Right. Killer dogs are put down because they cannot be safely separated from human society – you can’t just release them into the street. There’s 6-billion-plus people on the land, but only a tiny fraction of that in the much larger sea. Killer whales have vastly lower odds of ever encountering humans at close range again. If this animal is released into the wild, I’d be stunned if we ever heard anything more about him (except for rumor, and, of course, if they put a tracking tag on him).
As far as cost goes, at some point the insurance liability is going to make it economic to get rid of him despite the invested costs.
As far as whether the whale is “guilty” or “a murderer” goes, do human legal standards apply to an animal? If they do, I would advise him to take the Amistad defense.
I used to work at a large aquarium that held dolphins and whales (Belugas, and briefly pseudorcas or “false killer whales.”) I knew most of the trainers and they were highly educated, gentle, very caring people. They made sure the cetaceans got the absolute best care possible, had a stimulating environment, a nutritious and varied diet, etc.
This was a terrible accident, but the woman was a professional and new the risks. Also, if its determined that the whale is a future danger (moreso than other captive whales) it should probably be euthanized humanely.
If the whale was not put down as a result of the other two deaths, I don’t think that would happen after yesterday’s events. But I don’t know how these things are usually handled.
This excerpt from the Darwin Awards site seems relevant. The comment about his lack of training was mentioned in stories about the death yesterday. This whale is usually not used in public exhibitions.
Generally speaking a dog also isn’t going to kill someone just with its sheer bulk- it would kill in an attack.
Couldn’t they just keep him in his tank and not have him interact with trainers all that much? No shows, etc. If he was never trained for human contact to begin with that seems to make sense.
What I would want to know is, if this whale wasn’t trained to socialize with humans and generally was not used in public shows like this, why was he a part of this show? That sounds like a terrible decision on the part of someone at SeaWorld.
I don’t know for sure but in those parks, while there is no actual show on stage, the tanks are used for training and feeding and the public is free to walk in and see what’s going on. I don’t know that this is how it happened, but just saying that sometimes animals that are not show animals are on stage.
No animals like this should be kept in zoos. It’s disgusting. The only animals that should be in captivity are ones in breeding programs for endangered species or rehab centers for injured animals. Zoos are for profit businesses that could generally care less about raising awareness of wildlife. What the hell does a kid learn by watching some idiot ride the back of a killer whale? Case in point: this killer whale is a rarity living to almost thirty years old in captivity. The average killer whale lives 35 years in the wild. In captivity? Four friggin’ years! It’s shameful.
More directly about this incident the most updated story I just saw makes it seem like it was definitely an attack. Witnesses are saying the orca grabbed the trainer by the pony tail and dragged her under then started biting her and thrashing her around. It also says her death was due to injuries sustained as well as drowning.
These incidents are not wholly uncommon with orcas actually. Two months ago another trainer was killed due his chest getting crushed from a bite. It was in the Canary Islands so we didn’t didn’t hear about it in the US. Since the seventies there have been almost two dozen attacks on trainers that involved injury and, rarely, death.
He learns that if you poke a stick enough times at a large predator, it will kill you. A valuable lesson both in itself and as a metaphor for more daily concerns such as handling you in-laws and all that.
Not that I doubt you, but do you have a cite for these estimates? At the oceanarium I worked at, I heard the exact opposite. Due to better diets and healthcare and water quality, cetaceans in captivity live much longer than in the wild.
They still need to take care of the whale and supervise his relationships with the other whales.
Tilakum was not a part of the show. SeaWorld does have animals that are for research, breeding and viewing-through-the-glass. This event occurred in one of the back pools.
And capeo, it’s clear that you’ve made up your mind about animals and captivity, so I’m not going to engage in a futile debate with you. To others reading capeo’s post, I need to stress that his or her figures about lifespan are wrong as well as the suggestion that the people who work at SeaWorld do not care and respect these creatures. I’ve worked with them first-hand and up-close.
Just saw capeo’s self-correction. Captured whales and those raised in the environment are wholly different matters.
It seems even orcas born in captivity don’t have it so good. Of all the orcas in captivity almost 2/3 didn’t make it past ten. In the wild a male averages 30, a female 50.
Are they? I’ve think I’ve cited them just fine now. If you have conflicting data I’d love to see it.
While you are at it I’d like to hear your defense of having such animals in captivity to do flips for gawkers. What’s the benefit for people or the animal?
I’ll try to read your cite later, but this quote is a poor use of statistics: you need to compare the childhood mortality rate and the average life expectancy of each group. You can’t compare the childhood mortality rate of one to the life expectancy of the other.
