Abstract
To support optimal monitoring and enforcement investment, management aimed at minimizing disturbance to wildlife requires an understanding of how regulatory compliance might vary spatially as well as across species and human-user groups. In the Salish Sea, humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) and two ecotypes (southern resident and Bigg's) of killer whales (Orcinus orca) now interact with a large and growing number of small commercial and recreational vessels that partake in whale watching. Those vessels often approach close to cetaceans and thus pose risk via collision, marine noise and pollution, exposure to which may result in disturbance, injury and death. The primary management tool for mitigating impacts is minimum distance regulations. Compliance, however, is poorly understood. We examined commercial and recreational small vessel compliance with viewing distances across two seasons (June–September 2018 and 2019) in over ≈404 h of on-water observation. Overall vessel compliance was nearly 80%, but several distinct patterns emerged. Recreational boats were significantly more likely to violate distance regulations and boaters were more likely to be non-compliant around killer whales. Compliance did not vary with day of week or time of day. Spatially, non-compliance was concentrated in waters closer to coastal communities. Collectively, these patterns suggest that optimal enforcement could be targeted to identify areas of high non-compliance, especially for killer whales, with effort spread across days and times. Finally, we discuss how investments in education could target recreational boaters at a time when multiple and interacting stressors are accumulating in the Salish Sea.
Highlights
Non-consumptive encounters with wildlife can impose harm
Non-compliance was more frequent with Killer whales (KWs) than humpback whales (HWs) (n = 118 of 159 non-compliant encounters; Kruskal-Wallis, P = 0.007; Table 1)
When scaled to encounter rate, 18.6% of commercial whale watching en counters around KWs and 14.4% around HWs were non-compliant, while recreational vessels did not comply with mammal dis tance regulations (MMDRs) during 45.5% of encounters with KWs and 20% with HWs (Table 1)
Summary
Non-consumptive encounters with wildlife can impose harm. Regulations to manage human-wildlife encounters are common, applied to hunting and fishing [1,2] and outdoor recreation [3,75]) and wildlife viewing [4,5]. The efficacy of regulation, scales to compliance. Effective management requires an understanding of what contexts predict compliance as well as potential correlates [9,10]. Social acceptability of non-compliance may vary [13,14], as can knowledge of regulations [15]. Man agers require knowledge about who engages in non-compliant behav iour, as well as where and when it occurs
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
