The Northernmost Dugong In Dire Danger
Kenichi Iyanaga
The Association to Protect the Northernmost Dugong (International Section)
info@sea-dugong.org
http://sea-dugong.org/
On March 22, 2013, Minister of Defense Itsunori Onodera filed with the Governor
Hirokazu Nakaima of Okinawa Prefecture application for permission to landfill thewaters off Henoko, Nago City to construct a new US Marine Corps Airbase. Twenty one
million cubic meter of landfill material is planned to be dumped to the place where,according to the Prefecture, the natural environment must be strictly conserved.
The waters off Henoko, situated on the eastern shore of Okinawa Island, is one offew remaining shores still rich in wildlife. The water area planned for landfill is a partof the habitat of the Okinawa dugong, the northernmost of the species and on the vergeof extinction.
Governor Nakaima requested, on April 12, the Okinawa Defense Bureau, a divisionof the Defense Ministry, to clarify the places from where the landfill materials are to beobtained and to state whether or not they contain hazardous materials. The Bureau
submitted, on May 30, a revised version of the application according to which the mostof the landfill materials would be purchased from various dealers with whom thecontract would be signed after the landfill project is permitted. The nature of thematerials, therefore, are unknown. However, the revised version gives some information
about the kind of the landfill materials and general locations from where the materials
would be obtained.
Application for landfill may be admitted only if the project would not cause
environmental contamination. We will show below, from the stand point of dugong
protection, that there exists a high probability for the landfill to cause environmental
contamination and that it goes against the principles of the Basic Act on Biodiversity.
The planned Henoko base
The planned base would occupy about 205ha of the waters off Henoko and a part ofOura Bay; about 160ha of the sea area would be filled in; about 78.1ha of seagrasscolony would be destroyed; about 6.9ha of coral would be lost. (Dugong feeds on seagrass,which is not a kind of seaweed, but a flowering plant that grows in shallow water.)
1

The formal name for the planned base is ‘The Replacement Facility for the Futenma
Air Station’. The Futenma Air Station is a US Marine base situated in a heavily
populated area in Okinawa and is known as the ‘most dangerous air base in the world’.
The US agreed in 1996 to return the base to Japan within six to seven years. In April,2013, however, both Japan and the US agreed that the base would not be returned
before 2022, and if returned, it would be only after the ‘Replacement Facility’ iscompleted. In October, 2012, notoriously accident-prone military helicopter MV22
Osprey was introduced to the Futenma base steamrolling overwhelming opposition by
the Okinawa people.
Okinawa Prefecture, 0.6% in area of Japan, is burdened with 74% of the US bases in
the country. Noise, danger and never ending abuse of the local residents by themembers of military have turned the Okinawa people strongly against a new base in
their prefecture.
Agreement based upon the US Japan Security Treaty regarding facilities and areas
and the status of US Armed Forces in Japan gives the US military free access to any
port or airport in Japan, rights to use all public utilities and services belonging to, or
controlled by the government of Japan. The US military in Japan behaves as an army ofoccupation. Japanese rulers, on the other hand, have long regarded Okinawa as a place
to be sacrificed for the metropolitan parts of the country. Repeated demand by the
Okinawa people for immediate return of the Futemma base and no further base in theirprefecture have been ignored by the Japanese government. Instead, the government
offers large sums of money to force the new base plan down the Okinawa people’s throat.
The money is to be used to build infrastructures and other facilities not really needed by
the local people. The constructors, in most cases, are powerful enterprises in themetropolitan areas. The money flows back to the ‘main land’, and the Okinawa people
are left with destroyed environment and the burden of maintaining the facilities. Beingaware of these facts, the citizens of Nago City support their Mayor Susumu Inamine
who is firmly against the new base plan.
The Okinawa Dugong
Dugong (Dugong dugon) belongs, with manatee, to the order Sirenia which has been
included on the IUCN Red List for the Threatened Species for decades. Dugong is amarine mammal that lives exclusively on seagrass and in coastal waters. An adultdugong eats 28~40Kg of seagrass per day. Dugong is an important member of thecoastal ecosystem. Dugong is a sensitive animal and produces a single calf every few
2years.
The Okinawa dugong is, as stated above, the northernmost population of the species.
It used to be commonly seen around Okinawa Island. Local people of Okinawa, then an
independent Ryukyu Nation, used to revere dugongs as spirits of the sea. Dugongs werealso hunted for meat and their bones were used as tools and ornaments. They have been
an important part of the local culture. In 1897 the Meiji Government forcibly ended The
Ryukyu Dynasty and annexed the island nation to Japan. Over-hunting diminishedtheir population and reckless fishing using explosives and poison after the end of theWorld War II drove them close to extinction. Extensive land development also caused
coastal water pollution and habitat degradation.
In 1972 the Okinawa dugong was designated as a Natural Monument by the Law forProtection of Cultural Properties. The Fishery Resources Conservation Law prohibitedthe hunting of dugongs in 1993. The Mammalogical Society of Japan listed the dugong
as an endangered species in 1997. In 2005, Okinawa Prefecture listed dugong as
threatened IA (CR). In 2007 the Ministry of the Environment reviewed the Red List ofJapan and included dugongs as critically endangered animals (IA). However, dugong’s
habitats are not legally protected and their by-catch is not penalized.
Seagrass colonies are still seen along the eastern and northern shores of Okinawa
Island including Henoko waters. However, fast spreading ‘artificial beaches’ created for
tourists attraction is seriously degrading the coastal ecosystem. During aerial surveys
by the Ministry of the Environment from 2002 to 2005 only three to ten dugongs wereseen per year.
The EIAOn December 28, 2011, the Defense Department submitted an Environmental
Impact Assessment to the Governor of Okinawa Prefecture concerning the planned land
filling and the base construction. The Governor issued his opinion on March 27, 2012,
stating his grave concern that the projects might cause serious environmental impact inspite of the conclusion of the EIA claiming that ‘no particular environmental harm
would occur according to the execution of the projects’. The Governor pointed out morethan 570 items in the EIA as inappropriate and stated that it is impossible to conserve
the environment by the measures proposed in the EIA.
The Defense Department organized a group of specialists to review the EIA and, on
December 18, 2012, submitted a Revised Version of the EIA.
In Japan the EIA is compiled by the contractor of the project. The purpose of the EIA3

is not so much to conserve the environment as to draw up ‘appropriate measures helpful
to conserve the environment while executing the project’.
The Defense Department assigned several firms to compile the EIA; seven retirees
from the Department were among the staff members of the firms.
As a rule, in Japan, the conclusion of the EIA says, ‘no particular environmental
harm would occur while executing the project’.
The EIA proceeds in three stages: Scoping, compiling Preparatory Assessment andpresenting the Final Assessment. A concerned person may offer opinions with regards toitems contained in the first two documents.
On August 19, 2009, a law suit was filed in Naha District Court in Okinawa
demanding the Government and the contractor of the new base construction to start
afresh the Scoping and the Preparatory Assessment stages of the EIA as, the plaintiffs
claimed, these parts of the EIA go against the purposes of the Law concerning the EIA
and also violate the rights of the citizens to offer opinions because the concerned papers
hid important items such as the deployment of MV22 Osprey in the planned base; thecitizens may not offer opinions concerning items not included in the first two documentsof the EIA.
Professor Toshio Kasuya, a renowned specialist in marine mammals, presented his
opinion to the Naha District Court on January 13, 2012, stating his sharp criticism on
the EIA; he wrote that it is essential to avoid a further disruption of the marine
ecosystem.
The Court rejected the suit on February 20, 2013, ruling that citizens are given theopportunity to present opinions concerning the EIA but not legally provided with therights for it; the court did not care to go into the matter of illegality of the EIA
procedures. The plaintiffs decided to appeal the ruling.
The planned landfill and the new base construction would be devastating to thecoastal ecosystem, harmful to the local people’s living and in defiance of the oppositionby the whole of Okinawa people and go against the principles of the Basic Act on
Biodiversity.
Let us point out below, from the view point of protecting the Okinawa dugong, that
the EIA (revised version) is far from being scientific.
1) Dugong and the waters off Henoko
The EIA claims that only three dugongs were observed. It also says that nodugong sighting was reported in the waters off Henoko since 2003.
In April, 2003, survey work for another EIA for an airbase construction at sea off
4the Henoko beach was started. This project, also called the construction of The
Futenma Airstation Replacement Facility, was the antecedent to the present airbase
construction project. The project, started in July, 2002, was a copy of a plan drawn
up by the US Marine in 1966 to build an airbase at sea off the Henoko beach. The
project was met by strenuous opposition which succeeded in preventing even one
pile from being rammed in to the seabed. Powerful international pressure opposing
the air base construction, and the Dugong vs Rumsfeld suit started in September,2003 in San Francisco, California also helped the opposition. The air base at sea
project was withdrawn and, in 2006, it was replaced by the present plan placing thebase closer to the shore. It is clear that the disturbance accompanying theantecedent project discouraged the dugongs from frequenting Henoko waters.
It should also be noted that a US Marine Corps base Camp Schwab, located near
the planned construction site, has been a source of the disruption to the coastal
ecosystem. However, as the EIA admits, dugongs have been visible at Henoko
waters until 2003.
2) The number and behavior of remaining dugong population
Any experienced wildlife researcher knows the near impossibility of assessing
exact number of an isolated wildlife population. The names and/or affiliation of thepersons who actually carried out the dugong observation for the EIA are not
identified. The EIA simply reports that there are three remaining dugongs around
Okinawa Island: individuals A, B and C. According to the EIA the individuals A andB seem to be mother and her calf seen along the north-eastern shores of Okinawa
Island while the individual C is regularly observed at Kayo waters, approximately
five kilometer to the east of Henoko beach. The observation operation has been quite
disruptive. Numerous pieces of equipment were placed at Henoko waters and Oura
Bay as if to scare dugongs away from places near the construction site. The aircrafts
tracking the dugongs, the EIA reports, at times lowered the flight altitude to see ifsuch action drove off the animals.
Survey of the dugong trenches, traces of the dugong feeding, was carried out
until 2009 and, according to the EIA, the trenches were mostly found in Kayo waters.
In June, 2011, however, an NGO group found a numerous dugong trenches in a deep
seabed at Oura Bay. The EIA also admits that a few trenches were found at Henoko
waters also.
A construction work to guard the local community from typhoons has been
carried out on Kayo beach since the beginning of the year 2013. The construction is
now carried out on land but there is a possibility that this work would disrupt Kayo5waters ecosystem and discourage the remaining dugongs from frequenting there.
The dugong behavior pattern will change as time passes. However, the EIA assumes
that the remaining dugongs would stay within the range recorded by the aircraft
observation, one kilometer away from the construction site throughout theexecution of the project.
3) Noise Impact
Ramming piles, dumping rocks and dredging cause intolerable noises. The EIA
adopts, as ‘limit of noise tolerable to dugong’, the noise level considered by a study ofthe dugong behavior in Australian waters. It also adopts, as ‘noise level harmful tothe marine mammal’, the ‘standard’ recommended by the US Army. The EIA admits
that during the early period of the base construction there are occasions when boththe ‘limit of tolerable noise’ and ‘noise level harmful to marine mammals’ aresurpassed within the range of the dugong movement observed from aircraft during
the EIA study. The EIA document then says, “Efforts shall be made to lower thenoise levels, and if any change in the dugong behavior might be observed a study
shall be carried out to see if such a change is related to the construction works. If theresults of the study is conclusive to the adverse effects of the construction works
measures such as reviewing the construction methods shall be taken without delay.”
The final EIA document and its revised version admit the use of MV22 Osprey
and also admit that the ‘noise level harmful to marine mammals’ would besurpassed at spots directly under the flight courses. However, the EIA claims, thelocations in question are not included within the dugong movement ranges observed
during the assessment study.
4) Impact Related to Vessels Movement
According to the EIA, during the construction period, there will be occasions
when more than fifty construction vessels will be at work. Professor Kasuya says, in
his opinion presented to the Naha District Court, “According to an observation
carried out in Australia, dugong’s reaction to the vessels depends on the water depthof the location, vessel speed and direction of the vessel movement. However, theresult of the study reports, there were occasions when dugongs reacted to the vessel
movement one kilometer away, took refuge and needed more than one hour toreturn to the original places. It is also known that dugongs avoid approaching thewater areas frequented by vessels.” However, the EIA only states that, “Attempts
shall be made to limit the vessel speed and to keep a visual watch in order to avoid
hitting dugongs.”
If the new base were constructed oil tankers and other transportation vessels
6would frequent the area. According to the EIA, the maximum noise level caused by
the vessel movement will be 103dB. The EIA says, “Considerations such as lowering
the vessel speeds shall be made so that the probability for causing adverse effects todugongs would be small.”5) The ‘Extinction Risk’
The revised version of the EIA adopted an opinion of a specialist concerning theprobability of extinction of the Okinawa dugong a hundred years from now.
According to the specialist’s calculation, the totality of seagrass colonies around
Okinawa Island may support approximately one hundred dugongs but no more. In
order to carry out computation, he then assumes that a dugong lives as long as there
is food supply and a mature female dugong mates and reproduces as long as she
finds a male. Since there remains such a small number of dugong the probability forthe population of the Okinawa dugongs to consume the remaining seagrass colonies
within the following hundred years, namely the ‘extinction risk for the Okinawa
dugong’ is less than one percent. The specialist then calculates the ‘extinction risk’assuming the loss of 78ha of the seagrass colony through the execution of theplanned landfill and concludes that the increase of the ‘risk’ is about 0.01%, a‘negligible number’.
According to the specialist’s theory, the smaller the number of surviving dugong
is the smaller would be the ‘extinction risk’; there is no need to list the Okinawa
dugong as threatened.
6) Landfill
Professor Mitsuru Sakuma writes in ‘Yama ga Kieta-Zando Sanpai Sensou(Mountains Disappeared; Construction Waste, Industrial Refuse and People’s
Resistance)’, published by Iwanami Shoten, “Within the recent 40 years a large
number of mountains disappeared to produce12 billion ton of material to build the‘concrete jungles’ in the metropolitan areas. Many million tons of the waste emitted
by the ‘concrete jungles’ now form a series of phantom mountains standing at theplaces where the real mountains stood.”
The period of ‘rapid economical growth’ in Japan brought a grave damage to its
biodiversity; in order to obtain raw materials for concrete and cement and to extract
landfill materials mountains were flattened and the coastal sea-bed was made bareby gigantic suction machines. In Hiroshima Prefecture, facing Setonaikai, an inland
sea west of Kyoto and Osaka, a group of local fishermen stood up against
devastating sand extraction from coastal areas and, with the help of the Chugoku
Shimbun, a local media which exposed the grim state of sea-bed, succeeded, in 1998,7

to have Hiroshima Prefecture prohibit the extraction of the sea-sand.
Extraction of the landfill materials and dumping them to Henoko water, still richin wildlife, both would give devastating damages to the environment. The EIA for
the Henoko landfill project, however, fails to mention anything about the nature of
the landfill materials. The EIA is fatally defective.
As stated above, it was only after Governor Nakaima demanded the revision of
the application for landfill the Okinawa Defense Bureau gave some information
about the landfill materials extraction sites:a) 3,600,000 cubic meter of soil would be acquired in Nago; a portion from a
refuse dump, a byproduct of leveling a part of the Camp Schwab site, andanother would be extracted from a mountain near Henoko Dam. It is possiblethat the refuse within the Camp is contaminated by harmful matters related
to the camp activities such as military drills. Extraction of a huge amount ofsoil from a mountain means destruction of the mountain ecosystem.
b) 580,000 cubic meter of the sea-sand would be extracted from a number ofplaces around Okinawa Island. One such location is about 80 km south-west of
Henoko. The extraction would aggravate destruction of marine ecosystem.
Lines of vessels carrying the sand would disturb the dugongs. Sand dumped to
Henoko waters and Oura Bay might contain invasive species. Instead ofattempting to assess the impact of introduction of invasive species, theapplication says, “The specifications for the purchased materials shall containclauses assuring ecological safety of such materials.”c) 16,440,000 cubic meter of rock pieces would be acquired from quarries in
Okinawa Island, Tokunoshima Island, about 150 km to the north of Henoko,
Amami-Oshima Island, 50 km further to the north, and several places in
Kyushu and quarries facing Setonaikai. Some of these rock pieces may behighly alkaline. It should be made sure that the pieces do not containpoisonous chemicals such as arsenic, cadmium etc.
d) In addition, construction refuse, deposit dredged from dams or ports, crashedconcrete waste would also be used; acquisition places are not given.
The application says, “The specifications for construction refuse shallcontain clauses assuring that the above material would pass the norm
concerning the environmental safety of soil.” The ‘norm’, issued by the
Ministry of Environment, requires the amount of certain poisonous matters
contained in the soil to be within the permissible density. The ‘norm’ also
states, “As regards the soil not satisfying the norm, attempt shall be made to8have such material attain the required safety levels as soon as possible.”
The Asahi Shimbun, a leading news paper in Japan, reports in its
February

17,

2012

issue,

thatarsenic

surpassing

thepermissible

concentration was detected from a construction refuse disposal site in Chiba
Prefecture. The disposal site had all the soil carried into the site pass the‘norm’. This report is only a part of similar cases. Professor Sakuma writes, inhis book mentioned above, that Kimitsu City, in Chiba Prefecture, notes thatthe most of the construction refuse is polluted.
Deposit dredged from dams or ports may contain harmful materials suchas neonicotinoid insecticides, banned by the EU in 2013 as they may be theprimary cause of bee colony collapse disorder. Neonicotinoid insecticides arewidely used in Japan since 2000 and reported to be harmful to marine
invertebrates. Deposit in many estuaries and bays in the north-eastern part ofJapan are contaminated by radioactive matters emitted by the Fukushima
Daiichi Nuclear Reactors.
Sources of the concrete waste planned to be used for the landfill must be
clarified. The concrete waste may be highly alkaline. The waste may also be
contaminated.
7) Basic Act on Biodiversity
The Article 3 (1) of the Act says, “Conservation of biodiversity shall be carriedout for the purpose of ensuring that conservation of endangered wildlife species, etc.
is aimed at and that the diversified natural environment is conserved according to
the natural and social conditions of the region, taking into consideration thatmaintenance of sound and bountiful nature is indispensable for conservation of
biodiversity.”
The clause (2) of the same article states, “Use of biodiversity shall be carried out
for the purpose of using national land and natural resources by a sustainable
method to ensure that impacts on biodiversity are avoided or minimized, taking into
consideration that biodiversity has been damaged along with changes insocioeconomic activities and that use of natural resources is likely to have an impact
on biodiversity in Japan and abroad.”
The Article 14 (1) says, “The Government shall, for the purpose of conservation of
the biodiversity of endemic organisms, conserve regions that are found to beimportant in terms of conservation of biodiversity, including those having naturalcharacteristics that represent the natural environment of Japan and those that areimportant as habitats of diversified organisms, regenerate any ecosystem that has
9been damaged in the past and take other necessary measures.”
It is clear that the Henoko landfill project goes against the principles of the Basic
Act on Biodiversity.
The Article 27 says, “Local governments shall implement policies pursuant to thepolicies of the government in the preceding Section and other policies forconservation and sustainable use of biodiversity according to the natural and social
conditions of their areas, aiming at comprehensive and planned promotion of thesepolicies.”
As mentioned before, the planned landfill site is set aside by Okinawa Prefecture
as an area where natural environment must be strictly conserved. In accordance tothe Basic Act on Biodiversity, Governor Nakaima is obliged to turn down the landfill
application.
August 21, 2013
Errata:I made mistake as regards the individuals A,B,C of the Okinawa dugongs (p.5); theindividual A,B and C should be read, respectively, B,C and A. A is the one regularly
seen in Kayo , B and C are mother and her offspring. I apologize.
Please spread the word and, if possible, submit your opinions to the following:1) The US President Barack Obamawww.whitehouse.gov/contact
President Obama should be made aware that forcing through the Henoko basewould not only harm the endangered Okinawa dugong but also make the Okinawa
people, long abused by the Japanese government, strongly resent the US presence intheir Prefecture.
2) The Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe
https://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/forms/comment_ssl.html
Prime Minister Abe should be told that the people of the world, including many
Americans, are uneasy about his enthusiasm in building up military forces, hisdisregard of the Okinawa people’s opinion and his indifference to the plight of theendangered dugong.

103) The Okinawa Prefecture Governor Hirokazu Nakaima
kouhou@pref.okinawa.lg.jp
Governor Nakaima needs to be encouraged so that he continues to stand with the
Okinawa people against the Henoko base.

11