Marine park threatens to euthanize 30 whales if Canada does not provide funding(theguardian.com)
theguardian.com
Marine park threatens to euthanize 30 whales if Canada does not provide funding
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/oct/06/canada-marineland-beluga-whales
9 comments
Why don't they just release them into the ocean?
these whales would need extensive rehabilitation, and would have to be introduced to other wild pods in any area where they are released.
it might be very difficult to untrain them from seeking humans and begging for food, or stealing from fishermen at the risk of hooks or nets.
There are no facilities currently in Canada to reintroduce them to the wild and the ones in Iceland have not done well.
yes thats the problem in this situation. its not cool anymore to keep these [people?] in captivity for a show, such research/rehab facilities are winding down and dissappearing.
Ontario Today on CBC talked to it and the facilities in Iceland found that they didn't do well and never left even when they could. They've never lived out of captivity. I think the Gov should take over care of them and take enough for 20-30yrs of care from the sale of the property.
It's unlikely captive whales can survive in the wild.
[deleted]
Seems like extortion. The public display business has tanked (sorry), so now it's either send them to China, euthanize them, or ask the public purse to subsidize care of the animals (ie., the new business is 'take government money to do a "good thing"').
I do have concerns about 'send them to China', since I think that that would be another display zoo with no qualms about continuing exploitation.
I don't like option three, and the reports I've seen (Guardian but also CBC etc) suggest that rewilding is off the table. I'd be ok with "the people of Canada will take care of the whales, but your business is your problem". I'd be ok with proving this point even if someone claims that the existing business could do it cheaper. A separate sanctuary would make clear that 'we care about the animals, but not your business plan as it relates to the public purse', to establish a policy.
If it is really the case that option 1 (china) is considered ongoing torture, and option three is unaffordable/unimplementable, then I guess that option 2 (euthanizing) is a front runner.
I do have concerns about 'send them to China', since I think that that would be another display zoo with no qualms about continuing exploitation.
I don't like option three, and the reports I've seen (Guardian but also CBC etc) suggest that rewilding is off the table. I'd be ok with "the people of Canada will take care of the whales, but your business is your problem". I'd be ok with proving this point even if someone claims that the existing business could do it cheaper. A separate sanctuary would make clear that 'we care about the animals, but not your business plan as it relates to the public purse', to establish a policy.
If it is really the case that option 1 (china) is considered ongoing torture, and option three is unaffordable/unimplementable, then I guess that option 2 (euthanizing) is a front runner.
This is pure BS on Marine Land.