This is where I reflect on the words of Mohandas Gandhi here on your Dolittler website.  No need to say more except to say thank you for this wonderful piece of writing.

Leesie April 6th, 2009 10:03:21 AM

I sympathize in different ways with your thoughts here. I am glad that the dolphins, now that they're captive, are being well-cared for and entertained. I really believe that there have been circus animals that were happier with their tricks and their relationship with their (non-abusive) trainer than well-researched zoo animals in fake habitats that end up pacing back and forth day in and day out, without any point to their lives that they can understand. I think that we all have a lot to learn from the occasional developed relationship between a wild animal and a human. I know many people who have been touched by (rescued) captive "ambassadors" raising support for their wild brethren.

As for watching dolphins frolic from afar -- if we didn't harm wild animals, many of them would have little reason to avoid us and fear us (cf. island isolated animal populations). We'd still be better off minding our own business where food and livelihood is concerned (though if it's not REALLY untouched wilderness, then I believe humans are responsible to manage shared or altered environments to the benefit of the wild populations).

Finally, on the issue of profit -- whenever animals are being truly well-cared for, it's hard for me to believe that it's solely a profit-driven enterprise. There are just too many ways of cutting corners when it comes to animal care, if profit is the only concern (on the other hand, that lagoon looks awfully small). Generally speaking, if profitting off of animals is what's needed to make them valuable in a money-based ecnomy -- I'd rather they were worth something to people than worth nothing. But when I put myself in the same situation, I still imagine myself making the same choice, so maybe I'm wrong about my own views.

Sarah April 6th, 2009 10:23:54 AM

I hate to sound snarky, but if you're paying your money to stay at Hawk's Cay, a business that includes the dolphin program you mentioned, you're supporting the program whether you go and pay that extra $100 or not IMO.  You either support a business and give them money, or you boycott them and don't. You can't give them some money and say, "but I only like x, y, or z of your business model," because all those comments are lost when they're looking at the bottom line.

lindabcs April 6th, 2009 10:58:39 AM

I find it hard to dichotomise businesses. Most do something I disagree with to some extent. Some I boycott entirely and others based on subsidiary and industry. For example I did shop at the Edmonton mall even though I disagree with them keeping dolphins. I have read a lot of the work about "dolphin therapy" and ther like. And also came to the conclusion that no matter how much it might benefit people, the dolphins would probably rather be doing something else most of the time.

emily April 6th, 2009 11:20:36 AM

I say Bravo.

How do you feel about swimming with dolphins in the open ocean?

Marsha April 6th, 2009 11:30:07 AM

Yet in practice, dolphins should have next to nothing to do with humans. Spied from ashore, frolicking from afar...that’s about it. Can’t think of any other reasonable excuse to interact with them up close and personal beyond veterinary attempts on their behalf.

Off the coast of Brazil, humans and dolphins have been engaging in cooperative fishing for over two hundred years. The dolphins herd the fish into a tight group, they signal the humans when to throw the nets, the nets make even the fish that aren't caught in them panic, and it maximizes the catch for both species.

Not to disagree with your choice not to swim with them, but yes, humans and dolphins find practical reasons to interact beyond humans dispensing veterinary care.

Lis April 6th, 2009 01:47:01 PM

There are a few other known voluntary interactions. If the dolphin initiates contact and can leave human control at any time, that seems okay to me.

emily April 6th, 2009 02:59:00 PM

I would of swam !  probably twice or at least every morning I was there !  If...If the education, conditions, needs, etc.. of the dolphins were/are being met to excellent standards then hell yeah I would swim!

If one child swims and is touched to the point that they develop a deep love and concern for wildlife and grow up to campagn for wildlife then that is well worth $100.  I believe my love and concern for animals is deeply rooted in my childhood experiences - My Father took me to the Zoo the first Saturday morning of each month, those Saturdays are my best memories. 

People can better appreciate, will feel more connected too, will be more likely to dig in their wallets, dedicate time to "things" that they have a love and concern for - love and concern develop out of experiences which most often involve many senses ;)  

Seeing a dolphin out at sea frolicking is cool, it will evoke an emotional response but in the water up close will cement and solidify an emotional response and I would guess or bet that any person leaving that experience is more likely to donate time, money and resources to dolphin causes than persons who have not.

Hope your having a great vacation !

LC April 6th, 2009 03:16:12 PM

Unless yo go to India and meditate for three days on some Himalayan peak it's tough to escape.

Evet April 6th, 2009 03:25:42 PM

Yet in practice, dolphins should have next to nothing to do with humans. Spied from ashore, frolicking from afar...that’s about it.

That sounds very pc and all that, but have you ever lived around dolphins?  I have.  You cannot avoid them many times. They're amazingly curious and often will come to you (in a boat, on a surboard, even while you're swimming) just out of curiousity.   Dolphins should have next to nothing to do with humans?  Tell that to the dolphins!

Kara April 6th, 2009 03:44:26 PM

I think there is a difference between swimming with captive dolphins and the tendency of dolphin to come check people out (and their amorous interest in rubber research boats).

emily April 6th, 2009 03:47:46 PM

Why is the captivity of dolphins in a safe, enriched environment providing entertainment and more importantly education and a personal connection to the general public not ok, but those kept at the aquarium you mentioned evoked far less negative feelings?

Is it purely the issue of profit?  If so, the world is in trouble - parrot feeding/viewing stations in the wild, whale watching tours, african safaris and thousands of small conservation areas around the world exist solely because there is profit to be made.  Hundreds of thousands of human beings are now protecting animals they would otherwise be hunting, or conserving habitat they would otherwise be destroying because of eco-tourism and the profits involved.

If making profit from these animals is the only criteria for your negative views, then I would suggest taking a look at the bigger picture.

If, however, it is an issue of captivity, why is it ok for some animals and not for others?  Why is dolphin therapy any different than horse therapy?  Why is the training and work of breakthrough researchers like Irene Pepperberg and her African Grey parrots, or The Gorilla Foundation and Koko deemed acceptable (after all, their research has shown us an intellect and emotional side to animals not even dreamed possible by science just a few decades ago and thus called into question our treatment of ALL animals, not just gorillas and parrots) but the work of others such as zoos, who inevitably touch more people on an individual level, is called into question so often?

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not a fan of captive marine mammals, and in fact we rescue exotic parrots the people are inevitably ill equipped to care for.  I'm also a firm supporter of ZooCheck.  However, I believe this issue is not black and white, cut and dry.  There's a large grey area in which the greater good must be taken into consideration as well.  Humans don't care nearly as much about photos as they do about individuals they have met and even more so about individuals they have had positive interactions with.  Without zoos, aquariums, and properly run wildlife interaction programs (such as reptile camps for children) sadly, the average person doesn't care about wildlife and habitat losses.

Another angle to look at as well is that dolphin mortality in the wild is extremely high... death by toxins, lack of food, fishing, nets, trash, boat collisions... perhaps these dolphins are (sadly) better off in their sterilized, artificially enriched environment.  Again, let me state that I don't agree one way or the other - but the whole picture needs to be looked at from a realistic rather than emotional point of view.

Kim April 6th, 2009 06:20:12 PM

Kara (and others who addressed the "from afar" line): That's true on the dolphins' innate curiosity. I live in ana area where the dolphins do swim near us out of curiosity. Biscayne Bay, decimated as it's been, is still a place that hundreds of bottle-nosed dolphins call home. If you see them swimming alongside, you can stop your engines or drop your sails and if you're lucky they'll swim around you in circles. 

In fact, today I was almost upended by a large dolphin while kayaking (the first time I ever saw one close up while in a kayak!). He/she swam away after startling us (very unexpected as it was). I've got to say, though, that kayaking is a much better way to see dolphins than in any other kind of boat (and way better than in any aquarium). And no, I've never had the pleasure to have swum with one in the wild. Honestly, I think I'd be a little scared. Wild is wild and I'm no match for a swimming beast that weighs more than I do. 

Dr. Patty Khuly April 6th, 2009 06:21:18 PM

Kim: It all ultimately comes down to what's best for the animals. The financial structure of the enterprise doesn't matter. It's the fact that as long as there's public demand for the keeping of more of any kind of animal than is necessary for its betterment as a species/individual, there are bound to be welfare issues.

Question is: how many animals is it wise to maintain? To what extent is the role of zoos and parks and places like this necessary for the education and enlightenment of humans who might otherwise never reflect on their plight or be moved to support it? And how is a zoo or Hawk's Cay's dolphin facility better than a circus in many cases? Why do circuses raise so much ire when the average zoo does little better for their welfare and showcases the animals arguably for the 'enlightenment' of humans (at least, that's what they argue)?

I do worry that corners are always being cut whenever these animals are held captive. How can you possibly consider a 20 x 20 m enclosure a suitable environment for a pelagic animal? Does that make a difference? 

I don't know the answers to these questions. I just know that I'd rather stay out of the demand side as long as I have qualms about them. That's why I made the choice I did. This is my rationale. The rest is up to each individual to make an informed decision. 

Dr. Patty Khuly April 6th, 2009 06:33:45 PM

Interestingly, I came across this just a little while ago. It explains the shift of dolphins from aquariums and research facilities to “swim-with” places. It seems there’s now a shortage of dolphins given the rising popularity of these smaller ventures. That’s apparently a problem now that reproductive programs are looking for dolphin mates. To me, the trend is scary. And not what I expected. Here’s a key blurb. Hope you find it as interesting as I did.

“Ironically, the success of the marine mammal freedom movement (Free Willy, et. al.) has helped to create the swim-with industry, the fastest-growing form of marine mammal captivity and newest Sea World endeavor. O'Barry et al have convinced the public that dolphins are too intelligent and sensitive to have to jump through hoops--so now, instead of watching dolphins do tricks, millions of people hope to bathe in the dolphin aura. Formerly teased and gawked at, dolphins are today being loved to death.

The aquatic counterparts of roadside zoos that once lined the Florida coasts are mostly gone now, unable to compete with Sea World at Orlando. A few, however, have reinvented themselves as swim-with facilities. Increasingly stringent regulation has kept other swim-withs from opening in the U.S.--but growing demand has encouraged entrepreneurs around the world to dive in, often with little or no animal care experience.

A spinoff effect of the rising interest in swim-with is that the surplus of captive dolphins that encouraged release projects in the mid-1990s has become a shortage. Military-trained dolphins are no longer plentifully available from the former Soviet Union. The U.S. Navy is not surplusing dolphins either. The Minnesota Zoo has reportedly been trying for more than a year to find mates, through purchase or loan, for an adult female dolphin and an adult male--although the male, at age 39, may no longer be capable of reproducing. An exchange with the Mystic Marinelife Aquarium in Connecticut was discussed, but after the last Mystic dolphin died in March 2001, the Marinelife Aquarium decided to feature California sea lions instead.”

Dr. Patty Khuly April 6th, 2009 06:41:15 PM

I love the book A Different Nature: The Paradoxical World of Zoos and their Uncertain Future by David Hancocks. He gives a great history of zoos and discusses how they've become what they are today. He explores the ethical conflicts zoos present (is keeping a tiger in a too-small habitat ethically justifiable if it means it will inspire a  love of nature in a child? Where do you draw the line between what's best for animals and what's best for the animal-viewing public?), and talks about how he thinks zoos will have to change to stay viable in the future. Great read, and it might help sort out some of your thoughts about zoos vs swim-with programs vs circuses.

Megan April 6th, 2009 07:11:00 PM

Interesting twist, Dr. K.

I, too, would have chosen NOT to partake of the swim.  While at the Toronto Zoo this past summer we stopped by the visiting Manta Ray exhibit.  It was quite a large, shallow tank with a rocky bottom (about 25' x 75' with several dozen Mantas of varying sizes swimming within. 

The setup was strict, and all jewellery had to be removed and a good scrub down essentially from the shoulders down was undertaken by all.  I was surprised (happily) that such precautions were being taken.  One of my biggest complaints about "touch" exhibits is the exposure of animals to human cosmetics, perfumes and cleaners.

We arrived just as the feeding was ending.  I was quite shocked to realize that people were feeding the rays by hand.  Some of these rays were up to 2.5' in width - while the rays themselves posed no danger to the people, there was the inevitable knee-jerk reaction by several softer members of the crowd when a ray went to take a shrimp, which would of course startle the ray, causing it to leap from the water.  With only a 12" lip from the water to the edge of the tank, there was a legitimate concern of a ray becoming injured while jumping and hitting the wall, or even leaping from the tank.

In addition, there were two rays swimming around holding one side above the water, performing a kind of 'wave.'  A clearly visible red irritation line was present on both rays on the raised fins, and while I don't know what the cause could have been, I do know that allowing ill animals to remain on stage and under unavoidable stress was extremely irresponsible from a keeper's standpoint.

The point of the exhibit was to show that Mantas are beautiful creatures, kind and gentle creatures, and just one of many that deserve our attention and protection - not only of themselves and their food sources, but also of their habitat.  I believe that this goal was attained, but I too was extremely uncomfortable with the situation.  However, simply shipping in a bunch of Mantas in a tank to be stared at would hardly have produced such a lasting impression.  It was obvious that both the children and the adults present were truly affected by the interaction.

So, what is the answer?  I don't know... I also wonder about my conflict between animals such as polar bears, tigers and elephants in captivity and the need of zoos to not only educate and inspire the public but also to maintain a captive population of genetically variable individuals.

As for the circus argument, the circus has been viewed as a negative due to two main issues.  One is the generally poor circumstances the animals are kept under.  They remain in tiny cages, receive little natural light, and are often trained using seriously negative and harsh treatments.  The second is the fact that these animals are never allowed to establish a natural den or territory - they are moved about artificially and exposed to stresses that zoo, sanctuary and exhibit animals would never undergo.  While that 20 x 20 pen may seem inadequate to you, at least it's familiar to the dolphins who inhabit it.  The big cats, elephants and other animals used by zoos have no where to call home aside from their crates, which are generally large enough only for transport.

While I agree that where to draw the line is also a question that needs to be answered, I believe that the circus is a different can of worms entirely.  One could compare a rodeo to a circus - but I have a hard time comparing a zoo to such an environment.

Kim April 6th, 2009 07:27:51 PM

Megan - thanks for the recommendation, I'm always looking for a new read.  I'll check it out for sure.  :O)

Kim April 6th, 2009 07:28:44 PM

Oh boy, growing up with grade school matinee field trips to B&B circus at the Boston Garden, Stoneham Zoo, Benson's Animal Farm, chimp acts on Ed Sullivan & various TV shows, "Flipper", and Sea Hunt?

All kids, including myself, thought these things were great! Do you think it occurred to the adults or school teachers,at the time, that these exhibits represented animal welfare breaches?

Only these last several years, have I pondered on the issues, and most I know, don't even think about it.My thoughts wander to my Mom, a sensitive person, that was an older child witnessing & knowing of human cruelties & atrocities. She barely spoke of it, only once in awhile in a passing comment, of Nazi power and terror.

We have come a long way as a society, but still further to go.

Pocket's Story from New Hampshire

Barbara A. Albright/NH April 6th, 2009 08:44:15 PM

Have fun!  Hawk's Cay is a great place - we had a conference there in, I think, 2003.  I loved the lagoon pool and everything else.  I didn't swim with the dolphins, not my thing, but I enjoyed watching them hopping the fence to go for a boot in the canals and then coming back.  I figured they must have liked it there.

PS Barbara, I went to a circus once - hated the animal acts.  I was 7 years old.  Never liked zoos, and have always found making fools of animals on television and in movies distasteful.  So, not all kids thought these things were great.  That said, I'm no animal liberationist and wouldn't want to ban the practices just because I don't like them.

Caveat April 7th, 2009 12:58:23 AM

I commented today about the same thing on yesterday's post. This idea we have, that nature is somehow inviolate and 'wild' animals are best isolated from us for their own good is, to my mind very very detrimental to those very animals. Speking personaly I love animals and 'nature' very much and I want to make sure that there is a world for my children and my children's children down through the ages left to explore. I know I got this love and aprecation first hand. I caught and vainly tried to keep alive innumerable small animals when I was young. Most of these animals died, which was very bad for the individual animals, but they would have died anyway, probably no better than they died with me -predators starve in the wild, prey gets eaten, usualy alive-. However I developed a deep and lifelong love for all of nature based on my personal experence with it. Nature in general has benifited from my conservation efforts that stem from a love that was born out of my very personal contact with nature, that often resulted in the specific animals death. If my parents or society in general had removed this oportunity from me out of concern for these specific animals chances are I wold not have turned out to be the person I am today, very much interested in the sustainability of my lifestyle. Instead of banning outright the capture and my often futile husbandtry efforts my parents helped to educate me on what these animals needed to survive and how sad it was when one of them died because I didn't know how to keep it alive. Looking forward to my own future children I hope I can use their love of all small and wild things as a teachable opurtunity, and look beyond the specific suffering that may be involved.

Jacob L'Etoile April 7th, 2009 10:43:20 AM

This idea we have, that nature is somehow inviolate and 'wild' animals are best isolated from us for their own good is, to my mind very very detrimental to those very animals.

In theory, yes - however, in practice, this has proven to be the only way to save a number of species.  The California Condor, for example, exists in the wild ONLY because every individual was removed from the wild, bred in the safety of captivity, and then re-released into the wild in greater numbers in planned areas.

The black-footed ferret is another example, to name two just from North America.

The inbreeding coefficients of the cheetah population has been slowly reduced thanks to genetic material introduced from captive bred individuals, carefully chosen to increase genetic variability.

Once again, the situation is not so black and white...

Kim April 7th, 2009 12:07:20 PM

Kim, This goes exactly to prove my point, both of those species benifited/survived as a direct result of human intervention in the individual animal's lives. The public awarness generated by the condor restoration was a good thing as well. Another example in the Perigrine Fund, largely (some would say exclusively) responsible for the sucessful breeding and reintroduction of the perigrine falcon. The birds used by the fund were donated by falconers, and falconers figured out how to breed them in captivity. It was also falconers who sounded many of the warning bells that something was wrong, discovered when taking eyesses to train. Now we once again have the privalageand joy of captureing them for falconry. The one grey area for me is the protection of extessive tracts of habitat as a biodiversity buffer. I am not sure how protected they should be. Protected from habitat destroying human involvement, certinly, protected from all use no. I just don't know where the line falls.

Jacob L'Etoile April 7th, 2009 01:15:41 PM

I've seen people kayak next to dolphins (Delaware). Thrilling and I can't imagine anything in captivity could ever compare.

Stefani April 7th, 2009 03:03:27 PM

This idea we have, that nature is somehow inviolate and 'wild' animals are best isolated from us for their own good is, to my mind very very detrimental to those very animals. While that is partially true, the problem is that we have taken over all of their habitat. We pave over the wetlands then say leave the animals alone in the wild. What would probably be best for the animals would be for humans to vanish from the earth - not likely to happen. Next best is more along the lines of education and getting people involved and what usually works for getting them involved for the majority of people is interaction with those animals so while ideally, the dolphins would not have to interact (or even see people), at least getting the people to swim with them does raise public awareness and concern for the animals. Unfortunately, humans appear to be here to stay ...

mikey April 7th, 2009 04:17:13 PM

I thought you might be interested in a recently published study about Keiko (the orca from the film Free Willy) and his release back to the wild -- it was published in Marine Mammal Science, but summarized in the science blog, The Great Beyond. It's an interesting read.

Jeannie April 7th, 2009 09:01:51 PM

Sorry, I think anyone who wants to swim with a wild dolphin is at best misguided, and at worst pretty damn stupid. We're talking about a large and intelligent carnivorous animal, an animal in which there are documented attacks on humans. Granted, in most cases I've heard about the dolphins were provoked, but there's no telling what may provoke a wild animal. Some things are best observed at a distance. As my Marine Vert professor said once... "You know why all the stories of dolphin/human interactions are positive? Because you never hear from the people that they drag OUT to sea."  I've interacted at some level with  wild dolphins out at sea while fishing, but it never crossed my mind to jump in the damn water with them. I'd honestly rather be in the water with a shark, they are much more predictable.

el chupacabra April 8th, 2009 04:28:20 PM

I would've passed as well. Something about captive animals that would otherwise be wild bums me out too much. I've never been been comfortable with zoos or aquariums, even the really 'nice' ones. They leave me conflicted. The kayaking experience sounds way better. 2 years ago we were kayaking of of Camden, ME and harbor seals took an interest in my kayak. It was so thrilling!!!!!!!!!!!! I stopped paddling and one came right up to me. My thrill turned to terror when I realized how huge those things are and they have giant teeth.... so I slowly paddled away. Nice and calm. That was wild nature enough for me! ;)

CreatureofHabit April 8th, 2009 04:51:57 PM

I dunno... Are these domesticated dolphins who can't be released into the wild? If so, they have to live somewhere, somebody has to pay for it, and somebody has to manage all that. Are you willing to do the fundraising or donate the large, pristine habitat they deserve? Yeah, that's what I thought. Neither am I.

Given that they have to live in this place, I would think they might welcome the attention, assuming moderate doses, with breaks and supervision, and they are allowed to wander off if they get tired of their guests.

I have equids (a horse and two donkeys), and when people want to meet them I only allow it with the animals loose (never haltered and tied), and no food involved. If they get tired of being patted on the nose or curried with insufficient vigor, they can leave, and they do. (Being free to leave also means there is never a need to feel threatened, or to defend themselves by biting or kicking.) But mostly they push each other out of the way to get more brushing and ear rubs. Dolphins have always seemed to me to have a similar temperament - friendly and inquisitive. I would guess that a regular stream of visitors would give them something interesting to do with their time. Better than television, at least.

My experience with letting people meet our critters is that they come away changed, for the better. Most have never been close to a large animal. They discover the most amazing things, like "wow, she likes being brushed," "hey look, they have expressions, just like dogs do," and in one mind-boggling college-educated case "can she really feel that? I always thought they couldn't feel anything except for on their heads." (The latter could only have been from being told some idiotic thing like "animals don't feel pain.") People can read books and watch videos all day long, and not get the same appreciation for an animal that comes from meeting one "in person" even for a few minutes.

When I was a kid I would go on quiet (cold, overcast, mid-week) days to Sea World, where there was a dolphin petting tank. For a while there was a Beluga Whale, Cindy, who (with no treats involved) would come over and roll on her side to get petted for minutes at a time. She especially liked to be rubbed just behind her eye. This was on days when the place was empty, and I'm sure she welcomed the company. The dolphins would initiate games of catch, if they found something they could toss to you. Do I feel bad for interacting with them? No way. Do I feel bad for paying admission? No, it supported other educational and rescue efforts. How do I feel about hunting whales, or catching dolphins in fishing nets? It makes me sick to think about it.

People love and protect what they know. They don't come to care deeply for things they have no experience of. Was it a great thing to keep rescued and rehabbed dolphins & a whale in a tank for people to pet? No. But it's not a perfect world, and their options were limited. On the whole I don't think it was a bad thing.

Linda Eskin April 8th, 2009 09:41:58 PM

Linda: Agreed. But one thing is a rescued and rehabbed, can't-return-to-the-wild animal, another is an active trade in these animals because the demand for "swim-with" is rising. If "swim-with" situations become popular enough, it won't be about placing un-placeable animals anymore, it'll mean animals flowing into US captivity from alternative, overseas markets (already a problem in Asia). And as I quoted in a blurb above, if all the US dolphins are busy being loved on, these animals will no longer be available for breeding programs and other worthy conservation projects. Again, how many dolphins would it take to foster a love of these animals in all our children through direct experience? 100? 1,000? 100,000? 1,000,000? Food for thought. 

Dr. Patty Khuly April 9th, 2009 08:12:51 AM

i've been turned off to animals kept in captivity for our pleasure all my life and probably will keep that thought. However, after reading "Made for Each Other" I wonder if there isn't in some instances some reasoning why these types of interactions might need further review.

joyce kesling, CDBC April 12th, 2009 10:36:03 AM

شات

amal_ May 22nd, 2009 09:47:16 AM

“Marriage bridal gown world pictures pictures of wanted to plan a happy surprise, a number of wedding photography studio is the purpose of holding more money ‘Kengren’, they set a ‘trap’ let you keep track of.” Wedding photos has just finished a small selection mother told the journalists, was originally a good original price 7999 yuan Zhao Shuren said that the wedding package, less than 2,000 yuan only to 5999 yuan.

bridal November 25th, 2009 12:21:16 AM

M65 Field Jacket

m65 field jacket January 21st, 2010 01:46:02 AM

Give please. I really enjoyed it. Help me! Could you help me find sites on the: Best color laser printer scanner. I found only this - laser printer cartridges. Unlike mimeo, business had the important strength to win various services in a possible floor, which wondered it same with computers, laser printer. Just, days need in negative lenses and corporations addressing from the other correct user environments to such heart years, laser printer. Waiting for a reply :confused:, Kiri from Congo.

Kiri February 17th, 2010 03:17:18 PM