Sorry, Cbbfish, I feel just as strongly that such parks, as well as most of the zoos in the world, have limited usefulness in today's world. Zoos began so that people could see animals they would otherwise never see.

With the advent of video, this raison d'etre no longer exists.

Nice to hear that Anheuser-Busch has rescued over 13,000 animals since 1970.

How many humans has A-B rescued in that same time period?

What kind of human programs are they underwriting?

Can anyone explain why it's okay to slaughter cows, pigs, birds, fish, but not dolphins?

Forget it. Don't bother. In the grand scheme, it doesn't matter. We're killing animals. We're eating animals. We're wearing their skins and furs. We're not using all the parts of the animals we kill, but we're trying, right?

Anyone out there truly know what goes into a hot dog or a hamburger?

<Anyone out there truly know what goes into a hot dog or a hamburger?>

Yes I do and it is gross. But I don't believe that makes it OK to capture dolphins for amusement.

cbbfish, No, Breakfast with Shamu is not breakfast with a guy in a Shamu suit. You eat at tables next to the backstage area where the whales swim. You are literally mere feet from the whales. I know this because my family and I did it last week. We actually found it quite informative and learned a lot about the animals.

Kswl - limited usefulness? Seeing something in real life and something on video are 2 totally different things.

TripleSec - I don't know exactly how many humans AB has rescued since 1970, but they have spent $460 million since 1982 in alcohol awareness and education to help fight underage drinking and drunk driving.

I can explain why it’s okay to slaughter cows, pigs, etc. - WE EAT THEM! I've never heard of anyone eating dolphin, although I'm sure there's a culture somewhere that either does or has or has at least tried.

Ilisa - which seaworld did you go to? SeaWorld Orlando’s Breakfast with Shamu is a character breakfast. Dine with Shamu is dinner in the backstage orca area here. You must’ve gone to San Antonio or San Diego. But either way, it's like you said - very cool and extremely informative/educational.

Cbbfish:

"they have spent $460 million since 1982 in alcohol awareness and education to help fight underage drinking and drunk driving."

That goes nicely with their beer business and commercials that appeal to teenagers and young adults.

Yes, seeing animals in the flesh is more "real," obviously, than seeing them in a movie or videotape. So what?

cbb, it was in San Diego. They also have a dinner option as well. We enjoyed it immensely. My 3 year old son has not stopped talking about Shamu and has suddenly developed a huge interest in whales.

I've been involved with trying to help educate people about the swtd practice for several years, and I used to get so frustrated with people.

I have come to the conclusion that there are several different categories that people fall into, and I've quit banging my head against the wall trying to get those who refuse to see the logic in the fact that the capture of (in this case, very intelligent) wild animals for the SOLE reason of keeping them for entertainment is WRONG.

People can always use various tactics to justify cruelty.

1.) But I WANT to.
2.) Who is it hurting?
3.) They're just animals.
4.) It's "educational" (did you know the US only allows it to operate if a facility MAKES it educational?)
5.) God put animals here for us to use in whatever manner we see fit (I doubt that includes torture)
6.) What's the difference between swtd and zoos? (apples and oranges)
7.) But they want to interact with US too! (Some people are just not too bright.)

I think I have seen every excuse imaginable.

People who want to do it don't anger me.
People who want to do it, learn more about how bad it is, and do it anyway make me worry about our future.

The dolphins don't have a choice on whether or not to participate - we do.

cbbfish - So, other than taste, why is it okay to eat one fish, but not another? Or one mammal and not another? Sacred cow, anyone? I don't buy into this part of the food chain. If you're hungry, eat. It's a huge world. You'd eat a tarantula if you were hungry enough in the Amazon jungle.

Oh, NO! Not the Amazon tarantulas!! They're a protected species...blah, blah, blah. What about protecting the humans?

The indigenous peoples eat the indigenous foods. Shipping has facilitated the sharing of food sources. Get over it. You've already eaten things other than chunk white tuna in spring water. It's not on the label, friend.

I would never take my grandkids to swd, nor did I partake in this activity myself.

BUT, although I agree with most of the reasons against above and do think humans have tortured animals enough in the past and present that great improvement should be encouraged- I disagree with the almost angry anti-homo sapiens (IMHO) environmentalist tone that comes out again and again on these boards.

Actually I was going to post much earlier but didn't. I don't think you can alter anothers view when they are that emotionally based.

But I do agree with TripleSecDelay on the wider picture. We do have canine teeth, you know, and all other species have been used as food, if you get right down to it. I am absolutely sure dolphin is eaten, as is most anything that comes from the sea- by many island cultures.

I've never had any interest in swimming w/dolphins - too staged for my taste. That said, I think that unless all the folks here are vegetarians TripleSec is correct in pointing out the hypocricy (sp?) of some of the comments.

Let me just get this right, it's not okay to capture dolphins, but it would be okay if we ate them? Just playing devil's advocate (I don't really have any interest in eating a dolphin).

Saying that having video makes zoos unnecessary is equally absurb. I guess we can all stop traveling and just pick up some videos of the places we'd like to go!

That would be the right thing to do, if instead of going to other countries, "traveling" meant that we imported their peoples into glass rooms for viewing.

Your analogy doesn't hold.

kswl: Your comment was: "Zoos began so that people could see animals they would otherwise never see. With the advent of video, this raison d'etre no longer exists." This indicates you believe it was okay to have zoos prior to video but now it is not as seeing animals on video is just as good as in person. My analogy holds. If you have a problem with caging animals, that's another issue. I'm surprised you were okay with zoos prior to video - I guess it was okay to cage animals for educational purposes up until technological advances. Interesting perspective.

Folks, there's a big difference between pulling cows and chickens off a tractor-trailer and making them into burgers and hot wings, and going out into the wild to capture animals solely to provide "entertainment."

If there's a culture that eats dolphins, I have no problem with that. They're not endangered after all.

The distinction is the misery the activity causes - from their forcible removal from their pods, to their forced performance in completely unnatural environs with unnatural food, to their early deaths.

If you don't have a problem with that kind of treatment of another living being, then there's nothing anyone on here can say or do to convince you that it's wrong.

Just an fyi that cows and chickens don't come from trailers. I guess the chickens are happy cooped up in pens? This is a natural envirnment for them? They don't meet with an early death? Have them been psychoanalyzed to make sure they are miserable?

I'm not saying that swtd is okay or a good thing, I just get tired of people defending the cute animals.

snowrooster, you just don't get the distinction do you?

Cows and chickens are DOMESTIC animals that live in regulated conditions for a short period of time in a relatively natural environment and don't have to do ANYTHING but die.

Captive dolphins are WILD animals forcibly and violently captured (more than 50% DIE within 90 days of capture) and are about 10 times smarter than chickens and cows, and are forced to perform nearly every day for hours on end for years on end until they die.

If you think that is apples to apples, you are sorely mistaken.

I don't give a flip whether an animal is cute or ugly as can be. Abuse is abuse.

That last line is especially good, snowrooster. I hear you, as it is the "cute" animals that get the sympathy.

How about the kids in Florida who go sharking! Haven't read any threads here about that practice, nor ever in any newspapers outside of Florida itself, and there only minimally. I know my cousins' kids say it's a common Friday night activity near Clearwater.

And there are some here that believe that there is no up side to any big business in corporate America, so you aren't going to win any arguments listing the positives. Ironic, in that the same corporate structures are funding most public radio and television, which also feature a lot of the environmentalist mantra.

I'm not disagreeing that dolphins are abused or that swd is wrong, but other animals are mistreated as well.

Animals are DOMESTIC because we have DOMESTICATED them. I suppose you wouldn't mind living in a cage or a pen long as it was regulated and you didn't have to do anything but die?

I find it hypocritical to preach about the mistreatment of one animal only to go home and eat/wear another animal. That's my opinion.