42
3.1 Introduction
Whale-watching is defined by the International Whaling Commission (IWC) as
“any commercial enterprise which provides for the public to see cetaceans (whales,
dolphins and porpoises) in their natural habitat” (IWC 1994). This activity started in
California in the 1950s (Hoyt 1984, 2009) but has been expanding rapidly worldwide since the 1980s (Hoyt 1995, 2001), when the International Whaling
Commission called a moratorium on all commercial whaling (IWC 2014). Since
then, whale-watching has been largely promoted by businesses and NGO’s as an
economically viable and sustainable use of cetaceans (Woods-Ballard et al. 2003),
recognized as having significant social, economic and educational benefits (e.g.
Duffus and Dearden 1990; Forestell 1993; Hoyt 2001; Stamation et al. 2007;
Brumatti 2013).
The most recent statistics (O’Connor et al. 2009) revealed that 119 countries
worldwide develop whale-watching, involving 13 million tourists, and generating
$2.1 billion year
−1
and an estimated 13,200 jobs. This activity has been growing
globally at an average 3.7% year
−1
, however, on a regional scale, for example in
South America, whale-watching has been increasing an average 10% year
−1
and is
now developed by the majority of countries in the continent, with Brazil alone
receiving 200,000 tourists in 2008.
This rapid development, however, has been raising concerns over its impacts on
cetacean populations (e.g. Parsons 2012; Rossi-Santos 2016) and its long-term sustainability, as its growth has outpaced management in several locations (Forestell
2007; Higham et al. 2015; New et al. 2015).
Although legislation, guidelines and codes-of-conduct have been developed
around the globe in an attempt to reduce the potential negative impacts of whalewatching (see Carlson 2012), these are often voluntary, and thus largely ineffective
(Allen et al. 2007; Wiley et al. 2008), or unenforced, resulting in non-compliance
(Scarpaci et al. 2003; Lusseau 2005; Kessler and Harcourt 2013).
In Brazil, there has been specific legislation to avoid the intentional molesting of
cetaceans and regulate whale-watching tourism since 1990. However, these rules
are generally unenforced and cases of non-compliance have been documented
(Instituto Baleia Jubarte, unpublished data).
To be genuinely sustainable whale-watching must be ecologically, socially and
economically sustainable, and this requires an integrated approach to its management, based on the precautionary principle and considering it as a non-lethal consumptive activity (Berrow 2003; Higham et al. 2015). In this context, when the
number of operators and vessels is limited through a permit system, there is greater
potential for the sustainable management of whale-watching (Berrow 2003). As
suggested by Higham et al. (2009), a permit system must be based on the scientific
assessment of the carrying capacity for a specific location, and include regular
assessment and reapplication. However, obtaining adequate scientific data for this
purpose is not an easy task (Ahn et al. 2002).
L. Fernandes and M.R. Rossi-Santos
3.1 Introduction
Whale-watching is defined by the International Whaling Commission (IWC) as
“any commercial enterprise which provides for the public to see cetaceans (whales,
dolphins and porpoises) in their natural habitat” (IWC 1994). This activity started in
California in the 1950s (Hoyt 1984, 2009) but has been expanding rapidly worldwide since the 1980s (Hoyt 1995, 2001), when the International Whaling
Commission called a moratorium on all commercial whaling (IWC 2014). Since
then, whale-watching has been largely promoted by businesses and NGO’s as an
economically viable and sustainable use of cetaceans (Woods-Ballard et al. 2003),
recognized as having significant social, economic and educational benefits (e.g.
Duffus and Dearden 1990; Forestell 1993; Hoyt 2001; Stamation et al. 2007;
Brumatti 2013).
The most recent statistics (O’Connor et al. 2009) revealed that 119 countries
worldwide develop whale-watching, involving 13 million tourists, and generating
$2.1 billion year
−1
and an estimated 13,200 jobs. This activity has been growing
globally at an average 3.7% year
−1
, however, on a regional scale, for example in
South America, whale-watching has been increasing an average 10% year
−1
and is
now developed by the majority of countries in the continent, with Brazil alone
receiving 200,000 tourists in 2008.
This rapid development, however, has been raising concerns over its impacts on
cetacean populations (e.g. Parsons 2012; Rossi-Santos 2016) and its long-term sustainability, as its growth has outpaced management in several locations (Forestell
2007; Higham et al. 2015; New et al. 2015).
Although legislation, guidelines and codes-of-conduct have been developed
around the globe in an attempt to reduce the potential negative impacts of whalewatching (see Carlson 2012), these are often voluntary, and thus largely ineffective
(Allen et al. 2007; Wiley et al. 2008), or unenforced, resulting in non-compliance
(Scarpaci et al. 2003; Lusseau 2005; Kessler and Harcourt 2013).
In Brazil, there has been specific legislation to avoid the intentional molesting of
cetaceans and regulate whale-watching tourism since 1990. However, these rules
are generally unenforced and cases of non-compliance have been documented
(Instituto Baleia Jubarte, unpublished data).
To be genuinely sustainable whale-watching must be ecologically, socially and
economically sustainable, and this requires an integrated approach to its management, based on the precautionary principle and considering it as a non-lethal consumptive activity (Berrow 2003; Higham et al. 2015). In this context, when the
number of operators and vessels is limited through a permit system, there is greater
potential for the sustainable management of whale-watching (Berrow 2003). As
suggested by Higham et al. (2009), a permit system must be based on the scientific
assessment of the carrying capacity for a specific location, and include regular
assessment and reapplication. However, obtaining adequate scientific data for this
purpose is not an easy task (Ahn et al. 2002).
L. Fernandes and M.R. Rossi-Santos