Whitby whalebones: what YOU said on plans to replace decaying clifftop landmark
The topic of replacing Whitby’s iconic whalebone arch is currently the subject of much debate.
Council chiefs are investigating whether to replace the clifftop landmark with bones from a live whale caught by native Inuits in Alaska, or with those from a dead whale.
They are also considering trying to source replica bones.
However local wildlife conservationists have condemned officials for considering the use of real bones from either a dead or live whale, saying it normalises that 'wildlife body parts are appropriate for public display.'
However Alexandra Smith, manager of Whitby Wildlife Sanctuary, has said she would condemn any move to replace the bones with another set from either a live or dead whale.
Mayor of Whitby, Coun Sandra Turner, added: "We don’t condone the killing of any whales to replace the whale bones that we’ve got.
“If there is a set of whalebones that are just in store somewhere that can be put in place, then yes, that would be excellent.”
But what are the views of the Whitby public?
We asked on our Facebook page: “Would you support the use of real whalebone to replace the iconic Whitby landmark?”
Michael Smith: “Yes if ethically sourced. Or (as others suggest) reinforce / resin coat existing ones if possible.
"Or if artificial then bronze or stainless would look good. But please not plastic or fibreglass.”
David Elliott added: “Absolutely 'yes' as long as the whale was not slaughtered for the purpose” whule Cheryl Dillon added: “Yes. It's not as if you’re going to kill a whale for the bones is it.
"Obviously it would be from natural causes.”
Karen Simmonds said: “A bronze replica would be more fitting” while June Pearce stated: “The Whitby whalebones are renowned.
"Everyone who visited would remember them, they are such a feature, so why settle for anything else?”
Lisa Bell supported the move too, stating: “Yes, I would, wouldn't be the same otherwise.”
Lucca Minopoli wasn’t convinced, suggesting that a “high quality moment” would be a more dignified way to honour the past.
“Whitby’s history doesn't need grisly trophies to prove its worth and status.
"Continuing to display real bones is an archaic way to celebrate its heritage.
"It's a ghoulish reminder of a hunt that nearly wiped a species off the map.”
Sarah Louise Barry argued that it would be far more fitting to replace with materials without having to kill another animal and to not do so “would highlight how we still live in a barbaric age akin to the mid 1800s.”
She added: “The bones were originally from a bowhead whale.
"They are now endangered and are protected under CITES regulations.
"There are thought to be only between 50 and 250 known mature individuals left in the world.
"Yet most people commenting think it's ok to replace them?”