Join our zoo community

SeaWorld's New Blue World Project

Discussion in 'United States' started by Moebelle, 15 Aug 2014.

  1. Shellheart

    Shellheart Well-Known Member 10+ year member

    Joined:
    19 Mar 2013
    Posts:
    369
    Location:
    San Diego,CA
    Oh believe me, there are people who want them back in the ocean. There's plenty of "release Tillikum" or "Free Corky" petitions. The general public will have no idea of the issue of imprinting and will undoubtedly want them in the ocean.
     
    Birdsage and wensleydale like this.
  2. The Vegan

    The Vegan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    21 Nov 2012
    Posts:
    91
    Location:
    Earth
    Does anyone have an idea of how much money will be spent on this project? I don't believe SW has publically released any estimates...Thanks.
     
  3. The Vegan

    The Vegan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    21 Nov 2012
    Posts:
    91
    Location:
    Earth
    To answer own question:

    "It is a multi-million dollar expansion of their existing killer whale enclosure at all three of their parks. The entire project is projected to cost $300 million" (New details revealed about SeaWorld San Diego's Blue World project)

    I have no idea if this is a reliable source, nor if that estimate is just for San Diego's extension or for all three parks. The article seems to say the latter, though I expect that a single "Blue World" could cost just that much.

    In any case, I think it's really quite obvious that this endeavor is a reaction to the Blackfish uproar - no matter what SW might claim - and for that matter, it's not exactly a concession. It will be interesting to see what will happen in SeaWorld's future.
     
  4. Shellheart

    Shellheart Well-Known Member 10+ year member

    Joined:
    19 Mar 2013
    Posts:
    369
    Location:
    San Diego,CA
    To be honest a tank upgrade would have happened sooner or later anyways,but Blackfish probably sped up the process. Personally I felt there were other exhibits more in need of an upgrade at the moment, but the plans for the Blue World Project seem amazing. I'm excited to see what it'll actually look like when it opens.
     
  5. vogelcommando

    vogelcommando Well-Known Member 10+ year member

    Joined:
    10 Dec 2012
    Posts:
    17,732
    Location:
    fijnaart, the netherlands
  6. wensleydale

    wensleydale Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    17 Apr 2014
    Posts:
    1,331
    Location:
    CT, USA
    I suppose cnn is feeling very smug right now. I hope to god that these aren't animal care staff jobs.
     
  7. steno

    steno Member

    Joined:
    9 Dec 2016
    Posts:
    16
    Location:
    HNL
    Unfortunately, the jobs were Zoological Operations (to include Animal Care and Training) and Culinary.
     
  8. Coelacanth18

    Coelacanth18 Well-Known Member Premium Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    23 Feb 2015
    Posts:
    3,715
    Location:
    California
    Of course. Why cut administrative positions? It's not like the health and welfare of their primary revenue source will be compromised by firing caretaker staff. :confused:
     
    wensleydale likes this.
  9. Shellheart

    Shellheart Well-Known Member 10+ year member

    Joined:
    19 Mar 2013
    Posts:
    369
    Location:
    San Diego,CA
    I think it's time for us to heavily consider what's going to happen when SeaWorld closes. It doesn't seem like a far-fetched possibility.
     
  10. wensleydale

    wensleydale Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    17 Apr 2014
    Posts:
    1,331
    Location:
    CT, USA
    You're being sarcastic right?
     
  11. wensleydale

    wensleydale Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    17 Apr 2014
    Posts:
    1,331
    Location:
    CT, USA
    I have this fantasy where some equity group steps in and takes them private again, who knows maybe it will happen. Surely the place has potential. Maybe the company that owns MSQ and Marineland Antibes. But I know it would be a stretch.
     
  12. wensleydale

    wensleydale Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    17 Apr 2014
    Posts:
    1,331
    Location:
    CT, USA
    God willing the animals don't end up the the hands of the ar loonies. I'm not confident that won't happen though, if SeaWorld closes. Curse the selfish woman who made blackfish.
     
  13. Coelacanth18

    Coelacanth18 Well-Known Member Premium Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    23 Feb 2015
    Posts:
    3,715
    Location:
    California
    @wensleydale : Yes, it was sarcasm.

    I wouldn't say the woman who created Blackfish was selfish...
     
    jayjds2 likes this.
  14. jibster

    jibster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    28 Apr 2015
    Posts:
    279
    Location:
    Columbus, Ohio, USA
    Maybe not, but for all the woe about Sea World's financial straits, I find it far more disturbing that they're cutting animal care professionals. It seems to me that this bolsters the point that some of the animal rights protesters have made about it being disturbing that a for-profit company is in charge of these animals' welfare.
     
    Coelacanth18 likes this.
  15. steno

    steno Member

    Joined:
    9 Dec 2016
    Posts:
    16
    Location:
    HNL
    It could be that two years ago at their last massive layoff they trimmed the fat as much as they could in those other areas, and are finding ways to streamline their animal care operations. The Zoological Operations department does include those educators that speak about exhibits, and the folks that sell fish in the feeder booths for the pinnipeds. While not ideal, the animals might not feel the loss of those roles directly. I do know, however, that a few senior folks directly involved with the animals are among those let go.

    I did read one article which speculated that they would imagine the rescue program could be cut. While extremely sad for the thousands of animals SeaWorld helps every year, the rescue program is a money pit to the company, aside from the brownie points it procures from those that likely already see the value in what SeaWorld does.

    I know the activists won't be rolling up their sleeves to schlep through the mud, be in danger of bites and other conditions, and lose hours of sleep nursing the stranders back to health... if they even had the knowledge of where to start rehabilitation.

    Sad all around.
     
  16. Coelacanth18

    Coelacanth18 Well-Known Member Premium Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    23 Feb 2015
    Posts:
    3,715
    Location:
    California
    @steno : Considering the reasons that SeaWorld is in the mess it's in right now, I think they have more to lose than brownie points by cutting out their rescue program or anything else they might do that actually contributes to conservation and animal welfare. They'll also begin to lose whatever credibility they have left as a zoological institution.
     
    jayjds2 likes this.
  17. steno

    steno Member

    Joined:
    9 Dec 2016
    Posts:
    16
    Location:
    HNL
    Plenty of other reputable zoological institutions do NOT participate in rehabilitation programs, for a variety of reasons, some, I'm sure to include, financial. I don't think one can insinuate that zoological credibility is lent to rehabilitation programs. SeaWorld contributes a lot to conservation efforts around the globe, arguably more than other institutions.

    SeaWorld employees and fans were told that the killer whale breeding ban was to ensure a future for SeaWorld. The way Manby saw it was a either a SeaWorld without killer whales, or no SeaWorld. The same can be said of their rehabilitation program.
     
  18. Coelacanth18

    Coelacanth18 Well-Known Member Premium Member 5+ year member

    Joined:
    23 Feb 2015
    Posts:
    3,715
    Location:
    California
    @steno : You're right that a lot of reputable zoological institutions do not participate in rehab programs. I don't think that's the only measure of zoological credibility, but I do think that it is one form of measure. For me, it's more about the overall picture of what SW contributes to wildlife conservation. Cutting anything related to that means that they are contributing less; so, while cutting their rehab program certainly doesn't take away all of their credibility, it does diminish it to some extent IMO.

    I would be interested in hearing more about how much money SW contributes to conservation, because the numbers that I have read indicate that they spend a very minute fraction of their profits on conservation. I won't argue that it contributes more than other institutions, but to me the proportions are more important than the amounts. I am sincere in wanting to know if I'm wrong: I always strive to be reasonable and adaptive to new evidence and opinions.
     
  19. Shellheart

    Shellheart Well-Known Member 10+ year member

    Joined:
    19 Mar 2013
    Posts:
    369
    Location:
    San Diego,CA
    I don't believe we've ever gotten exact amount spent on conservation,even if for one year. What we do have is their counter which shows how many animals they've saved (presumably over their 50 year history) which is currently at an astonishing 29,727. Personally I think seeing the amount of animals saved is more important then hearing about the money spent. It helps give a concrete idea of what their efforts go to versus dollar amounts with no real specific direction of spending.
     
    wensleydale likes this.