The topic at hand is with whales.  More specifically, with the captivity, hunting, and killings that they face daily.  Why do we still allow people to treat an endangered species in such inhumane ways when it is detrimental to their well-being and dangerous to our well-being?  To stop these processes, the ban on commercial whaling should be revised while simultaneously making it illegal to breed or hold whales in captivity.  I have always been fascinated with whales and marine animals in general.  Dolphins are my favorite animal actually and they are closely related to whales.  Similar to most people, I have been to different aquariums as a kid, but never a performance at places like SeaWorld.  This topic is relevant because whales are one of the most intelligent creatures in the world facing extreme inhumanities, behavioral changes threatening the lives of humans, and possible extinction.  

This topic is interesting to me because I have never thought about what is happening to whales as a problem because I had never really looked into it.  SeaWorld was always a place that seemed fun and countries that kill whales were only doing it for food, so it was okay.  I feel credible because I did not have a side going into the research; I was neutral.  After researching, I learned that there is a difference in killing animals humanely versus inhumanely.  There is a similar difference evident in zoos and places like SeaWorld, where the animals are coerced to perform.  Whales are an endangered and a protected species as well, and yet these things are still happening to them.  After beginning my research, I personally think that treating animals in this way is wrong, let alone animals that are so similar to humans in their brain capacity and emotional intelligence.

The first article I used is from the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) website.  They claimed that hunting whales is cruel and the excuses countries have been using to continue this process are invalid.  We do not need to kill whales in order to learn about them.  The reader is then walked through the killing process, focusing on how it is inhumane.  The article cites someone who has been on the expedition.  "If we can imagine a horse having two or three explosive spears stuck into its stomach and being made to pull a butcher's truck through the streets of London while it pours blood in the gutter, we shall have an idea of the present method of killing.  The gunners themselves admit that if whales could scream, the industry would stop, for nobody would be able to stand it" ("The Cruelty of Whaling").  Clearly, something is wrong here.  The organization that published this article is for animal rights, therefore it values the humane treatment of whales.  This source is credible as it is an organization that has researched these problems and knows what they are talking about.  However, it is a biased source because of what the organization advocates for.   

In captivity, the lives of whales are significantly worse and more constrained.  The source compares the lives of whales in the wild versus those in captivity. In captivity, whales have a smaller tank, artificial seawater, limited diet, isolation, a shorter life expectancy, and other restraints (Williams 28).  The source also focuses on the myths marine parks tell their visitors.  The overall interest of this article is on whales in captivity and why they think it should stop.  The author believes that whales deserve better conditions as captivity is negative to their health and has dangerous outcomes for humans.  This report is written for the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS), so it is biased right from the start as the society advocates for the rights of whales and does not mention the opposing side.  Even though it is biased, the source remains credible in that it is an organization that has done research and uses facts.  They know a lot about whales and the conditions that they face and the different outcomes of those conditions.  

Tilikum, the largest whale in captivity, was the main source behind three different violent attacks on humans.  This article's purpose is to prove that keeping whales in captivity is against their nature.  The article compares behaviors of whales in captivity versus the wild, noting the lack of attacks on humans for those in the wild ("Over 30 Years and Three Deaths").  The author simply wants whales to not be held in captivity any longer.  They believe that captivity causes a change in the behavior of whales, making them a threat to humans as visible in the death caused by Tilikum.  It is a biased article in that the organization that published it is against whale captivity and that is apparent in the organization's name.  It does not mention the benefits of captivity, if any, and is only focused on their argument.  However, this source is credible because it discusses recent events that people are probably already aware of.  It then discusses facts and the events, giving a more in-depth analysis of them.  

The problem with whales is controversial.  People think it is wrong because of the inhumane treatment of an endangered species and other people think it is right because whales are just another animal used as a food source and for monetary gain, thus a debate exists.  There really are not any agreements on this topic though people disagree about the methods of killing whales, killing in the first place, the effects of captivity, and some other issues.  These different perspectives and debates do not change my view as I think that people who are for this treatment of whales are merely uniformed and ignorant about the topic.  This has been a well-known issue for several decades and yet nothing is changing.  I want to keep my paper general and focus on the overall treatment of whales as opposed to strictly the killings or captivity in order to meet the length requirement.

