Updates On 22nd Dec 2012
ACRES 
Dec 22, 2012 
ACRES, NGOs 
0 comments
| Tweet |  |
Please help to share this: Open Letter to Resorts World
22 December 2012
Mr. Tan Hee Teck
CEO
Resorts World Sentosa (RWS)
Dear Mr. Tan,
INVITATION TO PUBLIC DEBATE ON WILD-CAUGHT DOLPHINS
I hope this email finds you well.
2. ACRES would like to invite RWS to a public debate about the controversy surrounding your purchase and confining of the wild-caught Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops aduncus). The debate is scheduled to take place on 19th January 2013 at 2pm. However, if RWS is unavailable on this date, please advise us of an alternative date.
3. RWS publicly stated that “Ultimately, Singaporeans and our visitors will make their own decisions as to the benefits of marine parks and the care provided to our dolphins”. ACRES hopes that the public will be able to make an informed decision and this debate will provide them with the facts and they will be able to hear both sides of the story.
4. For more than a year, ACRES’ requests for meetings with RWS have been turned down. We sincerely hope that RWS will accept our invitation this time and we look forward to a positive discussion on this issue.
5. We hope that RWS can provide some clarifications to the statements you have made and address the concerns that ACRES and members of the public have raised. Please note that we have read your website, blogs and FAQs and these concerns have not been addressed there.
a. Considering that anthropogenic noise is a known stressor for cetaceans, which have very sensitive hearing, can RWS clarify if having a firework display near where the dolphins are being housed comprises the welfare of the dolphins?
b. Can RWS clarify if the pools the dolphins are currently housed in have been cleaned recently? Please see the attached photo.
c. Can RWS clarify if these pools are large enough for the dolphins to express their normal behaviours?
d. Can RWS clarify if surrounding the dolphins with four walls compromises their welfare? A report by The Humane Society of the United States and the World Society for the Protection of Animals states that “Smooth concrete walls usually surround these sound-sensitive animals and inhibit or discourage the natural use of their acoustic abilities”.
e. RWS stated that “Current research shows that bottlenose dolphins thrive in zoological parks and live longer than their counterparts in the wild”. Can RWS clarify if the research quoted was on common bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) or the Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops aduncus), which is the species that RWS is confining?
f. Did RWS export the 25 dolphins from the Philippines while the legal case in the Philippines was still being heard with regard to whether their re-export should be prevented? We understand that the RWS witness took the stand in Court for this legal case on 19 November 2012. The judge adjourned the case on that day, and had yet to pass her judgment, but did RWS go ahead to export some of the dolphins on that day?
g. Will RWS be informing its visitors that one of the major threats this species of dolphin face in the wild is “Live-captures for oceanariums” and that “their preference as a captive display species makes them vulnerable to depletion from such catches”?
h. The Alliance of Marine Mammal Parks and Aquariums stated that it does not support collection of animals from Solomon Island waters, and that any collections from there to date would not adhere to their standards and guidelines requirements. Can RWS clarify how it is still stating that “the acquisition and care of our dolphins have met, will continue to meet and, wherever possible, surpass international guidelines”?
i. RWS previously stated that “no calves or lactating mothers were among our dolphins that were humanely and sustainably collected”. A published scientific study has provided compelling evidence that past trade in T. aduncus was indeed unsustainable and detrimental to the survival of these populations. Can RWS still state that the dolphins were “sustainably collected”?
In addition, dolphins are highly social animals living in a close knit family unit. If no calves or lactating mothers were collected, can RWS urgently clarify what was done to these individuals? Were they forcefully removed and separated from their families?
j. Can RWS guarantee that the public contact sessions with the dolphins will be safe for both the dolphins and members of the public? ACRES wishes to highlight that just last month, a child was bitten by a dolphin at SeaWorld Orlando. You can view the footage here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SXiakfblpFs
k. Considering the recent successful release in Turkey of two wild-caught dolphins who spent six to seven years in captivity (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt0fvrJ1cPI), does RWS still believe that it is not possible for dolphins to be rehabilitated and released back into the wild?
l. RWS states in its FAQs that “It is with regret that they (ACRES) continued to make inaccurate representation of information (e.g. we will not be having animal shows)”. Can RWS clarify what inaccurate information ACRES is supposed to have given.
Please note that ACRES has not stated that RWS will be having animal shows. In fact, it was RWS who published a job advertisement indicating that the Marine Mammal Specialist (Job ID 11912) responsibilities include “behavioral conditioning of the mammals for…show-type behaviors”.
6. Please let me know if you need any further information.
7. I look forward to your favourable reply. Thank you.
Yours sincerely,
Louis Ng (MSc)
Founder and Chief Executive
ACRES
www.acres.org.sg
91 Jalan Lekar
Singapore 698917
(O): +65 6892 9821
(F): +65 6892 9721
Source: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151199168511523&set=a.223077136522.136042.22159071522&type=1&relevant_count=1
| Tweet |
|
Facebook Comments