Thinking of taking the kids to Monterey Bay Aquarium this year for a family vacation? If you’re considering doing this because you love sea life and want to share the wonders of it with your children, don’t give your money or support to the Monterey Bay Aquarium.
In the fall of 2007, the Monterey Bay Aquarium made no objections to allowing Monterey Bay, including the Monterey Bay Marine Sanctuary, to be aerially sprayed with a pesticide compound that is toxic to aquatic life and illegal to introduce into water.
Rather than taking the very strongest stand to protect the sea otters and other aquatic creatures, the Monterey Bay Aquarium maintained an eerie silence regarding the California Department of Agriculture’s illegal ‘emergency’ spraying of Monterey. The Monterey Bay Aquarium refused to let concerned local residents come to make presentations regarding the dangers of the spray to their board members. They turned a blind eye and a deaf ear, and as a result the following damage was done to marine life and wildlife on the Central Coast of California:
At least 650 sea birds washed up dead on the beaches
Song birds and hummingbirds died and disappeared
Cats, dogs and rabbits were sickened and died
Fish died
Bees died
It is impossible to know how many sea otters may have died in the Monterey Bay as a result of the spraying. What we do know is how many sea otters are hanging onto existence by the merest thread in the Monterey Bay.
The Last of California’s Sea Otters
Once, sea otter populations flourished in the hundreds of thousands of members, stretching in an arc from Asia to Baja. However, the bloody fur trade of the 1700s-1800s resulted in what was believed to be the total extinction of California’s sea otters. Then, in the 1920′s, a tiny population of them was rediscovered and they were eventually protected by the federal Endangered Species Act.
Yet pesticides like DDT and the toxins in city runoff infiltrating the Monterey Bay have kept populations at dangerous lows.
Today, only 2800 sea otters remain in California. According to marine biologists, a single event, such as an oil spill, could wipe them out entirely. The precious sea otters would be gone forever.
Like beavers on the land, sea otters create and maintain ecosystems in the sea. They are a keystone species for the health of kelp forests.
The Monterey Bay Aquarium trades on the idea that they care about the otters and other marine life of Monterey, but they did nothing to protect wildlife from the CDFA’s chemical assault despite the fact that it is precisely the kind of cataclysmic disaster capable of pushing the tiny population of sea otters over the brink into permanent extinction.
The Monterey Bay Aquarium Is Untruthful
The slogan of the aquarium, and its professed mission statement is:
“The mission of the non-profit Monterey Bay Aquarium is to inspire conservation of the oceans.”
Allowing, without protest, the dumping of toxic pesticides that have runoff and drifted into the sea is the polar opposite of conserving the ocean.
Following the 2007 aerial spraying, a sickly yellow-green sludge poured from the streets, through runoff tunnels, right into the bay, covering the Central Coast for miles with yellow foam, laden with the plastic microcapsules in which the pesticide was distributed and causing the deaths of marine birds and wildlife. Among the sea birds killed was the federally-protected Endangered Brown Pelican. The federally-protected Sea Otters inhaled, swam in and ate the pesticide in Monterey Bay and no one knows how many may have been sickened and killed.
Monterey Bay Aquarium certainly isn’t telling us.
Many of the animal exhibits in the aquarium take in their water directly from the bay. Did Monterey Bay Aquarium employees come into work the mornings following the spray to discover dead fish and marine mammals floating in the tanks? Were they given orders to dispose of the dead creatures before the public was let in?
Monterey Bay Aquarium isn’t telling us.
There’s so much money riding on it for them.
Behind the Scenes at the Monterey Bay Aquarium
In 2006, the Monterey Bay Aquarium profited from the nearly 1.9 million visitors who paid admission to the business at the price of $24.95 for adults and $15.95 for children. Their website received over 8 million visitors. This is huge business, all trading on the image the Monterey Bay Aquarium has successfully created in the public mind of caring for the health of marine life and habitat.
The time to prove themselves came in 2007 when it was announced that Monterey would be subjected to blanket pesticide application. Monterey Bay Aquarium failed in their self-proclaimed mission of conserving the ocean and hundreds, likely thousands and thousands, of wild creatures died.
The aquarium’s Executive Director, Julie Packard, writes interesting articles about her commitment to protecting the ocean from toxins, fighting global warming, conserving wildlife. What was she doing when the entire Central Coast was mobilized into an uproar over forcible aerial spraying of untested chemical compounds over people, animals, water and land? Why was Julie Packard silent when she should have been shouting loudest against the poisoning of Monterey Bay and its wildlife? What better fight could Julie Packard have spearheaded in 2007? Why did she fail? Why refuse to let local people come present to her staff about the harm of the spraying?
What happened at Monterey Bay Aquarium? Did A.G. Kawamura, a USDA bigwig, a government official show up in Julie Packard’s office last year, shut the door and blackmail her into creating a policy of silence regarding the exposure of sea otters, vital marine mammals, fish and sea birds to deadly, untested pesticides? Did they scare her so badly that she went along with them? Could money have changed hands? I have no idea. I’m only asking, asking, asking – what is going on?
Because the Monterey Bay Aquarium isn’t telling us.
Rather, they are continuing to take tickets and invite thousands of schoolchildren to visit the toxic Monterey Bay Aquarium which must be loaded to the ceiling with pesticide residues and deadly PM10 pollution as is the rest of the Central Coast now. They are continuing to trade on the unsupported claim that they are committed to protecting wildlife while allowing the government to spray Monterey, unhindered by a single protest. It could have been incredibly powerful for Julie Packard and her staff to invoke the Endangered Species Act in order to protect species like the sea otters and Brown Pelicans.
Any person who knowingly violates any provision of the Endangered Species Act may be liable for a civil penalty of not more than $25,000 for each offense, and a criminal penalty of not more than $50,000 and/or imprisonment for a period not to exceed 1 year.
CDFA ought to be facing this penalty right now, and the Monterey Bay Aquarium ought to be congratulating themselves for forcing the State and Feds to uphold their own laws! But, they have chosen silence.
What Can A Boycott of the Monterey Bay Aquarium Do?
The Monterey Bay Aquarium is a business that relies upon millions of dollars in annual ticket sales to remain in operation. If people stop buying the tickets, the aquarium will go out of business.
A boycott acts as a way to put pressure on businesses that have lost their conscience. It reminds them that receiving our money is contingent on winning our approval of their company. The Monterey Bay Aquarium has lost public approval by failing to protest the aerial spraying of Monterey.
Numerous citizen testimonies emerged following the spraying of residents who live in the same neighborhood as the aquarium. Citizens and their pets fell grievously ill and went outside to witness the rafts of dead and dying seabirds wash up on their beaches. It would be indefensible for the Monterey Bay Aquarium to claim that bay wildlife and the animals in their care were not affected by the aerial dumping of toxic pesticides.
As we see it, they now have a choice. If the Monterey Bay Aquarium was blackmailed, threatened with punishments, they need to become transparent about that. I am completely confident that their millions and millions of patrons would rush to their aid if they knew that the government had interfered with the stated conservationist mission of the aquarium. The time to come clean about this is now.
Just this month, the Monterey County Court ruled that CDFA broke the law and violated the California Environmental Quality Act by declaring a false emergency and spraying Monterey. CDFA is now being viewed by the public as lawbreakers.
A boycott sends the message to the aquarium that they should not lump themselves in with these lawbreakers.
The Court ordered that an Environmental Impact Report be conducted prior to the any further aerial spraying in Monterey.
If the Monterey Bay Aquarium staff came into work to discover dead fish and mammals floating in their display tanks, the time to come forward with that vital information is now. A boycott tells Julie Packard and every single employee at the aquarium that the truth about the injuries and death of wildlife is more important to the public than entertainment or money. The deaths of marine life and fouling of the bay and watershed need to form part of the basis of the EIR. Again, it is illegal to spray Checkmate (the pesticide CDFA used) in such a way that it gets in water. It got into the water. This is illegal and Monterey Bay Aquarium doubtless knows how much of it ended up in their tanks. They need to uphold their self-appointed mission and come clean about what happened after the spraying.
In a capitalist society, your dollar speaks loudest. A boycott tells Monterey Bay Aquarium that they need to uphold real protection of marine life if they want to stay in business.
It’s Not Enough To Abstain
For a boycott to have impact, you need to tell the offending business why you will not be giving them your money. If, in the past, you have sent donations to the Monterey Bay Aquarium, contact them to tell them you are withdrawing your financial support unless they come clean about the LBAM spraying of Monterey and its damage to wildlife. If you intended to buy tickets this year to take your family to visit the aquarium in Monterey,
phone the ticket office at (800) 756-3737 and tell them you have changed your mind about the trip because Julie Packard and her staff failed to protest the spraying of pesticides on endangered marine life.
It is unfortunate that private citizens so frequently have to act as the conscience for public businesses. Yet, this is a power that we hold and that power is in our refusing to support businesses that double-talk. The Monterey Bay Aquarium has the choice to live up to their mission of protecting marine life or to lose public trust and go out of business. Talk to them. Tell them that this is their choice. They cannot afford to remain silent.
16 users commented in " Boycott Monterey Bay Aquarium If They Won’t Boycott LBAM Spray "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackSomeone had to say it, Mim. Thank you for your righteous anger and your courage.
I can’t believe they are sticking their heads in the sand on this. I’ve carried my Seafood Watch card for a long time, believing my purchase decisions were making a difference on the rare occasions that I eat seafood. Money talks. Now I hope if we treat them like the fish in the “Avoid” column, they will wake up and address this issue honestly.
CDFA & Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Reached A Working Agreement on the LBAM Project, which allowed for “buffer zones” (see website link below)
http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/egov/Press_Releases/Press_Release.asp?PRnum=07-079
The working agreement was released by CDFA on October 5, 2007, which did not allow spraying into the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary waters.
According to Roy Upton in his bird die off report:
Thick yellow foamy runoff accumulated in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary along
West Cliff Beach, Santa Cruz, CA immediately following the aerial spray. This material was observed to runoff from the rivers and drainpipes into the Bay. Official reports reported this was due to red tide without explaining its occurrence on land, in yards, and on houses. Microcapsules were observed in this material. It
is highly likely this is a mixture of billions of tiny microcapsules that mixed with surfactant (aliquat 336) and emulsifiers into this thick froth. No official report of the analysis of this material was ever released by USDA, Department of Fish and Game, EPA, or CDFA.”
The bottom line is that no state and federal agencies want to know the negative consequences of the LBAM chemicals. The mentality of bureaucrats is that the less they know the better for the state to continue the spraying. This is why state and federal legislation needs to change since we can not trust anyone in our government to do what is legally, morally, and ethically the right thing to do. We must change our laws if we do not want to get sprayed!
Mary Anne -
I appreciate your support. Thank you. It hurts me terribly to think of people with so many animals in their charge being silent when animals are being maimed and killed.
BPM -
Thank you so much for your copy on that. The Marine Sanctuary is a different entity than the Aquarium, I believe, but yes, the Sanctuary did get that agreement…clearly a useless agreement as all the pesticide ran right off the streets into the bay.
2 minutes of thought should have made it obvious that, in addition to pesticide drift, all those tunnels that channel right into the bay would deliver the pesticide into the water. And then it rained and that’s exactly what happened. Just tragic.
Kevin -
I join you in your shock that the Monterey Bay Aquarium is shutting their eyes to what is happening. And it’s so short sighted. Whatever short-term gain they hope to make by not protesting pesticide dumping in the bay may be serving them right now in some way I can’t conceive of…but if it kills of their animals??? How do they plan to stay in business?
Thank you for your Avoid idea! That’s clever and astute.
Mim
The Monterey Bay Aquarium is located within the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS), a Federally-protected marine area (the equivalent of a saltwater national park) off California’s central coast.
MBNMS issued the permit to CDFA on 10/5/07 for the LBAM aerial spraying with the condition of buffer zones for airdrift. Here’s information on the permit:
http://montereybay.noaa.gov/sac/2007/101907/101207permits.pdf
Was the Monterey Bay Aquarium in the airdrift buffer zone?
TV News Coverage on LBAM aerial spray and the Monterey Bay Marine Sanctuary:
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/marine-sanctuary-questions-moth-spray/1088968924?icid=acvsv2
Thank you so much for those links, BPM
Please, correct me if I’m wrong…it is my understanding that the Monterey Bay Aquarium and the Monterey Bay Marine Sanctuary are 2 separate entities, though they are physically contiguous. Do you concur with this?
The buffer zone was apparently 100 meters, right? Unfortunately, aerial pesticide has been documented as drifting as much as fifty miles, according to a study I read that was conducted in Alaska. So, yes, the spray got into both the aquarium and the bay, regardless of the 100 meter agreement. That’s just a useless distance.
And, then, of course, it rained and, as you’ve noted above, the spray washed right off the land, through drainpipes, into the bay.
Has anyone got any information about what the Monterey Bay Marine Sanctuary did when the ooze ended up in the bay? Clearly, that newsreel indicated that MBMS stated they would consider CDFA to be in violation of federal law if pesticide got into the bay. Does anyone know if they are suing CDFA or have taken any actions at all?
Maybe some of the folks in Santa Cruz/Monterey can let us know.
Thank you for your incomparable link gathering skills, BPM. You are great!
Mim
Mim,
You have it right – they are both two different entities.
The Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI) is a not-for-profit oceanographic research center in Moss Landing, California affiliated with the Monterey Bay Aquarium (started by the Packard Foundation). Did they oppose the spray?
From my understanding many people were in denial about the LBAM aerial spray thinking it wouldn’t happen. For example, The Monterey Herald Newspaper took the position that people were over-reacting. Monterey did oppose the aerial spray but, to my knowledge, did not file a lawsuit against the spray, like Santa Cruz City/County did. HOPE finally did, which was settled just recently in favor of CDFA doing an EIR before any spraying. Is that your understanding?
Isabelle with StoptheSpray also agrees that Julia Packard had lunch with Kawamura and decided not to take a position on the spray (see website link below).
http://forum.stopthespray.org/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1159&p=1728&hilit=aquarium#p1728
Julia Packard has an interesting background found here:
http://currents.ucsc.edu/06-07/01-01/dinner.asp
and here:
http://www.sanfrancisco.com/monterey-bay-aquarium-b3213741
Julia Packard should have publicly opposed the spray, but didn’t. My assumption is that Kawamura sold her a bill of goods – just like he has been doing with everyone else. However, Julia Packard should have come out on record after the spray, especially with the known consequences.
Did anyone ever contact Ms. Packard to determine why she didn’t oppose the spray?
Let’s hear from the volunteers who work at the aquarium. What have you been told? Or, can someone join the group – to find if there’s been any communcation with staff or volunteers on their opinion on the spray. We need to get to the facts. Let, there not be silence. Let’s cause a stir of the water – so they are not so comfortable in their own shell! Can we believe they are this stupid to believe the spray is only a safe pheromone. But… then I’m told stupid is as stupid does … Thanks for listening hotchilipepper
I cannot believe that you folks would condemn an institution like the aquarium that has done so much good over a single issue like this! In its 24-year history, the aquarium has turned almost 50 million people on to the oceans and our need to conserve them. Let’s take a step back and acknowledge that for a moment. So often we allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good! Let’s not fall victim to that again here……!
Ed
Hello Ed,
Thank you for taking the time to share your feelings on this. We’re not saying that the Monterey Bay Aquarium hasn’t done some good work in the past.
What we’re saying is that Checkmate is the next DDT and the Monterey Bay Aquarium is intentionally playing dumb about this for reasons they will not disclose.
Perhaps they have changed their past policies which may have been geared toward conservation. Allowing toxic chemicals to be dumped, without protest, into Monterey Bay which includes both the Marine Sanctuary and the waters which feed some of the aquarium’s displays is a bizarre stance for the aquarium to take.
They are not acting conscientiously and a boycott forces them to re-examine how their decisions are affecting public perceptions of their business.
Checkmate aerial spraying is the biggest threat to health and life in California. Monterey Bay Aquarium cannot afford to be silent in this matter.
I do thank you for your response, Ed.
Mim
Regarding the Monterey Bay Aquarium….how come they are exempt from the ban to use trawlers to drag the bottom of the MB National Sanctuary to catch fish to feed to their captive fish?? They are using exemption because they are a ‘research organization’ and thus can go use damaging trawling gear to strip the bottom to feed their aquariums. This is not unlike the Japanese whaling fleet that use a ‘research exemption’ to continue whale hunting. Fisherman report they see lots ‘by-catch’ disposed of by these trawlers. Of course, the aquarium doesnt own these trawlers….they contract this out to fishing vessels out of Moss Landing. I dont understand why commercial fishing was banned cause they damage the bottom with trawling gear while the MB Aquarium is allowed to continue to do practice.
Dear Lorenzo,
Thank you so much for asking such an important question. Apparently, the Monterey Bay Aquarium is up to all kinds of bad stuff.
A friend of mine in Monterey explained that locals tried to put a stop the the Monterey Bay Aquarium not only using the Marine Sanctuary as their private refrigerator for feeding the animals in their displays, utterly robbing all of the tide pools in the area, but they are also SELLING what they take from the tide pools to other aquariums in the the country.
As vegans, we need to disclose that we come to this issue of the Monterey Bay Aquarium with pre-conceived bad feelings. We believe it is unethical to use living animals for the purpose of entertainment and profit. So, a business like the Monterey Bay Aquarium is operating a venture that we feel is immoral.
But, until I started learning more about them and their environmentally-unfriendly practices, I didn’t realize just how corporate they really are, and how uncaring they truly seem to be about the protection of animals and habitat.
So, they are trawling the sea, using the tide pools as their private refrigerator and they utterly failed to protect Monterey Bay from aerial spraying.
Not a good organization. They do not deserve public support or funding.
Thank you again for taking the time to comment.
Mim
Administrators at the Monterey Bay Aquarium say they work and vote with “consensus” when asked why they haven’t opposed the spray. Does their consensus include all of the govt. agencies? Is this another example of the collusion and interdependence of all of our non-profits, universities, and environmental groups – silence in the face of abuse. The public stands alone apparently against all the powers that exist at this time in our dismembered regulatory and oversite agencies.
This is not unlike the Japanese whaling fleet that use a ‘research exemption’ to continue whale hunting. Fisherman report they see lots ‘by-catch’ disposed of by these trawlers. Of course, the aquarium doesnt own these trawlers….they contract this out to fishing vessels out of Moss Landing.
Welcome Brett,
That is a good comparison. Unfortunately, I’m afraid that local attitudes toward the aquarium are changing from supportive to suspicious because of policies like these, and obviously, because of the Monterey Bay Aquarium’s lack of concern for the health of wildlife and neighbors in regards to the pesticide spraying. When I think of the enormous store of public good will this institute has enjoyed, I am reminded that good will can run out if you don’t carefully protect it by cherishing your patrons.
I appreciate you taking the time to comment here and hope to see you again.
Kind Regards,
Mim
Leave A Reply