Are we killing them with kindness? Evaluation of sustainable marine wildlife tourism

Abstract

The increasing popularity of marine wildlife tourism (MWT) worldwide calls for assessment of its conservation outcomes and the development of appropriate management frameworks to ensure the conservation of the species and habitats involved as well as the long-term sustainability of this industry. While many studies have examined the positive and/or negative implications of particular forms of MWT, few have attempted to identify factors of concern shared across different types of marine tourism, or examine their implications for sustainability in a broader perspective. We reviewed the existing literature to highlight common impacts on animal behaviour, health and ecology, and to identify successful cases based on minimal negative affects and/or lack of chronic/ irreversible impacts on target species or habitats. To ensure the achievement of both economic and ecologic objectives, the following steps should be integrated in MWT management: 1) Increase of research on the biology and ecology of target species/habitat and application of relevant information for the development of suitable policies, frameworks and management strategies; 2) Structured enforcement of existing policies and enhancement of ecological awareness of visitors through active education; 3) Application of an adaptive management framework to continuously improve the codes of conduct employed; 4) Involvement of different stakeholders and local communities in the development and improvement of the MWT activity. Combining these strategies with the extrapolation of frameworks and policies from cases where adverse ecological impacts have been addressed and successfully resolved can further contribute in ensuring the long-term health and conservation of the species/ habitats involved in MWT activities.

Hand feeding can periodically fuel a major portion of bull shark energy requirements at a provisioning site in Fiji

“…In combination with information on caloric value of bait and energetics of target species (Barnett et al, 2016), such data help to get a much clearer picture of costs and benefits of provisioning to energy budgets of terrestrial and aquatic species targeted by wildlife tourism. Such information will eventually be useful in developing best practice guidelines to improve sustainable tourism activities (Trave et al, 2017).…”

To Feed or Not to Feed? Coral Reef Fish Responses to Artificial Feeding and Stakeholder Perceptions in the Aitutaki Lagoon, Cook Islands

“…Procuring encounters with non-captive wildlife is therefore a core motivation for wildlife-and eco-tourism, two booming sectors in the tourism industry (Newsome et al, 2005;Burgin and Hardiman, 2015). Tourists' demand for prolonged encounters with elusive animals encourages tour operators globally to attract these artificially through food (Newsome et al, 2004;Milazzo et al, 2006;Trave et al, 2017). Feeding marine fauna whilst snorkeling and diving is therefore a common, yet poorly regulated practice in marine tourism (Green and Higginbottom, 2000;Moscardo and Saltzer, 2004;Corcoran et al, 2013), with potentially grave implications for the conservation of affected marine ecosystems.…”

“…Artificial feeding events aggregate predatory fish and exacerbate predatory behaviors, thus resulting in interference competition and elevated predation risk for certain species (Newsome et al, 2004;Milazzo et al, 2006;Semeniuk and Rothley, 2008). Importantly, when large species are attracted and excited through artificial foods, human safety can be compromised (Perrine, 1989;Moribe, 2000;Brookhouse et al, 2013;Trave et al, 2017).…”

“…It follows that experimental approaches documenting the effect on the habitual foraging rates of species are scarce (e.g., Wen et al, 2018). These knowledge gaps complicate the quantification of the impacts of artificial feeding at the ecosystem level and the sustainability of this practice within the ecotourism industry (reviewed by Newsome et al, 2012;Trave et al, 2017).…”

Looking for Evidence that Place of Residence Influenced Visitor Attitudes to Feeding Wild Dolphins?

“…On the human side of the wildlife interaction, there are many psychological, social and economic benefits arising from wildlife tourism experiences (Murray et al, 2016;Orams, 2002 and2013). Many authors suggest that wildlife tourism can also contribute to conservation efforts through the use of education to raise visitor awareness and concern for the wellbeing of species targeted in the tourism experience and the natural habitat those animals need to survive (Chan and Baum, 2007;Newsome, Moore and Dowling, 2013;Chan 2014;Trave et al, 2017). There is however the potential for detrimental impacts on the target species, including changed natural behaviors, reduced breeding success and altered feeding practices, especially where feeding is a component of the wildlife experience (Christiansen et al, 2016;Newsome, Dowling and Moore, 2005;Orams, 2002).…”