The Belugas Have Landed
hakaimagazine.com
hakaimagazine.com
Sorry, that's not normalcy. Locking a whale in a pool for life is cruel.
Just because people enjoy foie gras doesn't mean it's morally permissible to force-feed-to-death sentient beings.
Protecting an imoral industry because there is a demand for it is imoral.
So what I wanted to say is that change comes from consumers, and as such if we choose to say no by not giving our money for anything immoral, we can kill those activities.
Marineland has been the subject of many, many scandals and investigations (non-exhaustive, see Wikipedia for sources and a complete list): - illegally capturing dolphins - 15 premature orca deaths - 5 premature beluga deaths - the owner shot a fawn in the throat and let it bleed out - the park has mass graves for its animals on its property - the park has been investigated several times for its water quality, including after the death of a seal and injury of several others on loan from the Vancouver Aquarium
Anecdotally, from my last visit to Marineland (before I was aware of just how disgusting the park is) - the bears almost universally have patches of missing fur - the whales have almost no room to swim
I feel nothing but 100% vitriol towards Marineland. It's one giant animal abuse system, and this has been well documented by Ontario newspapers. The owner, John Holer, is an awful person who profits from the suffering of intelligent animals and I would like nothing better than to see him lose his fortune and spend time behind bars.
Thank you for prompting me to be more complete in my criticism of Marineland. Marineland is a disgraceful blight on Niagara and the province of Ontario in general. It should have been shut down decades ago.
And then, nothing.
I find an article about it on Hacker News of all places.
I get that there was some sensitivity about it given the lawsuits they had to fend off, but while we got an email about changes to the dinosaur exhibit this week, they didn’t even mention the belugas.
Maybe SpaceX has spoiled me by setting a standard for showing off their work.
I don't understand this restriction. Honestly the entire endeavour of taking n animal and reducing its movement by a two or three orders of magnitude looks extremely cruel on its own face.
But, if you're going to do it then why aren't they allowed to breed in captivity?
> all five of the transported whales’ mothers are from this stock, although it’s unclear where their fathers came from.
Lack of documented heritage would be a red flag for any official breeding program.
The department making the rules likely wouldn't have any federal jurisdiction over any offspring, as they'd be privately owned, and would not be "imported wildlife." They do, however, have (an absurd & abusive amount of) power over the initial import permits.
At least that's the "loophole" that has allowed all other marine mammal exhibits to remain open, even after their capture has been illegal for decades.
If the goal is to reduce the overall number of cetaceans in captivity, breeding more of them directly goes against that.
so was it just a sale?