiding it...
http://www.comparativepsychology.org/ijcp-2010-3/02.obrien_robeck__FINAL.pdf
Of course they're travelling to the hunt, whalers aren't scientists. They can't just package the sperm and send it to them. Of course Seaworld isn't hiding it, there's nothing to hide. There is nothing illegal or scandalous taking place. Some people may find it gross, but many things in science involve gross things. It is not a good reason to condemn them.
Seaworld is just taking sperm, they're not going out in boats with the native people and participating in the hunts. They are no more part of the hunt than a squirrel is part of a tree.
To say that one is either part of the solution or par of the problem is no different than saying "Either you ware with us or you are against us".Those who are not with you are not against you, they're just there. Likewise, Seaworld's team of scientists are neither right or wrong for using the resources available to them.
I consider a species' intelligence as that species' ability to survive in their native habitat. I consider Humans to be one of the most stupid species out there. Of course, many of our species do still survive off the land and off of what's available to them so we aren't too stupid. Cetaceans, elephants, and primates are all highly intelligent in both my standards and by Human standards. If we can keep the later two happy and healthy in captivity then we should be able to do the same for the cetaceans as well. The same mistakes we have made with cetaceans we have made with most captive animals it's just that cetaceans haven't been in captivity as long and now their are more people aware and caring for their treatment.
The Vegan
Well-Known Member
For me, cetaceans are definitely on the other side of that line. Combining the predatory nature of a big cat with the social complexity of elephants or apes, they are simply too difficult to keep in captivity. Replicating the ocean to a dolphin's standard is just too great a task.
Pinnipeds are also beyond that line, for the same reasons. Why there is little debate about their suitability in captivity is beyond me.
Large fish - Whale Sharks, Manta Rays, Great Whites - also seem to be poor candidates for captivity due to their size and strongly migratory nature.
Lastly, most pelagic fish, not being able to understand the concept of barriers, should not be confined by them.
Pinnipeds are also beyond that line, for the same reasons. Why there is little debate about their suitability in captivity is beyond me.
Large fish - Whale Sharks, Manta Rays, Great Whites - also seem to be poor candidates for captivity due to their size and strongly migratory nature.
Lastly, most pelagic fish, not being able to understand the concept of barriers, should not be confined by them.
ThylacineAlive- First off as a fun fact, Mystic was the first to attempt to AI a Beluga Whale. It was unsuccessful.
Second, I wouldn't say that they plan to receive dolphins soon. There has been nothing said about it except when Mystic temporarily housed Shedd's dolphins that it was a glimpse into the future, as Mystic plans to bring them back again. There was nothing that said they'd be brought soon.
Also, we have only had 2 Brazilian Ocelot births, not 3.
Second, I wouldn't say that they plan to receive dolphins soon. There has been nothing said about it except when Mystic temporarily housed Shedd's dolphins that it was a glimpse into the future, as Mystic plans to bring them back again. There was nothing that said they'd be brought soon.
Also, we have only had 2 Brazilian Ocelot births, not 3.
On a picture I posted on the zoo's gallery I thought you said we did 3 successful AIs but a quick double check shows you said ours was only the 3rd done on the species. I just remember wrong and I apologize.
The point is Mystic plans on dolphins some time in the future.
So what's your opinion on all of this?
I'm not 100% where I read this but apparently because the common cetaceans in captivity are open water animals who rarely visit shores or ocean floor it would actually be contrary to their needs to have plants, rocks, that kind of thing and would only serve to make them look nicer to humans while removing swimming space and causing injuries.
I'd guess in that way it's similar to great apes who would look lovely with some trees, but the injuries and issues caused by having forest type enclosures means that sturdy climbing frames are actually much better for them.