Good news coming out of New South Wales (NSW), with the passing of new legislation that effectively bans the breeding and importation of captive dolphins in that state.
This change does not affect Sea World in Australia, which is located on the Gold Coast in Queensland (QLD). It does, however, cover the only other facility in Australia (and New Zealand) that continues to keep dolphins captive for human entertainment - a much smaller facility in Coffs Harbour, called Dolphin Marine Conservation Park (DMCP).
Previously known as Dolphin Marine Magic and Pet Porpoise Pool, this facility currently holds 3 dolphins.
Although this legislation is of course welcome news, the media surrounding this announcement discusses moving DMCP’s remaining dolphins to a 'sea pen sanctuary.' Although referred to as a 'sanctuary,’ it’s really far too early to label the sea pen plans as a sanctuary of any kind, especially if the definition of the word sanctuary holds any value.
To date there has been little transparency surrounding the plans and feasibility study, particularly regarding if the dolphins will still be required to perform or interact with the public, or if they will be retired and maintain as close to a natural existence as possible.
Of course a sea pen and larger, more natural space should provide some improvement, given the dolphins currently exist in concrete, swimming-pool-sized tanks.
Disturbingly, during the Government Inquiry to which Advocating Wild and a number of prominent NGOs and scientists made submissions, it was revealed that should the sea pen plans fail or additional dolphins at DMCP should die, the remaining animals would likely be transferred to Sea World in QLD, where a breeding ban doesn’t exist.*
While we are happy to see this legislative change and congratulate all those involved in its implementation, we continue to have questions, and remain focused on what will happen next for Zippy, Bella and Jet and the other marine mammals at Sea World Gold Coast - now the last dolphin breeding facility in Australia.
~
Image Credit: Dolphin Marine Conservation Park
*Inquiry transcript section:
The Hon. EMMA HURST: What sort of plans to you have in place when you get down to one dolphin? Even if there was a sea pen and obviously that sea pen would be a rescue and rehab centre, what happens when two more dolphins die and you cannot have one dolphin, what plans do you have in place?
Mr GOODALL: To be honest, we have not thought that far. We have lost Calamity and Bucky, because they were older and dolphins do not live as long as us. We have now got down to three. We have invited Isabella to come back to check them and let us know that that number is sufficient. But if we had, say, Zippy die, we would be down to two, and what makes a pod? But I will let Dr March have a say.
Dr MARCH: In terms of that, dolphins are obviously a social species and the social dynamics can play a big factor in maintaining their physical and their psychological health. One of the key things that we do here is just continually assess how the dolphins are interacting with one another. That is one of the things that Dr Clegg will come back and assess as well, how those dynamics have changed now that we are down to three dolphins. Once that assessment comes back, that the remaining dolphins are in a poor state of welfare based on social dynamics, then we will have to remedy that. That will have to be moving the dolphins to a different facility.
The Hon. EMMA HURST: And that would be Queensland, Sea World?
Dr MARCH: That would be Sea World, yes.
The Hon. EMMA HURST: Have you spoken to Sea World about taking the dolphins if that were to happen?
Mr GOODALL: I obviously have spoken to Dr March, in case anything happened would they be prepared, and yes, they are happy to take them.
To see all submissions and reports relating to this Inquiry click here: https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/committees/inquiries/Pages/inquiry-details.aspx?pk=2555#tab-reportsandgovernmentresponses
~
The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the authors. Disclaimer: Advocating Wild are a small group of independents who receive no funding and do not collect donations. Our blogs are opinion pieces unless otherwise stated and the views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text belong solely to the author(s), and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of mentioned organisations. All information we provide is accurate and true to the best of our knowledge, however there may be omissions, errors or mistakes. Our blogs are for informational and awareness raising purposes only and we are not professional marine mammal experts. Advocating Wild reserves the right to change the focus or content of our blogs at any time. All images contained in this blog where stated have been used or created with permission.This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorised by the copyright owner. Credit is given to the author of quotes, photos and other related materials. We source these materials from various public internet sites, in an effort to advance understanding of animal rights issues. We believe the use of materials on this site constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material and is distributed on this site without profit. If you wish to use any copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain expressed permission from the copyright owner. If you are the owner of any copyrighted material and believe the use of any such material does not constitute “fair use”, please contact us, so we can make proper corrections, and ultimately, take it off the post if requested and or if proven necessary.The owner of this page, its administrators, or representatives will not be held personally responsible, nor liable for any damages, actual or consequential, for any posts by third parties which may violate any law. All quotes obtained directly or through our sources and provided for our use.