Several years ago a colleague veterinarian told me that she had never successfully treated a cetacea: once the clinical signs were observed the disease was generally terminal. I can personally state that I have at times felt the same way.

However, as a result of information exchanged through organizations like IAAAM, diagnostic methods have considerably improved the art and science of aquatic animal medicine over the past several years. For example, the research conducted by a variety of organizations and agencies has made it possible to establish normal blood values for many species; generally speaking, this information is freely available to all scientific institutions. In my opinion the "weak link" at the moment is the great lack of qualified pathologists to assist in the interpretation of histology. To the best of my knowledge, there are no laboratories which offer their services on a "business" basis. Histology is commonly conducted by the personal friends of people in our profession -- associates who are inclined to be interested in marine mammals.

While testing is usually done as a favor and at no cost to the practitioner, the "turn-around" time for histology reports can vary from six months to one year. Speaking for my own organization, I know we would be more than happy to pay for laboratory work if we could receive reliable information in two to three weeks' time. Free service, done on a basis of mutual interest and friendship, may be acceptable for general, long term research, but it is of little comfort or value to the practitioner in the field who is experiencing an epidemic in his animals and requires laboratory reports as a basis for treatment.

This situation is compounded by the confusion surrounding the United States "Marine Mammal Protection Act" -- which prohibits the importation of marine mammals, "in any form," without special certification. While this provision can be circumvented by mislabeling samples, such action is demeaning and forces the ethical practitioner to flaunt the letter -if not the intent-- of the law. More recently, authorities are permitting biological samples to be imported, but this aspect of the act hangs like Damocles' Sword over the research of the very animals the act is intended to protect.

The relationships between the veterinarian, oceanariums, marine life and the general public have always been in flux but never so much as in the last few years. Oceanariums now find it necessary to react to the public awareness which they, themselves, originally fostered. They are no longer merely a facility for recreation. Now, more than ever before, oceanariums are becoming a source of vital scientific information and a positive influence on youth and conservation organizations.

As the competition for the fish supplies of the sea increases, the likelihood of marine mammals being pushed to extinction is not beyond the realm of possibility. For example, there are approximately 5,000 Australian sea lions left in the world. The numbers of dugong and manatae are showing annual decreases.

I can appreciate that small organizations cannot afford to maintain detailed records or finance research programs. But as professional practitioners -- whether associated with large or small organizations -we have an obligation to advise and a responsibility to fulfill roles in scientific research, animal husbandry, company management and public opinion. These roles must be fulfilled simultaneously; our unemotional input is important to the public's and governments decision-making process.

I'll refer to the aspect of public opinion in a moment but I'd like first to comment on the value of scientific information exchange. Initially I'd like to state that the prestige of an individual or the size of the organization for which he works has little bearing on the value of information. Within reason, observations, evaluations or even theories from a handler working in a small organization should be sought, exchanged and evaluated with the same care as a thesis one of us might prepare. The important thing is the free exchange of ideas and information.

Early diagnosis is always difficult in cetacea. And in certain pinnipeds -- particularly the Stellers -- blood sampling, in itself, can be a bit of a challenge. At Ocean Park we routinely draw blood every 30 days on all cetacea to establish the normal blood values of Tursiops aduncus. This sampling also provides an "early warning system" of pending disease. There are several blood tests which I have been unable to correlate with disease but yet seem to indicate a pending clinical problem. One, in particular, is the test for alkaline phosphatase levels. Our laboratory records indicate values exceeding 1,000 units are not uncommon and are generally found in a healthy animal. Values below 300 are usually associated with disease.

I have not yet ascertained the importance of this observation, but I believe the observation and the cause could be significant. The mere fact it has been mentioned could be the initial step in the creation of a new diagnostic method. Access to this kind of information -- and the application of this organization as a forum -- has already provided beneficial returns: the NBT test, which provides non-specific monitoring examination, was first described by Greenwood at a meeting several years ago. This method has been used in our laboratory for the past two years. As an extension of the basic test, I also require our trainers to observe and record the type of feces and smell the breath of each cetacea as part of their daily routine. If there is any foul or unusual odor to the breath, a culture plate is made of the expired air. Of 300 samples taken we were able to isolate pure cultures of Staphlycoccus aureous and confirm three cases of Staph. Pneumonia before clinical signs were observed.

Our laboratory is also working in conjunction with Scripps Institute of Oceanography on research involving a gas flow meter placed over the blow hole of the dolphin. Since there is a rapid and large tidal volume in the forceful respiration of cetacea, its flow can be readily measured. If pneumonia or another airway-blocking disease exists, there is a resultant reduction in the tidal volume. We have also trained the sea lions to participate in a similar test by placing the machine over the nose of the animal. This early detection system is still in development and it will probably be quite some time before normal values are established. However, these examples show that the state of the art is constantly being developed. They also make the point that the exchange of information is important if not vital to our growth, and that these meetings -- and organizations such as IAAAM -- provide the conditions for such work to prosper.

Now, if you'll bear with me through a rather oblique lead-in, I'd like to address myself to the question of public opinion. The breeding of marine mammals in captivity is in its infancy. There are several publications out on the subject and the seminar held on dolphins in the United States at San Diego two years ago grouped together many of the observations made by a variety of facilities. Having read the difficulties of neonatal dolphinlogy and the low percentage rate of success, I was able to prepare my company in advance for the cost and difficulties involved in trying to set up a breeding colony for cetacea.

In S. E. Asia one of the most obvious areas of research is fish mariculture. Fish farming is a substantial part of the economy in certain countries -- particularly in the Philippines, Thailand and even in the New Territories of Hong Kong. Generally speaking, all aspects of fish farming benefit more from preventive medicine than from trying to contain a disease once it is started. This is due in no small part to the large number of fish involved, and the cost and difficulty of medication. For the same reason, we use preventive medicine on behalf of the mammals and fish under our care -- and preventive knowledge in our relationships with management. We must also begin to apply more preventive attention toward our role in forming public opinion.

There is probably no marine facility which does not require some aspect of governmental approval for the acquisition and keeping of marine mammals. Geographically isolated facilities such as Ocean Park in Hong Kong may deal with seven or eight different governments a year concerning the acquisition and transport of animals. As a consequence, governmental recognition of one's facility and expertise is frequently vital. The nature of our business often requires us to receive animals after normal working hours. Such late shipments can create difficulties with governmental officials unless our problems are understood. Our lack of real involvement in the formation of the Marine Mammal Protection Act has created problems which, I am certain, none of us could have foreseen. Yet we, of all people, should have been spearheading the legislation. For the sake of our professional reputations and -- let's be honest -for our livelihoods, we should have better guided this legislation so it reflected both our concern and our self interests.

The point I am trying to make is that we must utilize every opportunity to develop a good rapport with the public and with pertinent governmental departments before a problem presents itself. The IAAAM has been instrumental in establishing guidelines which, although not always applicable to every facility, certainly have provided a framework and a starting point for effective marine mammal management. The art and science of collecting, keeping, and in many cases breeding aquatic animals is certainly a specialized occupation.

We cannot afford to ignore the public and political climate in which we work. Time must be spent in preventive public relations. In the case of aquariums in S. E. Asia, there are many unusual husbandry requirements which are not found in Europe and the United States. For example, Ocean Park has had to assume the role of a research center for marine mammal diseases in S. E. Asia in order to maintain its own marine mammal inventory. This is particularly true because of the contamination of our water system by Pseudomonas pseudomallei. This bacteria can be freely cultured during the typhoon season and is literally everywhere. Our laboratory has grown the bacteria-from sea water, the roof tops of our buildings, school playgrounds and along surfaced roads. In addition, we have isolated the bacteria from the intestines of fish caught off Australia, Hong Kong and Japan. The presence of this bacteria has required our organization to develop a research vaccine program against Pseudomonas pseudomallei and, at the same time, explain what we are doing to the public.

Ocean Park is fortunate. We have marketing staffs who keeps themselves abreast of my department's problems, work and objectives. With an average of 6,000 visitors a day -- every day of the year -- we have found it impractical and often detrimental to try and keep troubles to our self. From our Board on down, all aspects of our operations are attuned to preventive medicine. In the field of public relations we have created a reputation for being overtly candid. And, in the long run, this has worked remarkably well: the public is sympathetic to any troubles (the media handle our problems in their true context rather than exaggerating); everyone takes delight in our successes; government respects our integrity and provides utmost cooperation.

Each locality has its own degree of public awareness towards aquatic animal medicine. The public, in general, can be quite emotional -particularly when dealing with cetacea and pinnipeds. Public awareness can be nonexistent one day and a volatile issue the next. Therefore, it is good common sense to develop a preventive medicine approach in regard to relations with the general public. Every event, no matter how big or small, should be analyzed for its effect on public opinion and, whenever practical, should be exploited to create public confidence in the oceanarium and, in particular, confidence in the veterinarian and his staff.

It is my opinion that where there is liaison between government officials and the aquarium or oceanarium, plus a balanced exposure in the news media, the chance for adverse publicity can be greatly reduced or possibly even eliminated. Certainly, as professionals, our advice is more likely to be sought. We will be better able to influence our own destinies if we have established a reputation for candidness and availability.

Information can work for or against our best interests. On a scientific level, the free exchange of information can make our jobs easier and our treatment success rate higher. We have the ability to develop the state of the art beyond our wildest dreams. Information can -- and must -- be used as a tool of management to influence public opinion and governmental legislation. Unless we want the "tail to continue to wag the dog," we had best sit up and take note. Abused or ignored, information will hurt us when and where we least expect it. And if we don't take an interest in all fields of animal medicine -- even those beyond our immediate sphere -- we leave ourselves open to speculation or, worse, to exploitation by unqualified "experts."

All of us have a deep respect for our profession and, as a consequence, we all work to the best of our abilities. But it is not enough to do good; we must be seen to be working in tandem toward the good of all -- if we wish to realize our potentials as professionals both individually and as a group.