Stephen Colbert: “Environmental scientists —
this is true — have tested salmon in the Puget Sound out around
Seattle. And they found that, because those salmon are near all
these wastewater-treatment plants, the salmon are full of drugs,
including Prozac. I don’t blame them, because if I spent all my
life living in wastewater, I would definitely need a mood
stabilizer.”
Stephen Colbert dedicated a portion of his “Late Show” with a
humorous take on a recent scientific report about how drugs are
passing through people’s bodies and ending up in Puget Sound, where
they can affect fish, including salmon. This video has been viewed
about 216,000 times since it was posted last Tuesday.
In the four-minute video, Colbert goes on to have a conversation
with Sammy the Salmon, who seems clearly affected by the drugs he
has been consuming.
On the serious side, you can read about the study from the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in a
Kitsap Sun story by reporter Tristan Baurick. Tristan’s story
inspired me to write a
“Water Ways” post about one possible solution being studied:
building enhanced treatment processes into existing wastewater
plants.
In other humorous news, perhaps you’ve seen the new SeaWorld
commercial called “The
new future of SeaWorld.” The ad promotes SeaWorld’s decision to
quit breeding killer whales and to halt its theatrical shows with
orcas but not to move them out of their tanks. Recall
Water Ways, March 17.
PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, quickly
posted a parody that you can watch in the second video player on
this page.
One other bit of humor came out in print last week as an April
Fool’s joke from the Center for Biological Diversity. Here’s a
quick sample from
“Endangered Earth online.”
“The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service this week confirmed rumors
that the comb-over wilderness atop the pate of presidential
contender Donald J. Trump is indeed “critical habitat” for more
than 300 endangered species.”
“The Center’s innovative ‘Take Extinction Off Your Plate’
campaign — aimed at reducing meat consumption for the sake of
people’s and the planet’s health — announced today it would be
baking 10,000 kale-lentil muffins and delivering them to needy gray
wolves across the West.”
“The Center went to federal court this week to challenge the
Environmental Protection Agency’s recent finding that smooth jazz
is ‘perfectly safe’ for people and wildlife.”
Lolita, a killer whale taken from Puget Sound in 1970 and placed
in a Miami aquarium, could be reclassified as an endangered
species, along with other endangered Southern Resident orcas. At
the moment, Lolita is not listed at all.
Lolita lives alone in a tank at
Miami’s Seaquarium. Photo courtesy of Orca Network
NOAA Fisheries announced today that PETA — People for the
Ethical Treatment of Animals — has provided adequate documentation
to consider whether captive orcas (specifically Lolita) should be
listed along with their counterparts still roaming free.
One must not presume, however, that because NOAA has accepted
PETA’s petition that a listing will follow, agency officials
stressed.
I was under the impression, from talking to NOAA officials last
year, that we would soon know whether or not the entire Southern
Resident population would be taken off the Endangered Species List,
as proposed by Pacific Legal Foundation. But that decision appears
to be delayed for consideration of the Lolita petition.
“The agency said to make sure that its review is complete and
based on the best available science it would now solicit any new
information about Lolita’s genetic heritage and status to include
in the ongoing status review,” NOAA said in a news release. “A
finding on the delisting petition is due next January.”
PETA filed its petition on behalf of the Animal Legal Defense
Fund, Orca Network and four individuals. The 33-page petition,
filed in January, applies only to Lolita, since the 35 other killer
whales captured in Puget Sound have died, the petition notes.
Documents — including the Lolita petition — can be found on
NOAA Fisheries’ website. I discussed PLF’s delisting petition
and provided links to related documents in
Water Ways last Oct. 24.
The PETA petition strongly challenges the reasons for ever
leaving Lolita out of the endangered population:
“No explanation was offered for Lolita’s exclusion from the
listing because no legitimate explanation exists. Lolita’s
biological heritage is undisputed. The Endangered Species Act
unquestionably applies to captive members of a species, and the
wholesale exclusion of captive members of a listed species is in
excess of the agency’s authority.
“Lolita’s exclusion serves only one purpose: It protects the
commercial interests of the Miami Seaquarium. The Endangered
Species Act specifically precludes agency consideration of whether
listing a species would cause the holder of any member of the
species any economic harm. Thus Lolita’s exclusion violates the
act.
“This petition urges the National Marine Fisheries Service to
rectify this unjustified and illegal exclusion, thereby extending
Endangered Species Act protections to all members of the Southern
Resident killer whale population.
“Although as a legal matter Lolita’s genetic heritage is
sufficient to merit her listing, this petition provides additional
support in four sections. The first section provides the factual
background regarding the Southern Resident killer whales’ listing
and Lolita’s exclusion. The second section explains the application
of the act to captive members of listed species. The third section
applies the five factors that govern listing decisions under the
act to the Southern Resident killer whales generally and also to
Lolita. The fourth section considers policy reasons that support
Lolita’s protection, given her significant scientific value to the
wild population.”
Advocates for the release of Morgan have failed in their appeal
to overturn the court ruling that transferred the young killer
whale to Loro Parque, a Spanish amusement park. An appeals court
ruled that the transfer was not unlawful. See
today’s Dutch News
“Morgan is provisionally kept in Tenerife. Fortunately, in Spain
animal protectors are attracting the fate of the orca and want to
continue our fight there. We’ll continue to monitor Morgan and we
will help where we can. And in the Netherlands we focus on the
future, to ensure that stranded cetaceans will no longer fall in
the hands of the commercial industry. The fact that the license for
the care of these animals is no longer in the name of the amusement
park Dolfinarium, but in the name of SOS Dolphin, is a good first
step.”
—–
UPDATE: Nov. 29
Morgan was loaded into a plane today and flown to her new home
in Loro Parque, an amusement park on the Spanish island of
Tenerife. The transport, which involved trucks on both ends of the
trip, was uneventful.
Toby Sterling covered the story for the Associated Press.
—– UPDATE: Nov. 21
A Dutch court ruled this morning that Morgan may be sent to live
at Loro Parque aquarium, ruling against advocates who had hoped to
reunite the young orca with her family in Norway.
In a written finding, Judge M. de Rooij said chances of the
female whale surviving in the wild were “too unsure,” according to
a report by Toby Sterling of the Associated
Press.
“Morgan can be transferred to Loro Parque for study and
education to benefit the protection or maintenance of the species,”
she was quoted as saying.
Reactions among supporters for her release are being compiled on
the Free Morgan
website.
Ingrid Visser, who helped lay the scientific groundwork for
Morgan’s release, was quoted as saying the only hope for Morgan now
now lie with the Spanish courts or the Norwegian government.
“Personally, I am devastated that after all these months of
fighting the good fight, to find that reason and science lost over
money and ulterior motives,” Visser wrote on the Free Morgan page. “Our long-term
goal of establishing laws to ever prevent an animal in need being
turned into an animal used for profit and personal gain will not
stop with Morgan’s incarceration.”
—–
Separate legal actions continue to swirl around two famous
killer whales, Morgan and Lolita.
The fate of Morgan, the orphan killer whale, lies with an
Amsterdam judge who is scheduled to decide tomorrow if the orca
should be moved permanently to an aquarium in Spain or be taken to
a coastal location where she might be reunited with her family.
said
Steve Hearn, head trainer
at Dolfinarium Harderwijk, plays with Morgan at feeding time two
weeks ago.
Associated Press photo by Peter Dejong
Morgan, estimated to be 3 to 5 years old, was rescued in poor
condition last year in the Wadden Sea and was nursed back to health
in a marine park called Harderwijk Dolfinarium. Advocates for her
release say Morgan is being commercially exploited in violation of
international law regarding marine mammals.
As for Lolita, animal-rights groups in the United States filed a
lawsuit last week regarding the killer whale captured in Puget
Sound in 1970 and kept in the Miami Seaquarium almost her entire
life.
The new lawsuit contends that Lolita should have not have been
excluded as part of the “endangered” population when the federal
government listed the Southern Residents under the Endangered
Species Act in 2005. The Animal Legal Defense Fund and People for
the Ethical Treatment of Animals say if Lolita is included among
the endangered orcas, it will lead to better treatment and possibly
a reunion with her relatives.
Morgan’s story
Advocates for Morgan’s release say her caretakers at the marine
park did a good job nursing her back to health, but the law
requires that every effort be made to release marine mammals after
rehabilitation is complete.
The dolphinarium filed a report saying that it is unlikely that
Morgan would be able to survive in the wild and that finding her
family was unlikely. Some experts who supported that initial report
have since changed their minds, however.
Dutch Agriculture Minister Henk Bleker sided with dolphinarium
officials, saying moving Morgan to a large tank at Loro Parque is
best under the circumstances. That decision was unchanged after the
judge ruled that the ministry must conduct its own evaluation,
independent of the dolphinarium.
The Animal Legal Defense Fund and People for the Ethical
Treatment of Animals are asking that Lolita be included in the
population listed as endangered under the Endangered Species
Act.
It isn’t clear what this would accomplish, but the groups make
the point that the Endangered Species Act makes some exceptions for
listing animals kept in captivity, but the focus is on using those
animals for recovery of the listed population and does not apply to
animals kept for commercial use, the groups argue. Quoting from the
lawsuit
filed in U.S. District Court in Seattle (PDF 92 kb):
“In its final listing decision (in 2005), NMFS provided no
explanation for its decision to exclude all of the captive members
of the Southern Resident killer whale population from the listing
of that population as endangered.
“Because of its final listing decision, NMFS has excluded Lolita
from the protections of the ESA, thereby allowing her to be kept in
conditions that harm and harass her, and that would otherwise be
prohibited under the “take” prohibition of the ESA, 16 U.S.C. §
1538(a), including, but not limited to, being kept in an inadequate
tank, without companions of her own species or adequate protection
from the sun.”
The group asks the court to set aside the portion of the listing
decision that excluded Lolita from the endangered population,
because it was “arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion,
and not in accordance with law.”
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has raised
objections over a planned demonstration of fish-throwing at a
veterinary conference.
The idea was to invite fishmongers from Pike Place Market to
toss fish around as part of their appearance at the conference of
the American Veterinary Medical Association next month in Seattle.
It’s part of the act at the market.
Now PETA is saying if the demonstration is to be held at all,
the fish-tossers should throw rubber fish.
After watching
KCPQ (Channel 13)’s story last night about PETA’s objections to
the demonstration, I was ready to question PETA’s logic, if not the
sanity of the group. PETA already has something of a flaky
reputation.
While watching the TV news report, I was literally hooting at
what seemed to be the notion that PETA was objecting to the
fish-throwing at the Pike Place Market.
“These fish are dead!” I said laughing. “How can PETA say
tossing fish around is disrespectful? If you want to talk about
disrespect, spend some time on a fishing boat, where fish are
rounded up in a net and dumped into the hold. If you want to talk
about disrespect, visit a salmon hatchery, where fish are sliced
open to remove the eggs. If you want to talk about disrespect,
think about killing the fish, cooking the fish, cutting the fish
into pieces and eating it!”
OK, I didn’t really say all that in so many words. But that was
the essence of my logical argument. I thought PETA was really
missing the boat, so to speak, by arguing about fish-tossing, when
people have been making an honorable living from fishing for
thousands of years.
Then I went to PETA’s Web site
and read the press release and letter to the veterinary group. I
realized that PETA had not missed these greater points at all. It
was the news reports that came up short. Reporters, both television
and print, were so amused by PETA’s objections to fish-tossing that
they failed to pick up the nuance of PETA’s argument.
KCPQ may have realized the inadequacy of the report, as it held
an in-studio interview this morning with PETA’s president Ingrid
Newkirk.
It turns out that PETA is not objecting to fish-tossing in
general — at least not so much in this letter. The group continues
to object to the killing and eating of all animals, and believes
that net fishing is a cruel way for fish to die. Organizers were
making the point that veterinarians — charged with protecting and
treating animals — should not celebrate such cruelty by tossing
fish about in an amusing way.
PETA promotes veganism. It is pretty well established that
eating lower on the food chain has less impact on the environment.
I find the argument against meat-eating logical, and I have cut
back my personal consumption of meat and chicken to some
degree.
But some of PETA’s campaigns are so removed from common sense
that a large number of people refuse to take the group seriously.
PETA organizers acknowledge that they do crazy things to get
attention, but maybe they should work harder on their nuanced
message. To be effective, PETA representatives must make a
connection with people who don’t already agree with them.
As hard as PETA tries, the message frequently seems off the
mark, especially if the group is trying to reach logical people —
let alone hard-bitten folks who believe in human domination over
other species.
PETA’s letter protesting the fish-tossing demonstration includes
this: “Surely the AVMA would not describe an event as ‘fun,
educational and inspiring’ if the animals being tossed around were
lambs, hamsters, or cats.”
I would have to say that most of us don’t eat hampsters or cats.
Personally, the idea of tossing dead bodies does not bother me
much, as long as these animals were treated well while they were
alive.
