I have been running away from writing recently… Or words have been running away from me… Or else I have been too busy running through some of life’s challenges to hear them… But, although words still evade me, I will pause long enough to post part of an article about the American Cetacean Society’s conference which appeared in the January edition of Vision Magazine.
And yes, that is the correct title, I promise it will make sense by the end of this post…
Underpinning this diverse wealth of information ran a strong connecting thread; a sense of coming-together-ness between people of varying backgrounds and opinions. Cetacean conferences are not always this eclectic. Some are purely for the scientific community, with presentations reporting current research areas, methodologies and results. Others are aimed at igniting a spark of activism, urging attendees to take action against the perceived enemies of cetaceans. At this conference, many influences were present in one room together who, although united by a common ground, did not necessarily share the same beliefs, methods or goals.
This was a fundamentally important element both for the conference and what it represents as a model of behavior within the world generally. After all, a conference merely mirrors the larger stage of any human endeavor; where the characters, methods, opinions and agendas of differing groups can be divergent to the point of aggressive opposition. On that broad stage, decisions which impact our planet are made, or not made, on the basis of whether differing factions can hear one another, reach an agreement and take action.
It was exciting to witness this trend of inclusivity and dialogue. The ride was not always easy. Discussions became heated on occasion, with one person’s, or group’s, agendas and beliefs becoming momentarily inflamed. But the discussions remained respectful and rational. The conference was entitled, “Whales and Humans: A Conflicted Relationship”. There was an inherent, comical irony to this, as it was evident how conflicted humans can become without the need for any other creature’s involvement! But, more importantly for the road ahead, the discussions demonstrated clearly how potential conflict can be resolved through committed effort, respect, compromise and good will.
A second fascinating trend was a sense of being in transition. As individuals and societies, humans are constantly evolving and becoming something else. But, there are plateau periods, where a paradigm has been established and not much occurs, and transition periods that are full of action and upheaval, as one paradigm dissolves and a new one emerges.
The ideas which surfaced during this conference reflected a potential dynamic shift. For example, the questions included: if cetacean populations recover and we can no longer use their ‘highly-endangered’ status as rationale for protecting them, what rationale can we apply?; do we move away from a scientific position of defining healthy population numbers to a broader ethical and moral set of parameters?; if so, how do we define ethics, as differing cultures have vastly differing perspectives?; as our species has only recently established the paradigm that all human beings have basic rights, regardless of gender, culture or color, on what basis can we agree a set of rights for another species?; can we establish it on the basis of their being sentient “non-human persons” (as defined by writer and Professor of Ethics, Thomas White)?; if we assert that cetaceans have moral rights, how do we balance these with human rights?
If we are to shift to a new paradigm, one where our relationship with all life is radically re-envisioned, we will have to grapple with many such tough questions, not seeking the quick and easy answers, but processing them thoroughly until new answers emerge from the struggle. Three subjects from the conference provided additional food for thought.
Jeff Friedman spoke on behalf of Hardy Jones from ‘BlueVoice’ about the death of an estimated 900 dolphins off the Peruvian coast in spring 2012. Autopsies carried out by BlueVoice and local marine rescue organization ORCA detected bleeding ears, fractured ear bones, air bubbles in the internal organs and pulmonary emphysema. These symptoms suggest that the dolphins suffered from acute decompression syndrome, possibly induced by repeated acoustic impacts. There remains no universally agreed conclusion about the deaths and the Peruvian government has stated that they were due to natural causes. However, an oil company was conducting seismic exploration in the area at the time and, in BlueVoice’s opinion, is a logical suspect. While this particular incident may seem far removed from American shores, it is pertinent to reflect that two of the main contributors to underwater acoustic disturbances are the navy and energy companies (predominantly oil and gas), both of which America has in plentiful supply.
Marine mammal toxicologist Peter Ross based at the ‘Institute of Ocean Sciences’, Canada, spoke about the toxicity levels in killer whales off the west coast of America and Canada. Pacific transient killer whales are believed to be the most highly contaminated animals on the planet as their position at the pinnacle of the food chain, where they prey on other marine mammals, results in their receiving the most concentrated levels of toxins. These toxins include chemicals used in agriculture, manufacturing and plastics industries. All ocean animals ingest them to a greater or lesser degree and they cannot be broken down or excreted from the body. Instead they remain in an animal’s tissues and organs and, as their chemical makeup resembles that of hormones, the illnesses they are likely to contribute to include immune and reproductive ones.
While ‘VIVA Vaquita’ did not deliver a speech at the conference, they were providing information about a surprisingly little known cetacean and its potential demise. There is a species of porpoise called the vaquita about to become extinct in our backyard. The vaquita lives in a tiny area of the Gulf of California and numbers about 200 individuals. Although their home offers healthy waters, with a plentiful food source, the vaquita are falling foul of fishing methods. The almost invisible gill nets, used to catch shrimp and fish, inadvertently trap and drown the vaquita. The fishing industry in the area is operated by local, small-scale Mexican fishermen, however, much of the catch is subsequently imported into America for consumption.
How we choose to respond to the three subjects above will be crucial to determining where we go next and what results we create. We could choose to expect businesses and governments to shoulder the responsibility of fixing the problems; laying the blame squarely at their feet and relying on their power to deliver answers. However this might be counterproductive if every day we choose to buy coffee in disposable cups with plastic lids, eat shrimp without verifying where it was fished from, and drive cars with big engines. A lasting shift towards a more positive future is unlikely to occur from the masses assuming a powerless, victim role; we have become weakened and lazy from living within the confines of that paradigm for long enough. Perhaps lasting change is more likely to occur if we choose the tougher road of dispelling our ignorance and powerless stance, and instead embracing awareness, discipline, passion, responsibility and courage. A perfect antidote to toxins entering at the base of a food chain and becoming concentrated up the chain, is for new thinking and action to be embraced at the grassroots level and create a spiraling bottom-up approach.
The conference ended with a sharing of ideas for how we can all embrace change in whatever small or large way it is within our sphere of influence to do. Ideas that were offered from attendees, included such simple ones as “carry your own cup everywhere”, “observe nature and keep a record”, “talk to kids and get them outside in the natural world”, “check how and where your seafood is fished”, “watch your personal habits and always leave things better than you found them”.
Sometimes the small things in life are the hardest; they are not exciting, they do not go ‘bang’ and they do not show big results fast. But, it is the small things as well as the large that make a difference, just as it requires the participation of many people from many walks of life. Whatever we make of our world today and tomorrow, we can be sure that it will be a product of us all, whether directly or indirectly. The American Cetacean Society conference served to engender an attitude of positive participation; of choosing freely to be actively involved. Because, after all, who wants to play the cowardly, disempowered sidekick in a movie, when, deep down, we all have the capacity to play a braver, wiser and more honorable role?
Sometimes we are fooled into thinking that the world is getting smaller… We can fly around it so fast, access information about every corner of it in seconds, watch instant live pictures of the most remote places from the familiarity of our homes… Smaller and smaller, more known less unknown, more commonplace less remarkable… Easily taken for granted and less easily able to shake us awake to look with wide-eyed wonder at the incredible, unfathomable, bounteous marvels around us.
Because really, the world is not getting smaller and it is still filled with wonder, more wonder than most of us can handle in one lifetime. (Maybe it is just our minds shrinking a little during our adult lives that fool us into thinking otherwise.) When we can summon just a little energy to step outside the relatively small box of everyday life, take ten minutes to explore something new, turn on a computer and look up new realms of interests, read a book about something we know nothing about, (never mind jumping on a plane and visiting someplace new)… We can stumble across things that explode the world open again and show us how vast it really is.
Mmmm, as I am finding out, the world of orcas is so much bigger than that and to think otherwise is to do a great injustice to orcas and to people who know better. Some such people are so intensely interested in killer whales that they spend their entire lives trying to learn more about them and passing that knowledge on to others. Peggy Stap of 
After my confusion about orcas and their seemingly misplaced classifications of residents (who do not reside in Monterey Bay at all); transients (who seem to reside or, at least, visit the bay most frequently); and offshores (who inhabit some mythic realm of my imagination in some distant ocean along with giant squids, Poseidon and krakens)… I did some online-orca-hunting of my own and suddenly found the world of the killer whales opening up before me and getting a whole lot bigger.
Resident and transient orcas were first named by a scientist called 
I cannot in one blog post do killer whales any justice by attempting to present the uniqueness and complexity of each ecotype. So, to give you just a tiny snapshot of their ‘characters’, let’s imagine we are in a speed-dating scenario, attempting to decide which orca-ecotype we would like to take on a date to the prom (to borrow Peggy Stap’s nickname for killer whales). I’ll allow each ecotype a few words to introduce themselves, but only as many as can be read in 30 seconds or so:
Well, if your speed dating encounter with killer whales has made you keen to have a second date and find out more, there are a couple of places I can recommend you turn to. I came across the most fascinating in-depth writing about orcas in the 
It is a subtle shift that occurs, between periods of time when words disappear into a hazy background while other preoccupations hold the foreground, and periods of time where a space opens up right in the centre for words to move into and claim for their own. At present, a jumble of words are tumbling over each other to be written. The overly linear side of my brain would like to organise them into a coherent order; complete the Bob Talbot posts, write some welcome updates on Peggy Stap and then progress to writing about Pieter Folkens and climate change, or the lack of it. However, aided and abetted by the Bob-cat still evading my attempts on completion, each time I sit down to write, I feel the other flexible, non-linear, meandering side of my brain (must be the right side) stepping forwards and moving me into non-logical places.
And so it is that today, while I had every conscious intention to write about Peggy Stap and our adventures together searching for cetaceans (aka whales) in Monterey Bay, I am pulled into a minor digression about her black and white research subjects which she calls her ‘dates to the prom’, none other than the fantastically named KILLER WHALES.
Of course, as most people know, this name does not do them justice but does elevate them, by name alone, to the status of being ‘cool’. And in the flesh, they are even ‘cooler’. There is just something so extraordinarily compelling about these most beautiful of ocean dwellers. Having seen them a handful of times up close and personal, I know that all the words in the world – stunning, magnificent, sleek, majestic, powerful… – can never be enough. Orcas generate a feeling which lies deeper than words can reach.
The absolute clincher that causes my jaw to drop in awe and my respect soaring to dizzying heights is knowing that these animals that hunt and tear apart seals, dolphins, whales and sharks have never willfully attacked a human in the wild. Moreover, there are only a handful of documented accounts of accidental attacks, none of which have been fatal. Different ‘sub-species’ of killer whales have completely different diets with some, called transient orcas, specializing in preying on marine mammals. I can only guess that a mammal-eating-orca knows full well that human beings are mammals, and ones which, if out swimming or surfing, would be a much easier target than, say, a fast, wary and alert harbor porpoise. Yet, they leave us alone. I cannot help but wonder as to why they afford us such a singular place of honour.
Even as we have been slowly but surely, ignorantly and self-servingly, hammering metaphorical nails into their coffins, orcas still leave us alone. It is, maybe, debatable whether killer whales would even be aware that our actions are the cause of their distress. Do they know, for example, that the high levels of toxins in their bodies are because of us? Or that their lack of food is caused by our endless fishing? Or that the injuries to their ears that can cause them to beach themselves come from manmade underwater explosions and sonar systems? Or even that the debris in the oceans which they can become entangled in is our debris…? How intelligent does an animal have to be to sense that at least some of these abuses can be attributed to those strange creatures who travel across the oceans in noisy, metallic, free-floating islands, dragging huge nets after them and dumping foul-smelling waste into the depths? Maybe orcas, along with fish and other ocean inhabitants, do not have a clue as to the source of their problems… But, seeing as orcas are a great deal smarter than fish, maybe they do. If they do, it is an even greater wonder that they still leave us alone and do not seek retribution. I am not sure if humans would do likewise.
In fact, the only documented accounts of orcas attacking and killing humans are when they are in captivity. Those stories make the headlines; surely we have all heard of incidents at one Seaworld or another where trainers have been hurt or killed, with the most recent killing of a female trainer in 2010 by an orca called Tilikum. Whether or not these incidents are willful attacks or misguided, boisterous attempts at play is uncertain. Dolphins in captivity can commit the extreme act of suicide by refusing to eat, refusing to breathe and striking their heads against aquarium walls. It is equally plausible that an orca could reach levels of despair, frustration and insanity deep enough to commit acts of aggression directed at people. I feel sad for the humans who have died and I feel equal empathy towards the killer whales; an animal of lesser intelligence and capacity for emotional distress, would not get bored, feel despair, or be capable of ‘losing their mind in the heat of the moment’.
… So, did I mention something about a transient orca? Let’s return to that ambiguous term. What on earth does ‘transient’ orca mean and, for that matter, what does ‘resident’ orca and ‘offshore’ orca mean? Initially I did not know that these different classifications of killer whales existed. Once I learnt their names, I still did not know exactly what the names meant and so I got very confused when Peggy told me that her main research subjects are transient orcas and not resident ones. I assumed, quite understandably I think, that resident orcas must reside in Monterey Bay, (with transients going in and out of it randomly, and offshores staying a long way out to sea and never entering the bay).
“It was only in my forties that I became less judgmental about us as a species and more accepting that we behave as we do because it is our nature; just like any other creature. When I was young I was morally outraged. On some level I still am, but I now temper that outrage with rational thinking that I hope leads to more effective solutions.”
In his youth, this conflict was strong. Bob was guided more by his emotions than by intellect. It was innate for him to feel passionately about the world and our species’ relationship with it. He would feel, react to how he felt and then take action, often driven by anger and frustration. He experienced guilt, angst and the belief that he should be doing more, coupled with an equally judgmental attitude towards the rest of the human race. He took up the good fight believing that if issues were made clear to people then reason and empathy would win out.
This sparked a dialogue between the rational and emotional sides of Bob’s nature, something along the lines of, 
However, Bob is of course human and admits he can still be a judgmental person. 
Which is why he remains an environmentalist to this day; one who accepts that our future may not be bright, but nevertheless keeps hope alive that it still could be. And one who wants to instill in each of us the unshakable, ethical and honorable stance that if something is worth fighting for we must fight, regardless of whether we win or lose.
