A National Geographic Blogger Is Not Impressed
Recently, a National Geographic News Watch blogger named Maddalena Bearzi wrote a piece entitled, “Are You Kidding? Larger Tanks Won’t Cut it for Killer Whales” and we think she’s way off base.
She’s purposefully and intentionally off base – it’s the agenda.
Ms. Bearzi claims SeaWorld’s Blue World Project, a first-of-its-kind killer whale habitat expansion, is morally wrong and missing the point: that killer whales should not be in captivity at all.
Let’s take a closer look at some of her *reasoning*:
The blog post cites certain statistics on how orcas live in the wild and uses them as evidence that no matter how big SeaWorld can make the tank, it’s still not enough. Can orcas travel up to 100 miles a day in the open ocean? Yes. Have killer whales been clocked at speeds of over 20km/hr? Yes.
But before you accept these elements of wild killer whales as indicators of the way things should be, ask yourself one thing: why do wild killer whales exhibit those behaviors?
Because the wild is an uncertain place. Starvation, disease and death are always looming.
The wild is no Disney movie. It’s move or die.
Killer whales, in particular the Southern Resident stock, was designated as depleted under the Marine Mammal Protection Act in 2003 and listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act in 2005.
According to the National Marine Fisheries Service Recovery Plan for Southern Resident Killer Whales, major threats associated with wild killer whales were these:
- prey availability,
- pollution and contaminants, and
- effects from vessels and sound.
Other factors like demographics, small population size, and vulnerability to oil spills were also considered detrimental.
Regarding basic needs, a killer whale needs to travel up to 100 miles a day to feed itself. A killer whale can swim at speeds of up to 20 km/hr to feed itself.
Or die.
When orcas at SeaWorld are fed restaurant quality fish at regular intervals throughout the day (see Orca diet and feeding habits here), receive around the clock veterinary care, and are engaged in mentally and physically stimulating activities, they no longer need to swim far or fast to survive.
Would you rather be forced to travel 50 miles a day for food, shelter and security – or death? Or do you prefer your car, house and grocery store – and an enriching life?
We thought so.
The author also takes a paragraph to advocate for the sea pen idea that so many activists are overly fond of. We wrote an article addressing the pitfalls of sea pens earlier. But to put it simply, since sea pens are still a brand new idea. It’s cruel and apathetic to expose orcas to pathogens and stress triggers they are biologically ill-equipped to deal with and we are ill-equipped to prevent.
As a last ditch effort, Ms. Bearzi claims that, “keeping whales in captivity is more likely about enabling audiences to see the animals up-close which, of course, brings in more money…”
Is profit not directly linked to conservation? Would people care as much if they had not experienced the magical interaction with an animal at a zoo or aquarium?
Mark Simmons, who was the director of husbandry for the Free Willy/Keiko release project, says in his column that once an organization’s basic needs are met, it can focus efforts on outreach.
Making money is not an evil for zoological institutions, but rather a blessing. The more profitable an institution is, the more conservation and research projects are conducted.
The Blue World Project will be an amazing addition to SeaWorld parks, not just for the added space, 50-foot depths, moving current, and ocean-like atmosphere, but because this project will usher in an era of increased scientific research to benefit killer whales in the wild and at the parks.
It’s time to stop falling for these weak and intellectually incurious opinions from people who have no idea what they are talking about. Let science and logic be your guide and you will usually do well in this life.
