More details on sad baby humpback saga

Regarding the abandoned baby humpback whale that was put to death this week in Australia, Outposts may have been too trusting of Australian newspaper reports when implying the whale’s so-called mercy killing went smoothly.

You may recall that the 2- to 3-week-old motherless whale, which had attempted to nuzzle boats inside a bay, was administered a fatal injection after it was determined by national parks and wildlife experts that there was no other practical solution.

Commenter "K" tersely claimed the story is best told by the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, which apparently was rebuffed when it volunteered to help keep the whale—first nicknamed Colin, then Collette—alive.

Outposts was merely reporting on Collette's death, attributing and quoting newspaper accounts, but will gladly post a portion of a statement issued by Sea Shepherd founder Paul Watson:

As I said before Collette was killed, we could not be faulted for trying to save her life but the bureaucrats can be faulted for not even trying.

The “mercy” killing did not go very well.

Whales cannot be killed easily, as the Japanese whalers have demonstrated for decades. With Collette, first they put a noose and straps around her and then a veterinarian jumped in the water and stuck a syringe near the dorsal fin to sedate her. This was done twice. They then tied her to an inflatable boat and began moving Collette towards the beach.

As they approached the beach, Collette thrashed about with her head and tail coming right out of the water, completely arching her back. She was panicking and in extreme stress. She struggled all the way to the beach, a condemned prisoner on the way to execution by lethal injection.

The energy she expended in her struggles illustrated that she was not as weak as the “experts” had determined. This young whale wanted to live. On the beach, a tent was erected around her to keep the public from witnessing the execution. They then injected the poison and killed her.”

 
It's a sad story no matter how you slice it. Check out the Sea Shepherd website for more of Watson’s commentary on this and other issues.

--Pete Thomas

Comments

[A. Viirlaid]

We could have done more for Collette. She and her mother and her kind deserve our protection. They are our living relatives in the oceans of our world.

Killing should not be our first response. Euthanasia should be our last resort. And it should be done more humanely.

We have to be better prepared next time. There will be such a time again. We need to have a quicker response for food -- imagine a young whale trying to suckle on boats.

Next time we will not have ANY excuse -- not that we had one this time.

Humans are kind, giving, and by our nature and most heartfelt intention, nurturing of Life.

To repudiate Life is to disavow ourselves.

Maybe when we had no other recourse, but to kill wild beings for food and clothing and oil, there was justification -- today there is NONE.

In honor of those many who have needlessly perished — My dedication to those who still are being exterminated with not even a second thought in passing, follows.

Mother Whale’s Lament

I cry for our shared grace
I cry for your human family
I cry for your whaler's family
I cry for my family
I cry for me

With your warm hand you could stroke my skin like so many of your family have chosen to do
You would feel my warmth and gratitude

Why do you touch me only with your cold harpoon as you thrust it into my flesh?
I thought after so much killing that we would both crave harmony

That we had learned that we both feel and love
That we both treasure life
That we revere our comrades
That we embrace our children

That we share the same blood of our ancestors
That our hearts both beat the rhyme of life

How my child will cling to me as you haul my dying carcass out of the sea
How she will cry
Until you kill her too

A. Viirlaid, Toronto

[Ted]

It was truly a sad situation, but there was no way this calf could have been released back into the wild, even if people could feed it for a while. The problem is that humpbacks ARE intelligent, and research shows that, like most other intelligent creatures, humpbacks teach their young how to hunt and how to fit into society. Without a mother, Collette would never have learned the essential skills needed to support herself in the wild. Bottlenose dolphin orphans have this same problem; they would starve in the wild because they have always been hand-fed and do not know how to hunt. I know of no aquarium facility large enough to permanently house a full-grown humpback whale, and placing Collette into any tank would be as cruel as caging a bird so it cannot fly.

Outposts originally reported the news - this is nothing to be ashamed of, regardless of what "K" says. Newspapers are supposed to report unbiased news. Paul Watson's rhetoric is well-known to have a flair for the theatrical. The intent is to foster more support for their group, and that is what he's supposed to do - get people "fired up" to support his cause.

Sea Shepherd's heart is in the right place for wanting to try and raise and keep a 20-40 ton whale that would eventually eat up to 1.5 tons of krill per day, but it's simply not feasible. If it were, there would already be a humpback at one of the world aquariums. Not even Sea World, with its tanks big enough for 4 or 5 orca can house one.

As far as nutrition, I do not know if anyone has been able to get a sample of humpback milk to determine its vitamin and nutrien content, but I seriously doubt it. Experimentation (guessing) on the formula could cause health and developmental problems such as poor bone development, which could disfigure the animal, or possibly cause its death.

Terrible things happen in the wild, such as Collette's mother being attacked by sharks, but without humans involved, Collette would face one of two fates - horrible lonely isolation with slow starvation or the agony of being torn apart and eaten alive by predators. With humans involved, Collette ran the risk of malnourishment and possible crippling developmental problems, not to mention being penned into a facility that would be the equivalent of a human's 6x4 prison cell for the rest of her life. Given that line of thought, I would rather have a quick lethal injection on my conscience rather than knowing I extended her suffering through my own ignorance of baby humpback nutritional needs or by turning her loose to slowly starve to death in the wild.

I respect A. Viirlaid's position and applaud his/her willingness to go above and beyond, but I believe being humane does not always mean preserving life at all costs; sometimes it is about ending suffering as quickly as possible. Killing was not the first response; it was the most humane response.