SFWoA. Whats the latest on the whales?

Tuesday, February 11, 2003 8:29 PM
Just curious if anything new has happened on the Orca front. When I visited SFWoA back in May, Shauka had just gotten there and I had the priviledge of seeing her swimming around in her new home.

Have they made any progress of getting the 2nd whale to the park? I am assuming Shauka has had to do the show by herself for the 2002 season.

If I mispelled Shauka improperly, I apologize. I am not sure how her name is spelled. :)

------------------
Arena football has arrived in the Windy City. Go "Chicago Rush"

+0
Wednesday, February 12, 2003 3:35 AM
As of now it is my understanding that the 2nd whale has been tied up in some international issues and may not be coming.

Either Six Flags will have to resolve that issue, seek another whale, or give up the one they currently have. I understand that the first was acquired on the condition that they would get a mate.

+0
Wednesday, February 12, 2003 4:20 AM
I am totally against keeping those poor whales in that confined area. Set them free!

I'm sorry, but the "wildlife section" of SFWoA just isn't working. That side of the park is so dead. I liked it better when there was a traditional amusement park on one side of the lake, and Sea World on the other. Those were the good old days.

------------------
YOUNGSTOWN 2010

+0
Wednesday, February 12, 2003 4:25 AM
Set them free? And what shall they do when they're "free?" They don't know how to socialize with other whales or find their own food.

Tens of millions of dollars have been spent trying to get Keiko (you know him as "Free Willy") back to sea, and guess what, nothing has worked. He still comes back to humans for food.

An emotional gut reaction to a very complex issue is not very insightful.

------------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com - Sillynonsense.com
"The world rotates to The Ultra-Heavy Beat!" - KMFDM

+0
Wednesday, February 12, 2003 4:31 AM

jkpark said:


I'm sorry, but the "wildlife section" of SFWoA just isn't working. That side of the park is so dead.


I agree, it is always dead on that side of the park, but the shows (especially Shouka) had a nice sized audience... I enjoy that side of the lake being as quiet as it is, as I enjoy going there to just watch the animals. I don't think I'd have ever set foot in Sea World again if Six Flags hadn't have bought it.

------------------
Jess, the Barbie Thug.

AIM: Pritti Kittie

*** This post was edited by Jess 2/12/2003 9:32:22 AM ***

+0
Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:17 AM
I'm pretty sure Wahoo Skipper is correct. I think SFWoA wants to get the other whale to breed with Shutka (sp?) and that's why there are issues with SFWoA getting the second whale.

I got to see her too, shortly after she arrived there. Her routine of course, was rusty but she was sweet and really trying to get it right. I agree with the not setting them free because they can basically no longer function in the wild, however, I do feel that SFWoA has spent so much money working on the ride side of the park, there really needs to be some expansions on the wildlife side. The holding areas for the dolphins and whales are way too small. They have the room to fix that. I hope that one day they enlarge those areas. Who would want to swim in a stupid little circle all day?

A lot of people say they wouldn't visit the wildlife side if it weren't for the ride side of SF. For me, it's probably the other way around. I like the quiet mellow feel over there (except for the seals and sea lions barking all day, you gotta have that :) )

------------------
...Agghh, gimme a break will ya?

+0
Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:44 AM
Geez, folks, it's Shouka.

Anyway, for those who think they should be released into the wild, remember that zoological parks have been responsible for the saving of several endangered species. By breeding Shouka with another whale, they are helping the species, not hurting it.
------------------
SRM 2003-Look for the guy with my name on his chest

+0
Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:59 AM
Releasing into the wild is not the answer but I don't think it is fair for that whale to be alone, with no mate. If they can't get another one they ought to sell her to Sea World and just do dolphin shows at the stadium.
+0
Wednesday, February 12, 2003 6:11 AM

Well, I guess they could keep what they have. -But don't remove anymore animals from their natural habitat. Keep the wildlife wild.

Hey, I'm not complaining. I'm just telling it like it is. -But let me ask all of you something. How would you like it if a you were removed from your own home and were placed in a cage?!

Beam me up!
------------------
YOUNGSTOWN 2010

+0
Wednesday, February 12, 2003 6:17 AM

jkpark said:

I'm just telling it like it is. -But let me ask all of you something. How would you like it if a you were removed from your own home and were placed in a cage?!


The never ending argument brought up by animal rights extremists and before you go accusing me of not knowing what I'm talking about. You're talking to someone who was literally raised in zoo's as my father has run several of them over the course of his life and is currently a senior VP at one of the best ones in the world. Zoo's have done far more good than damage to animals.

Yes in the pre-1970's and such the cages were barbaric, the conditions poor, and breeding was not often thought of, but I dare you to find a zoo now that doesn't have a sucessfull breeding program with at least ONE endangered species.

Also think about this.. If we hadn't gotten to the top of the food chain and say.. cows did.. you don't think they'd serve us up, wear us for clothes, and use us as pets?? You're living in a fantasy world.

I'm gonna go take care of my hunger now by takign advantage of 50,000 years of evolution.. ;)

------------------
June 11th, 2001 - Gemini 100
VertiGo Rides - 82
Technical Services - 2002
Frightzone Screamster - 2002

*** This post was edited by Red Garter Rob 2/12/2003 12:05:19 PM ***

+0
Wednesday, February 12, 2003 6:34 AM
I do have to agree with some of you and say it was better when it was Geauga Lake on one side and Sea World on the other. Sea World got a fair amount of guests and everything seemed better under control. When you look at the park now, SFWoA, the old SW seems to be better taken care of and has friendlier people working it. That could be, however, that part of the time it is a ghost town and it isn't nearly as hard to maintain. I'm not saying that I don't like SW, but I think it was a lot more effective when it wasn't attached to Six Flags.
+0
Wednesday, February 12, 2003 6:15 PM
SWO was doomed. Either SF bought the property or it would have been sold off and redeveloped. So it really doesn't matter if SF bought it or not, there wouldn't be any Sea World in Aurora anyway. (of course this is all my opinion after analyzing the facts).
+0
Thursday, February 13, 2003 5:35 AM
Another thing, Rob, to continue on that line, is that the majority of these animals (the whales) were born in captivity. If they were captured from the wild, they generally only land in the US if they were being mistreated elsewhere. There are exceptions, but for Sea World, who owns the majority of the animals, this is the case.

I'm not ready to consider Six Flags a conservationist company like I would Busch, especially since my biologist wife and friends don't feel very good about the condition of the park, but Busch in particular has a very strong program.

------------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com - Sillynonsense.com
"The world rotates to The Ultra-Heavy Beat!" - KMFDM

+0
Thursday, February 13, 2003 5:49 AM
I agree. The "wildlife" section can be a great area of the park if they take it easy with the "wild rides" section.

------------------
YOUNGSTOWN 2010

+0
Thursday, February 13, 2003 7:54 PM
SF Marine World seems to be doing just fine with both a marine and ride park. Although i understand it is a bit small.

But also notice that all of the Sea Worlds are turning more towards rides. They ALL have invested quite a bit in them. Not that i'm saying that they are ignoring the animals. But the trend is not in their favor.

+0
Friday, February 14, 2003 4:19 AM
A couple of Sea World parks build a roller coaster and that's a "trend?" Hardly. The rides keep them competitive and draw a more diverse crowd, but I still waited longer for the Shark Encounter (or whatever they call it) in Orlando than I did for Kraken.

------------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com - Sillynonsense.com
"The world rotates to The Ultra-Heavy Beat!" - KMFDM

+0
Friday, February 14, 2003 9:11 AM
Shouka is doing just fine in her pool and so are the dolphins. Those who say their pools are to small remember SWO had 3 whales in the pools while SFWoA only has one and is currently seeking a 2nd. Plus we only have 3 or 4 dolphins compared to 5-6 that SWO had in the same pool.

Word is that we are currently in court fighting to get the permits to export Kshament from Argentina. Rumor also has it that SFWoA is researching the possiblities into buying back or leasing the male whale owned by Sea World that lived at SWO before the purchase.

------------------
SFWoA TL 2003!

+0
Friday, February 14, 2003 9:24 AM
LOL Jeff, I did ask about "all those trains"...Kraken DOES have three of 'em. The op said that they HAVE run two, and do on their busiest days. Of course, he said that while we were waiting for the one train to return, half-empty, to pick up ALL the remaining people waiting to ride. Kraken does give SWF something different to offer, but man, that thing gets fewer riders than DBH....(not really, but it's closer than you'd think)...

My *belief* is that even though those two coasters may not get tons of RIDERS, they do bring considerable patrons into their respective businesses, and pay for themselves with PLENTY to spare...

Edit: Back on track, while I'm never thrilled with the idea of captive mammals, I do recognize the invaluable contributions to preservation and education made by A-B parks, the various Sea Worlds, zoos, and others....
*** This post was edited by rollergator 2/14/2003 2:25:50 PM ***

+0
Friday, February 14, 2003 9:30 AM

Jeff said:
Set them free? And what shall they do when they're "free?" They don't know how to socialize with other whales or find their own food.

Tens of millions of dollars have been spent trying to get Keiko (you know him as "Free Willy") back to sea, and guess what, nothing has worked. He still comes back to humans for food.

An emotional gut reaction to a very complex issue is not very insightful.

------------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com - Sillynonsense.com
"The world rotates to The Ultra-Heavy Beat!" - KMFDM


I agree with you. The only answer is to not capture or breed anymore of these animals.Let them live the way nature intended. In the wild.

------------------
tambo

+0
Friday, February 14, 2003 10:41 AM
Since when was breeding a species a bad thing? I believe that orcas are an endangered species, so the more of them, the better.
+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...