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:

Kuno, canine war hero or cannon fodder.

Heroes or unwitting participants.

Kuno, a British military dog, has recently joined a long list of those that have been injured or killed in action in the line of duty and was awarded a PDSA Dickens medal for bravery as a “hero“.

Kuno, a young 3 year old Belgian Malinois, took part in a military operation in Afghanistan in 2019 and was seriously injured when helping his comrades who were pinned down from machine gun and grenade fire. He was sent in under a hail of bullets wearing night vision goggles to attack the al-Qaeda extremists.

It sounds like a storyline from one of the animated movies we are all so fond of where the heroes are animals doing great deeds, particularly the part of wearing night vision goggles. Unfortunately, this was real life and our hero was shot and suffered a multitude of injuries resulting in part amputation of his back legs. He now has the accolade of being the first UK military working dog to be fitted with custom prosthetic limbs and must contend with these injuries for the rest of his life.

“The great care the UK armed forces provide to animals”

The UK Defence Secretary stated that Kuno had changed the course of the mission by saving British soldiers lives but also added that the story showed “the great care that the UK armed forces provide to the animals that serve alongside them.” But it seems rather illogical to view sending a dog through a hail of bullets as providing great care of them.

Kuno miliatry dog and Dickens Medal for bravery
Heros or cannon fodder. [Photo credit:PDSA/TIMES PHOTOGRAPHER RICHARD POHLE]

Is it a betrayal of the trust they obviously form with their handlers to send dogs like Kuno to their deaths.

Surely to be a hero you need to have a fair idea of what you are doing at the time. Dogs have many attributes but understanding the dangers of charging into machine gun fire is not one of them. When we describe and fete them as heroes we are obviously humanising them and giving them the ability to process and acknowledge the risks and dangers they are getting themselves into, but this is against scientific doctrine and understanding.

Dogs will always try to cope with anything we demand of them and mostly treat everything as a game, so following a command regardless of its intentions is an act of trust and faith on their part and perhaps a betrayal of this trust on ours.

Are we doing them an injustice by giving them medals?

It is unclear what charities like the PDSA are trying to achieve by giving them medals unless it is to alleviate some of our guilt of putting them at risk in the first place. Although it is a poignant gesture, particularly when it is posthumous, and expresses our animal loving instincts the dogs possibly deserve better from us instead.

I have not thank god been in such a situation as Kuno and his comrades found themselves but I hope there was great heart searching when making the decision to sacrifice Kuno’s well-being to save their own. The story illustrates that these dogs are merely extra weaponry or ‘kit’ and are expendable in these situations and any consideration of their rights or welfare is not viable. But can we seriously call these dogs genuine heroes and glorify these enforced acts of so called bravery, when they have not ‘volunteered’ their services and are obviously unaware of what they are doing. At best they are just unwitting ones.

Related articles: