The report commissioned by the French Ministry of Ecology is out: the future of Marineland's orcas and dolphins at stake

The authors of the IGEDD (General Inspectorate for the Environment and Sustainable Development) report open the door to the idea of marine sanctuaries, as required by the spirit of the 2021 law, and point out that of the proposals made, only the project supported by One Voice is a feasible solution. But it also argues that if the schedule required it – and this seems to be a requirement of Marineland, whose bosses are seeking to transform the park – Loro Parque would be a place ready to welcome orcas immediately. 

Naturally, One Voice objects to the fact that such an option is being considered. It would consign Wikie and Keijo to an even bleaker future of captivity and endless training, in even smaller basins than those way too tiny in light of their needs that we denounce on the Côte d’Azur.

In the case of dolphins, the report recommends that individuals be divided between a sanctuary and several dolphinariums… This illustrates Marineland’s lack of consideration for the animals who have been their heyday, and allows us to perceive, for those who have not yet done so, their essential “values”, which are far removed from our own.

“Recommendation 4: propose that Marineland share the dolphins between the Jonian dolphin conservation sanctuary in Taranto, Loro Parque and other dolphinariums, and ensure the facilitation of exchanges between teams for the realization of transfers.”

Contract, reproduction….. or the admission that everything we said was true

The report by the “mission to explore the various options for the future of the cetaceans at Antibes Marineland” confirms everything One Voice has been saying for years: the orcas held by Marineland are indeed destined for a Japanese dolphinarium.

“Of the two establishments holding cetaceans in France, Antibes Marineland, which at the time of writing this report owns two orcas and 12 bottlenose dolphins, does not wish to enter into this derogatory framework and therefore plans to part with its animals. It has entered into a contract […] with a Japanese aquatic park willing to take them in, which has aroused strong opposition from animal protection associations, who consider this transfer to be contrary to the spirit of the law, as it would lead to a deterioration in the animals’ well-being”. (Page 5)

“Marineland has established contacts and signed a contract in 2023 with the Kobe Suma Sea World park in Kobe, Japan, which has built facilities to accommodate orcas.” (Page 8)

And in Kobe, as in Tenerife’s Loro Parque, where the problems encountered by the animals are legion, as we denounced, Wikie would be subjected to reproduction by the captivity industry. Worse still, the family unit formed with Keijo could be reduced to nothing:

“The KSSW [Kobe Suma Sea World, editor’s note] has a policy of captive breeding and is therefore very interested in acquiring Wikie, a female with proven reproductive qualities. The maintenance of the family unit made up of Wikie and her son Keijo, an essential element in their well-being, is therefore not guaranteed. Indeed, participation in a breeding program with Kamogawa Park will involve exchanges of animals and probably the separation of the family unit”. And: “The fact remains that transport by cargo plane over a long distance (more than 12h flight) is undeniably stressful and involves a risk for the animals”. (Page 24)

“Since 2012, however, [Loro Parque] has experienced several animal deaths due to intestinal problems, heart problems or unexplained causes”, and further: ‘There are plans to breed Wikie.’. (Page 26)

As far as we’re concerned, none of these places are suitable!

The only viable project for orcas is indeed the one supported and promoted by the association since 2019, and which the report presents as the only marine sanctuary meeting the AMI criteria:

“On the basis of the responses received to this AMI by comparing them with the reception conditions of the two aquatic centers that have given their agreement to welcome orcas and dolphins, and after consulting a group of experts on captive and wild cetaceans, the mission was able to make the following recommendations: as far as orcas are concerned, it considers that only the Nova Scotia sanctuary project, led by the Whale Sanctuary Project, meets the AMI criteria in terms of technical quality, feasibility in terms of deadlines and financial sustainability, even if the project is of an experimental nature which involves an inherent element of risk”. (Page 5)

The responsibility for the predicted tragedy lies neither with the associations nor the activists

The mission’s experts recommend dialogue between the associations and the park. That’s all we’re asking for, and it’s not new!

“Recommendation 3: propose that Marineland initiate team collaboration with the WSP (Whale Sanctuary Project, a sanctuary supported by One Voice, editor’s note) to examine the feasibility of an effective transfer to the sanctuary in the coming months, and at the same time start discussions with Loro Parque on the future of the animals.” (Pages 6 and 34)

For years, we have been urging French dolphinariums and the authorities to plan for the creation of marine sanctuaries. We have also repeatedly called on the park to cooperate with us to this end, without success. It’s a lie to suggest that our legal actions against the park have made it impossible for us to discuss the matter. Rather, it was the park’s repeated rejection of our outstretched hand, and its determination to sell the orcas to another dolphinarium, that left us no choice but to fight it.

“The pressure exerted by activists in the field, combined with the presence of the media and the multiplication of legal actions, seems to have contributed not only to accelerating the park’s decision in principle to dispose of the animals, but also to postponing their transfer to Japan and mobilizing the French authorities to urgently find an alternative solution. It has also undoubtedly led to the abandonment of a scenario of maintaining the animals in situ by means of work and a scientific program, given the strain it is putting on Marineland’s management and employees, and to the breakdown of dialogue on a possible transfer to a sanctuary, which would require mediation efforts if it were to be carried out successfully at present”. (Page 12)

The likelihood of the surviving orcas being sent to a sanctuary, even if it is the best solution, is slim as it requires precautions to be taken. In reality, the way is paved for a swift arrival in the Spanish dolphinarium, should the decision be taken…

“The only acceptable alternative to the orca sanctuary would be their placement at Loro Parque in Tenerife, which has the advantage of having facilities ready to accommodate the two specimens in addition to those already present, in conditions similar to those at Marineland.” (Page 5) 

Yet it is these deleterious conditions that are at the heart of the problem! We are astonished that the mission does not mention the state of health of the orcas or their transportability in this respect… Isn’t it now a question of “getting rid” of the animals who have made Marineland’s fortune? 

The temptation of a transfer in defiance of a court ruling

The icing on the cake is that Marineland’s intention has never been to comply with the law, nor with the various court rulings handed down since the law was passed, which have invariably pitted it against us.

“Marineland SA signed a contract on October 23, 2023 with the Japanese company GRANVISTA Hotels & Resorts, which is carrying the KSSW project, for the donation of two orcas and the loan of the other two for breeding purposes (historically practiced by the Kamogawa Seaworld belonging to the same group), public education and scientific research on animal behavior).” (Page 22)

“During successive interviews, the park’s management has not ruled out a departure of the animals despite the injunction to keep them on site ordered in January 2024 by the court under threat of penalty payments, considering that it is prepared to suffer the financial consequences.” (Page 11)

Timetable and savings against animals

Even if, in the end, the report’s conclusions are more balanced concerning the two surviving orcas, the decision (and the ensuing responsibility) effectively rests with the politician… It would be disastrous and unacceptable for this decision to be determined by purely economic considerations.

“Consulted by the mission, the Ministry’s Legal Affairs Department (DAJ) considers that the legal risk is largely averted from the point of view of issuing the CITES export permit: a priori, there is nothing to prevent the departure of the animals, insofar as they are fit for transport and the dossier provided by Marineland is sound.

Given Marineland’s plan to convert its activities into an amusement park without keeping animals, the high cost of maintaining the animals (in the region of €500,000 per year per orca) and the legal costs incurred, the financial consequences for the State if it decides to oppose the departure of the two orcas are likely to be greater than if it decides to grant the permit. In fact, since its decision to part with the orcas is a direct consequence of the provisions of the law of November 30, 2021, Marineland could be entitled to demand that the State cover the costs associated with canceling the departure and maintaining the animals kept at Marineland against its will, or even the financial losses associated with the delay in the conversion plan, until a solution is found.” (Page 12)

Parques Reunidos has already lost a lot of money with the impossibility for the group to send the four orcas as early as 2020 to China and then in 2024 to Japan, thanks to our legal actions and our public and media alert, uninterrupted for almost four years.

“Marineland’s cetacean staff are anticipating its imminent closure, and are already actively seeking employment in other centers. This, combined with the delays in renovating the facilities since the law was passed, puts the animals’ physical and mental health at risk. It appears to the mission that, whatever destination is ultimately chosen, it is not possible to delay the departure of orcas and dolphins beyond 12 to 18 months without exposing them to excessive risk.” (Page 30)

If Marineland and its managers are demanding that the government unblock the situation as quickly as possible, it’s likely that timing and money will be the most decisive aspects with no regard for the animals. The executive power now holds the cards to come out on top of this situation, in compliance with the spirit of the law passed in 2021.

“Contact has been made with Marineland’s management, who have said they are willing to work together to find a solution for the future of the cetaceans, and will ultimately defer to the Ministry’s decision, insofar as it does not call into question Marineland’s project to convert into an amusement park and the timeframes envisaged (start of work in 2025).” (Page 15)

Some will appreciate the bad faith with which the park uses the animals’ physical and mental health to justify sending them to another dolphinarium…

The experts’ conclusion does, however, offer some hope for Wikie and Keijo:

Two scenarios can be proposed to Marineland with the aim of obtaining its collaboration, with different political, judicial and financial consequences to be anticipated:

• As a priority, explore the transfer to the WSP sanctuary, which requires more complex and time-consuming preparations (finalization of the project, travel, greater difficulty for caretakers to accompany the acclimatization phase given the remoteness, scientific mobilization to be ensured for supervision and monitoring…) and includes a share of the risk of failure both in terms of animal welfare and funding. On the other hand, this option allows for more positive communication, focused on a noble ambition in two respects – animal welfare and research – and could make the decision symbolic at international level of France’s action as the first State to try to offer a more respectful end-of-life to this emblematic species in comparison to captivity, and in favor of protecting cetaceans in their natural environment.
• In the event that this first option is not feasible, the transfer to Loro Parque is a pragmatic solution which, however, presupposes the termination of the contract with the Japanese park and prior negotiation, notably concerning the division of costs between Marineland and Loro Parque, and the preparation, according to a procedure well established in captivity circles, of the animals and teams. This choice is likely to trigger media reactions and legal actions from associations. We don’t know how the staff will react, but we can only hope that they will be involved in the preparations and the aftermath of the transfer, in the interests of the animals”. (Page 33)

For us and for the orcas, there is only one dignified and moral solution

Only the full support of the Ministry (which is supposed to protect them) can now save Wikie and Keijo’s fate. Our hope is immense, and we stand ready to move forward in concert, strengthened by years of preparation for this eventuality. Our determination to prevent any transfer to another dolphinarium in Japan or Europe is boundless.