Dolphins are classified under the order of Cetacea, and belong to the family of Delphinidae. They are aquatic mammals comprising of more than 50 species (Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 2011), some of which are the Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin (also known as pink dolphins), bottlenose dolphin, and Irrawady dolphin, which have been spotted in the Southern Islands of Singapore (“Recent Sightings”, 2011).
The best known species include the bottlenose dolphin,
Bottlenose dolphin, by Walstrom, Susanne
which is the species that Resorts World Sentosa (RWS) plans to house at its Marine Life Park (“Frequently Asked Questions”, 2011), and is involved in the recent furore owing to the death of two Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins bought by RWS. Further exploration of this will be presented in the case study section of this blog.
Another species that can be found in Underwater World Singapore (UWS) is the Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin.
Indo-pacific humpback dolphin, by M. Bridges
These dolphins are housed in the Dolphin Lagoon, where visitors can pay to swim with them (“Program Description”, n.d.), and where they also have been touted as “therapy for the terminally ill” (Tan, 2012, as cited in “Dolphin therapy”, n.d.).
Presently, however, dolphins have been listed as an endangered and priority species by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). Their decline can be attributed to environmental and human factors. Human factors include the accidental entanglement in fishermen’s nets and other fishing activities, leading to the dolphins’ subsequent death, their habitats could also be detstroyed due to industrial, agricultural, and recreational activities (“Threats”, n.d.), and trading of these aquatic animals could also be another factor in their decline (“Cites Seeks Tougher Limits”, 2012; Wild Singapore News, 2012).
Fortunately, there has been greater support for the conservation of dolphins in recent years, where RWS and UWS have both stepped up on conservation of these cetaceans. There is also greater public awareness about the plights of dolphins, where Singaporean locals have been more active in conservation efforts of dolphins. Throughout the other sections of this blog, issues that will be covered includes the importance of conserving dolphins for the ecosystem and humans, human’s beliefs and perceptions in shaping our relationship with dolphins, and a case study that will focus on the furor over RWS’ acquisition of wild Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins.
Hi, my name is Hui Shin, and I am a Year 2 student majoring in Pscyhology. Since young, I have been intrigued by dolphins. Similarly, most people also seem to have a penchant for dolphins. Thus, I find it interesting to explore the why and how in our fascination with dolphins.
Do contact me at hsng7@e.ntu.edu.sg if you have queries.
P.S. I hope this blog will be informative to those who are intrigued about the human-dolphin relationship, especially in how this relationhip can relate to dolphin conservation issues.
While there are people who believe in conserving dolphins out of an innate need to conserve living organisms, others might need stronger reasons to propel them towards dolphin conservation. As such, I had explored the importance of dolphins to the ecosystem, and to humans, where an example of dolphins’ importance to Singaporeans can be found under the Singapore tab.
Dolphins, being at the top of the oceanic food chain, allows them to be “bio-indicators” (“Questions”, n.d.) for the state of their habitats. When the population of dolphins decline, it could be an indication that the organisms they feed on are declining as well. Hence, any anomalies that adversely impact their habitats leading to the decline of marine organisms could be detected through the decline in dolphin populations.
WWF has also classified dolphins as a “priority” and “flagship” (“Priority and Endangered Species” n.d.) species. WWF had further identified that dolphins occupy an essential position in the food chain, help stabalise or reestablish environments, and also serve as a symbolic icon to increase knowledge and greater financial support for greater conservation endeavors.
Hence, dolphins play important roles not just in their abilities to forewarn humans about the state of their environments, but also serve as “ambassadors” for other conservation issues.
Also, as the ecosystem is interlinked, observation and protection of dolphins could actually help maintain the environment and ecosystem itself. When the coastal areas are protected, humans benefit as well, since we depend on much of the same sea foods as dolphins (e.g. fish), and also share the same consequences should coastal areas become polluted (“Questions”, n.d.). Thus, a decline in the numbers of dolphins would also indicate a decline in river health; conservation of dolphins will allow us to keep a more efficient track of the state of the river and other river organisms.
While dolphins play important roles in the larger ecosystem, they are essential to humans as well. For instance, they assist humans in tasks, aid in education of marine mammals, and have also been touted to have therapeutic effects for humans.
One of the way in which dolphins assist humans can be demonstrated by the Navy’s training of dolphins in using their sonar to identify, pin-point and retrieve objects underwater (“Q and A”, n.d.). As humans do not have the ability to dive as deep as dolphins can, without incurring huge costs in advanced equipment, dolphins serve as important helpers in these “underwater tasks’. This highlights the effectiveness of enlisting the help of marine life to aid terrestrial beings, and thus heightens the need to conserve these mammals should humans continue to engage their services. Even though the Navy in Singapore might have no use for this method, Singaporeans still depend on dolphins in other ways such as entertainment or for therapy. The need to conserve dolphins then, is not limited to just the United States, but also to Singapore as well.
Research by Samuels and Spradin (1995), Frohoff and Packard (1993), and NMFS (1990) had indicated that dolphin-assisted therapy had aided mentally and physically handicapped patients or the terminally ill for twenty years (as cited in Brensing, Linke & Todt, 2003). This form of therapy is also currently being held in Singapore’s Sentosa Underwater World, where terminally ill patients get to interact with dolphins. Several studies had further indicated the effectiveness of this therapy in mentally handicapped children’s learning and motor abilities, as well as the relationship of handicapped children with their family (Nathanson, 1989, 1993; Voorhees, 1995). This could be due to the relaxing effect that interacting with dolphins brings to humans, as demonstrated in the analysis of EEG patters (Cole, 1996; Birch, 1997, as cited in Brensing et al., 2003).
Curtis (2000) had noted that most of the therapy research had focused on the benefits to humans, and not on possible disadvantages to dolphins. Ethical and safety issues (Iannuzzi and Rowan, 1991, as cited in Brensing et al., 2003) had thus been brought up in recent years. This can be seen in Singaporeans’ reactions to the case of the Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins, where locals have begun to question the importance and necessity of capturing dolphins for humans’ benefit. However, the campaign for the dolphins’ return to the wild is still in its infancy stages, and much remains to for it to be fully established and carried through.
As mentioned in the earlier section, dolphin-assisted therapy is currently held for the terminally ill at Sentosa’s Underwater World.
In a report in The Straits Times, patients from HCA Hopsice Care visited the Dolphin Lagoon this year on 21st March, 2012 at Sentosa’s Underwater World.
Most of the day hospice care patients can only survive for one year, and are plagued by life-limiting conditions such as end-stage cancer. As what the Singapore Hospice Council (SHC) chairman R. Akhileswaran had stated, the experience of interacting with the Indo-Pacific humpback dolphins at UWS could be the first for some patients, “while for others…sad to say, it could well be their last” (Tan, 2012).
Hence, the chance to interact with dolphins could be very much appreciated by the patients, and could also aid in their emotional well-being. The joy experienced by patients is apparent in one of the ovarian cancer patient Chong Ah Chiew, 74, who “[grinned] happily from the experience” (Tan, 2012) after interacting with one of the humpback dolphins named Han.
Chong Ah Chiew petting dolphin, ST PHOTO: JASON QUAH
The general manager of UWS Peter Chew, 31, also claimed that dolphin therapy is beneficial for the staff at UWS, as it removes the commercial aspects of their jobs and allows them to offer compassionate services. Hence, it is not just the hospice patients who benefit, but also the staff who provide these services.
While these dolphins at the Dolphin Lagoon are typically used for entertainment purposes, the above example has also illustrated the meaningfulness of allowing dolphins to interact with the terminally ill. Where humans might be feeling dejected and depressed over contracting a terminally ill disease, dolphins can provide companionship and bring some joy back into their lives. Even though the interactions might not last very long, the short experience of joy is still beneficial and could remain as a wonderful memory for hospice patients.
To further sustain this relationship between humans and dolphins, it is thus essential that humans actively engage in the role of conservation of dolphins. This is not just for the benefit of dolphins, but also for the benefit of humans as well.
with Dolphins
After the introduction on the importance of conserving dolphins, we shall now look at some of the reasons as to why humans are willing to and take action in conserving these marine mammals. Firstly, we will be taking a general view of why humans all over the world would care for dolphins, and then focus on Singapore through the case study of RWS’ acquisition of dolphins.
There has been widespread of knowledge of dolphins being one of the smartest of all sea creatures (Biederman, 1994), where they have been touted as being able to mimic and memorize, plan ahead, engage in observational learning, communicate their experiences, solve complicate sums and tasks or even learn different tasks at the same time (“Dolphin”, 2011). In short, they seem to be almost like humans. This unexpected perceived similarity could have increased humans’ attraction to dolphins; marine animals that did not seem to have a strong relationship with terrestrial creatures could actually accomplish much of what humans could do as well.
Borrowing concepts from the education and advertising world, when performances of students exceed expectations of objective criteria such as tests, the student is said to be overachieving ("Overachievers", 2008). In advertising, when a product’s perceived performance exceeds initial expectations, the consumer experience satisfaction with the product (Allen, O’Guinn, & Semenik, 2012). Even though dolphins are not usually regarded as products, they can be considered as ‘students’, or ‘learners’, where if they exceed humans’ expectations of the tasks that they can perform, we will experience positive emotions towards these marine mammals.
As humans did not expect marine mammals to be so similar to humans, we thus might feel a sense of awe and amazement upon learning that dolphins could be the “second most intelligent creatures after humans” (Marino, Gerogia, & Reiss, 2010, as cited in Ng, 2011), intelligence which researchers had claimed to even surpass that of chimpanzees. As a result, humans develop a more positive liking towards dolphins, as the abilities of what it can do as it exceeds our expectations. Take for example an analogy, Mary does not think much of a fellow group-mate Alice and feels that she would not be able to complete her part of the work well. However, when Alice submits a piece of well-written work, Mary would feel surprised, as Alice had exceeded her expectations. As such, Mary develops a greater liking for Alice.
Hence, the touted intelligence and similarity of dolphins to humans shaped our perceptions towards dolphins positively, such that we feel a greater sense of attraction and hence a subsequent need to conserve them more. Our liking of dolphins can even propel us to identify with these marine mammals, a topic which will be discussed under the identity section.
Clayton and Myers (2009) had indicated that the humans’ basic sense of self includes their relationship to non-human animals, as reflected in humans’ close identification and attachment with their pets. They further noted this display in some tribes such as the Amazonian Bororo, who proclaim themselves to be red macaws (Cocker, 1985; Levy-Bruhl, 1996). As a result, humans might engage in the process of totemism, where they identify their social groups with animals (Lévi-Strauss, 1966, as cited in Clayton & Myers, 2009). They might thus identify themselves with dolphins and form close attachments to them such that they become compelled to act for the sake of dolphins, who are deemed to be ‘powerless’ relative to humans. Thus, this might explain why humans are willing to engage in conservation steps to help these marine mammals.
Furthremore, Greenebaum (2004) notes that the humanization of pets is prevalent in Western culture, where pet pedicures (as cited in Clayton & Myers, 2009) are common. This phenomenon is also present in Singapore, where there have been a slew of once-human services being provided to pets now, such as spa services, supplements and vitamins, and even pet hotels. Clayton and Myers (2009) further note that this identification will then affect individuals’ social identity indirectly, where it can also indirectly affect how they interact with other people and involvement in conservation issues.
As such, people might label those who are involved in animal conservation as an ‘animal protector’ or ‘animal lover’, which could lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy. For example, when humans indentify with dolphins, they could become labeled as a ‘dolphin protector’. As they and others view themselves as someone who protects the marine mammals, they will be more likely to be attuned to information regarding dolphins. Other people might also be more likely to approach them for dolphin-conservation related issues. As they engage in these conservation issues, either on their own accord or from being approached by others, they then fulfill the prophecy of being a protector of dolphins. Their exposure to nature (i.e. dolphins) thus predicted emotional attachment to the mammals, which then in turn predicted behavior (Clayton, 2003, 2008), and might thus explain why humans are likely to conserve dolphins.
Even though humans are often dependent on dolphins for various uses, the human-dolphin relationship can also be two-way, where dolphins sometimes also depend on humans. Pereber and Schuster (2009) indicated the presence of this interdependence between dolphins and fisherman (Busnel, 1973; Neil, 2002; Orams, 1997; Pryor, Lindbergh, Lindbergh, & Milano, 1990), and also noted some cases of dolphins going up to humans seeking food (Dill, Dill, & Charles, 2003; Dudzinski, Frohoff, & Crane, 1995; Orams, 1997).
For example, in Myanmar, Ayeyarwady River, Irrawaddy dolphins and cast-net fisherman engage in cooperative fishing, where Brian, Mya Than Tun, Aung Myo Chit, Han Win, and Thida Moe, (2009) observed that the fishermen would use various methods (e.g. hitting the water surface or making sounds) to attract the dolphins in a bid to engage their help. If the dolphins are willing to cooperate, they would then gather the fish into a compressed mass. One dolphin would then move its tail towards the fishermen, “signal[ling]” (Brian et al., 2009) them to cast their nets. In this way, Brian et al. speculated that fishing becomes easier for fishermen and dolphins, where fishes become confused by the flurry of movements or when they fall out of the net towards dolphins.
As a result, fishermen might come to treat dolphins not merely as animals, but also as helpers. This could result in them respecting the dolphins as well.
Further along this line of cooperation, Pryor et al. (1990) had discovered that this form of cooperation also exists between Brazilian fishermen and the common bottlenose dolphins (as cited in Brian et al., 2009). However, the dolphins were the ones who initiated the cooperation in this case. They would display feeding behaviours directly after fishermen cast their nets, and usually only stop when the net was hauled up. Another observation Brian et al. (2009) noted was that when hauls were large, the mammals usually engage in intense social displays (e.g. rubbing and mating) in between casting of nets. Anderson (1879) had noted this consistent cooperation for at least 130 years, thus indicating that it could have aided in the dolphins’ ability to find food and improvement of their social bonds, and thus also plays a part in the conservation of dolphins. Embedded is a video of this cooperative fishing:
These two examples of cooperative fishing could perhaps imply that humans are not wholly dependent on dolphins, but that dolphins could also use the presence of humans for their own benefits. Perhaps this is as nature was meant to be, where no organism can survive without the other; the ecosystem is a whole web of interconnected relations. Thus, interdependence between humans and dolphins could have led to humans perceiving dolphins as an equal organism which deserves our help in their conservation.
Zooming into the Singaporean context, we will discuss a case study of the recent public outcry over the fate of dolphins purchased by RWS. Through this case study, issues of Singaporeans’ perceptions and beliefs in shaping their relationships with dolphins, and possible reasons for the public’s widespread interest and demand for the release of these marine mammals in the name of conservation will be explored.
Ng (2011) reported that RWS had bought seven Indo-Pacific dolphins from the Solomon Islands in December 2008. He noted that these dolphins were captured from the wild, and were sent to a marine park in the Philippines – Ocean Adventure, for training. Ng also noted that RWS had subsequently bought additional eleven and nine wild-caught Indo-Pacific dolphins in January 2009 and December 2009 respectively. Those dolphins that were bought in January 2009 were also sent to Ocean Adventure for training, while the latter nine were sent to Langkawi.
Public outcry started to explode when two of the nine dolphins in Langkawi died in October 2010 (Ng, 2011). The public was even more outraged when RWS did not immediately announce the deaths, but confirmed it only after two months from the deaths.
The media quickly reported the incident, further disseminating the news of RWS and the deaths of the dolphins under their care. The Animal Concerns Research and Education Society (ACRES), “an animal protection organization” (“Our Mission”, n.d.) was also quick to develop campaigns to demand the release of the remaining surviving dolphins. A furor then started over the demand for the release of these dolphins, leading to debates over the issue of dolphin conservation. Public dissent began to arise over the necessity of keeping dolphins in captivity as a way of conserving them, or to return them to the wild as the best choice for dolphin conservation.
Inclinations to Conserve Dolphins
As discussed in the earlier sections, identifying ourselves with dolphins can have an impact on our behaviours toward the mammals. Further expanding on this idea, Clayton and Myers (2009) had also stated that this identification can help develop our acts of conserving dolphins, due to the sense of personal involvement in the dolphins’ state of health.
Clayton and Myers further go on to state that the chance for people to engage in conservation would enable themselves to be labeled as a “conservationist” (p. 72), or as a ‘dolphin protector’. Given Singapore’s adoration of dolphins, the label of a ‘dolphin protector’ is valued in society, which thus heightens the desire in locals to act on behalf of the dolphins. This could be due to the effect of social desirability, where humans act in ways that are socially desirable (i.e. conserving dolphins) so as to obtain approval from social others (Cialdini, Reno, & Kallgren, 1990, as cited in Fisher Dubé, 2011) and to maintain a positive self-concept.
Hence, due to the identification that some locals might have towards dolphins, they could have perceived RWS’ treatment of dolphins as if it were treatment to themselves. Thus, they reacted more strongly towards the news of the dolphins’ deaths, where some might even participate in campaigns and protests to demand for the release of the Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins.
2. Exposure to Dolphins
Singaporeans’ interest in dolphins probably began to take root when Underwater World Singapore (UWS) brought in the Indo-Pacific humpback dolphins to Dolphin Lagoon in 1999 (“Milestones”, n.d.). As UWS began to use these marine mammals for exhibition and interaction purposes, locals who visited the underwater park became impressed by the dolphins’ “tractable and trainable” (Whitlow, 1993) abilities. Whitlow further noted that the popularity of dolphins increased steadily through media. The TV broad cast of “Free Willy” on Singapore’s Channel 5 network, a story where a boy attempts to and succeed in freeing Willy, an Orca (a species of dolphins commonly known as Killer Whale), who had been captured and separated from his family (“Plot”, n.d.) might have thus strengthened locals’ liking towards the mammals. Hence, when news broke of the two dolphins who had died under the care of Resorts World Sentosa (RWS), many locals felt the need to demand for the return of the remaining surviving dolphins to the wild.
Furthermore, sightings of dolphins in Singapore could have led to Singaporeans becoming excited and thus becoming more interested in conserving the mammals. As the sighting of dolphins do not seem probable in Singapore, actual sighting of species such as the Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin, bottlenose dolphin, and Irrawady dolphin in the Southern Islands of Singapore (“Recent Sightings”, 2011) could have piqued Singporeans’ interest in having discovered and protecting something “rare”. The Singapore Wild Marine Mammal Survey (SWiMMS), a research project to keep track of wild dolphins around Singapore have also set up their own page on popular social media website Facebook, to enable Singaporeans to share their sightings of dolphins in Singapore. Other websites such as Habitat News have also enabled Singaporean netizens to publish incidents of dolphins appearing in Singapore waters. Below embedded is a video one Singaporean has posted on the site:
Through the social nature of sharing these dolphin sightings on social medial platforms, Singaporeans are able to discuss with their peers and thus generate more interest in the issue of dolphin conservation. As more people are informed, there also arises a possibility for more people to become more involved and motivated to conserve dolphins.
3. Interdependence between Dolphins and Humans
Interdependence between captive dolphins and Singaporeans could have led to the locals extending this relationship to wild dolphins as well. As a result, Singaporeans might experience a greater stake in conserving these marine mammals, as they had placed them on an equal status as humans.
Interdependence exists between humans and dolphins, where visitors depend on dolphins to promote social bonds, and dolphins on humans to provide care and financial support. Clayton and Myers (2009) had reported that most visitors to zoos go with their family members or peers, which increases the chances for interaction among humans. Parents can make use of animals to facilitate their communication with their children. When their children’s interests are piqued by animals, parents could have had an easier time engaging their attention and explaining the animals to them, which could then result in positive feelings for both parents and children. Similarly, UWS had encouraged family bonding through interaction with the dolphins by offering discounted admission rates to UWS and the Dolphin Lagoon for family members of participants who join their “Swim with the Dolphins" programme.
On the other hand, dolphins at UWS also depend on visitors and staff to provide care for them. Several researchers had also pointed out that the human-dolphin interaction can be more intrinsic than previously thought, where solitary dolphins have been known to seek the company of humans, at least transiently, so as to make up for their loss of strong social relations with their own species (Frohoff & Packard, 1995; Goffman, 2005; Lockyer, 1990; Müller, Battersby, Buurman, Bossley, & Doak, 1998; Müller & Bossley, 2002; Orams, 1997; Webb, 1978, as cited in Perelberg & Schuster, 2009). Hence, the Indo-Pacific humpback dolphins at UWS could also depend on humans for needs beyond basic care; they have a social dependence on humans. As in the case for dolphins at the Dolphin Lagoon, without their pods to interact with, these marine mammals at UWS could have substituted staff and visitors for sources of interaction instead.
This interdependence could thus have strengthened UWS visitors’ identification to dolphins, thus stirring a greater desire in humans to do their part to conserve dolphins. This could be especially true for those who had more interaction with dolphins, such as those visitors who had participated in the “Swim with the Dolphins"programme.
4. Exaltation of Dolphins
Another possible reason for Singaporeans’ interest in the conservation of dolphins could lie in our exaltation of dolphins. Marino (2011) noted that dolphins had long been depicted in stories of Western and Eastern (e.g. Australia and Laos) folklore, where dolphins offer assistance and kinship. For example, ancient Greece tells a story of the son of sea god Poseidon, Taras, who was believed to have been saved from a shipwreck by a dolphin dispatched by his father.
As a Singaporean, I had also grown up with stories of dolphins coming to the rescue of humans attacked by sharks. Due to the vivid imageries and widespread reporting of vicious and aggressive shark attacks, we tend to perceive sharks as the ‘bad’ animal that should be avoided at all costs. Dolphins, on the other hand, are perceived as the ‘saviour’ of humans, which will help humans defend against the ‘bad’ sharks. Stories and documentaries of dolphins saving humans from sharks further add on to our enchantment of these marime mammals. For example, the first part of a five parts video by BBC Natural World about dolphins saving humans can be found embedded below:
Furthermore, stories of dolphins forming friendships with humans in this twenty-first century, continue to exalt the status of dolphins. Marino (2011) notes one such example of a human, Dean Bermal, and dolphin, JoJo, a wild Atlantic bottlenose dolphin. Further reading of this can be found at JoJo Dolphin Project . I guess most Singaporeans would also recall the popular TV show of Free Willy, a story of where a boy attempts to and succeed in freeing Willy, an Orca (a species of dolphins commonly known as Killer Whale), who had been captured and separated from his family (“Plot”, n.d.).
This movie had been aired on the local Channel 5, and could have left a deep impression on Singaporeans that dolphins, including the impressively-sized Orca species, could even be on friendly terms with humans.
Through stories like this, we might have become entrenched with the notion that dolphins are not only our friends, but also our saviours, and thus when dolphins such as those in RWS are in danger, we become seized by a perceived sense of responsibility that we should step up and help them. However, also noted in the BBC documentary is the reminder that dolphins are still wild, and reasons for their “rescuing” of humans still remain unclear. Similarly, caution should be exercised when humans interact with wild dolphins. While there had indeed been cases of dolphins assisting or forming friendships with humans, we need to be careful not to become disillusioned about exalting dolphins to the status of human beings or even as holy saviours.
Dolphins had been kept captive and used for recreational purposes in Underwater World Singapore (UWS) since 1999. For approximately ten years, many Singaporeans have been to Dolphin Lagoon, with no violent objections to the captivity of dolphins. However, all this changed two years ago when two dolphins under Resorts World Sentosa’s (RWS) care died. While it is not clear if this incident triggered Singaporeans’ violent reactions, or whether dissent had already been present in Singaporeans all these years, it is still worth it to look at some of the possible reasons for this recent furor.
1. Improved education
As mentioned earlier, UWS and RWS had both stepped up conservation efforts, and are actively educating the public about conservation issues. For example, not only is UWS involved in environmental projects, it also supports school excursions to UWS to learn more about marine life (“Introduction”, n.d.). Thus, young Singaporeans who had learned about conservation issues when they go on school trips could have grown up more interested in conservation issues. They could also have gained more knowledge about dolphin conservation through other sources like their peers or their overseas experiences.
Also, the issue of conservation might have only gained popularity in recent years, and thus public dissent only aggravated two years ago, rather than in the past ten years. Furthermore, less information could be found in the past as compared to recent years, where information can now be easily obtained through the Internet, and where schools also place greater emphasis on conservation issues.
Hence, increased awareness and resources, leading to better education, could be possible factors for the recent furor over RWS’ acquisition of the dolphins.
2. ACRES’ Aggressive Use of Media
Perhaps one of the most important factor for Singaporeans’ huge reactions could be the rapid spread of information through the media. ACRES utilized social media platforms such as blogs and Facebook to reach out to a massive number of technologically-savvy youngsters, who are also quick to ‘share’ the information on Facebook, thus disseminating information faster through electronic word-of-mouth. Below is a picture posted by a protester for the release of dolphins, which can be found on her blog.
ACRES had used Facebook to garner support for the release of the Indo-paciific bottlenose dolphins, and support has been encouraging, as can be seen by the comments posted on ACRES’ Facebook page. The group has also urged the public to help spread the message to their friends. With the ease of simply clicking and sharing the information, it is possible that many Singaporeans would be aware of the call by ACRES through rapid sharing of this information.
Furthermore, ACRES had also set up a campaign “Save the World’s Saddest Dolphins”, where it has garnered a huge number of 21,549 Facebook ‘likes’. Although this number of ‘likes’ does not mean that the people who had visited the website and made a small commitment by clicking on the ‘like’ button would definitely act on conservation issues, it still indicates the successful dissemination of information to a total of more than 20, 000 people. It can also be debated over whether these people truly understand the message of conserving dolphins, or whether they are just following the ‘trend’ or their friends wishes. There are thus mixed comments over the ‘success’ of ACRES campaign, which can also be illustrated in the comments on one of their campaign videos:
Comments ranged from the positive, such as commendations and support for the video, to negative responses that questioned the understanding of the children involved in the making of the video, and the questioning of the emphasis on dolphins but not on other animals. Further viewing of the comments can be followed at this link.
This debate can also be read at Wild Singapore, where there are Singaporeans standing on both sides of the story.
While the public’s reactions are mixed, it is evident that aggressive use of the media by ACRES has generated widespread public interest in the issue of dolphin conservation in Singapore. This could thus have lead to greater awareness and reactions from Singaporeans.
However, it is important to note that while there are many who are willing to support ACRES, there are also many who support RWS’ decision to display the dolphin in their new Marine Life Park. The arguments put forth by both parties would have their strengths and weaknesses, though I would advise people not to let their emotions take over their rationality. Take a careful look through arguments presented by both parties before making an informed decision as to whether to support ACRES or RWS.
Dolphins’Return to the Wild, but Not Other Captive Animals
Another intriguing point in the furor is the public’s outcry for the release of dolphins, but not other captive animals. Captive animals are all being held captive and not allowed to return to their natural habitats. However, why do Singaporeans demand the release of dolphins more aggressively than they do for other animals? Possible reasons are discussed in this last and final section of the blog.
1. Uniqueness of Dolphins
As mentioned in the previous section of Humans’ Perceptions of Dolphins, humans perceive dolphins as highly intelligent and curious. Also, as they live underwater, which humans consider as “mostly inaccessible [and thus] mysterious” (Marino, 2011), Marino concludes that dolphins are perceived as highly attractive to humans. This point can be applicable to Singaporeans, who have relatively less contact with coastal creatures as compared to other countries such as Hawaii. Hence, Singaporeans would tend to regard dolphins as a rare and mystical creature, due to relatively fewer exposures to these mammal creatures as compared to people from other coastal countries.
Furthermore, while Dunbar and Whiten (2001) noted that dolphins are capable of behavior and learning abilities that match that of non-human great apes, Whitehead, Rendell, Osborne and Würsig (2004) further observed that recent studies indicate they are also capable of sympathy and forming unique groups within populations, a characteristic that is not present in non-human great apes. Furthermore, research by Marino and Reiss (2010) also indicated that dolphins are actually next in intelligence only to humans, where they claim that “they are so bright [that they] should be treated as ‘non-human persons’” (as cited in Ng, 2011, p.14). Further research also shows that the bottlenose dolphin species could be brighter than chimps, where they also have a strong sense of self and are able to formulate plans.
Marino (2011) thus notes that these perceived characteristics of dolphin propel them to a much higher status, and to be seen as sharing a natural “empathetic bond with humans” (para. 2), as compared to other animals which we perceive to be more stupid or uglier (e.g. pigs). These factors not only highlight the uniqueness and similarity of dolphins to humans, but also emphasize the fact that dolphins can even surpass certain capabilities of apes, which had traditionally been believed to the next closest to humans in terms of abilities. As a result, dolphins could have been cast in a new light of awe and wonder, where the possibility that bottlenose dolphins are more unique than other animals could have led Singaporeans to more strongly demand the release of the dolphins.
2. Physical Appearance and Interaction
One superficial point that could have led to Singaporeans’ greater interest in dolphins could be the dolphins’ ‘smiling’ façade. Marino (2010) had noted this seeming “smile” dolphins naturally have due to their physical structure had led some people to be deceived into thinking that dolphins are happy and kindly. This notion is widely held by Singaporeans, where many of my peers also perceive dolphins to be smiling and kind. Cartoons and organizations such as UWS have further expounded on this ‘smiling’ façade of dolphins to attract viewers and visitors. Many of the attraction pictures UWS had chosen include those where the dolphins are pictured as what humans would term as a smile, examples include the picture below:
However, it is important to note that the ‘smile’ is actually due to dolphin’s physical make-up, where their ‘smiles’ exist only in our imaginations. Singaporeans, unfortunately, could hold strong views that dolphins are indeed smiling and thus become more likely to help dolphins, as they perceive that dolphins are able to communicate emotions to humans.
Another point that could aid in Singaporeans’ favoritism towards dolphins could be increased opportunities for them to interact with dolphins, as compared to other animals. Clayton and Myers (2009) had noted that when surveyed, zoo visitors indicated that the most favourable experiences included those where they could interact with the animals. This is as the case with the Indo-Pacific humpback dolphins at Dolphin Lagoon at UWS, where visitors can choose to interact with the dolphins through the “Swim with the Dolphins” programme. As compared to other endangered animals such as the dugong, where not as much interaction could be provided, dolphins could have left a more lasting and favourable impressions on visitors. This could then result in greater action towards the conservation of these marine mammals.
As people devote more time in looking at larger and active animals (Bitgood et al., 1988; Shettel-Neuber, 1988; Davey, 2006; Ward et al., 1998, as cited in Clayton & Myers, 2009 , dolphin exhibits in UWS could have attracted more visitors. With increased time spent with these marine mammals, visitors could also remember conservation issues better. Furthermore, in Kellert’s (1996) survey of Americans, he found that most felt affiliated with animals whose physical and mental characteristics are similar to humans, especially those which are larger in size, able to form social bonds, and are considerably intelligent (as cited in Clayton & Myers, 2009). Drawing a comparison to Singaporeans, the same could be said of locals’ attitudes towards dolphins, which as mentioned earlier, posses all the features that Kellert had stated above. Thus, Singaporeans could have developed a biased attitude towards dolphins and be more engaged in dolphin conservation issues.
3. Promotion by Organisation
The increased interaction with dolphins could also be aided through organisational support. For example, the “Swim with the Dolphins” programme by UWS could have propelled dolphins to the “flagship” species status, where they are deemed to serve as symbolic icons to increase knowledge and greater financial support for greater conservation endeavors. Compared to other marine animals such as dugongs which are not promoted to such a great extent as dolphins, dolphins enjoy much greater visibility and opportunities to interact with humans.
From the description of UWS of their "Swim with the Dolphins" programme, dolphins are also presented in a romantic manner, where visitors can “delight [themselves] through a close interaction with [their] charming pink dolphins at the Dolphin Lagoon” (“Description”, n.d.). UWS further woos visitors with the promise of teaching these Indo-Pacific humpback dolphins tricks UWS claims the dolphins are naturally inclined to perform. This can be interpreted as a gimmick by UWS to get more visitors, but at the same time, the popularity of the programme also demonstrates the successful promotion of dolphins by UWS.
Furthermore, UWS also seems to place much emphasis on dolphins as attractions, where there is a Dolphin Suite, a VIP gallery for privileged guest to view dolphin performances, and a well thought-out Dolphin Lagoon Programme schedule where visitors not only get to ‘meet’ the dolphins, take photos with them (“Dolphin Lagoon, n.d.), but can also interact with them.
These efforts by UWS could have instilled a more positive image of dolphins in Singaporeans’ mind, as compared to other marine mammals which are not as aggressively promoted. Hence, it seems natural that Singaporeans would devote more attention and be willing to stand up for conservation issues regarding dolphins.
4. Potential in Aiding Humans
Another factor for Singaporeans’ increased efforts in dolphin conservation issues could be the touted benefits that dolphins can bring to humans. For example, the Alliance of Marine Mammal Parks and Aquariums had noted that children with critical illness from organizations such as Make-A-Wish Foundation, hopes to relate to marine mammals. These interactions can encourage them not to be bound by their illnesses, and could thus also be a source of hope for them (“Q & A”, n.d.). As noted in the earlier section under the Singapore context, Indo-Pacific humpback dolphins are used as a form of therapy for terminally ill patients. Reports such as these could have led to a sense of gratefulness in humans towards these marine mammals. This is similar to the case of visually-handicapped humans’ dependence upon guide dogs, where it has now become an undeniable fact that dogs are not only man’s best friends, but also men’s best helpers. With the insertion of dolphins into the picture, perhaps dolphins could also reach the status of dogs to become man’s best friend and helper.
Further supporting potential benefits that dolphins can bring to humans, DeMares (2000) reported that humans experienced positive emotions after interacting with wild dolphins, and had significant impacts on our sense of self. Curtin’s (2006) interviews with participants who swam with dolphins also indicated that they felt attracted and connected with the mammals. Further evidenced by Antonioli and Reveley’s (2005) research, participants who swam with captive dolphins reported lower levels of depression after swimming with the mammals for 2 weeks (as cited in Clayton & Myers, 2009).
These touted benefits could have led to Singaporeans’ disillusion that dolphin are “healers” for humans, where they could have even be seen as doctors. Thus, when these “healers” are in danger, Singaporeans feel a strong need to conserve these marine mammals.
Throughout this blog, factors affecting humans’ relationship with dolphins, and our inclinations to help conserve these marine mammals have been discussed. Some of the reasons presented in this blog include humans’ identification with dolphins, interdependence between humans and dolphins, exposure to dolphins, and organizational support.
In the case study of Resort World Sentosa (RWS), the debate over the housing or release of the Indo-Pacific bottlenose has not been settled as of today April 1, 2012. Even though no definite conclusion has been reached, I feel that the increased public awareness regarding dolphin conservation issues is a good start in propelling Singaporeans towards taking bigger and more concrete steps in the area of conservation.
References
Anderson, J. (1879) Anatomical and Zoological Researches: Comprising an Account of the Zoological Results of the Two Expeditions to Western Yunnan in 1868 and 1875; and a Monograph of the Two Cetacean Genera, Platanista and Orcaella
Allen, C.T., O’Guinn, T.C., & Semenik, R. J. (2012). Advertising and Integrated Brand Promotion. (6th ed., International). South-Western Cengage Learning.
Biederman, A. (1994). Nature. Boys' Life, 84(3), 13.
Brian D. S, Mya Than Tun, Aung Myo Chit, Han Win, & Thida Moe, (2009). Catch composition and conservation management of a human–dolphin cooperative cast-net fishery in the Ayeyarwady River, Myanmar. Biological Conservation, 142(5), 1042-1049. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2009.01.015
Birch, S. (1997). Dolphin–human interaction effects. Doctor Thesis, Department of Electrical & Computer Systems Engineering, Monash University, Caulfield Campus.
Brensing, K., Linke, K., & Todt, D. (2003). Can dolphins heal by ultrasound? Journal Of Theoretical Biology, 225, 99-105. doi:10.1016/S0022-5193(03)00225-X
Busnel, R. G. (1973). Symbiotic relationship between man and dolphins. Transactions of the New York Academy of Science, 35, 112–131.
Cialdini, R.B., Reno, R.R., & Kallgren, C.A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct. Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 1015–1026
Cites Seeks Tougher Limits on Coral, Shark, Dolphin Trade. (2012, March 22). [Web log message]. Retrieved March 25, 2012, from http://wildsingaporenews.blogspot.com/2012/03/cites-seeks-tougher-limits-on-coral.html
Clayton, S. & Myers, G. (2009). Conservation Psychology: Understanding and promoting human care for nature. Chichester, England: Wiley-Blackwell.
Cole, D.M. (1996). Phenomenological effect of dolphin interaction on humans. International Symposium on Dolphin Healing, Co-hosted by the AquaThought Foundation, pp. 1–7.
Conservation. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2012, from http://www.underwaterworld.com.sg/conservation.htm
Curtis, J. (2000). Dolphin assisted therapy or gimmickry. Underwater Nat., 25(3), 18–21
Dill, L. M., Dill, E. S., & Charles, D. (2003). Feeding preferences of the Monkey Mia dolphins: Results from a simultaneous choice protocol. Marine Mammal Science, 19, 650–660.
Dolphin, aquatic mammal. (2011). Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th Edition, 1-2.
Dolphin Lagoon. (n.d.). Retrieved March 24, 2012 from http://www.underwaterworld.com.sg/abtus_dolphin.htm
Dudzinski, K. M., Frohoff, T. G., & Crane, N. L. (1995). Behavior of a lone female bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) with humans off the coast of Belize. Aquatic Mammals, 21, 149–153.
Frequently Asked Questions. (2011, July 5). [Web log message]. Retrieved March 25, 2012, from http://mlp.rwsentosablog.com/2011/07/05/faqs/#more-1
Fisher, R.J., & Dubé, L. (2011). Research report: Development and validation of an eating norms inventory. Americans’ lay-beliefs about appropriate eating. Appetite, 57, 365-376. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2011.05.308
Frohoff, T.G., & Packard, J.M. (1993). Behavior of captive bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) and humans charging controlled in-water interactions. M. S. Thesis, Texas A&M University, Collage Station, TX.
Iannuzzi, D., & Rowan. A.N. (1991). Ethical issues in animal-assisted therapy programs. Anthrozoös, 4, 154–163
Introdution. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2012, from http://www.underwaterworld.com.sg/abtus.htm
Marino, L. (2011). Dolphin Assisted Therapy: From Ancient Myth to Modern Snake Oil. Phi Kappa Phi Forum, 91(1), 4-6.
Milestones. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2012, from http://www.underwaterworld.com.sg/milestones.htm
Nathanson, D.E. (1993). Cognitive improvement of children in water with and whitout dolphins. Anthrozoös, 6(1), 17–29
Neil, D. T. (2002). Cooperative fishing interactions between Aboriginal Australians and dolphins in eastern Australia. Anthrozoös, 15, 3–18.
Ng, L. (2011). Resorts World Sentosa’s plan to house wild-caught dolphins. Retrieved March 31, 2012, from http://www.saddestdolphins.com/report/Acres%20-Resorts%20World's%20Dolphins%20Report.pdf
NMFS (National Marine Fishery Service). (1990). A Final Environmental Impact Statement on the Use of Marine Mammals in Swim-with-the-Dolphin-Programs. Office Protected Resources, Silver Spring, MD.
Orams, M. B. (1997). Historical accounts of human-dolphin interaction and recent developments in wild dolphin based tourism in Australasia. Tourism Management, 18, 317–326.
Overachievers. (2008). International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Retrieved March 31, 2012 from http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3045301842.html
Our Mission. (n.d.). Retrieved March 31, 2012, from http://www.acres.org.sg/aboutacres/ourmission.html
Plot. (n.d.) Retrieved April 1, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Willy
Perelberg, A., & Schuster, R. (2009). Bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) prefer to cooperate when petted: Integrating proximate and ultimate explanations ii. Journal Of Comparative Psychology, 123(1), 45-55. doi:10.1037/a0013585
Program Description. (n.d.) Retrieved March 24, 2012 from http://www.underwaterworld.com.sg/adventures_swimdolphin.htm
Priority & endangered species. (n.d.) Retrieved March 25, 2012, from http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/
Pryor, K., Lindbergh, J., Lindbergh, S., & Milano, R. (1990). A dolphin–human fishing cooperative in Brazil. Marine Mammal Science, 6, 77–82
Questions. (n.d.). Retrieved March 25, 2012, from http://www.imms.org/dolphinfaq.php#q25
Q & A on Marine Mammals in Parks and Aquariums. (n.d.). Retrieved March 24, 2012, from http://www.underwaterworld.com.sg/pdf/Q%20and%20A%20on%20Marine%20Mammals%20in%20Parks%20and%20Aquariums%2023%20Mar%2007.pdf
Recent Sightings. (2011). Retrieved March 25, 2012, from http://www.tmsi.nus.edu.sg/mmrl/swimmsmap.htm
Saltzer, R. (2001). Understanding visitor wildlife interactions: Seaworld visitor survey. Retrieved March 31, 2012, from http://www.crctourism.com.au/wms/upload/images/Disc%20of%20images%20and%20PDFs/for%20bookshop/Documents/WT_Seaworld.pdf
Tan, J. (2012). Dolphin therapy for terminally ill at Sentosa's Underwater World. The Straits Times.Retrieved March 31, 2012, from http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_781198.html
Threats to whales and dolphins. (n.d.). Retrieved March 25, 2012, from http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/cetaceans/threats/
Voorhees, R. (1995). The effect of a unique stimulus (swimming with dolphins). On the communication between parents and their children with disabilities. Masterwork, University of Miami, School of Medicine.
Whitehead, H., Rendell, L., Osborne, R.W., & Würsig, B. (2004). Culture and conservation of non-humans with reference to whales and dolphins: review and new directions. Biological Conservation, 120(3), 427-437. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2004.03.017
Whitlow, W. L. (1993). The sonar of dolphins. Available from http://books.google.com.sg/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Q3MIsrPDA5EC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=why+dolphin+important+in+singapore&ots=RDjSIv0RCF&sig=4iY4NZM6YBoZOvgZ_XlbCoPcOGA#v=onepage&q&f=falsespringer verlag
Background image by Bong Grit.
