Blog

Whales injure tourists. Why can’t we leave wild animals in peace.

The fact that these gentle whales were using “classic defensive actions” is proof that they were upset and stressed.

Recently on Ningaloo reef off the north west coast of Australia there have been three incidents in just one week involving tourists being seriously injured while swimming with whales on new organised tours. A 27 year old woman suffered broken ribs and internal bleeding when hit by a humpback whale and had to be flown by Flying Doctor to Perth for treatment. A week later another woman suffered the same fate and there have been other incidents to tourists causing minor injuries. All this because entrepreneurs want to add another extreme tourist attraction to visiting the reef. As if disturbing them by shadowing them with boats is not intrusive enough.

In all these incidents there was no malice on the part of the whales just humans getting in their way and upsetting them and posing a perceived threat to their calves. As one tour operator put it:

The whale immediately swam straight at the group [of tourists] to place herself between her group and her calf and she then engaged in a number of really classic defensive actions right next to the group including slapping her pectoral fins onto the water and slapping her tail down into the water. Unfortunately when she was doing that one of the swimmers was hit by her tail and another was hit by her pectoral fin less seriously. .

Nine News, Perth

These new swimming encounters are being monitored by the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions in the Ningaloo Marine Park and will undoubtedly be a great success. They are scheduled to become a permanent licensed industry in 2021 at the completion of a five-year trial and all kinds of regulations, codes of practice and safety procedures are being trialed just so someone can make money out of it, when in fact for the safety and wellbeing of all concerned it would be sensible to ban such ventures. The big question is whether a Government conservation department should be encouraging such ventures.

Child swimming with humpback whale
A young snorkeller swimming with a Humpback and calf. Sensible or irresponsible.

We all want to be a David Attenborough.

It regrettably seems that there are no limits to the lengths we will go to disturb and stress wild animals in their natural habit in our pursuit of getting up close and personal with them. It is a compulsion that appears to be fueled by social media and wanting to emulate the exploits of icons like David Attenborough Steve Irwin and other wildlife presenters, adventurers and celebrities we see on TV. We have this belief that animals only exist to entertain us and have no interests in a life of their own. Everybody wants to get a piece of animals.

Whether it be be swimming with dolphins, aggravating sharks from the safety of cages, disturbing egg laying turtles, damaging coral, having selfies with drugged up tigers, monkeys or snakes, visiting gorillas or riding on elephants, everybody wants a piece of the action. It is on everyone’s bucket list to get up close and personal with an exotic animal and to have a selfie or photograph taken to put on social media despite the stress, suffering and disturbance caused to the animals.

The problem now is that there are too many people wanting to do it and this just encourages more such wildlife encounters to make it easy for us and we selfishly give little thought to the stress or suffering we may be causing. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with wanting to be in the presence of animals but there has to be a compromise and it should be done from a discreet distance and the right reasons. It should be a respectful and personal experience and not to just to get a selfie photograph or to touch the animal. Unfortunately we are reaching a point where we cannot all be a David Attenborough. We can already view marine animals from a boat we do not need to get in the water with them.

Related articles:

Ear cropping of dogs, time to make it illegal to own one.

If Dobermans and the other breeds were meant to have cropped ears they would be born with them.

The ear cropping of dogs in the UK has been banned since 2006 when the Animal Welfare Act made it illegal but it is still an increasingly common sight to see these dogs being openly paraded in the streets and on social media. Australia has also banned the procedure, but there are still many countries in Europe and also the USA where it is still prevalent and actively encouraged. And this is where the problem lies.

The ban, like many animal welfare laws in the UK was not given enough thought and was never fit for purpose because it did not make it illegal to own an ear cropped dog making it easy to import them ready cropped or to take the dog to another country to have it done and thus circumvent the law allowing the suffering to take place elsewhere.

New petitions in the U.K. and U.S.A to ban the import of ear cropped dogs.

The RSPCA has recently announced a 236% increase in the last five years of the number of reports of dogs with cropped ears and are backing a new petition instigated by a dog trainer and welfare campaigner calling for a ban on importing dogs who have had their ears cropped. Their figure of 178 reports is obviously woefully understated and just the tip of the iceberg. Only last week I followed two men walking down the high street each with a doberman, one a three month pup, with splinted ears. Unless you are familiar with the the ban you are probably unaware there is a problem with it.

A similar petition has also been begun in the USA where the procedure can be legally performed by a licensed Veterinarian and where the American Kennel Association encourages it for dog shows. U.S. veterinarians still perform the procedure even though their governing body the American Veterinary Medical Association opposes it.

Dogs operated on abroad to circumvent the ban.

There are companies that legally import dogs with cropped ears into the UK and there is nothing to stop owners taking their dogs to countries in Europe that still allow it or even the USA and bring them back. There is little point in reporting them as the owners can legitimately claim they were done abroad.

Cropping is purely cosmetic and has no health benefits. There is no medical evidence that it prevents ear infections as often claimed by its proponents or any other health benefits. It is an inhumane and unnecessary procedure that serves no purpose other than changing the appearance of a dog. It is done more for the vanity of the owner than the well-being of the dog and because of a perverse belief that it makes the dogs look the way they “should look” and more attractive and fiercer.

Sadly a petition to ban the importation of dogs with cropped ears last year failed to get even half the required 100,000 signatures required for the Government to debate it. Whether this is an indication of the lack of interest or support of dog lovers is difficult to deduce, but there is another Government petition due to end in August 2021 to stop “the rising numbers of ear cropped dogs in the UK” which is also floundering somewhat.

WHICH YOU CAN SIGN BELOW:

Related Articles: