What's going on Canada?
π Meta
πΊοΈ Provinces / Territories
ποΈ Cities / Local Communities
Sorted alphabetically by city name.
π Sports
Hockey
Football (NFL): incomplete
Football (CFL): incomplete
Baseball
Basketball
Soccer
π» Schools / Universities
Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.
π΅ Finance, Shopping, Sales
π£οΈ Politics
π Social / Culture
Rules
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca
fuck off, if you open a zoo or marine park knowing you can't afford it, you deserve to be euthanized instead.
You missed the point: this was a transfer of live animals as part of an orderly shutdown of a decades-old park that was wildly successful in its time. Without the rmtransfer the animals will either starve or be euthanized.
These animals cannot be released or they'll be dead in no time.
The official blocking the removal of the animals to a new habitat simply doesn't understand that there is no life for these animals outside a proper enclosure.
Marineland became dicks. But this is them being least-bad. Let them shut down as best as possible, or it's Whale Stew for weeks.
It could be argued that finding a new home for them is worse in the long run as it has more potential to prolong abuse and captivity of whales. If the new home loosens their standards and started abusing the whales, new whales could be brought in and abused as the older ones pass away. Euthanasing could bring an end to that cycle, although none of options here are particularly good.
Or these get euthanized and new ones are caught where they where going to do. Is the most likely outcome.
What would take longer to kill them, starving or the allegedly guaranteed death from releasing them?
Seems to me that they'd stand a better chance in the wild compared to being left in a tank to starve.
I think this is the argument people give for abandoning their pet dogs in the countryside. We all know the dogs never stand a better chance. I doubt the whales would either.
Just euthanize them it is much more humane. Or you think releasing them and having them starve is humane?
Someonen else linked a link where they can be rehabited, probably too much cost for the shitty park
Everyone is screaming about the treatment (and I mean justifiable), but no one is willing to offer an actual solution. I ain't an expert on the topic of Beluga whales, but I mean if a wild release was possible and the best solution, why aren't these people getting involved then? Likely because it's maybe not the best solution.
So that leaves the government of Ontario to step in, and OK, but problem remains the same. All these supposed sanctuaries that people want them to live in, again, where are they and why aren't they stepping in? Because such a thing might not exist.
Would love to be totally wrong here, but this has the makings of a boondoggle.
πΆ Everyone haaaaaaaates Marineland πΆ
Fuck them.
Seize marineland and all their assets. Use the funds to transport them back to the wild. If not enough $ then run a fund to help and govt cover whatever is needed to finish the job.
They can never be released in the wild.
Maybe a ocean area blocked off and they get retrained and released.
Edit seems they can
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keiko_(orca)
They tried this with the whale from Free Willy, and the whale failed to adapt to the wild before dying.
That was a Hollywood movie.
They tried, in real life, with the animal that was cast as the character in the movie.
Love how your source doesn't actually say the orca released only lived a little while before dying
It shows hope for the future. It would be bleaker if we did not keep trying. The alternative is life in a cement jail.
Does it?
It shows dying early deaths. Is that better than a life in a (better) captive place?
Definitely, trial and error for a solution is better than giving up. The long term as a solution would provide forever after that point.
Some deaths would provide for no deaths in the future.
Just my plebe thoughts is all.
And as fair as that view is, I wouldn't do "trial and error involving the likelihood of death" on humans, or for me, most (if not all) living creatures.
So that's gonna be a controversial sell, and using "save the dolphins" that leave out crucial info isnt going to be it..
I agree itβs untenable.
There would be many peops that agree to take that risk on.
Even though, it would be a no go right from the start due to funding and as you mentioned harm to others.
The thought I had is far beyond my pay grade so to speak but would not a few deaths on either side be worth it to save many many more in the future?
No, it's not ethical.
It's unacceptable to do that to humans in a 'modern Western's' clinical ethics setting.
I agrue it's still unethical to do to animals..
This is the strangest hostage movie ever
Whale what's the porpoise of euthanizing them when they can just release them into the Niagara river near the park and let the falls do the work?
Shit, you have something there bud.
I do seriously wonder when marine mammals will end up the Great Lakes. Like a seal population in the 1000 islands might be a thing our lifetime given climate change
Climate change is going to make the Great Lakes saltwater?
There are freshwater subspecies of harbour seals
Euthanize the owners.
Sucks but itβs way better than forcing them to live in Marineland