The Beluga Whales at Marineland (and Phil Demers) need our help.

Philip Demers is a Canadian former professional marine mammal trainer at Marineland of Canada in Niagara Falls, Ontario.

In this episode, we discuss the current plight of 30 beluga whales at his former employer's location.

Please follow Philip and his colleagues on Instagram at:

@walrus_whisperer

@urgentseas

First, if you haven't watched my film and live in Canada (or have one of those VPN things), you can watch it here:

https://youtu.be/oMUx3yuyznc?si=oagpg7bGnpbuyXlJ

Be sure to follow me on Instagram @drcliffworldwidevet.com and on Twitter at @drcliff_vet
Listener questions, episode suggestions, or if you have a good idea for a guest, email me at dr.redford@vet905.com
Additional information can be found at drcliff.ca

Transcript

Dr. Cliff Redford (00:00)

Hey everyone, welcome to another episode. guess a surprise episode, a unplanned episode, kind of an emergency episode of vet life with Dr. Cliff. Uh, it's an emergency because there's, uh, there's a lot of bullshit going on with, uh, Marine land, Canada. It was shut down a couple of years ago and, uh, they still got 30 Beluga whales they're taking care of. And now they're saying that they're bankrupt.

And they're asking for money from the federal government, the federal Canadian government, well as the provincial government in Ontario to help them take care of these beluga whales, or they will have them euthanize. So this is very time sensitive episode. And I've got this great guest, Phil Demare is coming on. Who is a whistleblower as well as, well, he's, he's pretty much responsible for getting the word out.

about marine land and I believe he's responsible for marine land California shutting down as well so stay tuned to this episode

All right. Welcome back everyone. As promised, the amazing and inspiring and hopefully ready to kick some ass. Mr. Phil Demers is joining me. Say hi and tell us who you are, guess, and what you're all about.

Phil Demers (01:30)

Thanks for having me Phil Demers former employee of Marine land of Canada the one that's making the news rounds today as it has for much of the last decade I worked there from 2000 to 2012 became a whistleblower of animal cruelty thereafter was ⁓ You know subsequently sued by Marine land For millions of dollars that litigation 13 years in continues everything that's happening in the news today is what we'd forewarned

I wasn't alone as being a whistleblower. was a dozen of us back up in around 2013 at this point. that's it. I'm very familiar with the way Marineland operates. recent round of headlines of this ultimatum, they've basically given the government, which is give us money or we euthanize the belugas. You know, it sounds eerily familiar to the last 13 years of litigation that I went through.

in actually trying to free one of my walruses. I say one of because my walrus had a baby and a complicated story, but nonetheless, the litigation that still continues between Marine Land and I was resolved, even if only temporarily, with them being forced to move the walruses to a better facility. So everything that's sort of playing out right now is it's the public's getting a glimpse into what's been my world for the past 13 years.

Dr. Cliff Redford (02:54)

Yeah, and it's, ⁓ I mean, I can hear the stress on your voice and it's been, it's been a battle for you. ⁓ Quickly tell us about this Walrus. You had, you'd finally gotten her moved, is it to the West coast?

Phil Demers (03:09)

No, MarineLiner and I had agreed I would drop the... I mean, essentially we had agreed that we would drop everything. So they would drop the lawsuit and I would drop my counter lawsuit and my claim to ⁓ never mind damages, but the legal fees, which were hundreds of thousands of dollars. And we had now we couldn't have specified a specific facility to send them to because that's a third party and can't necessarily negotiate terms without the consent of a third party.

We'd agreed on specific terms on where the walruses could be sent. Marine land ultimately sent them to Abu Dhabi. ⁓ SeaWorld, which is a brand new facility and albeit arguably the best walrus facility in the world, but it was outside of the conditions of our lawsuit. So yeah, so the lawsuit essentially continues.

Dr. Cliff Redford (03:43)

Hmm.

Gotcha.

Right. So right now, Marine land's been shut down for a couple of years. Is that right?

Phil Demers (04:04)

They elected not to open this year. Last year they opened on a very limited basis, so no rides, no restaurants. I'm not even certain a gift shop was operating, but they had a few animals on display. But this year they didn't open and they won't open again.

Dr. Cliff Redford (04:19)

Yeah. And, but yet there's still 30 belugas that are basically being held hostage and being used as pawns.

Phil Demers (04:30)

Four dolphins, two sea lions, ⁓ one seal, a lot of ⁓ elk, bear, deer. They used to have bison, the bison are gone. We don't know exactly where we have, you we've been told a number of different places where they could have gone, but no, marine land still has a lot of animals.

Dr. Cliff Redford (04:50)

Yeah, a lot going on. ⁓ It's sad and I hate to sort of relive it, but I think people need to know. Tell me about the conditions that these whales and some of the animals are, we're living under and I'm sure it's no better now. It's probably worse.

Phil Demers (05:07)

Right, so when I quit in 2012, it was on the basis that Marineland was very complacent about their water quality and one of the major disinfection units broke down and because Marineland only operates six months out of the year and they were closed for six months over the course of the winter, you there wasn't a whole lot of incentive for the owner to actually fix the water. So it had broken at the end of the 2011 season. So over the course of the winter,

You know, effects that had happened that this water disinfection unit breakdown caused was widespread and awful. ⁓ you know, we tried, you know, the veterinarians, the, the, the, the maintenance staff, ⁓ the trainers, we tried to get the owner and management to address it. They just wouldn't, wouldn't, wouldn't, wouldn't. And ultimately I, I'd resolved that I was becoming a, I was part of the problem by, by not perhaps.

fighting harder to address the issue outside of Marine land. That's what ultimately led me to ⁓ speak out. And it was to sort of forewarn of this exact situation because things were really bad then. I couldn't have imagined that they would get worse. I at the time naively believed that the government would ⁓ intervene and there would be ⁓ some issues there. But ⁓ in the course of last 13 years, the government more than not protected Marine land.

Everyone's crying crisis and emergency now. the reality is, Marineland was losing money for the better part of last five years, six, seven years. mean, steadily and increasingly. The animals, the disinfection unit, the conditions, they've all gotten worse. And so anyone can say that they didn't know and et cetera, et cetera. But at this point, there seems to be more finger pointing and

and absolving everyone of their respective responsibilities in this rather than addressing it. And this is what we've been screaming for 12 years, 13 years, we've been saying, this scenario's coming, do something to avoid it. And here we are.

Dr. Cliff Redford (07:18)

Yeah.

It's not a perfect situation, but there are checks and balances in place throughout Canada and the U S and elsewhere to take care of dogs and cats. And, you know, if there's puppy mills, they get shut down and they get fined and they get, you know, permanent record and there's ways around it. And, know, sometimes it can get frustrating, but why do you think like, it sounds like these, these animals, Marine land were ignored.

Phil Demers (07:49)

Well, in 2012, when I first ⁓ came out as whistleblower, I'd only then learned that there was no standards of care whatsoever within any licensing or guidelines whatsoever in all of the province of Ontario and federally as well. So they actually lived in a complete void of protection. So we did inspire and worked with the government as best we could to create some regulations and standards of care, which have never been enforced. I've never once been enforced since they've become ⁓

become the standard and the marine lands in breach of all of them. So there was, it's really more of a lack of political will. In 2019, we passed a federal bill called S203, which banned the captivity of marine, or rather of dolphins, whales and porpoises in Canada, you know, with a bunch of different caveats, including rather, including that they can't breed the animals anymore and that the transfer.

or import of animals is largely considered by the fisheries minister who has the final say and that's why we learned that ultimately she rejected a permit request or export request by Marine Land to go to China and this is what consequently the news is all about because Marine Land was, that we hear, Marine Land had a lucrative deal with China, they stood to make some monies in there and now they don't and they're upset.

They're very pissed about that. should mention that MarineLand as an operation, know, it's easy to, when you're a business, create a financial crisis on paper. MarineLand closing or not opening this year was a strategy. They only allowed for so much money to remain in the bank. And they took that to a precariously low number strategically. But, you know, it's worth reminding people, they sit on 700 acres of prime

land in Niagara. We're talking about this, maybe the business itself doesn't have the value, but the business and the land that it sits on is worth hundreds of millions of dollars. So what you're seeing at Marine Land is more of what Marine Land always does. It makes excuses for not wanting to care for the animals or wanting for basically anyone else to do it.

Dr. Cliff Redford (10:03)

Yeah, I'm sure there's multiple corporations with various marine land type names to it, all owned by the same...

group of people or family or whatever and the marine land corporation that runs the ticket sales of the tourist attractions is air quotes bankrupt but the marine lands holding I'm making that name up that owns the 700 acres you know they may not have any money liquid but they're clearly a value right they've clearly got equity but ⁓

Phil Demers (10:38)

There's been a lot of recorded

consolidation of a number of businesses at MarineLand into, ⁓ know, they have dummy corporations that they've recently set up with a partner. They've got a bunch of different things. There's a lot of consolidating of bank accounts and businesses. And again, all in a way to, ⁓ you know, to preserve the value of the business. And if it's costing you money to feed the whales and a sale that you'd hope to make money on, sell through, and now you're forced to look at alternatives, which might not be as lucrative,

You you start to, you make sure those books are cooked in such a way that now we declare bankruptcy and someone's got to step in and save the day and they point the finger at the feds and the Ontario government and that's it. Suddenly everyone's looking for a plan to bail Marine Land out of their own problems.

Dr. Cliff Redford (11:24)

Yeah. Yeah. ⁓ now you mentioned bill S two three. ⁓ which, know, ⁓ I would assume, I mean, you were involved in getting it created you and your, colleagues. ⁓ but it was used by the fisheries minister as a reason for these whales not to go to a similar place, albeit better, ⁓ in China. How do you feel about that? Would you, if it was up to you, would you allow them to go?

Phil Demers (11:53)

Yes, I was insisting on their being moved. The conditions are immediately significantly better. The facilities are, you know, these are brand new, you know, massive facilities, you know, and then I can tell, and I've had people in China reporting on site at Chime Long Ocean Kingdom as early as all of two weeks ago. And, you know, the whales look healthy, cetera. Now granted, they are performing, so there are like interactions with humans in the pools.

and they do have three mother belugas that have recently given birth, so they are breeding the animals. And that's outside of the scope of the spirit of Bill S-203. But at the end of the day, between all the balances, checks and balances, et cetera, in the balance of the decision-making, it is ultimately up to the minister. So she could very well have approved their export given the circumstances. So I wouldn't have made that decision. I was encouraging of the opposite. But here we are.

But you know, and I always stress that if one door closes another opens. So we see what this leaves Marine Land's belugas. But I'm not convinced we won't be revisiting the idea of exporting them again to the US or other places. Perhaps ⁓ in a way that doesn't fiscally benefit Marine Land, but in the end is looking after the interests of the animals. I hold out hope still.

Dr. Cliff Redford (13:12)

Yeah. Did minister Thompson ever formally reach out to you and discuss this with you?

Phil Demers (13:18)

No, unfortunately on that subject, ⁓ she will speak to animal rights groups before she'll speak necessarily to someone on the field. And it's a shame that she didn't because I could have offered her a bit of a wider scope of the issues. ⁓ I don't know that many of these animal rights groups have ever actually worked with animals. They come from marketing backgrounds and they have education in a place and they have ideologies and theories.

Dr. Cliff Redford (13:41)

Yeah.

Yeah.

Phil Demers (13:47)

But ultimately what these whales need is pragmatism. They need something that's ⁓ rational. too often, and I don't know what your personal opinion is on the matter, but too often I find these animal rights organizations ⁓ operating in their own benefit. ⁓ It's about being in headlines and soliciting donations. It's really less so about the animals. Here was a resolve everyone could have been satisfied with.

⁓ in the end if they were in fact looking at the interest of the animals first and not the interest you know of their ideology or ideological considerations which is you know that the animals need to be returned to the wild and that there's no sort of middle to all of that and that will kill more animals and will deplete far more bank accounts than ⁓ you know taking approximations towards maybe eventually a goal in that capacity but you know we gotta stop

dreaming the perfect scenario and look up imperfect ones on route two so that at least some quality of life is preserved for these animals. Because at the end of the day, these animal rights organizations don't know the animals. They don't know them from, you know, and having worked with those animals specifically, you know, have a little bit more investment in the outcome of what becomes of them than most. And a lot of these organizations don't understand the scope of this. They don't really understand the issues. They only see an idea. And because it's their

because the echo chamber that they operate out of only wants to hear of that idea. It's all they can talk about and frankly all I see is muddied waters because of that. think that it was a mistake not to send at least some of the belugas.

Dr. Cliff Redford (15:24)

Yeah, yeah.

Yeah, I mean, as far as my opinion with some of these animal rights groups, and it's with any charity, there's some amazing charities out there. And then there's other charities that are in the business of being a charity and business is very, very good. ⁓ And, you know, they spend more on and they have more staff or team members often volunteer ⁓ drumming up donations than they do actually solving the problem.

Phil Demers (15:50)

.

Dr. Cliff Redford (15:55)

that they're trying to solve. ⁓ And yeah, pragmatism has to be considered, you know, at all times. I mean, in my industry, we sometimes have to euthanize animals that we could fix them, but the family is unable or in the really tragic times unwilling to do what's necessary. And, you know, for the sake of the animal, we need to euthanize them. ⁓ And I mean, this is what marine land is threatening, right?

that they're gonna euthanize these blue whales and you not, you've probably had this thought and correct me if I'm wrong, you know, we don't send these whales to China and then Marine land says we're gonna euthanize. Sure, there's ways of saying, well, you're not allowed, et cetera, et cetera.

then there's a risk that all of a sudden they start dying of supposedly natural causes, you know, and that is a risk,

Phil Demers (16:57)

You know time has been against these whales for far too long. It's not getting better. It's getting worse every every option To consider still requires months into years of marine lens whales staying exactly where they are. So unfortunately every I mean just about every consideration outside of that of euthanasia, which is still not on the table

as far as, and maybe it's difficult for me to process that, it's even from ⁓ a logistical perspective in what's required of doing it and who would have to actually involve themselves in doing it and what, you know, the dark shadow that you wear for the remainder of your life having participated in a cost savings measure that kills a bunch of belugas is, you know, it's not fathomable at my end and in all of the circles, including that of Marine land, it's not really an option. This was...

Again, was a strategy on the end of their lawyer. I dealt with that for 13 years. I had an animal in the balance that they were always leveraging that if I didn't do dot dot dot, they were going to dot dot dot sort of subtly. it didn't take, you know, it took me to call their bluffs eternally to finally get to the point where they were forced to move the animals and do what was right. So I don't see this as any different scenario. This is bluster. It's a strategic.

financial crisis manufactured by marine land. ⁓ just don't, it's not a question of them being able to pay, it's question of them not wanting to and also being really angry that they were going to get top dollar. But again, again, on the minister's shoulders is well, what other options do we have? If, if you know, if they're considering which I've long been advocating for, which is to seize the animals and then send them to, you know, and again, this is me just ⁓ spit balling, but

let's call it a coalition of US facilities willing to take the animals because you may or may not be aware, but Mystic Aquarium acquired five of MarineLand's belugas a number of years ago and three of them died within weeks into months. And then one was knocking on Death's door. They've since recovered. ⁓ that said, and additionally, the fact that SeaWorld had to sue MarineLand to recover one of their loaned orcas, which was, you know,

pretty close to ending in disaster at Marine land. SeaWorld and the likes, they don't want to buy any of Marine land's animals. They don't want to enter into any business arrangement with them. But I keep romantically imagining a coalition of facilities that have space at their facilities to come out and work with the Canadian government, work with the NOAA, whatever other necessary organizations in the US to facilitate sort of a...

Sort of a taking over of, so if everyone were in agreement that they would adhere to the spirit of the law, of the Canadian law, which is no more breeding and ultimately ⁓ display only or for education, which frankly most of the facilities in the US adhere to already, and I'm comfortable that there's oversight, I'm comfortable that there's regulations and the likes in the US, and I think that the US, or Canadian government would agree that they're frankly better and stronger oversight than here in Canada, more effective at least.

⁓ Maybe we could enter into an agreement where a bunch of those facilities take the the whales and it cost them nothing That might be enough to incentivize them. They become heroes in all of it And you know some of the animals now find a new home, you know better than marine lands immediately so I I still think there's options on what becomes you know, there's talk of a of a sanctuary ⁓ being built at marine land brand spanking new elaborate multi-million dollar thing and

You know, unfortunately, that's whereas most of the people didn't want to consider such a thing. When you look at what MarineLand's whale's options are, it's once again, one of the best options. you know, we'll see what becomes in time, but this is a familiar tone and ⁓ theme by MarineLand.

Dr. Cliff Redford (20:54)

And.

Right. And this sanctuary was, was it from an outside party? Like they were looking to buy and develop that land and yeah. Okay. But you think currently it sounds like the government is going to be saying, no, that's not acceptable.

Phil Demers (21:08)

That's happening as we speak.

Well, I think that this particular group is looking for a lot of ⁓ help with the government, maybe more than they're willing. So I think that there's a couple of hangups ⁓ in all of this. I can't say that I know with certainty. just know that whereas there is a party willing to invest an inordinate amount of money in redeveloping, there is a number of hangups to that. But there are conversations of that exact sort taking place.

Dr. Cliff Redford (21:42)

Yeah.

had heard on the radio ⁓ that there was some sort of sanctuary being built out of the East coast. All right.

Phil Demers (21:49)

But you definitely heard it, but there is no sanctuary being built on

the East Coast. What there are is what I call salaried theories being tossed around and have been so for the longest time. But the whale sanctuary project, which we've aptly renamed the whale scam-tuary project, has been announcing since 2017 that they'd be ready to receive whales in the next subsequent year, always increasing their demand for funding.

Dr. Cliff Redford (21:56)

No.

Phil Demers (22:14)

And lo and behold, it turns out that they were a non-starter to begin with because they don't actually have the unanimous consent from the landowners where they're actually proposed to build. And so throughout the entirety of this thing, what they really are is a fancy picture and a pitch, but no logistical sense in any of it. It's unprecedented. I visited the site, it's polluted, it requires... ⁓

a lot of infrastructure that is beyond the scope of what they're capable of funding. The numbers that they've proposed in terms of funding are, ⁓ those numbers are not accurate. They need way more money. They have no guaranteed ⁓ money, which you need if you're gonna take on whales. You can't take on whales and then say, we ran out of money again. And you know, I truly think in my heart, having seen, witnessed all the proposed projects in that capacity,

Dr. Cliff Redford (22:44)

Right.

Phil Demers (23:08)

that it's going to take capitalism to save these animals. It's just not going to, charity's just not going to work. So that, so again, I stress in all of the examples of animal charities that I've come across, they're the most egregious in terms of being useless because they can't take those whales. They'll continue like ambulance chasers to chase headlines and interject their point of view in with the journalists and paint a pretty picture of a thing that can.

But the reality is it cannot.

Dr. Cliff Redford (23:39)

Yeah, yeah, they're really good at bluster and puffing up their feathers, but, know, they'll swim with the current, so to speak, and then as soon as it gets difficult, they wouldn't be able to, you're right, they wouldn't be able to fix it at all. Yeah.

Phil Demers (23:55)

There is no sanctuary in Nova Scotia. There's only

chatter of it and illustrations. There's nothing else. Literally nothing else.

Dr. Cliff Redford (24:01)

Yeah, yeah.

But whoever's coming up with that idea is probably getting grants and funding and donations and.

Phil Demers (24:07)

So,

you take a look at their funding, mean, the money that's gone to their wages, we're talking about an excess of $175,000 US dollars, some of which, they've got two paid employees, and between the two of them, they're getting a quarter million US dollars to talk about a thing they want. It's just crazy. What are they doing for that money? Nothing. They're just interjecting themselves in every possible conversation.

regarding whales so that they can propose something that they themselves cannot actually make happen.

Dr. Cliff Redford (24:40)

Yeah, Jesus. How would, I was talking on, I was on my buddy's radio show an hour ago, as I had mentioned to you, and we're actually talking about this a little bit. And he asked me how they would have gotten the belugas to China anyways. I mean, it would have been in some sort of water container on a plane.

Phil Demers (24:58)

Yep, precisely. It's not that difficult and yes, there's a lot of ⁓ medications and drugging happening. they're on Valium. Essentially what it is is you've got a sling. You can imagine two long bars, longer than the length of the whales with the material sling in between. So two holes for their pecsins, one in the genital slit for if they pee, poo, et cetera. And the tail at the end. And the bars with the crane up top harness it.

Dr. Cliff Redford (25:04)

Yep.

Phil Demers (25:26)

tightens up the whale and lifts it out of the water. It then is placed into a box where the metal, like a shipping container, where the bars are resting on the outer edges of it so it's supported. There's just enough water to ⁓ alleviate some of the weight that would otherwise be on the vitals of the animal so there's some buoyancy between breaths. And then that's it. You load them on a transport, you take them to the airport, load them on the...

Hercules airplane, they take off, they land. And, you know, I've done this a number of times. I've received whales from Russia. I've been at the airport. I've been in the belly of the airplane. I've unloaded them at 3 a.m. in a snowstorm at Marine land. And I can't think of one example of an animal that died as a consequence of the transport. whereas typically I should be a person that's saying, it's an awful thing. What I would say rather is it's a totally doable thing.

Dr. Cliff Redford (26:24)

Right, right. And I mean.

Phil Demers (26:25)

Like,

them dying is a small risk, I would say.

Dr. Cliff Redford (26:29)

Yeah. And, and is it going to suck for these whales and be uncomfortable? Of course, of course. But if you could somehow communicate with them and say, look, you're never getting out of a pool. You're always going to be in some sort of form of a, of a pool or in capture. We can't get you out into the wild for so many different reasons. ⁓ or into one of these, you know, this bullshit sanctuary in the East coast. And I, I bought it hook line and sinker, no pun intended. Right.

Phil Demers (26:33)

Ugh.

I

promoted the hell out of it. I gave them a lot of money, man.

Dr. Cliff Redford (27:02)

Yeah, yeah, so frustrating. ⁓ but if you could explain to them, Hey, you're going to go to this much bigger facility. That's that's, you know, better in all these different ways, according to, to Phil, who knows what he's talking about, but you're going to have a shitty ride. It's going to be 24 hours of, of drug induced haze and, and discomfort. It's like sitting in, in coach, you know, flying to flying to wherever to the other side of the world. So obviously the, the whales would say, yeah, get me the hell out

Phil Demers (27:14)

Okay.

Dr. Cliff Redford (27:32)

here. Get me somewhere, if not perfect, obviously better than what's

going on right now. ⁓ What's your honest take? What do you think the next couple of years holds for these guys?

Phil Demers (27:49)

I think it's going to be a mixed bag. think there's going to be more deaths. I think that's just a natural consequence of where they are and the delay that they're remaining there for. I think there'll be a resolve to send some to other facilities. I think they'll revisit China as an option in the most desperate cases. I think that no one on their conscience, especially the minister,

is going to euthanize or allow for the euthanasia of whales as a cost saving measure when they can ultimately be saved by a facility that she really only needs to learn a little bit more about to feel comfortable about than this sort of blanket issue of not sending the animals to remain in captivity, given the fact that that's the only option. So I think she was probably misled by a number of organizations. So I think that will be revisited. And outside of that, I think there'll be some consideration to an investment that to maybe

rebuild something substantial there where the animals can remain on display. ⁓ You know, no breeding, no performance, best possible conditions, best possible water. I mean, we could dream of the world's largest, but you know, it doesn't even have to be. Unfortunately, it just needs to be something where people become then accepting of the fact that you've got beluga whales in Canada that will be there for the next 30 years until the very last one dies. And then we will have, ⁓ you know, turn the page on that dark chapter.

It's not what anyone necessarily wants, but the reality is those are the amount of years that these animals need to be dealt with. So we can pretend to forget about them and pretend like this wasn't a problem of our own doing. Or we can show them some level of dignity and take responsibility as a whole. So there's a large community in the world looking to do whatever is possible. The shame of it is that it's 30 animals. And again, I stress there's four dolphins in there and some sea lions.

But yeah, I think that time will tell, but I don't think there's gonna be one straight answer to what becomes. I think it's gonna be a few things.

Dr. Cliff Redford (29:48)

Do you think changing Minister Thompson's mind is our best bet at getting some sort of better resolution?

Phil Demers (29:56)

I think in the coming weeks, that would be something to very immediately revisit if other options aren't on the table. Because again, because we're limited with what's actually possible, you'll know very quickly what your options are. And so I'm guessing she's getting a better scope of the issue with the conversations that are taking place. I understand that the feds and Ontario government and Marine land were meeting yesterday.

The tone will certainly be turned down, which is good. We won't be hearing any more of the threat of euthanasia in the media to get the Fed's attention or to sort of manufacture sympathy or empathy for Marineland. But yeah, I think that's not that it needs to be revisited again, unless they know something we don't. Again, if they know something we don't and there's a whole bunch of games being played behind the scenes that Marineland doesn't necessarily like the way it's going because it doesn't benefit

Dr. Cliff Redford (30:43)

Right.

Phil Demers (30:52)

them in the way that they think they should be benefited. I don't know what's going on, but MarineLand is operating exactly as MarineLand always does, which is bluster, bluster, threat, bluster, threat, bluster, give up.

Dr. Cliff Redford (31:03)

And only for their own, their own benefit. Always, always, always.

Phil Demers (31:05)

Always. ⁓ It's coming

down to monies. I'll offer a quick perspective. There used to be ⁓ an owner, his wife, a son, and then an adopted son. The owner's dead, the owner's wife has recently died, the owner's son has died, the adopted son remains but has never been, has had limited involvement in the business, will never have any involvement in the business. A lawyer has taken over and that's it. It's a question of

of selling everything off while preserving the trust, while preserving the value of the trust. It's not about what we can afford or what we can't in terms of the interest of the animals. It's he's there to squeeze out every last dollar and he is absolutely laser focused on exactly that. So with that in mind, whatever's playing out in the background, we don't know, but my guess is the bluster comes from dissatisfaction with something.

in whatever is meant to be in the transition of Marine land to this next year.

Dr. Cliff Redford (32:09)

All right. What can all of the listeners and all the viewers of this and everyone out there hearing this can do is it just pressure the pressure of the government, solve this, get them to China, know, ⁓ give Phil, Phil a knighthood, ⁓ so he can start, ⁓ you know, pushing people around like what, how can we help?

Phil Demers (32:31)

So unfortunately at this point, this is ⁓ more of a waiting pattern because just too much policy taking place behind the scenes. It would have been a different story to launch a campaign of the sort to get the government's attention in advance of all this. But you know, here we are already. So the government's at the table. Everyone's at the table. You know, I...

I don't like people necessarily signing petitions. Those are data mining ⁓ schemes where, you know, eventually I'll just be asking for your donations for an organization. So those sort of operate in that capacity. We're not looking to bring attention to an issue. ⁓ It's already there. And, you know, too often people will engage in that level of ⁓ activism where they put their email somewhere and they go, I feel good about it. I did the thing. And they think that that's a resolve. It's not.

It rarely actually amounts to anything. It offers you some level of peace in your heart that you did something, but really you did something that benefits another organization than the animals. So what I would say is be at the ready because calls to action do happen and they happen fast. know, my social media pages, so Phil Demers, ⁓ be it that or Walrus Whisper or Urgencies, which is an organization I operate through for advocacy as well. ⁓

You know all of these come with very timely inside sort of tips from whistleblowers and vantage points you wouldn't otherwise get from you know, so I Would say more than not it's keep the animals in your heart and don't become complacent because this isn't a new issue Bear in mind that when I became whistleblower in 2012 50 whales or in excess of have died since then, you know There's a lot of concern now for the remaining 30, but had we not ⁓ ended

whale breeding, there'd be another 30 in those tanks because back in 2019, Marineland had an excess of 60 belugas in those tanks. you know, that said, this is a long-standing issue. There's a lot of whales have died, far more than there remains to save over the course of my time as activist, if you will. But those, you know, suddenly entering the game, understand this is a slog, man, and there's no immediate resolve. There's no perfect, but...

It does require public engagement. I'm not a big fan of sharing the emails and trying to etc. But share their stories, share their stories, share the videos of their stories. you want to do is you want to give the animals a voice. You want to personify them, make them come to life. And that's what a good journalist does, what a good activist does. It's what a good podcast does, what a good storyteller does. So we're trying to bring them to life to keep them to life. And so people can do the same.

So, you know, stay on the share buttons, stay engaged and stay at the ready. But, you know, petitions and, you know, writing things, we're past that.

Dr. Cliff Redford (35:21)

Yeah, yeah, very well put. Listen, will put, ⁓ as always, I will put all your social media connections on the summary. Everyone please check it out and stay tuned and support Phil and his colleagues and get ready to ⁓ stand up and make some noise or do whatever is needed to be done when the time comes. I imagine, Phil, this has put a ton of emotional and financial hardship ⁓ on you. ⁓

You're probably 25 years old, with a gray beard, looking more like 50. It happens fast, it does. It is. Yeah, there you go. But you are a true inspiration for me. ⁓ And hopefully for everybody listening, you've put your neck out to do what's right at a huge cost. ⁓ And ⁓ I thank you for it. I thank you for your time.

Phil Demers (35:56)

It happens fast man. is a great diet.

Dr. Cliff Redford (36:20)

I will have you back on here anytime you need to get the word out. Just hit me up ⁓ on Instagram as you know, and next time you're in the Toronto area, let me know and drinks are on me. We'll definitely hang out. Excellent. Excellent. Thank you very much, Phil. Cheers.

Phil Demers (36:29)

Deal, deal. All right, cheers. My pleasure. Thanks.