Heat Likely Killed Columbia Sea Lions
By Joseph Friedrichs, 5-14-08
The sea lions found dead in the Columbia River May 4 likely died from heat prostration while they were trapped in cages set up to keep the creatures from eating salmon.
The National Marine Fisheries Service announced Wednesday afternoon that more conclusive results may be available once studies of tissue samples taken from the dead animals are completed, likely within ten days. Original assumptions as to why the sea lions perished were that poachers shot the animals as they sat defenseless in cages.
Today’s announcement blemishes the fact foul play was involved with the death of the six sea lions.
[End of article]1. Sea lions haul out in the hot sun for many hours at a time, often in the
hot, summer, California sun (where their breeding grounds are located), without dying of heat stroke.
2. According to, ironically enough, NOAA (they have a weather page),
the temperature would probably not have been above about 50 degrees during the
time they were in those traps. The low temp on Sunday morning was 35,
and the high was only 73 and was not reached until more than 5 hours
after the sea lions were found dead.
3. The story changed several times in suspicious ways, and now
suddenly there is no culprit? How convenient. And how predictable.
4. They were in those traps for less than 24 hours. Most of that time
at night. They simply would not have died, especially not ALL SIX OF
THEM AT ONCE, in such a short period of time without some kind of
intervention.
There is also the fact that they initially said that the bodies had bullet holes in them. Even more than a day later, after the bodies had been examined, they were still sticking with this story. Two days later, they said that there were no bullets found, and that this indicated, according to multiple sources, that a "high powered rifle was likely used," since a bullet from such a weapon would have traveled all the way through the animals. (This would be consistent with our observations at the dam, the day of and the day after the killing, of workers going over the floors of the two traps, looking for bullets.) If they had already examined the bodies, as they said they had at that time, and determined that there were bullet holes but no bullets, then why are we to believe that they then discovered, several days after THAT, that there were now miraculously no bullet holes either? Would this not have been quite obvious during an exam thorough enough to conclude that bullets were not present? Yes. It would.