NEWS
BA Holidays, Virgin Holidays and TripAdvisor’s Viator have all announced they will no
longer be selling SeaWorld tickets. Before them, Tomas Cook adopted this policy. No doubt, these companies were under pressure from organisations such as Peta and Te Born Free Foundation, as is my own company. Te objectives of those organisations are
Oliver Brendon FOUNDER AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE, ATTRACTION TICKETS DIRECT
Criticism of SeaWorld more philosophical than scientific
sound and some of their campaigns successful and justified. Peta helped to expose the practice of taking orcas from the wild, and SeaWorld recently decided to stop its breeding programme aſter intense pressure from various groups. But the current debate about whether SeaWorld
could or should relocate dolphins and orcas to ‘sanctuaries’, and whether companies such as mine should stop selling SeaWorld tickets, is multilayered and oſten fuelled by emotion rather than information. With this in mind, I visited SeaWorld to learn more about their animal welfare work and rescue policies, and ask about some of Peta’s accusations.
SeaWorld’s rescues SeaWorld never say no to a rescue, whatever the cost. Tey have rescued more than 36,000 animals, including 706 manatees and more than 500 dolphins. All manatees and many dolphins have been released back into the wild. Tis isn’t a cheap exercise and is paid for by revenue from the commercial arm of SeaWorld Parks. Animals in captivity are ambassadors for
their wild counterparts. Te research on marine mammals conducted by SeaWorld has helped rescue and rehabilitate wild animals, and aided lobbying of the fishing industry to be more dolphin-friendly.
Ironically, that research is used by the likes of Peta to atack SeaWorld, which is accredited by every zoological and marine mammal governing body. Peta wants SeaWorld to release marine
mammals, but release them where? Animal welfare organisations, including Peta, accept dolphins and orcas born in captivity cannot be released into the wild. Tey would not survive because there is too much pollution, sea temperatures are unpredictable and they do not have the skills to hunt fish. ‘Sanctuaries’ are touted as the best option; ‘pens’ would be a more accurate description. In these, marine mammals are still in captivity but exposed to pollution and erratic sea temperatures, and oſten without the necessary ongoing care they need.
Climate priorities Te arguments against SeaWorld are more philosophical than scientific. Organisations such as Peta should be campaigning to protect natural habitats – otherwise the only place we’ll be able to see wild animals in the future will be in the zoos and aquariums they are campaigning to shut down. Tere is real urgency to reduce single-use plastic,
convince people to eat less meat and reduce their carbon footprint. In comparison to mammoth and urgent challenges such as ocean plastic, the disappearing Great Barrier Reef and the burning Amazon, campaigning for companies such as mine to stop selling SeaWorld tickets is misguided. We all could and should be doing more to
protect the natural environment for wild animals.
Read a longer version of this article at:
go.travelweekly.co.uk/comment
18
7 NOVEMBER 2019
travelweekly.co.uk
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80
