ZOOS AND THE TROJAN DOLPHIN?
John
D Dineley
Ratel:
Journal of the Association of British Wild Animal Keepers, Volume 21, Number
21 1994 © The Association of British Wild Animal
Keepers
This spring saw the opening in the UK of the Warner Brothers' feature film Free Wily, a story of a young boy who befriends a killer whale or orca (Orcinus orca) living on its own in a run-down US adventure park. The story ends with the whale, aided by the boy, being freed back to the wild.
A nice heart-warming film for the family? Indeed, it may well be.
But also, according to Chris Stroud, a leading member of the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society, in an article in the magazine Wild About Animals: "the film's underlining message is that orca, and whales and dolphins in general, are unsuitable [sic] for captivity and should be left with their families [sic] in the wild".
At this current time no zoo or aquarium in the UK exhibits a member of the cetacean (whales and dolphins) family. Unlike other European countries such as Belgium, Finland, France, Spain, Germany, Holland, Switzerland, Italy, Portugal and Sweden, members of the British public will not, at this time, be able to have close, intimate contact with dolphins within zoos and aquaria in the UK.
Sadly, the demise of dolphin exhibits in the UK has seemed to have had tacit approval from some members of the zoo community. It is with this in mind that I decided to voice a warning over the dangers of the influx of what could be termed zoological political correctness.
It has been suggested by some protest groups that the decline in dolphinaria in the UK is evidence that the public no longer wish to see dolphins in captivity. But the contraction of dolphin displays in the UK is not solely a product of public dislike for such facilities and is not reflected in the United States or, as mentioned above, in Europe.
In fact, one reason for the decline in the UK of dolphin exhibits has been the obligation of UK dolphinaria to raise large capital investment to upgrade their facilities to new UK dolphin-keeping standards by 1993. Ironically, the Review of Dolphinaria, on which these standards were based, considered that dolphinaria should be allowed to continue to operate in the UK.
Due to an inability to fund such projects, a number of facilities could not longer maintain dolphins, namely, Whipsnade, Morecambe and Brighton.
Two animals from Brighton - Missie and Silver - and an animal from Morecambe - Rocky - were acquired by the 'Into the Blue' project for rehabilitation and release in the Caribbean in 1991. This project was co- ordinated by the celebrity-led Zoo Check and various other animal groups.
The project has been considered by some to be very controversial, and serious scientific concern has been expressed regarding the eventual release of the three ex-British dolphinaria animals into the waters of the Caribbean due - among other considerations - to the released dolphins not being from the island waters and being, therefore, genetically 'foreign'.
The dolphins at Flamingoland in North Yorkshire were transferred to the Kolmarden Zoo in Sweden as a breeding loan for the zoo's new £12,000,000 extension to its dolphin complex.
Windsor Safari Park closed due to the failure of its parent company's interest in other areas. The Safari Park itself was an economically viable business; this fact was widely stated in the media at the time of its closing. Their animals - four adults and the five calves bred at the Park - have now been moved to the Harderwijk Marine Mammal Park in Holland.
In an article relating to the closure of the Windsor Safari Park published in RATEL in August 1993, my colleague David Lindsay makes an interesting point regarding the unhelpful view of dolphinaria held by some members of the zoo community:
"An aspect of the dolphin debate is the way that some establishments gave implicit support to the anti's. It is the oldest trick in the book to pick off individuals one at a time. The debate is not going to go away when there are no more cetaceans or elephants or polar bears or ..... !"And although such views were not instrumental in the demise of dolphin exhibits in the UK, they are not helpful. It seems that these members of the zoo community appear unable to grasp the fact that the groups that have lined up to prohibit dolphins in captivity are also lining their sights on all other aspects of captive wild animal management, including the keeping of other animal species in zoos and wildlife parks.
At the 1986 conference of the International Marine Animal Trainers Association, a prophetic paper was presented by an educational adviser to an Australian marine park. It presented a modern parable featuring a tribe of humans called The Libbers and their creation of mythical beasts: the Trojan Dolphins. It tells of their campaign to stop dolphins being kept in captivity and how - with the help of another powerful tribe, the Politicians - they success.
The story recounts that:
"The Libbers said the dolphins were more intelligent and sensitive than any other creature and therefore should not be held in captivity."But the conclusion of this story should be of interest to all in the zoo world as it concludes:
"... the Libbers mounted their Trojan Dolphins and rushed through the gates of every zoo in the world. Once inside, they said that all other animals should be released too, and started to make Trojan Seals, Trojan Snakes and Trojan Spiders. Soon after, the gates of every zoo in the world shut for ever."Of course, this is only a story - a work of fiction. But could it become reality?
In fact, the drawing-up of lists of 'politically correct' animals that may (or may not) be kept in captivity has already been muted. in March 1993 . it was reported in The Daily Telegraph that the animals pressure group Zoo Check (Born Free Foundation): ".. intends to set up a research program to identify which species can be kept in captivity without mental damage". It has already been (incorrectly) stated by some that as well as the dolphin, the polar bear is also not a suitable candidate for captive management.
Ironically, investigation of these two species' suitability for captive management by independent scientists (in the case of dolphins by Margaret Klinowska and Susan Brown, and polar bears (Alison Ames) has found that, in general, the case for the prohibition of these species from captive management is unfounded.
The scope for other species to be included in captive prohibition has also increased with the formation of the Great Ape Project, which broadly wishes to see 'human rights' extended to non-human primates such as chimpanzees, gorillas and orang-utans. This would, in theory, prohibit the 'imprisoning' of such animals in zoos, laboratories and other like establishments.
So while not denying the importance of the application of the highest standards in the accommodation and care of animals in captive environments, unless some members of the zoo community start to see the reality of the current situation, it is quite possible that the Iibbers will get to achieve their desires and, astride their Trojan Dolphins, will ensure that the doors of the zoos of the world will be forced to shut for ever!
References
Ames, Alison (1994) The Welfare and Management of Bears in Zoological Gardens. UFAW: Potters Bar
Lindsay, David (1993) Windsor Safari Park - some personal notes. RATEL Vol.20, No.4.
Klinowska, Dr Margaret and Brown, Dr Susan (1986) A Review of Dolphinaria. Department of the Environment, London, UK.
Singer, Peter (1993) The Rights of Ape. BBC Wildlife, June 1993.
Vines, Gall (1993) Planet of the Free Apes? New Scientist, June 5, 1993.
Weir, Jeff (1986) Education and the Trojan Dolphin. Conference Proceedings of the International Marine Animal Trainers Association.
