December 07, 2007: Applied Technology and Management INC, (ATM) of Miami Florida, has completed  a draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the Construction of a Dolphin Facility at Sandy Point/Blowing Point,  Anguilla. The 96 page statement is dated November 2007 and concludes  that net environmental impacts should not be significant and that the site's location and design minimizes direct impacts to either the terrestrial or marine environment.

Though not confirmed by the Anguilla National Trust (ANT), we have reliable information, that the organization has submitted detailed comments on the EIS to the LAND DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE (LDCC). From what we know, their comments in general maintains their stance of opposition to the facility on the island. The ANT denies direct consultation referred to on more than one occasion in the EIS. Of several issues raised by the organization was a fundamental concern about the health of penned dolphins and in addition the water which will be some 10 times more shallow than depths wild dolphins are known to dive. In addition they pose serious questions and comments on issues such as  waste storage and treatment as well as the overall impact on sea grass habitats.  

Our sources tell us that the comments from the ANT points to the fact that the water quality report is dated and is not Anguilla Specific. Moreover, it is said that the Veterinarian’s Summary is not placed in the context of conditions on Anguilla.

Based on our information, the ANT also had some concerns about the Socio-Economic Impacts Assessment component of the EIS because the assessment doesn’t offer any sound conclusions as to whether the project is good for Blowing Point/Sandy Point or not.

The ANT suggested to the LDCC that since the dolphinarium is seeking to move to Blowing Point, it is primarily this community that will have to deal with the resulting positive and negative impacts albeit social, cultural, economic, or ecological. It is important that their voices and concerns be heard, acknowledged, and addressed.

In fact, the report makes the inference that the increase of visitors to Anguilla can be directly attributed to the Dolphin Discovery facility. However, our sources indicate that the ANT dispelled this flawed logic by pointing out that while the statistics collected over the years indicate an increase in the number of tourists, not enough research has been conducted to determine what the primary reason for that increase is. The ANT goes on to say, we are told that visitors who come from St. Martin and who visit the dolphinarium are often visiting the island on a package which includes a number of different places around Anguilla with one of those places being Dolphin Discovery. Our sources say that the ANT has warned the LDCC that to make a direct correlation between day visitors to Anguilla coming specifically for Dolphin Discovery would require more in-depth study; and without this information, it would be difficult to state that tourist numbers would decrease (particularly those of day visitors) and income generated by such tourists would be lost if the dolphinarium was no longer operating on the island. The Socio-Economic component seemed to have been a serious bone of contention for the ANT we are told.

Reliable sources say that the ANT questioned the objectivity of the socio-economic assessment. We are told that the Organisation pointed out to the LDCC that while it is important to include a socio-economic assessment in an environmental impact statement/assessment, it is also essential that it remains objective and that it examines both the benefits and constraints of a development initiative. The ANT’s analysis concludes that the report was highly subjective in favour of the dolphinarium Operator and failed to capture or at least fully discuss the perceptions and the reasons behind those perceptions of community members towards Dolphin Discovery. If our sources are correct, we understand why the ANT would point to the fact that the Appendix containing the questionnaire and the results of that questionnaire was missing. The ANT told the LDCC that the information in this survey could have provided more insight into the community’s position on the matter.

Copies of the EIS Report and an accompanying Socio-Economic report have been posted online.