Does California Coastal Commission Have Authority To Ban Breeding At SeaWorld?

Listen for the latest news through the day right here KPBS. Our top story on midday edition the California coast of commissions decisions about the breeding of Orcas at SeaWorld maybe, complicated legal issue in court. SeaWorld has not yet said if it will suit to overturn the decision. Last week the commissioner approved the world's request to expand the holding tanks for its killer whales on the condition that it holds its captive reading program. Since the world has only stopped taking whales from the wild agreeing to the commission's terms what and the killer well shows & -- San Diego Park. Joining me are Sara Wan she's former coastal commission chair and a former consultant to the animal legal Defense fund. Serra, welcome. Thank you. Carney Anne Nasser is also here. Welcome. Thank you for having me. Serra, let me start with you. Why do you think that the commission did it turned out the Rose request to -- There is a real advantage to a more meaningful control of what happens by putting in the condition that was requested. If you they had denied it, then it would leave the status while which would mean that the Orcas that were there would be under the same conditions that they're in now. By approving it with the condition one although it is not much extra room it does give the existing Orcas some extra room and allows the commission to put conditions and control and regulate what happens to those Orcas Sarah, what did you recommend to the commissioners? As a representative it was exactly what the commission did. We recommended that we did not ask for denial. We recommended approval with the commission that was impose. SeaWorld would be prohibited from captive reading but Sarah, would it be allowed to house killer well spread and another see will Park? No, the condition also ask that the -- are not allowed to bring any new Orcas in or ship any Orcas out. Our condition was very specific. It says that the -- they should be allowed to keep the Orcas that they have now but not allow any captive breeding. Carney Anne Nasser why does that maintain that breeding Orcas are cruel? These our morals -- animals would fit with their families for the entire lives. It would be in a very rich environment in the ocean. The environment virtually bathtubs at SeaWorld. It is very complex animals of everything that is natural and important to them. There's no educational value in point is the animals were deprived of the ability to exhibit normal behaviors. There is nothing educational about seeing them forced to perform tricks either. We did invite the world to join in this discussion, but they declined. We do have a bite from a SeaWorld representative Todd Schmidt. Here that is. Breeding is a natural fundamental right of animals. We know killer walls are social animals. It would be inhumane to not allow them to bring. Breeding is stimulating for the animals. The production of calves produces social bonds that are fundamental for the social structure of killer walls. That was Todd Schmidt a senior veterinarian at SeaWorld responding to the California commission that they can expand their tanks SeaWorld, but they have to stop there Orcas breeding program. Sarah, I think some people might understand why the artificial insemination program of Orcas is something that should be stopped. What is wrong with the cap of Orcas meeting normally? They don't need -- me normally. SeaWorld chooses who mates with whom and when. They breed the female at eight years of age with nature they don't read before 13 to 15 years ago by the way, I was really funny about them social bonding. They inbreed them with fathers and mothers and cousins and uncles and then when the Cavs are relatively young, they separate them from the mother and ship the -- off to other facilities. There is evidence of 17 different wells will be shipped to other facilities. They do not allow them to develop normal social bonds just the opposite to go these animals live in the wild with their family for all of their lives. They break them up. What is normal and natural about that? Just a follow-up. It's laughable to me that Todd Schmidt and SeaWorld have a certain concern for the fundamental rights of Orcas consider that they are in the business of denying these animals their very first primary fundamental rights which is our right to freedom. It is nothing more than a ruse for them to distress that they are [ Indiscernible ] about providing for these animals because these animals are used -- for entertainment acts. They are torn away from their families. A former SeaWorld employee testified the commission that SeaWorld has separated at least 19 calves from their mothers. All of SeaWorld's claims have been literally turned over on their head. Sarah, if SeaWorld was to accept these conditions to expand their holding things most people agree that it would eventually end the killer well shows at SeaWorld. Do you agree and was at the goal? Yes, I agree. I should point out that given the fact that Orcas live for long time and presumably if SeaWorld takes proper care of them, they will live for another -- the ones they have will live another 20 or 30 years. It still means the world to continue to run their operation, but simply phase it out and they will have plenty of time to put together a new model for the way in which a do business. Carney Anne Nasser might expand not to expand the holding takes what would be the effect of that on the Park and the Orcas that are there now? It would be that SeaWorld would continue to circle the drain by demonstrating yet again that it's not on doing what's best for the Orcas. It's all about money. If they decide not to give these existing Orcas the benefit the marginal benefit, it all comes back -- to propagate their moneymakers. Doesn't this decision make life worse for the Orcas at the park if SeaWorld continues to keep the Orcas in the tanks you claim are too small for them? Our hope is that SeaWorld will do the right thing. Ringling Brothers recently announced that they are going to retire the use of elephants. So our hope is that SeaWorld will get on this thing and stop the negative publicity which is just ongoing because it continues to be the wrong thing. Retire them to sanctuaries so that they can experience what they're naturally accustomed to experiencing. The ball is in SeaWorld squirt. They have the opportunity to do the right thing here. They're going to lose if they continue to do the wrong thing. They're also going to lose and the report. Let's talk about the legal court for a minute. See what content of the California coastal commission does not have jurisdiction to determine how captive Orcas are treated. SeaWorld's attorneys a SeaWorld operates in compliance with federal animal welfare law and federal law preempts any state restrictions. So my question is why do you think the coastal commission does have outright? For two reasons. First of all, they're wrong on that federal [ Indiscernible ]. The federal law does not prevent the coastal Commissioner any state from dealing with this. I don't want to get into the details, but there are two federal laws that are involved one is the Marine mammal protection act, which in 1994 SeaWorld removed the right of the federal government to deal with any cetaceans that are captive or not in the wild. That does not come into play. The other one is the animal welfare act and the animal welfare act has specific clauses in their to allow states to set higher standards. So in fact, if the commission as a state regulatory body wishes to set standards under its jurisdiction as a state agency, it can do so. It all boils down not to the federal law which really does not play into this at all ago but to the state law. The coastal act which is the rule of the law that governs the jurisdiction of a coastal commission gives the coastal condition the authority to do what it did. If your argument is correct, sir, and that commission does have jurisdiction on how the Orcas are treated you say that -- why wouldn't the commission brand that breeding of Orcas whether the holding tank is expended are not? They can do it. The jurisdiction doesn't work that way. They can't just go way to somebody and say here is something we want you to do. They have to tie it to a development that takes place. Something that is happening that has been applied to the commission for [ Indiscernible ] they can put a condition on that permit. They can go back and say to SeaWorld or to anybody on any issue we don't think what you are doing is consistent with the coastal act and therefore, you need to take this and that and the other action. They can do that. They can tie -- they have to have the [ Indiscernible ] to the permit. In this case one SeaWorld a price for the permit, that -- Sara, do you think your put -- influence the members of the coastal commission on this decision? No, I don't think so. I know some of them personally. I don't the that was the issue. I think that they were very well aware both their legal right to do what they did and their concerns are about the -- what was happening to the Orcas . All of the discussions with them that I had both as what are called ex parte communications that is one-on-one communications outside of the hearing room and all of the communications and discussions in the hearing room were based on fact not personal relationships. One councilmember upon hearing the commission's decision said San Diego without SeaWorld would be on a manageable. I think there were quite a few people who do feel that way. Is that the animal legal Defense fund school to shut down SeaWorld? I know perfectly well what a magnificent community that is. To suggest that some of California's most pristine coastal communities requires a captive Marine entertainment park in order to continue to have up feel to its own residence and tourist is absolutely laughable. Moreover, the public is rejecting the notion, but it is appropriate anywhere to use animals for entertainment to subject them to us extreme confinement and to deny them of their specific instincts. It's not educational. It diminishes public interest. It's teaching our children the wrong message. Other human beings are here for the use of our own entertainment. Beyond the performing Orcas show is it the animal legal Defense fund school to shut down SeaWorld? Absolutely not. Just like it's not the goal -- to shut down Ringling Brothers. We are talking about multibillion dollar entertainment companies is anybody can create a cutting edge forward thinking educational experience that really builds an educational mission of teaching people and children about life in the ocean and about Marine mammals, then there are ways to do that without abusing and exploiting the animals they claim they want to educate people about. There are print -- plenty of ways to entertain the public also without exploding animals. Our hope is nearly 2% an awesome experience to the public, present an educational experience to the public, but do it without the expense of animals to cruelty and deprivation. Sara, as you see it SeaWorld has said that it is examining all of his options in relation to the commissions decision. As far as you see it what legal options those of Park Avenue? They have two choices. They can see the commission and let the courts decide. I think that the commission is on very very strong and firm legal grounds. I don't think that they would win such a lawsuit. Courts give wide discretion to a body like the coastal commission. It did not exceed it -- its authority. There is -- there other option is to simply not accept the permit and leave things as they are. If they do that, they have a problem in the sense of tell me why you would do that if presumably your reason for putting this project forward was to improve the lives of the existing Orcas , then why would you not do this and not accept at least the condition and move forward with it.? Thank you. I wanted to say once again that SeaWorld declined our request to be part of this discussion. I have been speaking with Sara Wan and Trent three -- Carney Anne Nasser. I want to thank you both very much. Thank you.