On 20 February 1991, Keltie Byrne, a 20-year-old student and part-time Orca (Blackfish) trainer, slipped and fell into a tiny pool in which killer whales were kept after a show. The three Blackfishes are reported to have dragged and repeatedly submerged Keltie, until she drowned, despite other trainers’ attempts to rescue her.
The whales, allegedly suffering from the trauma of their captivity right from when they were young, together with the poor relations between them as a species, and the treatment they were subjected to at Sealand and SeaWorld, were implicated in this film as the possible causes for why the Blackfishes mauled Keltie.
It is yet to be documented that a killer whale has harmed a single human in the wild.
Some former correspondents at SeaWorld have also claimed that the unfamiliarity with new trainers, and perhaps the pregnancy of at least one of the females (Haida II) were possible causes for the behavior of the whales.
Sealand of the Pacific closed shortly after the incident in November of 1992, and all three killer whales were sold to SeaWorld in the United States. Tilikum and Nootka IV went to SeaWorld Orlando, while Haida II and her baby Kyuquot went to SeaWorld San Antonio. As of February 2010, only Tilikum and Kyuquot were alive even though Blackfishes lifespans compare to that of humans.
Tillikum has been involved in two further deaths at SeaWorld Orlando, including one on February 24, 2010.
This documentary centers on Tilikum, a 12,000 lbs. Blackfish, responsible for the death of 3 people, including Dawn Brancheau the former senior trainer at SeaWorld in Orlando. The film explores the reasoning behind the alleged “psychosis” of Tilikum. The film shows the killer whale’s experience in captivity, and the unacceptable cover up executives at Sealand and SeaWorld have tried to make of the killings.
While SeaWorld naturally refused to be interviewed in this documentary, the films perspective mostly derives from former trainers and employees of SeaWorld, including various experts. Their experience working with Orcas for many years they say, “is truly heart breaking,” in light of the treatments enacted to the whales.
Presenting the theory, the evidence and finally a solution to the topic at hand, BLACKFISH, 2013, is an empathetic story employing some fine technique in its use of footage from shows featuring trainers at much younger ages.
While we’ve always known Blackfishes’ are intelligent creatures director Cowperthwaite dedicates a lot of the film to demonstrating their higher than human capacity for emotions; watching them over time and building up the cinematic connections necessary for understanding how these kidnapped killer whales bond to their trainers and each other.
The film delves into Tilikum’s incarceration and life in captivity, and we witness the pain and frustration felt by the Blackfish. It is easy to piece together the resultant ‘violent behavior’ against the three trainers and only conclude SeaWorld’s occupancy conditions for the killer whale was far from ideal.
Many advocates have called for a change of attitude and above all, a change of law, that will protect animals from being kidnapped from the wild at will for our viewing pleasure in aquariums and zoos.
To recognize the legal rights of the Blackfish for example, would involve appropriating an African traditional idea in law – allowing killer whales three distinct benefits that is denied them under common American, European, and International law.
The three stipulations include:
First, ‘standing’ – the right to have legal actions instituted on their behalf. It is no answer to say that the Blackfish cannot speak. Corporations and states cannot speak either. Lawyers speak for them, as they customarily do for ordinary citizens with legal problems.
We could treat the killer whale as we do legal incompetents, human beings who have become vegetables. A court simply designates someone, the incompetent’s guardian, with the authority to represent her and manage her affairs.
By analogy, when a friend (presumably one of the established environmental groups) of a killer whale perceives it to be in harms way or endangered, the friend should be able to apply to a court to establish a guardianship.
The guardianship would thereafter be the legal voice for the ‘voiceless Blackfish,’ instituting actions in her name and appearing before appropriate agencies on her behalf.
Second, when courts make balances of competing interests, as in deciding whether a company like SeaWorld that is harming killer whales should have to shut down, it is only the competing human interests that they have considered exclusively. What does not, but should, weigh in the balance is the damage to the sea, the oceans, and to the Blackfish itself.
Third, where, relief is granted in an environmental case, there is no reason why damages should not go to the benefit of the environment and the Blackfish. The animal’s portion would be put into a trust fund to be administered by the guardian, to defray the costs of replenishing the ocean, stocking it with Blackfish and algae, and so on.
African traditional law stands to teach us a great deal that the members of the environment are all persons, if not human. Only with this perspective can we begin to extended care, or humanity, to our environment. It makes more sense than what the world is doing to the defenseless Blackfish.
