One of the most tired cliches in the environmental movement is the line that some vicious animal, sharks and snakes are commonly cited, is really pretty harmless and that their only natural enemy is..... dramatic pause.... man. Please. The average American is not to blame for Japanese culling of tens of thousands of sharks fins, or the Chinese penchant for smuggling rhino horns to make tea to cure the common cold. Americans are generally conscious of the idea that wildlife cannot just be slaughtered in mass. We did that with buffalo and carrier pigeons and learned our lesson. But the greens continue to try and guilt trip us into donating to environmental nonprofits under the theory that the cobras and great whites of the world are really kind hearted creatures that would never hurt us.
Absolute nonsense. Dangerous wildlife is composed of vicious creatures which cannot be treated like stuffed animals. Every so often someone takes a manta ray spine through the chest and proves this theory correct.
Or they get attacked by a killer whale.
This week the Occupational Safety and Health Administration is holding a hearing. One of many, actually. But one of particular interest has to do with Sea World. The purpose is to determine potential liability for violations of federal regulations regarding marine mammal usage.
Sea World attorney's are before an administrative law judge arguing federal rules were not violated in 2010 when Tillikum the whale attacked and killed its trainer. Sea World faces a $75,000 fine for its alleged failure to adhere to these federal regulations.
It is a shame that this young trainer was killed, but there are some things that simply cannot be regulated. Accidents happen- particularly around dangerous animals.
This is precisely why special care needs to be taken in such circumstances and the best way to encourage such prudence and minimize such accidents is to give incentives to organizations to act cautiously. But federal regulations are a poor way of promoting such safety.
The best measure to encourage caution is the marketplace. Sea World should be sued civilly for failing to adhere to a standard of care expected of such a business. Family members or other concerned parties with standing can pursue a cause of action against Sea World in court and recover damages, including possible punitive damages. Such an action which would incentivize Sea World and similar business to improve safety practices, if indeed their existing practices are insufficient.
There is no need to have a federal regulatory body pre-emptively go to Sea World or other organizations and order them to have their whales fed a certain way or disciplined in a particular manner.
While in the immediate such regulations might ostensibly improve safety, ultimately they would lead to inefficiencies in the marketplace. Such artificial interference increases prices and actually decreases safety.
A cynic would suggest that absent federal rules, Sea World might simply ignore needed safety precautions and instead deal with lawsuits as they come, preferring to pay damages rather than institute the type of safety measures needed to assure killer whales do not attack trainers. Realistically though, this approach would be the least profitable Sea World could take.
What employer wants to expose staff to unnecessary risk? Even leaving aside the potential civil liability, the loss of employees to injuries would severely drive up the cost of labor.
Sea World's cheapest course of action in the absence of federal rules is to ensure a safe working environment for its staff which balances profit with decent working conditions. This is the marketplace approach, a course which would aim to minimize the chance of a serious accident.
This goal is, not coincidentally, the federal regualtors' approach as well. Most federal action is well intentioned. It is the method that is inefficient- and a side effect of those inefficiencies actually harms safety.
Under the present system, where OSHA must examine and regulate a variety of Sea World's policies, an unnecessary level of oversight increases the cost of business and skews the efficiencies of the free market. With less resources to commit to safety, and solely the goal to placate federal investigators, Sea World caters its safety plan to what bureaucrats in Washington demand, not what actually keeps its staff safe.
At the root of the problem is that sensible regulation requires a local approach. Local or perhaps state governments could best regulate such industries, using national organizations and studies to examine new ideas about regulation.
We do not have a federal system because it is quaint. We have one because it works. The federal government should limit itself to acting in the few, express areas where there is a Constitutional mandate to govern.
Killer whale regulation is clearly not on that list.
Sensible libertarian views on nearly everything- except foreign affairs.