Forum Replies Created
- Posts
FINS magazine ("Asia’s best scuba diving publication") has an online poll: Disneyland Hong Kong announced it will be promoting shark fin soup. Disneyland also claims it promotes wildlife conservation. What do you think?
HK Standard, which first helped land Disney in the soup, has further reports, including: Disney urged not to serve shark fin soup and: Disney ducks shark attacks Latter mentions:
Quote:Kym Murphy, senior vice president of corporate environmental policy for Disney, sits on the Board of Trustees for the National Marine Sanctuary Foundation, an American marine protection organization– it would be interesting to learn what the foundation thinks of this issue. An email just in:
Quote:Dear Mr Eisner, Since Sylvia Hui’s editorial in The STANDARD on 18 May 2005 – "Disneyland weddings for the young and wealthy..The menus feature traditional Chinese banquet delicacies such as roast suckling pig, shark’s fin soup and sliced abalone", you would have received hundreds of pleas at a global level to remove the gruesome item from the menu. We are disappointed at the response or lack there of to the issue; it is apparent that shortsightedness or plain ignorance from your banquet and PR staff. By promoting and offering shark fins soup, DISNEYLAND is seen as supporting the culling of sharks, eventually causing their extinction in the world’s oceans. Imagine shark fins to be the hand and legs of Mickey Mouse; chop them off and throw the lame struggling body of Mickey on the side walk to die a slow painful death!. That is how sharks are harvested from the world’s oceans. Please consider the following: 1. In the minute it takes you to read this letter almost 200 sharks will have their fins removed while still alive and thrown back into the sea to die. Shark experts estimate that 100 million sharks are slaughtered each year for their fins. 2. Shark fin is tasteless and has no nutritional value – they are cartilage, just like your fingernails and hair. 3. It is Cruel to consume shark fin – it is akin to chopping legs off cow and throwing them back into the field and allowing them to bleed to death. 4. Because of the demand from Asia, fishermen from Galapagos are now pushing for wholesale revisions to the fishing statute by demanding a year-round fishing calendar, use of long-line fishing, a lifting of the prohibition on shark fishing. In this respect, the Asian culture are threatening to destroy one of the most unique and fragile eco-systems remaining on this planet. 5. Sharks reproduce very slowly and we are killing them faster than they can replace themselves. Sharks have slow growth rates and do not reach sexual maturity for years. It takes a whale shark 25 years to reproduce. For hammerheads and Tiger sharks it takes 15 years. Once sexually mature sharks have long gestation periods with the embryo developing in the mother for up to two years. 6. Sharks are vanishing from our world’s oceans very quickly – the demand for shark fin soup in Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong and China is primarily responsible the peril of sharks globally – some 100 million animals are killed every year just for their fins. To conserve sharks and the preserve the species, we must address the issue at the heart of the problem; we must reduce the demand for shark fins in Asia. Since 2001, OceanNENvironment and Asian Geographic have launched the ‘Say No to Shark Fins" Campaign on an annual basis targeting at young couples and children. Instead of supporting conservation, DISNEYLAND HONG KONG is now contributing to the extinction of sharks, promoting cruelty and wastefulness to children and young adults. Since many shark species are protected, DISNEY is therefore seen as encouraging the sale and consumption of endangered species. In this aspect DISNEY is promoting to children and young people a message that cruelty and exploitation of animals is acceptable. THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE. We respectfully suggest the following actions: Admit the shortsightedness and instead support the conservation of sharks by removing shark fins soup from wedding banquet and replace with other more sustainable delicacies. Since 2002, OceanNEnvironment and Asian Geographic have produced a card/letter package " WHY WE ARE NOT SERVING SHARK FINS SOUP TONIGHT?" for couples to distribute at their wedding dinner – perhaps you may wish to consider this as an option – by doing this DISNEYLAND and prospective wedding couples will be seen as intelligent, eco savvy most importantly contributing to the preservation of our ocean environment. I trust that you will respond expediently. Imagine the next edition of Asian Geographic with Mickey Mouse struggling in agony without his arms and legs on the cover. Get the picture? Michael AW Chairman, OceanNEnvironment Australia Publisher, Asian Geographic : Scuba Diver Australasia: Underwater Channel Publisher Asian Geographic Magazine Scuba Diver Australasia http://www.asiangeographic.org http://www.scubadiveraustralasia.comHeard today that US Consulate has reportedly phoned someone involved in arguing against HK Disneyland serving shark’s fin soup, asking re next moves. Hmm… black helicopters out next?
South China Morning Post had article on shark’s fin trade today. In it, defenders of Disney position arguing they are following local culture/tradition – which may seem fine, but traditions/cultures do change as societies change; this is a pitiful argument to put against cruel, wasteful, unnecessary practice that’s impacting shark populations (and marine ecology) – especially when Disney supposedly supports environmental issues.
Mentioned re host serving shark’s fin for “face”.Dr Brian Darvell, of first email quoted in this thread, has received this:
Quote:Dear Dr. Darvell,
My name is Matthew Smith, from Flint, Michigan. The reason I am sending this Email is that I have recently read about Disney and their irresponsibilty with respect to conservation by proposing to serve shark fin soup in Hong Kong. I, my wife Rana, and a large group of friends and family were planning on a week trip to DisneyWorld in Florida. After explaining about Disney and Eisner’s attitude towards the issue we have changed plans not only to go to another resort, but also encourage other organizations that offer group travel to Disney resorts not to do so. It would be greatly appreciated if you had an address or email that I could contact at Disney to tell them about our concerns and why we have changed our plans and asked for a full refund on our trip. Each and every member of the group will be contacting Disney and any help you can offer would be appreciated.
Thank You from a fellow supporter,
Matt SmithWith google today, came across article from xinhuanet, re sharks’ containing pollutants including mercury:
Shark fin may cause sterility
– while doesn’t mention the conservation message, this does seem another reason why shark fin soup might not be the best dish for a wedding banquet.Post edited by: Martin, at: 2005/05/28 17:48
forbes . com, Daily Telegraph, BBC News (online), Los Angeles Times among media Google News is finding today with reports on HK Disneyland offering shark’s fin soup.
SCM Post this morning reports that Disney is defiant over shark’s fin soup issue; spokeswoman quoted as saying:
Quote:Hong Kong Disneyland takes environmental stewardship very seriously and we are equally sensitive to the local cultures. It is customary for Chinese restaurants and five-star hotels to serve shark’s fin soup in Hong Kong, as the dish is considered an integral part of Chinese banquets. At Hong Kong Disneyland, shark’s fin soup will only be served to our guests at private functions on special request.So, how does taking environmental stewardship very seriously square with serving a soup made from the fins of threatened species (many sharks are in decline) – which are cut from the living animals, which are tossed back into the water to die horrible deaths? (A friend who’s a wildlife cameraman told me of diving in Galapagos, and seeing two sharks that had just had fins cut off swimming in circles round bottom of a bay; with no fins, they can’t control movement, so will die.) Instead of sensitivity, smacks of callous corporate greed. Yes, many restaurants do serve this soup in HK – I believe they’re very wrong too. But from company espousing family friendly image, making films including Shark Tale, and involved in Finding Nemo, shouldn’t we expect something better – some corporate courage, perhaps? For more re shark’s fin soup and conservation, see The Great Shark Fin Debate from South China Diving Club, and WildAid’s Shark Campaign.
Hi Mike:
Glad you’re interested in visiting.
Sometimes, can be a lot of visitors on a Sunday. Mainly on “ecotours” – big groups led around by leaders with flags (and maybe loud-hailers); in spaces between groups, peaceful.
But I went to Tung Ping Chau recently, expecting just such groups – after many of them on my last visit – and only rather few visitors. So, not sure if these “ecotours” are less popular (hope so – seems to me they pack people in, do things pretty fast, and not great for participants, altho cheap).I suggest you check ferry timetable, get there in advance so that maximise chance of getting on ferry (no advance booking that I’m aware of).
The southern trail is easier to follow; but in hot weather carry plenty to drink – maybe water and a bottle of sports drink. (No stores away from main village area.)
No good sign to point out just which is Turtle Rock etc (when I last went); but Buddha’s Hand easy to recognise. I recommend walking onto the rocky, southern headland; take care, as some steep cliffs.Rugged Trail is indeed rugged; not real tough, but take more care if you try. Less people along this.
Hope this helps. If you do go, please post a message about results – whether you liked it, had any problems etc. (And if you’ve photos, you could post two or three of best ones if you register here.)
Martin
San Tau well worth covering, maybe early on walk fr Tung Chung to Tai O.
Just had long phone talk w Esta Overmars of Islands Courier; various ideas – inc link w Dragon Boat race in Mui Wo that day; can aim for some posters, perhaps with help from New Lantao Bus Co. Also, stronger involvement w local community.
Hopefully can manage a good day; got interest from some good people so far, so looking ok.
Paul Melsom also interested in some involvement – partly, he’d like volunteer tree planters, for land nr Mui Wo, on 5 June.
I think there are enough signs.
Not big env problems that I can recall.
Hope you’ll go n have a look!
Martin
With govt mooting indoor, man-made beach for ne Lantau (and not explaining how this might be sustainable), just done a bit of searching on net, and found re indoor beach in Japan. Ocean Dome… is an article in the Ecologist, focuses on the unreality of the beach.
Also an April 2004 Business Week article on Ocean Dome’s financial troubles – part of resort that cost US$1.5 billion; by 2001 had US$3 billion in debts, and rescue efforts proving difficult: Rescuing this Japanese resort won’t be a picnic Seems about as sustainable as Cyberport – no wonder our govt suggested it.
In December, Britain’s Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution – "an independent standing body established in 1970 to advise the Queen, the Government, Parliament and the public on environmental issues" – issued a report on UK fisheries, which likewise says past fisheries policies have failed; overfishing remains a serious problem: Among recommendations:
Quote:We therefore call for radical change to increase protection for the marine environment.Quote:the UK government and fisheries departments should initiate a decommissioning scheme to reduce the capacity of the UK fishing fleet to an environmentally sustainable level and move towards managing fisheries on the basis of controlling fishing effort – the overall amount of fishing activity – rather than the quantity of fish landed. It should take steps to ensure such measures are also introduced at the European level.Instead of presumption in favour of fishing,
Quote:… we recommend that the presumption should be reversed; applicants for fishing rights (or aquaculture operations in the marine environment) should have to demonstrate that the effects of their activity will not harm the sea’s long-term environmental sustainability.recommendations would lead to
Quote:30% of the UK’s exclusive economic zone being established as marine reserves closed to commercial fishing.The extensive report (even a summary document runs to 30 pages) is available at: RCEP Turning the Tide Report
from Clive Noffke, of Green Lantau Association:
Quote:Thanks for forwarding that. Indeed it is the new Tung Chung Rd alignment (Country Park section) that your correspondent saw. The JV building the road has set up a website for the EM&A report (which I monitor). It contains a description of the project, the alignment, and the current (monthly) state of play.The Country park section was agreed by my predecessors in GLA who felt that the government arguments for going off-line (essentially achieving a gradient of no more than 15 degrees) were incontestable. The EP is very stringent however, and EM&A report at 190 pages (each month!), is testimony as to how stringent it is. I have walked the alignment with the Project Manager in February, and felt they were really trying their best. Regards Clive
just come across a govt response to Concept Plan objection, on Internet objection was by Ruy Barretto, a lawyer who’s closely linked to Kadoorie (also a botanist) Assuming you haven’t seen the response: it’s more detailed than the (to me) simple-minded rejection of the 19 green groups’ statement; so you may find it worth a read; links here are to pdf files: http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr04-05/english/panels/plw/papers/plwcb1-1262-1e.pdf While Ruy’s response to the plan – also worth a look I think, is at: http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr04-05/english/panels/plw/papers/plwcb1-1040-1e.pdf
