Captive Cetaceans: A Handbook for Campaigners - Whale and ...

SECTION 6
Rehabilitation: humanitarian or opportunistic?
"Alliance members spend millions rescuing, rehabilitating and releasing marine
mammals found stranded along our coastlines that would die without the commitment
of extensive resources and the medical expertise of these facilities. More than 1,500
animals have been returned to their natural environments through these voluntary
efforts since 1987." (Alliance of Marine Mammal Parks and Aquariums, 1993)
Response: Although efforts to rehabilitate beached and stranded marine mammals are
commendable and sometimes heroic, they are not without controversy. At least eight
Alliance member facilities are incapable of responding to strandings due to their
geographic location far from the coast. The majority of animals returned to their
natural environments consists of pinnipeds and aquatic birds. Live cetacean strandings
are rare, comprising less than one percent of marine mammal strandings.
Furthermore, it is estimated that less than 5% of cetaceans which strand alive survive
rehabilitation.
Marine mammal veterinarian Leslie Dierauf (1990) reflected on the purpose of
rehabilitation: "It may be a cruel thing to say, but most rehabilitation is done for the
people involved, rather than the actual animal populations." While treating beached or
stranded animals may provide insight to disease trends and the health and stability of
the marine environment, are we not also interfering with the course of nature?
Without question, public display facilities have benefited greatly through positive
publicity and, subsequently, a humanitarian image. Additionally, it's highly probable
that expenses incurred are written off as tax deductions.
In 1992, the Shedd Aquarium was so anxious to obtain a male beluga to mate with its
two females that it applied for an emergency authorisation to import a beluga featured
on international televised news. The whale was believed to have escaped (or
abandoned) from the former Soviet Union, and was swimming in Turkish waters off
the Black Sea (Hodges, 1992). Besides the possibility of gaining a breeding male,
positive media coverage was almost guaranteed. However, the permit application was
denied.
Following the highly publicized death of an abandoned infant gray whale off Pt.
Loma in January 1997, both Sea World and NMFS were criticised for their indecisive
and flawed policies. NMFS must authorize the taking of distressed marine mammals
unless the animals have beached themselves or have been harmed as a result of
human-related causes. The infant was entangled in kelp during the species’ migration
to the lagoons of Baja California for nearly 24 hours. Curator Jim Antrim attempted to
defend Sea World’s inactions, claiming “a committment to rescue and rehabilitation
of sick or injured marine animals”, and asserting that Sea World “scrupulously
follows federal laws, policies and guidelines” (Antrim, 1997). But only ten days
earlier, Sea World officials refused to send any aid or assess another infant gray
whale which stranded in Marina Del Rey, California. For more than 48 hours,
61