corkyorca25

[corkyorca25]

Antis would rather have a dead dolphin than a captive one. The audacity of activists to claim captivity kills, when they are the ones killing. This is what emptying the tanks does. This is the consequence of agendas over actual welfare.

"wEll tHey DIeD fReE!" They never asked to be free, and have no concept of freedom vs captivity. And if you honestly believe dying a horrible death in the wild is better than a death in a loving, caring captive environment, then you should not be allowed anywhere near any animal.

To clarify: I'm not against all risk-taking with animals. But when you release long-captive animals with limited or no survival skills and literal fake teeth, those animals should not be fending for themselves.

Also, long-captive dolphins/orcas/etc will not forget their attachment and positive associations with humans. A wild animal relying on humans for food/companionship is pointless and may as well stay in a tank/seapen/etc.

Seeing a post about "successfully released dolphins" only to find out it was 1. The dolphin project 2. There were 3 originally and one died under their care so they hid it 3. When "released" one died and the other went MIA/is potentially also dead and everyone in the comments cheering about it and trying to harass people calling out the truth. Y'all really just want your idealized versions of everything huh

Oh yeah, that was the Bali Sanctuary project. One of the released dolphins who died was Johnny, an older male who had prosthetic teeth placed prior to release. Yes, that’s correct. They released an animal with prosthetics into the wild.

Look, I get that you can’t expect every released animal to survive. That’s part of wildlife rehab. But they should at least be candidates for release!

[corkyorca25]

Hello, I come with a request.

If you could, please, spare a minute of your life and sign a petition. (Link at the end of the post.)

Recently, an animal rights activist organization has blocked the transfer of two orcas and twelve dolphins out of marineland Antibes in France, a marine park which has closed down on January 5th—one which is in terrible condition.

The animals live in unfiltered pools with failing infrastructure, one which can kill them at any moment, due to the fact that the park is officially bankrupt, following a law banning cetacean performances in France.

The activist organizations insist on keeping the orcas and dolphins there until a sanctuary is built. The problem is, no sanctuary will ever be built in the foreseeable future, and the cetaceans don't have that time to wait. Recently, the largest sanctuary project (the whale sanctuary project) has been outed as a cash-grab and a scam, after it was revealed its owners have been earning GIGANTIC salaries without spending even a cent on the sanctuary project.

The plan is to fight for the transport of the two orcas and twelve dolphins to Loro Parque and Zoo Madrid. It may not be the ideal choice, but it's the only solution they have.

If not transferred, the animals will be euthanized, which is what the organizations are wishing for. They're openly celebrating the fact that healthy animals may be put to sleep, and mock the situation on their social media.

This is their only chance, and the only thing we can do. The two orcas are a lonely pair—a mother and her son, whose condition has recently been worsening.

Link to the petition.

Please, also remember to check your email to confirm your signature. For you, it's 30 seconds. For them, it's life or death. Be their voice.

Two killer whales have already died tragic deaths, one of them due to a condition said to have sprouted from the toxic algae in the tank, and the other from consuming a piece of metal which separated from the infrastructure.

[corkyorca25]

Beware of 'selective perspective.'

Imagine this: You're scrolling through social media. Maybe you're searching for the newest trends, toys for your furry friend, or mindless entertainment. A post catches your eye- it is an account you have not viewed before. Pictured is a dog, in horrific condition, eyes despairing, and ribs showing. The description tells you his story, how the organization got him, and his poor prognosis. At the bottom, a line intrigues you: 'another example of dog ownership's cruelty. Time to ban this madness. [insert link].' That's odd. Why blame dog ownership in general rather than the person responsible? You've never seen anyone do that before. You follow the link to learn more.

You're brought to a well-designed, modern website. The name reads something like 'dog ownership wrongs,' or 'the dark side of canine use,' or 'ban pets now.' The logo is solem, a young puppy in clear distress. The website contains thousands of heartbreaking stories and information on the true colors of the dog industry (some of this information is plain accurate, others are half-truths or misunderstandings, bad arguments, or outright lies. You don't know that, yet.) You head to 'values' or whatever they may call it, and find something alarming. The goal of those behind the organization is not to just raise awareness or campaign for harsher laws- no, plain and clear, they demand the complete outlawing of dog ownership. You shake your head, almost not believing what you're seeing. Take all dogs away because of some bad owners? That's crazy and unrealistic. Surely there are issues, but this 'solution' is unfair and punishes good owners. THIS is how anti-zoo, anti-racing, and anti-meat institutions operate. Presenting a purely negative picture and failing to mention how good organizations operate. How animals can thrive in human care, and how to improve conditions. They want nothing but their way, total abolition. No modification, no acknowledgment of progress made. If these strategies were employed like the fictional example above, the vast majority would deem their end goal insane, unrealistic, and unfair. And yet when these same strategies are used against zoos, people rally and campaign, demanding the 'cruelty' end, and ignore the animals thriving in modern facilities. There is no doubt that bad zoos exist. The solution is not to end all zoos, just like the solution to dog abuse is not to ban dog ownership..

[corkyorca25]

Hey, I have an important request!

Hello! Sorry for the inactivity, but I have something important to share! Please, read; 2 Killer whales, Wikie and Keijo, along with a pod of dolphins at the now closed-down Marineland Antibes in France are at risk of an unnecessary euthanasia. But why, you may ask? Multiple animal rights activist groups have been wasting months worth of time for these animals to move out to safer conditions, claiming that they will build a sanctuary for them. Not only do these take years, but none of them exist yet and no one has a permit, even. Today is the deadline for all the animals there. Loro Parque, the park that was suppose to get Wikie and Keijo, has summited an appeal. No updates yet.

The activists only want euthanasia as the answer. Not a sanctuary. They'll rather have a dead whale than a captive whale. That's the whole point. Please sign this change petition so we can get Wikie, Keijo, and all of the dolphins out of Antibes ASAP. Thank you for your time. https://chng.it/ys22Tpnz9b

[corkyorca25]

Hey Born Free, you claim zoos are bad, but your 'sanctuaries' are okay? HMM...

I found myself on Born Free UK's website today. Like most anti-zoo organizations, they shame zoos but justify their sanctuaries. Because it's only okay when THEY do it. They have a long 'report' on why it's wrong to keep big cats captive and the 'terrible suffering' they endure in confinement. Which is mainly composed of painting roadside zoos, bad zoos, outdated practices, and the illegal pet trade, as the same as modern, responsible zoos. Of course, they run 'sanctuaries.' Almost the same thing as zoos, but all of a sudden, the animals are 'free' and 'finally not suffering.'

XDDDDDDDDD. So, you keep animals in captivity, with conditions like those of a modern, well-thought-out facility that ensures their welfare. But if it were a zoo, it would be 'cruel.'

These people can't take their own arguments seriously. Also, in their anti-captivity report of exaggerations and failure to consider how well animals in good facilities do, they state how captive big cats are sometimes kept in unnatural groupings. And yet, at one of their sanctuaries, it appears they keep a leopard and her adult daughter together, something that would not occur in the wild. Again, it would be cruel if it were a zoo. They can't see their own double standards.

Hot take: Maybe you should be logically consistent?

[corkyorca25]

Pet owners have no place criticizing zoos.

It's simple, really. Before you condemn or attack any facility for holding animals, make sure you don't own pets. Domestication or selective breeding does not suddenly exempt dogs, cats, fish, and other animals from anti-zoo arguments. These animals share 99.9% of DNA with their wild counterparts. Your pet is still in 'captivity.' You are still giving 'limited space.' You are still denying 'freedom.' You are still 'enslaving' the animal. The animal is still entertainment. I'd argue by anti-captivity logic, pet ownership (especially purebreds) should be even worse than zoos. Why? Dogs did not come about naturally- they were selectively bred by humans, and many breeds suffer health problems. Not only that, they spend most of their time in unnatural houses surrounded by unnatural items, unlike many modern zoo enclosures. But of course, nobody follows this simple logic. If you condemn captivity just because it's captivity, then please 'free' your animals before posting ignorant attacks on zoos.

[corkyorca25]

Morgan and her calf deserve better

And by that I mean, they deserve better than the Free Morgan Foundation's blatant lies and self contradictions (links to their Facebook post).

I have to wonder what kind of gall one has to posses to take it upon themselves to post something like this. They've decided to name Morgan's calf CODDA, because: "In recognition of the 2021 film “CODA” which told the story of a Child of Deaf Adults and with deep respect and appreciation for the contributions of the deaf community, we have named Morgan’s new calf CODDA because it is the Child of Deaf & Deceased Adults."

How interesting.... in honor of the deaf community, they are on the one hand acknowledging that Morgan is hearing impaired (which they have been trying to downplay if not outright deny for years), while simultaneously saying this:

"...Loro Parque has always insisted that Morgan is deaf and therefore will never be able to communicate and socialize properly with her calf."

The latter part, that Morgan will never be able to properly socialize with her calf, is something Loro Parque has never claimed to my knowledge. That is what FMF is claiming.

So let me get this straight... the Free Morgan Foundation wants to liberate Morgan from LP, ideally back to the wild, but is also now claiming that Morgan won't be able to properly communicate or socialize with her calf...... so let me get this straight.... allowing her to breed is not in her best interests, but setting her free.... is? I'm sorry, would being in the wild or a sanctuary somehow magically give her the ability to socialize properly?

Also, they're taking it on themselves to name her calf in honor of the deaf community, while simultaneously saying that Morgan would be an unfit mother because she is deaf. Just........ let that sink in!

Yeah, orcas don't have hands with which they can sign. Do these "orca experts" not realize that orcas also communicate through visual and body language cues? What an incredibly egotistical, anthropocentric mindset to take here, to assume Morgan can't be a good mom because she can't communicate like deaf humans do.

They continue: "Loro Parque claims they are breeding orca for conservation, but no responsible facility would breed a hybrid offspring (mother and father of the calf come from different genetic populations and therefore the calf has no conservation value)."

Conservation value is not measured simply by genetic purity, nor by whether or not you can release a certain individual back into the wild. Loro Parque does scientific research, and several papers on their orcas have been published. Whether you like them or not, that is a fact. Conservation is achieved through scientific collaboration between ex situ and in situ efforts. To claim this calf has no conservation value just tells me that you have no idea what you're talking about. Yes, Loro Parque is an entertainment venue as well. Entertainment, education and conservation are not mutually exclusive things.

They then go on to say the Loro Parque has said the calf's father is Keto. No, they have not! To claim that they did is a bald faced lie, but why tell it? Because it gives them an excuse to shoehorn in Alexis Martinez's death:

"No other animals which kill humans are used for breeding – and this once again shows the lack of any moral standards by Loro Parque and its owners and management."

Okay, but they're not breeding these animals to select for specific traits. They aren't being bred for domestication. That's not how these zoological breeding programs work! They breed to maintain genetic diversity, not to weed out aggression.

For as much as they talk about animal welfare, are they going to talk about how socio-sexual behavior and breeding are actually important parts of cetacean welfare? If they want to ban LP from breeding, there are only two ways to do that: hormonal birth control, whose long term effects on orcas are poorly understood, or through separating males and females. In Morgan's case, that would mean keeping her in isolation since she's the only female there right now. Explain to me how either of those options are supposed to be kinder than allowing her to breed naturally? (And yes, it was natural breeding, because LP doesn't use artificial insemination).

But that's not what FMF cares about. They will actively lie and sacrifice animal welfare for the sake of getting what they want for an orca they have never worked with.

It should be noted that third party studies from the US Navy have confirmed Morgan's hearing impairment, and multiple court cases in Europe have dismissed FMF's claims. And yet these grifters press on, because you know what sells better than an orca show?

The aesthetic of an orca suffering.

In fact, the idea sells so well, that people on reddit can post stuff like this and no one bats an eye:

The shameless anthropomorphism in the first three comments are bad enough, but that last one....

Imagine hoping the calf dies. Just imagine hoping an otherwise perfectly healthy animal... dies. And for what? Because you think animal welfare should be measured against the human construct of "freedom?"

Blackfish, Free Morgan, etc. This is not based on animal welfare, and it never was. It's based on the morbid aesthetic of an animal suffering for likes, clicks and donations.... donations that, ironically enough, have little to no conservation value. The biggest threats orcas and other cetaceans face today is not the captivity of a few individuals. Emptying the tanks does not help their wild counterparts... but it does certainly hurt the ones that are in human care.

[corkyorca25]

Animals don't long for 'freedom' like people do.

An increasingly common anti-zoo/aquarium argument goes something along the lines below: "Oh yeah? So what if they have great healthcare, toys, and food, they're still deprived of freedom and live in confinement! Would YOU want to live in an apartment forever, even with all those benefits?!" I will explain why is a terrible argument, incorrect, and anthropomorphic. 1: It vastly oversimplifies/misrepresents the size of zoo enclosures. An environment perfectly tailored and modified to an animal's wants, needs, and desires allows for enough space to display natural behavior, exercise, and provide mental stimulation. Branding this an 'apartment' or even 'bathtub' is an invalid/poor comparison. Now, are there exhibits far too small that cause animals mental/physical issues? Yes. Does this mean that an enclosure smaller than what a species roams in the wild is automatically cruel? A solid no. The above paragraph perfectly sums up what a responsible enclosure should do. Horses can travel dozens of miles per day in the wild, yet do great in pastures a fraction of their wild range. 2: Animals do not want 'freedom' like humans do. People desire to go to the store, see movies, travel the world, get their dream job, etc. Animals do none of that- they don't slouch and think how unfair it is they can't struggle in the wild. Anthropomorphism plays a huge part in this argument. It assumes animals, especially intelligent ones like cetaceans, have the same desires listed above. They do not- they roam vast ranges in the wild in search of food and to avoid predators- this is not a concern in human care.

The minds/brains of different species operate differently. Dogs do not think like birds, mice like cats, bugs like elephants, killer whales like people. A killer whale does not look at their pool and think 'I can't stand this bathtub.' Lions don't long for the African savannah. Dogs don't long to live life like wolves. Some traits persist across species- all animals want to avoid hunger and sickness. This does not mean their minds view the world like humans do. They want to be free from pain, hunger, and sickness; not free to go wherever they please at the cost of those. And animals in modern, responsible facilities aren't forced to do anything they don't want to. Food deprivation is no longer used. And if you still insist animals want freedom or think the same way humans do, you should carry that logic to other situations. "How would YOU like to eat kibble every day? How would YOU like to wear a collar and walk on a leash?" I have never seen anyone make that sort of argument. Seems like Anthropomorphism is only when it suits the agenda. "But why do zoo animals escape then?" Great question. Escapees are rare, but they do occur. Does this prove the animal is miserable and wants to be free? No. An animal seeing a chance to get out of its enclosure may take the chance for several reasons- simple curiosity, wanting to get closer to people, extra food, interesting smells, etc. An escaped animal might also become frightened and run, furthering the distance between them and their habitat. If a dog or cat runs away nobody says 'Well, clearly they hate living in an unnatural, manmade house! Stop keeping them imprisoned!"

Yes, dogs and cats are domesticated but were not selectively bred to adapt to a modern human house, they were bred with jobs in mind and for companionship with humans- this is not the same as living in a modern house. Yet they adapted well.

3: No, I wouldn't want to live in an apartment my whole life. But as explained above, I am a human and animals have different desires/minds.

TLDR: The animal mind doesn't work the same way as the human mind and apartment/tiny building comparisons are silly.

[corkyorca25]

Letting animals reproduce is cruelty? *Facepalm*

I found an article about Morgan's second pregnancy crying about 'how if Loro Parque really cared, they wouldn't let her reproduce!' and the logic continues to blow my mind. The article also whined about how awful and unnatural all captive orca pods are (the author(s) clearly haven't done five minutes of research) and then made the above claim. 1; make up your mind. You claim the pods are unnatural yet scream when the animals are allowed to reproduce and create more natural pods. 2; unnatural DOES NOT automatically equal bad or harmful. 3; wouldn't denying Morgan the chance to rear calves be even MORE unnatural? Calves greatly enrich the entire pod. Not to mention the side effects of birth control and/or isolation from the males. If they did this the same people would cry she's being 'drugged and isolated!' 4; there are situations where animals should be stopped from reproduction, like illness, genetic problems, or lack of space. NONE of these apply to Morgan's situation.

[corkyorca25]

Activist logic

"The pods are so unnatural! They should be with their relatives!" Loro Parque: *announces Morgan's second pregnancy* Activists: "NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!" FYI mixes between ecotypes aren't inherently bad. Most dog breeds were created by selective breeding and I've never heard ANYONE say 'this would never exist in the wild! It should be banned!"

Ula wasn't well in her short life but there's no evidence this was because she was an ecotype mix. Many eco-mix orcas are thriving. Oh, and congratulations Morgan!

[corkyorca25]

Straight facts. Blocking the transfer of these orcas is nothing short of animal abuse, period. Inouk would still be alive if they hadn't blocked the transfer. The same kinds of people who support One Voice are the people who think it would be better for Corky if she's taken away from the pod she's lived with for decades and put in an unfiltered sea pen to 'reconnect' with her 'real family.' Seaworld isn't perfect, but the pod in San Deigo is more her family than any wild relatives can or will ever be.

This goes for all extremists “animal rights”, Better Dead Than Fed movements but especially for the “Empty the Tanks” activists that continues to block the movement of orcas out of poor conditions and into a better facility because it’s not a sanctuary (sanctuaries for orcas have not been built or established as a viable option in any way)

This is also for all the people whose response to a loved animal dying in human care to be “good, at least he can be free now” or advocating for orcas in human care to be “put out of their misery” if they can’t be moved to a (nonexistent) sanctuary.

Your goal is to get a win, your goal is be right and to assure yourself on how morally superior you are about your stance. And your position on this is only true if the animals are suffering. So you want them to be suffering so that you’re right and will attack anyone trying to educate you otherwise.

You don’t care about these animals as individuals with needs and personalities. They are whatever you project your own miserable thoughts onto.

I’m sick and tired of governments listening to these unhinged lobby groups that are living in a reality that doesn’t exist. Sanctuaries don’t exist. Orcas in human care aren’t longing for the ocean. Most of them don’t know what an ocean is.

Marineland Antibes is objectively not fit to house their orcas anymore, their orca habitat is quite literally falling apart. But the activists want the orcas to stay and be "sacrificed" for their cause.

I'm so tired of this.

French source