CAMPAIGNS

DOLPHINS

Suffering, not Smiling
The Truth About Captive Dolphins

Evidence that the dolphins were wild caught
The six Indo-Pacific humpbacked dolphins arrived at Dolphin Lagoon (operated by Underwater World Singapore) in July 1999. Underwater World Singapore (UWS) had acquired them from Oasis Sea World (OSW), a marine park in Thailand.

As this species of dolphin has been severely threatened by human activities, they are listed on Appendix 1 of the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Appendix 1 lists highly endangered species which are threatened with extinction.

When individual animals of a species listed on Appendix 1 of CITES are moved between countries, CITES import and export permits are required, and these must state the origin of the animal. On the CITES import and export permits issued by both Singapore and Thailand, the six dolphins were listed as captive bred. However, Acres found out that four of the dolphins were in fact caught from the wild.

Following the allegation by Acres that some of the dolphins had been caught from the wild, UWS issued a public statement in September 2003, maintaining that all of their dolphins currently at UWS were bred in captivity. Appalled by their denial, Acres launched an investigation, which took us as far as Thailand, to collect further evidence.

Our investigation revealed that the marine park from which UWS had acquired the dolphins, Oasis Sea World, obtained their first dolphins in 1988, and it was the only marine park in the world before UWS to hold a group of Indo-Pacific humpbacked dolphins. At least three of the dolphins UWS acquired from them were born before 1988, which means they could not have been born in captivity. Jumbo, the resident male dolphin at Dolphin Lagoon for example, is over thirty years old. He was born in 1973, long before Oasis Sea World was opened!

With this evidence, Acres lodged a complaint to both the Singapore and Thai regulatory authorities - the Agri-food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) of Singapore and the Forestry Police of Thailand- stating that the import and export permits submitted to CITES contained inaccurate information.

In December 2003, Acres, along with the Forestry Police of Thailand, raided Oasis Sea World to collect more evidence. Mr. Vichai, President of OSW admitted during the raid that “some of the dolphins were caught in Thai waters but the Thai and Singapore authorities cooperated to do this legally”.

In January 2004, AVA confirmed that four of the dolphins were indeed wild caught. AVA blamed the mistake (on the permits) on a clerical error and clarified that UWS had informed them before the application were processed that some of the dolphins were wild caught. But UWS had left the section on ‘source of animal’ blank on the application form and the AVA officer processing the permits mistakenly stated that all dolphins were captive bred. Thailand had also made the mistake of stating that all dolphins were captive bred on the export permits.

This meant that UWS knew that some of the dolphins were caught from the wild but had still misinformed the public, stating that all the dolphins currently at UWS were captive bred.

UWS has since removed information stating that the dolphins were captive bred from their website. They have issued no comments with regard to misinforming the public.


Help us campaign against the captive dolphin industry.


top

......................................................................................................................