A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
Nothing will meaningfully improve until the rich fear for their lives
In their mind the park is practically over, everyone fucking hates them, their need to provide a veneer of giving a fuck about these animals is fucking gone, who cares?
*Nothing will meaningfully improve until the rich fear for their lives again
Canada or Ontario should liberate the whales and take over the property for the necessary property and income to do so.
That's a great reason not to raise wild animals in captivity.
They'll be held as hostages by corpo scum.
"Give me money, or I'll kill 30 whales. Ahahahah! They're mine, and I can do whatever I want! AHAHAAHAH! Hail HR! Hail HR!"
That's not fiction. That's the story.
"we're closing. We cannot afford to keep these whales with no staff and no land. We want to move them to another habitat which has agreed to keep these animals which cannot be released."
"No because they could maybe be mistreated."
"They WILL be neglected here and the people buying the land will need them gone. It's euthanasia or transport. Or you adopt them."
Barring a time machine to stop the park from opening in 1961, that's the options.
The option is right there in the article:
Under provincial law, Ontario has the power to seize the whales to ensure their safety – recouping any costs incurred when the park is sold.
How much do you wanna bet that any fines for killing the whales will be substantially cheaper than relocation, so the park will do that and just eat the fine rather than risk the province confiscate the whales and then charge them later?
But if I say billionaires should pay more taxes or be euthanized I’m put on a list
Why the fuck are there still whales there and why are the corpos allowed to threaten death if these whales. They wanted to sell them to china (where they most likely will be further abused), now if they can't get money they'll kill them?
C'mon Ottawa, force them to rehabilitate and release them, even if it kills the park.
C'mon Ottawa, force them to rehabilitate and release them, even if it kills the park.
A lot of animals cannot be rehabilitated and released. If they were born and raised in captivity, they have effectively no chance of survival on their own. I don't know what the situation is for these animals, but I've been to plenty of zoos and aquariums in the past that have rehabilitation programs and even they have a few "lifers" who will never leave.
AFAIK there are rarely whales born in captivity and nearly all were stolen from their pods and thrown into a swimming pool.
And when you feed bears you get bears that can't survive on their own.
Same deal.
Only animal I know that even has a chance in the would is a domestic house cat. Some can't learn to hunt, some can, you never know. And mostly how they survive is finding humans to care for them, so maybe that doesn't really count.
In the past, attempts to rehabilitate whales have taken decades and resulted in failure. The whales have simply become wholly dependent on humans to feed them and give them company.
TBH, though, most of them kept in captivity end in suicides as the reverberations from their small enclosures are like living in a room where the alarms blare 24/7 so the euthanization might actually be a gift to them.
So it comes down to putting them in the wild to die slowly or kill them outright. If I had to choose I guess I'd want them released, but I'm not really in either camp. I also really don't like the idea of continuing their suffering in captivity.
You only read the headline didn't you
This Marine Park fellow sounds like one bad hombre.
Yeah and he’s also dead. Used to smuggle illegal Belugas to breed and imprison them at Marineland. He’s already in hell.
Marineland is still trying to continue existing?
Me reading headline: I fuckin bet it is Marineland. Me reading the first paragraph of the article: I fucking knew it! Fucking marineland.
🎶 Every one haaaaaates Marineland! 🎶
"Look what you're making me do"
Everyone is big mad about the whales. Meanwhile, there's a whole lot of other animals that aren't famous being fucked with, and humans, and a pretty compelling case that the costs of caring for damn belugas is actually pretty burdensome.
It's not bad people care about show whales. It's bad that it's vastly disproportionate.
It is proportionate
to their size
(In all seriousness, it's a lot easier to make suitable living quarters for most other animals. If you can't make suitable living quarters, it's unethical, full stop. Yes I'm including factory farm meat in that)
The government should seize the property and the assets of the owners and shareholders and anyone related to the owners to pay for this. You don’t end up here by accident.
But they’ll just get their way and retire wealthy.
It’s provincial jurisdiction. Blame Doug Ford.
Turn it into a spa, folks!
Why not release them?
If they were born and raised in captivity their odds of survival are pretty low. Like someone who always lived in a large city and never went camping being dropped off in Alaska odds of survival.
Rehabilitation only helps so much without the actual experience of growing up with other members of their species in the wild.
Edit: Of course the adults in the wild are the ones that survived until adulthood so I still lean towards attempts to rehabilitate and release, just noting it isn't as simple as releasing.
True
Their odds of survival in the wild are higher than being euthanized by a billionaire in an animal hostage crisis.
Captive animals don't always do well being released in the wild.
Why not let the rules of nature decide? Unlike human society, that lets the weak rule the strong, only the strong may survive in the wild. That is natural selection.
It's not natural selection if we yanked them out of the natural order and kept them from acquiring the skills necessary to survive in the wild in the first place.
If you consider people as part of the natural order, then it is in fact natural selection. This isn't a commendation of our place in nature.
People always say this as some sort of "gotcha" statement, but what we do to them is clearly very different from their normal life cycle and something we have the will to stop doing or somehow make up for the damage unlike other natural events like volcanoes erupting or meteors striking.
How different is it than ladybugs and aphids, except for we (think we) have the will to do better than our nature demands? Also, I think I made it pretty clear that I don't think that stance does our species credit. But I would say the outcome is very natural, even if natural isn't exactly desirable.
Euthanize, BUT NOT RELEASE, right??
Narcissism / machiavellianism / sociopathy-psychopathy / nihilism / SADISM / and systemic-dishonesty
.. dimensions-of-human-evil in their position, at least.
The ideological displacing-considered-reasoning dimension may be on-display, too..
( they're running-out of dimensions-of-human-evil to exercise!
& the Western-psychology's "dark triad" is only a small subset of these dimensions.
Obviously, the psychology-profession'll never accept these dimensions as valid, because it wasn't them who authorized, or noticed, them.
Profession-narcissism is a very real force in our world )
Perhaps the executives of that operation are identifying that humankind ought murder the innocent ( the whales ) while catering-to the psychopaths ( the executives )?
Are we obedient to that directive?
XOR do we intentionally-ditch the dishonest-framing & force right framing, & THEN decide?
_ /\ _