SailGP’s races feature in-your-face action, with agile, hydro-foiling catamarans tacking and jibing for the title over several days.
However, public comments ahead of the global series’ return to New Zealand have left this past year’s controversy in the shadows, as a key appointment attracts criticism from dolphin advocates.
A year ago, SailGP’s inaugural New Zealand race, in Whakaraupō/Lyttelton Harbour, over the hill from Ōtautahi/Christchurch, was hailed as a commercial and sporting success, attracting thousands of spectators and pumping millions of dollars into the local economy. (For the record, the title was won by Canada, skippered by Kiwi Phil Robertson.)
Beneath the surface, all wasn’t well, however.
During the final, on March 19, the race controller ignored instructions to stop the race after observers determined two nationally vulnerable Upokohue/Hector’s dolphins were too close to the boats.
No dolphins were harmed during the race, which was held in a marine mammal sanctuary. But experts say vessel strikes are likely to kill dolphins.
The Department of Conservation started investigating. However, SailGP didn’t provide GPS data, despite a request, and department officials were unable to establish whether an offence took place.
A second probe, into whether “spotter” boats herded dolphins away from the super-fast catamarans, was dropped after the department decided a full investigation wasn’t in the public interest.
Te Hapū o Ngāti Wheke, which exercises rangatiratanga (right to exercise authority) and kaitiakitanga (guardianship) over Whakaraupō, said its continued support for SailGP depended on a review of the marine mammal management plan, and it wanted “genuine improvement”.
A return to Lyttelton Harbour wasn’t meant to happen until 2025, but when the pin was pulled on Auckland for 2024, it was seen as the only viable option.
In December, details dribbled out about agreed changes to the plan (MMMP) for Whakaraupō, but the full version wasn’t released publicly until this past week – nine days before racing starts.
“This year’s plan builds on robust measures which worked well in season three, as well as what we now know about delivering events in this unique marine environment,” SailGP managing director Andrew Thompson said in an accompanying statement.
ChristchurchNZ general manager of destination and attraction Loren Aberhart said: “As was shown by last year’s 45-minute delay to the racing to wait for Hector’s dolphins to leave the course during the broadcast window, the MMMP prioritises marine mammal safety over racing.”
(We asked how ChristchurchNZ – the city’s economic development agency, which is paying millions of dollars to host SailGP – could omit from that statement any reference to the conservation department’s investigations, including the race controller ignoring instructions to halt racing to protect dolphins. An anonymised statement, provided by senior communications manager Alastair Paulin, said: “We have nothing further to add.”)
In the March 14 statement, Mishele Radford, chair of Te Hapū o Ngāti Wheke, Rāpaki, said: “The successful implementation of the revised MMMP is critical for the protection of our taonga, the safety of all marine mammals, and ultimately the success of SailGP 2024.”
“Asking Jared Pettersson about dolphins is like asking me about fashion.”
University of Otago Emeritus Professor Steve Dawson
A new role created this year is an “independent decision-maker”, with the power to delay or pause racing in line with agreed protocols. The person appointed to that role is Jared Pettersson, a director of environmental consultancy Enviser Ltd.
“Pettersson is the lead author of the MMMP and his role is to oversee its implementation,” said the March 14 statement, issued jointly by SailGP, ChristchurchNZ, and Ngāti Wheke.
Marine scientist Steve Dawson, Professor Emeritus at the University of Otago, questions the appointment.
Dawson, who gave expert advice for SailGP’s original MMMP, says in his opinion Pettersson can’t be independent when he “actively facilitated” SailGP’s project. Petterson’s expertise is in engineering, not dolphin behaviour or ecology.
“Asking Jared Pettersson about dolphins is like asking me about fashion,” Dawson says. “It is a farce.”
(Dawson is also disappointed SailGP has dropped real-time acoustic sensors from Lyttelton. “The development of a fully functioning acoustic detection system could have been a way that SailGP could have contributed something with a positive environmental benefit.”)
In the lead-up to the 2023 race, SailGP referred to Enviser as “our consultants”. Indeed, Enviser helped with SailGP’s application to DoC to use an acoustic deterrent device – an application that was eventually dropped – and Pettersson himself provided the department with additional information.
(According to an email from Ngāti Wheke’s Nuk Korako, on March 20 this past year, Pettersson was in the control room during the previous event’s final race, and “confirmed to SailGP that they were in breach of the MMMPlan”.)
Newsroom asked SailGP, ChristchurchNZ, and Ngāti Wheke how Pettersson could be considered independent given the firm had been in SailGP’s employ, and why they appointed an engineer to the role.
Nat Fortier, NZ SailGP team’s senior manager of marketing and communications, chose not to directly answer the conflict of appointing a paid adviser. She says ChristchurchNZ will pay Enviser for the decision-maker role.
“Given the televised event has more than 50 million world-wide viewers, a collision leading to dead or injured dolphins is not ideal for New Zealand’s tourism image.”
Briefing to Conservation Minister Tama Potaka
“The role of the independent decision-maker is to oversee the delivery of the MMMP, ensuring the integrity of the plan in all training and racing scenarios. That includes the power to delay or pause racing if there is a risk of harm to dolphins.”
Highly skilled marine mammal experts are employed to implement the plan, Fortier says, including the Hector’s dolphin observer manager who coordinates land-based and on-water observers, and passes information to the event’s control room.
“This [decision-maker] role draws on extensive expertise and experience – both of environmental management and SailGP racing. As such, it is a paid function like any other consultant.”
The appointment of Pettersson – the author of original and amended plans – was “unanimously supported” by Te Hapū o Ngāti Wheke, DoC and ChristchurchNZ.
Radford, chair of Ngāti Wheke, Rāpaki, confirms the hapū’s support for Pettersson.
“We believe that appointing an independent decision-maker who is knowledgeable of the MMMP, and the environment of Whakaraupō, is crucial for ensuring the integrity and effectiveness of the MMMP.”
Initially, ChristchurchNZ said it thought Newsroom was asking for a collective response, and SailGP would answer on its behalf. We gave the public agency, funded by the city’s ratepayers, an extra day to comment but comms manager Paulin confirmed SailGP’s response on its behalf stood.
In February, Aberhart, ChristchurchNZ’s general manager of destination and attraction confirmed SailGP’s marine mammal management plan “does not have the force of law”.
“However, the plan is designed to keep marine mammals safe and as such it is underpinned by the Marine Mammals Protection Act 1978. Under that Act, it is an offence to harass, disturb, injure or kill marine mammals.”
Since November 2021, 47 Upokohue have been reported dead – 17 of those since November this past year. Most of the reported deaths have been in Canterbury, says Māui and Hector’s Dolphin Defenders chair Christine Rose.
“Yet race organisers are putting dollars before dolphins with this high-speed boat race in the heart of Hector’s home.”
Already, the Department of Conservation has briefed skippers, and other event staff, about their obligations under marine mammal legislation, including the expected behaviour of observer vessels, and the significance of Upokohue/Hector’s dolphins.
The department will brief marine mammal observer staff before the race.
Newsroom quizzed the department’s Mahaanui operations manager Andy Thompson about the difference between SailGP’s original and updated MMMP, given the original also had a requirement to halt racing if dolphins were present – which wasn’t followed, with no consequence.
Thompson, who was in the control room during the previous event’s final and issued an instruction to stop racing, says the amended plan belongs to SailGP, at which this question should be directed.
“In our feedback on this year’s plan, we supported the idea of a person in the control room who is independent of SailGP, and able to make the decision to halt racing, rather than having that decision sit with the race director.”
An objective of the plan is to ensure the event complies with the Marine Mammals Protection Act and regulations, Thompson says. “Therefore, some breaches of the plan may also result in breaches of the legislation.”
A big question is: What has been learned in 12 months?
We asked Thompson if the exact circumstances of the inaugural race occurred again this time, would the result be the same result (ie. instructions not followed, and no prosecution)?
Thompson won’t speculate on hypotheticals, but says any potential breach, and decision to prosecute or otherwise, would be based on an investigation.
“One change this year is that DoC will have a compliance officer in the control room. They have a range of powers under the Conservation Act and marine mammals legislation, including the power to intervene if it’s thought offending is occurring or is about to occur.”
A briefing to Conservation Minister Tama Potaka, in December, said the main risk to avoid during the SailGP race is Hector’s dolphins colliding with the boats’ sharp foils.
“Given the televised event has more than 50 million world-wide viewers, a collision leading to dead or injured dolphins is not ideal for New Zealand’s tourism image.”
Unacceptably in an already stressed dolphin sanctuary. Have any journalists done an assessment of the emissions created in staging such an event – including the manufacture and transport of yachts around the world, the travel involved in crew and viewers getting to the event, and the creation of the infrastructure required to host it?
Bullseye Juliet Neill. The risk to a rare mammal species is bad enough, but the carbon footprint of staging a discretionary activity such as this – with all the long-haul travel it entails – is a direct signal to our kids that our entertainment is worth more than their future. How many more reports do we need from scientists regarding the insanity of our current emissions trajectory? Do we just file them away and shrug?
It’s a moral issue, isn’t it? And it’s one that promoters and punters are choosing to run away from. How about journalists? It’s their future too.