Register or Login to Hide This Ad for Free!
Someone made a comment about why SeaWorld is worse than other zoos and they got a very diverse amount of answers.

One thought is zoos are just as bad, keeping animals at all is wrong.

Another is SeaWorld is more for entertainment whereas zoos are more educational.

Another is it varies, some zoos are better than others.

Another is orcas are just more intelligent and emotional than other animals. In response to that, someone mentioned how elephants are very intelligent as well. However, someone replied saying elephants are just easier to keep versus an orca.

It really is interesting how many different answers are out there. Honestly, my thought is if the pools are being more than doubled and the extension will likely be detailed to match that of a natural environment, what is wrong? It's not entertainment because scientific research is being done to help those in the wild. Their getting much better care than those in the wild. They use the shows as a way to show off the things that these animals can do. They use the exhibits as a way to gain money to fund the research and conservation.

I guess emotions win over logic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mjm1ahoney3
Nicole said:
While I like the idea of any animal getting an upgraded habitat, the correlation between this new project and Blackfish is very bad news.  I also seriously doubt it will do anything to appease anyone, since PETA has no interest in compromise.

I think what you mean to say, is "PETA has no interest in helping animals." With all the money they collect very little actually goes to animal assistance. Most goes to marketing and, of all things industrial freezers. (I will let you guess what those are for, but remember they prefer to put animals down then place them)
 
Consider Donating to Hide This Ad