December 3, 2004

Dear Sir,

During the 1960s, I captured and trained dolphins for the Miami Seaquarium, including the five dolphins that played the role of "Flipper" in the American TV series of the same name. I have witnessed firsthand the suffering imposed on dolphins during the violent capture process and their subsequent lifelong confinement. I have also seen a great many captivity-born die in captivity. Fact is, captive dolphins that were born in captivity suffer as much as those that have been captured. I made a lot of money as a dolphin trainer but chose to leave this business because, after realising what we were doing to the dolphins in the name of profit, my conscience wouldn't have it any other way. Since Earth Day 1970, I have worked to educate the public to what really goes on behind the glittering surface of the captive dolphin industry. Today, I work for the French animal protection organisation One Voice, an organisation dedicated to stopping the traffic and commercial exploitation of dolphins worldwide.

Ironically, Lynn and Martin Hassell of the proposed "Captive Dolphin Oasis", which has filed a planning application to open a business at the former Sonesta Beach Hotel is telling the public and the media that they want to confine and exploit dolphins because they want to teach people respect for nature! This is the hypocrisy that the dolphin captivity industry is based upon. The capture, confinement, and captive breeding of dolphins does represent a form of education, but it's a form of bad education in that it teaches the public that exploiting nature in the name of profit is acceptable. If the tourists that visit that lovely island want to see dolphins and get a real education about the complex lives of these animals ? as opposed to seeing them in a distorted and unnatural environment ? they have the unique opportunity to do so, in a respectful, non-invasive manner.

Having captured, bred, and trained dolphins in the past, I know exactly where the people at Captive Dolphin Oasis are coming from: I used to come from the same place. In consequence, I know that the captive dolphin swim programme will never be able to tell the public the truth about the capture, captive breeding and training of dolphins. If they did, the people of Bermuda would revolt against it. In other words: They wouldn't buy a ticket. Having spent the last 40 years working with dolphins, I have reached the conclusion that these are complex and self aware creatures. They routinely make choices and decisions regarding the details of their own lives. They are entitled to freedom of choice; thus they are entitled to freedom. Breeding dolphins in captivity and sentencing them to a monotonous, unnatural existence in a small cage in the sea is simply wrong.

Editor's Note: This is one of at least a dozen letters received by The Royal Gazette to protest the proposed Dolphin Oasis attraction on the South Shore. Due to space limitations, we cannot publish them all.

December 2, 2004

Dear Sir,

I think all will agree that we as a people must be among the most generous and compassionate in the world. Having said that, I cannot understand why the Premier is still calling for more donations for the islands south of us, who suffered from the recent hurricane season. I do not think that the funds will be refused because the figure reached was not what had been set by the organisers here in Bermuda. We have given enough and it is time to take care of home. There are people in Bermuda who are hurting as much or more than those further south. Stop bleeding us dry.

Pembroke

December 2, 2004

Dear Sir,

I have tried my best to stay out of the independence "debate". I am reluctant to call it a debate, as it bears little resemblance to any style of debating that I am used to. There is, however, an abundance of letters written by those against Independence that are full of speculations, which do not provide one single credible crucial link as to how Bermuda would be doomed if we went Independent.

Before I completely pull apart the "arguments" of "Seeing it as it is" printed in today's paper, let me say that I am a Bermudian, and as a Bermudian whose ancestors have worked very hard to make this island what it is today, I feel that I am entitled to voice my opinion on this topic. I won't bore readers with my feelings towards other individuals who live on this island who feel that they should guide the way as to how their host country should or should not embrace independence.

Now, "Seeing it as it is" (SAS), is trying to scare the public, (yes, SAS, you did actually use a scare tactic) into being against Independence. SAS is lucky. Right now, this writer could easily convince anyone either way. Why? Because no one has any sound information. But SAS writes that they "are sure" of what will happen if Bermuda goes independent. I would like to know how? SAS does not speak of any psychic-type capabilities. Nor do they write about any projections using social science.

Why? Because no one knows. So, SAS, I refuse to sit here as an informed reader and believe your hogwash that has come off the top of your head. Oh, this and that will be gone, we will be a "third world country". For your information, there is no such thing as a third world country. There are only more economically developed countries or less economically developed countries.

Believe it or not, (believe it!), Bermuda is an MEDC. This is an important thing to know because this sets us apart from any Caribbean island's status at the time they went into independence. Bermuda can not be compared to any of these countries. We are long past the state that these countries were in when they went independent. SAS, Winston Churchill himself stated, "Study history!" I respectively advise that you heed his advice. SAS, stating "with a strong possibility that", "I am sure", and "Imagine all those..." are not things you should be stating when you are trying to convince the misinformed of what "might" happen. Any educated person will look past these speculations and wonder why you have provided no crucial links between the horrible "possibility" of Bermuda becoming a "third world country", and her independence.

I challenge SAS to stop speculating about what "might" happen, and instead read historical interpretations of the causes and ramifications of Independence in any country that they consider to be "third world". Next, read up on the UK's foreign policy regarding dependent territories. You will be surprised at what you find! I am not trying to convince SAS one way or the other, but I am trying to help SAS have an argument based on something other than what he "imagines" may happen. Once their argument is less imaginative, I doubt they will have much to say at all.

AKILAH BECKLES

Smith's Parish

November 28, 2004

Dear Sir,

Please allow me some more of your space in your valued newspaper to discuss some "food for thought" on placing mega-cruise ships in Hamilton or St. George's. Has anyone given any thought of how we are going to get these mega cruise ships into Hamilton or St George's? I remember when dredging of our ship channels was a day to day occurrence. We have not dredged any of our ship channels for some 50 years!

The government of the day 50 years ago owned and operated a dredger named the which was captained by a St. George's resident, Capt. Dale. When the North Channel was dredged and built in the 1940s by the American Military, American dredgers were here doing that job to allow their giant aircraft carriers, like the USS , and USS and the heavy cruisers USS and USS to get up into Harmon's Bay in the Great Sound to anchor. One particular area that was continually dredged was the Dundonald Channel going past the Stag Rocks.

It would be prudent to have one of our local marine companies to purchase a dredger, crew it with locals, and lease it out to the government of the day to keep our ship channels clear at all times. You could put a mega-cruise ship in Granaway Deep, and use ferries to take people back and forth into Hamilton. Granaway Deep is deep enough to put large ships into it. I saw two funnelled ships in this area many years ago. The reason the cruise ship went into King's Wharf in Dockyard instead of where it was destined to go in Hamilton was because of its draft. It was drawing 27 feet in its bow and I'm sure in its amidships it was drawing at least 32 feet. So Hamilton Harbour was out of the question, as I believe 27 and one half feet is the allowed depth of any ship in Hamilton Harbour at low tide.

Prior to the King's Wharf being built, mega-cruise ships like the and the had to go to anchor in Harmon's Bay in the Great Sound past the Stag Rocks and use a tender Service.