This topic interests me because I have always had a love for all animals and I hate to see them trapped in cages or mistreated and abused by the people in power over them. The people who hold the power at SeaWorld are also hugely benefitting from the mistreatment of marine animals. This affects my values because I feel like the killer whales at SeaWorld have been unfairly trapped and kept against their wills, and they do not have a voice to speak up for themselves so we as people need to stand up for them. I am an environmental studies major, which also entails wildlife, so I understand how whales live out in the wild and realize that their habitats and communities at SeaWorld are so far different than what they would be used to that it must be completely miserable for them. I have done tons of research on this topic, and have taken many biology classes that discuss the natural whale habitat and how much of a community animal they are. I am qualified because I have worked hard to get many unbiased facts, and have therefore formed my own opinion and thesis on the matter. 

With the release of Blackfish (2013) and the Cove movies, awareness for the horrors that happen at SeaWorld is steadily growing, but SeaWorld is still up and running for the benefit of those who profit off the lives of whales. The major values at stake for this article are the inhumane aspect of keeping animals against their will in cages that are too small for them. Also, as the writer has attended SeaWorld as a child, she claims that they gave her false information regarding the lives of wild orcas and the ones they have in captivity at SeaWorld. The author's credibility is in the fact that she has been to SeaWorld, where they gave her false information, and then went home and researched the topic further and got her information from marine experts, rather than SeaWorld who gave out false information in order to make them seem humane and like the whales are healthy.

"Why Shutting Down SeaWorld is Not the Answer" is an article written by Catherine O'Sullivan, a previous Marine Land employee who has spent a lot of time researching whales. She is against letting the whales go free into the ocean, and brings up the "Willy/ Keiko Foundation" where there was a huge fundraiser to free a whale that had lived all of its life in captivity, and when Keiko was finally set free, she was found washed up on a beach starving a few months later because she did not know how to fend for herself in the wild. She also mentions how all of the whales currently at SeaWorld were born into captivity and if they were set free, they would face the same fate as Keiko. I believe that this piece does change my argument, and it shows the point that maybe instead of letting the whales go on their own to fend for themselves, humans have a responsibility to them and perhaps they should live in a wildlife sanctuary instead. Her opinion is not very biased because she is well informed and uses facts to prove all of her points.

This article claims that the habitats at SeaWorld are unsafe an unnatural for the whales, and that the mortality rate for whales in captivity is 2.5x higher than those in the wild. Also, in order to reach the distance traveled in one day of a whale in the wild, those in captivity would have to circle their cage 1400 times. It also includes graphs and pictures of the unsafe habitats, and some of the injuries that have been sustained by the whales from their habitats and from being in quarters that are too close with other whales. It shows graphical data of the lifespan of whales in captivity vs. whales in the wild, so the reader can get a better understanding of how drastically different the two are. The purpose and value for this article is informing the public of what whales in captivity are facing. And the interest at stake is getting SeaWorld to free their whales into sanctuaries. This website is whales.org which is a website dedicated entirely to researching whales and informing the public about the findings; however, this article is arguing for closing SeaWorld. This website is highly credible because most of the information found on other parts of the website are informative articles that do not have any particular agenda, other than presenting information.

This research question is arguable because there are very logical arguments to be made on each side of it, and everyone has a strong opinion one way or the other. Most of the sources agree the something needs to change in order to protect the whales, but the disagreements come in when the question of what to do arises. Some argue for setting the whales free, while others do not think they could survive on their own and they need to be sent to sanctuaries better suited for their needs. These perspectives have shown me that maybe sanctuaries would be better since these whales are so used to living in captivity. I do not think my research question should be revised, but rather go more in depth of what I am asking.

