Total Posts:36|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Marine Mammals in Captivity

PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2014 9:40:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I am an ardent supporter of keeping marine mammals under human care. Does anyone care to discuss?
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
theta_pinch
Posts: 496
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2014 10:35:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/12/2014 9:40:19 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
I am an ardent supporter of keeping marine mammals under human care. Does anyone care to discuss?

Okay.
Any sufficiently complex phenomenon is indistinguishable from magic--Me

"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it."
Niel deGrasse Tyson
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2014 10:32:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/12/2014 10:35:59 PM, theta_pinch wrote:
At 2/12/2014 9:40:19 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
I am an ardent supporter of keeping marine mammals under human care. Does anyone care to discuss?

Okay.

"Okay, let's discuss" or "okay that you feel that way"?
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
theta_pinch
Posts: 496
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2014 1:06:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/13/2014 10:32:29 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 2/12/2014 10:35:59 PM, theta_pinch wrote:
At 2/12/2014 9:40:19 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
I am an ardent supporter of keeping marine mammals under human care. Does anyone care to discuss?

Okay.

"Okay, let's discuss" or "okay that you feel that way"?

Okay, let's discuss.
Any sufficiently complex phenomenon is indistinguishable from magic--Me

"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it."
Niel deGrasse Tyson
nummi
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2014 1:15:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I am an ardent supporter of keeping humans behind bars with no good reason. Anyone object? If yes then how do you regard other animals being kept behind bars, as they are in zoos, with no good reason?
Juan_Pablo
Posts: 2,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2014 1:27:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I don't mind if marine mammals are kept in tanks or in cages as long as the animals are well-fed, well-provided for and are quite comfortable. I'm absolutely against animals being kept in deplorable conditions. This I do have a problem with!
ADreamOfLiberty
Posts: 1,570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2014 3:36:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/12/2014 9:40:19 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
I am an ardent supporter of keeping marine mammals under human care. Does anyone care to discuss?

I don't like it. Dolphins in particular have displayed extraordinary emotional and conceptual advancement. We should be treating them like humans until their behavior can be shown to be something other than what it appears (It appears to be the behavior of a self-aware consciousness capable of intelligent self-determination, with crude reasoning skills).

I am not against shows, and them living with humans; but until we can communicate about what they would like to do in the future, they should not be kept in any tanks without outlets to the sea. [which they can open at will].
LOL, yeah, it's pretty amazing how they think they can "reason" with you. - Sidewalker, speaking of advocates for sexual deviancy.

So, my advice, Liberty, is to go somewhere else. Leave, and never come back. - YYW

And that's what I did. Contact me at http://www.edeb8.com... by the same user name if you have anything you'd like to say.
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2014 4:05:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
The animals in Zoological establishments certified by the AZA are cared for by the best of experts in the field. There is no pampering or treat that is spared. If it a good for the animal. And they can do it, they will, even down to brushing their teeth.

Second, the Zoological community is the single largest force on the conservation front. An example is the Georgia Aquarium, the worlds largest aquarium. It houses the worlds largest teaching veterinary hospital, the worlds largest aquatic research center, spearheads the worlds largest marine clean-up program, the worlds most extensive conservation program, and the world largest kelp forest restoration program.

It partnered with the coral restoration fund to run the worlds largest reef restoration effort, with the Monterey bay aquarium to run the worlds most advanced sea otter rehabilitation program, the shedd aquarium and the Alaska marine center, along with Russian counterparts, to spearhead the worlds biggest beluga research and conservation front. Georgia Aquarium partnered with Mote Marine laboratories to run two simultaneous programs, one on right whale conservation and one on manatee conservation. Georgia aquarium runs the largest dolphin conservation and rehabilitation program in the world.

The only marine mammals held by these non-profit zoological organizations are those deemed by experts as unable to survive in the wild.

Instead, they serve as Ambassadors to raise awareness of the aquatic world, and to inspire awe, amazement, and foster a sense of connection with the public. The goal is to get people to care about these creatures and their habitat through "edutainment".

This type of caring and connection cannot be developed unless the people can actually see and interact with the animals themselves. This is why I support zoological organizations like the Georgia Aquarium.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2014 4:09:50 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/13/2014 1:15:33 PM, nummi wrote:
I am an ardent supporter of keeping humans behind bars with no good reason. Anyone object? If yes then how do you regard other animals being kept behind bars, as they are in zoos, with no good reason?

A) we have good reason. See my explanation.

B) the marine mammals kept by AZA certified establishments are not kept "behind bars". They live in replicated habitats and live a far easier life then is at all possible in the wild.

C) the only marine mammals kept by the organizations I mentioned have been declared unable to survive in the wild, and were adopted from rehabilitation centers who didn't have room to keep them permanently.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2014 4:10:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/13/2014 1:27:42 PM, Juan_Pablo wrote:
I don't mind if marine mammals are kept in tanks or in cages as long as the animals are well-fed, well-provided for and are quite comfortable. I'm absolutely against animals being kept in deplorable conditions. This I do have a problem with!

And anyone who doesn't is a terrible person and ought to be tarred and feathered.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
ADreamOfLiberty
Posts: 1,570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2014 11:13:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/13/2014 4:05:44 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
The animals in Zoological establishments certified by the AZA are cared for by the best of experts in the field. There is no pampering or treat that is spared. If it a good for the animal. And they can do it, they will, even down to brushing their teeth.

A poor substitute for freedom.

Second, the Zoological community is the single largest force on the conservation front. An example is the Georgia Aquarium, the worlds largest aquarium. It houses the worlds largest teaching veterinary hospital, the worlds largest aquatic research center, spearheads the worlds largest marine clean-up program, the worlds most extensive conservation program, and the world largest kelp forest restoration program.

Good for them, why do they need to lock up dolphins to do that?

It partnered with the coral restoration fund to run the worlds largest reef restoration effort, with the Monterey bay aquarium to run the worlds most advanced sea otter rehabilitation program, the shedd aquarium and the Alaska marine center, along with Russian counterparts, to spearhead the worlds biggest beluga research and conservation front. Georgia Aquarium partnered with Mote Marine laboratories to run two simultaneous programs, one on right whale conservation and one on manatee conservation. Georgia aquarium runs the largest dolphin conservation and rehabilitation program in the world.

The only marine mammals held by these non-profit zoological organizations are those deemed by experts as unable to survive in the wild.

Which happen to be any that were born in tiny pools huh? If they can't survive they'll get hungry and come back.

Instead, they serve as Ambassadors to raise awareness of the aquatic world, and to inspire awe, amazement, and foster a sense of connection with the public. The goal is to get people to care about these creatures and their habitat through "edutainment".

All so noble, do it with volunteers.

This type of caring and connection cannot be developed unless the people can actually see and interact with the animals themselves. This is why I support zoological organizations like the Georgia Aquarium.

I've been approached by wild dolphins and I was just taking a swim. No way I'll believe that it's impossible to interact with them unless they have no where else to go.

At 2/13/2014 10:51:45 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
I guess no one has a decent rebuttal?

The night is young ;)
LOL, yeah, it's pretty amazing how they think they can "reason" with you. - Sidewalker, speaking of advocates for sexual deviancy.

So, my advice, Liberty, is to go somewhere else. Leave, and never come back. - YYW

And that's what I did. Contact me at http://www.edeb8.com... by the same user name if you have anything you'd like to say.
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/14/2014 12:57:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/13/2014 11:13:05 PM, ADreamOfLiberty wrote:
At 2/13/2014 4:05:44 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
The animals in Zoological establishments certified by the AZA are cared for by the best of experts in the field. There is no pampering or treat that is spared. If it a good for the animal. And they can do it, they will, even down to brushing their teeth.

A poor substitute for freedom.

Freedom in which they are subject to predation, starvation, disease, poaching, etc.

Second, the Zoological community is the single largest force on the conservation front. An example is the Georgia Aquarium, the worlds largest aquarium. It houses the worlds largest teaching veterinary hospital, the worlds largest aquatic research center, spearheads the worlds largest marine clean-up program, the worlds most extensive conservation program, and the world largest kelp forest restoration program.

Good for them, why do they need to lock up dolphins to do that?

As I said before, the dolphins are adopted from a rehabilitation center after being declared unable to survive in the wild.


It partnered with the coral restoration fund to run the worlds largest reef restoration effort, with the Monterey bay aquarium to run the worlds most advanced sea otter rehabilitation program, the shedd aquarium and the Alaska marine center, along with Russian counterparts, to spearhead the worlds biggest beluga research and conservation front. Georgia Aquarium partnered with Mote Marine laboratories to run two simultaneous programs, one on right whale conservation and one on manatee conservation. Georgia aquarium runs the largest dolphin conservation and rehabilitation program in the world.

The only marine mammals held by these non-profit zoological organizations are those deemed by experts as unable to survive in the wild.

Which happen to be any that were born in tiny pools huh? If they can't survive they'll get hungry and come back.

No, actually. The animals that fit into that category are taught to feed themselves and released into the wild.

It is more like having a chronic illness that requires medication three times a day or it will die, or a tail so mangled by poachers that the dolphin cannot swim well enough to hunt. How's about the ones who have a dental issue preventing the from eating anything but the mush prepared for them by their caretakers? Or the hundreds who are well beyond their wild life expectancy?

Instead, they serve as Ambassadors to raise awareness of the aquatic world, and to inspire awe, amazement, and foster a sense of connection with the public. The goal is to get people to care about these creatures and their habitat through "edutainment".

All so noble, do it with volunteers.

Almost ten thousand of them, between the different organizations involved, and I am one of them.


This type of caring and connection cannot be developed unless the people can actually see and interact with the animals themselves. This is why I support zoological organizations like the Georgia Aquarium.

I've been approached by wild dolphins and I was just taking a swim. No way I'll believe that it's impossible to interact with them unless they have no where else to go.

So cool! How about the belugas!? I bet you turned right around and got to enjoy an educational presentation on them, which finished just in time for you to walk up the beach and meet the penguins! But then you got distracted by the adorable antics of the sea otters. That would have been fun to watch, had you not needed to hurry and see the majestic manatee.

Oh right, 99.99% of the worlds population will never get the opportunity to travel and see these wonderful creatures in there natural habitat. I guess we can just knock on there door, show them a picture, and beg for a donation.


At 2/13/2014 10:51:45 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
I guess no one has a decent rebuttal?

The night is young ;)

I'm waiting.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
ADreamOfLiberty
Posts: 1,570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/14/2014 1:25:25 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/14/2014 12:57:56 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 2/13/2014 11:13:05 PM, ADreamOfLiberty wrote:
At 2/13/2014 4:05:44 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
The animals in Zoological establishments certified by the AZA are cared for by the best of experts in the field. There is no pampering or treat that is spared. If it a good for the animal. And they can do it, they will, even down to brushing their teeth.

A poor substitute for freedom.

Freedom in which they are subject to predation, starvation, disease, poaching, etc.

They can have both freedom and the protection of humans if you simply give them an open shunt to the sea. Or better yet build the facility on the water.

Good for them, why do they need to lock up dolphins to do that?

As I said before, the dolphins are adopted from a rehabilitation center after being declared unable to survive in the wild.

So you think they will just wander off and get themselves killed even though they know there are friends and food to be had? That doesn't sound like the same animals I've been fascinated with since a young age.

The only marine mammals held by these non-profit zoological organizations are those deemed by experts as unable to survive in the wild.

Which happen to be any that were born in tiny pools huh? If they can't survive they'll get hungry and come back.

No, actually. The animals that fit into that category are taught to feed themselves and released into the wild.

It is more like having a chronic illness that requires medication three times a day or it will die, or a tail so mangled by poachers that the dolphin cannot swim well enough to hunt. How's about the ones who have a dental issue preventing the from eating anything but the mush prepared for them by their caretakers?

In those cases I presume those animals will return (or not stray far at all) given the choice. It would then still be quite possible to allow people to interact with them. Indeed since they can't attach themselves to a wild family they will rely on humans and other animals at the facility for companionship. What is the problem with giving them the choice then?

Or the hundreds who are well beyond their wild life expectancy?

You know I heard that some of the reports on wild life expectancies were way off. Of wild orcas living for 80 years for instance. *smashes microphone in face* care to comment?

All so noble, do it with volunteers.

Almost ten thousand of them, between the different organizations involved, and I am one of them.

I meant the dolphins....

I've been approached by wild dolphins and I was just taking a swim. No way I'll believe that it's impossible to interact with them unless they have no where else to go.

So cool! How about the belugas!?

Uh, this was east coast US just a couple hundred yards off sure... so no.

I bet you turned right around and got to enjoy an educational presentation on them, which finished just in time for you to walk up the beach and meet the penguins!

You may have me confused with an antarctic alien with holographic technology?

But then you got distracted by the adorable antics of the sea otters. That would have been fun to watch, had you not needed to hurry and see the majestic manatee.

Ohhhh jeez that took me too long to get. You're saying it's better in an aquarium (or whatever you call those things). Sure maybe it's funner, but are you really saying that you couldn't convince dolphins to hang around voluntarily and do shows?

I know I would do pretty much anything for free fish :p

Oh right, 99.99% of the worlds population will never get the opportunity to travel and see these wonderful creatures in there natural habitat. I guess we can just knock on there door, show them a picture, and beg for a donation.

I must be in dolphin central then if I am part of the 0.01%

So you're saying you can't bring them inland with my constraint? Well maybe if you showed them that crane thing that is used to move them, and took them inland for a couple months and then took them back, and they choose to get in the harness again...
LOL, yeah, it's pretty amazing how they think they can "reason" with you. - Sidewalker, speaking of advocates for sexual deviancy.

So, my advice, Liberty, is to go somewhere else. Leave, and never come back. - YYW

And that's what I did. Contact me at http://www.edeb8.com... by the same user name if you have anything you'd like to say.
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/14/2014 11:03:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/14/2014 1:25:25 AM, ADreamOfLiberty wrote:
At 2/14/2014 12:57:56 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 2/13/2014 11:13:05 PM, ADreamOfLiberty wrote:
At 2/13/2014 4:05:44 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
The animals in Zoological establishments certified by the AZA are cared for by the best of experts in the field. There is no pampering or treat that is spared. If it a good for the animal. And they can do it, they will, even down to brushing their teeth.

A poor substitute for freedom.

Freedom in which they are subject to predation, starvation, disease, poaching, etc.

They can have both freedom and the protection of humans if you simply give them an open shunt to the sea. Or better yet build the facility on the water.

The rehab facilities are designed exactly that way, and one of the ones run by GAQ is actually fifty miles into the ocean, run off of boats.

It is only after they go through the program designed to release them into the wild, and it is determine that they are completely unable to survive in the wild, that they are sent to AZA certified aquariums.


Good for them, why do they need to lock up dolphins to do that?

As I said before, the dolphins are adopted from a rehabilitation center after being declared unable to survive in the wild.

So you think they will just wander off and get themselves killed even though they know there are friends and food to be had? That doesn't sound like the same animals I've been fascinated with since a young age.

Yes, they would! You may have been fascinated by them, but I doubt you study and train them for a living. What you need to realize is that the people who work with them in these organizations are doing it because they love the animals, probably much more than you do. Remember that most of them are volunteers, like myself, and the ones that do get paid, don't make much. We love them too, but our experience with them tells us that this is the best thing we can do with them.


The only marine mammals held by these non-profit zoological organizations are those deemed by experts as unable to survive in the wild.

Which happen to be any that were born in tiny pools huh? If they can't survive they'll get hungry and come back.

No, actually. The animals that fit into that category are taught to feed themselves and released into the wild.

It is more like having a chronic illness that requires medication three times a day or it will die, or a tail so mangled by poachers that the dolphin cannot swim well enough to hunt. How's about the ones who have a dental issue preventing the from eating anything but the mush prepared for them by their caretakers?

In those cases I presume those animals will return (or not stray far at all) given the choice. It would then still be quite possible to allow people to interact with them. Indeed since they can't attach themselves to a wild family they will rely on humans and other animals at the facility for companionship. What is the problem with giving them the choice then?

We do. We let them go, unless it is determined to be too dangerous for whatever reason. Usually it takes them returning to humans three times before they are considered unfit for life in the wild. This goes for all our marine mammals not just dolphins. Sea otters especially, the rehab program is designed to remove any association of humans with food or comfort, so that they don't try to come back. Sometimes it is just not okay to release them.


Or the hundreds who are well beyond their wild life expectancy?

You know I heard that some of the reports on wild life expectancies were way off. Of wild orcas living for 80 years for instance. *smashes microphone in face* care to comment?

Wild life expectancy is calculated by averages. Many organisms live beyond it, but more die young.

When I say that they are beyond their life expectancy, that is to say that they are old, and have health issues that would have killed them by now, had the lived in the wild.


All so noble, do it with volunteers.

Almost ten thousand of them, between the different organizations involved, and I am one of them.

I meant the dolphins....

And how do you mean?


I've been approached by wild dolphins and I was just taking a swim. No way I'll believe that it's impossible to interact with them unless they have no where else to go.

So cool! How about the belugas!?

Uh, this was east coast US just a couple hundred yards off sure... so no.

I bet you turned right around and got to enjoy an educational presentation on them, which finished just in time for you to walk up the beach and meet the penguins!

You may have me confused with an antarctic alien with holographic technology?

But then you got distracted by the adorable antics of the sea otters. That would have been fun to watch, had you not needed to hurry and see the majestic manatee.

Ohhhh jeez that took me too long to get. You're saying it's better in an aquarium (or whatever you call those things). Sure maybe it's funner, but are you really saying that you couldn't convince dolphins to hang around voluntarily and do shows?

I know I would do pretty much anything for free fish :p

That is our training method. They do what they are told, they get a treat. They are never punished for not following commands, they just miss out on the treat.


Oh right, 99.99% of the worlds population will never get the opportunity to travel and see these wonderful creatures in there natural habitat. I guess we can just knock on there door, show them a picture, and beg for a donation.

I must be in dolphin central then if I am part of the 0.01%

Possibly, I don't know where you live or what your financial situation is. Have you ever seen Sea otters playing in the wild? Or Belugas? Or manatees? Penguins? If you want to see these things you are forced to travel to all ends of the earth. 99.99% of, forget the worlds population, developed nations rather, will never have the opportunity to see any more than one of these animals in the wild.


So you're saying you can't bring them inland with my constraint? Well maybe if you showed them that crane thing that is used to move them, and took them inland for a couple months and then took them back, and they choose to get in the harness again...

Actually the swim into it voluntarily. The same crane used to move them is the one used in training exercises, veterinary examinations, and sometimes just a toy for them to play with.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
ADreamOfLiberty
Posts: 1,570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/14/2014 2:20:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/14/2014 11:03:30 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 2/14/2014 1:25:25 AM, ADreamOfLiberty wrote:
They can have both freedom and the protection of humans if you simply give them an open shunt to the sea. Or better yet build the facility on the water.

The rehab facilities are designed exactly that way, and one of the ones run by GAQ is actually fifty miles into the ocean, run off of boats.

It is only after they go through the program designed to release them into the wild, and it is determine that they are completely unable to survive in the wild, that they are sent to AZA certified aquariums.

So you're saying only those individuals who can leave those rehabilitation facilities, but choose to stay are moved inland?

So you think they will just wander off and get themselves killed even though they know there are friends and food to be had? That doesn't sound like the same animals I've been fascinated with since a young age.

Yes, they would! You may have been fascinated by them, but I doubt you study and train them for a living. What you need to realize is that the people who work with them in these organizations are doing it because they love the animals, probably much more than you do.

I don't know if you're aware of my 'crusade' here, but I can promise you that nobody objective takes "but I love them" as a valid excuse and I agree they shouldn't.

The morality of your interactions with animals must stand on it's own, your intent does not matter.

What I think I know about their behavior is this, they are higher mammals and as such have different personalities. There is no way any expert no matter how experienced can say that they will all do X or all do Y regardless of context.

If one of them is willing to leave and not come back, even to the point of starvation that is their right. If you are saying a significant number depart only to die shortly afterwards I would like some evidence of that. I suspect that people are evaluating their abilities in captivity and then not giving them the option to leave if they have doubts.

Remember that most of them are volunteers, like myself, and the ones that do get paid, don't make much. We love them too, but our experience with them tells us that this is the best thing we can do with them.

My philosophy tells me the best thing you can do for another being is almost always to respect their own opinions about what's best for them. Money is no issue, I am not one of those who believes it corrupts man's intentions.

In those cases I presume those animals will return (or not stray far at all) given the choice. It would then still be quite possible to allow people to interact with them. Indeed since they can't attach themselves to a wild family they will rely on humans and other animals at the facility for companionship. What is the problem with giving them the choice then?

We do. We let them go, unless it is determined to be too dangerous for whatever reason. Usually it takes them returning to humans three times before they are considered unfit for life in the wild. This goes for all our marine mammals not just dolphins. Sea otters especially, the rehab program is designed to remove any association of humans with food or comfort, so that they don't try to come back. Sometimes it is just not okay to release them.

Well that is better than I would have expected, I am obviously ignorant of the specifics of these operations and was thinking of places like sea world. So the door is left permanently open so to speak?

When I say that they are beyond their life expectancy, that is to say that they are old, and have health issues that would have killed them by now, had the lived in the wild.

What if they want to die in the wild?

Almost ten thousand of them, between the different organizations involved, and I am one of them.

I meant the dolphins....

And how do you mean?

I mean the dolphins are volunteers, and you know this because they can leave [permanently] but don't.

Ohhhh jeez that took me too long to get. You're saying it's better in an aquarium (or whatever you call those things). Sure maybe it's funner, but are you really saying that you couldn't convince dolphins to hang around voluntarily and do shows?

I know I would do pretty much anything for free fish :p

That is our training method. They do what they are told, they get a treat. They are never punished for not following commands, they just miss out on the treat.

I see no problem with that, now if you let them come and go as they please then everything is fine. They are like employees, fish for putting on a show. A consensual trade.

Oh right, 99.99% of the worlds population will never get the opportunity to travel and see these wonderful creatures in there natural habitat. I guess we can just knock on there door, show them a picture, and beg for a donation.

I must be in dolphin central then if I am part of the 0.01%

Possibly, I don't know where you live or what your financial situation is.

and I can't tell you, look I didn't point that out as a "everyone can be like me and live where I live and sail out for a while and go swimming and just happen to run into marine mammals" I was pointing out that marine mammals are not adverse to interacting with humans for pure curiosity. If that is the case then surely they could be convinced to do so for food and friendship.

Have you ever seen Sea otters playing in the wild? Or Belugas? Or manatees? Penguins?
No to all.

If you want to see these things you are forced to travel to all ends of the earth. 99.99% of, forget the worlds population, developed nations rather, will never have the opportunity to see any more than one of these animals in the wild.

Ceded, but that doesn't give you the right to kidnap them. I don't believe in a 'greater good.' There are real animals, individuals like you and I. You can't make up for violating their consent by making the lives of some other animals out there better.

So you're saying you can't bring them inland with my constraint? Well maybe if you showed them that crane thing that is used to move them, and took them inland for a couple months and then took them back, and they choose to get in the harness again...

Actually the swim into it voluntarily. The same crane used to move them is the one used in training exercises, veterinary examinations, and sometimes just a toy for them to play with.

Well then there is a problem, if the crane is associated with so many things you can't be sure they are saying 'yes' to going back inland. They could just be saying 'yes' to an exam.

Dolphins can recognize representative images right? Perhaps show them a photo or other depiction each time before using the crane?
LOL, yeah, it's pretty amazing how they think they can "reason" with you. - Sidewalker, speaking of advocates for sexual deviancy.

So, my advice, Liberty, is to go somewhere else. Leave, and never come back. - YYW

And that's what I did. Contact me at http://www.edeb8.com... by the same user name if you have anything you'd like to say.
nummi
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/14/2014 2:57:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/13/2014 4:09:50 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 2/13/2014 1:15:33 PM, nummi wrote:
I am an ardent supporter of keeping humans behind bars with no good reason. Anyone object? If yes then how do you regard other animals being kept behind bars, as they are in zoos, with no good reason?
A) we have good reason. See my explanation.
None of those were good reasons. Felt more like round talk without any true substance.
Why would animals need any of it? They would be much better off in their natural environments.

B) the marine mammals kept by AZA certified establishments are not kept "behind bars". They live in replicated habitats and live a far easier life then is at all possible in the wild.
Replicated is living behind bars. And those "replications" are nowhere near natural environments, not even remotely close.
It is not about having an easy life, it is about living right. Those animals are as good as some things, like toys. They are not regarded as living creatures, if they were they would not be kept barred in.
How would you like it if you were locked in a place that you could never leave, unless it was if someone paid for you or someone thought it would be nice for you to be somewhere else. Total lack of self-control over any part of your life. How would you like it? How would you like to be just a thing to be played with? You are an animal as well.

C) the only marine mammals kept by the organizations I mentioned have been declared unable to survive in the wild, and were adopted from rehabilitation centers who didn't have room to keep them permanently.
Unable to survive in the wild? Were their parents as well unable to survive in the wild? And theirs? And theirs? This is no excuse. It is wrong and completely lacks any truly useful purpose for anyone.
If some animals are too weak to survive on their own in the wild then those animals must die. This is basic evolution.
They are not some things you play with however you wish. And you must account for their incapability to comprehend everything as well as we do. They do not know, they cannot know, as we can and do. They are being abused.

Zoos and any places where animals are kept are abominable. Those places wouldn't exist if matters were right. Damn... so much would be different, better, if matters were right.
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/14/2014 3:11:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
The rehab facilities are designed exactly that way, and one of the ones run by GAQ is actually fifty miles into the ocean, run off of boats.

It is only after they go through the program designed to release them into the wild, and it is determine that they are completely unable to survive in the wild, that they are sent to AZA certified aquariums.

So you're saying only those individuals who can leave those rehabilitation facilities, but choose to stay are moved inland?

No, what I am saying is that if they are able to survive in the wild then they are put there and not givin the option of staying. If they will suffer and die in the wild, then they are instead sent to AZA certified organizations to serve as species ambassador.




Yes, they would! You may have been fascinated by them, but I doubt you study and train them for a living. What you need to realize is that the people who work with them in these organizations are doing it because they love the animals, probably much more than you do.

I don't know if you're aware of my 'crusade' here, but I can promise you that nobody objective takes "but I love them" as a valid excuse and I agree they shouldn't.

The morality of your interactions with animals must stand on it's own, your intent does not matter.

Then let us analyze the morality.


What I think I know about their behavior is this, they are higher mammals and as such have different personalities. There is no way any expert no matter how experienced can say that they will all do X or all do Y regardless of context.

Hence each individual has a caretaker that gets to know them as a separate individual, gets to know their needs, personality, behavior, habits, etc.
Each decision is made on a case to case basis.


If one of them is willing to leave and not come back, even to the point of starvation that is their right. If you are saying a significant number depart only to die shortly afterwards I would like some evidence of that. I suspect that people are evaluating their abilities in captivity and then not giving them the option to leave if they have doubts.

Here is where we disagree. If I know for a fact beyond any reasonable doubt that the individual will suffer and die in the wild, then we will not put it into that situation.


Remember that most of them are volunteers, like myself, and the ones that do get paid, don't make much. We love them too, but our experience with them tells us that this is the best thing we can do with them.

My philosophy tells me the best thing you can do for another being is almost always to respect their own opinions about what's best for them. Money is no issue, I am not one of those who believes it corrupts man's intentions.

I can understand that. We are able to tell when an individual is unhappy, and we fix it. If an individual is unhappy doing a show, we don't make them. If they are unhappy with the pod, then they are transferred to another one. There comfort and happiness is our first priority, the "edutainment" of the guests is completely secondary.




We do. We let them go, unless it is determined to be too dangerous for whatever reason. Usually it takes them returning to humans three times before they are considered unfit for life in the wild. This goes for all our marine mammals not just dolphins. Sea otters especially, the rehab program is designed to remove any association of humans with food or comfort, so that they don't try to come back. Sometimes it is just not okay to release them.

Well that is better than I would have expected, I am obviously ignorant of the specifics of these operations and was thinking of places like sea world. So the door is left permanently open so to speak?

I cannot speak for sea world, as they are not part of the Aquarium network. I do not know anything about how things are done there.

I don't understand what you mean by "left permanently open". What I am trying to say is that if it is possible to survive in the wild, they are put there. Only after an animal is determined unable to survive in the wild are they put into aquariums.


When I say that they are beyond their life expectancy, that is to say that they are old, and have health issues that would have killed them by now, had the lived in the wild.

What if they want to die in the wild?

Almost ten thousand of them, between the different organizations involved, and I am one of them.

I meant the dolphins....

And how do you mean?

I mean the dolphins are volunteers, and you know this because they can leave [permanently] but don't.

Ohhhh jeez that took me too long to get. You're saying it's better in an aquarium (or whatever you call those things). Sure maybe it's funner, but are you really saying that you couldn't convince dolphins to hang around voluntarily and do shows?

I know I would do pretty much anything for free fish :p

That is our training method. They do what they are told, they get a treat. They are never punished for not following commands, they just miss out on the treat.

I see no problem with that, now if you let them come and go as they please then everything is fine. They are like employees, fish for putting on a show. A consensual trade.

That is what it is. If they don't want to put on a show, we don't make them, and they just miss out on the fish. They are still fed their regular meals, just not the treats.



Oh right, 99.99% of the worlds population will never get the opportunity to travel and see these wonderful creatures in there natural habitat. I guess we can just knock on there door, show them a picture, and beg for a donation.

I must be in dolphin central then if I am part of the 0.01%

Possibly, I don't know where you live or what your financial situation is.

and I can't tell you, look I didn't point that out as a "everyone can be like me and live where I live and sail out for a while and go swimming and just happen to run into marine mammals" I was pointing out that marine mammals are not adverse to interacting with humans for pure curiosity. If that is the case then surely they could be convinced to do so for food and friendship.

Have you ever seen Sea otters playing in the wild? Or Belugas? Or manatees? Penguins?
No to all.

If you want to see these things you are forced to travel to all ends of the earth. 99.99% of, forget the worlds population, developed nations rather, will never have the opportunity to see any more than one of these animals in the wild.

Ceded, but that doesn't give you the right to kidnap them. I don't believe in a 'greater good.' There are real animals, individuals like you and I. You can't make up for violating their consent by making the lives of some other animals out there better.

We don't kidnap them. As I said, they are rescued from various things and put into rehab if necessary. Example: a dolphin is caught in a tuna net and her tail is severly injured. GAQ associates rescue the dolphin and bring it to a rehab center. The dolphin is cared for, treated, goes through physical therapy and training if necessary, then released back into the wild. If, however, the injury is too serious to fully heal, and she can no longer survive without human care, she is sent inland.


Well then there is a problem, if the crane is associated with so many things you can't be sure they are saying 'yes' to going back inland. They could just be saying 'yes' to an exam.

Dolphins can recognize representative images right? Perhaps show them a photo or other depiction each time before using the crane

We use sound signals to communicate what is about to happen and what they should do.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/14/2014 3:13:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/14/2014 2:57:00 PM, nummi wrote:
At 2/13/2014 4:09:50 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 2/13/2014 1:15:33 PM, nummi wrote:
I am an ardent supporter of keeping humans behind bars with no good reason. Anyone object? If yes then how do you regard other animals being kept behind bars, as they are in zoos, with no good reason?
A) we have good reason. See my explanation.
None of those were good reasons. Felt more like round talk without any true substance.
Why would animals need any of it? They would be much better off in their natural environments.

B) the marine mammals kept by AZA certified establishments are not kept "behind bars". They live in replicated habitats and live a far easier life then is at all possible in the wild.
Replicated is living behind bars. And those "replications" are nowhere near natural environments, not even remotely close.
It is not about having an easy life, it is about living right. Those animals are as good as some things, like toys. They are not regarded as living creatures, if they were they would not be kept barred in.
How would you like it if you were locked in a place that you could never leave, unless it was if someone paid for you or someone thought it would be nice for you to be somewhere else. Total lack of self-control over any part of your life. How would you like it? How would you like to be just a thing to be played with? You are an animal as well.

C) the only marine mammals kept by the organizations I mentioned have been declared unable to survive in the wild, and were adopted from rehabilitation centers who didn't have room to keep them permanently.
Unable to survive in the wild? Were their parents as well unable to survive in the wild? And theirs? And theirs? This is no excuse. It is wrong and completely lacks any truly useful purpose for anyone.
If some animals are too weak to survive on their own in the wild then those animals must die. This is basic evolution.
They are not some things you play with however you wish. And you must account for their incapability to comprehend everything as well as we do. They do not know, they cannot know, as we can and do. They are being abused.

Zoos and any places where animals are kept are abominable. Those places wouldn't exist if matters were right. Damn... so much would be different, better, if matters were right.

I have addressed each and every one of those contentions in this thread. Please read up, and get back to me with your thoughts.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
ADreamOfLiberty
Posts: 1,570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/14/2014 4:45:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/14/2014 2:57:00 PM, nummi wrote:
Zoos and any places where animals are kept are abominable. Those places wouldn't exist if matters were right. Damn... so much would be different, better, if matters were right.

Weren't you the guy who advocated that we stop eating plants and start eating just animals?

At 2/14/2014 3:11:02 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
No, what I am saying is that if they are able to survive in the wild then they are put there and not givin the option of staying. If they will suffer and die in the wild, then they are instead sent to AZA certified organizations to serve as species ambassador.

If they will suffer and die in the wild are they given the opportunity to go into the wild?

Hence each individual has a caretaker that gets to know them as a separate individual, gets to know their needs, personality, behavior, habits, etc.
Each decision is made on a case to case basis.

There is no need to guess at what they would want to do when you can just see what they do.

Here is where we disagree. If I know for a fact beyond any reasonable doubt that the individual will suffer and die in the wild, then we will not put it into that situation.

If he/she swims out on their own and does not return, they are putting themselves in that situation.

I can understand that. We are able to tell when an individual is unhappy, and we fix it.

I am not concerned with how they are treated while participating at these facilities, I'm sure it's humane. I am concerned about them not being given the choice (which could easily be offered to them) to not be at the facility at all (or not all the time).

I don't understand what you mean by "left permanently open".

A means by which the animal can at will leave the facility and progress by navigable waterways to the ocean.

What I am trying to say is that if it is possible to survive in the wild, they are put there. Only after an animal is determined unable to survive in the wild are they put into aquariums.

I find such a standard irrational. Some animals who can survive in the wild may wish to stay at the facility, they would be as good 'species ambassadors' as any. Some animals who cannot survive in the wild may well want to try, even to the point of death.

That is the rational standard if what the animal wants (their consent) is the paramount value.

That is what it is. If they don't want to put on a show, we don't make them, and they just miss out on the fish. They are still fed their regular meals, just not the treats.

What if they'd rather be exploring the sea floor than doing a show or sitting in a tank?

We don't kidnap them. As I said, they are rescued from various things and put into rehab if necessary. Example: a dolphin is caught in a tuna net and her tail is severly injured. GAQ associates rescue the dolphin and bring it to a rehab center. The dolphin is cared for, treated, goes through physical therapy and training if necessary, then released back into the wild. If, however, the injury is too serious to fully heal, and she can no longer survive without human care, she is sent inland.

If a hospital treats you, they have not kidnapped you. If they decide you can't get a job because your leg has been amputated and send you to a long term facility without your consent, then they've kidnapped you.

We use sound signals to communicate what is about to happen and what they should do.

Are you confirming that you have a signal for "going inland for a couple months, want to come?"
LOL, yeah, it's pretty amazing how they think they can "reason" with you. - Sidewalker, speaking of advocates for sexual deviancy.

So, my advice, Liberty, is to go somewhere else. Leave, and never come back. - YYW

And that's what I did. Contact me at http://www.edeb8.com... by the same user name if you have anything you'd like to say.
nummi
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2014 6:42:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/14/2014 3:13:08 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
I have addressed each and every one of those contentions in this thread. Please read up, and get back to me with your thoughts.
Addressed perhaps but given real answers to them? You have not.
I don't know if this is you trying to act like advocating a side you don't really like but you are doing it very very poorly either way.
nummi
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2014 6:46:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/14/2014 4:45:02 PM, ADreamOfLiberty wrote:
Weren't you the guy who advocated that we stop eating plants and start eating just animals?
You really should take another look at that "debate". (A hint why, I never said just animals.)
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2014 9:23:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/15/2014 6:46:54 AM, nummi wrote:
At 2/14/2014 4:45:02 PM, ADreamOfLiberty wrote:
Weren't you the guy who advocated that we stop eating plants and start eating just animals?
You really should take another look at that "debate". (A hint why, I never said just animals.)

No, only 90% of them.

If you don't like my explanation, then I am not interested in having a conversation with you. You have already demonstrated that that you lack the reasoning power of a three week old puppy.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
nummi
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2014 10:52:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/15/2014 9:23:54 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 2/15/2014 6:46:54 AM, nummi wrote:
At 2/14/2014 4:45:02 PM, ADreamOfLiberty wrote:
Weren't you the guy who advocated that we stop eating plants and start eating just animals?
You really should take another look at that "debate". (A hint why, I never said just animals.)
No, only 90% of them.
To you the same. You really should take another look at that "debate".

If you don't like my explanation, then I am not interested in having a conversation with you. You have already demonstrated that that you lack the reasoning power of a three week old puppy.
There's nothing to like about your explanations. They go against reality in so many ways.

Very astute perception - of course I lack the reasoning power of a three week old puppy! Because I'm not a three week old puppy! I'm a human.
Age has very little to do with mental maturity and comprehension skills, as so many have demonstrated, you included.
You have a lot to learn about reality. But first you must unlearn the crap you've filled your brain with.
ADreamOfLiberty
Posts: 1,570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2014 1:14:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/15/2014 10:52:43 AM, nummi wrote:
But first you must unlearn the crap you've filled your brain with.

You first?
LOL, yeah, it's pretty amazing how they think they can "reason" with you. - Sidewalker, speaking of advocates for sexual deviancy.

So, my advice, Liberty, is to go somewhere else. Leave, and never come back. - YYW

And that's what I did. Contact me at http://www.edeb8.com... by the same user name if you have anything you'd like to say.
nummi
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2014 2:42:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/15/2014 1:14:29 PM, ADreamOfLiberty wrote:
At 2/15/2014 10:52:43 AM, nummi wrote:
But first you must unlearn the crap you've filled your brain with.
You first?
No, there's extremely little, if at all, crap in my brain.
ADreamOfLiberty
Posts: 1,570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2014 3:32:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/15/2014 2:42:28 PM, nummi wrote:
At 2/15/2014 1:14:29 PM, ADreamOfLiberty wrote:
At 2/15/2014 10:52:43 AM, nummi wrote:
But first you must unlearn the crap you've filled your brain with.
You first?
No, there's extremely little, if at all, crap in my brain.

That's good, crap is disgusting. Why would anyone ever put it in their brain? It's not sanitary!
LOL, yeah, it's pretty amazing how they think they can "reason" with you. - Sidewalker, speaking of advocates for sexual deviancy.

So, my advice, Liberty, is to go somewhere else. Leave, and never come back. - YYW

And that's what I did. Contact me at http://www.edeb8.com... by the same user name if you have anything you'd like to say.
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2014 3:50:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/15/2014 2:42:28 PM, nummi wrote:
At 2/15/2014 1:14:29 PM, ADreamOfLiberty wrote:
At 2/15/2014 10:52:43 AM, nummi wrote:
But first you must unlearn the crap you've filled your brain with.
You first?
No, there's extremely little, if at all, crap in my brain.

This is why I despise talking to you. Not once have you ever presented evidence to back up I single goddam thing you have ever said, you insult the intelligence of anyone who dare ask for evidence, you demonize people who know what they are talking about, and the idea that you just might be wrong never even crosses your mind. You are so filthily arrogant that you truly act as if it is completely impossible that you don't know something. You are a despicable person.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
nummi
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2014 5:22:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/15/2014 3:50:33 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 2/15/2014 2:42:28 PM, nummi wrote:
At 2/15/2014 1:14:29 PM, ADreamOfLiberty wrote:
At 2/15/2014 10:52:43 AM, nummi wrote:
But first you must unlearn the crap you've filled your brain with.
You first?
No, there's extremely little, if at all, crap in my brain.

This is why I despise talking to you. Not once have you ever presented evidence to back up I single goddam thing you have ever said
So, you don't like going against qualities you yourself possess and exhibit.
My evidence is mostly simple objective logic. And I do tell people to think objectively, you've yet to do that in many regards.

, you insult the intelligence of anyone who dare ask for evidence
Only if they are wrong and have repeatedly ignored simple logic and even obvious evidence that is merely a glance away. What else is there left to do in the presence of such willful ignorance even you exhibit?

, you demonize people who know what they are talking about
Like who?
I demonize those who think and believe they know what they are talking about, but when looking objectively at reality and what they say, then those two are entirely different things. Those who think and believe they know what they are talking about but miss reality do not know what they are talking about.

and the idea that you just might be wrong never even crosses your mind.
It does. Always when I don't know. If I don't know for certain then I say so.

You are so filthily arrogant that you truly act as if it is completely impossible that you don't know something. You are a despicable person.
You might want to recheck arrogance from a dictionary...

No, I'm not despicable. But you most definitely are. You have a brain that bears a mind, thus, what the fvck is your problem with looking at reality objectively?? Too much grain in your brain blocking your view? (It actually can effect the mind like this.) This willful ignorance and utter stupidity you and many others exhibit does tend to piss off from time to time.
You have a lot to realize about the world you live in, and about yourself. But I suppose "conventional" ways have to fail first and you must suffer immensely to begin searching for real answers and thus seeing things clearly. You don't doubt as long as you feel "well" and are "comfortable". You don't even know who you are.

A question, about health. The avatar picture, is it a picture of you? If so then you are fat and that is a symptom of a false diet. You advocate a diet and lifestyle that makes you yourself sick physically and mentally! And you call me despicable and arrogant? You are so disgusting in every way.