Interview with the Previous Generation

Q1: In the play Our Town, characters who have died reflect back on their mortal lives during Emily’s funeral. The spirits warn Emily that she should not dwell on it too much and that the living are ignorant. How do you feel about the deaths of those close to you?

Do you think that she’s in a better place now?

What about your friend you talked about that you said you couldn’t forget his death? What happened with him?

Q2: Over the course of a couple years, the town displayed in Our Town undergoes substantial changes, both technologically and culturally. How do you think the culture of your community has changed since you were a child? Do people act differently in a notable way or hold vastly different values?

Do you think the people act differently, like they have different values than what they did in the past?

Q3: Despite being pressured by everyone around them, George and Emily feel reluctant in committing to their wedding. Did you ever feel uncertain in your romantic relationships? / Was this uncertainty ultimately worth it?

Do you think it was worth it for you to be unsure about them?

Can you elaborate?

Q4: Ultimately, George and Emily ‘s relationship proves successful as they build a family and home together. However, Emily unexpectedly dies in childbirth while having her second child. She sacrificed her life so that her children can live on in her memory. How much are you willing to sacrifice for your family?

Q5: The play also explores the themes of regret and grief, as the spirits lament over how much time they wasted in life and how much they took it for granted. What do you regret doing in your life, if anything?

Do you think the regret from this time has left a lasting impact on you?

How do you feel that it has left an impact on you?

God is in man and in all living things. Your soul is God. Through an understanding of nature, we will understand God and ourselves.

Sharks: Teetering on the line between Life and Death

Since the beginning of human history, people have lauded sharks as noble and mysterious predators. Inuits, for example, believe that Greenland sharks can spiritually aid shamans, and that their existence mediates the very survival of their society. However, in the past century or so, their perception has soured due to their overwhelmingly negative portrayal in the media. The primary reaction to sharks is now fear, contrary to the extraordinary wonder they could encapsulate before. Declining population of sharks drives them towards extinction and shatters the fragile marine ecosystems that rely on them as a long-standing keystone species. Widely circulated myths and misconceptions about sharks only further their imminent demise, if nothing is done.

Television, books, and newspapers foremostly perpetuate the fear of sharks and inadvertently lead to their killings. Wildly popular shows and movies like Jaws, Shark Week, and Sharknado display sharks as frenzied man-hunters with an instinct to kill. Even if fantastical and titillating, they’re often presented as the irrefutable truth, allowing oblivious people to take to it easily. Peter Benchley, the writer of Jaws, regrets even writing the novel because of the disastrous impact it had on public opinion of sharks. Christopher Neff introduces the ‘Jaws Effect’ as an explanation for the overwhelmingly negative portrayal of sharks, where “film-based historical analogies are used as a political device to frame real-life events.” Governments use this artificial fear to justify anti-shark policies such as shark culling and to undermine the importance of formal protections on overfishing and other threats.Shark attacks usually place blame on the shark itself, as “the largest percentage of solutions, 41 per cent, called for killing the shark” (Neff). When someone wishes to swim in the ocean, they should acknowledge that they are venturing into an unfamiliar environment and accept the risks that come with it. Despite this, authorities diverge attention from any human fault for the sake of convenience, disregarding any professional input on the matter. As a result, the media demonizes sharks and the masses follow suit, disintegrating any form of altruism or curiosity ascribed to them.

With the news of mortal shark bites and rising terror, shark culling became a popular way to eliminate the perceived threat in the mid-20th century. Shark culling involves the use of traps and fishing nets with large lures to either kill or incapacitate sharks local to the area, in fear of them attacking swimmers. Though discontinued in New Zealand and Hawaii, many parts of Australia and South Africa still perpetuate the damaging practice. The invasive nets and drum-lines used to kill sharks often outstretch their reach and harm local marine megafauna. At least seventy dolphins and eighty rays died from shark nets in Queensland, Australia between 2009-2014, many of which are endangered or threatened populations (Watson). This puts shrinking dolphin populations at risk as well, as dolphins' ability to “expand that population are compromised by that loss of these individuals from various forms of nets, including shark nets,'' according to Peter Harrison, director of marine ecology at SCU (Watson). Furthermore, there is no evidence whatsoever that ‘shark control’ significantly mitigates the prevalence of shark bites, even suggestively shown to cause more of them. Overall, shark nets have a negative impact on marine life as a whole and generally serves little benefit, wasting money that could be used in conservation efforts and the like.

Despite the number of sharks killed through culling efforts and trophy hunting, it cannot hold a candle to the devastation that overfishing has wrought on the rapidly diminishing shark population. Sharks are intentionally killed for their fins, meat, and liver oil, though they more commonly die as a result of by-catch. In fisheries, sharks often serve as the ‘unintentional target species,’ as they’re often utilized in animal feed and miscellaneous products. Determined to assess the severity of this decline, professor Nicholas Dulvy found that “Of the 1,093 species [of chondrichthyans], 99.6% were threatened by overfishing” in an extensive study profiling the worlds’ oceans. This shocking statistic reveals the root of the problem. Decades of overfishing resulted in a mass exodus of the ocean, as “globally, the abundance of oceanic sharks declined by 71.1% from 1970 to 2018” (Pacacoreu). Since most sharks live longer lives and have slower growth rates relative to other marine species, this has a disastrous effect on their population. Their depopulation becomes even more pronounced, as regenerating their lost numbers is a lengthy and difficult process. The damage done is decidedly irreparable, and sharks will likely never recover, even with significant human intervention.

Sharks occupy an extremely important ecological niche, and their ecosystems suffer greatly when this delicate balance is disturbed. Many sharks stand as apex predators in their ecosphere and even subtle changes in numbers can wreak havoc. Francesco Ferretti, a prominent marine ecologist, found that “declines in shark populations could trigger cascading effects through food webs.” With a decrease in large predatory sharks from overfishing, mesopredators —mainly smaller sharks, dolphins, and sea turtles— dominate the ocean with the absence of predation. The abundance of these mesopredators overfeed on ‘resource species’ and significantly reduce their numbers.Their dwindling populations also affects humans, as a scarcity of resource species means even less food for an already unsustainable population. Communities with little species diversity and coastal ecosystems, where most fishing occurs, suffer the most from their depletion.

Sharks do, albeit rarely, bite people, but never with direct malicious intent. They have no appetite for human meat. The ‘mistaken identity theory’ presents that they merely mistake humans for seals or fish, and understandably so in the disorientation of a beach crowded with tourists. In an innovative study focusing on how a shark would interpret various stimuli through video processing, no significant difference could be discerned between humans or seals swimming (Ryan). This could explain why sharks often concede their attack on humans after a single bite, unless they feel otherwise threatened. Furthermore, their chief means of exploring their world is with their mouth. ‘Test bites’ are utilized to determine what something is, as their eyesight is a supplementary sense at most. One study on shark bites found that only “about six of the 75–100 unprovoked attacks that currently occur worldwide each year result in human mortality” (Midway). With such statistics, it’s more likely for someone to die from a falling vending machine than in a shark attack. More than a hundred million sharks perish every year, due to the combined efforts of overfishing and shark culling. With so few shark bites each year and even fewer fatal ones, this hardly justifies their almost indiscriminate slaughter.

Sharks suffer disproportionately at the hands of humans through no fault of their own. They have thrived through five mass extinctions over hundreds of millions of years, but now more than “over one-third of chondrichthyans are threatened with extinction globally” (Dulvy) through egregious human exploitation. Public perception of sharks leaves them vulnerable to these threats, as few people actually care about their fate, refusing to own up to their actions. The decline in sharks through overfishing and shark culling only exacerbates the global degradation of marine ecosystems. Even if society seems to maintain sharks as a mortal enemy through the few cases of fatal shark attacks, this view of them is ignorant and over-blown. Though likely to never flourish like they previously did, sharks can thrive once again if people can accept them for what, and who, they are.

1961 set a precedent for widespread cetacean captivity when Marineland captured an orca and subsequently put her on display. Since then, we have abducted hundreds of these animals for the purpose of simple amusement. Renowned for their striking appearance and titanic size, parks featuring this massive predator continue to accrue billions of dollars in profit from exploiting their suffering. I affirm that orcas cannot remain in captivity, and I will thoroughly address the deficiencies in captive orca’s health, social bonds, enrichment, while also considering the moral and ethical issues of continuing their imprisonment.

Orcas suffer from a multitude of health issues either directly caused by or exacerbated by captivity. Out of sheer boredom, they often gnaw on the concrete walls and metal bars of their tanks (Marino). Trainers must perform pulpotomies on severely damaged teeth, which leaves the pulp of their teeth exposed to the open air (Jett). This renders integration into the wild nigh-impossible, as they cannot hunt with glorified stumps for teeth.Exposed pulp leaves blood vessels and nerves revealed, providing a gateway for harmful bacteria to enter (Jett). Even with frequent cleanings, this leaves them open to infections, the leading cause of death in captive orcas (Anderson). Additionally, this renders integration into the wild nigh-impossible, as they cannot hunt with glorified stumps for teeth. All adult male orcas in captivity suffer from dorsal fin collapse, compared to only a few ill individuals observed in the wild (Marino). Under normal circumstances the dorsal fin stays rigid from the forces constantly acting on it through swimming. Captive orcas also spend much of their time at the water surface, which accelerates dorsal fin collapse and makes them vulnerable to skin cancers and sunburns. Their lifespans are comparably short; on average, they survive less than ten years when kept in captivity (Lott). Females can possibly live up to one hundred years in the wild, while males can live up to sixty years (Anderson). Considering the scale to which they suffer, captivity is an obvious detriment to orca health and overall well-being.

Orcas often share the same tank with members of a different pod, which can vary so drastically some scientists debate whether they should classify them as a different species (Anderson). They have different calls, diets, hunting strategies, and traditions (Lott). An inability to properly communicate with each other results in hyper-aggressive behaviors (Marino). In one infamous incident, an orca entitled Kandu initiated a bloody fight with another female, hemorrhaging major arteries in her head. Blood spewed from Kandu’s blowhole until she eventually succumbed to her injuries almost an hour later. Although fights like this sometimes occur in the wild, captivity makes it difficult for orcas to establish familial bonds with each other (Lott). Additionally, they cannot simply escape individuals they dislike. This contributes to massive levels of stress and leads to violent intraspecies instances such as this (Anderson).

Marine parks deny orcas their natural right to fully exercise their senses. Most of their stimulation stems from performing or other human interactions. When not performing, orcas often stagnantly float at the surface of their tank in a behavior known as logging (Marino). They cannot even hunt live prey; their diets consist mostly of frozen herring and smelt fed directly from the trainers (Lott). Not only does this completely disregard the diverse diets orcas enjoy, it prevents them from employing their strategic hunting methods that permitted the development of their intelligence (Anderson). Furthermore, the tiny tanks they inhabit can never hope to compare to the breadth of the open ocean (Lott). Mandates on tank sizes have been imposed through the Marine Mammal Protection Act, but these mostly shield the corporations from accountability and do virtually nothing for orca welfare (Feldman). No tank can ever adequately hold a massive dolphin that can easily travel more than a hundred miles a day. Most orcas lack the real estate to dive down or comfortably turn around (Marino). Their tanks also lack any plants, rocks, or any other natural landscaping that would provide any semblance of their native habitat (Lott). The lack of any meaningful stimuli causes orcas to succumb to ennui or act out aggressively in a desperate attempt to release their frustrations.

One of the most compelling arguments to many regards human vulnerability to orcas and the ethical concerns of keeping such an intelligent animal. The death of senior SeaWorld trainer Dawn Brancheau gained worldwide notoriety, bringing the question of orca captivity into the forefront (Feldman). Tilikum, the largest orca ever kept in captivity, perpetrated this attack and killed two other people prior (Feldman). After a show, he dragged Brancheau underwater in plain sight of spectators. He scalped her and completely severed her spinal cord, making revival an impossibility (Parsons). Tilikum has since died and additional safety precautions have been enforced, though this cannot guarantee more violent attacks won’t occur. No encounters with orcas in the wild have resulted in serious injuries, let alone deaths (Anderson). Despite their killer reputation, they are actually known to be surprisingly inquisitive around humans; orcas have been observed offering fish to fishermen and pulling pranks on them (Marino). Their understanding of human bonds can be attributed to their cognitive brilliance. Orcas can recognize themselves in the mirror, which evidences self-awareness and higher thought processes (Anderson). They possess the second biggest brain in the animal kingdom, outranked only by the sperm whale. More importantly, orcas have a higher cortical surface area than any other mammal, awarding them a highly gyrencephalic brain (Anderson). Studies suggest that gyrification of the brain has a positive relationship with practical memory skills and efficient information processing. Considering their extraordinary intelligence, cetacean captivity proves analogous to trapping a person in a small cage and only letting them out to force them to perform trivial circus tricks.

Marine mammal parks and their supporters argue that captivity saves threatened orcas from extinction, even if they face a multitude of problems. However, they perpetrated many of the problems orca populations face. The mass capture of orcas in Puget Sound has had a lasting detrimental effect on the Southern Resident orca population, the only population of orcas ever listed as endangered. As an apex predator, nothing threatens orca welfare more than human activity itself, such as the effects of pollution and climate change (Marino). Keeping orcas in captivity actually proves detrimental for the longevity of their species (Anderson). Health problems seldom observed in the wild plague captive orcas, cutting their lifespan short (Marino). Most calves born to captive mothers die shortly after birth or are stillborn, making breeding programs less fruitful than expected (Lott). All of these reasons nullify their claim of captivity fostering conservation efforts.

Despite their grim reality, many captive orcas can look forward to a freer future. Through public outcry and infamous documentaries such as Blackfish, dolphinariums have sharply decreased in popularity, forcing them to adjust their tactics (Parsons). SeaWorld has agreed to end their orca breeding program and eventually phase out orca captivity completely (Feldman). Many countries, such as Canada and the United Kingdom, either outright ban cetacean captivity or make it incredibly difficult to operate dolphinariums through the implementation of strict standards (Anderson). In captivity, orcas constantly suffer in regards to health, sociality, and enrichment (Marino). Gradually transitioning into sea-side sanctuaries will let them thrive, not just simply survive. Sea-side sanctuaries allow orcas to relish natural life while in a protected environment, as most of them can never properly integrate (Feldman). As captive orcas slowly reintegrate into the wild they gain back their freedom, setting a precedent for the implementation of worldwide, unalienable animal rights.

Fast Fashion Flourishes While the Environment Wilts

Works Cited

Is the Pen Mightier than the Sword?

Marie CurieMarie Curie