Keiko news reports
Stejacorca
Hi aad's,
i discovered the following news reports and thought you might be interested in
them.
Cheers,
Stefan Jacobs
http://members.aol.com/stejacorca/index.html
Subject: Independent Veterinarians Confirm that Keiko is in Good Health
Date: 06.10.97 19:17:12 MEZ
From: AOL News
NEWPORT, Ore.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 6, 1997--Keiko the killer
whale was declared healthy and free of all bacterial and fungal
infections this morning by two independent veterinarians, Dr.
Michael Simon and Dr. Deke Beusse.
Dr. Simon examined the killer whale in Newport this morning,
drew blood samples that were analyzed by the medical laboratory at
Pacific Communities Hospital, and interpreted their results. Dr.
Beusse reviewed the results from Florida.
The two independent veterinarians joined Dr. Lanny Cornell,
Keiko's veterinarian, in pronouncing the killer whale in good health.
The doctors also agreed with Dr. Cornell's assessment that Keiko's
tapeworms pose no health hazard, and should be expected in a whale
eating live fish. All animals in the wild have parasites, according
to Bruce Mate, an Oregon State University wildlife professor and
recognized marine mammal expert.
"We are not surprised to have Keiko's wellness overwhelmingly
affirmed," says Beverlee Hughes, president of the Free Willy Keiko
Foundation. "Keiko's health and well-being is our organization's
first and foremost concern, and always will be. We share that
concern with people around the world."
Reino Aventura donated Keiko to the Free Willy Keiko Foundation.
As Keiko's guardian, the Foundation plans to move him to a bay pen in
the North Atlantic within the next 12 to 24 months. "We're very
confident that Keiko will one day make the move to a protected but
natural environment -- a sort of halfway house to the wild," Hughes
said. "He is making remarkable progress in that direction."
The Foundation emphasizes that the decision to fully return to
the wild will be made only if it is in Keiko's best interest. Keiko
himself will indicate if he is ready. "He may choose to remain in a
bay pen, or to commute to the wild from the safe harbor of human
care," Hughes says.
Keiko's journey from illness and captivity back to health and his
native North Atlantic waters is unprecedented. The Free Willy Keiko
Foundation characterizes its ground-breaking project as something
like Christopher Columbus' journey to the New World. "If Columbus
had listened to every nay-sayer and skeptic, he would never have
arrived here," says Hughes. "We are committed to our effort to put
Keiko in the most natural, least restrictive environment he can
handle, regardless of those who believe that the status quo is all
that is possible."
Keiko was donated to the Free Willy Keiko Foundation, which
serves as Keiko's guardian. Initially, the Aquarium provided the
Foundation with animal care staff who worked under Dr. Cornell's
direction. Since July 1, all Keiko's day-to-day care has been
provided by the Foundation's own staff, which has over 110 years of
combined veterinary and rehabilitation experience with
cetaceans -- whales, dolphins and porpoises.
"As Keiko's physical condition got better and better, our long-
range focus began shifting from a captive rehabilitation facility to
a bay pen in the North Atlantic," says Hughes. "We needed our own
animal care team-one with field experience as well as rehabilitation
skills, and one that can travel with Keiko if he moves to a sea pen
or other location."
But by early this past spring, as the Foundation began to
assemble its animal care staff and prepare for Keiko's next move, its
relationship with the Aquarium began to deteriorate. One of the
Foundation's growing concerns was the increasingly poor water quality
the Aquarium maintained in Keiko's pool. The Aquarium failed to make
agreed-upon repairs to the filtration system, even though the
Foundation was willing to pay for the work, and was so negligent in
its operation of the system that Keiko contracted a bacterial
infection from the pool's filthy water in July. As 150-foot
visibility from one end of the pool to the other dwindled to 50 and
then 20 feet, the unclean water also frustrated Aquarium visitors,
stymied behavioral researchers and endangered staff working in the
pool. Notwithstanding the Aquarium's efforts to prevent the
Foundation from making the required repairs, the Foundation finally
replaced the system's filtration sand itself, at a cost of $80,000 -- a
step that has resulted in greatly improved water quality and
visibility.
"I find it baffling that the Oregon Coast Aquarium would
disseminate information about Keiko that is so clearly wrong," says
David C. Phillips, founder and board member of the Free Willy Keiko
Foundation. "Compared to his health in Mexico, by every measure,
Keiko's health has dramatically improved. His recovery and
rehabilitation since arriving in the U.S. have been remarkable."
"Why would the Aquarium not ask the Foundation about Keiko's
health?" Phillips posed. "Why would they certify that Keiko was in
good health, less than one month ago? Who on their staff would be
qualified to evaluate Keiko's health and say he is `stressed?'"
The Free Willy Keiko Foundation is a private, not-for-profit
organization founded in November 1994 to relocate, rehabilitate and
release Keiko to the wild, if possible; and to return other captive
and stranded cetaceans to their native habitats through operating a
state-of-the-art, cold-water rehabilitation facility in Newport,
Oregon.
--30--KS/se
CONTACT:
Free Willy Keiko Foundation
Diane Hammond, External Affairs Officer
541/867-3540
Subject: Aquarium's Negligent Operation of Life Support System
Jeopardized Keiko's Health
Date: 06.10.97 19:17:36 MEZ
From: AOL News
NEWPORT, Ore.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 6, 1997--The Oregon Coast
Aquarium's gross negligence permitted the water in Keiko's pool to
become polluted with water-borne pathogens and cloudy with algae and
suspended particulate matter.
As a result, in early July 1997 Keiko contracted a potentially
serious bacterial respiratory infection.
Keiko's life support system -- pipes, filters and disinfecting
mechanisms -- imports and maintains the water in which Keiko lives.
Unwaveringly excellent water quality is essential to Keiko's good
health. When the construction of Keiko's life support system was
completed at the end of 1995, the Oregon Coast Aquarium was given a
comprehensive manual that specified procedures for operating the
system and for both routine and preventive maintenance.
-- The Aquarium consistently failed to operate the life support
system as a "closed loop system" rather than an "open system." In a
closed loop system, water is constantly skimmed from the pool's
surface and run through a filtration system, ensuring a level of
purity that cannot be accomplished with an open system.
-- For substantial periods of time -- in some instances, days --
the Aquarium permitted the water level in Keiko's pool to drop too
low to skim. During those periods, no filtration occurred.
-- By mid-April, the Aquarium and the Foundation jointly realized
that the media in all 12 of Keiko's life support filters needed to be
replaced to reverse the ongoing deterioration of Keiko's water
quality. On April 16, the Aquarium agreed to have the media replaced
by Aquarium staff. Cost was not an issue, the Foundation was going
to pay the replacement costs.
By mid June, the Aquarium still had not replaced the filter sand
and Keiko's water quality had deteriorated dramatically. Underwater
visibility that had once been 150 feet -- across the entire length of
the pool -- had declined to as little as 20 feet. The Foundation
advised the Aquarium that Keiko could no longer wait and that the
Foundation had made arrangements to begin replacing the sand on
July 5.
The Aquarium physically prevented the work from beginning on the
morning of July 5, even though by this time the water quality was
dangerously sub-par. After a couple hours of negotiations, the
Aquarium relented and permitted the work to start. The replacement
was successfully completed by August 10, and the Foundation paid the
$80,000 of replacement costs.
The quality of the pool's water has greatly improved and is now
within established health parameters. Keiko's good health was
confirmed this morning when three independent veterinarians reviewed
laboratory results from a blood sample and found the killer whale
free of all bacterial and fungal infections.
--30--CER/se
CONTACT:
Free Willy Keiko Foundation
Diane Hammond, 541/867-3540
John Dineley
Tue, 7 Oct 1997, John Dineley <dolphin@zalophus#.demon.co.uk> wrote:
<DId1saA+...@zalophus.demon.co.uk>
>And so the in-fighting begins and these developments should be of
>serious concern to anyone who *genuinely* has an interest in the welfare
>of the animal "Keiko".
Since my above posting I have found an interesting response to the
alleagtions made aginst the Oregon Coast Aquarium on this aquarium web
site. Check out:
http://www.aquarium.org/latest.htm
--
============================================================================
John Dineley, BA.Hons.
Zoological Consultant
PO BOX 153
Bedford
MK40 2JD
United Kingdom
Telephone & Fax: 01234-342387
Email: Dol...@zalophus.demon.co.uk
=============================================================================
NB: My newsgroup email address has been corrupted to avoid unwanted mail.
Remove the # from the end of "zalophus" for correct address.
=============================================================================
Please note: The views expressed in this email are my own and do not
necessarily reflect the views of any employers, clients or professional
organisations I have membership or affiliation to.
==============================================================================
John Dineley
========================================================================
Taken from the Oregon Coast Aquarium Web page. Tuesday, October 07, 1997
October 6, 1997
OREGON COAST AQUARIUM SURPRISED, DISAPPOINTED BY FOUNDATION ASSAULT
Continues to Seek Truly Independent Review of Keiko's Health
NEWPORT, Ore. - The Oregon Coast Aquarium today expressed surprise and
disappointment regarding the actions of the Free Willy Keiko Foundation.
Calling the Foundation's assault on the Aquarium sad and perplexing,
Aquarium President Phyllis Bell repeated the request that a truly
independent review of Keiko's health be conducted as soon as possible.
"The water in Keiko's pool never fell below established health
parameters," Bell said. "Was water quality a concern? Yes. The Aquarium
requested in June 1996 -- more than a year ago -- that the media in
Keiko's life support filters should be replaced. It is my understanding
that the Foundation delayed replacing them because of financial
constraints."
Concerns about Keiko's health surfaced on October 1, when the Aquarium
Board requested an independent evaluation. The Free Willy Keiko
Foundation, which owns Keiko and dictates his medical and rehabilitation
plan, does not regularly share information about Keiko's health or care
with the Aquarium.
"If we hadn't come forward with our concerns, the public would not have
known that Keiko has been ailing," Bell said. "It's worth pointing out
that the Foundation consistently has scoffed at our concerns about
Keiko's health, but now accuses the Aquarium of endangering his health.
The two don't go together. Either he's healthy or he's not. If they want
to blame the Aquarium for problems they have been covering up, fine. We
just want to make sure that Keiko gets the medical attention he
deserves."
Bell said she is pleased the Foundation's health evaluation apparently
shows Keiko's health is improving. However, she called for the
Foundation to immediately share their complete findings with the
Aquarium and continued to call for a truly independent evaluation of
Keiko's health. "We won't be satisfied until someone who is not
connected to either organization conducts a comprehensive evaluation of
his health," Bell said.
The Aquarium is aware that Keiko is being treated for a fungal infection
in his lungs and was treated this summer for what the Foundation
describes as a bacterial respiratory infection. Keiko also is showing
signs of parasites. The Foundation has acknowledged Keiko is suffering
from tapeworms and was treated for roundworms. Additionally, the
Aquarium has learned that Keiko has two other types of nematodes -
internal parasites -- besides the tapeworms.
The Aquarium is requesting the Free Willy Keiko Foundation take the
following steps as quickly as possible:
- A comprehensive medical evaluation;
- The evaluation should be conducted by an team of
veterinarians/scientists who have no connection to either the Aquarium
or the Foundation;
- The team should have experience evaluating and treating killer
whales;
- The team should examine Keiko on site; and
- All information should be shared with the Aquarium, the Foundation
and the public.
The Oregon Coast Aquarium is a private, nonprofit, educational facility
that aims to educate a broad spectrum of the public in an enjoyable way
about Oregon's abundant natural resources, so they will cherish them now
and in future generations. The Aquarium offers a year-round schedule of
educational programs, events and exhibits for the public and serves
school groups through lab, theater and self-guiding educational
programs. More than 55,000 students have attended the Aquarium this
year. The facility will soon be at work on an expansion that will
complete exhibits on the freshwater streams, estuaries and upland
forests.
---------------------------------------------------------------
October 2, 1997
Keiko's Health Questions & Answers
Q. How is Keiko feeling?
A. The Oregon Coast Aquarium is concerned about the current health of
Keiko and is pushing for a broad independent evaluation of his health
and care. What we know is that Keiko is being treated for respiratory
ailments and is showing external signs of tapeworms. He also appears
listless at times and possibly stressed. We believe a broad independent
evaluation of Keiko's health and care is the best way to ensure Keiko
receives the best possible care.
Q. Will visitors notice anything different about Keiko?
A. Some visitors have noticed that Keiko hasn't been his old self
lately. However, Keiko is still being cared for by the Free Willy Keiko
Foundation in the Aquarium's Open Ocean Exhibit, which remains open to
Aquarium visitors.
Q. What is the Oregon Coast Aquarium doing about concerns regarding
Keiko's health?
The Aquarium is working with the Free Willy Keiko Foundation, which owns
Keiko and dictates his medical and rehabilitation plan, to achieve a
broad independent evaluation of Keiko's health and care. The Aquarium is
committed to ensuring Keiko receives the best possible care.
Q. If it's so concerned, why can't the Aquarium just take over Keiko's
care?
A. Although Keiko is an exhibit at the Oregon Coast Aquarium, he is
owned by the Free Willy Keiko Foundation. The Aquarium is working hard
with the Foundation to resolve matters pertaining to Keiko's health and
day-to-day care, but it isn't as simple as taking over his care because
we don't own him.
Q. Does this mean Keiko's rehabilitation and release back to the wild is
in jeopardy?
A. The Oregon Coast Aquarium is committed to acting in the best
interests of Keiko and the other animals in our care. We have always
supported and continue to support the effort to safely rehabilitate and
release Keiko back to the wild, if possible. The Foundation owns Keiko
and will be the sole decision maker regarding Keiko's release. Our
concerns about Keiko's health have nothing to do with the release issue.
Q. Is the Aquarium raising these concerns because it doesn't want to
lose Keiko as a money-making exhibit?
A. Our actions are purely motivated by our concern for Keiko's health
and welfare. Keiko's exhibit has been great for us, but the Aquarium was
thriving prior to Keiko's exhibit coming here and we will thrive after
his exhibit leaves. We always have assumed he was only a visitor and not
a permanent exhibit here. In fact, the Aquarium's master plan assumes
attendence will drop back to normal levels in less than two years
regardless of the Foundation's decision about Keiko's release.
Q. How long has this been going on?
A. We became concerned about Keiko's health and care earlier this
summer. The Aquarium Board immediately made the Foundation aware of
these concerns and since then we have been working with the Foundation
to achieve a broad independent evaluation of Keiko's health and care.
Q. How much of this is political infighting between the Oregon Coast
Aquarium and the Foundation?
A. This has nothing to do with politics or egos. It has to do with
Keiko's care and well being and the Aquarium's strong belief that Keiko
deserves a broad independent evaluation as soon as possible.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fact Sheet
Keiko's Health
The Oregon Coast Aquarium became concerned about Keiko's health and care
earlier this summer and immediately made its concerns known to the Free
Willy Keiko Foundation.
The Aquarium's concerns are based on the fact that Keiko appears
listless at times and possibly stressed. He is being treated for what
the Foundation describes as a bacterial respiratory infection similar to
bronchitis in humans -- and is showing external signs of tapeworms.
The Free Willy Keiko Foundation, which dictates Keiko's medical and
rehabilitation plan, does not regularly share information about Keiko's
health or care with the Oregon Coast Aquarium.
The Oregon Coast Aquarium is working with the Free Willy Keiko
Foundation to achieve a broad independent health evaluation so Keiko can
have the best possible care. The two organizations are currently in the
midst of confidential negotiations.
Ownership
Even though many people assume Keiko is the property of the Oregon Coast
Aquarium, he isn't. The Free Willy Keiko Foundation owns him. In 1995,
Keiko was donated to the Foundation by Reino Aventura, a theme park in
Mexico City and, in January 1996, he was transported to the Open Ocean
Exhibit at Oregon Coast Aquarium.
The Aquarium has a long-term agreement with the Foundation centered
around the Open Ocean Exhibit pool, which was constructed in 1995 on
Aquarium property with funds raised by the Foundation.
Motivations
This week's public statement by the Aquarium was issued in response to
media inquiries. The Aquarium Board wanted to communicate to the
community and its staff and volunteers that it shares their concerns
about Keiko's health and care and is committed to protecting Keiko's
interests.
Like many visiting exhibits, the addition of Keiko has boosted
attendance at the Oregon Coast Aquarium, but the attendance boost has
long since peaked. In 1996, the number of visitors reached 1.3 million.
However, as expected, attendance in 1997 has dropped significantly.
The Oregon Coast Aquarium is not dependent upon Keiko. The Aquarium was
among the most popular tourist destinations in Oregon before Keiko's
exhibit came and has plans in place to ensure it will thrive after Keiko
is gone. The Aquarium always has viewed Keiko as a temporary exhibit.
Release
The Oregon Coast Aquarium has supported and continues to support the
Foundation's efforts to safely rehabilitate Keiko and release him back
to the wild, if possible. In fact, the Aquarium believes that a broad
independent health evaluation will provide Keiko with the greatest
chance of an ultimate safe release.
The Aquarium is seeking to ensure that the Foundation's rehabilitation
efforts in no way endanger Keiko's health and/or safety.
------------------------------------------------------------------
October 1, 1997
NEWPORT, OR -- The Oregon Coast Aquarium announces in response to press
inquiries that it continues to share the concerns of its staff and
volunteers about the current health of Keiko, the killer whale, who
resides at the Oregon Coast Aquarium.
Although the Free Willy Keiko Foundation owns Keiko and dictates his
medical and rehabilitation plan, the Aquarium and its staff have
developed serious concerns about his current physical condition.
The Oregon Coast Aquarium is aware that Keiko is being treated for
respiratory ailments and is showing external signs of tapeworms. He also
appears listless and possibly stressed.
The Oregon Coast Aquarium continues to work with the Free Willy Keiko
Foundation to achieve a broad health evaluation so that Keiko can have
the best possible care and the greatest chance of an ultimate safe
release.
Stejacorca
More news reports on the issue.
By BRAD CAIN
NEWPORT, Ore. (AP) - Owners of the whale that starred in the hit
movie ``Free Willy'' accused an aquarium Monday of putting greed
ahead of the animal's well-being by saying he was too sick to be
released into the wild.
Keiko's arrival at the Oregon Coast Aquarium aboard a plane from
an aquarium in Mexico in January 1996 had a storybook quality, with
hundreds of cheering children lining the streets of this tourist
town to welcome him.
Now, the uplifting saga of a whale's rehabilitation and possible
release has turned into an ugly dispute marked by charges of greed
and malfeasance.
Last month a veterinarian quit over Keiko's care and the state
is investigating charges that the mammal is in poor health and
being exploited.
And in the latest turn of events, the foundation that owns Keiko
held a news conference Monday to rebut statements made last week by
Oregon Coast Aquarium officials who claimed Keiko was listless and
being treated for respiratory ailments.
Dr. Lanny Cornell, a San Diego veterinarian representing the
Free Willy-Keiko Foundation, accused the aquarium of saying Keiko
was ill to prevent their star attraction from being set free.
``If I had a cash cow, and I saw it about to disappear, I would
become upset about it,'' Cornell said.
Cornell said he and another doctor examined Keiko Monday morning
and found him to be fit. ``He is, in essence, a very good-looking,
mature killer whale,'' Cornell said.
Within a year or two, it may even be possible to begin the
process of returning Keiko to the North Atlantic, Cornell said.
Keiko's presence has helped double attendance at the aquarium
and has generated an estimated $75 million for the local economy
since his arrival.
But Phyllis Bell, president of the aquarium, said economics had
nothing to do with the announcement last week that Keiko was
ailing.
``We just want what's best for Keiko,'' she said.
She also denied allegations by foundation officials that
aquarium employees had let the water quality in Keiko's tank get so
bad that it made the whale sick last summer.
Aquarium officials cared for Keiko from the time he arrived
until July 1, when the foundation assumed care for him. He is still
being kept at the aquarium.
Last month, a veterinarian and the aquarium's chief of animal
husbandry resigned, citing ethical concerns about Keiko's care.
``I would not sign a life insurance physical on that animal
today,'' said Steve Brown, who had been one of the whale's two
veterinarians. Brown, who had worked as a subcontractor to the
foundation, said Keiko was sick with a fungus in his respiratory
system at that time.
The Oregon Veterinary Medical Examining Board last week launched
an investigation to determine who is caring for Keiko and how well.
Nonetheless, foundation officials announced in August that Keiko
had gained 1,900 pounds and grown 6 inches, to 21 feet, since his
arrival in Oregon. They said he had begun to catch fish swimming in
his tank.
And if Keiko was under the weather, he wasn't showing it Monday.
The 9,600-pound whale made several quick passes and delighted
several hundred tourists by pushing an inflated blue ball around
his tank.
``He looks a lot better than when he arrived here,'' said
Dolores Hamel, 66, of Sunriver, Ore., who was visiting with her
husband. ``I don't know if he's ready to leave or not, but he sure
looks good.''
Associated Press AP-NY-10-06-97 1920EDT
Stefan Jacobs
email: stejacorca
website: http://members.aol.com/stejacorca
John Dineley
Mon, 6 Oct 1997, Stejacorca <steja...@aol.com> wrote:
<19971006203...@ladder02.news.aol.com>
>Subject: Independent Veterinarians Confirm that Keiko is in Good Health
>Date: 06.10.97 19:17:12 MEZ
>From: AOL News
(snip)
>Subject: Aquarium's Negligent Operation of Life Support System
> Jeopardized Keiko's Health
>Date: 06.10.97 19:17:36 MEZ
>From: AOL News
(snip)
And so the in-fighting begins and these developments should be of
serious concern to anyone who *genuinely* has an interest in the welfare
of the animal "Keiko".
Sadly, it come as no surprise to me that allegations regarding the
treatment of the animal "Keiko" have begun between the aquarium and the
coalition who wish to release him. With "Keiko"s care now transferred
to supporters of the activists any chance of getting a clear and
objective understanding of his health status, or his fate if released
back to the wild, now becomes slim. The fact that this news release
makes hyped claims at the experience of "Keiko" new care-gives generates
even more cause for concern. e.g.
>Since July 1, all Keiko's day-to-day care has been
>provided by the Foundation's own staff, which has over 110 years of
>combined veterinary and rehabilitation experience with
>cetaceans -- whales, dolphins and porpoises.
Naming a few names and specifics of experience would be more helpful
rather than this PR double-speak.
Moreover, the fact that sand is having to be replaced in a filter system
operational since only 1995 seriously suggests problems with the systems
construction or operation. Therefore, one has to ask how much
experience have the Free Willy Keiko Foundation chosen "experts" in
water treatment management of large volume water treatment systems to
prevent this occurring again?
It is also interesting that it is now started he may be transferred to a
sea-pen in the north Atlantic - not Iceland as original promised.
Finally, I found the following comments most puzzling:
>Phillips posed. "Why would they certify that Keiko was in
>good health, less than one month ago? Who on their staff would be
>qualified to evaluate Keiko's health and say he is `stressed?
I am not aware that Mr Phillips has any experience in animal husbandry
or welfare which clearly "Keiko's" original keepers must have. Moreover,
if Phillips doubted the expertise of "Keiko's" original keepers why did
he not voice his concerns earlier.
Furthermore, Phillips has a selective memory. Was it not in March this
year that reports were being made (and reproduced on this group) of
"Keiko" attacking the glass panels of his tank. I recall a Free Willy
Keiko Foundation spokesperson saying this aggressive display showed what
good progress Keiko was making.
This whole circus seems to be degenerating by the minute. Is it not
about time the NMFS, APHIS, etc. stepped in to make a full appraisal of
the situation?
John Dineley
Tue, 7 Oct 1997, Stejacorca <steja...@aol.com> wrote:
<19971007175...@ladder02.news.aol.com>
>Oh John, you better learn something about rhetorical questions and
>the profession of spokespersons before you state such nonsense again.
>BTW, do you have any experience in animal husbandry the size of a whale?
And what is your experience in this field? A nice web page and the
occasional trips to watch whales in the wild with Ken Balcombe?
My experience? Twenty-five plus years of practical experience with wild
animal husbandry and management (dolphins, seals, sealions, penguins,
marine fish, etc.) and an honours degree in psychology with biology.
Obviously I know nothing :-)
The difference between us is that when I give professional advice I have
to take responsibility for its outcome. You, on the other hand, can say
what you please with out any responsibility what so every.
My concerns for animals such as "Keiko" is due to the very poor track
record the animal-rights industry has when involved in cetacean
rehabilitation, e.g. Into The Blue, Sugarloaf, etc.
The current in-fight regarding "Keiko" was bound to happen and it has
more to do with politics than animal welfare. In fact, IMHO, releasing
long-term captives back to the wild is against the individual welfare.
The whole Free Willy - Free Keiko business is a cruel experiment
undertaken by the animal-right industry to score points against zoos
and aquaria. In my opinion, "Keiko"s health and welfare come second
place. As long as they can get that animal back into the sea and he
swims of into the sunset it will be deemed a success. Unless, of
course, his dead body embarrassingly washes ashore. However, the north
Atlantic is nice and deep so not much need to be worried about that.
Incidentally, Iceland decided a number of years ago not to allow former
captive orcas to be released back into their territorial waters long
before "Keiko" was an issue.
Moreover, the fact that it is now being discussed to release "Keiko"
elsewhere in the north Atlantic makes a total lie of all the propaganda
to find his family and release him back into his pod. It appears to me
that the protocols to release this animal are being made up as we go
along.
--
John Dineley
>Yeah, let's get NMFS investigate,
Actually, it is more likely to be APHIS but then being a self-styled
expert on these matter I thought you would have be aware of this.
>but both Keiko's health status AND
>the role of the captive industry in this whole "circus"!
If it was not for the captive display industry "Keiko" would not be
where he is now:
Who provided transport this animal to his new home?
The captive display industry.
Who provide a site for his pool?
Oregon Coast Aquarium.
Where did the expertise come from for his care?
Experts who work for or where trained by the captive display industry.
Moreover, if there is to be an investigation all those involved should
be subject to investigation.
Stejacorca
John Dineley <dolphin@zalophus#.demon.co.uk>
wrote on Wed, 08 Oct 1997 05:16 AM EDT:
>And what is your experience in this field? A nice web page and the
>occasional trips to watch whales in the wild with Ken Balcombe?
>
Thanks for the comments on my webpage.
I never claimed to have any professional background on cetaceans and i never
will since i'm not a marine biologist. I wish i was and could spend more time
studying whales than my job allows. But that's too late i guess :-)
But i learned as good as i could through my "occasional" work with orcas and
right whales since 1992. It also helps a lot to discuss issues with experts
like Ken Balcomb. And it also helps to read and keep your mind open.
BTW, John, i was just curious about your professional background on cetaceans.
Thank's for the informations. Sorry if it was offending to ask. I never said
and wouldn't dare to say that you "know nothing". I don't make this kind of
accusations to anyone.
Would you be so kind to tell us where and when you had/have "practical
experience with wild animal husbandry and management" of dolphins? Thank you!
>The difference between us is that when I give professional advice I have
>to take responsibility for its outcome. You, on the other hand, can say
>what you please with out any responsibility what so every.
>
That's something i can't take away from your shoulders, John. But i'll talk
about issues i'm interested in anyway, whether i'm responsible for it or not.
>My concerns for animals such as "Keiko" is due to the very poor track
>record the animal-rights industry has when involved in cetacean
>rehabilitation, e.g. Into The Blue, Sugarloaf, etc.
The "animal-rigths industry" has no control over the Free Willy Keiko
Foundation, we both know that. And the "very poor record" is not so poor at
all if you read the records carefully.
Have a look at "Cetacean Reintroduction. A List of Examples and an Annotated
Bibliography (1994 by K.C. Balcomb III et al.)". The captive industry has
killed whales and dolphins in a number that exceeds all records of
unsuccessful, lethal rehabilition attempts by the thousands. That's why i'm
concerned for animals such as Keiko. Or Lolita. Or Corky. Or Yaka. Or the
orcas in Japan. Or .....
>
>The current in-fight regarding "Keiko" was bound to happen and it has
>more to do with politics than animal welfare. In fact, IMHO, releasing
>long-term captives back to the wild is against the individual welfare.
>
>The whole Free Willy - Free Keiko business is a cruel experiment
>undertaken by the animal-right industry to score points against zoos
>and aquaria. In my opinion, "Keiko"s health and welfare come second
>place. As long as they can get that animal back into the sea and he
>swims of into the sunset it will be deemed a success. Unless, of
>course, his dead body embarrassingly washes ashore. However, the north
>Atlantic is nice and deep so not much need to be worried about that.
>
Dear aad's, did you ever thought to witness such a nice peace of objective and
scientific argument by John Dineley or his colleagues. Me not. I have no need
to comment those insults in detail. They speak for themselves. Looks like that
the industry shows some signs of distress as Keiko's fitness improves and with
it the chances for him to see life without walls again.
>Incidentally, Iceland decided a number of years ago not to allow former
>captive orcas to be released back into their territorial waters long
>before "Keiko" was an issue.
>
Iceland can change decisions. If the captive industry stops to pressure Iceland
because of fear for herself Iceland can make up it's mind objectively.
Actually i don't understand the industries paranioa about releasing orcas.
There are only a few orcas in captivity who are candidates for release anyway.
Why not give them the chance they deserve after years of making money.
>Moreover, the fact that it is now being discussed to release "Keiko"
>elsewhere in the north Atlantic makes a total lie of all the propaganda
>to find his family and release him back into his pod. It appears to me
>that the protocols to release this animal are being made up as we go
>along.
I don't know whether it is discussed to "release" Keiko outside Iceland if
there's no permit in Iceland. Where did you read that? Anyway, Keiko could be
rehabilitated in a sea pen in the North Atlantic outside Iceland (if there's
no permit in Iceland) nevertheless. In my opinion life there would still be
better for him than to join Vancouver's male orca Finna and die in his early
twenties behind concrete walls.
do...@mistral.co.uk
Subject: Re: Keiko news reports
Tue, 7 Oct 1997, Stejacorca <steja...@aol.com> wrote:
<19971007175...@ladder02.news.aol.com>
>>Oh John, you better learn something about rhetorical questions and
>>the profession of spokespersons before you state such nonsense again.
>>BTW, do you have any experience in animal husbandry the size of a whale?
JD replied;
>And what is your experience in this field? A nice web page and the
>occasional trips to watch whales in the wild with Ken Balcombe?
...So unless one has been involved in the abuse of dolphins they have
no right to comment or question?
>My experience? Twenty-five plus years of practical experience with
wild
>animal husbandry and management (dolphins, seals, sealions, penguins,
>marine fish, etc.) and an honours degree in psychology with biology.
...Come, come JD we’re on a dolphins newsgroup...so be honest and let
folk know ALL your experience with cetacea... Please correct me if I’m
wrong, but it amounts to a few weeks assisting and supporting the
disgusting treatment of dolphins held captive in a tiny plastic tank in a
London strip joint. Followed by a short time in the late 70’s working for
a company who caused nearly as much concern within their industry as Herr
Leinhardt...and you have had NO hands on experience with cetacea since.
For years you’ve failed miserable to obtain employment with cetacea, even
your adverts in EAAM fell on deaf ears...so if the industry declined your
*expertise*...there must be a reason!
>Obviously I know nothing :-)
....Your employment record says it all.
>The difference between us is that when I give professional advice I have
>to take responsibility for its outcome. You, on the other hand, can say
>what you please with out any responsibility what so every.
....Tut, Tut, and we all thought your statements here were NOT for your
masters benefit in the captivity industry....but simply your own?
>My concerns for animals such as "Keiko" is due to the very poor track
>record the animal-rights industry has when involved in cetacean
>rehabilitation, e.g. Into The Blue, Sugarloaf, etc.
....Try looking at the Marine Mammal Inventory and tell us how many
dolphins the captivity industry have *released*. Then show us how much
pre-release work and follow up was undertaken. They simply dumped
unwanted animals and ran.
>The current in-fight regarding "Keiko" was bound to happen and it has
>more to do with politics than animal welfare. In fact, IMHO, releasing
>long-term captives back to the wild is against the individual welfare.
....Finally, we hear you admit cetacea captured and stolen from
the wild are so damaged by your industry they cannot be returned
to their natural home....what great conservation policies you support.
>The whole Free Willy - Free Keiko business is a cruel experiment
>undertaken by the animal-right industry to source points against zoos
>and aquaria.
...But I thought you stated the captivity industry were fully involved?
Maybe they discovered they were not getting their own way and have
since tried everything within their powers to sabotage this project, as
previously attempted. Incidentally the training staff responsible for
Keiko nearly ALL come from Sea World, could they have seen the error
of their ways and want to make amends?....check out your IMATA
membership as I think you’ll find they are members in good stead.
>In my opinion, "Keiko" health and welfare come second
>place. As long as they can get that animal back into the sea and he
>swims of into the sunset it will be deemed a success. Unless, of
>course, his dead body embarrassingly washes ashore. However, the north
>Atlantic is nice and deep so not much need to be worried about that.
...It is only YOUR friends who have been PROVEN to slit the bellies
of newly captured cetaceans and sink them into the deep, in a hope of
hiding their disgusting trade....were capture death statistics used in the
longevity study you continually quote??
>Incidentally, Iceland decided a number of years ago not to allow former
>captive orcas to be released back into their territorial waters long
>before "Keiko" was an issue.
...Was that before or after captivity industry representatives spent much
time and even more money *lobbying* in Iceland??
Doug Cartlidge
Executive Director
European Cetacean Organisation
7 Meadway Court
The Boulevard
Worthing, BN13 1PN
England
Tele/fax; (+44 UK) 1903 241 264
email; do...@mistral.co.uk
homepage; http://www3.mistral.co.uk/dougc/
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Steve Dickey
(KEIKO'S-WELFARE-HEALTH) Regarding The Health and Well Being of Keiko
News Editors, Environmental Writers
SALEM, Ore.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 7, 1997--The Oregon
Veterinary Medical Association (OVMA) is very concerned about the
welfare and health of Keiko.
Recent reports regarding the controversy between the Free
Willy/Keiko Foundation and the Oregon Coast Aquarium raise concerns
about the truth of Keiko's health.
The OVMA strongly recommends that an independent team composed
of members from the National Marine Fishery Service, USDA, and the
International Association of Aquatic Animal Medicine be formed to
give an unbiased opinion regarding Keiko's health and potential
fitness for release. The OVMA's concern is directly related to the
idea of releasing Keiko back to the wild.
"Since man initially took Keiko from his natural environment 18
years ago, we have a responsibility to the life and well being of
Keiko," said Dr. Robert Franklin, OVMA President. "If releasing him
causes a substantial risk to Keiko's life, we would have to strongly
question that approach.
"The OVMA hopes that all parties would agree to this suggestion
for an independent evaluation of Keiko. The OVMA would like to
assist in any way possible. It must be remembered that the health
and well being of Keiko is the number one goal." --30--ALW/se
CONTACT: OVMA Glenn Kolb or Willie Rhodes, 503/399-0311
800/235-3502 (within Oregon only)
Oregon Coast Aquarium Provides Questions & Answers About Keiko
Q. Are you satisfied that Keiko is healthy now that the Free Willy Keiko
Foundation has declared Keiko is in good health?
A. We are not satisfied. We continue to seek a truly comprehensive and
independent review of Keiko's health from a team of veterinarians and
scientists not connected to either organization. It is the best way to
ensure that Keiko receives the best possible care.
Q. Why do you remain concerned about Keiko's health?
A. The Aquarium is aware that Keiko is being treated for a fungal infection.
We have learned Keiko has two other types of nematodes -- internal
parasites -- besides the round and tape worms. We remain concerned about
Keiko's health because the Foundation has not agreed to a comprehensive
health evaluation by a team of independent veterinarians and scientists not
connected to either organization.
Q. The Foundation has said Aquarium personnel isn't qualified to know
whether Keiko is sick. Is that true?
A. The Oregon Coast Aquarium raised concerns about Keiko's health as a
result of the observations of its Board, professional staff, volunteers and
the general public. We knew of Keiko's ailments because we get the bills for
the drugs he's taking. That's one of the reasons we came forward with
questions about Keiko's health in the first place. Until the Aquarium Board
publicly requested an independent evaluation of his health on October 1, the
Foundation has not revealed the fact that Keiko had what the Foundation now
describes as "a potentially serious bacterial respiratory infection, in
addition to a fungal-based infection of the respiratory system."
Q. Was the Aquarium to blame for Keiko's health problems?
A. We don't think so, but the Foundation's secrecy makes it difficult for
the Aquarium to know what's making Keiko sick. The Free Willy Keiko
Foundation does not share medical information or test results with the
Oregon Coast Aquarium. They didn't reveal his health problems until the
Aquarium Board and our staff raised concerns. We believe a truly independent
health evaluation will determine whether Keiko is sick and reveal what is
making him sick.
Q. What about the replacement of Keiko's life support filters?
A. The water in Keiko's pool never fell below established health parameters.
Nonetheless, the Aquarium requested more than a year ago -- in June 1996 --
that the media in Keiko's life support filters should be replaced, but the
Foundation delayed replacement because of financial constraints. We are
surprised and disappointed that the Foundation blames the Aquarium.
Q. How does the Aquarium's agenda differ from the Foundation's?
A. The Aquarium's actions are purely motivated by concern for Keiko's health
and welfare. We have always supported -- and continue to support -- the
effort to safely rehabilitate and release Keiko back to the wild, if
possible. To that end, we believe there would be no down side to having
Keiko's health evaluated by experts truly independent of the Aquarium and
the Foundation.
Q. Does it all boil down to the fact the Aquarium wants to keep Keiko
because he is a strong revenue source?
A. The Aquarium is not standing in the way of Keiko's safe rehabilitation
and release, if it's possible. Money is not a factor. The protection of
Keiko's health and welfare is what is motivating the Aquarium.
Q. But isn't it true that Keiko is too valuable for the Aquarium to let him
go?
A. That isn't true. Keiko's exhibit has been great for us, but the Aquarium
was thriving prior to Keiko's exhibit coming here and we will thrive after
his exhibit leaves. It is common for a new exhibit initially to drive up
attendance for any zoo, aquarium, museum or other public display facility.
We always have expected the number of visitors would return to normal within
a year or two after Keiko debuted. Our current figures and estimates for
future attendance (listed below) project a 25-30 percent decline this year
and another 25-30 percent drop expected in 1998. Keiko is no longer the draw
he used to be.
Attendance
1994 629,000
1995 595,000
1996 1,319,000
1997 837,000 (projected)
1998 692,000 (projected)
October 6, 1997
OREGON COAST AQUARIUM SURPRISED, DISAPPOINTED BY FOUNDATION ASSAULT
Continues to Seek Truly
Independent Review of Keiko's Health
NEWPORT, Ore. - The Oregon Coast Aquarium today expressed surprise and
disappointment regarding the actions of the Free Willy Keiko Foundation.
Calling the Foundation's assault on the Aquarium sad and perplexing,
Aquarium President Phyllis Bell repeated the request that a truly
independent review of Keiko's health be conducted as soon as possible.
"The water in Keiko's pool never fell below established health parameters,"
Bell said. "Was water quality a concern? Yes. The Aquarium requested in June
1996 -- more than a year ago -- that the media in Keiko's life support
filters should be replaced. It is my understanding that the Foundation
delayed replacing them because of financial constraints."
Concerns about Keiko's health surfaced on October 1, when the Aquarium Board
requested an independent evaluation. The Free Willy Keiko Foundation, which
owns Keiko and dictates his medical and rehabilitation plan, does not
regularly share information about Keiko's health or care with the Aquarium.
"If we hadn't come forward with our concerns, the public would not have
known that Keiko has been ailing," Bell said. "It's worth pointing out that
the Foundation consistently has scoffed at our concerns about Keiko's
health, but now accuses the Aquarium of endangering his health. The two
don't go together. Either he's healthy or he's not. If they want to blame
October 2, 1997
Keiko's Health
Questions & Answers
Q. How is Keiko feeling?
A. The Oregon Coast Aquarium is concerned about the current health of Keiko
and is pushing for a broad independent evaluation of his health and care.
What we know is that Keiko is being treated for respiratory ailments and is
showing external signs of tapeworms. He also appears listless at times and
possibly stressed. We believe a broad independent evaluation of Keiko’s
health and care is the best way to ensure Keiko receives the best possible
care.
Q. Will visitors notice anything different about Keiko?
A. Some visitors have noticed that Keiko hasn’t been his old self lately.
However, Keiko is still being cared for by the Free Willy Keiko Foundation
in the Aquarium’s Open Ocean Exhibit, which remains open to Aquarium
visitors.
Q. What is the Oregon Coast Aquarium doing about concerns regarding Keiko’s
health?
The Aquarium is working with the Free Willy Keiko Foundation, which owns
Keiko and dictates his medical and rehabilitation plan, to achieve a broad
independent evaluation of Keiko’s health and care. The Aquarium is committed
to ensuring Keiko receives the best possible care.
Q. If it’s so concerned, why can’t the Aquarium just take over Keiko’s care?
A. Although Keiko is an exhibit at the Oregon Coast Aquarium, he is owned by
the Free Willy Keiko Foundation. The Aquarium is working hard with the
Foundation to resolve matters pertaining to Keiko’s health and day-to-day
care, but it isn’t as simple as taking over his care because we don’t own
him.
Q. Does this mean Keiko’s rehabilitation and release back to the wild is in
jeopardy?
A. The Oregon Coast Aquarium is committed to acting in the best interests of
Keiko and the other animals in our care. We have always supported – and
continue to support – the effort to safely rehabilitate and release Keiko
back to the wild, if possible. The Foundation owns Keiko and will be the
sole decision maker regarding Keiko’s release. Our concerns about Keiko’s
health have nothing to do with the release issue.
Q. Is the Aquarium raising these concerns because it doesn’t want to lose
Keiko as a money-making exhibit?
A. Our actions are purely motivated by our concern for Keiko’s health and
welfare. Keiko’s exhibit has been great for us, but the Aquarium was
thriving prior to Keiko’s exhibit coming here and we will thrive after his
exhibit leaves. We always have assumed he was only a visitor and not a
permanent exhibit here. In fact, the Aquarium’s master plan assumes
attendence will drop back to normal levels in less than two years regardless
of the Foundation’s decision about Keiko’s release.
Q. How long has this been going on?
A. We became concerned about Keiko’s health and care earlier this summer.
The Aquarium Board immediately made the Foundation aware of these concerns
and since then we have been working with the Foundation to achieve a broad
independent evaluation of Keiko’s health and care.
Q. How much of this is political infighting between the Oregon Coast
Aquarium and the Foundation?
A. This has nothing to do with politics or egos. It has to do with Keiko’s
care and well being and the Aquarium’s strong belief that Keiko deserves a
broad independent evaluation as soon as possible.
Fact Sheet
Keiko’s Health
The Oregon Coast Aquarium became concerned about Keiko’s health and care
earlier this summer and immediately made its concerns known to the Free
Willy Keiko Foundation.
The Aquarium’s concerns are based on the fact that Keiko appears listless at
times and possibly stressed. He is being treated for what the Foundation
describes as a bacterial respiratory infection – similar to bronchitis in
humans -- and is showing external signs of tapeworms.
The Free Willy Keiko Foundation, which dictates Keiko’s medical and
rehabilitation plan, does not regularly share information about Keiko’s
health or care with the Oregon Coast Aquarium.
The Oregon Coast Aquarium is working with the Free Willy Keiko Foundation to
achieve a broad independent health evaluation so Keiko can have the best
possible care. The two organizations are currently in the midst of
confidential negotiations.
Ownership
Even though many people assume Keiko is the property of the Oregon Coast
Aquarium, he isn’t. The Free Willy Keiko Foundation owns him. In 1995, Keiko
####
Joe Dlhopolsky
do...@mistral.co.uk wrote:
> ...Come, come JD we’re on a dolphins newsgroup...so be honest and let
>folk know ALL your experience with cetacea... Please correct me if I’m
>wrong, but it amounts to a few weeks assisting and supporting the
>disgusting treatment of dolphins held captive in a tiny plastic tank in a
>London strip joint.
Umm. Perhaps this is a stupid question, but who would want to watch
dolphins strip? Assuming they did, what kind of clothing did they wear
in an aquatic medium? Furthermore, could this be another long
forgotten bit of evidence in support of dolphin intelligence? Or is it
the other way around.
It's bad enough human women are degraded in strip clubs. Now dolphins?
What's the world coming to???
Joe Dlhopolsky
joe...@i-2000.com
John Dineley
In article <8763977...@dejanews.com>, do...@mistral.co.uk writes
> >My experience? Twenty-five plus years of practical experience with
>wild
>
>>animal husbandry and management (dolphins, seals, sealions, penguins,
>>marine fish, etc.) and an honours degree in psychology with biology.
>
>folk know ALL your experience with cetacea...
(rubbished snipped)
Well, this statement just shows how little you really know about my
career or anything else for that matter :-) I also note you have
quickly slipped back in to personal attack mode to deflect any form of
rational debate.
> ....Your employment record says it all.
Yes - it suggests I have more overall experience than you do.
> ....Try looking at the Marine Mammal Inventory and tell us how many
>dolphins the captivity industry have *released*. Then show us how much
>pre-release work and follow up was undertaken. They simply dumped
>unwanted animals and ran.
Like your project Into The Blue :-)
Were, according to your own records, an animal also had to be
provisioned with food and treated with antibiotics after it was
released. Some rehabilitation process!
--
John Dineley
Zoological Consultant
PO BOX 153
Bedford
MK40 2JD
United Kingdom
View expressed are my own.
Email address has been corrupted to avoid junk mail.
Correct address: dol...@zalophus.demon.co.uk
Jaap van der Toorn
In article <19971008195...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,
steja...@aol.com (Stejacorca) wrote:
> [...]
> The "animal-rigths industry" has no control over the Free Willy Keiko
> Foundation, we both know that. And the "very poor record" is not so poor at
> all if you read the records carefully.
> Have a look at "Cetacean Reintroduction. A List of Examples and an Annotated
> Bibliography (1994 by K.C. Balcomb III et al.)".
I did read Ken Balcombs document (version 4.3.3, March 1995) carefully. A
few remarks on this exhaustive list are in order, I think: - it includes
anectodal reports - it includes some rehabilitated stranded animals - it
included a whole list of animals that have been captive for only a few
days to a few weeks. - a large proportion of the releases have no
followup whatsoever.
Let's just sum up the one that Balcomb mentions as "followup successful"
and which involved animals that had been in captivity for more than 1
year - 1993 - Flipper, Brasil, captive 10 years - 1992 - Bahama Mama,
captive 17 years, sighted up to 8 months after escape - 1992 - Atlantis
Park, Australia, 9 dolphins captive up to 11 years. 3 recaptured, 1
presumed dead, 3 unaccounted for, 2 unconfirmed possible sightings - 1992
- Anessa, captive born, escaped during a hurricane - 1991 - Rocky, Missie
and Silver, captive 20,22 and 15 years. Non-native release - 1990 - Echo
and Misha, captive 2 years. - 1987 - Joe and Rosie, captive 7 years.
Non-native release
Of these, there are confirmed sightings one year post-release for
Flipper, Echo and Misha. Sightings of Silver in 1994 in the company of
sociable dolphin JoJo are disputed. If we for the sake of argument
include him, there are confirmed long-term sightings of only 4 released
dolphins.
> The captive industry has
> killed whales and dolphins in a number that exceeds all records of
> unsuccessful, lethal rehabilition attempts by the thousands.
As for bottlenose dolphins, Small and DeMaster (1995) showed that the
annual survival rate (the probability that an animal alive today is still
alive one year from now) is not significantly different in captivity and
in the Sarasota population. For killer whales, the captive survival rate
is lower than in the wild (= the B.C. population).
For released animals we cannot make a realistic estimate of the survival
rate. There are only 3, possibly 4 animals that we know have survived for
at least one year post-release (out of 96 releases/escapes reported by
Balcomb). The optimistic view would be that all of the missing ones are
thriving, the pessimistic view that the missing animals are all dead.
Bottomline is we simply have no data.
Jaap
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Jaap van der Toorn
e-mail: ja...@compuserve.com (73064...@compuserve.com)
Home page: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/jaap/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
References:
K.C. Balcomb III (1995)
Cetacean Releases, version 4.3.3, March 1995
Center for Whale Research, Friday Harbor, WA 98250
R.J. Small and D.P. DeMaster (1995)
Survival of five species of captive marine mammals.
Marine Mammal Science 11(2):209-226
John Dineley
>wrong, but it amounts to a few weeks assisting and supporting the
>disgusting treatment of dolphins held captive in a tiny plastic tank in
>for a company who caused nearly as much concern within their industry
>as Herr Leinhardt...
I have reread and reposted this section of this posting from Mr
Cartlidge as my initial response may have been too light-heart when
addressing a serious slur on my character and professionalism.
I therefore reproduced below an edit of my current CV. I have omitted
recent and on going consultant work due to client confidentiality. I
have also omitted the various media events I have been invited to attend
over my career; the most recent was my appearance this week on the BBC
"Mysteries" television programme where I appeared as a expert on dolphin
behaviour. I also included a list of papers and articles I have
researched or had published and/or presented.
I hope such a posting will put an end to the juvenile silliness and
Argumentum ad hominem attacks that continue to emulate from DC and that
we can get back to fruitfull exchanges of news and debate.
========================================================================
JOHN DINELEY, BA. Hons
Member: International Marine Animal Trainers Association
European Association For Aquatic Mammals
Universities Federation for Animal Welfare
Association of British Wild Animal Keepers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1994 - 1997: STUDENT - CONSULTANT
University of Luton
Full time education reading for a BA. Honours degree: psychology with
biology. Degree awarded July 1997.
1987 - 1993: SEA-LION TRAINER.
Woburn Safari Park, Woburn, Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire.
Managed Woburn`s sea-lion display for the Chipperfield Organisation
(1987-1991) and Dolphin Services (1991-1993). Involved in all aspects
of display presentation; animal training (including newly imported,
untrained animals); and water treatment operation. From the summer
season of 1989 undertook cover presentation of a group of trained macaws
(Ara sp.) during staff holiday and days off.
1985 - 1987: SELF-EMPLOYED.
1978 - 1985: ZOO KEEPER/SEA-LION TRAINER.
Welsh Mountain Zoo, Colwyn Bay, Clwyd, North Wales.
General animal husbandry of a wide range of species. Specific care of
the zoo's group of California sea-lions (Zalophus californianus)
including the presenting and training animals for public display; during
my time at Colwyn Bay we began to successfully breed from this group.
Managing penguin exhibit including hand-rearing young. Rehabilitation
of local standard seal pups (Halichoerus grypus).
1976 - 1977: DOLPHIN/SEA-LION TRAINER.
Dolfirama, Zandvoort, Holland.
Assistant Head Trainer (bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops truncatus and sea-
lions, (Zalophus californianus) to a large Dutch dolphinarium.
1976: SEAL KEEPER.
Cornish Seal Sanctuary, Gweek, Cornwall.
Centre for rehabilitation of grey seals (Halichoerus grypus). Special
responsibility to maintain the sanctuary's pool complex water treatment
systems.
1975 - 1976: ZOO KEEPER.
Municipal Zoological Gardens, Blackpool, Lancashire.
General zoo stock husbandry. Training and presenting public feeding
displays of a group of Patagonian (Otaria flavescens) and California
sea-lions (Zalophus californianus).
1974 - 1975: DOLPHIN TRAINER.
Entam Dolphinariums, Trust House Forte, Manchester.
Training and presenting bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) and
sea-lions (Zalophus californianus) at the groups dolphinaria at Woburn
and Knowsley Safari Parks.
1974: DOLPHIN TRAINER.
Marine Mammals International, Royalty Theatre, London.
Training and husbandry of two bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus).
1971 - 1974: DOLPHIN TRAINER.
Margate Dolphinarium, Cliftonville, Margate, Kent.
Training, husbandry and transportation of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops
truncatus) and sea-lions (Zalophus californianus) from the groups
Margate base (summer 1971) and various satellite shows: e.g. Skegness
Dolphinarium (summer 1972, 1973) and touring winter shows in the north
of England. Towards the end of my contact with this group I was sub-
contracted in the summer of 1974 by Aquatic Mammal Enterprises of
Florida to care and present dolphins at Cleethorpes Zoo and Marineland,
Humberside. During this time period I also spent two months working at
the Brighton Aquarium Dolphinarium (Spring, 1972).
1970: TRAINEE AQUARIST
Seaquariums Ltd., East Croyden, Sussex.
Part-time week-end work experience as a trainee aquarists for an
exporter and retailer of tropical marine fish.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PAPERS
Does the Carrot Need the Stick? Are aversive stimuli an obligatory
component in the training and maintaining of behaviours in animals, with
particularly reference to marine mammals? (1997). Unpublished
Dissertation: University of Luton.
Reintroducing Captive Dolphins into the Wild. (1994) International Zoo
News, Volume 41/3, Number 252.
Zoos and the Trojan Dolphin? (1994) Ratel: Journal of the Association of
British Wild Animal Keepers, Volume 21, Number 2.
The Performing Orca - Why the Show Must Go On! (1992) Ratel: Journal of
the Association of British Wild Animal Keepers, Volume 19, Number 4.
Dolphinarium Dilemma - Hard Fact or Hype. (1991) Ratel: Journal of the
Association of British Wild Animal Keepers, Volume 18, Number 2.
Basic Techniques in Modern Animal Training. (1990) Ratel: Journal of the
Association of British Wild Animal Keepers, Volume 17, Number 6.
Principles in Water Treatment in Aquatic Mammal Pools. (1990)
International Zoo News, Volume 37/7, Number 224.
Kipper Goes Back To Sea - The Rehabilitation of a Grey Seal. (1982)
Soundings: Journal of the International Marine Animal Trainers
Association, Volume 7, Number 2.
Sea-Lion Breeding: Second Year at the Welsh Mountain Zoo. (1982) Aquatic
Mammals, Volume 8, Number 3.
Operant Conditioning - A Tool in Zoo Animal Training and Husbandry.
(1982) Ratel: Journal of the Association of British Wild Animal Keepers.
Water Treatment Systems in Small Volume Oceanaria. (1979) Soundings:
Journal of the International Marine Animal Trainers Association, Volume
6, Number 2/3.
A Trainers Observations of the Birth and Development of a California
Sea-Lion Pup. (1979) Aquatic Mammals, Volume 7, Number 3.
===========================================================
Stejacorca
Up-to-date status reports on Keiko's situation can be found at
http://www.keiko.org/home/status/index.html
Here's a transcript of the most recent status report dating October 9, 1997:
>
>Perhaps you've either read or heard about what is becoming an epic struggle
with >the Oregon Coast Aquarium for control over Keiko's care. A friend of the
>Foundation's describes the situation this way: "It's like leaving your baby
with a >babysitter only to come home and find that the babysitter is suing for
custody."
>
>While much of the recent media attention over Keiko and the Foundation has
>concentrated on that battle for control, an equal amount is being turned to
whether or >not Keiko can or should be released. And much alarm is being
expressed over >whether Keiko is ready for that or not.
>
>WE FEEL STRONGLY THAT KEIKO IS NOT READY FOR RELEASE--OR >EVEN FOR EVALUATION
FOR RELEASE. Far from it. While he has eaten live >fish (a few) he is far from
being proficient at hunting and eating live prey. While he >can now hold his
breath for 16 minutes, 23 seconds--more than a minute over his >previous
personal best--he is still getting stronger every day. And we have not yet
>completed the scientific research that will give us a detailed snapshot of
his >behavioral, physiological and linguistic abilities.
>
>In short, IT IS MOST CERTAINLY NOT TIME YET TO TALK ABOUT KEIKO'S >RELEASE TO
THE WILD. Let's take this step by step.
>
>We plan to take Keiko to a bay pen in the North Atlantic in the next 12 to 24
months. >Initially, he will live in an enclosure a bit larger than his current
pool, set within a bay >or fjord. Once he has acclimated to his new marine
environment, we will open the >enclosure and let Keiko call the entire bay or
fjord his home--while still netting off the >mouth of that body of water, so
that Keiko will still be under human care.
>
>Within this larger body of water, Keiko will have a lot to adjust to--murky
water, >currents, bad weather and consistent live prey, for starters. It may
take him years to >fully acclimate to these new, natural living conditions.
This is fine with us. We long >ago commited to working at Keiko's speed, not
ours.
>
>Once Keiko has adapted to his new and larger world--assuming he adapts
>successfully--his bay pen will be opened to the wild. From that point, the
decision to >return fully to the wild will rest with Keiko as well as with the
Foundation. He may >choose to remain completely under human care. He may
become a commuting whale, >going into the wild but returning to his human
caretakers regularly. Or he may fully >embrace the challenges of the wild, in
which case we will monitor him for as long as >technology will allow.
>
>We have been asked repeatedly over the past week or so whether we might be
>blinded to Keiko's real abilities because of our zeal to accomplish what no
one has >done before: releasing a captive killer whale into the wild. We have
answered, >emphatically, NO. To the contrary, the Free Willy Keiko Foundation
has made the >unwavering commitment to care for Keiko at whatever level he
chooses--fulltime >care within a bay pen, part-time care when he chooses to
return from the wild, or >long-distance care via tracking devices and an
intervention plan if that is necessary.
>
>As Keiko's owner and guardian, we take our moral obligations to Keiko very
>seriously. His life has been full of difficulties. Our goal is to shelter him
from them, not >to cause him more.
>
end of transcript
Stefan Jacobs
email: steja...@aol.com
website: http://members.aol.com/stejacorca/index.html
John Dineley
In article <19971011013...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, Stejacorca
<steja...@aol.com> writes
>Here's a transcript of the most recent status report dating October 9,
>1997:
>Perhaps you've either read or heard about what is becoming an epic
>struggle with the Oregon Coast Aquarium for control over Keiko's
>care. A friend of the Foundation's describes the situation this way:
>"It's like leaving your baby with a babysitter only to come home and
>find that the babysitter is suing for custody."
A very neat emotive and anthropomorphic sound bite. Keiko is not a
human, baby or otherwise. However, this emotive statement is quite
clever and creates a convenient smoke screen to divert attention away
from the real issue: Keiko's health been assessed by independent
experts.
>While much of the recent media attention over Keiko and the Foundation
>has concentrated on that battle for control, an equal amount is being
>turned to whether or not Keiko can or should be released. And much
>alarm is being expressed over whether Keiko is ready for that or not.
As I recall, the concerns over Kekio coming from the Oregon Coast
Aquarium related to his health and the issues of access to such
information not any plans for release.
>WE FEEL STRONGLY THAT KEIKO IS NOT READY FOR RELEASE--OR EVEN FOR
>EVALUATION FOR RELEASE. Far from it. While he has eaten live fish (a
>few) he is far from being proficient at hunting and eating live prey.
And what if it is discovered his pod predates on marine mammals? This
question has been asked in the past but conveniently side-stepped by
Keiko's current owners.
Whilst on this subject what happened to the hyped research based in
Iceland to find his family. Without such information it would seem any
release effort is dead in the water.
>We plan to take Keiko to a bay pen in the North Atlantic in the next 12
>to 24 months.
Not in Iceland as originally stated on The Discovery Channel, etc.
>Once Keiko has adapted to his new and larger world--assuming he adapts
>successfully--his bay pen will be opened to the wild. From that point,
>the decision to return fully to the wild will rest with Keiko as well
>as with the Foundation. He may choose to remain completely under
>human care. He may become a commuting whale, going into the wild but
>returning to his human caretakers regularly. Or he may fully embrace
>the challenges of the wild, in which case we will monitor him for as
>long as technology will allow.
So here we have it, a non-native release of a orca is planned. No
attempts to place this animal back to the area of capture nor with the
pod it came from. An action, if undertaken as described, goes against
intentional guidelines for the introduction of wildlife, e.g. IUCN
(1987) The IUCN position statement on translocation of living
organisms: Introductions, re-introductions and re-stocking. Gland,
Switzerland: International Union for Conservation of Nature,.
Moreover, a plan that seems to come from a book of fairy tails rather
than the science of species reintroduction. Does the Foundation really
think they are going to get permission from the NMFS to export this
animal out of the USA based on the above stated plan? Sadly they may do
due to political pressure. Although, it is interesting to note that the
recent refusal of permits for a traveling dolphin show into the USA and
the Dallas Aquarium Inia debacle seems to suggest that the NMFS are not
the puppets of either the aquarium or animal-rights industry some would
wish to portray them.
In any event, one really has to question the whole ethic of this
operation. Why has so much money been spent on one animal in the
controversial belief that his possible return to the wild would be of
welfare benefit. If the FreeWilly/Keiko Foundation want to contribute
anything of any substance to the saving of the marine environment than
tackling the problem of inshore population would be a start. However,
investing in third-world coastal sewage works, etc. is less glamorous
than playing with orcas :-)
>As Keiko's owner and guardian, we take our moral obligations to Keiko
>very seriously. His life has been full of difficulties. Our goal is to
>shelter him from them, not to cause him more.
If this is the case, why was the Alliance of Marine Parks and Aquariums
ordered by Keiko's current owners to remove chilling equipment they
helped install on Keiko's old pool in Mexico whilst plans for Keiko
future where being made? Very caring action indeed! Although, this
action should have altered facilities such as Oregon to the kind of
political in-fighting they would be letting themselves in for if they
ever tried to advise or criticise the FreeWilly/Keiko Foundation.
Perhaps, what is require is the transfer of Keiko ownership to an
independent body which has no affiliation with either the Foundation or
Aquarium. And that this group could also take responsibility for
deciding what really is best as regards the future welfare of this
animal.
Stejacorca
John Dineley <J...@zalophus.demon.co.uk>
wrote on Thu, 09 October 1997 06:27 AM EDT:
>The Mail On Sunday, April 17, 1994.
>At last, the real Free Willy may go free.
>
>Ken Balcombe quote:
>
>"The clock is running out because even in the best captive situation
>Keiko will die within three years"
>
>This statement was made 3 years and 5 months ago. Why is not Keiko
>dead?
Statistically Keiko is living against the odds already, since male orcas
seldom survive into adulthood in captivity, as the death of Finna
demonstrated tragically October 6. The pool in Newport is unlike any display
pool, because there is no show routine but there is lots of stimulation with
trainers who act more as companions than trainers. He still needs much more
room to move and stimulation, and the company of his own species and family.
>
>This is the same Ken Balcombe, of course, who seriously consider putting
>Keiko in a seapen in the Bahamas and training this animal to swim behind
>a boat all they way back to Iceland. When I recounted this story to an
>experienced marine mammal biologist (then working for the UK Sea Mammal
>Research Unit) the person thought I was joking and declared this was the
>kind of thing that children in kindergarten would think up.
>
Ahab and Ishmael, two young male killer whales from J or K pod were inducted
into the US Navy Project Deep Ops in 1968, and were trained to follow a signal
from a boat for daily excursions off the north coast of Oahu, Hawaii. There is
no reason
to think Keiko would not have successfully followed a boat travelling slowly
to the North Atlantic. The exercise would be good for him.
Stejacorca
John Dineley <Dol...@spam.spamblock>
wrote on Sat, 11 October 1997 08:35 AM EDT:
>>Perhaps you've either read or heard about what is becoming an epic
>>struggle with the Oregon Coast Aquarium for control over Keiko's
>>care. A friend of the Foundation's describes the situation this way:
>>"It's like leaving your baby with a babysitter only to come home and
>>find that the babysitter is suing for custody."
>
>A very neat emotive and anthropomorphic sound bite. Keiko is not a
>human, baby or otherwise. However, this emotive statement is quite
>clever and creates a convenient smoke screen to divert attention away
>from the real issue: Keiko's health been assessed by independent
>experts.
>
And these independent experts stated his health as good.
>As I recall, the concerns over Kekio coming from the Oregon Coast
>Aquarium related to his health and the issues of access to such
>information not any plans for release.
>
The "concerns about health" are just the "smoke screens to divert attention
away from the real issue": the Oregon Coast Aquarium fears to lose it's new
major money maker and the captive industry fears the questions after a
successful release.
>And what if it is discovered his pod predates on marine mammals? This
>question has been asked in the past but conveniently side-stepped by
>Keiko's current owners.
>
>Whilst on this subject what happened to the hyped research based in
>Iceland to find his family. Without such information it would seem any
>release effort is dead in the water.
>
Sounds like the old phrase the Reino Aventura consultant happened to shout out
when the first idea of Keiko's rehabilitation and release came up: "But he'll
never be able to feed on penguins again!"
Icelandic orcas mainly feed on herring but anyway if Keiko is unable to return
to the wild then he'll be cared for in a spacious sea pen for the rest of his
life.
Research is in the plan and will be done. The Free Willy Keiko Foundation is
not some amusement park who dumps a dolphin into the ocean without thinking.
>>We plan to take Keiko to a bay pen in the North Atlantic in the next 12
>>to 24 months.
>
>Not in Iceland as originally stated on The Discovery Channel, etc.
>
> <snip>
>
>So here we have it, a non-native release of a orca is planned. No
>attempts to place this animal back to the area of capture nor with the
>pod it came from.
John, we had that already. Repeating doesn't make the argument any better. Stop
the pressure on Iceland by the captive industry and Iceland will be the place.
>Moreover, a plan that seems to come from a book of fairy tails rather
>than the science of species reintroduction.
The only thing about the plan that isn't sientific is your industries fear of
it.
>In any event, one really has to question the whole ethic of this
>operation. Why has so much money been spent on one animal in the
>controversial belief that his possible return to the wild would be of
>welfare benefit. If the FreeWilly/Keiko Foundation want to contribute
>anything of any substance to the saving of the marine environment than
>tackling the problem of inshore population would be a start.
>
Here we go again. Keiko is not only a marvellous animal but also a symbol of
our approach to nature.
No money going towards Keiko has been taken away from any other project.
Why don't you take away the walls in front of your eyes? The billion dollar
captive industry has a ridiculous small budget for research and education
which shows clearly whose opinion is that
>investing in third-world coastal sewage works, etc. is less glamorous
>than playing with orcas :-)
>If this is the case, why was the Alliance of Marine Parks and Aquariums
>ordered by Keiko's current owners to remove chilling equipment they
>helped install on Keiko's old pool in Mexico whilst plans for Keiko
>future where being made?
Because in Reino Aventura's tank are dolphins who are dependent on warmer water
temperatures and would simply die in cold water.
Why did the Alliance of Marine Parks and Aquariums wait to do ANYTHING for
Keiko, who was suffering in Mexico, until the idea of rehabilitation and
release came up. Reino Aventura asked SeaWorld to take over Keiko because they
were worried about his health and SeaWorld declined.
>Perhaps, what is require is the transfer of Keiko ownership to an
>independent body which has no affiliation with either the Foundation or
>Aquarium. And that this group could also take responsibility for
>deciding what really is best as regards the future welfare of this
>animal.
>
The Free Willy Keiko Foundation is exactly that kind of independent you are
talking about. That's why your captive industry is so upset and desperate.
The whole attack by the captive industry was to be expected and finally
happened. The Free Willy Keiko Foundation has the power and independence to
stay clear of this dirty fight and to remain on target: Doing whatever is the
best for Keiko.
This might not be the same as what is the best for the captive industry. And
that's why we are witnessing this all happen.
>John Dineley
>Zoological Consultant
Where's your "Animal Welfare" consultant? Finally figured out that you're not
the right man to do "Animal Welfare"? Congratulations!
John Dineley
> http://www.keiko.org/home/status/index.html
It is also worth checking out the Oregon Aqaurium pages:
http://www.aquarium.org/keikohome.htm
John Dineley
In article <19971011151...@ladder02.news.aol.com>, Stejacorca
<steja...@aol.com> writes
>John Dineley <Dol...@spam.spamblock>
>wrote on Sat, 11 October 1997 08:35 AM EDT:
If that is the case why has the Oregon Veterinary Medical Association
still expressed concern.
October 7, 1997
Oregon Veterinary Medical Association Concerned About Keiko's Health.
Calls for Independent Evaluation
I have to also point out that one of the Foundation's "independent" vets
you metion worked for the Into The Blue project.
>The "concerns about health" are just the "smoke screens to divert attention
> away from the real issue": the Oregon Coast Aquarium fears to lose it's new
> major money maker and the captive industry fears the questions after a
> successful release.
If you check out the Oregon Coast Aquarium web page - which you have not
listed as an source of information - you will note that they have
addressed this allegation pointing out that Keiko's draw as an
attraction peaked a couple of years back.
<quote>
Q. But isn't it true that Keiko is too valuable for the Aquarium to let
him go?
A. That isn't true. Keiko's exhibit has been great for us, but the
Aquarium was thriving prior to Keiko's exhibit coming here and we will
thrive after his exhibit leaves. It is common for a new exhibit
initially to drive up attendance for any zoo, aquarium, museum or other
public display facility. We always have expected the number of visitors
would return to normal within a year or two after Keiko debuted. Our
current figures and estimates for future attendance (listed below)
project a 25-30 percent decline this year and another 25-30 percent drop
expected in 1998. Keiko is no longer the draw he used to be.
Attendance
1994
629,000
1995
595,000
1996
1,319,000
1997
837,000
(projected)
1998
692,000
(projected)
<end quote>
In any event, I think their concern is genuine although the only way it
will be proved or disproved is by an independent investigation. Or,
better still, an open sharing of the information re: Keiko' health from
the Foundation. Why do they want to keep this secret anyway. What have
they to hide?
>>Iceland to find his family. Without such information it would seem any
>>release effort is dead in the water.
>>
>
>Sounds like the old phrase the Reino Aventura consultant happened to shout out
> when the first idea of Keiko's rehabilitation and release came up: "But he'll
> never be able to feed on penguins again!"
>Icelandic orcas mainly feed on herring
Do they? Please cited the research that make such a sweeping statement.
>but anyway if Keiko is unable to return
> to the wild then he'll be cared for in a spacious sea pen for the rest of his
> life.
You have not answered the question as to why the research promised by
the Foundation to find Keiko's family has not been undertaken.
Another point, have not the animal-rights movement also been, rightly,
critical of establishments that keep orcas in captivity in isolation?
Therefore, I assume if Keiko can not be released he will be found a mate
- after, of course, years of much criticised isolation while being under
the direct control of the animal-rights industry.
>Research is in the plan and will be done. The Free Willy Keiko Foundation is
> not some amusement park who dumps a dolphin into the ocean without thinking.
Perhaps you got give us all detailed information when, in the last
couple of years, parks have dumped animals into the ocean without
thinking. The last person to do this appears to animal-rights activist
Ric O'Barry with the Sugarloaf dolphins.
>John, we had that already. Repeating doesn't make the argument any better. Stop
> the pressure on Iceland by the captive industry and Iceland will be the place.
The decision for Iceland to refuse the release of any long term orcas
was a scientific one. I reproduced the full text of a Marmam response
to this issue from a senior scientific adviser to the Icelandic
government.
<begin quote>
========================================================================
Original-Sender: Marine Mammals Research and Conservation Discussion
16-AUG-1995 06:48:36.96
From: Johann Sigurjonsson
Subject: message to marmam
Dear Robin;
Many thanks for your initiative to distribute material to marine mammal
scientists, which I find most useful. I have made use of your digest
service which avoids you being disturbed by messages that are not of
primary importance for your daily activities although you are interested
to keep updated what is going on in this field of interest. This is very
important because at my lab the email system has been for quite a long
time a very important communication media.
Most of the time I find what is on the marmam net of some use (at least
for somebody), although I have usually try to skip lengthy debates on
ATOC, loaded political issues, etc. I have learned to skip these quickly
and I am not in a position to say whether they are of good quality or
not.
I mention this because several times I have read some comments or "news"
about Keiko, the captive killer whale that featured in the recent movie
Free Willy. Several times I have heard that the animal was to be freed
into the wild where it originated, i.e. off the coast of Iceland. Since
in most cases this has been presented as for pleasure rather than
seriously, I have not bothered to interfere. However, on 8 August a
message entitled "GALA PREMIERE MAY HELP FREE REAL-LIFE WILLY" indicates
that a serious fund raising campaign is being initiated in the US with
the ultimate goal to release the animal into the sea off Iceland. Or as
it reads, first "the foundation needs to raise a further 10 million US
dollars, or 6 million, to rehabilitate him" (i.e. Keiko). And later:
"Meanwhile killer whale experts are scanning the waters off Iceland to
try to find the family he was taken from at the age of two so they can
be reunited".
Since I have been involved in providing scientific advice to the
government of Iceland for a number of years on killer whales and other
issues, I feel obliged to offer the following statement in conjunction
with the above mammam message: The government of Iceland has repeatedly
decided in recent years not to permit re-introduction of killer whales
into Icelandic waters that have been subjected to animal life in distant
parts of the world for a prolonged periods of time. This due mainly to
two reasons:
a. because such a re-introduction could lead to transfer of
"foreign" bacterias or other infectious agents with unknown
consequences for the local ecosystem or individual animals
b. because of the uncertainty regarding how an animal that has been
kept in captivity for most of its life would survive in the
wild.
Also, it seems strange to me the statement that "killer whale experts
are scanning the waters off Iceland", because anyone conducting research
on killer whales off Iceland needs permit to do so. To my knowledge the
appropriate authorities in Iceland have not been contacted nor have they
issued any permits to conduct such studies.
I would appreciate if you please could distribute this message on the
marmam network for the sake of those who prefer sticking to facts rather
than unreliable news.
Best wishes, Johann
Johann Sigurjonsson
Hafrannsoknastofnunin
Marine Research Institute
Skulagata 4, P.O. Box 1390,
121 Reykjavik,
Iceland
========================================================================
<end quote>
>No money going towards Keiko has been taken away from any other project.
>Why don't you take away the walls in front of your eyes? The billion dollar
> captive industry has a ridiculous small budget for research and education
> which shows clearly whose opinion is that
>>investing in third-world coastal sewage works, etc. is less glamorous
>>than playing with orcas :-)
Perhaps you would like to provide some facts and figures on how
"ridiculous(ly) small" the budget is for research and education in zoos
and aquariums.
>Because in Reino Aventura's tank are dolphins who are dependent on warmer water
> temperatures and would simply die in cold water.
As you said, you are not an expert and this statement says it all.
Bottlenose dolphins can adapt and thrive in water temperatures ranging
from 10 - 28 C, temperature suitable for orcas range from 2 - 20 C. The
temperatures in Mexico could have been lower to a comprise level that
would have benefited Keiko and been in a acceptable range for a
bottlenose dolphin. If this was the official excuse for the ordering of
the removal of the chilling equipment it a very poor one.
(reference: Geraci, J.R. and Sweeney, J. (1986). Marine mammals
(Cetacea, Pinnipedia, and Sirenia). In M. E. Fowler (ed.) Zoo and Wild
Animal Medicine. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company.)
>Why did the Alliance of Marine Parks and Aquariums wait to do ANYTHING for
> Keiko, who was suffering in Mexico, until the idea of rehabilitation and
> release came up. Reino Aventura asked SeaWorld to take over Keiko because they
> were worried about his health and SeaWorld declined.
I believe this was due to his state of health and the risks of disease
to other animals kept with him.
>The Free Willy Keiko Foundation is exactly that kind of independent you are
> talking about.
As I said above, then why where they not prepared to share information
freely with the Oregon Coast Aquarium?
In any event, we will just have to wait and see what NMFS and APHIS have
to say when they will eventually be asked to make judgements on the
various issues involved.
>>John Dineley
>>Zoological Consultant
>
>Where's your "Animal Welfare" consultant? Finally figured out that you're not
> the right man to do "Animal Welfare"? Congratulations!
That is a rather cheap remark and one I would not have expected from
you. The change of title is was to qualify the larger area of
consultant work I have been taking on recently. This still included the
animal welfare and behaviour work but also has expended to include staff
training and exhibit design, etc.
do...@mistral.co.uk
Subject: Re: Keiko news reports
>>In article do...@mistral.co.uk writes
>> ...Come, come JD we're on a dolphins newsgroup...so be honest and let
>>folk know ALL your experience with cetacea... Please correct me if I'm
>>wrong, but it amounts to a few weeks assisting and supporting the
>>disgusting treatment of dolphins held captive in a tiny plastic tank in
>>a London strip joint. Followed by a short time in the late 70s working
>>for a company who caused nearly as much concern within their industry
>>as Herr Leinhardt...
JD responded;
>I have reread and reposted this section of this posting from Mr
>Cartlidge as my initial response may have been too light-heart when
>addressing a serious slur on my character and professionalism.
>I therefore reproduced below an edit of my current CV..
Not bad JD! But could I suggest you post the CV you sent me in
February 1993. After checking out that one, we find NO reference
of you ever working for Brighton Dolphinarium, even from your dear
friend Alan Eastcott. There is also NO record of, or by you, contained
in the daily dolphin feed and behaviour logs. We also do not see any
reference, in this CV, to your working in America, which you *alluded*
to in your 1993 CV. But thanks for this new *version*, it’ll give us
something more to work on.
Nice to see you didn’t just train dolphins to remove *dancers* swim suits,
but that you were also involved with the *temporary* shows which
caused so much concern within the captivity industry...you worked at
some really low grade facilities. Maybe that’s why you don’t see any
problems within the captivity industry, when your *experience* is from
places even your own colleagues questioned.
Doug Cartlidge
European Cetacean Organisation
7, Meadway Court
The Boulevard
Worthing, BN13 1PN
England
tela/fax; (UK44) 1903 241 264
email; do...@mistral.co.uk
homepage; http://www3.mistral.co.uk/dougc/
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
John Dineley
In article <8766681...@dejanews.com>, do...@mistral.co.uk writes
>After checking out that one, we find NO reference
>of you ever working for Brighton Dolphinarium, even from your dear
>friend Alan Eastcott. There is also NO record of, or by you, contained
>in the daily dolphin feed and behaviour logs. We also do not see any
>reference, in this CV, to your working in America, which you *alluded*
>to in your 1993 CV. But thanks for this new *version*, it’ll give us
>something more to work on.
Well, I did work at Brighton Aquarium. This was quite some time before
Alan Eastcott employment as curator - Ray Taylor was the manager at the
time. I do not believe I stated I worked in the US, I did work for a US
company in the UK.
>But thanks for this new *version*, it’ll give us
>something more to work on.
So you can engage in more character assignation :-)
>Nice to see you didn’t just train dolphins to remove *dancers* swim suits,
>but that you were also involved with the *temporary* shows which
>caused so much concern within the captivity industry...you worked at
>some really low grade facilities. Maybe that’s why you don’t see any
>problems within the captivity industry, when your *experience* is from
>places even your own colleagues questioned.
You are, of course entitled to your opinion regarding my experience.
You also overlooked Dolfirama in Zandvoort which was far from low-grade
for a facility for it’s time. With respect, some of the places you have
worked at certainly would not be consider high-grade even in the 1970s.
But enough of this. Are you interested in debating the various issue of
dolphin welfare or just attacking me personally? If it the later I can
not see any constructive point in the exercise.
--
John Dineley, BA.Hons.
do...@mistral.co.uk
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 19:36:35 -0600
From: ja...@compuserve.com (Jaap van der Toorn)
Subject: Re: Keiko news reports
Jaap van der Toorn Wrote;
>I did read Ken Balcombs document (version 4.3.3, March 1995) carefully. A
>few remarks on this exhaustive list are in order, I think: - it includes
>anectodal reports - it includes some rehabilitated stranded animals - it
>included a whole list of animals that have been captive for only a few
>days to a few weeks. - a large proportion of the releases have no
>followup whatsoever.
While Balcombs list is far from complete, it clearly shows the captivity
industry have released many captive cetaceans, BUT it is they who failed
to attempt any follow up work. Apart from the Sarasota and Atlantis
releases only animal welfare organisation releases have attempted post
release monitoring.
One point which causes me much concern is that pre-release medical tests
were not undertaken by the captivity industry.This must be seen as both
irresponsible and extremely dangerous to the wild population, but little
to nothing is said about this *crime*.
Doug Cartlidge
European Cetacean Organisation
7 Meadway Court
The Boulevard
Worthing, BN13 1PN
England
tele/fax (+44 UK) 1903 241 264
do...@mistral.co.uk
Subject: Re: Keiko news reports
JD responds;
>Well, I did work at Brighton Aquarium.I do not believe I stated
>I worked in the US, I did work for a US company in the UK.
....Then it’s very strange we see NO reference, or records, by
yourself in the Brighton daily feed and behaviour logs. I didn’t
state you said you’d worked in America, check the facts...I
said you *alluded* to it...post the CV you sent me in 1993,
or send it again....if I’m wrong!
> With respect, some of the places you have worked at certainly
>would not be consider high-grade even in the 1970s.
...For once you are correct...NONE of the places I worked at could be
considered *high grade*, they were ALL disgusting dolphin prisons! The
only difference is I looked at what I was doing with total honesty and
QUIT. The last 20 years have been my way of repaying the abuse I was
involved in. Try it JD, for once in your life, be honest with yourself
and look at what you are involved in....slavery!
>But enough of this. Are you interested in debating the various issue of
>dolphin welfare or just attacking me personally? If it the later I can
>not see any constructive point in the exercise.
...I’m always interested in debating the issues. As for personal attacks,
as you know, I have yet to start! What I have done is question facts not
borne out by the evidence to hand. Tell you what, I’ll fax you 3 of my
company references, you do the same to me, then we’ll post them for
confirmation and checking....sound fair?
do...@mistral.co.uk
Subject: Re: Keiko news reports
JD writes;
>And so the in-fighting begins and these developments should be of
>serious concern to anyone who *genuinely* has an interest in the welfare
>of the animal "Keiko".
...It’s taken your industry long enough to drive the wedge in! But as
they see Keiko is ready for relocation to a sea pen, they have pulled
out all the stops to prevent it happening. Who suffers...Keiko!
>Moreover, the fact that sand is having to be replaced in a filter system
>operational since only 1995 seriously suggests problems with the systems
>construction or operation.
....I DO NOT BELIEVE IT!! For once I find something you write which
I TOTALLY agree with!! We know that any failure of a life support
system will elicit medical problems for captive cetacea. In the past many
have had their skin burned off, suffered stress, illness and death from
filtration failure...so how and why did it happen IF those operating it
had ANY concern for their *charge*...trouble is JD, OREGON COAST
AQUARIUM were doing the operating when the water failed....NOT the
FWKF...check the facts!!
>This whole circus seems to be degenerating by the minute. Is it not
>about time the NMFS, APHIS, etc. stepped in to make a full appraisal of
>the situation?
...Surely NMFS have no rights to do anything, especially since the
captivity industry lobbied so well for their powers to be removed? Isn’t
that fact JD! As for APHIS, how can they do anything when they daily
allow the captivity industry to breach food handling health and hygiene
regs, by allowing any Tom, Dick or Mary to feed captive cetacea without
even washing their hands? Could it be you put profit before animal
health, by allowing people to handle your animals food who have just
visited the toilet, have a contagious disease or brought their own
rotting fish to feed the captives???? PROFIT BEFORE ANIMAL CARE AND
WELFARE!!! Do your own thorough *research* on petting pools JD, and tell
me if I’m wrong.
Jaap van der Toorn
In article <8767570...@dejanews.com>,
do...@mistral.co.uk wrote:
> While Balcombs list is far from complete, it clearly shows the captivity
> industry have released many captive cetaceans, BUT it is they who failed
> to attempt any follow up work. Apart from the Sarasota and Atlantis
> releases only animal welfare organisation releases have attempted post
> release monitoring.
- Ken lists only 3 releases that have been undertaken by what you refer
to as animal welfare organisations:
Flipper (1993): resighted over longer period of time (most of these
are anecdotal reports, not part of an organized follow-up)
Rocky, Missie and Silver (1991): non-native release. No confirmed
sightings of at least Rocky and Missie one year post-release.
Possible later sighting of Silver.
Joe and Rosie (1987): non-native release. No documented resightings
one year post-release.
- To this we can add:
Bogie and Bacall (1996): escaped through cut fence. No resightings.
Luther and Buck (1996): non-native release. recaptured in poor
condition.
If you have a list of documented releases and documented resightings of
the released animals that were not included in Ken's list, Ken would
no doubt love to see those. So would I and probably a number of other
people in this group.
> One point which causes me much concern is that pre-release medical tests
> were not undertaken by the captivity industry.This must be seen as both
> irresponsible and extremely dangerous to the wild population, but little
> to nothing is said about this *crime*.
I am glad to see that you are now apparently supporting a point that
a number of people, including myself, have been putting forward in the
context of (cetacean) releases for some time now:
if you are introducing long-term captives into a wild population you
should do a careful medical and genetic evaluation: in principle release
animals only into the population they were originally taken from (native
releases) and do a number of full scale medical examinations throughout
the adaptation phase.
Ken's list does not mention pre-release medicals for any of the releases.
A number of the releases on this list are (unplanned) escapes and
obviously they were not preceded by a formal pre-release examination.
However, these animals were housed in open water facilities and should
have had a proper medical checkup before arriving at the facility and
should also have received regular medical examinations. If that is true
in all those cases is very hard to verify now, since most of those are
from the 70s and early 80s.
The Sarasota and Atlantis animals were subjected to regular health
checks. Luther and Buck had one single blood sample taken just a few days
before their release. Obviously a pre-release examination was not done
for Bogie and Bacall, although they did have regular check-ups while in
the Indian river enclosure. (Full medical records were included with the
release permit application). Do you know if any medical records exist for
Rocky, Missie and Silver, Flipper and Joe and Rosie and if those records
are available on request?
Jaap
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Jaap van der Toorn
e-mail: ja...@compuserve.com (73064...@compuserve.com)
Home page: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/jaap/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
Stejacorca
Further news on Keiko:
Subject: University of Miami Expert Urges Independent Evaluation of
Keiko
Date: 13.10.1997 17:48:23
From: AOL News
CORAL GABLES, Fla.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 13, 1997--Gregory D.
Bossart, V.M.D., Ph.D. has joined a growing list of influential
experts calling for an independent medical evaluation of Keiko the
whale, star of the movie Free Willy.
Bossart was the principal investigator contracted by Warner
Brothers Inc., during the 1994-1995 time frame to inspect benign
tumors that had formed on Keiko's back and pectoral fins. Bossart
later diagnosed these tumors to be the result of a newly described
papillomavirus. At that time, Bossart also said he found evidence
suggesting Keiko had an underlying immunological dysfunction (an
immune system disorder).
"I echo the sentiments expressed by the Oregon Coast Aquarium and
the Oregon Veterinary Medical Association as they seek a truly
independent medical evaluation of Keiko," Bossart said. "An
independent team with representatives from the National Marine
Fisheries Service, USDA and International Association of Aquatic
Animal Medicine should be called on to field an unbiased opinion."
"It is of utmost importance that an accurate assessment of
Keiko's health and welfare be secured as soon as possible. Keiko's
health and well-being need to be the first and foremost concern,"
Bossart said.
Bossart is a comparative pathologist at the University of Miami
School of Medicine, a noted aquatic marine mammal expert and author
of a long list of published reports and medical studies on whales,
dolphins, sea turtles and other sea creatures. He is active in a
number of appointments that include the National Marine Fisheries
Service Working Group on Unusual Marine Mortalities, the Aquatic
Medicine Advisory Committee at the University of Pennsylvania School
of Medicine and the Marine Life Preservation Society,
where he currently serves as president.
--30--ek/KS/se
CONTACT:
University of Miami
Fariss Samarrai, 305/284-5500
John Dineley
In article <8768301...@dejanews.com>, do...@mistral.co.uk writes
> ....Then it’s very strange we see NO reference, or records, by
>yourself in the Brighton daily feed and behaviour logs.
Well, I did work at Brighton, albeit for a short time, if you do not
wish to believe me there is not much more to say on the matter.
As the US reference - well that just you playing around with words for
effect. As to sending you a copy of the 1993 reference I do not have a
copy.
(snip)
> ...I’m always interested in debating the issues. As for personal attacks,
>as you know, I have yet to start! What I have done is question facts not
>borne out by the evidence to hand.
No. You have deliberately avoided answering questions that I have asked
you, e.g. what do you think are the requirements to successfully
maintain dolphins in captive care. You will recall the discussion some
time ago when I did answer your questions on this matter and I asked for
your opinions in return.
As far as "facts" and clams of "the evidence at hand" you now admit to
having evidence to hand (a CV of mine posted to you in 1993) that by no
stretch of the imagination fits my career details you only recently
posted to this group.
>In article do...@mistral.co.uk writes
> ...Come, come JD we're on a dolphins newsgroup...so be honest and let
>folk know ALL your experience with cetacea... Please correct me if I'm
>wrong, but it amounts to a few weeks assisting and supporting the
>disgusting treatment of dolphins held captive in a tiny plastic tank in
>a London strip joint. Followed by a short time in the late 70s working
>for a company who caused nearly as much concern within their industry
>as Herr Leinhardt..
As revealed in my recent CV posted on this group, "the short time in the
late 70s" you state was 7 years from 1970 to 1977. Incidentally, the
Royalty Theatre employment last three month not "a few weeks".
>Tell you what, I’ll fax you 3 of my
>company references, you do the same to me, then we’ll post them for
>confirmation and checking....sound fair?
No. Let's get back to the debate on dolphin welfare.