Monday, 22 December 2014

Response to Can we be Rational about Seaworld?

Can we be rational about Seaworld

I have responded to this article, but just incase this comment doesn't pass the moderation process, here it is.

There is a lot of scientific and factual evidence out there, here are some of them for you too
Blackfish replies to Seaworld's interpretation of Blackfish and the links proving what is true and where Seaworld lied are all in here

1. swimming 100 miles per day - Ken Balcomb has studied the SR's for 37 years and documented them swimming 75 miles per day average. HERE  I think the point that is trying to be made is whether the orcas across the globe are hunting, playing or just socializing, they are constantly in motion even when sleeping. As you can see from video evidence, Seaworld orcas are not. Using the West Nile Virus which has killed Seaworld orcas, no recorded cases in the wild as it is carried by mosquito, had they not been logging at the surface, they wouldn't have been bitten. Seaworld often say they are sleeping but as you should know cetacean brains are designed so they can shut off half at a time to constantly be in motion even when sleeping.
Video evidence of Seaworld orcas inactivity





2. Dorsal fin collapse is easily explained by both Naomi Rose and Todd Robeck Seaworld vet in the recent debate. Do take note though that Todd Robeck admits that the Seaworld website is misleading by using just the data from  Dr Ingrid Visser and both agree that dorsal fin collapse in the wild is only 1%.  His is however incorrect that the dorsal fin is made of cartilage it is actually made of collagen.   This seems to be the best source for the information as it does show both scientific and Seaworld's opinion in this matter.


In response to this statement ''so SeaWorld has been called out for misrepresenting that figure. The point is that collapsed dorsal fins do occur in the wild ''.
The point actually is that Seaworld deliberately manipulated the information and has misled people with it, hence the protest from Dr Visser and their own vet admitted that. 

3. Longevity -
Firstly was there a need for the scientist turned activist comment. Naomi Rose still received her phD in the social dynamics of killer whales.
She oversees HSI campaigns to protect wild and captive marine mammals and is a member of the International Whaling Commissions Scientific Committee.
She has published popular and scientific articles and lectures at several universities.
She participates in task forces and workshops at International, National and State Level.
She received her PhD on the social dynamics of killer whales in 1992 from the University of California in Santa Cruz.
So whether you think she is an activist or not is irrelevant to your 'unbiased' blog. You say you too have a PhD so does that become non existent because you write a pro cap blog?

As for the longevity claims there are actually research papers out there proving that captive orcas DO NOT live as long as their wild counterparts.
SeaWorld's explanation of longevity comparisons between wild and captive populations states: "The issue of killer whale lifespan is one that is often misconstrued and overly simplified. The simple truth is that no one knows." But then they go on to say that they do know: "The data we do have show that killer whales at SeaWorld are living as long as their counterparts in the wild. "

But how long do they live in natural habitats?

This paper isn't as old as the one you claimed to find, this is 2005 and reveals      
46 years for Northern Resident females from 1973 to 1996 and 30 years from 1996 to 2004;
50 years for Southern and Northern Resident combined females from 1973 to 1987;
39 years for Southern Alaska Resident females from 1984 to 2001;
31 years for Northern Resident males from 1973 to 1996 and 19 years from 1996 to 2004;
29 years for Southern and Northern Resident combined males from 1973 to 1987; and 31 years for Southern Alaska Resident males from 1984 to 2001. (The complete breakdown is in Table 14 on page 55.)

The 2005 Olesiuk et al paper is the best summary of orca lifespans to date with hard data. One important caveat however, is that those data are from a population that was quite likely significantly culled by random shootings prior to the start of the field studies. The estimates in Olesiuk et al are based on observations beginning in 1973, and mortalities from shootings may have been high for decades prior to that date, which could have significantly biased the lifespan estimates downward, because the killed animals would have added to the ranks of older age classes during the study if they had not been killed.

This 2012 paper   describes something briefly discussed in the 2005 paper: female reproductive senescense, or menopause. A striking similarity between humans and orcas comes clear in the female post-reproductive lifespans.

Orcas and humans (and pilot whales) are the only mammals known to science (so far) to exhibit menopause. For both humans and orcas, females are reproductive for about 25 years until around 40 years of age, but often live 3 or 4 decades after their last offspring is born. In natural orca communities where mating is governed by cultural traditions (along with diet, language, etc.), the first calf is born when the mother is about 14-15 years old. Most human females are capable of having their first baby at about that age. At SeaWorld, females are often bred much earlier, at 6 or 7 years old, indicating either artificial inducement by hormonal supplements, or the absence of cultural restraints, or both.

We don't have definite birth years for the older orca females, but several have been post-reproductive since the photo-ID studies began in 1973, and are still alive, indicating they are at least around 75 now, and some are older. That is roughly equivalent to human life spans. 
Male maturation rates are also very similar for humans and orcas, beginning in early to mid-teens with full maturity in late teens. This indicates that full male lifespans in undisturbed populations may also be similar.  Olesiuk, et al., p. 33:

So those studied in 2012 are known to be at least 75 years old. Oh, but hey, at least no one is anthropomorphizing here, there is no need to compare them to human baseball players as the scientific evidence speaks for itself.

When Seaworld have 75 year old orcas in their tanks then they can claim they live as long as their wild counterparts.

4. Attacks and deaths = there are 4 deaths by captive orcas not 3 - Keltie Byrne, Daniel Dukes, Alex Martinez and Dawn Brancheau, many near death and many many incidents. If you think that is a good rate over 50 years, then compare that to the wild population where there have been 5 incidents and no deaths, 2 involving orcas tipping an iceflow no contact with humans made, 1 where they sank a boat tipping 6 people into the water, no human contact made, 1 where a boy swimming with seals was bumped on the shoulder as if the attack had been aborted and 1 where an orca did grab a leg but immediately let go. 
As for your video Mel taught his pod how to catch sealion pups without risking death from permanent beaching, only 7 orcas in the world have been recorded as able to do this. Transient orcas ''playing'' with their food is something predators do, cats play with their prey too.
In comparison of the 5 incidents the wild orcas realised it was a mistake and let go, even they guy who needed over 100 stitches said the orca could have killed him outright which it indeed could, the captive orcas on the other hand did not stop, these people were not merely drowned their autopsy reports prove that, they were well and truly attacked.

I note you have no links to their autopsy reports if you want them just let me know.

It isn't just death at Seaworld that shows these attacks, they are also logged on Seaworld's own animal profiles. In order to prove that captivity is the issue causing aggression you only need to look at those profiles.
For example
Kasatka  Seaworld log 12 incidents against her -
Her profile states Kasatkas minor aggressive bouts are seen more often when social problems occur with other whales.
Emits aggressive behaviour quick head movements, jaw popping, snapping of jaws ans sliding out of the water to challenge strangers
Her aggressive incidents with trainers seem to occur after trainer switches with minimal or no reinforcement or WHEN SHE WAS SEPARATED FROM HER CALF AND THE CALF WAS IN DISTRESS. Since Takara's birth her aggression towards trainers increased and her waterwork relationships are very much dependent on the whereabouts of Takara.
There is no doubt in anyone's mind that Ken Peters was lucky to escape the tank with his life, it would have killed the majority of us.

You would think the solution would be to stop separating her from her calf wouldn't you?  Doesn't this prove the aggression is caused by Seaworld? Separating her from her calves knowing that it causes aggression seems pretty irresponsible wouldn't you say?

As for the incident with Tilikum you are right something did piss him off.
Tilikums animal profile states
During times of frustration due to social stress in the environment Tilikum has exhibited aggressive behaviour by mouthing the stage, vocalizations, deep fast swim, tightening body posture, and sometimes lunging towards the control trainer.

This was the show minutes before the attack

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7kwT0_rH5k

As you can see, deep fast swim, definite social stress to the point one of the orcas at 0:56 is knocked out of the water by the other. You  can also see the trainers have left the stage as they have lost control and the deep fast swims continued into the back pool.

In light of the fact they Seaworld already knew that Tilikum lunged at control trainers during periods of social stress, do you think it was a good idea for them to allow Dawn to continue the show and to lay down with him after they had just witnessed the incident minutes before?

There are also many incidents including the deaths here which also provide you with the links to their profiles and the autopsy results. Daniel Dukes is particularly interesting seeing as Seaworld stated he was found on Tilikum's back and died of hypothermia when the truth is the medical examiners report shows many pre death injuries including his scrotum being completely avulsed, and post death injuries showing Tilikum continued to ''play'' with him. This is not the story Seaworld gave is it?
other incidents

5. You start off saying that separation is indisputable and you are correct Seaworld HAVE played on the word calf. Just as I would say about my daughter - my baby, when she was a baby, I still call her my baby even though she is 18.
To compare them with social dogs again is wrong. Dogs and cats even in the wild leave their mothers to form their own family and territory, in the case of lions the males are actively chased out of the pride. Even humans rarely live their whole lives with their mothers, they eventually leave home and start families of their own.

Orcas are however different in that respect. They stay in matraline pods their whole life, so when people pull Blackfish down emphasizing the fact that Takara was 12 when she was taken and she was taken with her calf Kohana. They fail to say that both of those were part of Kasatkas matraline, had they been wild, Takara would have started her own family BUT she would have stayed in Kasatka's matraline group with her brothers, sisters and their calves too.

When Seaworld released this video


  saying 'why would we do that' Well why would they do that???  What they failed to do was finish the story. Kohana was taken with Takara that is true, but she was then taken to Spain separated from her mother and is still there to this day. Takara was moved again leaving Trua behind too. These orcas are alive and physical proof that They Do Do THAT!


When Seaworld released this video to try to convince people that they did indeed recognize the importance of social bonds, they couldn't have picked a worst orca as an example of that. Katina with 2 of her calves.

Katina, who is a wild caught orca, had Kalina first,
Kalina was taken to do a tour of the Seaworld parks and not returned until she was 9 years old. Whilst away she had a calf of her own at the extremely young age of 7, 18 months gestation so she was 5 and a half years old and Seaworld allowed her to become pregnant. When Keet was 18 months old his mum was moved again as she was pregnant again.
SEAWORLD SAID KEET BECAME DEPRESSED after her move but he was cared for by Haida 2 and made friends with Kyuquot and Katerina, despite that at aged 5 he was moved to away from them too.

She then had Keto - SEAWORLD SAID HE WAS MOVED OUT OF ORLANDO TO CORRECT HIS BAD HABITS he was 3. He stayed at San Diego for 9 months, then was moved to Ohio and then to San Antonio. He finally formed a bond with Kayla even fighting with Ky over her and was then reunited with his brother and they too became really close. Despite the bonds he made as he would have naturally been at his mothers side all his life, he was then sent to Loro Parque never seeing any of them again. People wonder then why he killed poor Alix Martinez, Seaworld knew he was messed up as they tried to correct his bad habits, who gave him those bad habits? Even though they knew about Keto they still let the trainers in Loro Parque swim with them, being supervised by Brian Rokeach didn't stop the death.


Then there is Skyla how old was she when Seaworld took her from her mother? 2, what was the reason for that??

When Kalina died from septicemia, she had none of her calves with her, why was that as Seaworld state they don't separate them??? Those 4 orca would have stayed in Katina's matriline after Kalinas death, so thats one calf.

Katerina - Katina's second calf was taken aged 2, and sent to San Antonio, she died there aged 10. Why did they take her from Katina as Seaworld's lovely videos say they respect the mother and calf bond, and the simpering mother of 4 says 'we wouldn't do that' but they would and have.

Taku was so messed up he mated with his own mother, producing Nalani a full inbred who can go nowhere as she will never be part of the breeding programme, if she ever is there certainly would be uproar as no respectable institution would breed an animal knowing they were full inbred.  He died at San Antonio of pneumonia aged 14.

Unna - where is Unna and how old was she when she was moved?? She has been on birth control since miscarrying her first calf. Why isn't she still with Katina??

Ikaika was only 4 when he was traded for 4 Belugas and sent to Marineland. After winning the court battle he was brought back to Seaworld, so why wasn't he brought back to the same tank as his mother as he would have been with her for life in the wild??

Nalani - beautiful Nalani can't go anywhere as she can never be used for the breeding programme due to being the result of mother and son mating.

7 calves later she had Makaio, who is still with her. She should have all her calves with her and as 3 of them have died from septicemia, pneumonia and infection which then raises the question of how have these orca got those infections as Seaworld says their tanks are free from bacteria, infection and pathogens. Look through the causes of death for the other orca too, this is obviously NOT the case.

To produce a video saying Seaworld are aware of the mother and calf bonds makes the situation so much worse, as ignorance could have been an excuse, now there is no excuse for separating these orca.

The orcas in the video are her youngest calf and inbred Nalani.


6. Firstly the reports aren't from 20 years ago. Lets take a look. If we pick a none Blackfish trainers as we all know their views and why they want the captivity to end,  and go for say Bridgette Pirtle who you will be aware is now saying she supports Seaworld. Ignoring what she had to say about Blackfish and looking at why she said she left Seaworld seems to be the right way to answer this one.

In this interview she says   ''I spent too many years watching decisions made to spend money on show elements, playgrounds or barbeque restaurants.  Now is the time to let actions speak louder then words.  Give the animals the best.  Update facilities that haven’t seen any expansion since the 80s.  Ultimately, the same concerns voiced as a result of Dawn’s accident had been voiced after incidents in the past. Lessons not learned and continually disregarded. Many of those taking care of the animals are fighting for less responsibility to be placed upon their ever-drooping dorsal fins. Show schedules, public interactions, and dining obligations create a strain on animals already in a highly stressed environment. They are proudly introduced as “ambassadors” but they are simply work horses for a profit hungry industry desperate to remain relevant in a society that has already begun to recognize we have moved past such a trite necessity. Until parks like SeaWorld exhale their dying breathe, tighter regulations and stronger accountability for adhering to such guidelines is a given.''

This interview
The breeding program should end, and animals for entertainment should end.

What are they going to do with all these whales?

That was a battle I fought in my last year at SeaWorld. It was disappointing to me to see more money spent on parts of the park that didn't benefit the animals. They'd spend millions of dollars renovating a children's play area or revamping the sound system.
But there wasn't enough pool space [in San Antonio].
When you look at the Animal Welfare Act, the parks meet it, but the act is outdated. Killer whales aren't even acknowledged as being dangerous.

In this interview 
  she tells the story of Unna who miscarried during a show. The show had to continue and after it was over trainers had to dive in and pick up the pieces of fetus. She went on to say she had 3 miscarriages in total. Seaworld acknowledge she had one saying her health was so compromised she has been on medication ever since.
Despite asking her to clarify this she chose not to respond. Either she is lying saying Unna had 3 miscarriages or Seaworld are lying saying she has only had one.

Even in her interview with Eric Davis of Awesome Ocean and Stand with Seaworld she said  

What would Bridgette do if she was in charge of SeaWorld?

 “I would end animals for entertainment purposes, and stop the breeding program''

This isn't a 20 years ago trainer is it so I guess her comments on what it is like to work for Seaworld are relevant.


Secret Agendas and Summary

Had you looked in the right places for what the agendas were you would have found that NO ONE has said they want Seaworld to close, nor have they said sump the orcas in the open ocean.

Naomi Rose put forward a win win situation to Seaworld, win for the orcas and win for Seaworld
 She states
First, orcas in captivity are out of shape; they are the equivalent of couch potatoes, as the largest orca tank in the world is less than one ten-thousandth of one percent (0.0001%) the size of the smallest home range of wild orcas.
Second, they are in artificial and often incompatible social groups. This contributes to chronic stress, which can depress the immune system and leave captive orcas susceptible to infections they would normally fight off in the wild.  WE CAN SEE THE PROOF OF THAT IN SEAWORLD'S OWN ANIMAL PROFILES.
Third, they often break their teeth chewing compulsively on metal gates. These broken teeth, even drilled and cleaned regularly by irrigation, are clear routes for bacteria to enter the bloodstream. These are the obvious factors; there are almost certainly others contributing to the elevated mortality seen in captivity. THIS HAS BEEN PROVEN TOO SEE THE MARINELAND V SEAWORLD COURT FILE.

These facilities can work with experts around the world to create sanctuaries where captive orcas can be rehabilitated and retired. These sanctuaries would be sea pens or netted-off bays or coves, in temperate to cold water natural habitat. They would offer the animals respite from performing and the constant exposure to a parade of strangers (an entirely unnatural situation for a species whose social groupings are based on family ties and stability -- "strangers" essentially do not exist in orca society). Incompatible animals would not be forced to cohabit the same enclosures and family groups would be preserved.

Show business trainers would no longer be necessary. Expert caretakers would continue to train retired whales for veterinary procedures, but would not get in the water and would remain at a safe distance (this is known in zoo parlance as "protected contact"). And the degree to which they interact directly with the whales would be each whale's choice.

A fundamental premise of these sanctuaries, however, is that eventually they would empty. Breeding would not be allowed and captive orcas would no longer exist within the next few decades.

YOU HAVE OBVIOUSLY READ IT JUST CHOOSING TO PICK OUT THE ONE LINE, NOT THE WHOLE THING.

PETA who Seaworld make people believe are their arch enemies also put forward a plan WHICH DOESN'T INVOLVE CLOSING DOWN SEAWORLD

Lori Marino put forward a view on what Seaworld could do which AGAIN doesn't involve closing Seaworld

You can also see here in the Q and A's from Awesome Ocean and Mark Simmons, at 33:50 even Mark Simmons said the ocean didn't kill Keiko.


There is also then this which is a whole new way to see captive animals  the footage of those orcas actually being orcas catching their own fish, being pack in their matraline pods, swimming in the kelp etc could be relayed back into the park.

WHERE I STAND.

 You said at the beginning of this I will share the information my personal research has uncovered, so have I.
There is no grey area here, factual evidence from official documents cannot be disputed we know that. Court transcripts cannot be made up, necropsy reports, autopsy reports etc so this are undisputed FACTUAL EVIDENCE.

What I have found when speaking to people to try to show them this evidence is
Seaworld, Stand with Seaworld, Awesome Ocean, and all the related sites run by Eric Davis, Erin McKinney and Mike block anyone showing a different opinion, so how can people make up their minds about anything if they are not being allowed to see the documentation for themselves. You said yourself you have research this for over a year, but you still missed all those important links.

When you speak to people who do support Seaworld, it starts with being accused of being a PETA supporter. I don't support PETA's kill policy anymore than they do, so once that barrier is down, it moves to Blackfish, my usual response is pretend it didn't exist then, the evidence is before Blackfish's time of 2013. They then accept the evidence, dont read it come back with some stupid thing and resort to name calling, check my twitter for proof of that. If they get a retaliation then I'm nasty lol.

On the other hand I have spoken to people who have said it won't change their mind but thank you for being so civil. I am always civil unless it comes from the other person first, even then I don't say shut up as you are more noisy than your dead mother was last night, or your dead mother can't suck properly. Is there any need for things like that?

Check out the Stand with Seaworld page, post after post about PETA fueling anger and paranoia against anyone who tries to show them the actual facts. Check Awesome Ocean, nearly all the posts are manipulating data, bullying individuals even a 10 year old girl who spoke out against Seaworld and they have people in such a frenzy that they thing everyone is the enemy. I have debunked those posts over and over as Eric and his friends obviously do have an agenda, working for a marketing company they obviously think they are doing great marketing for Seaworld when in fact they do more damage to Seaworld than the anti captivity people do. Check my blog, one article after another corrected with the right information, not manipulated facts to try to push an agenda

The whole thing is out of hand, people like me are not stupid those orcas can't go back to the open ocean for the following reasons
  • 14 of them are hybrid including the new calf with no conservation value what so ever. The powers that be would never let them out into the wild to corrupt the wild gene pool and where would they go they have no equivalents out there? 
  • 2 are inbred they wouldn't be allowed to go either.
  • In any other institution they would be in a Marius situation. I am glad they are not as I don't believe Marius should have been killed but he was as he wasn't genetically right to enter the wild gene pool.
  • Those who need tooth flushing can never be out in the ocean as they would always need that husbandry.
  • Those on medication like Ike and Unna couldn't go
In light of all the above the matraline which we know are so important would have to be separated which would then make all those campaigning to get them out of the tanks as bad as Seaworld, which is why NO ONE has put that forward.

Seaworld need to be open and transparent with the people who support them. Many believe the captive orcas pay for the rescues as their ticket money funds them. That is a downright lie as Prescott fund funds the rescues as it does for all the other facilities, manatee club funds their rescues and sea turtle rescues are funded too. Take a look at page 20 on here, Seaworld had nothing to rescue with in 2001 not even a boat, yet they tell people they have been rescuing for 50 years.

Seaworld claim all the people on Blackfish are activists, they were asked their opinions as they are orca experts take a look at their credentials here

Nothing will change the fact that 45 orcas have died in those tanks that is almost 1 per year, 244 dolphins have died, 23 Belugas have died, pilot whales, false killer whales dead.


 In 50 years, things may have been improving but when Seaworld and their supporters say they receive top vet care, restaurant quality fish, top dental care, when it isn't it tooth flushing for the damaged teeth and give people a false impression of what has happened in those tanks which people like me all know about, they are the cause of the friction between the 2 sides, fueled by Stand with Seaworld and the lies they tell people too.

If it doesn't change peoples minds that is fair enough, but to not even look at the evidence because they have been led to believe anti caps are some sort of monsters is wrong, the evidence is there, add in the links so it is unbiased as you say it is supposed to be and if you need more evidence just ask as I have also been studying this since the days Cuddles was in a tank in the UK.

 There is always 2 side to everything these 3 videos for me sum it up visually

Corky 2


Wild orca matraline


Why do they sum it up for me?
The matraline pod in the second video is Corky's mother and her family

Lastly
Tilikum 13th December 2014 after refusing to do a show



Do you think its OK that he feels like this and displays it too?

Now do you see why captivity is wrong for these creatures?








Tuesday, 16 December 2014

Awesome Ocean - lies about captures and the death of J32 again

Once again Awesome Ocean's article debunked

Starving and Pregnant: A Look Into J32’s Tragic Death

Featured
J32-death-southern-resident-killer-whales
Photo Credit: Gord Kurbis/CTV News
Earlier this month we shared the tragic news about a young killer whale found stranded and dead in the Pacific Northwest.
That article was debunked here as being disgraceful as it used this poor whales death to try to increase Seaworld's gates
We've been waiting for test results to determine exactly why this killer whale died, and now that the necropsy is complete, we can assure you the results are heartbreaking.

The necropsy report can be seen here on the Fisheries and Oceans Canada website, it doesn't say anything about starving at all. She died of infection

Here's what we know:
J32, aka Rhapsody, Was Starving To Death
When biologists and scientists performed the necropsy, they discovered that the female orca had a thin layer of blubber that was also oil free. This means that she was experiencing a prolonged period of malnutrition. She and her unborn calf were starving.
The necropsy results say nothing about starving, the preliminary necropsy report also stated  

'' With reference to the necropsy, the gross observation that J32’s blubber layer was relatively thin and dry of oil is consistent with inadequate diet for an extended period, and there was very little fecal material in the intestines. Dr. Stephen Raverty said that there was blockage of the colon, but I did not observe that evidence because the colon was taken along with the uterus, vagina, ovaries, and anus in a complete “package” for analysis in Vancouver.''

Yet again you selected the bit of the report that suited your explaination, completely missing of the part that she also had a blocked colon which would have contributed to her lack of blubber

Killer Whale Calfs Are Dying In The Wild
Adding to the tragedy of this whales untimely death is the fact that she was pregnant. As you can see in the necropsy report the calf caused her death
''the cause of death was a result of in utero fetal loss with secondary bacterial involvement (endometritis), and eventually maternal septicemia; meaning the fetus caused an infection that became systemic, and ultimately fatal to J32'' 
.In the past three years, the Southern Resident Killer Whale population has not seen a killer whale calf survive. Right now, there is a 100% mortality rate for killer whale calfs in the Pacific Northwest.
100% mortality sounds huge but there have only been 2 births since 2005, the calf who died L120,and Sooke L120 was the third calf for Surprise! (L86), but was not seen with Mom in recent sightings by the Center for Whale Research, the organization that maintains the annual census of the Southern Residents.  Surprise’s second calf, Sooke (L112), died in February 2012 at 3 years old, and a necropsy revealed signs of severe acoustic trauma and now J32's unborn calf.


Killer Whale Prey Is Toxic And Disappearing
The main source of food for the Southern Resident Killer Whales is salmon. Over the past few decades, numerous environmental issues have depleted salmon stocks past the point of sustainability.
Read the scientific paper about killer whale food stock here.
This is true hence you being sent the petitions to remove the dams blocking the salmon runs, which you failed to do anything with, despite it being sent to you personally over and over again to post onto your various websites and facebook pages. Yet you chose to do nothing.

Researchers have found that the salmon that killer whales are feeding on is toxic and contain dangerous chemicals that have turned this entire pod of orcas into what scientists are considering the world's "most toxic animals."
 Read the NOAA report here
The report doesn't say salmon is toxic at all. The report in 2008 which you list states 4 main concerns
 1. Reduced quantity and quality of prey (Chinook/King/Spring salmon) (dams etc)

2. High environmental levels of persistent biochemicals, such as PCB’s and flame retardants, that have known harmful effects on marine mammals (eg. immune system repression and reproductive system dysfunction)( they live in the highest populated area of all killer whales.)
 
3. Sound and disturbance from vessel traffic and shipping.NOAA has observed the whale watching boats and it isn't those where the disturbance comes from it is things like this, the Southern residents territory is in a high shipping area.
 
 
4. Potential oil spills


If this issue isn't resolved, these whales will disappear. The only place people will be able to see killer whales on the West Coast will be at SeaWorld San Diego.

That again isn't true, the Northern residents are not endangered nor are the transients or other whales swimming in overlapping territory

 SeaWorld Is Not The Problem With The Southern Resident Killer Whales
Southern-Resident-Killer-Whale-Population-2014
The graph above paints a picture of the population for the Southern Resident Killer Whales. Please click Awesone Ocean's link to read what it says about the graph

SeaWorld stopped collecting killer whales from the Southern Resident pods in 1966; other marine parks continued to collect killer whales in the Pacific Northwest until 1973 when the population bottomed out at 66 members.
This is the biggest lie on the pageSeaworld DID NOT stop capturing the Southern Residents in 1966 at all.
In 1976, Washington State sued SeaWorld for violating its permits during the violent captures, and the court ruled in favor of outraged citizens and Dr. Newby, who testified against the capturing of orcas in Puget Sound. SeaWorld was included by name in the court’s decision prohibiting orcas from being forcibly removed from their rightful ocean home.

                                          Ralph Munro Former Secretary of State

As you can see from the video evidence, from the former Secretary of State Seaworld were still capturing in 1976. After being banned from US waters, they tried to move onto Alaskan waters and when that was stopped without taking a breath they moved on to Iceland.

Using the graph posted by Awesome Ocean, you can see the dip around the time they were capturing, and the population never recovered as they took calves who would have reached breeding age in their late teens, taking out a whole breeding population.

Over time, the Southern Residents bounced back to a peak population of 98 members in 1995. Since the peak in 1995, the population has been in decline ... and it has NOTHING to do with SeaWorld.

It has everything to do with Seaworld as you can see above. When you lie about the dates you can make it look like it has nothing to do with them, but when Courts are involved the timeline is plain to see and be researched.
 
 After examining this tragic death, the persecution of SeaWorld and other zoological organizations by animal activists is reckless and irresponsible.
Not when the people who support you can see that this is a downright lie you are trying to tell them, to further Seaworld's agenda. It is a plain insult to those people who can see for themselves what happened at what time.

SeaWorld is the only zoological organization in the world that has the expertise, resources and facilities to address the complex issues facing the declining population of Southern Resident Killer Whales.
Fact: There are only around 12 female Southern Resident Killer Whales left that are capable of having calves. When the Southern Residents were surveyed in 2004  Not a single animal was encountered that was estimated to be born between the years 1967 and 1970.
43% of reproductive females were taken from the population during those captures, which does not include the possible calves from those females too.


Fact: No killer whale at SeaWorld has ever died of starvation. No killer whale at Seaworld has ever died of old age either
Fact: In the past 3 years, there have been no successful killer whale births among Southern Resident Killer Whales. In the past 4 years, SeaWorld has seen the successful births of 5 killer whales. But none of those have any relevance as Seaworld breed hybrid orcas in their tanks with no conservation value what so ever.
Fact: In 2014, SeaWorld funded a project to study and assess the Southern Resident Killer Whale population's food sources and identify potential long term solutions.
It says this project is $24,964. Seaworld said they were giving $10 million to the Southern residents. What are the results of this study, is it done yet, has it started yet and where is the rest of the money Seaworld promised? 

If you are an animal activist, and you truly care about the welfare and wellbeing of animals, put down your signs, stop the angry tweets, and join SeaWorld and other great nonprofits as they work to save this endangered population of orcas in the Pacific Northwest.

Make a list with evidence of what exactly Seaworld has done for the Southern Residents!!

The same response applies to the last time you used a Southern Resident's death to try to manipulate people to support Seaworld.
 As for this last statement my personal comment to that would be GET STUFFED. Had you not been so focused on your own agenda, making stupid little meme's to attack PETA hoping people wouldn't see what was going on  and spent less time slating people for doing fantastic jobs out there with the wild orcas, you would have known already that people CAN and DO fight for the Southern Residents whilst STILL protesting Seaworld.

This once again is my own personal opinion, but I think this is the lowest I have ever seen Awesome Ocean stoop, to use the death of a Southern Resident to try to rally more support for Seaworld. You really do make me sick.

Cetaceans Released from Captivity

Pilot whale released from Miami Seaquarium
 
 
 
Cetacean Releases compiled by Ken Balcomb  

As we know it is often said that cetaceans in captivity cannot be released thanks to the research by Ken Balcomb it has been proven that they not only can be released they HAVE been released.

See the list below, I have highlighted some points you may find extra interesting too
 
Kenneth C. Balcomb III
Copyright 1995
Center for Whale Research
Friday Harbor, WA 98250

"Over the years that dolphins have been kept in captivity, some have been released back into the wild after varying periods of time. During most of these early dolphin reintroductions, the animals were often taken from a tank and placed back in the bays close to the facilities. Some of these were display animals no longer of use to the facility. In all these cases there was no followup monitoring." (Bassos, 1993).
This document is dedicated to "Keiko", "Junior", "Tanouk" and "Lolita" , as well as the many smaller captive cetaceans which have been and are maintained in solitary confinement and inadequate facilities devoid of significant educational benefit to the public or conservation benefit to their species. They could be returned to the benefit of all.
For this preliminary summary, I have included anecdotal reports of releases of dolphins (including large species such as killer whales) from captivity by institutions and individuals which have maintained them in many parts of the world. I have also included a few examples of reintroductions of stranded cetaceans which provide useful background on followup documentation. But, it is not the astonishing durability and survival instinct of these animals in nature that is in question. Currently, a major point of contention in the issue of release or reinstatement of captive cetaceans is whether the dolphin or whale will readapt to catching live prey after it has been fed piecemeal in prolonged captivity. Another point of contention is whether released animals will spread acquired pathogens to the wild community, or have sufficient immunity from pathogens in the wild. And, a third point concerns the question of whether a released cetacean will readapt socially, or be condemned to a life of loneliness.
These points must be responsibly addressed; but, if post-captive release is lethal, dangerous and irresponsible, then why has it been done so many times by organizations that are generally considered responsible?
This is not intended to be an exhaustive list, and any additions or suggestions the reader can offer will be appreciated. Considering the worldwide, sometimes illegal and often unregulated trade in these animals, there undoubtedly have been other releases for institutional and business convenience which are not included herein. In the interest of proper historical documentation, I will list only those which have been published or have been reported to me firsthand by reliable sources. This does not include reports of approximately 20 dolphins that have been rehabilitated from stranding events and released back to the wild (NMFS records). It will be particularly useful in future editions of this publication to compile a list of releases of cetaceans that were examined by qualified veterinarians prior to release, and for which veterinary records (and/or specimen materials) may be available. This information, together with similarly compiled information from stranding events may yield useful epidemiological insights into the question of immunocompetence and introduction of 'captive acquired pathogens' to wild populations. The state of the art in telemetry and observational studies can in many cases reveal whether released animals fare well and are socially reinstated.
In the case of non-native introductions, DNA techniques may now be employed in studies of the host populations to reveal additional information concerning the genetic ramifications of non-native releases (eg. in The Bahamas Tursiops truncatus population; or in operational releases such as done by the U.S. Navy, other navies, and swim programs).
Whatever one's view on captivity may be, it is in the interest of humanitarian treatment of those animals which are no longer suitable for display, etc., to seriously examine release and reinstatement to the wild as an option for their retirement. In this respect, the genetic and immunological issues are important and should be objectively addressed; but, in a very real sense they represent spilt milk due to the common past practices of institutions the public has entrusted with the care of marine mammals.

Dolphin (Tursiops sp.) releases
1993. Flipper – a male bottlenose dolphin released off Laguna, Brazil after approximately ten years of captivity (Rollo, 1993). Since release, Flipper has been seen along at least 155 miles of coastline, often in the company of other dolphins. His most recent sighting was in early 1995. Returned to native habitat. One dolphin; Captive 10 years; followup successful.

1992. TT-745 – a male bottlenose dolphin captured on 20 July 1988 in Mississippi was inadvertently released by the U.S. Navy on 2 June 1992 at an undisclosed location (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Not reported whether returned to native habitat. One dolphin; Captive 4 years; no followup. There should be more information available on this animal through FOIA request.

1992. TT-682 "Scanner"– a male bottlenose dolphin captured on 08/30/84 was inadvertently released by the U.S. Navy on 1 May 1992 at an undisclosed location (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Not reported whether returned to native habitat. Good veterinary records at first in Hawaii, later in Key West Florida to 4/24/92; ran off with a pod 4/22/92, but apparently was recalled or voluntarily returned; transferred to Morehead City NC on 4/28/92. Presumably, Scanner went AWOL off North Carolina. In 1988 this dolphin was reported to have exhibited skin lesions similar to those observed in east coast strandings; should seek samples. Dr. Greg Bossart signed veterinary report of 3/17/88 indicating skin dermatitis of viral etiology. One dolphin; Captive 8 years; no followup.

1992. Bahama Mama – an adult female bottlenose dolphin inadvertently released after at least seventeen years of captivity (Claridge and Balcomb, 1993). No official followup occurred, however this dolphin was positively photo-identified up to eight months after release in the company of wild dolphins in the Bahamas. Assumed returned to native habitat. One dolphin; Captive 17 years; followup successful.

1992. Rajah (male), Nero (male), Frodo (male), Rani (pregnant female), Echo (juvenile daughter of Rani), Mila (female) and Luka (her calf), Nakita (juvenile daughter of Mila), Kia (juvenile) – nine bottlenose dolphins in a socially perturbed group released 13 January 1992 off Perth, Australia, after eleven years of captivity (Gales and Waples, 1993). Rajah, the lone male, followed the research boat out to sea and within ten minutes had his first encounter with wild dolphins, two subadults. "Rajah seemed to have no problem keeping pace with the wild dolphins..." Eleven days later, he approached the research boat excitedly and followed it back into the seapen enclosure. He had lost 18 kg (10.8% of his prerelease weight), which was considered unsatisfactory, and he is now kept permanently in a large netted enclosure within a marina. Mila was recaptured 28 February, and she was reported to have lost 23 kg (14.7% of her prerelease body weight), which was considered unsatisfactory. She also is now kept permanently in the large netted enclosure. Her calf (Luka) presumably died. One of the juveniles (Echo) was recaptured one week after release, having lost 10kg (8.5%) of her prerelease body weight, which was considered unsatisfactory. She too is now maintained permanently in the large netted enclosure. Frodo appeared to be in fine condition on 16 February. Nero was seen at sea on 31 January. Several other sightings of these released dolphins (unidentified as to which ones) have been made as late as September 1992. The authors report that, "The major reason for the ambiguity of the results was our inability to effectively track the dolphins whilst they were at sea." Returned to native habitat. Nine dolphins; Captive 11 years; 3 recaptured, 1 presumably died, 2 followup successful, and 3 no followup.

1992. Matt, an adult male bottlenose dolphin was rehabilitated, freezebranded, and then released after 37 days at Mote Marine Laboratory's facility (Gorzelany, 1992). Within a matter of minutes he was associating with a mother-calf pair in the area. At least 12 sightings of Matt have been reported in the first nine months following release. Returned to native habitat. One dolphin; Captive 37 days; followup successful.

1992. Annessa, a captive-born Atlantic bottle-nose dolphin held at the Dolphin Research Center in the Florida Keys, disappeared and was feared lost during a hurricane in August, 1992. Annessa survived the hurricane, however, and was adopted by a pod of wild dolphins. She has been sighted numerous times - healthy an foraging on her own. One dolphin; Captive since birth; followup successful.

1991. Rocky (male), Missie (female) and Silver (male) – three bottlenose dolphins released off Turks and Caicos Islands, after twenty, twenty-two, and fifteen years of captivity, respectively (Klinowska and Brown, 1985). "In the acclimation seapen, they learned how to capture live fish" (McKenna, 1992). Released September 1991. All have been resighted numerous times since then, and Silver has been seen as recently as early 1994. In several of the recent sightings, Silver was in the company of JoJo, a "friendly" dolphin that swims near Club Med at Providenciales, Turks and Caicos. Rocky and Missie were captured in the North Atlantic or Gulf of Mexico (probably off Florida), and Silver was captured off Taiwan in the Pacific. Not returned to native habitat.

Note: This reintroduction was recently labelled as fraud by marine parks spokespeople in the United Kingdom, but this author is convinced that it was conducted responsibly and without intent to deceive. Three dolphins; Captive 20, 22 and 15 years; followup tentatively successful.

1990. Echo (male) and Misha (male) – two adult bottlenose dolphins released intentionally after two years of research (Wells, 1991; Bassos, 1993), with extensive followup. The dolphins had been captured in 1988 with the intention of studying aspects of their reintroduction following captivity. Released on 6 October 1990 off Bishop Harbor, Tampa Bay, Florida in the vicinity where they had been captured. These two dolphins have been resighted numerous times (recently March, 1994), and they appear to have successfully reacclimated to the wild. Released to native habitat. Two dolphins; Captive 2 years; followup successful.

1990. TT-652 "Budro", a male bottlenose dolphin captured 02/24/84 in Mississippi was inadvertently released by the U.S. Navy on 06/04/90 at an undisclosed location (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). Budro was at Key West, FL on 5/2/90. No followup reported. Not known if returned to native habitat. Veterinary records 3/29/90 indicate Budro exhibited anorexia, possible ulcer which was medicated; and 4/22/90 records indicate "animal well fleshed and healthy" at that time. One dolphin; Captive 4 years; no followup.

1987. Joe (male) and Rosie (female) – two bottlenose dolphins released off Wassaw Island, Georgia, after seven years of captivity (Coyle and Hickman, 1988). "All reports of their activity in the wild indicate that they are in good health and have associations with resident pods." Released July 13, 1987. These dolphins were captured off Mississippi and released off Georgia. Not returned to native habitat. Two dolphins; Captive 7 years; followup successful.

Note: Dr. David Bain has suggested that Joe and Rosie may have been the carriers of disease which ravaged dolphins along east coast in 1987/88, but on review of the facts that seems improbable. The massive die-off of dolphins along the east coast began off New Jersey in June 1987 before Joe and Rosie were released, and it progressed southward along the coast. Strandings of dolphins did not occur off Georgia until year end. A retrospective analysis in 1993 indicates the die-off may have been due to a morbillivirus with environmental contaminants implicated in immune system failure. Phocine morbillivirus has been detected in New England since 1986 and earlier.

1986. TT-658, "Echo", a female bottlenose dolphin captured 03/30/84 in Mississippi was inadvertently released 07/15/86 by the U.S. Navy at an undisclosed location (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). On 2/24/86 Echo was stationed at NOSC, Hawaii. No followup reported. Not known if returned to native habitat. Veterinary records indicate nothing remarkable in her history. One dolphin; Captive 2+ years; no followup.

1985. TT-672, a male bottlenose dolphin captured 09/06/84 in Mississippi was inadvertently released 08/02/85 by the U.S. Navy at an undisclosed location (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Not known if returned to native habitat. Veterinary records indicate NOSC San Diego. One dolphin; Captive 11 months; no followup.

1984. TT-#13, a female bottlenose dolphin captured 03/23/84 in Mississippi was released by the U.S. Navy ten days later, presumably in the vicinity of the capture site (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed released to native habitat. One dolphin; Captive 10 days; no followup.

1984. TT-#10, a male bottlenose dolphin captured 02/24/84 in Mississippi was released by the U.S. Navy twenty days later, presumably in the vicinity of the capture site (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed released to native habitat. One dolphin; Captive 20 days; no followup.

1984. TT-#11, a female bottlenose dolphin captured 03/03/84 in Mississippi was released by the U.S. Navy twelve days later, presumably in the vicinity of the capture site (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed released to native habitat. One dolphin; Captive 12 days; no followup.

1984. Nine bottlenose dolphins released after three months captivity for the filming of "Cocoon" by Fox Studios off Nassau, Bahamas. No official followup occurred. Twelve dolphins had reportedly been captured off Eleuthera, Bahamas (S. Claridge, pers. comm.). One died, two are reportedly now at UNEXSO, Freeport, Bahamas. Released to native habitat. Nine dolphins; Captive 3 months; no followup.

1984. TT-#14, a male bottlenose dolphin captured 07/26/84 in Mississippi was intentionally released 08/14/84 by the U.S. Navy, presumably near the capture site (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed released to native habitat. One dolphin; Captive 18 days; no followup.

1984. One Atlantic bottlenose dolphin captured 07/03/84 off the Florida panhandle was released 08/26/84 by the Gulfarium of Fort Walton Beach because it "would not adapt to captivity." No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 57 days; no followup.

1983. One Atlantic bottlenose dolphin captured 06/22/83 in Mississippi was released 07/07/83 by the Aquarium of Niagara Falls (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 15 days; no followup.

1983. One Atlantic bottlenose dolphin captured 07/27/83 by Sea World for Dr. Gerald Kooyman (Scripps Institute of Oceanography) was released 10/01/83, presumably near the capture site (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 2 months; no followup.

1983. Two bottlenose dolphins were released in Mississippi sound approximately one month after capture by Marine Animal Productions, Inc. (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. Two dolphins; Captive 1 month; no followup.

1983. Two Atlantic bottlenose dolphins were reported in the NMFS MMIR 08/03/93 to have been captured by Sea World and subsequently released. No followup reported. Presumably native reintroduction. Two dolphins; Captive 2 weeks; no followup.

1982. One Atlantic bottlenose dolphin was reported released in Mississippi Sound four days after capture by the Dinnes Memorial Veterinary Hospital in Saugus California (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 4 days; no followup.

Note: It is interesting that the MMIR reports 45 bottlenose dolphins held by Dinnes Memorial Veterinary Hospital suddenly commencing in 1982 and extending until 1991 - 25 died, and the remaining were transferred to other organizations, eg. The Mirage in Las Vegas, Brookfield Zoo, National Aquarium in Baltimore, Mystic Aquarium, Marine Animal Productions, and Marineland Spain. I telephoned the veterinary hospital on 17 August 1994 and was told by the receptionist that the dolphins they owned were leased to exhibitors in various states when they were held, and they no longer hold dolphins. The average time of survival for the dolphins that died in this "rent-a-dolphin" program was less than three years. Deaths were attributed to such causes as: chlorine toxicity, palm fronds, oleander poisoning, sting ray spines, intestinal obstruction, pneumonia, and accidental drowning.

1982. Eight Atlantic bottlenose dolphins were reported in the NMFS MMIR 08/03/93 to have been captured by Sea World, three died within ten days of capture of pneumonitis, pancreatitis and possible septicemia, and two dolphins were released. Two dolphins; Captive 9-12 days; no followup.

1982. One Atlantic bottlenose dolphin was released one month after capture by Marine Animal Productions, Inc. (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 1 month; no followup.

1981. Eight Atlantic bottlenose dolphins were captured and held at Sea World of Florida for up to 90 days while they were used in experiments to monitor the development of freeze-brands. Released in the vicinity of capture site in Indian River, Florida and followup conducted by Sea World (Odell & Asper, 1990). Native Reintroduction. Eight dolphins; Captive <90 days; followup successful.

Note: Although not reported by the authors, there were sixteen dolphins reported in the NMFS MMIR 08/03/93 to have been captured by Sea World in 1981, one of which died during capture, two died subsequently, and two were sent to the New England Aquarium.


1980. An adult male bottlenose dolphin was rehabilitated from stranding on Florida coast, and released by Miami Seaquarium after four months captivity. No followup occurred, but the dolphin was observed joining a large pod of dolphins after release. Native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 4 months; no followup.

1980. Two Atlantic bottlenose dolphins were captured and held at Sea World of Florida for up to 90 days while they were used in experiments to monitor the development of freeze-brands. Released in vicinity of capture site in Indian River, Florida and followup conducted by Sea World (Odell & Asper, 1990). Two dolphins; Captive <90 days; followup successful.

Note: Although not reported by the authors, there were fifteen dolphins reported in NMFS MMIR 08/03/93 to have been captured by Sea World in 1980, of which seven were released up to 90 days later and five others subsequently died in captivity. Native reintroduction.

1980. One Atlantic bottlenose dolphin captured 07/22/80 at Rockport Texas by Adriatic Sea World was released 07/31/80 presumably in the vicinity of the capture site (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 9 days; no followup.

1979. Two Pacific bottlenose dolphins (6 yr male, 8 yr female) permitted ocean access after four years of captivity at Sea Life Park in Hawaii (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). The dolphins gradually ventured further from their seapen, and eventually after four months of ocean access they chose to remain at sea. No followup occurred, but it was assumed they had reintegrated into a local pod. Native reintroduction. Two dolphins; Captive 4 years; no followup.

1979. One Atlantic bottlenose dolphin was released 11/05/79 by Marine Animal Productions Inc. after being held in captivity for one week (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 7 days; no followup.

1979. One Atlantic bottlenose dolphin released after one month captivity by Marine World Africa USA (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 1 month; no followup.

1979. One Atlantic bottlenose dolphin released to Gulf of Mexico after two months captivity by Marineland Cote D'Azure, France (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 2 months; no followup.

1978/79. Ten Atlantic bottlenose dolphins were captured between 23 August 1978 and 15 February 1979 and held at Sea World of Florida for up to 90 days while they were used in experiments to monitor the development of freeze-brands. Released at capture site in Indian River, Florida and followup monitoring was conducted by Sea World (Odell & Asper, 1990). Native reintroduction. Ten dolphins; Captive <90 days; followup successful.

Note: Although not reported by the authors, three dolphins reported in NMFS MMIR 08/03/93 for this period died during or after capture.

1978. TT-#08, a female bottlenose dolphin captured 04/04/78 in Mississippi was released by the U.S. Navy the next day, presumable in the vicinity of the capture site (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 1 day; no followup.

1978. Four Atlantic bottlenose dolphins were captured by Sea World and released up to two months later, presumably in the vicinity of the capture site (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Assumed native reintroduction. Four dolphins; Captive 2 months; no followup.

1978. One Pacific bottlenose dolphin was captured by Sea World and released ten days later, presumably in the vicinity of the capture site (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Assumed native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 10 days; no followup.

1978. One Pacific bottlenose dolphin (Leo Tg-558M) was captured for the US Navy on 20 January 1977 off Catalina Island, California and escaped 15 January 1978 off Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii where it "joined an indigenous herd (confirmed)." One dolphin; Captive one year; followup apparently successful.

1977. TT-#07, a female bottlenose dolphin captured 08/19/77 in Florida was released five days later by the U.S. Navy, presumably in the vicinity of the capture site (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Assumed native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 5 days; no followup.

1977. Two female Atlantic bottlenose dolphins used for research project by Dr. Lou Herman in Hawaii were illegally released off Oahu, Hawaii after more than five years of captivity (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup occurred. Non-native reintroduction. Two dolphins; Captive 5 years; no followup.

Note: DNA studies of the Hawaiian Pacific host population may reveal useful information concerning the success or failure of this release.

1977. Seven Atlantic bottlenose dolphins were captured by Sea World and released up to three months later, presumably in the vicinity of the capture site (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. Seven dolphins; Captive <90 days; no followup.

1975. TT-495, a male bottlenose dolphin captured 07/11/74 in Mississippi was inadvertently released by the U.S. Navy 10/10/75 at an undisclosed location (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Unknown reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 15 months; no followup.

1975. TT-499, a male bottlenose dolphin captured 07/13/74 in Mississippi was inadvertently released by the U.S. Navy 08/25/75 at an undisclosed location (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Unknown reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 13 months; no followup.

1975. One Atlantic bottlenose dolphin captured 05/10/75 in Mississippi by Marine Animal Productions Inc. was released 05/23/75, and another captured 10/19/75 was released 11/05/75 because they were " not adapting." (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 13-16 days; no followup.

1974. TT-#02, a male bottlenose dolphin captured 07/09/74 in Mississippi was released by the U.S. Navy six days later, presumably in the vicinity of the capture site (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). Three additional dolphins captured the same day were also released. No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. Four dolphins; Captive 6 days; no followup.

1974. Liberty and Florida – two bottlenose dolphins released off Eleuthera in the Bahamas after two years of captivity. Prior to release, the dolphins were readapted to feeding on live fish, freeze branded, and airlifted to the Bahamas for release. One of these may now (1994) be the dolphin known as JoJo off Turks and Caicos. (McKenna, 1992). Non-native reintroduction. Two dolphins; Captive 2 years; no followup.

1974. Six bottlenose dolphins released after one and a half years in captivity for the filming of "Day of the Dolphin" off Marsh Harbour, Abaco Bahamas. No official followup occurred, however local residents reported seeing some of these distinctively marked individuals up to two years later. The dolphins had been captured off Key Largo, Florida and released in the Bahamas (Dr. Jesse White, pers. comm.). Non-native reintroduction.
Note: DNA techniques could determine whether there was any genetic influence by this reintroduction. Six dolphins; Captive 18 months; followup?

1972. Gussie (male) – an adult bottlenose dolphin released in Biscayne Bay, Florida after two years of captivity at Miami Seaquarium. Reintroduction because of unsuitability for training. No followup occurred. Native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 2 years; no followup.

1972. Opo (female) – a bottlenose dolphin returned to original capture site in Biscayne Bay, Florida after one year of captivity at Miami Seaquarium. No followup occurred, but the dolphin had readapted to diet of live fish and was allowed to swim away. Native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 1 year; no followup.

1972. Two bottlenose dolphins used for behavioral studies at Mote Marine Laboratory were marked and released after less than one year in captivity (Irvine and Wells, 1972). No followup occurred. Native reintroduction. Two dolphins; Captive <1 year;
.
1970. Adult female bottlenose "diseased" dolphin released in Biscayne Bay following stillbirth after unreported number of years in captivity at Miami Seaquarium (Dr. Jesse White, pers. comm.). No followup occurred, but dolphin was observed swimming in Biscayne Bay following release. Native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive ? ;no followup.

1970's? "A single mature male dolphin was released from an Aquarium at Port Elizabeth Museum in South Africa and although no specific effort was made to track the animal he was sighted on several occasions post release (G.Ross, Pers. comm.)" Ref. Gales and Waples, 1993. One dolphin; Captive ? years; no followup.

1967. Three or four dolphins released off Key Biscayne, Florida by Dr. John Lilly after several years of communications experiments. Reference personal communication from Rosi L├Şvdal, who had seen the dolphins numerous times while Dr. Lilly was conducting experiments, and whose son (Scott Kurth) was present at the release. Rosi reportedly observed one of the released animals off West Andros in 1973, and identified it by a distinctive notch on the top leading edge of the dorsal fin. She also reports that the dolphin appeared to have recognized her, as well. Native reintroduction. Three or Four dolphins; Captive ? years; followup ?

1966. Dal (male) and Suwa (female) – two bottlenose dolphins released in Florida to open lagoon after two to four years of captivity, and fed by human caretaker for more than twenty years. Dal died of natural causes in 1986, and Suwa injured a young male swimmer in ocean in 1987, and was subsequently no longer allowed out of lagoon. Pet relationship, not complete reintroduction.

1964. Pedro – an adult male bottlenose dolphin released by Miami Seaquarium after approximately ten years of captivity. No official followup occurred, but the dolphin was observed swimming in Biscayne Bay following release. Native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 10 years; no followup.

1960's. Dolly (female) – Atlantic bottlenose dolphin released by US Navy near Key West, Florida following unreported length of time in captivity (Lockyer, 1990). No followup occurred, but this dolphin was reported for many years to be sociable with people in the Florida Keys. Assumed Native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive ? years; no followup.

1960's or 1970's. Dee-Dee – an Atlantic bottlenose dolphin released by Hugh Downs following unreported length of time in captivity (Miami News Weekender, May 16, 1987). Dr. Henry Truby (Professor of Pediatrics, University of Miami) reported, "We released a number of dolphins with no problems."... "We kept trying to release Hugh Down's dolphin and he'd come back home like a boomerang. He'd be waiting for us at the dock." Assumed Native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive ? years; no followup.

Dolphin (Lagenorhynchus sp.) releases
1991. On 15 February, a 161-kg male Atlantic white-sided dolphin stranded on Lieutenant Island, Wellfleet, Massachusetts and was transported by New England Aquarium staff to Mystic Marineland Aquarium. After eight months of rehabilitation the animal was fitted with a satellite-monitored Argos radio transmitter and released off Stellwagen Bank in the Gulf of Maine. Transmission continued for six days with normal dive patterns, until the tag was apparently dislodged during a storm. (Mate, et al., 1994) One dolphin; Captive 8 months; followup successful.

1979. South of Montauk Point Long Island, NY, a white-sided dolphin was released with spaghetti tag. Reportedly seen one month later swimming with alarge group of lags. (pers. comm, J. Lawrence Dunn). One dolphin; Captive ?; followup successful.

Killer Whale (Orcinus orca) releases

Please take note how long some of these were held for during the capture process 

Pacific Northwest Reintroductions. Although no official followup on reintroductions occurred, photo-identification studies which commenced in the early and mid 1970's in British Columbia and Washington State have documented the recovery and social structure of virtually all of the pods which were exploited for public display. We list reintroductions following capture events to elucidate potential social effects of perturbation, which were unknown and unconsidered at the time of capture. In all of the following cases, the sub-sequent independent followup by the Center for Whale Research indicates that the reintroductions can be considered successful, and have been verified by the author, except as otherwise cited.
1976. S and O pods, numbering 7 whales, were captured in Puget Sound and held temporarily while two whales (O-4, O-5) were selected for a Sea World and University of Washington radio tag research project. The unselected whales were released after one week to reintegrate back into the transient community. The two selected whales were maintained in captivity for 55 days before being released to reintegrate back into the transient community (Erickson, 1977). They have been independently photodocumented almost every year since release and are still alive 19 years post-release. Native reintroduction.

Note: Transient whales range over thousands of miles and could potentially have great difficulty relocating their podmates following reintroduction; nonetheless these two certainly did reintegrate into their social community. Seven whales; Captive 7-55 days; followup successful.

1975. Q pod, numbering six whales, was captured off southern Vancouver Island and held temporarily while a young female and a young male were removed for public display. The unselected whales were released to reintegrate back into the transient community. Photodocumented numerous times since release. Native reintroduction. Four whales; Captive ?; followup successful.

1973. Unknown pod (presumably southern resident) was captured in Washington State and held temporarily while one mature female was removed for public display. Native reintroduction. ???

1973. K pod, numbering approximately 17 whales, was captured off South Vancouver Island and held temporarily while one mature female was removed for public display. An adult male (K-1) was retained for two months before being released to reintegrate into his pod. Native reintroduction. Sixteen whales; Captive ? to 60 days; followup successful.

Note: K-1, alias Taku, is a prominent member of K pod, and is now approximately 39 years old, based upon his state of maturity in 1973.

1973. L pod, numbering approximately 39 whales, was captured off South Vancouver Island and held temporarily while a mature male and a mature female were removed for public display. The unselected whales were released to reintegrate back into the local community. Native reintroduction. Thirty-seven whales: Captive ?; followup successful.

1972. J pod, numbering approximately 15 whales, was captured in Puget Sound and held temporarily while one young male was removed for public display. The unselected whales were released to reintegrate back into the local community. Native reintroduction. Fourteen whales; Captive ?; followup successful.

1971. L pod, numbering approximately 45 whales, was captured in Possession Sound and held temporarily while two young females and a young male were removed for public display. The unselected whales were released to reintegrate back into the local community. Native reintroduction. Forty-three whales; Captive ?; followup successful.

1971. Unknown pod (presumably southern resident) of whales was captured and held in Washington State while two young males were removed for public display. Native reintroduction. ???

1971. Ishmael, a young male killer whale from J or K pod was inducted into the US Navy Project Deep Ops in 1968, but escaped from his handlers off the north coast of Oahu, Hawaii in February 1971 (Bowers and Henderson, 1972). No followup due to radio tag failure. Non-native reintroduction. One whale; Captive 28 months; no followup.

Note: If DNA studies were conducted on killer whales in Hawaiian or Central Pacific waters, it is possible that some genetic influence of Ishmael's reintroduction might be detected. It is also possible that Ishmael may yet be found by photo-identification studies.
1970. M pod, numbering three whales, was captured off southern Vancouver Island and held temporarily. One young female whale (Chimo) was removed for public display, and the other two (M1, M2) were maintained in a seapen at Pedder Bay, BC. These two whales "escaped" the seapen after eight months captivity and reintegrated back into the transient whale community (Hoyt, 1990). They have been photodocumented almost every year since. Native reintroduction. Two whales; Captive 8 months; followup successful.
1970. J, K, and L pods, numbering approximately 85 whales (contemporary news said 50 whales, but number was higher), were captured in Possession Sound and held temporarily while twelve whales were removed for public display (or by accidental drowning). The unselected surviving whales were released to reintegrate back into the local community. Native reintroduction. Thirty-eight to seventy-three whales; Captive 13 days; followup successful.

Note: The only surviving captive whale from this event now resides in solitary confinement at Miami Seaquarium. She is a J, K, or L pod female now approximately 31 years of age. DNA and communications research proposals to enrich her environment and examine the strength of social bonds over the long term have been presented to Miami Seaquarium.
1969. A5 pod, numbering approximately sixteen whales, was captured in Pender Harbor Vancouver Island and held temporarily while six whales were removed for public display (Hoyt, 1990). The unselected whales were released to reintegrate back into the local community. Native reintroduction. Ten whales; Captive ?; followup successful.

Note: Only one whale survives in captivity from this capture event: Corky at Sea World, San Diego.  "Prime Time Live" surprised Sea World officials by playing an audio tape of A5 pod at Corky's tank. This impromptu experiment aired in August, 1993. Corky visibly shuddered as she heard her family's voices. Yaka was involved in a study reported in 1993 in which, "Results of this study demonstrate that captive killer whales will pursue, capture and eat live fish. The whales in this study used echolocation while in pursuit of fish, as well as at other times." (Newman and Markowitz, 1993).

1969. A male killer whale from A5 pod released after one year captivity in pen in Pender Harbor since 1968 capture. No details available. Native reintroduction. One whale; Captive 1 year; followup ?

1968. J and L pods, numbering approximately 65 whales, were captured in Puget Sound and held temporarily while five whales were removed for public display or military purposes (US Navy). The unselected whales were released to reintegrate back into the local community. Native reintroduction. Sixty whales; Captive ?; followup successful.
Note: See Ishmael, 1971 reintroduction.

1968. A5 pod, numbering approximately 18 whales, was captured off northern Vancouver Island and held temporarily while six whales were removed for public display. The unselected whales were released to reintegrate back into the local community. Native reintroduction. Twelve whales; Captive ?; followup successful.

1967. K pod, numbering approximately 25 whales, was captured in Puget Sound and held temporarily while eight whales were removed for public display. The unselected whales were released to reintegrate back into the local community. Native reintroduction. Seventeen whales; Captive ?; followup successful.

Icelandic killer whale reintroductions. As in the Pacific Northwest, no official followup studies have been conducted to ascertain whether there was successful reintegration of any of the released animals. In contrast to the Pacific Northwest, there are no independent followup or photoidentification studies either. It is clear, however, that killer whales have been released back into the Icelandic population after periods of captivity (Dudok van Heel, 1986; Sigurjonsson, 1988), and there is no evidence that they have not been reaccepted and fared as well as has been reported for Pacific Northwest animals. At least one Icelandic reintroduction after captivity of several months duration was considered by world experts as the best option for survival for the reintroduced animals. The following records are the only ones we know about:
1981. Seven killer whales captured and one released shortly after being captured to reintegrate back into the wild community. One whale; Captive ?; no followup.

1980. Six killer whales captured and one released shortly after being captured to reintegrate back into the wild community. One whale; Captive ?; no followup.

1978. Eleven killer whales captured and three released after being kept in a holding pool for several months, during which time they developed frostbite and skin infections. Two other killer whales died in this holding pool before shipment from Iceland. Three whales; Captive ? months; no followup.

1976. Six killer whales captured, one released shortly after being captured and two released after being kept in a floating pen. Three whales; Captive ?; no followup.

Other successful whale reintroductions
Most other cetacean reintroductions have been conducted following rehabilitation from stranding events or release from captivity due to health/behavior problems. The followup for such reintroductions has generally been brief or non-existent, but there are a few notable exceptions:
1972. Gray whale (Eschrictius robustus). A baby gray whale (Gigi) was captured in early March of 1971 during an expedition sponsored by Sea World, Inc. This whale was maintained in captivity for one year at Sea World, San Diego before being instrumented with a radio tag and released on 13 March 1972, during the gray whale northerly migration. The reintroduction was considered a success, but official followup was discontinued in May 1972 when the radio tag failed (Evans, 1974). There were several confirmed sightings of this whale after radio tag failure, one of which was two years later reporting the square white scar intentionally placed for identification. One whale; Captive 1 year; followup successful.

1985. Humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae). "Humphrey", the famous wrong way whale which swam up the Sacramento River, CA in November 1985 was escorted back to sea following a 24 day ordeal ending in a freshwater slough. He stranded several times, and appeared close to death on more than one occasion, but he nonetheless survived his ordeal and was documented by photo-identification studies numerous times for the three following years (Calambokidis, et. al., 1989). While not an actual reintroduction from captivity, Humphrey provides a remarkable example of survival resilience in these animals. One whale; 'Captive' 24 days; followup successful.

Pilot whale (Globicephala melaena). Following rehabilitation from stranding events, pilot whales have been reintroduced to the ocean environment on numerous occasions throughout the world (Robson, 1984 lists six successful pod rescues around Australia and New Zealand). Rarely, has there been any followup. We cite a couple of examples where there has been followup, and would appreciate learning of any others.

1991. Two pilot whales were rehabilitated by the Miami Seaquarium from a stranding which occurred on the Florida coast in 1991. They were satellite tagged by Dr. Bruce Mate and released in the vicinity where they had stranded. These two whales were resighted off the coast of Florida in February 1994 by the US Coast Guard, and their tag harnesses were still attached, although the batteries had died. (Mate, pers. comm. 1994). Two whales; Captive ?; followup successful.

1987. Three pilot whales were rehabilitated at the New England Aquarium in Boston, MA from a stranding which occurred on Cape Cod in December, 1986. They were released at sea off Cape Cod on June 29, 1987. One whale was fitted with a Telonics-built Argos transmitter (satellite tag), and one was fitted with a conventional radio tag. "The satellite-monitored whale was tracked by Argos for 95 days, as the whale swam at least 7,600 kilometers. Just three weeks after tagging, this Argos-equipped whale was spotted in a group of more than 100 pilot whales, suggesting that its movements and dive patterns were typical of normal pilot whales." (Mate, 1989). Three whales; Captive 6 months; followup successful.
 
1967. Pilot whale (Globicephala melaena). After almost eight years of captivity at Marineland of the Pacific, a twenty year old pilot whale named Bimbo was successfully reintroduced to the wild. Captured in January/February, 1960 at a length of 17' 6", he performed well for about three years. When his female pilot whale and dolphin companions died, Bimbo's behavior changed drastically. "One day he would be as friendly as ever, the next in a wildly agitated state or apathetic and apparently depressed" (Valentry, 1969). It was decided to keep him as an attraction whether or not he performed. After four years of treatment including antidepressant drugs and tranquilizers, Bimbo smashed into a window, flooding spectators. He was released in August, 1967 at a length of 20' 6", "...after much planning and weeks of isolation in a tank for physical tests to make sure he was fit for fending on his own at sea" (op. cit.). He was resighted in 1969 near Santa Barbara, CA by a U.S. Navy collector, and again in 1974 near San Clemente identified from photographs by L Cornell and J. Prescott (pers. comm., John Prescott.) One whale; Captive 7.5 years; followup successful.

Other cetacean species reintroductions with no followup.
1988. Two harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) released 11/16/88 after eight months of captivity by Zeedierenpark Harderwijk (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. Two porpoises; Captive 8 months; no followup.

1984. One Atlantic white-sided dolphin (Lagenorhynchus acutus) was released on 04/11/84 after four months of captivity/rehabilitation by Mystic Marinelife Aquarium (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 4 months; no followup.

1983. One spinner dolphin (Stenella longirostris) was released on 06/07/83 by Sea Life Park, Hawaii after seven years of captivity (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 7 years; no followup.

1983. One common dolphin (Delphinus delphis) was released 09/09/83 by Marineland of New Zealand after three weeks of captivity (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. One Dolphin; Captive 21 days; no followup.

1980. One Dusky dolphin (Lagenorhynchus obscurus) was released 01/14/80 by Marineland of New Zealand after an unreported length of captivity (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive ?; no followup.

1978. Mr. A.H. Cobreros of Bahia Blanca Argentina held two Commerson's dolphins (Cephalorhynchus commersonii) in a pond for 48 days before releasing them back to the wild (Goodal, et. al., 1988). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. Two dolphins; Captive 48 days; no followup.

1974. Two rough-toothed dolphins (Steno bredanensis) were captured by Sea Life Park, Hawaii and released six days later (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. Two dolphins; Captive 6 days; no followup.

1972. One spinner dolphin (Stenella longirostris) was released 08/17/72 by Sea Life Park, Hawaii after twenty months of captivity (NMFS MMIR 08/03/93). No followup reported. Presumed native reintroduction. One dolphin; Captive 20 months; no followup.

Other short-term reintroduction opportunities for cetaceans which currently may provide information on epidemiological and genetic effects of reintroduction.
UNEXSO, a swim with the dolphin facility in Freeport, Grand Bahama routinely allows several of its dolphins (some imported from Mexico) to escort boats and divers to the open ocean, and some dolphins are reported to remain at sea for several days (mingling and mating with wild dolphins) before returning to their facility. It would appear that this operation could offer opportunities to study both epidemiological and genetic effects of non-native reintroductions of bottlenose dolphins.
For military operations, including exercises, there have been many cetacean reintroductions conducted worldwide, some temporary and some permanent, which have not been adequately documented in the public or scientific record. The circumstance of removal from the wild has also generally not been available to the public or to the scientific community. At some point in time, the facts about these removals, introductions and releases, transfers and all of the information on epidemiology, genetics, physiology, husbandry, training, and abilities of these animals should be made available to science and the tax-paying public. Such information is potentially available from Cuba, The United States, and the former Soviet Union, at least. We would appreciate learning of any contact persons who may be able to guide us to sources of some of this information.
We have requested (08/07/94) intentional or inadvertent dolphin release information from the Navy under the authority of the Freedom of Information Act, and have been advised by the Office of the General Counsel, Department of the Navy (20/07/94) - "To date no Department of the Navy marine mammals have in fact been released to the wild. Therefore, the Department of the Navy and the Naval Command, Control and Ocean Surveillance Center, Research Development Test and Evaluation Division (NCCOSC RDT&E DIV) has no documentation requested." We pointed out the discrepancy of this response with the MMIR's, and in a followup letter from the Office of the General Counsel (24/08/94) a list of nine inadvertent dolphin releases was provided, indicating that none of the releases were native: six dolphins from Mississippi were inadvertently released in the Pacific, one Mississippi dolphin escaped in North Carolina, and another in Florida. Perhaps the most interesting release from a documentation standpoint was that of Leo (Tg-558M), who was caught 20 January 1977 at Catalina Island off California, and escaped 15 January 1978 at Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii, where he "joined an indigenous herd (confirmed)."
"The Navy has been training most of its marine mammals free, in the open ocean, daily, for over 25 years. There are no records on the release of these animals as the Navy has never considered this practice to be a release/return to the wild. There are no veterinary medical records correlated to the daily working of these animals in the open ocean." Given that these are publicly owned animals, and that it is standard procedure to maintain detailed husbandry records for them, we suggest that germane veterinary medical records may available for them, whether or not they are correlated with daily working in the open ocean.

Considerations for future releases and research on reintroductions.

"Zoos and aquaria play an important role in species conservation and propagation. As wild populations dwindle, it often falls on captive breeding programs not only to maintain captive populations, but to reintroduce individuals to the wild. For marine mammals, successful captive breeding has been well documented with births reported in 16 species, including cetaceans, pinnipeds, sea otters, and manatees." (Duffield, 1990.)
When will we seriously examine the issue of research on cetacean reintroductions to the wild in order to allow zoos and aquaria to play their important role? To date, it seems unlikely to occur in the private sector, so long as public interest in release, reintroduction or reinstatement to the wild, per se is considered an anathema to the business of maintaining marine mammals for entertainment purposes. Even so, rehabilitation, reintroduction or release and adequate followup should theoretically not be a problem in the public sector. Of all the dolphins released intentionally or unintentionally by the Navy (n=24, including 12 long-term captives), none have reported any followup, although we think this deserves further examination. Of all the dolphins released by the public display industry (n=72), all of those which reported followup (29) were successful except for three which were recaptured and returned to captivity (that release "experiment" was sponsored by a marine park going out of business).
In many cases where followup occurred for public display animals released, and in all cases where followup was successful, it was done by persons independent of and unsponsored by the public display industry. Sixty percent of the dolphins released by the public display industry had no followup whatsoever! By what objective criteria can anyone say that release is cruel and likely to result in the dolphins' death? Who is responsible for that?
There already are surplus marine mammals of some species in captivity, for example Tursiops truncatus in several US public display facilities, and almost the entire US Navy inventory of marine mammals whose maintenance budget is $5.5 million per year. There will predictably be more surplus animals in the future. The US Congress (Congressional Record-House, 18 November 1991, p. 10460) made a request to the US Navy to "...develop training procedures which will allow [marine] mammals which are no longer required for this project [US Navy] to be released back into their natural habitat. The conferees prohibit the release of these mammals to any alternative captive environment. The conferees further direct the Navy to budget in future years the funds necessary to adequately care for mammals in the Navy inventory and to adapt the mammals which are no longer required for Navy projects for release into the World's oceans." Congress then gave the Navy $500,000 to heed their request.
Perhaps it is incumbent upon the Navy to study this problem with us.