National Aquarium in Baltimore Ending the Dolphin Exhibit?

W

wensleydale

Well-Known Member
This is worthy of its own thread, there is talk of the Aquarium ending its dolphin exhibit and sending them to some kind of "sanctuary."

Dolphin Exhibits May Close at the National Aquarium

I am absolutely opposed to this. I feel that those who advocate this are too close to anti cap groups for good science. I hate the accusations that the aquarium is trying to protect its "business model" because I know it is non profit. I worry that the ocean environment will be more stressful than the "chronic stress" the anti caps claim they are experiencing. I don't think that radical groups should be able to dictate how we care for animals and what animals we chose to care for. I worry that this is a knee jerk reaction after "Blackfish" which was really just a propaganda film in my opinion:mad:. And a bunch of other stuff, but I feel I should limit myself to a paragraph.

Other thoughts?
 
This is my favorite aquarium to visit in the U.S. I couldn't care less if they ended their dolphin exhibit. Honestly, send them away. More space for top-notch exhibits! :)

Now, while this is floating around it will bring good/bad views and so forth. In the end, it is free PR. Whether good or bad, still free. Everyone will weigh in on it. This is also a crucial time while they design their next phase and plan for a location in D.C. It keeps them fresh, in the front of minds of donors, admirers, members, etc. Even if the fundies rear their ugly heads, still free PR. This can help them get the money they will need to pursue their next endeavor.
 
@wensleydale: Absolutely agree with you. Every institution that stopps keeping cetaceans is ammunition for animal rights activists. They will allways use it as a "proof, that those animals could not be kept in captivity".

And although I must confess that there CAN be good arguments to stop keeping them, I mostly have the feeling that the responsible persons do miss the courage to "face against the enemy".
 
Copying my response from the main National Aquarium thread, as it contains the link to the Aquarium's main comment section about the matter:

This idea is horrible. New management at the aquarium that came in a couple of years ago has been determined to appease the anti-captivity animal rights extremists. The dolphins are by far the most popular animals at the aquarium and draw the most support, visitors, and funding. Why cater to the animal rights extremists/anti-captivity crowd, who do not and never have supported the aquarium or anything it stands for to begin with, instead of appealing to the aquarium’s actual patrons, supporters, and their families, is beyond me. Most facilities such as SeaWorld, Georgia Aquarium, and Vancouver Aquarium are fighting back against these lunatic people, yet Baltimore/National Aquarium just caves in? Outrageous! It was stupid enough to eliminate the dolphin shows several years ago, but this is just insane. The aquarium will greatly suffer from this in the form of loss of visitors, leading to further ticket price hikes, leading to even fewer visitors and the suffering of the aquarium that could lose much of its strength it once had to fulfill its mission, if it doesn’t completely go belly up (the aquarium has almost always had dolphins as its main attraction since its opening). I’ve been encouraging people who feel the aquarium should remember its goal of connecting people with nature by keeping the dolphins to tell the aquarium so in its future plans comment box at the bottom of the page here: National Aquarium - Our Future. The aquarium and its supporters need to fight back against these anti-captivity/extremist protesters, as dolphins and whales are just the first targets for them. These activists from PETA and the like do not represent the majority of people and have absolutely no right to dictate how aquariums, zoos, and such institutions should take care of their animals.
 
WhiteTiger said:
Most facilities such as SeaWorld, Georgia Aquarium, and Vancouver Aquarium are fighting back against these lunatic people, yet Baltimore/National Aquarium just caves in?
Click to expand...

It isn't just "animal rights extremists" who are concerned about the welfare and ethics of keeping cetaceans in captivity. Many mainstream people, including people who support zoos and aquariums, are questioning how cetaceans should best be exhibited and whether some species like orcas can be adequately cared for.

Several facilities have gotten out of exhibiting cetaceans in the last few years for both practical and welfare concerns (e.g., it takes mega-millions of dollars to build or modernize cetacean facilities and Minnesota Zoo, Oklahoma Zoo, etc. have opted to just stop). Other places like the National Aquarium and Vancouver Aquarium (from what snowleopard has indicated) are no longer featuring circus-style cetacean shows.

I have never been to the National Aquarium and don't know what the details of the management's thinking is beyond what I've read, but it seems like they are taking a very deliberate, thoughtful approach to the question of how best to keep their dolphins from scientific, ethical, welfare, and no doubt commercial perspectives.
 
Last edited:
Baltimore's aquarium: The latest battleground in the dolphin debate | Al Jazeera America

A new flurry of articles, since in my opinion they all give the same information I have only posted one.

Why are they showing Miami Seaquarium when the article is mostly about Baltimore?
Incidentally (I have finally decided it is worth my time to reply) everyone was angry when the Minnesota Zoo got rid of its dolphin exhibit. Oklahoma, I don't know, I think all of their dolphins died and they just didn't get new ones.
 
wensleydale said:
Incidentally (I have finally decided it is worth my time to reply) everyone was angry when the Minnesota Zoo got rid of its dolphin exhibit. Oklahoma, I don't know, I think all of their dolphins died and they just didn't get new ones.
Click to expand...



Who is the "everyone" who was angry with Minnesota for ending their dolphin exhibit? The zoo seems to be doing fine and is embarking on several new exhibits. The dolphin exhibit is being rebuilt for Hawaiian monk seals, which to many people will likely be even more special and interesting than dolphins.
 
There are numerous articles stating that zoo patrons were disappointed. Also, the state legislature, who felt that they had been deceived because they had just given them four million dollars to renovate the exhibit.

Minnesota Zoo dolphin fans say goodbye to Allie, Semo - TwinCities.com

May 14: Minnesota Zoo pulls plug on dolphin exhibit | Star Tribune

Also a petition to keep them:

http://www.change.org/petitions/minnesota-zoo-keep-atlantic-bottlenose-dolphins-at-the-minnesota-zoo

Quite a few people signed it:

Nearly 1K surfers sign petition to keep dolphins at Minn. Zoo - KMSP-TV
 
WhiteTiger said:
Copying my response from the main National Aquarium thread, as it contains the link to the Aquarium's main comment section about the matter:

This idea is horrible. New management at the aquarium that came in a couple of years ago has been determined to appease the anti-captivity animal rights extremists. The dolphins are by far the most popular animals at the aquarium and draw the most support, visitors, and funding. Why cater to the animal rights extremists/anti-captivity crowd, who do not and never have supported the aquarium or anything it stands for to begin with, instead of appealing to the aquarium’s actual patrons, supporters, and their families, is beyond me. Most facilities such as SeaWorld, Georgia Aquarium, and Vancouver Aquarium are fighting back against these lunatic people, yet Baltimore/National Aquarium just caves in? Outrageous! It was stupid enough to eliminate the dolphin shows several years ago, but this is just insane. The aquarium will greatly suffer from this in the form of loss of visitors, leading to further ticket price hikes, leading to even fewer visitors and the suffering of the aquarium that could lose much of its strength it once had to fulfill its mission, if it doesn’t completely go belly up (the aquarium has almost always had dolphins as its main attraction since its opening). I’ve been encouraging people who feel the aquarium should remember its goal of connecting people with nature by keeping the dolphins to tell the aquarium so in its future plans comment box at the bottom of the page here: National Aquarium - Our Future. The aquarium and its supporters need to fight back against these anti-captivity/extremist protesters, as dolphins and whales are just the first targets for them. These activists from PETA and the like do not represent the majority of people and have absolutely no right to dictate how aquariums, zoos, and such institutions should take care of their animals.
Click to expand...

Big Golden Star goes to you WhiteTiger, your point is loud and clear.These anti-captivity activist think they are doing the right thing to free all the captive cetaceans to the wild.Look what happened when they freed Keiko to the wild.He lived less than 3 years in the wild becouse other orcas never accepted him and he always ended up beside humans. Few dolphins that are living in the National Aquarium will be unable to survive in the wild.Nani a 39 year old dolphin was captured when she was still young and she dosnt know how to survive in the wild. We are not sure where they will move the dolphins but we are hopping that they will not be stupid and listen to these anticaps to release the dolphins back to the wild.It would be great if the Aquarium will fight back and keep the dolphins at the Aquarim where most of the dolphins call it their home.
 
First of all, this decision has not been dictated by “anti-captivity extremists” or “radical groups.” This has been an on-going, internal debate at the National Aquarium for years.

Responding to WhiteTiger: I totally disagree with your statement. The new management at the National Aquarium headed by CEO John Racanelli has done a tremendous job of steadying the ship and breathing new life (with a more conservation based message) into that facility. Nothing of what has been done is in response to “appease the anti-captivity animal rights extremists” or “cave in” to their demands or beliefs. These decisions are the result of thought provoking, deliberate, concrete discussions regarding the future of dolphins in captivity. New research into cetaceans social needs and cognitive abilities have changed people’s views. Regardless of who is sounding this alarm of cetaceans in captivity, such shifts in missions and values is what is needed for an institution to thrive in the 21st century, and this institution recognizes these issues and is changing with the times.

Responding to Megakillerwhale: The National Aquarium is not seeking to release their dolphins into the wild. Rather, they are exploring the possibility of placing the animals in a seaside sanctuary where they can explore the wilds in a confined, but much larger and stimulating environment. There will still be trainers feeding them, taking care of them, administering medical care, ect.

The big question today is no longer what if we end cetaceans in captivity, but when and how to successfully phase out cetaceans programs. I am willing to bet that the National Aquarium isn’t the only institution having discussions about what to do next.
 
Internal debate between whom? And if you're that desperate to to have them out of your aquarium why don't you just send them to a place like the DRC where they live in lagoons?
 
wensleydale said:
Internal debate between whom? And if you're that desperate to to have them out of your aquarium why don't you just send them to a place like the DRC where they live in lagoons?
Click to expand...

There has been an internal discussion and debate about the future role of the dolphin program at the National Aquarium and how justifiable it is to keep such animals in captivity in relation to the Aquarium's mission and values.

The idea of simply moving them to another facility is not really an option. These animals have been entrusted to that Aquarium, so it's there responsibility to take care of them. It's no longer appropriate to have these animals perform ridiculous circus tricks - rather, the Aquarium wants to establish a sanctuary for these animals. There are sanctuaries for elephants, chimps, and big cats, so why not for dolphins? Obviously, the Aquarium is moving in uncharted waters, so it's going to take some time to work out the logistics, but the Aquarium is certain to have these animals live out the rest of their lives in a much better setting.
 
Let me rephrase that. Is there really and internal debate or do you just belong to a social circle of volunteers who hold anti captivity beliefs?

And why wouldn't the aquarium be entrusted to find a new facility for them?
 
wensleydale said:
Let me rephrase that. Is there really and internal debate or do you just belong to a social circle of volunteers who hold anti captivity beliefs?

And why wouldn't the aquarium be entrusted to find a new facility for them?
Click to expand...

You are becoming very rude, wensleydale.

The articles that you yourself have posted make it clear that the National Aquarium staff is having internal debates and discussions about what they should do with their dolphin program.
 
wensleydale said:
Let me rephrase that. Is there really and internal debate or do you just belong to a social circle of volunteers who hold anti captivity beliefs?

And why wouldn't the aquarium be entrusted to find a new facility for them?
Click to expand...

If the aquarium wants to end the dolphin exhibit because it feels that dolphins shouldn't be in captivity at all, transferring them to another facility kind of defeats the purpose. But of course, they can't just be released into the ocean, and there's currently no dolphin sanctuary like, in existence. If the aquarium decides that keeping dolphins in tanks is bad, the task to build a sanctuary will fall on them.
 
NAIB Volunteer said:
First of all, this decision has not been dictated by “anti-captivity extremists” or “radical groups.” This has been an on-going, internal debate at the National Aquarium for years.

Nothing of what has been done is in response to “appease the anti-captivity animal rights extremists” or “cave in” to their demands or beliefs. These decisions are the result of thought provoking, deliberate, concrete discussions regarding the future of dolphins in captivity. New research into cetaceans social needs and cognitive abilities have changed people’s views. Regardless of who is sounding this alarm of cetaceans in captivity, such shifts in missions and values is what is needed for an institution to thrive in the 21st century, and this institution recognizes these issues and is changing with the times.

The big question today is no longer what if we end cetaceans in captivity, but when and how to successfully phase out cetacean programs. I am willing to bet that the National Aquarium isn’t the only institution having discussions about what to do next.
Click to expand...

I really enjoyed reading your response and I echo a lot of your sentiments. By the middle of August I will have visited my 240th zoo/aquarium and approximately 205 of those will be in the United States. Even with the fact that I'm obviously a massive fan of seeing animals in captivity, I've become disenchanted with the idea of whales and dolphins in captivity and have seen a number of facilities phase out their cetacean programs in recent years. Only 2 zoos in America still have dolphins (Brookfield and Indianapolis) and orcas are almost nonexistent across the continent apart from the 3 big SeaWorld theme parks.

Every facility with dolphins has seen annual protests and criticism of their cetacean programs and it seems to me that the tide most definitely has turned in favour of phasing out such endeavours. I read about it all the time in regards to my local Vancouver Aquarium, and Baltimore is not necessarily setting a precedent but will actually be continuing what has ever so slightly become a trend.
 
snowleopard said:
Every facility with dolphins has seen annual protests and criticism of their cetacean programs and it seems to me that the tide most definitely has turned in favour of phasing out such endeavours. I read about it all the time in regards to my local Vancouver Aquarium, and Baltimore is not necessarily setting a precedent but will actually be continuing what has ever so slightly become a trend.
Click to expand...

Yes, you hit the nail on the head - it's slowly becoming a trend. My views have changed over the years. I was always skeptical about housing orca whales, but always thought it was possible to provide a stimulating environment for belugas and dolphins. Now, I'm not sure that zoos and aquariums can meet such high needs.

I'll be interesting to see what happens with Vancouver Aquarium, considering their renovation and expansion plans for their cetaceans.

I suspect that it'll be some time before some of the largest Aquariums give up their cetaceans (SeaWorld, Shedd, Georgia, Mystic), but if the National Dolphin Sanctuary is successful, I feel that many smaller dolphin programs will follow suit (Brookfield, Indianapolis, Texas State) - all members of the Bottlenose Dolphin Breeding Consortium
 
NAIB Volunteer said:
Yes, you hit the nail on the head - it's slowly becoming a trend. My views have changed over the years. I was always skeptical about housing orca whales, but always thought it was possible to provide a stimulating environment for belugas and dolphins. Now, I'm not sure that zoos and aquariums can meet such high needs.

I'll be interesting to see what happens with Vancouver Aquarium, considering their renovation and expansion plans for their cetaceans.

I suspect that it'll be some time before some of the largest Aquariums give up their cetaceans (SeaWorld, Shedd, Georgia, Mystic), but if the National Dolphin Sanctuary is successful, I feel that many smaller dolphin programs will follow suit (Brookfield, Indianapolis, Texas State) - all members of the Bottlenose Dolphin Breeding Consortium
Click to expand...

I'm outright opposed to orca captivity, and extremely iffy with other cetaceans as well. The opposition to cetacean captivity is a growing movement, and not just one perpetuated by people opposed to zoos, or animal rights extremists, and this isn't just some passing fad. It will be interesting to see where this goes, and how it might affect cetacean captivity in the future. If a sanctuary is successfully built, it could lead to the building of more sanctuaries, which could further decrease the amount of dolphins in zoos and aquariums. (I'm particularly thinking of rescue case dolphins, which often end up in captivity if it's determined that it can't survive in the wild) Furthermore, it could change the way the general public sees cetacean captivity. Obviously a captive dolphin can't just be thrown out into the ocean, and a captive born one likely doesn't have much chance for rehabilitation and release, and people know that. If a dolphin sanctuary is built, and it succeeds in its mission, it might further promote the removing of dolphins from captivity because it would show that there is another, possibly better, option for these animals. Though of course, like you said, the larger aquariums and theme parks would likely take longer to phase out dolphins, assuming they do at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top