AS the dolphin saga continues, some of us who remain neutral can probably offer a more balanced outlook. My immediate response to those against the project, can you provide the real reasons surrounding the project bearing in mind that the following scenarios exist.
- St Lucia has and continues to offer support to Japan in respect to the whaling industry.
- St. Lucians continue to eat our porpoises
- The dolphins for the proposed park were both born and raised in captivity
- It has been proven that dolphins existing in captivity if released into the wild will not survive based on their protected upbringing.
- Government presently provides an annual subvention of EC$750,000.00 from tax payer’s funds to support Pigeon Island. On the other hand, if EC$2 million annually can be earned from the investors of the Dolphin park and paid to the Trust, this would reduce the financial responsibility on an overburdened administration.
- There is a market for visitors who prefer dolphin parks verses whale watchers.
- Both markets co-exist in several countries, so why can’t the concept co-exist at home?
- A dolphin park is simply another attraction available to our visitors.
- Along with the facility, there are a number of subsidiary support systems which young St. Lucians can be trained for (specialists in the field of medical and pharmaceutical enhancement, training of our youth in caring for various species involved in the park as it will be more than Dolphins within the compound.)
- We live in a global village and we cannot allow ourselves to remain in isolation.
- The wishes of 200 persons at a National Trust should not take precedence over a population of 170,000. Emotions are one thing, reality is another.
- It should be recalled that twenty-five (25) years ago, the Trust argued vehemently against the use of Pigeon Island for the Jazz festival. Pigeon Island became a new landmark as a result. (CHANGE IS THE ORDER OF THE DAY).
- With these facts on hand, St. Lucians can now judge for themselves the pros and cons of a Dolphin park.
– C. Deterville