7 ms·
"Monday's vote notably impacts Marineland, the Niagara Falls amusement park and zoo that is considered the last Canadian park committed to keeping cetaceans in
by blakesterz 7y ago
"Monday's vote notably impacts Marineland, the Niagara Falls amusement park and zoo that is considered the last Canadian park committed to keeping cetaceans in captivity."
Wow, so they passed a national law that essentially targets just a single park? How often does that happen anywhere? (I know the back story but I never knew Marineland was the only place... not saying this is wrong or right, just surprised)
- Ensorceled 7y agoOur current Prime Minister is a big fan of making grand statements when it comes to progressive issues[1]. This is as much a message to the rest of the world as to Canadians. [1] This isn't a criticism, per se, but this propensity does tend to get Trudeau and his party into trouble. I voted for his government in the last election and fully support this law.
- SketchySeaBeast 7y agoYeah, to his opponents it's grandstanding overreach. To me it seems like a codifying into law a statement about where society already is - much like marijuana laws, society was already there, but now it's acknowledging that, though in this instance it's banning and that was allowing. I'm not saying everything he's doing matches that, but in this instance, it would seem to be the case.
- Tiktaalik 7y agoGetting political, but this is classic Liberal Party. It's smart politics. It allows the party to claim the mantle of progressiveness even though it wasn't really them that did any of the work. See also: Gay Marriage legalization. The Liberals passed a bill legalizing it, but only after the courts of two provinces were set to make it legal anyway.
- uhhhhhhh 7y agoGay Marriage was legalized nationally, not limited to 2 provinces, so it was actually significant and they did support it and pushed through the legislation. Same with this bill. To downplay it because companies have already been adjusting to this expected reality quite petty, and they deserve full credit for the legislation of it.
- Tiktaalik 7y agoIt is not believable that rules restricting gay marriage would be struck down in some provinces but not others in Canada. Legalization was obviously inevitable. A few years prior the Liberal government of the day was opposed to gay marriage and voted to confirm the status quo definition of marriage. The Liberals of course deserve credit for seeing the obvious and not attempting any action to block gay marriage further, but they did not lift a finger to support gay marriage until the courts weighed in and forced the issue upon them.
- SketchySeaBeast 7y agoEven at that point the Conservatives voted against - they aren't great in a vacuum, but once you compare the two leading parties there's clearly a difference, one side going with social evolution as opposed to voting against. The Conservative's declared it a free vote as well, so it's not just the opposition filling its role as the opposition.
- uhhhhhhh 7y ago>It is not believable that rules restricting gay marriage would be struck down in some provinces but not others in Canada. Legalization was obviously inevitable. Long term the supreme court of Canada would have struck down provincial bans on gay marriage, but not all of the provincial courts would have. Inevitable could take 10 years, or 50. Doing it nationally and at once reduced years of suffering and human rights issues, and thus was significant. >The Liberals of course deserve credit for seeing the obvious and not attempting any action to block gay marriage further, but they did not lift a finger to support gay marriage until the courts weighed in and forced the issue upon them. That's simply not true.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- robotresearcher 7y agoIt also prevents future parks from existing.
- ysavir 7y agoThe article mentions that the bill was first introduced in 2015. I wonder how many aquariums had started removing their whales and dolphins during that time. Some quick searching shows that some aquariums have been doing this, including Marineland itself: https://globalnews.ca/news/5238289/marineland-vancouver-aquarium-shipping-beluga-whales/ https://globalnews.ca/news/5238289/marineland-vancouver-aqua... In this sense, passing the bill now might be less of an incentive to change and more prevention of a change back.
- fatbird 7y agoThe Vancouver Aquarium went through this at a municipal level several years ago, ultimately moving its belugas to Marineland (they’ll now be moved to Spain). This wasn’t an issue of targeting a single park so much as finalizing in law what was already a growing consensus across Canada that had already ended several other captive cetacean programs.
- chrisweekly 7y agoWeird; I wonder if the article was updated in the last hour since your comment -- because the lead sentence is: > "Marineland in Niagara Falls, Ont., says new law won't impact its operations."
- peeters 7y agoIn the near term, because animals already in captivity were grandfathered in. But those animals won't live forever, so Marineland's days of whale captivity are numbered.
- jdsully 7y agoIt’s an election year in Canada and the race is close. Expect more feel good laws that don’t actually change much.
- jeromegv 7y agoIf you actually follow activists such as @walruswhisperer you will realize this is much more than a feel good law, this is huge and they have been pushing for this legislation for a very long time.
- jdsully 7y agoOh I’m sure people have been backing this for a very long time. But the reason it’s become law at this time is the election.
- chrisdfrey 7y agoCurrent captive dolphins and whales are grandfathered in, so Marine Land will still keep running for a while.
- debacle 7y agoI went to Marineland ~10 years ago and it was one of the saddest things I've ever seen. Very poor wildlife management and obviously exploited orcas. I've heard it has gotten worse since then.
- jasonlotito 7y agoCan confirm. I was there around the same time (2007), and it was sad. My wife (who grew up seeing commercials to Marineland) had always wanted to go, because it looked so fun. Was literally the worst part of the trip. She was so disappointed.
- astura 7y agoMarineland is known to be a complete train wreck. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marineland_of_Canada#Controversies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marineland_of_Canada#Controver... https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2011/10/03/the_man_behind_marineland_50_years_of_controversy.html https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2011/10/03/the_man_behind_m...
- dawnerd 7y agoSame here, seemed like all they had were way too many orcas, and one really sad looking bear.
- kcbanner 7y agoA few paragraphs in: "Whales and dolphins that are already in captivity will be grandfathered in by the bill, meaning parks can keep all the animals they currently own."
- peeters 7y agoImportantly, it's the animals that are grandfathered in, not the parks. So it'll take a while but this will eventually bring an end to Marineland's captivity program.
- Raphmedia 7y agoThis comes at the same time as other changes dones to improve the whales's ecosystems. See [Whale watching excursions prohibited in part of the Saguenay-St. Lawrence Marine Park](https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1178858/parc-marin-saguenay-saint-laurent-interdit-croisieres-observation-baleines https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1178858/parc-marin-sagu...) for example.
- joshuahedlund 7y ago> Wow, so they passed a national law that essentially targets just a single park? How often does that happen anywhere? Might be more common than you think. The state of Missouri passed an amendment in 2010 [1] that changed rules about a position "except counties with a population between 600,001-699,999", which just happened to only apply to Jackson County in the state. (I always assumed there was some kind of backroom dealing involved with the officials of that county.) I can't find it now but I also think there's a similar law that used a similar population work around with a limit of 1,000,000 people, which was in danger of no longer applying to St. Louis county because the population was threatening to fall to around 999,000. [1] https://ballotpedia.org/Missouri_Election_of_Charter_County_Assessors,_Amendment_1_(2010) https://ballotpedia.org/Missouri_Election_of_Charter_County_...
- braythwayt 7y agoMarineland: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1241961--marineland-animals-suffering-former-staffers-say http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1241961--marinela... http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1253334--marineland-allegations-of-poor-treatment-of-deer-bears http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1253334--marinela... https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/xd43jj/marineland-is-a-hellhole https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/xd43jj/marineland-is-a-he... And there's lots more, it only takes a few moments with web search to turn up plenty of allegations that Marineland and its owner are toxic.
- djsumdog 7y agoThis has been a growing issue ever since documentaries like Blackfish came out. Awareness of how these particular creatures are treated has led a lot of existing parks to either close down or pivot to other attractions and conservation efforts. Even in the US, Seaworld has decided to phase out whales and try to push other attractions, due to shifts in public opinion. I have a feeling other US aquariums, like Chicago, will likely go the same route and not replace or breed their current dolphin/whales populations.
- peeters 7y ago> Wow, so they passed a national law that essentially targets just a single park? How often does that happen anywhere? (I know the back story but I never knew Marineland was the only place... not saying this is wrong or right, just surprised) What's the alternative where the law rules? If federal jurisdiction is where the law/regulation would belong, how else would you bring an end to that practice?
- uhhhhhhh 7y ago>Wow, so they passed a national law that essentially targets just a single park? It doesn't target them, it targets all Canadian wildlife institutions. The legislation has been in the works for a while, this is really codifying something federally that provinces and environmentalists have been trying to do for a while. Just because a lot of the ground work was already done before the bill was signed into law over the last decade doesn't mean this is targeted at the last remaining holdout (who is mostly grandfathered in to be clear, they can't bread or capture but can keep what they have).