Solomon NGO Newspaper Ad

[A] What is so important about dolphins?

1. Dolphin is an intelligent mammal and has senses. It has feelings and can suffer pain, trauma and stress. Humankind, being blessed with the authority called "dominion over the earth", must, therefore show respect and love for such creature. ECANSI has inspected the dolphins at Gavutu on 10 August 2003 and is able to say in brief that the dolphins were not in good health and condition as was obvious from body injuries and symptoms of stress and respiratory problems. The dolphins were fed with inadequate refrigerated fish, and were kept in shallow enclosed sea, which was contaminated with debris due to slow movement of current. On a subsequent inspection in the following weekend ECANSI discovered that the numbers of dolphin had reduced from 41 to 35. It was suspected that the missing dolphins could have died through illness or released or killed. The Honiara sea pen, behind Prime Minister's office is not any safer either. A research conducted by the Environmental Health Division of HCC in 1999 showed that the sea in front of Honiara City was contaminated with microbiological bacteria, namely, E. Coli and G. Coliforms. It is expected that the bacterial level has worsened with the recent rise in population.
   
2. Dolphins have their own role in the marine ecology. In many diverse ways, we depend very much on our marine resources. As such the marine ecology must be preserved and conserved to sustain our livelihood. Dolphin must, therefore, be seen in that broad environmental perspective. It is true that our economy is now dependent very much on log exports. With the alarming rate of logging, the virgin forest will soon disappear. Unless, serious reforestation projects are carried out, this country will lose its main source of foreign reserves and revenue. When that occurs, the next available resource at our disposal is the sea resources. Hence, it is only logical that we now take serious action to harvest our sea resources sustainably with respect and care for our resources and their habitats.
   
3. Proponents of dolphin exportation (like Robert Satu) have attempted to equate treatment of animals in other countries with what they are doing with the dolphins in Solomon Islands. Mr. Satu will do better to know that such is the reckless or negligent behaviour of mankind which must change now. Mankind, since creation, has been negligent and reckless about his environment until certain events taught him lessons to reassess his activities and consumption behaviour. Examples of such events were epidemic diseases, hunger, poverty and natural disasters. Not all of us have changed our attitudes or acknowledged that those events were caused by our own makings. Environmental groups are merely reminding us of our obligations to be careful about the manner we exploit our resources so as to keep ourselves free and safe from epidemic diseases, hunger, poverty and natural disasters. If another country was ill-treating its animals, that should not be a valid excuse for any Solomon Islander to do the same to our dolphins. We should be responsible and accountable for our own resources. Two wrongs do not make it right. All too often our people, including our leaders, have made it an excuse that if someone else had done something before, it was fine for them to do likewise now.
   
4. It is not correct for Mr. Satu or his author to say that NGOs and Green Peace are criticizing one thing and not other environmental issues. There are many and diverse environmental issues which requires immediate attention. The organizational capacity of NGOs, however, is not sufficient for them to address all issues at one time. Hence, if an environmental group like ECANSI is dealing with the plight of dolphin now, it does not mean that it is disregarding the heavily contaminated sea outside Fishing Village nor does it condone air pollution in that part of town. ECANSI will soon be undertaking projects which aim at ensuring that the Forest Laws, Regulations and Logging Practice Code of this country are observed and carried out; and in a sustainable manner. Currently ECANSI is undertaking Coral Gardening as a project to rehabilitate our corals. All good citizens should play their part to protect, conserve and sustain the environment.

[B] What about traditional dolphin hunting ?

1. ECANSI does not condone nor support traditional dolphin hunting. Such activity is equally devastating to the environment, especially if unregulated by law as is the situation now. The Lau people who are known for hunting dolphins will confirm that the last time they caught a specie known in Lau as Robo Au ( i.e Peponocephala electra or Lagenodelphis hosei) was in 1978 by the Sulufou village in Northeast Malaita and Walande Village in South Malaita. Indeed, number of dolphins caught in one expedition has reduced drastically over the years.
   
2. ECANSI observes that traditional dolphin hunting has rooted itself deeply in customary marriages and trading in some Malaita communities and so makes dolphin issue inseparable from other worthy customs. As such, ECANSI believes that the issue of traditional dolphin hunting must be resolved in a manner that respects and preserves worthy aspects of culture.
   
3. ECANSI will undertake a serious research into traditional dolphin hunting and is optimistic that traditional dolphin hunting can be resolved. This time-immemorial tradition of dolphin hunting is no longer preserved in the heathen rituals. In Malaita these rituals are now performed in the Christian prayers of the Anglican Church priests. Hence, the Anglican Church will have a greater role in resolving this issue.
   
4. Since traditional hunting has a peculiar place in those Malaita communities, it is meaningless and irrational to justify commercial hunting on the ground of existing traditional practices or even to make any comparisons at all.

[C] Should commercial dolphin hunting be allowed in Solomon Islands?

1. Whilst the issue of traditional dolphin hunting is yet to be resolved it is environmentally unwise and unsound to allow any commercial hunting at all. The devastating impact of traditional hunting cannot be set as a basis for allowing commercial hunting.
   
2. It has been admitted by the Department of Fisheries that there is no scientific database on marine mammals. Since no scientific database is available to measure the sufficiency of the dolphin stock and specie, it is illogical to allow any commercial hunting.
   
3. It has also been admitted by Department of Fisheries that there has not been any environment impact assessment study on the potential impact of dolphin hunting on the fisheries resources of this country. Hence, it matters not whether the Department of Fisheries set a quota as low as 100. If removal of 100 dolphins, in addition to the number killed by traditional hunters, would affect the fisheries resources and the ecology, then it would be total recklessness to allow commercial hunting. Since, there is no environment assessment been carried out, and it is difficult at this stage to make any sound judgment, it would have been prudent upon Department of Fisheries to take precautionary action by not allowing commercial hunting at all. The Department of Environment is expected to insist on environment impact assessment.
   
4. Since Department of Fisheries had issued one licence, it is very likely that other investors would join the queue. That is a real risk and if the Department of Fisheries declines new applications, the Department will be seen as allowing Marine Exports Ltd or SIMMEC monopoly over dolphins. The sensible thing is for the Department of Fisheries to cancel the Licence and undertake a thorough scientific study either on its own or by engaging an organisation to undertake such study.

[D] What about the dolphins in amusement or recreational parks?

1. Dolphins need proper environment and habitat that is conducive for their survival. Hence, to keep dolphins in amusement or recreational parks amounts to inhumane treatment and total ignorance of the animals. Dolphins require special care and attention and they deserve proper environment to live in. To keep them in amusement and recreational parks is not far removed from slavery.
   
2. ECANSI believes that instead of keeping the dolphins in amusement or recreational parks for tourists to see, smart tourist operators can take tourists to the dolphins' natural habitats for viewing.
   
3. Many countries through out the world have prohibited breeding, keeping and training of dolphins in amusement and recreational parks. Solomon Islands is yet to reach that stage. This omission on the part of our government should not be seen as an excuse for Solomon Islands to capitalise on.
   
4. Solomon Islands does not have the necessary equipment and scientific requirements for breeding, keeping and training of dolphins in amusement parks. Keeping of dolphins in pens such as the Honiara and Gavutu pens are even far below the standards required. Until such standards are met, any keeping, breeding or training of dolphin in amusement or recreational parks should be discouraged at all levels in our country.
   
5. In Australia, following a report by the Senate Select Committee on Animal Welfare in the Australian Federal Parliament in 1985, all dolphinariums and the keeping of dolphins in captivity were banned in every state. The only places that were allowed to remain open were Seaworld Australia because they rescued wild dolphins and whales; and the Pet Porpoise because they rescued dolphins in the state of New South Wales.

[E] What is the law relating to keeping, training or export of dolphins?

1. Solomon Islands has not ratified CITIES (Convention on International Trade In Endangered Specie). ECANSI hopes that the Environment and the Wildlife Act will come into force soon. The two companies carrying on dolphin activities are Marine Exports Ltd and SI Marine Mammals Education Center (SIMMEC). They are 100% foreign-owned companies; Company records do not show Mr. Satu as a business partner as claimed by him.
   
2. The Fish Processing Establishment Licence issued to Marine Exports Ltd was to commence on 1st January 2003. It was issued without the Environment Impact Assessment report enquired by law. The Director of Fisheries has explained that he waved that requirement under his statutory discretion. ECANSI says that the Director had exercised his discretion erroneously and contrary to other mandatory provisions in the Fisheries Act. There are no Regulations dealing specifically with mammals; such Regulation was still in the process but yet the Fisheries Department had seen it fit to issue the Licence ahead of the promulgation of the Regulation.
   
3. There is no evidence of the Export Permit and the Department of Fisheries has refused to disclose this permit.
   
4. Although the FIB granted Certificate of Approval to the SIMMEC for eco-tourism, the latter has not applied for a Licence under the SI Visitors Bureau Act 1996. The Certificate of Approval granted by FIB must be reviewed for cancellation. The FIB approval requires that all machines and equipment used should at least comply with Australian Standards. If the Licence given by Department of Fisheries was in relation to Gavutu and Honiara pens, then there is definitely no eco-tourism establishment site otherwise there will be a clash between two licences.
   
5. The Honiara City Council has not issued any business Licence in respect of the keeping of dolphin at the Honiara pen. The keeping of dolphin in that area is a nuisance in terms of the Environment Health Act because the dolphins could suffer illness from the contaminated sea. Infected dolphins could then develop virus or bacteria harmful to the public in Honiara.
   
6. The local fishermen who supply Marine Exports Ltd and SIMMEC with dolphins may not have the licence to hunt dolphin commercially in Guadalcanal Provincial Waters or Honiara City Council sea.

ECANSI, therefore, calls for the immediate release of dolphins into the Ocean where they belong to and where their families are waiting for them to return home.