Errors in dolphin storyThe article “No mercy” (Varsity, November 1997, Pp. 36-37) contained so many errors it would be pointless to list them here. The most important is the quotation from John Wong: “Most (dolphin) watchers neither know much about the dolphins’ behaviour, nor do they care about them. They sometimes feed the creatures with unsuitable food, such as snacks. And some chase the dolphins for fun, scaring and hurting them.” Mr. Wong has told me that he did not say the above, and in fact he was never interviewed by the author, and had no knowledge of the article. He also pointed out that, while there is a possibility of such things happening, he has never witnessed anyone feeding, chasing, or hurting a dolphin. The concept of dolphinwatchers posing a threat to dolphins is the main point of the article, and the writer appears to have fabricated it from her own imagination. In fact, Dr. Cheng Wo-wing, the officer in charge of patrolling the Sha Chau and the Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park, and Dr. Tom Jefferson of the Ocean Park Conservation Foundation, and myself, who together have spent many hundreds of hours observing dolphins and marine vessels, have never witnessed any such incident. The writer quotes several paragraphs from Mr. Wong about how engine noise disturbs dolphins. She may have found these passages in his recent book Chinese Resident Dolphins, where they refer to engine noise in general. In parts of the dolphins’ habitat, up to 70 boats an hour pass through, including container ships, hydrofoils, and hovercraft. Hong Kong Dolphinwatch, the largest dolphinwatching operator, has run an average of 12 trips a month over the last year. The noise of our engines is nothing new to the dolphins, and cannot be considered a serious threat. Far from “accus(ing) these commercial operations of adding to the dolphins’ miseries”, Mr. Wong actually lists properly conducted dolphin-watching tours as an educational tool under the “Conservation Plans and Action” section of his book. Hong Kong Dolphinwatch was founded precisely for this reason: to educate people about
the marine environment and the real threats the dolphins face — pollution, habitat
loss, and overfishing. Sensationalist articles such as this one not only represent
extremely irresponsible journalism, but hinder conservation efforts by focusing attention
on trivial non-issues. Varsity's responseAfter checking with the staff writer concerned, Varsity stands by the report in question. We confirmed that the story is an accurate compilation of information from several sources, including a telephone interview with Mr. John Wong. In the telephone interview, Mr. Wong did indeed mention that feeding dolphins was one of the possible hazards to the animals, according to our staff writer. However, we agree that there is always room for improvement. We recognise Dolphinwatch’s valuable contributions to environmental conservation, and we apologise if our report appeared to be sensationalistic. — The Editors [Ageism in the News||Wasted Expenses] |
