Yuen Tsuen Ancient Trail is selected in the Charity Hike this year. It is not only an adventurous hiking trail but also an old trading route linking two settlements (Yuen Long & Tsuen Wan).  The journey is full of natural sceneries and historical features. Following the route with online supporting materials, participants would wander up and down along nature trail from Chai Wan Kok to Yuen Long. The hilltop Lookout at Shek Lung Kung will be soon approached. With 180 degree view of Hong Kong Island, Tsing Yi and Lantau, an unobstructed view of Tsing Ma Bridge and Victoria Harbour is unforgettable.

Due to the public gathering limit, we could not take part in the launching ceremony with hundreds of participants as in the previous years. Therefore the event period extends to 17 days, from 26 March to 11 April 2021.

Please support Green Sense Charity Hike 2021 by:

1. Join Green Sense Charity Hike 2021 (Chinese Event details can be viewed on http://greensense.org.hk/charityhike）【ENROLL NOW】

• Individual Participant: The minimum donation is $150 (Event Charm, TrailWatch Mobile 3 in 1 Lens and Gift Voucher pack)
• Individual donating $250 or more will be awarded Valued Gift Pack (Including Event Charm, Green Sense x Lockill Resuable Face Mask, TrailWatch Mobile 3 in 1 Lens and Gift Voucher pack)
• Company Team of 4 Participants: The minimum donation is HK$1000 (4 Valued Gift Packs and E-certificate will be issued for appreciation)

2. Make a donation 【Click here to make an online donation】

• If you cannot join the Charity Hike 2021, donations are also welcomed.

Route Preview:
Yuen Tsuen Ancient Trail (Half): Tsuen Wan to Shum Tseng (~10km in 3 hours)
Chai Wan Kok at Allway Gardens → Shek Lung Kung Pavilion → Lin Fa Shan Public School Ruin → Ting Fu Tsai → Tsing Fai Tong → Sham Tsang
Reference: https://www.trailwatch.hk/?t=activities&rid=10212856

Yuen Tsuen Ancient Trail (Full): Tsuen Wan to Tai Tong (~12.5km in 5.5 hours)
Chai Wan Kok at Allway Gardens → Shek Lung Kung Pavilion → Lin Fa Shan Public School Ruin →  Ting Fu Tsai → Tai Lam Country Park →  Tai Tong, Yuen Long
Reference: https://www.trailwatch.hk/?t=activities&rid=10212838

Please protect the countryside by “Leave No Trace” , hope we all can keep up with the green living and cherish the natural environment for our next generation.

Disclaimer, Terms and Conditions:

The organiser, its contractors and employees and representatives will not be responsible for any accidents or injuries to participants or spectators during the event.

Donation is non-refundable. The Organiser reserves the right to refuse entry to participants who declare false information on their application form, do not make the minimum donation, or fail to meet application requirements as stated.

BirdLife International
The David Attenborough Building,
Pembroke Street, Cambridge,
CB2 3QZ, UNITED KINGDOM

Dear Sir/Madam,

We are Green Sense, a registered charitable green group in Hong Kong. Our work ranges from highlighting non-environmental friendly practices in society through research and monitoring, to enhancing the environmental consciousness of individuals through education and publicity.

We are disappointed to know that the BirdLife International has removed the Chinese Wild Bird Federation (CWBF), a Taiwan bird conservation group, from its partnership.

According to the official statement of CWBF, it was told that its legally registered Chinese name posed a risk to the BirdLife International. CWBF is required to change its Chinese name, as well as to sign a document formally committing to not promote or advocate the legitimacy of the Republic of China. As a non-political conservation organization, CWBF decided not to sign the document, but is willing to discuss changing its Chinese name at the General Assembly on 7th September 2020. Yet, the BirdLife International has removed CWBF from the partnership before the Assembly, stating that the latter has not addressed the “risks”.

We see CWBF as a devoted member in wild bird conservation. We hope that the BirdLife International could provide a clear justification on its decision to remove CWBF from the partnership, as well as not giving the chance for CWBF to discuss at the General Assembly on 7th September 2020.

Taiwan is an important stopover site for migratory birds along the East Asian-Australasian Flyway, allowing them to refuel, roost and rest. Bird conservation groups in Taiwan can record and study the patterns and habits of migratory birds. With the help of CWBF, such useful ecological data can be circulated to other studying parties of the world.

We believe that the removal of CWBF from the BirdLife International, without justified ground, is a loss to global wild bird conservation. This case, as a demonstration of political factors hindering nature conservation efforts, may also weaken the authority and legitimacy of the BirdLife International.

We hope that the BirdLife International may reconsider and rectify its decision to remove CWBF from the partnership, for the sake of global bird conservation.

Yours faithfully,

Green Sense

Green Sense Charity Hike 2017 finished successfully at 19th March under the rainy weather. More than 300 participants and volunteers joined this activity. Thanks to the full support of everyone of you, the event was able to successfully completed.

We would like to express our gratitude to every company teams, individual participants and all the volunteers who stayed at their position under the rain till last minute. The event could conclude successfully all because of your participation and co-operation.

We hope everyone enjoyed this journey and gained the green messages at the check points. We also hope that everyone acts green from now on to protect our precious nature. Green Sense will continue to point out the non-environmental friendly practice in society through research and monitoring, in order to enhance the environmental consciousness by education and publicity.

Event highlights of the day: https://flic.kr/s/aHskWkZYhQ

Pollution is severe in Southwest Fan Lau and Kau Ling Chung Beach in Lantau

Government measures should be announced to prevent the reflux of refuse

Recently large amount of garbage from mainland was driven to Hong Kong and was brought to the beaches. After the report from media, residents have paid more attention to the problem of marine refuse.

Member from Green Sense did an inspection in the Southwest Fan Lau and Kau Ling Chung Beach on 10 July. These two places and the mangrove in Shui Hau are located on the south coast of Lantau Island, which suffers from the problem of marine refuse. In the report ”Investigation on the Sources and Fates of Marine Refuse in Hong Kong” published in April 2015 by Environmental Protection Department, Fan Lau and the mangrove in Shui Hau are both classified as priority areas. Green Sense believes that the problem in Shui Hau would be followed up after the visit and cleaning by the government officials. However, Fan Lau and Kau Ling Chung Beach are remote areas and can only be reached by rough paths, which make the cleaning a bigger challenge. The Government should not ignore the problem of marine refuse in the areas. Green Sense would also report the situation to Government departments.

“The government should announce the measures, and provide more resources on cleaning marine refuse, in order to prevent the reflux of garbage back into the ocean. The government should also negotiate with the Chinese government on the proper waste management, in preventing the impact to the marine ecology and the environment. ”said Roy Tam, Chief Executive (Voluntary) of Green Sense. Tam thinks that manpower and marine refuse would need to be transported through waterway at places like Fan Lau and Kau Ling Chung, therefore more attention is needed to the arrangement of the cleaning by the government.

Marine refuse is one of the problems that no one should ignore, we should be responsible to protect the environment. Green Sense appeals to you all for reducing consumption and wastage, in order to provide a livable environment for our next generation.

Click here for more photos on the day of inspection

Kai-to ferry departs from Aberdeen to Po Toi

Visitors could reach Po Toi by Kai-to ferries that depart from Aberdeen or Stanley. Take a walk from the Po Toi Pier, you could find a few stalls and a seafood restaurant, selling all kinds of local specialties. One of the must-buy items is Po Toi seaweed. Visitors have the opportunity to appreciate the natural beauty of the Island, and also support local businesses full of local characteristics and memories. The ecotour offers a taste of the fishing village specialties while promoting the Island economy, which fulfils the principle of sustainability. Meanwhile, participants could have a glimpse of local lifestyle by getting in touch with the Island residents. Due to its remote location, Po Toi Island still does not have stable electricity supply. The Island is only powered by diesel generators from 6am to 6pm, causing inconvenience to the residents. Even when summer heat peaks, they could only use rechargeable electric fans to cool down. Isn’t it quite unbelievable that Hong Kong has such a primitive place?

Residence and restaurant along the Po Toi Pier 

You could walk into history as long as you leave the inhabited area. Take the stone steps and you will find Po Toi School, as if a time machine brings you back to an old village school. Although it is now abandoned, you can still see the classroom and the structure that are filled with an old school atmosphere. The single building structure that contains only one classroom stands as a sharp contrast to the well-equipped schools nowadays. Keep walking the steps, you will be led to another abandoned building – Mo’s Family House. You might have a general idea about how people used to live based on the House’s architectural style and structure. It was built between hillsides. The magnificent walls and luxurious stairs design demonstrated the high status of Mo’s family at that time. These rare historical remains serve as an important platform for later generations to understand lifestyles in the past. They are more meaningful than the words written in textbooks.

Po Toi School 

Tired after walking uphill? You may take a rest near the stalls and refresh yourself before heading to the next destination – Rock Carvings on Po Toi. The Carvings are one of the declared monuments in Hong Kong, a status that indicates its historical significance. Although the totems and words are not clear or understandable, but you could feel the hard work done by our forefathers who did not have books or electronic devices to record and express their reverence for nature.

Rock Carvings on Po Toi

If you keep walking on the hiking trail, you will find a paved trail that leads you to the southernmost tip of Hong Kong. On the way you could appreciate the many faces of granite rocks after different levels of weathering and erosion, such as block disintegration and honeycomb weathering, which resulted in the interesting shapes of the rocks. You could find a lot of great spots for photography, for example, the Palm Cliff that has experienced block disintegration, the Tortoise Rock that looks like it is treading uphill, and the Monk Rock. Every rock is unique, and therefore it is worth visitors to understand how the geography in Hong Kong has shaped the process of rock formation. Once you finish this section of the hiking trail, you could reach the Lighthouse 126 where you could enjoy the wonderful panorama of the South China Sea. No wonder so many tourists pitch their tents here. Although the walk is not an easy one, it is worth the effort in order to see the natural wonders with our bare eyes.

The Monk Rock

On the way to the southernmost tip of Hong Kong

Ecotour is not only about appreciating the nature, but also about understanding the interdependent relationship between human development and environment protection, in which land planning is one of the issues that should be in the spotlight. Po Toi Island is facing a controversial change of land use, which is the plan of property developers to build niches in the name of increasing the supply of niches. The dozens of Island residents disagree with the plan. Many see the property developers as ignorant to the natural habitat of the Island. Po Toi is a natural reserve of ecological diversity. Any construction could destroy its ecological balance, and its habitat should be preserved. The ecology should not be ruined to build niches, luxury homes or hotels for the sake of city development. Some people argue the lack of stable water and electricity supply is the reason to develop Po Toi Island. However, it is unknown whether the residents’ basic needs would be satisfied after the development. It is crucial to balance development and conservation. Visiting Po Toi Island could stimulate one’s reflections on the needs of the residents and the importance of ecology. The Island’s development must be carefully considered.

Will it be a positive change for Po Toi if it is to become a country park? Despite the fact that economic development is limited in a country park, the residents are guaranteed a better living standard as well as protected homes. It is therefore not surprising to see this suggestion being backed by the residents. They care more about their daily lives than big-scale economic development. In fact, the Po Toi land use controversy is only the tip of an iceberg – Hong Kong has a lot more land planning issues that worth our attention.

Fake Consultation by Airport Authority  Underestimate Pollution
12 Infrastructures on Lantau and in Tuen Mun
Exceed Environmental Threshold
Air Pollution threaten 600,000 Tung Chung and Tuen Mun Residents
Abandon “Economy Overrides All” Mindset!

大嶼山北岸及屯門的污染性基建

Today is the World Environment Day. We urge all citizens of Hong Kong to oppose the construction of the third Runway of the Hong Kong International Airport. Such opposition is, at present, the most effective way to protect our environment.

Aviation industry is a polluting industry. A significant amount of carbon dioxide and other pollutants will be emitted during flights. The greenhouse effect produced by upper-air emission of carbon dioxide is double that made near the ground. However, the Airport Authority Hong Kong (Airport Authority) has barely mentioned the increase of carbon emission in its consultation paper (Hong Kong International Airport Master Plan 2030). Nowadays, more and more citizens are adopting a lifestyle of low carbon emission. Ironically, however hard we tried to reduce of use of airconditioning, to enforce legislation related to idling engines, and to replace old buses, still, we can hardly cancel out 50% increase of the carbon emission generated by the three-runway system. The omission of this environmental destruction is surely a loophole of the consultation paper.

The consultation paper has also omitted the threshold of environmental sustainability. There are already 5 polluting facilities in Tuen Mun District and North Lantau. If those under consultation and planning are included, namely, the third runway, Hongkong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge and Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facilities Reclamation Works, Incinerator at Tsang Tsui, Sludge incineration facility, Reclamation for Tung Chung New Town, Logistic Park and the possible railway connecting the airport of Hong Kong and Shenzhen. There will be 12 polluting infrastructures concentrated. The carrying capacity of the whole area is clearly exceeded. Among the 7 polluting infrastructuresyet to be constructed, some require huge area of reclamation; some at the same time produce lots of air pollutants. If the North Lantau coastline is reclaimed for the third runway, the channel (between the North Lantau and Tuen Mun) will face the same fate of Victoria Harbour and become narrower and narrower. Surely regrets will not help at that time. Moreover, the severe sir pollution generated by these infrastructures threaten the health of 600,000 Tung Chung and Tuen Mun Residents.

Another problem of the consultation paper is that it releases misleading information in relation to the impact on the Chinese White Dolphins. According to the consultation paper, the proposed reclamation area is a wide stretch of Contaminated Mud Pits. It claims that it is an area of low Chinese White Dolphins abundance. Therefore, the area has little marine conservation value but reclamation. We, Green Sense, thinks that the conclusion of the above two observation is erred because of lack of common sense. As the government designated the area as Contaminated Mud Pits, Chinese White Dolphins does not stay for long. The Dolphins dash and pass because of the is turbance of the marine environment. As a result, they are not counted. Yet it does not mean they don’t use the area to and from the three core areas. The professional knowledge and independence of the consultants of the Airport Authority are under serious doubt.

Improving the current two runways(first option of the consultation) can ensure a limit of pollutants and carbon emission, while the third runway (second option of the construction) will increase the emissions endlessly. The construction of the third runway reflects the old fashioned mindset of trading environmental quality for economic gains. We, Green Sense, sincerely invite all Hong Kong citizens to seriously think about whether we should still adopt the said old fashioned mindset for thefuture of Hong Kong.

Acquisition policy

OceanParkhas stated in their own animal acquisition policy that “acquisition of animals from the wild is always a last alternative and pursued only if there is independently verifiable scientific evidence that the wild population is sustainable and that the removal of a limited number of animals is non-detrimental to the population’s survival.” However, after several enquiries, the World Wide Fund for NatureHong Kongfound just last week that the Park has not followed their own Animal Acquisition Policy when acquiring the threatened bluefin tuna. This proves that the Park will abandon their own corporate policy whenever they choose. Moreover, acquisition of bluefin tuna from the wild has not been proven sustainable, and not only depletes the wild population further but also misleads the public to believe capturing wild endangered animals is a practice of conservation and education. This act is certainly counter to its social responsibility to educate the public in an appropriate manner.

Welfare issues

OceanParkleads the public to believe that they deeply care about their acquired animals. However, the Park has always concealed the death toll figures of the animals at their facility deliberately from the public and media. According to a member of staff atOceanPark, the Park placed the bluefin tuna inside their new pool while the pool facility was not properly prepared, in order to meet the grand opening of the Grand Aquarium just in time for the Lunar New Year holiday. Because the water filtration system and water quality were not set properly at the time, 10 of the 80 bluefin tuna died. And only a dozen out of 40 hammerhead sharks initially acquired have survived, due to overcrowded living conditions in their quarantine pool when first introduced into the park. How animals are kept atOceanParkis certainly opposed to how they promote themselves as conserving wild animals and educating the public. This reveals that their operations and management have been poorly transparent so the public have no way to evaluate if the Park should import certain species, or if their animal husbandry techniques are up to standards needed to keep these species in captivity. 

Polar Exhibit

Besides the Grand Aquarium,OceanParkhas already announced that they will acquire more wild animals for their Polar Exhibit, which is scheduled to open in 2012. These species include beluga whales and walruses, species that are in danger in their polar habitats. Due to the low survival and reproductive rates of beluga whales in captivity, it is generally believed by scientists that the Park would need to capture beluga whales from the wild. To try to conform to their own animal acquisition policy,OceanParkfunded a survey on a wild beluga whale population in Russian waters more than two years ago, in the hope that it would prove that catching individual whales would not be detrimental to the sustainable survival of their wild population. However, the survey has been conducted under the table andOceanParkhas never revealed how they conducted the study. The park has also yet to disclose any findings or report on any impact assessments that the acquisition will have on the wild population. Also the park has not made any promise to disclose the full report for inspection by independent and authoritative scientists, making the integrity and reliability of the report in serious doubt.

It is even more obscure that the Park has already established the exhibit for beluga whales before there is any evidence supporting acquisition of wild beluga whales. According to a member of staff at the Park,OceanParkhas already reconstructed their dolphin training pool into a beluga quarantine pool, for their scheduled import, approximately this coming March or April. This has already raised grave concern from international conservation groups. Two of the most prominent cetacean conservation groups in the world – the Humane Society International and the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society – have issued statements (Appendix 1) for this press conference, expressing their discontent and concern aboutOceanPark’s plan to acquire wild beluga whales. This shows thatOceanPark’s recent plan of animal acquisition has raised concerned not only locally but internationally too, further undermining the image ofOceanParkas well asHong Kong.

It is believed that the new Polar Exhibit will also contribute to local environmental problems. A large amount of energy would be consumed in order to maintain cold air and water temperatures for the polar animals in the new exhibit. AsHong Kongnow generates electricity mainly by burning coal, the huge amount of energy consumed would then emit carbon dioxide, contributing to global climate change. Claiming to be environmentally friendly and conservation-oriented,OceanParkhas not applied these principles during their operation. For instance,OceanParkclaimed that the Polar Exhibit would be used to raise public awareness about global warming and its impacts, but it is contradictory and ironic that the exhibit itself will further contribute to climate change.

Petition and Follow-up Actions

To address the abovementioned problems, Hong Kong Dolphin Conservation Society and Green Sense started a petition last month, with the statements (Appendix 2) cosigned by 17 local and international organizations, expressing grave concerns about the underlying problems at Ocean Park. We hope that the public andOceanParkvisitors will be aware of the long-existing problems behind the park’s so-called education and conservation work. The public should also think about the aims and policies ofOceanPark’s establishment, and the Park itself should fully realize its social responsibility when it comes to animal acquisition and environment conservation. Our joint-statement has also been supported by nearly a thousand people on Facebook. Some have also written down their discontent and appeals toOceanParkat an online petition site. 

Cosigning parties have already expressed their views and six important appeals toOceanPark. Legislator Ms Audrey Eu has already promised to follow up the issue by writing to the LegCo Panel on Environmental Affairs, with the hope to increase transparency on the Park’s operations, and strengthen the surveillance onOceanParkfrom the outside.

Green Sense Major Campaign on Wedding Expo

Shark fins are common in Chinese Wedding menu. Because of years of high demand and overfishing, many species of sharks are threatened with extinction.  Since there are numerous couples married every year, wedding banquets have become the rendezvous for huge consumption of shark fins. We hope that every couple preserves sharks while sharing the joyful moment with friends and relatives so that their number can be stabilized and sustained. .

Green Sense holds a campaign which advocates “Happy Wedding, Saves Sharks” near the exhibition venue of the Hong Kong Wedding Banquet and Accessories EXPO 2010 at Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre on today and tomorrow (6^th and 7^th November, 2010). We wish couples could make an informed choice during their wedding banquet with the knowledge of the ecological and humanitarian problems caused by consumption of shark fins.

According to Census and Statistics Department, there were 4,460 tons of shark fin products imported amounting to HK$1.3 billion in 2009. Yet another 4,935 tons of shark fin products valued at about HK$620 million were re-exported.  The figures clearly show that millions of sharks are killed every year and the amount of various species of sharks is seriously depleted. Because of the lucrative profits,not only are there massive killings of sharks but also inhumane and cruel catching.

In 1996, only 15 species of sharks in the world were threatened. Today, the figure has significantly increased eight-fold over the past decade. Currently, there are over 120 species of sharks threatened according to IUCN Red List. The huge demand of consumption by human being is pushing for its extinction.

We, Green Sense, sincerely urge couples choosing sustainable alternatives for shark fins. We have enquired most Chinese restaurant corporate and hotels and they all can change wedding menu according to consumers’ needs and preference, for example, by replacing shark fin soup with birds’ nest soup, seafood soup or vegetarian shark fin soup. These substitutes not only preserve the ecology but also maintain a grand and elegant wedding banquet.

Apart from having substitutes for shark fins, couples could also save water by communication with the hotels. There is a recent trend in Chinese wedding banquet that plates are replaced and changed per dish. This practice is also known as ‘meals for the disabled’. The amount of plates to be washed is multiplied because of the practice, wasting significant amount of water and aggravating the water pollution problem. We, Green Sense, wish couples could consider not serving ‘meals for the disabled’ in their wedding banquet.

* All words and expressions should be construed according to the press release in Chinese.

Proposed plan of beluga import: critical conservation and animal welfare issues

In 2005, Ocean Park announced their plan to build an Arctic exhibit (to be opened between 2011 and 2012) and proposed to import belugas and walruses into the exhibit for entertainment purposes.  This news has raised serious concerns by local and international conservation organizations.  Belugas live in Arctic waters, and are not suitable to be kept in captivity, especially in a tropical region.  Their survival rate and success rate of breeding have been low in captivity.  As a result, oceanaria need to continuously capture more wild belugas to replenish their stock, which can become a serious conservation issue.  For example, the National Museum of Marine Biology and Aquarium in Taiwan has imported ten belugas since 2002 in two shipments.  Even with their first-class facility and expertise, at least half of them have already died due to their inability to survive in captivity.

Ocean Park always expresses to the public that capturing animals from the wild is their last resort to obtain animals.  However, many species in their proposed collection have to be captured from the wild.  They have found no other alternatives for exchange with or purchase from other facility.  And the park cannot explain why their existing dolphin stock is not sufficient and whether there is enough justification to capture more wild dolphins to jeopardize their survival in natural environments.  Moreover, Ocean Park repeatedly claimed to study the beluga population abundance before any capture takes place.  But without any obvious evidence of sustainable catch, they have already spent huge amounts of money to build a facility specifically for keeping beluga whales.

In addition, Arctic exhibit also causes energy wastage. The arctic animals live in very low temperature, like 5℃. Yet, the temperature of Hong Kong is more that 15℃ all the year round and even more than 30℃ in summer. In order to cool the exhibit, much of the electricity is used and this in turn damages the earth.

Superficial education and vague conservation message

As a non-profit making organization, Ocean Park received valuable public land from the Hong Kong government at no cost. So they surely have the responsibility to serve the Hong Kong public while avoiding to cause any conservation dilemmas and damaging Hong Kong’s reputation internationally as contributing to wildlife conservation issues.  Instead, Ocean Park keeps bringing in animals from the wild to jeopardize their conservation status and own welfare with only one aim: to generate more profits from tourists.  Moreover, the park has always maintained secrecy on how they capture and keep their wild dolphins and have always conveyed false notions to their visitors.  Their irresponsible acts have blurred the line between public education and entertainment.  For example:

1. Ocean Park deliberately avoids mentioning that their dolphins were member of wild populations (or the offspring of wild animals).  The visitors may think that dolphins are human properties that they can be caught from the wild any time to generate profit and entertain people.  The public may also think that dolphins can adapt well in captivity and willingly perform tricks every day.  Ocean Park has not been educating the visitors diligently on protecting wild dolphin populations and their living habitats either.  All they have been doing is to boast of their husbandry practice in order to shift the public attention from real conservation issues of capturing wild animals and animal welfare of their captive animals.
2. Ocean Park deliberately sends a wrong message to the public that visiting the park is just like getting close to nature and one can only appreciate the dolphins by attending the dolphin shows or even spending more money to touch them.  For example, the park’s activity “Dolphin Encounter” has misled the public that true appreciation of dolphins can come only from touching and interacting with them and the information conveyed to the participants are superficial and unbalanced.   Undoubtedly, this activity is strictly a commercial activity to generate more profit for “conservation” in which dolphins are forced to become a money-making machine.  There is tremendous amount of information on wild dolphins available on the internet. And in Hong Kong the public can observe the Chinese white dolphins in their natural habitats very close to home from a boat or from the shores of Hong Kong.  Obviously, it is unnecessary to attend dolphin shows and to touch dolphins in order to learn more about their biology and ecology.
3. We find the educational content of the courses held by the Ocean Park Academy deliberately avoiding the facts about the living habitats of wild whales and dolphins, their complex social structure and emotions and conservation issues in their natural environment.  Understandably, they never mention where their animals were initially captured and the cruel process of such capture

Our requests to Ocean Park…

Suspend the construction of the Arctic exhibit or modify the exhibit to become an education and conservation centre for better presentation of accurate and balanced views of marine conservation messages to the visitors;

Stop any plan of importing belugas, walruses and other wildlife into Ocean Park, and pledge not to catch any whales, dolphins and large marine creatures to avoid conservation dilemmas;

Eventually end the dolphin “circus shows” for entertainment purpose and use the dolphins only for free public educational activities;

Include information on dolphin capture process, natural behaviours and daily lives of dolphins and whales in their living habitat, as well as the differences between wild and captive dolphins, into their public awareness programme, including the courses of Ocean Park Academy.

Our next steps…

We will send out educational booklets to all local schools to convey the accurate message of whale and dolphin conservation (including the hidden truth about captivity), in order to provide more balanced views to local students on proper concepts of marine conservation;

We will organize sustainable eco-tours, including land-based observation of wild Chinese white dolphins, to raise public awareness on proper ways to observe animals in their natural settings without disturbing their daily lives, and on the importance of wildlife conservation;

We sincerely urge the Professional Teachers’ Union to stop selling Ocean Park admission tickets until the park promises not to import belugas or any other marine mammal and other wild animals with conservation issues;

Even though Ocean Park is not under any government department, we will contact the Hong Kong government to urge for their surveillance on the park operation.

On the other hand, Green Sense sent request letter to all 56 government departments, asking whether shark fin is consumed, as well as whether guideline for its consumption is in place. Only 14 departments replied (see attached table). Most departments have indicated that shark fin has not been served within the past year in internal or official banquet, with the exception of Architectural Services Department. As to whether there is a guideline, only the Hong Kong Observatory has issued an internal memo in February 2008 ruling that “shark fin dishes are not allowed in all banquets using public funding”. In addition Planning Department replied they “would set departmental guideline.” Other departments, said they “do not need”, “have no plans” or “think it is inappropriate” to devise such guideline.

Later, the Environmental Protection Department sent us a reply on behalf of the rest of the departments. It indicates that the government will only regulate the trading of three species of sharks under the “Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora” (CITES). But it did not respond whether or not shark fin has been served in its internal or official banquet; nor did it respond whether guideline on shark fin’s consumption was issued internally or government-wide. Green Sense also sent the same query to the Chief Executive’s Office last week. The Office only quoted the same response from EPD. All in all, the government has very vague attitude towards the issue of shark fin consumption and the response varies from one department to another.

Currently, the over-exploitation of sharks is serious. This April, the U.S. Hawaii State Government has passed the legislation banning the sale and possession of shark fins. Green Sense believes that the Hong Kong SAR Government should take the initiative to include all the shark species under regulation and develop guidelines banning the consumption of shark fin among government departments, instead of merely complying with CITES and make excuse that many shark species are not yet included in the international conventions. It should also save sharks and marine ecosystems with real action, encouraging people not to eat any shark fins and shark products, so as to respond
to the call of conservation of sharks and marine ecology locally and internationally.