Marineland: what remains after an ecological victory?

I. Introduction

Let's get straight to the point: summing up the Marineland situation as a project killed off by environmentalists is misleading. The situation is more complex and can be summed up in 3 aspects.

1. An economic problem

Pappers ' figures show the impact of COVID in 2020 at €11m, well below the company's 'usual' level (around €20m in 2019 and 2022). The significant losses recorded in those years underline the company's persistent difficulties in achieving sustainable operating profitability.

2. A not so strong mobilisation of citizens....

Via our Follaw panel (which is free, remember!) In 3 years, Marineland and the cetacean issue have been relatively little discussed, with 954 publications.

• In March 2023, the courts ordered an assessment of the orcas' state of health following warnings from the animal protection association One Voice, which condemned their "pitiful state of health".
• In May 2023, the project to transfer killer whales to Japan caused concern and media reaction. One Voice announced: " We have a serious sanctuary project ".
• On 17 January 2024, One Voice welcomed the court decision banning any transfer of orcas before the end of the independent assessment, highlighting the importance of assessing their health. The association reaffirmed its opposition to captivity and is campaigning for the creation of sanctuaries.
• 28 March 2024, Death of a killer whale, Moana, aged 12 (the second in just five months). The autopsy revealed that the cause of death was septicaemia. The bacteria that killed the animal had not been spotted by the caretakers.
• At the beginning of November 2024, One Voice criticised Marineland for "starting to get rid of the exploited animals that made its fortune. The dolphinarium is sending seals and sea lions to other parks: Spain? Asia? The great "purge" has begun on the sly."
• At the end of November 2024, Marineland announced that it wanted to transfer the animals to a park in Japan. This move was criticised by the One Voice association.
• In December 2024, Marineland confirmed its plan to close definitively in January 2025.

Even at the global level of the accessible Web, there have been as few publications with 84 items of content (X + forums + Web according to Meltwater).

On the political front, the situation is just as calm: in four years, only 11 amendments have been tabled, 4 of which remained dormant in the PLF 2024, 4 rejected, 2 withdrawn, and 1 adopted concerning animal mistreatment, particularly of cetaceans. On social networks, the positions taken are mainly from ecologists and La France Insoumise.

3. But it is very much embodied by the associations and their media work.

While there were fewer than 1,000 publications in our panel on the issue, there were 535 articles, a sign of rapid media coverage.

II. The forces behind the advert

1. A big presence on Instagram, animal rights movements and the far right

We collected all the discussions about the event on Linkedin, X, TikTok, Instagram and Threads and analysed how these players followed each other across all networks:

• A community in red, mainly with LFI, ecologists and the general public. It also includes Instagram accounts, which are much more mainstream than the other communities.
• A community in mauve that is media-friendly. It also includes animal rights and animal protection movements. It is cross-network
• A community in blue, mainly RN and Reconquête, but which includes a fair number of animal protectionists. It is mainly on X.

If we look at what all these accounts follow, we get the same breakdown, with an HD view that can be downloaded here , where we see even more communities with their more structured influencers, including Netflix, which has the biggest following of all the networks combined!

2. A debate between grassroots, common sense and locality versus environmentalism and animal protection.

Discussions about the fate of animals provoke strong reactions and opposition between far-right and environmentalists.

• For the latter, they celebrate the possibility of a "new life" for orcas and dolphins ("We owe them a new life: without hunting, shows or tourism". (Cloé Perrotin)). They take advantage of this to add criticism of the park's past practices and a celebration of the victory of animal rights activists. Animal protection associations also denounce the lack of foresight, making the future of the animals concerned difficult (we're talking about 4,000 animals!), the collateral victims of a closure that is nonetheless foreseeable. As for the future of the dolphins, Christine Grandjean, founding president of the association C'est assez, told France Infothat a "solution for four dolphins" has been found: a sanctuary in Taranto, Italy, is ready to receive them "in exceptional conditions at sea, with caretakers, vets, everything is ready and the dolphins could arrive next July",
• On the other hand, the Reconquest and far-right communities sometimes point out the inconsistency with which environmentalists are being placed by this situation, coupled with laws such as that of the Conseil d'Etat limiting the transport of animals for commercial purposes. Finally, they criticise the fact that these closures disproportionately affect modest families who cannot afford other types of leisure activities and who enjoy this type of park. Finally, there have been a few publications denouncing the comments made by Typhaine Auzière, Brigitte Macron's daughter, on the subject in the TV programme TPMP. However, this far-right community is not 100% united against the project. Indeed, many people in this community are also fundamentally pro-animal and against the project. Moreover, politically, the RN and Reconquête have quite antagonistic positions. I could only find one publication, by Frédéric Boccaletti, MP for the Var, which said:

https://twitter.com/345332120/status/1822927841589068165

In addition to this political exchange, there are a number of other fairly distinct narratives:

• The local economic impact: Some people are also talking about the impact on the region, pointing out that this closure marks the end of an era for local tourism. "A page is being turned for the Côte d'Azur", says TourismeAntibes, as do other local players with a rather high profile in the media. The human consequences of the closure are a point of concern for some authors. "The closure leaves 4 families out in the cold" (Delumet Marilyn). (Delumet Marilyn) is one example that illustrates concerns about the employees affected. Tweets also mention the economic losses for the region and the lack of support for the workers affected. This narrative contrasts the celebration of closure on ethical grounds with the social impact on local communities.
• Historical perspective or nostalgia. On this theme, note a publication by the INA, which published a tweet on an archive:

https://twitter.com/Inafr_officiel/status/1864979150701838497

III. Ecocidal projects: after the standstill, the big void?

While the caricature of certain narratives, claiming that Marineland had been "murdered" by bloodthirsty environmental activists, is clearly fallacious (the activists only took legal action to protect the animals, and they did so in the traditional way), it is nevertheless true that it was Marineland's financial situation that was more problematic. But this raises an essential question: what happens to a project that is abandoned on the altar of ecology?

Pressing the 'delete' button on a project is not enough to make the problems disappear and a solution appear. The 'C'est assez' (Enough is Enough) association doesn't disagree, pointing out that it has never called for an abrupt closure, but for a gradual cessation of activities.

It's all very funny, though, because I've never met a company that was determined to die a slow, gradual and well-organised death. Similarly, it's hard to imagine managers who are competent enough to manage such complex projects in a company that is doomed to die its 'beautiful death'. This immanent thinking about degrowth often collapses when we realise that degrowth also means the death of social subsidies, funding for culture and many other pillars of social justice. So shouldn't we be proposing concrete solutions when we oppose projects that are deemed to be ecocidal?

In May 2023, One Voice announced: "We have a serious sanctuary project". Clearly, this has not materialised. That said, regarding the future of the four dolphins, Christine Grandjean recently stated that a sanctuary in Italy was ready to take them in.

Finally, it should be noted that some of the projects recently abandoned for environmental reasons now appear to be relatively useless and of little social value.

• Sivens dam project (2015): water retention project criticised for alleged destruction of a wetland and impact on protected species.
• Notre-Dame-des-Landes airport (2018): planned near Nantes, this airport project was abandoned in January 2018 after decades of protest. Opponents criticised its environmental impact, in particular the destruction of wetlands and biodiversity.
• 1,000-cow farm project (2015): industrial dairy farm in the Somme was forced to reduce its size in 2015 in the face of criticism over animal welfare and environmental nuisance.
• Montagne d'Or project in French Guiana (2019): open-cast gold mine project criticised for deforestation and pollution of local ecosystems.
• Center Parcs project in Roybon (2020): a tourist complex in the Isère region, comprising hundreds of cottages and a water bubble. Criticism focused on the destruction of wetlands and damage to local biodiversity.

Then there are two flagship projects that have been cut even though the problems have not been resolved:

• The Europacity project (2019): planned in the Triangle de Gonesse at the request of the government and famous for its artificial ski slope (which was not built in the end but which cast a shadow over the project), the project had a zero carbon impact ambition. The project would have created around ten thousand jobs in a region with high unemployment. It should be noted that activists had argued that there should be no projects there because... of possible plane crashes. Since then, opposition to line 17 for the GPE is still ongoing, even if it is still confirmed. 400 hectares of farmland have been set aside to preserve local agricultural activity. The remaining 110 hectares, owned by the State, are earmarked for an economic cluster focusing on the bioeconomy and public facilities such as an international school complex. In 6 years, nothing has been done for this desolate region.
• Renovation of the Gare du Nord in Paris (2021): This ambitious project was intended to transform the station for the Olympic Games. Slowed down by environmentalist and Communist opposition, it was pulled the plug by Emmanuel Macron because he was unable to meet the deadlines and because of soaring costs. Since then, the station has been in a pretty deplorable state on all the renovation fronts (seating infrastructure, flow management, taxi disruption, opening up to the north and security management) for France's main international station.

This year also saw a number of green energy projects come to a halt, including theRhônergiahydroelectric dam project on the Rhône and the photovoltaic park project on the Lure mountain (2024).

The associations are targeting a wide range of projects, including the Lyon-Turin high-speed rail link, the megabassines in Deux-Sèvres, the extension of the port of Marseille, the Tréport offshore wind farm, a giant battery factory in Douvrin, and the planned biomass power plant in Gardanne.

However, it has to be said that these projects, although they often have an ecological vocation, are nonetheless being opposed by environmental groups. For example, the A69 motorway between Castres and Toulouse and the Amazon complex at Fournès, which are more controversial for their direct impact, have been "excluded" from the list of projects defended as ecological.

In reality, complexity dominates. There isn't just one ecology, but several visions of ecology. For example, is a nuclear power station like Fessenheim environmentally friendly (low CO2 emissions) or ecocidal (because of the nuclear waste)? Should we abandon nuclear power in favour of renewable energies, even if it means using massive quantities of coal in the meantime? Is a wind turbine that kills birds really environmentally friendly? Is a solar power plant that artificializes land really without impact? There are no simple answers to these questions, and they reveal that ecology has become a political issue in its own right, marked by dividing lines.

It is therefore becoming increasingly difficult to label a project as 'non-ecological'. The world is changing, as are companies and economic players. Let's not forget that several decades ago, Marineland was seen as a place to raise children's awareness of wildlife protection and as an educational tool.

This shows that one of the major challenges for the ecological and social movements will be not only to denounce the projects they consider to be ecocidal, but also to propose concrete alternatives and solutions to stop these projects.