WDC Blog - From the Front Line

The study of animal personalities is rapidly become one of the fastest growing areas of research in behavioural biology and ecology. The term ‘personality’, within this context, is used to describe significant behavioural and physiological differences between individuals of the same species, which are consistent over time in different contexts or situations. For field researchers, the personalities of their study subjects may have important implications for their results and thus for conservation efforts. For example, just as we humans may react differently in different situations, other species may exhibit differential responses or vulnerability to certain stressors in their environment or certain social situations.

Does this mean that for some populations we may eventually be able to identify and quantify personality characteristics, such as brave or committed, timid or resourceful? Perhaps. What will this mean for the way in which we define populations or sub-groups within those populations? How might this influence conservation and protection efforts? Only time will tell.

At present we are left watching, often in amazement, at some of the interesting events that unfold in the natural environment; where an individual from one species apparently adopts an individual from another, or comes to their aid. There’s been a variety of such awe inspiring whale and dolphin stories circulating over the last few months. It would be timely to reflect upon some of these tales and consider what personality traits might possibly be in play and how this may highlight the uniqueness of each of these individuals.

Many dolphin species live in complex social groups, some can innovate and then learn from each other. For example, there are some bottlenose dolphins in Western Australia that use sponges as tools to help them forage. Research shows that the female ‘spongers’ (as these tool-using dolphins are known) tend to be more ‘cliquish’ and preferentially associate with other dolphins that ‘sponge' suggesting that, like humans, these female dolphins prefer to associate with those individuals who share their sub-culture (in this case, the use of sponges as tools).

Let’s consider just a few of the recent stories in the media, which help to give us some other rare glimpses into the private lives of dolphins and whales.

Common dolphins come to the aid of another group member
In a compelling account from Korean waters, a group of five common dolphins were recorded using their bodies as a raft to try to keep another stricken dolphin afloat. A full account of the event is available in the journal Marine Mammal Science. There have been a number of recorded incidents of dolphins supporting dead or stillborn calves near the surface using their bodies. This is not unexpected, as air breathing mammals, once a calf is born the mother must ensure the youngster reaches the surface swiftly enough for his or her first gasp of air. However, cases where females have been recorded supporting the bodies of their dead calves, sometimes for many days after the calf has died, also raise speculation about these individuals exhibiting grief.

What is unusual about the story from Korea is the collective and coordinated effort of these dolphins (reported up to 10) to keep their companion afloat. The researchers reported that the dolphins appeared to take on different roles, with some attempting to keep the stricken individual afloat, whilst others circled around, perhaps providing protection. They note that five dolphins at a time lined up to form a raft to support the ailing dolphin, whilst another used their mouth to keep the dolphin’s head (and blowhole) above the water.

Stricken dolphin calmly permits help from a diver
In an equally amazing story an entangled dolphin allowed a scuba-diver to delicately cut away the fishing line from his or her pectoral fin and mouth. This video footage is so compelling that it quickly became international news. Perhaps the most remarkable part of this entire event is the point at which the dolphin leaves the diver to surface for air and then returns so that the diver can continue to cut away and remove the fishing line.

Sperm whales and a dolphin with a deformed spine
Another incredible story, again between species, details how a bottlenose dolphin, born with a severe spinal curvature, was apparently ‘adopted’ (at least in the short-term) by a group of sperm whales. The researchers note that the dolphin was observed for eight days interacting with the whales. It is difficult to determine the motivations on either side for such behaviour, nevertheless this is a fascinating account of unusual inter-species interaction.

Dolphins call each other by name?
And finally, if any reconfirmation of the importance of social bonds between dolphins were needed, the results of some interesting research on dolphin signature whistles, demonstrates that dolphins actually copy the signature whistles of other dolphins when separated from them. This research concludes that: ‘This use of vocal copying is similar to its use in human language, where the maintenance of social bonds appears to be more important than the immediate defence of resources’.

Why do scientific reports AND anecdotal accounts matter?
Scientific research helps us to understand the complexity of the world around us. Anecdotal reports can give some good clues about which scientific questions we should be asking. Personal, individual accounts, such as some of those described here, enable us to opens our minds about the way in which whales and dolphins may live; how they interact with each other and their environments. Some of these compelling stories inevitably challenge us to consider whales and dolphins as ‘who’ not ‘what’, with individual personalities, capable of experiencing a range of emotions.

In stark contrast, the shocking analysis of the brutal killing method being used to kill dolphins caught in the Japanese drive hunts in Taiji, challenge us to reject these hunts, not only on the basis of the insurmountable animal welfare issues, but also on the basis that these are all unique individuals, each contributing in their own distinctive ways to their complex communities.

Beyond our initial reactions to the horror depicted in the footage from the dolphin hunts in Taiji and elsewhere, it is important to consider the true nature of dolphins to better understand the extent of the atrocities being committed.

I wonder what the unique personality traits of the dolphin killed in this footage might have been, or whether they had a unique name within their social group. One thing is certain, for that individual, we will never know.

If you haven’t done so already, please sign our petition.

One might think it is a scene from a horror movie.  Rather, it is video taken from Taiji, Japan depicting the almost unspeakable acts that occur beneath the tarpaulins from September through April each year in the dolphin drive hunts there. A recently published clinical analysis of the killing methods utilized in these hunts reveals their extreme cruelty.

Anyone familiar with the old Quaker philosophy of ‘bearing witness’ will know that it is often embraced by advocates and other humanitarians working to expose and rectify injustices through personal testimony and presence on the ground where atrocities are occurring.  Fundamental to this philosophy is the cultivation of personal integrity and faith by speaking the truth, even when it is difficult; taking responsibility for one’s actions and consequences; and confronting others who are committing wrong or unjust acts.

Here, bearing witness takes on new meaning as the intimate details of the actual killing procedures utilized by the fishermen have come to light in a recently published clinical analysis of the methods in the Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science (JAAWS) and through the video documentation of the hunts, forcing us all to confront this unnecessary cruelty.  The public is now exposed to a close-up view and detailed understanding of the trauma experienced by the dolphins in their last moments, and having already endured the arduous process of round-up and confinement in the killing cove.

With gratitude to Atlanticblue.de for providing the video footage, and utilizing the expertise of veterinarian Andy Butterworth and dolphin scientist Dr. Diana Reiss, we have been able to challenge the data collected by Japanese researchers that suggests the methods being utilized are humane and result in a swift death.  This analysis and video has pulled back the curtain and given us an unfortunate front-row seat to the killing. The analysis and video provides the world with a better opportunity to see what is happening underneath the tarpaulins in Taiji, and to better understand the extreme suffering that is occurring during these hunts.  These abhorrent procedures were tested on a variety of species, and deployed as the primary method of killing dolphins in the drive hunts. The original data can be found posted on the Taiji fishing Cooperative’s very own website.



I was in Taiji in 2006, alongside Hardy Jones and Ric O’Barry. At that time, the fishermen were just starting to use tarpaulins to shield the view of the shoreline in the killing cove, and would even wait to slaughter the dolphins until we (the witnesses) left town. There have been some changes since then, including this newer slaughter method that was introduced more fully in 2008, as well as new structures along the rocky shoreline to prevent frantic dolphins from bashing themselves against the rocks (as if this is any more horrible than the fate which awaits them), coast guard surveillance of the hunts, and even discussion of a proposed whale farm that might hold whales and dolphins for the public’s amusement and ‘education’ and to line the town’s coffers with yet another form of dolphin exploitation.  Public awareness has also increased, with annual pilgrimages to Taiji being undertaken by citizens from every walk of life, many of whom saw the documentary The Cove and find travel to Taiji where they can bear witness to the hunts is the most tangible thing they might do to confront them. Even more promising, citizens within Japan are also becoming involved by launching peaceful walks and protests against the hunts. Surveillance by Cove Guardians provides daily video feeds of the hunts as they occur in real time and as the season unfolds. And more dolphins are being taken into captivity from the hunts than ever before.

But what hasn’t changed is the desire of the fishermen to keep the activities in the cove hidden from public view.  If culture and tradition, why such secrecy and shame? Albert Schweitzer, in a call to unveil the cruel activities in the name of tradition everywhere, stated “The thinking (person) must oppose all cruel customs, no matter how deeply rooted in tradition and surrounded by a halo. When we have a choice, we must avoid bringing torment and injury into the life of another.” What is deplorable is the disparity between how dolphins and other animals are treated, even within Japan.   The current techniques employed in the drive hunts violate even current animal welfare regulations within Japan where domesticated animals are afforded protection under their equivalent of the Animal Welfare Act. These guidelines intended to minimize pain, suffering, fear, and “agony” are outlined for species such as horses, cattle, sheep, pigs, dogs, and other animals under human care or management.  Dolphins and whales are not protected by this law, nor are they afforded protection under the wildlife protection and hunting laws. Instead, dolphins and whales fall under the jurisdiction of the Fisheries Agency under the Department of Agriculture, which affords them little protection.  This is in sharp contrast to the protection for dolphins and whales in legislation in other parts of the world where the slaughter of whales and dolphin is strictly prohibited and even their harassment incurs penalties.

Even Japan’s stranding guidelines, issued by the very same agency (Japan Fisheries Agency) responsible for issuing quotas for the dolphin hunts across Japan, cite the necessity of involving a veterinarian in the humane euthanasia or slaughter of a stranded dolphin, and only under extreme circumstances where the individual animal is not likely to survive.  Here, the stranding manual suggests that the spinal incision method, similar to killing method in the drive hunts (without the utilization of the wooden plug), ‘gives psychological damage to observers’ and that spectators should be eliminated from the site, and drugs used instead to “execute” small cetaceans such as dolphins.  In the drive hunts, dozens are killed at a time, dragged to the shoreline by their tailstocks after an exhausting round up at sea.  Under many commercial slaughter regulations, and even compassionate euthanasia standards, it is required that animals should not be in close proximity when killed to avoid the distress associated with the sight, sounds, and smells of slaughter. For example, in the US and UK, the regulations and guidelines governing the humane treatment and slaughter of animals prohibit the killing of an animal in the presence of other animals. From a scientific, humane, and ethical perspective, the treatment of dolphins in these drive hunts sharply contradict current animal welfare standards employed in most modern and technologically advanced societies.



And who is complicit in supporting this horrible slaughter?  Beyond the whaling politics of Japan, we are faced with a harsh reality that implicates many in the cycle of violence at Taiji. The airlines that continue to carry dolphins from the drive hunts within Japan and to international destinations around the globe support a deadly international trade in dolphins that fuels these devastating hunts. The captive facilities that continue to acquire dolphins from the drive hunts sustain this cruel practice.  So, too, the patrons who vi sit captive facilities that either acquire dolphins directly from the hunts, or whose programs support the continuation of captivity worldwide, are ultimately complicit. And any of us that continue to remain silent in the face of such horror and yet choose not to act or deny the obligation that comes with bearing witness to a wrong that needs to be made right.

“Think occasionally of the suffering of which you spare yourself the sight”--Albert Schweitzer. WDC continues its call for an end to the drive hunts on welfare grounds alone.  In the end, it is not just about the metal rod and dowel, it is about the entire process of the hunts which is inhumane and that involves extreme suffering.  The stress and acute trauma that is experienced by the dolphins as they are rounded-up at sea, driven miles by speedboat into a tiny cove, and the panic that ensues as they are then dragged to shore, is all part of the killing process. The bottom line is that these hunts are both unethical, and unnecessary.

Find out how you can help our campaign to end these hunts.

Never underestimate the efforts of a single individual, or a small group of committed individuals, especially in this day and age of electronic media. Shona Lewendon’s recent efforts to mobilize the international community to press the issue of the dolphin slaughters in Japan as Tokyo seeks a bid for the 2020 Summer Olympics have been met with a crescendo of international support.  Labeled the Global Taiji Action Day, or Olympic Challenge, Shona’s enthusiasm and networking efforts have spawned over 42 local and coordinated demonstrations to occur on February 22nd in more than 21 countries.  Currently, Shona’s petition to the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has received over 250,000 signatures and continues to grow. WDC support’s Shona’s approach in encouraging the IOC to consider the brutal dolphin drive hunts in its forthcoming meetings to discuss Tokyo’s bid for the Olympic games, and believes this form of political leveraging is critical to raise this issue with the highest levels of international diplomacy.

And this approach is not only strategic from an international relations perspective, but is guided by the Olympic Charter itself.  The guiding and binding principles of the official Olympic Charter and bylaws, meant to govern not only the International Olympic Committee (IOC), but also the national Olympic Committees (such as the Japan Olympic Committee-JOC), govern the organization, action and operation of the Olympic Movement and sets forth the conditions for the celebration of the Olympic Games. It is the constitution for the IOC and other Olympic committees.  Within this charter is specific language relating to the IOC’s roles and responsibility regarding the environment, mandating the IOC to “encourage and support a responsible concern for environmental issues.”  In this regard, the IOC and JOC are obligated to address this very significant environmental issue of the dolphin drive and other hunts that occur around Japan’s coastline and that have become the focus of international concern and local conflict on the ground in Taiji, just 160 miles from Tokyo.

As a candidate city for the 2020 summer games, Tokyo should be prepared to address the international concern surrounding the annual dolphin hunts that occur in its waters, where up to 20,000 small whales and dolphins are permitted to be slaughtered each year through a variety of methods.  Decades-long condemnation of the dolphin drive hunts that occur primarily in Taiji in Wakayama Prefecture has undergone a resurgence of interest as the issue moved to the big screen with the release of the Academy-award winning documentary, The Cove, in 2009. WDC has been involved in actively opposing the dolphin drive hunts for nearly two decades and has been working on a number of levels to nurture lasting change within the hearts and minds of those within Japan and elsewhere that are opposed to the hunts.

More importantly, as symbolized by the Olympic Games themselves, cooperation and collaboration in addressing controversy on the international stage is necessary and possible.  With continuing strife, stalemate,  and growing tensions on the ground in Taiji, international activists continue to affirm their commitment to bearing witness to these brutal hunts through their occupation of this coastal village.  At the same time, the central Government of Japan continues to ignore the growing international debacle at its doorstep through its persistent flouting of not only international conventions and global environmental treaties addressing its whaling activities, but its spurning of world opinion in an attempt to maintain its political leveraging over matters involving the utilization of global fisheries and other natural resources.  As the Government of Japan continues to cling to an outdated practice that most of the civilized world, and most likely a majority of its citizenry, finds appalling and that brings unnecessary shame to an entire country, the need for international diplomacy is ever-present, providing the Olympic Committee with an opportunity to engage in peaceful and balanced dialogue on this issue.

WDC took a similar tack in leveraging the power and influence of the Olympic Committee by engaging with the UK Olympic Committee regarding any potential sourcing of Icelandic fish products from the HB Grandi company (or its UK distributors)  as this company has proven links to whaling in Iceland.  Through our constructive dialogue with the organizing Committee, and their mandate to comply with the spirit and intent of the Charter regarding environmental responsibility,  the London 2012 committee  agreed to conduct an internal audit of their fish supplies for the Games (all fish intended for athletes, staff or the public). This audit confirmed that the Games were indeed ‘Grandi-free’ and therefore clear of links to Icelandic whaling.

If Japan wishes to be seen as a responsible global leader, and a welcomed host for an event such as the Olympics, then it must look closer to home and end this archaic practice. Shona’s efforts help to highlight the conflict that the Japanese Government faces in trying to divorce itself from the brutality of the dolphin hunts and its industrial whaling policy while projecting its global credentials as a potential host. This approach challenges the issue of global governance and the IOC’s mandate for environmental responsibility opens the door.

Another swim-with-the-dolphin facility has been proposed in the Caribbean.  WDC is no stranger to the seemingly perpetual proposals from existing facilities to either expand their dolphin programs in their current locations, or extend them to other islands, such as what Dolphin Cove Jamaica is attempting to do on the Turks and Caicos Islands. A swim-with dolphin program has been proposed at Coral World Ocean Park on St. Thomas, USVI, using all of the traditional arguments that such a program is necessary to enhance both education and tourism. Although these are usually the two primary justifications for siting a dolphin program in the Caribbean, or anywhere for that matter, we encourage the authorities to consider whether these programs are harmful not only for the dolphins involved in these programs, but the people of St. Thomas and all that travel there.

It is no secret that many of us want to be close to dolphins. The honest truth is that most of us want to be close, sometimes without thinking about the costs to the animals involved, the environment, or personal safety.  In fact, I believe captive facilities have catered to and exploited our love for these animals by packaging an experience that appears to be made from heaven—an opportunity to get up close and personal with these animals in what appears to be a controlled setting and where the animals choose freely to engage in a relationship with us. However, nothing could be further from the truth. The project’s champions state that only captive-borne dolphins will be utilized, assuming that these statements will be enough to preempt the community’s concern that dolphins will be captured from the wild to stock the facility, or from the dolphin drive hunts in Taiji, Japan.

Unfortunately, facilities that promote dolphin swim-with programs suggest that the interactions between humans and dolphins are reciprocal—that dolphins seek out these interactions through their own will and desire. Rather, these dolphins are motivated by food in a severely restricted environment, not by a reciprocal desire to be near us. No matter how we might justify these attractions, whether through a veneer of education, or with the hope of attracting tourist revenue and bolstering the local economy, these programs are self-serving prisons for a species that naturally roams hundreds of miles a day, and should never be forced to seek an encounter with us except on its own terms. These programs are nothing more than our entertainment and amusement, at the dolphins’ expense, no matter where these animals come from, and regardless of the facts put forward by Coral World.

Furthermore, dolphin swim-with programs are not all rosy for human participants, either:  injuries occur frequently, and can be serious. An unsuspecting public is not ready for a dolphin that becomes aggressive and either bites, rams or pushes them underwater. These incidents are too numerous to count, but more recently a Swedish tourist was injured near Cancun, Mexico in Isla Mujeres and has vowed never to swim with dolphins again. One high profile incident that was profiled in the media occurred in 2002 where ‘Inside Edition’ journalist Nancy Glass was severely and permanently injured by 500-pound dolphin that fell upon her during a swim-with encounter in the Bahamas.

Furthermore, Coral World’s insistence that it will only utilize captive-born dolphins in its programs should be questioned. We have seen other swim-with facilities within the Caribbean struggle to find captive-born dolphins for their programs, and have resorted to taking them from the wild, primarily from Cuba.  I am certain that although Coral World claims that it will bring in only captive-born animals to its proposed facility, it may indeed end up sourcing these animals from the wild now, or in the future when its dolphins die and need to be replaced.

Whether they take them from the wild or not, Coral World and other swim-with facilities sustain an international trade in dolphins as they perpetuate the very demand for these interaction programs that instigates captures from the wild and transport throughout the Caribbean, and elsewhere.The dolphin trade is indeed lucrative, but many Islands throughout the Caribbean have refused to implement dolphin programs, including Antigua (who had even once proposed capturing dolphins in their waters), Dominica, St. Maarten, and Costa Rica. Others have banned additional imports or exports of dolphins and other marine mammals, including Mexico.

Furthermore, captive dolphin tourism is being questioned and the cruise industry has shown signs of change. More enlightened cruise lines are turning away from promoting swim-with and other captive programs to their patrons.  Recently, Carnival UK noted its change of policy in promoting swim-with activities at ports of call by announcing in their 2010 Sustainability Report that as part of their green initiatives and as a reflection of their commitment to the environment, they have elected not to operate tours which involve interaction with captive dolphins. They join Regent Seven Seas, formerly Radisson Cruise Lines, who made the same decision in 2005 when they took a stand against the capture and exploitation of dolphins by announcing that they would be dropping all swim-with excursions from their rosters.

Inconceivably, many swim-with facilities are located on or near the coast, oftentimes just yards away from where these animals swim free within their family groups. I think Coral World underestimates the concerns of a public that is keen to choose environmentally-responsible activities, and contribute to the welfare and sustainability of both the local environment and a species better left and seen in the wild.There certainly are better alternatives that Coral World could pursue that don’t contribute to the destruction of the marine environment and its amazing inhabitants, and perpetuate a more compassionate ethic that isn’t reliant upon the imprisonment of another sentient species.

As some of you know we are about to move to a new website. We believe that its going to be easier to find the information you want and we hope that its going to be much easier to follow what WDCS is doing on any one campaign.

With that in mind I thought I would publish a copy of the letter we have just sent to the Japanese Embassy in the UK. Its similar to letters we are sending to other embassies around the world, but we thought you may want to see what we are saying and maybe you would like to do something similar. Of course letters alone can not solve this issue, but we know that the various embassies do note the number of letters they get and what is being said.

When they don't get anything, they tend to assume the issue is no longer of concern. So if you get a chance, please let Japan know how you feel.

And as to what you feel, well, I hope like us, you feel that this is an unnecessary and extremely cruel practice. I am pretty tired of the Japanese whalers rhetoric and personally would say that they cannot continue hide behind statements about 'tradition' and 'culture' and, Japan, as part of the global commons, can no longer pretend that whales and dolphins are not like other animals and therefore are to be treated as nothing but 'unfeeling property'. Time for Japan to change, and sooner rather than later.

Ambassador Keiichi Hayashi
Embassy of Japan
101-104 Piccadilly
London W1J 7JT

via E-mail: ma@fpcjpn.or.jp or info@ld.mofa.go.jp

August 29, 2012

Dear Ambassador Hayashi:

I write on behalf of WDCS, the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society, to express our opposition to the dolphin drive hunts that occur annually in the town of Taiji in Wakayama Prefecture.  WDCS will be among those protesting in front of the Embassy on Friday, August 31st because of the ongoing slaughter of dolphins, small whales and porpoises by Japanese fishermen. Similar demonstrations are taking place outside Japanese embassies and consulates around the world in protest of these cruel and unsustainable hunts.

Dolphin drive hunts, also known as “drive fisheries,” occur annually from September through April in the coastal towns of Taiji and Futo. During these hunts, dolphins are encircled by motorboats out at sea and chased into shallow coastal waters where they are trapped with nets. The dolphins are then killed or trapped alive to be sold into captivity. Every aspect of this hunt is extremely cruel: from the exhausting drive from the open ocean that can separate family groups, to confinement in a netted cove where the dolphins are crudely slaughtered. Whether they are killed for their meat, or because they are considered pests in competition for fishery resources, these highly sentient mammals face severe distress, suffering and pain. The dolphins selected alive for sale to aquaria are subjected to an impoverished life in captivity. Many die of stress and injury during, and immediately after, capture and transport to these facilities in Japan and overseas.

More than 2,000 dolphins and small whales may be killed annually in Japan’s drive hunts, including bottlenose, Risso’s, striped and spotted dolphins, and pilot and false killer whales. Up to 20,000 small whales and dolphins may be taken in other hunts along the coastline of Japan, including more than 17,000 Dall’s porpoises taken in northern Hokkaido.

Despite these hunts being the subject of the award-winning documentary, The Cove, which has brought worldwide condemnation of these activities, many Japanese people are unaware that these hunts occur in their country. Additionally, despite growing evidence that the dolphin meat from these hunts is heavily tainted with dangerous levels of mercury and poses a potential threat to human health, the contaminated meat is sold in Japanese supermarkets.

As you are aware, whale and dolphin watching is steadily growing in Japan, along with a growing respect and care for marine life. Wildlife watching is not only a popular activity for locals and tourists alike, but is also a financially viable alternative to killing or capturing dolphins for entertainment. Drive hunts are a direct threat to the valuable whale and dolphin watching industry.

WDCS strongly opposes these drive hunts on both welfare and conservation grounds. We urge you to act now and to heed the voices of the global community opposed to the unsustainable slaughter of entire families and communities of whales and dolphins. Please end the dolphin drive hunts now.

Sincere regards,

Courtney S. Vail
Campaigns and Programs Manager

It is no secret that many of us want to be close to whales and dolphins. The honest truth is that most of us want to be close, sometimes at any cost. Until we know the truth, we might even feel entitled to it. We have a natural affinity for these animals that extends back centuries into the cultural heritage of our modern civilizations, and it is undeniable. Past public opinion polls have recognized this desire, including a fairly recent BBC poll identifying the number one activity that people wanted to do before they died: swim with dolphins. Captive facilities have catered to and exploited our love for these animals by packaging an experience that appears to be made from heaven—an opportunity to get up close and personal with these animals in a blatantly unnatural, but seemingly attractive and controlled, setting. As a society, we have been seduced by the lights, the shows, the spectacular tricks, and the glamorous and intimate relationships between whales and humans that are manufactured for our consumption.

Now, the Alliance of Marine Mammal Parks and Aquaria have released a new Harris Poll that indicates the public endorses captive facilities, and believes them to be more educational than even the classroom. And it also seems to support the BBC poll’s conclusions that swimming with dolphins is high on the public’s list of things to do. However, the poll leaves out a lot of important points, and is merely reflective of a public that only knows one side of the story. The poll asks no questions about seeing marine mammals in the wild, or questions that might suggest there are other ways to learn about and experience marine mammals outside the confines of a facility. Many of the questions are leading or flawed in producing a predetermined positive conclusion that captivity is the best or only way to appreciate marine mammals and learn about them. The poll’s first question leads the responder to necessarily support captivity because it suggests that this might be the only way a child might see them in his or her lifetime (“aquariums are important because children might not get to see them in the wild”). More realistically, if the public can afford travel to SeaWorld or most other aquaria, they have traveled far enough to see these animals in the wild. Many of these facilities are located on or near the coast, oftentimes just yards away from where these animals swim free within their family groups. Furthermore, ‘seeing’ these animals in person is certainly not a prerequisite for loving them or being concerned about their wellbeing and protection.

And missing are the questions regarding the unspoken conflict between what is best for us, and what is best for them. These misleading figures reflect the responses of a propagandized and programmed public, spoon-fed from birth that it is acceptable and ‘normal’ to see these animals confined in a zoo or aquarium. We have been pre-programmed to believe that it is natural to seek entertainment and an escape to a place where these animals are accessible and willing to interact with us, and where we have been told they are happy, content, and even better off than if they were in the wild. We are so accustomed to these messages generated by SeaWorld and other marine parks’ public relations machines that our perceptions and beliefs have been shaped without our active participation. The seduction even greets us at the airport baggage claim of many major tourist destinations through attractive advertisements for captive facilities where you can swim with the dolphins. Through no fault of its own, the public has been denied the truth and has been swayed by the alluring messages of a multi-billion dollar commercial enterprise capitalizing on our love for these animals.

My four plus decades of life have provided me an opportunity to not only walk the varied paths of a dolphin lover and advocate, but to encounter many others along the way that have shared stories about their affinity for these animals, their feelings about captivity, and the rationalized choices that they make for themselves and their families. Growing up, I was lured and drawn in, like many, by the opportunity of SeaWorld, a logical destination for many families in the United States. It was here that I met my first dolphins ‘in the flesh’ at the petting pool at SeaWorld California when I was just eight years old. I left there wanting to be a trainer, believing this would be the best way to get close to these animals. But the catch is that I loved these animals before I ever set foot in SeaWorld. Through a lifetime of encountering these animals in the wild, education and an inborn passion to seek out what is best for these animals, I quickly abandoned my support of what I now see as selfish and indulgent entertainment. Now, I work to shut down those very same pools where I first encountered dolphins in person. Is this a natural progression for most people who encounter whales and dolphins in captivity? If people are given the truth about captivity, will they make the right choice--a choice in the best interest of dolphins?

Although I have come to know the backstory of captivity over time and work to expose and share it, the truth is that I was always conflicted. Long before I witnessed the drive hunts in Taiji, exposed the conditions at the dolphin petting pools, or reeled with the news of Alexis Martinez and Dawn Brancheau’s deaths, I knew there was something not quite right about SeaWorld and the stories they, and other captive facilities, told. With new truths about captivity surfacing daily, I am not the only one that feels this way. Truths of sordid dealings, brutal captures, and the incredibly deprived lives of the perpetually medicated and stressed animals are starting to sink in. However, it is the demand of the ticket counter that has facilities laboring to stock their pools and continue the revolving door of death.

After trainers Dawn Brancheau and Alexis Martinez's deaths, and a quick succession of orca deaths in several SeaWorld facilities, a congressional hearing investigated the educational value of captivity. At that hearing, then-representative Carol Shea-Porter indicated she needed help and more information to make sense of her personal conflict between what captive facilities claim to offer, and her sense of discomfort in seeing whales and dolphins in captivity. Former SeaWorld trainers have also stepped forward with their clarion call to expose the truths behind captivity and reveal their change of heart. And I think that if you search the hearts of most people, you will find a conflict between a self-interested desire to be close to these animals and the discomfort in witnessing these magnificent creatures torn from the wild ocean for our entertainment.

A few facilities are already turning away from traditional whale and dolphins shows, and questioning the sourcing of these animals from the wild. We applaud their movement in a positive direction, and encourage them to continue to phase out their collection of captive whales and dolphins.

It is time to get honest about captivity, and what motivates us. I believe those who attend these marine parks, spending almost any amount of money to flock to SeaWorld on family vacations, do so because they love these animals and because they do not know any other story. In other words, the public goes to marine parks because they love these animals; they do not love these animals because of marine parks. They go because they believe in what they have been told. The public does not know the story behind the individual lives in those barren and shallow aquamarine pools, and more importantly, many may not want to. But once you do know the story, it is hard to turn back, and to see these shows for other than what they really are. You don’t have to dig very deep, I promise. As modern day circuses have fallen out of favor, so too shall marine parks that rely upon the confinement of whales and dolphins for their profits.  But there is another story, and there will be many more that will continue to reveal the real truth and face of captivity—a truth that will help to reconcile that personal discomfort and conflict that so many have shared with me when they speak of captivity.

It comes down to one simple choice to set you, and eventually the dolphins, free:  Don't buy a ticket.  We go to these parks like SeaWorld because we love the animals, but it is the very same reason why we shouldn't.  It is time that we embrace the truth, and the conflict, and question our culture of captivity.  And with time, I believe those public opinion polls will reflect a different set of beliefs--one that finds the imprisonment of beings so very much like our own an abhorrent and archaic trend of the past.

It really is a very simple step to resolve the conflict between our self-interested love for dolphins, and the love and appreciation that is in their best interest.  It truly isn't counterculture or heretical to question SeaWorld, or the 'state of the art' Georgia Aquarium, or any of the other captive facilities that thrive on tourist dollars, however sacrilegious it might seem for those of us that have grown up with it.

Whilst not banning outright the consumption of whale meat and products in the Faroe Islands where the health risks to children have been clearly demonstrated, it seems the Danish Government are happy to ban Marmite and Farley's rusks. Or so it seemed a few days ago.

Further to an outcry from marmite lovers, the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs has stated, 'Neither Marmite nor Vegemite and similar products have been banned by
the Danish Food And Veterinary Administration. However, fortified foods
with added vitamins, minerals or other substances can not be marketed in
Denmark unless approved by Danish food authorities.'

Now I have to declare an interest as I was brought on both products and have been known to even mix the two. And anyone pretending to be squeamish about Farley's rusks should quietly try one again. They were nutritious and delicious.

Seriously though, as the Danish authorities seek to guarantee the safety of foods in Denmark this contrasts with their abject failure to address the pollution of their own citizens in the Faroe Islands - one must ask whether we are seeing some political hypocrisy in action here?

Denmark has taken some excellent steps in banning pollutants from entering the marine environment, so come on now, go the next step and help stop unnecessary whaling once and for all.

My thanks to discussions on Facebook for highlighting the Danish Ministry statement.

Taiji Update And the Oscar goes to THE COVE, one year later
 

(07.03.2010) What had happened since then? One year ago, on the 7th of march 2010, THE COVE won the Academy Award as the best documentary.  Previous to that evening, the movie, revealing in a relentless and exciting way the Japanese dolphin hunt, won every award you can achieve with a documentary during film festivals.

But in Japan, the movie couldn't achieve much approval. The Japanese press criticized the movie itself and the fact that it achieved an Academy Award. The film distributors who released THE COVE in Japanese cinemas were attacked by ultra-nationalists as were the cinemas who wanted to show the film. As a result, many of them decided not to show it.

These results were not expected by the nationalists and things went quiet about the movie and it literally disappeared from the screens. However, the noise made by ultra-nationalists on the streets of Tokyo unleashed a debate about the freedom of press and opinion in Japan, which is in a bad shape. More and more citizens of Japan are taking notice of major corporations and bribed members of the parliament enslaving publishers and dictating which media has to publish and in which way. And more and more the citizens of Japan they want to conceive an opinion of their own. Therefore, more than a few urged to be able to watch THE COVE and make their own mind up.

At the end, the nationalists became very quiet because they did not want to draw even more attention to the movie. And the movie became a success in several Japanese cinemas.  That's one accomplishment of this cinematic masterpiece, which has been available on DVD in Japan for two weeks now - with alot of promotion before the release of the DVD. In addition to that, there is a synchronized and uncensored version available for download.  

It's without a doubt the movie resulted in the decreased demand for dolphin meat. Well informed sources are talking about a total decrease of about 30 per cent in comparison to last year. The reason for that is mainly that most of the people are now aware of the high level of mercury the meat is containing. Moreover, the younger generation doesn‚t want to consume dolphin flesh.

Therefore the decrease in animals killed in this season's hunt is not a great surprise and it allows us to be a bit optimistic. About 900 dolphins were killed during this hunting season, which ended a few weeks ago; in comparison to last year's season where about 1,700 dolphins were slaughtered. To make it short: Yes, the movie, the Academy Award, the worldwide publicity, the book and the pressure from outside haven't failed to have the desired effect.

But that leaves the question about what comes next. Does it need more and steady pressure? Or would more pressure lead to acts of defiance and to a hardening of the situation, ie. that they will hunt the dolphins more than ever? The only thing for sure is, that it would be fatal to give up now and to look away from what's going on. It's now time to look forward to a future without a dolphin hunt in Japan. And to pursue that goal with all reasonable efforts.

One the last resorts of the proponents of whaling is that it’s a defence against moves to eliminate cultural diversity, or that it’s a form of ‘cultural imperialism. For the real hardcore moneymakers in the whaling industries, it’s a small step to accuse people of racism, and I can assure you that some are happy to do so at the drop of a hat.

Well, the actual history of whaling puts paid to most of those arguments (its quite modern in most places and opposition comes from all types of people, including those living in Japan, Norway and Iceland), but I also think that this formulaic defence of the indefensible is just downright wrong, and seeks to confuse the public debate from the real arguments.

If you want to read a rationale discussion on the issue of Icelandic whaling that avoids the stereotypes, please read Katharina Hauptmann’s blog on Iceland Review - Insightful.

For the love of whales and dolphins? An alternative perspective on Japan

Recent news reports from Japan verify that the government ended their southern ocean whaling mission early, citing harassment by anti-whaling activists. The Japanese whaling fleet managed to kill 172 whales in the waters off Antarctica over the last three months, only around a fifth of the quota Japan had set for itself the season.  The Japanese whaling ships may, or may not, return to the whales’ Antarctic feeding grounds next year.  Reports from Taiji also indicate that the drive hunt season has ended a bit earlier than usual, as the season usually extends through March (and into April for pilot whales).

We know that a decision to end cetacean killing altogether will be based on more than reaction to public protest, whether it is on the high seas, or in Taiji.  Unsustainable government subsidies, waning interest and appetite in whale meat, increasing public awareness, and politics are other reasons Japan may be realigning its fleets and its whale-hunting strategies.

But it is an even more recent report from Japan that also has us encouraged:  it was reported on Friday night that approximately 50 melon-headed whales stranded on the shore in Kashima, Ibaraki Prefecture in eastern Japan.  The stranding is not the encouraging news:  it is the response of the locals that is.  Apparently 22 whales were rescued and returned to the sea on Saturday through the efforts of some 200 people including city government officials and local residents and surfers near the Oritsu coast. 

This is not the first time Japanese citizens have risked personal safety or worked at great lengths to assist stranded whales and dolphins. Stories of divers and surfers, even fishermen, in Japan pushing stranded whales back to sea have surfaced in the press over the years.  And whale and dolphin watching is popular in Japan, as it is all over the world.  These stories just underline the complexities of the whaling issue; it is not possible to simply assume from Japan’s whaling and dolphin hunting policies that the public are not inspired and amazed, like us, by whales and dolphins, or would not run to their aid.

Despite the public’s notion that all of Japan is against these magnificent animals, with the ill-fated confrontations of Sea Shepherd and the Japanese whaling ships clashing each spring in the southern ocean taking center stage, and where even WDCS policy teams battle it out annually at the IWC side-by-side with diplomats and activists alike, trying to stave off another ‘research’ hunt by Japan-- we know better.  We have met, and work with, so many dedicated individuals in Japan that want to see an end to whaling, and dolphin hunting, and that stand side-by-side in our understanding of the need and desire to protect these sentient animals.

At WDCS, we are seeking ways to spread these seeds of change that will nurture the hearts and minds in Japan. And the real stories of individuals in Japan rescuing these animals, instead of slaughtering them or consuming them, are potentially the seeds of true change.  It is clear, whatever the motivation, that there is a love of whales and dolphins already existing in Japan, and we must find a way to encourage it, and nurture the compassion that continues to reveal itself.  We must continue to condemn inhumane practices, such as the coastal drive hunts or the offshore harpoon hunts, in all of their forms, while acknowledging that not all people in Japan eat whale and dolphin meat, or participate in these hunts.  And the lives of those whales saved in this most recent stranding, and the individuals responsible, are the difference.