Release of Corky

A great deal of attention in recent weeks has been focused on a proposal to release one of Sea World’s killer whales into the waters off British Columbia (“Sea World Dismisses Plan to Free Corky,” Nov. 8). According to its authors, the experiment is intended to “let Corky go home.” Corky has spent more than 20 years in oceanariums. By every medical standard, she is a healthy, contented animal, well adjusted to her surroundings. Corky is home.

The proposal was scrutinized by Sea World’s curatorial and veterinary staff and found to expose Corky to tremendous risks and to deny the crucial role she currently plays at Sea World.

Another important consideration is Corky’s contribution to Sea World’s missions of marine life education and conservation. Millions of people visit this park every year and leave with a personal, often profound respect for these animals. In 22 years, Corky has given countless people a keener understanding and awareness of killer whales and an increasingly fragile marine and environment.

The Corky proposal is predicated on a number of incomplete or questionable assumptions. First, the project synopsis continually refers to her as a “surplus” animal. Because she is passed reproductive age, proposal authors believe Corky is of little use to Sea World. Corky is no more a surplus animal than any of the other killer whales at Sea World. She is part of a social group of four whales that includes a newborn calf, the calf’s mother and a 3-year old female. Corky is an integral part of the framework of this family.

The proposal also discounts the level of trust that has developed over many years between Corky and the men and women who care for her. She looks to humans as sources of activity and nourishment, a relationship that is entirely contrary to the kind of instinct she would require to succeed in the wild. Corky is fed more than 250 pounds of fish daily. There is no compelling evidence that she could develop sufficient group hunting skills to support her own needs.

The project is also inadvisable for a host of medical reasons. For example, it is highly questionable whether, at her advanced age Corky’s immune system can now meet the challenges of life in the open ocean.

Corky’s health is a matter of utmost concern to me and all those at Sea World responsible for her care. Authors of the proposal appear well-meaning, but their experiment is a sentimental approach to the study of these animals. It was rejected by Sea World for a very simple reason. Corky is a happy and healthy animal. She serves the interests of science and education far better in her home at Sea World than in an unacceptably risky experiment.

DR. JIM McBAIN, Senior Staff Veterinarian, Sea World of California