EAAM Statement on the Situation of Marineland Cetaceans

“Where it took decades of knowledge, care, and science to protect and care, it takes only a slogan to destroy.” - European Association for Aquatic Mammals

The European Association for Aquatic Mammals (EAAM) expresses its deep concern regarding the situation currently faced by the cetaceans housed at Marineland Antibes. These animals have been placed in a precarious and potentially harmfulposition because of political indecision, a lack of scientific consultation, and yearsof misguided campaigning rooted in misinformation, emotional manipulation andcoercive lobbying.

The case of Marineland Antibes highlights the urgent need for evidence-based decision-making and the establishment of a robust, science-driven framework that ensures the welfare of aquatic mammals under professional human care. This framework must also recognize and support their vital contribution to research, conservation, and public education.

Cetaceans housed in professionally managed zoological institutions benefit from expert and individualized care. Welfare assessments are conducted regularly usingscientifically validated tools and metrics. These standards not only ensure good physical health and behavioral well-being but are also transparent and continually reviewed by veterinarians, scientists, and animal care professionals.

Studies have demonstrated that cetaceans in accredited facilities live lifespanscomparable to or even exceeding those observed in the wild. As a striking contrast wild cetacean populations face increasing threats such as pollution, ship strikes, bycatch, and habitat degradation. These facts are rarely acknowledged in public discourse, yet they are essential to any serious discussion on animal welfare and conservation.

Since 2015, French zoological institutions housing cetaceans have been the target of intense campaigns conducted through social media and the press, bolstered by aggressive political lobbying and strategic legal actions—a form of law fare—aimed at forcing their closure. These efforts are often fuel led by ideological agendas rather than grounded in science or welfare expertise.

As a result, misleading arguments that ignore scientific consensus and best practices in animal care have been widely spread. Political pressure has intensified, disconnected from the input of professionals with relevant expertise. Public trust in legitimate conservation and research institutions has been systematically eroded.

Though these campaigns are presented as a fight for animal welfare, they are frequentlyled by amateur, self-proclaimed experts. The consequences are dramatic: institutionshave been pressured into closing, and the future of the animals they care for has beenplaced in jeopardy. In the absence of or lack of recognition for viable, science-backed alternatives—such as properly resourced and accredited facilities—the risks to animal health and welfare increase exponentially. This is precisely the case for the two killer whales and twelve dolphins at Marineland Antibes.

In this vacuum of realistic options, some voices propose so-called “sanctuaries” or“sea pens” as alternatives. However, these structures, while emotionally appealing,often fail to meet the complex biological, behavioral, and veterinary needs ofcetaceans. Most of the proposed facilities lack adequate infrastructure, professional oversight, or financial sustainability, rendering them unfit for long-term, high-standard care. These experimental concepts are often promoted without proper feasibility assessments, exposing animals to unnecessary stress and even greater welfare risks.

Alarmingly, the ideological intransigence of some anti-zoo campaigners—unwilling to acknowledge the limits of their proposals—could lead to dramatic outcomes such as advocating for euthanasia as a so-called “solution,” a scenario already hinted at in similar contexts. Such extremes reveal the dangers of dogma prevailing over ethics and science.

The EAAM urges European governments and institutions to:

1. Establish clear guidelines and contingency plans to protect zoological-cetaceans housed in accredited facilities that ensure their welfare and contribute to scientific research for species conservation.

2. Promote structured collaboration between institutions, researchers, and policymakers to preserve the essential role of zoos in addressing biodiversity loss.

3. Reject simplistic and ideological solutions that ignore the complexity of marine mammal care and the value of existing professional expertise.

4. Base all future policies on scientific evidence, avoiding the misuse of emotion and the influence of dogmatic activism.

   
   

The EAAM solemnly urge the Spanish government to reconsider its position of impeaching Marineland Antibes animals’ relocation to Spanish accredited zoological institutions. It is imperative to initiate a transparent and constructive dialogue involving all relevant stakeholders — including zoological professionals, scientists, veterinarians, international institutions, and animal welfare authorities — in order to build a-collaborative solution rooted in evidence and in line with modern animal welfare principles.

The absence of immediate, concrete, and operational alternatives cannot justify inaction. Prolonged maintenance of this cetaceans in uncertain conditions, with no viable path forward, exposes them to significant physical and psychological risks.

Refusing their transfer to accredited facilities capable of providing a suitable environment runs contrary to the recommendations of numerous field experts.

There is an urgent need to act with responsibility and scientific integrity to ensure an outcome that respects the welfare and dignity of these animals.

Board of the EAAM