Download PDF (2.5MB) - Anchor Environmental

More documents

Recommendations

Info

5. PERMIT-HOLDER CHARACTERISTICS, SUCCESS AND ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTION There are currently 18 permit holders in South Africa. Although 26 permits were originally gazetted in 2001, circumstances have allowed this total to reach a potential maximum of 27 permits, due to the unplanned double permitting of the Gordon’s Bay area (Area 6). Seventeen of the 18 existing permit holders kindly made themselves available to be interviewed during this study. 5.1 Sensitivity and availability of information It should be noted that much of the information collected during this study is highly confidential and could be potentially damaging if released to competitors. In order to maintain confidentiality, the economic characteristics of permit holders will be presented in summary form and discussed at the national level unless necessary. Any deviations from this will be explained as such. Though a high degree of cooperation and willingness to share information did exist, it is likely that some errors related to individual estimations and possible reluctance to divulge all financial details may have occurred. The reporting of summary statistics is likely to minimise this and allow real trends to emerge. 5.2 Distribution and history of permit holders The majority of boat-based whale watching areas fall within the Western Cape Province, which also has the highest numbers of permit holders and proportion of permits taken up (Figure 5.1). This supports perceptions by most permit holders that the Western Cape is the most well know whale watching area in the country, with specific sites, such as Hermanus, being well known on a global scale. The majority (80%) of all current permit holders interviewed had possessed their permits for more than one year, with two-thirds (69%) of these having possessed a permit since at least 2000 (including one that had changed hands during this time). Some 44% of current permit holders were in possession of permits from 1998, thus being active prior to the official gazetting of boat-based whale watching areas, and have maintained this status since that time. This suggests that turnover of permit holders has been low and that the areas currently filled by long-standing permit holders represent the more successful and sustainable areas available. The newer areas (and some previously-occupied areas) may represent more marginal areas which require further development and marketing in order to make them successful as boat-based whale watching sites. Based on information from respondents, the initial success of an area appears to depend on a combination of existing site-specific characteristics such as accessibility and infrastructure combined with marketing and management by the permit holder. Area 22, corresponding to Durban Harbour, thus appears to be an anomaly and the lack of successful permit holders there is likely to be temporary. No of permits 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Available permits Occupied permits Western Cape Eastern Cape KwaZulu-Natal Figure 5.1. Distribution of available and currently active permits in the three provinces where Areas have been designated. 17
It should be noted that data presented here relates only to active boat-based whale watching operators, defined as permit holders who have been active for at least one season. This excludes the two newest permit holders in Area 6. One operator had operated for only one season to date but was included as number of trips and activity was similar to some operators who had been in business for longer periods. The remainder of operators considered had had their permits for 4 years or more and thus had had sufficient opportunity to operate and gain experience in the business. In total, this comprised fifteen permit holders, of which fourteen were available for interview. 5.3 Business characteristics Boat-based whale watching usually only formed a small proportion of overall income for the entities that owned the permits. Several types of business arrangements were encountered (Figure 5.2). The model 1 situation of a stand-alone company was most common, particularly the model 1b situation, where a single company was involved that did boat-based whale watching in conjunction with other boat-based tourism activities. However, the simplest model, a stand-alone, specialist BBWW operator (model 1a), was the rarest, and apparently unsustainable as a business model. The only such permit holder was in the process of joining forces with a fishing company (see model 2). Indeed, many interview respondents (including non-permitted operators) felt that this type of stand-alone model would not be a viable proposition. A better model for specialist operators was model 2, whereby the operator could operate seasonally by leasing a boat belonging to another concern or parent company, commonly a commercial fishing company. In one case the operator was a community forum and the supplier of the boat a private individual. Nevertheless, this model was never particularly stable, as boat use arrangements changed from year to year. The arrangement was not always worthwhile to the boat owner. The model 3 situation was similar to Model 1b, but with the owners’ other business interests, such as accommodation establishments, having a direct impact on the marine tourism business, increasing its viability. Various other business arrangements were also found (model 4), for example with operators sharing offices, facilities, staff and marketing. In one case, four permits were linked to one company. Irrespective of the model, many permit holders also derived income from other business interests or employment. Model 1 (self-contained) (a) BBWW operator BBWW permit (b) Marine tour operator BBWW permit (c) General tour operator BBWW permit Model 2 (reliant on another entity for a boat) BBWW Operator BBWW permit boat Fishing company Owner Model 3 (other business interests have direct benefit) Marine tour operator BBWW permit clients Accommodation establishment Model 4 (shared costs e.g. facilities, marketing) (a) Marine tour operator Shared costs Marine tour operator BBWW permit (b) Marine tour operator BBWW permit Marine tour operator BBWW permit Marine tour Marine tour operator operator BBWW BBWW permit permit Figure 5.2 . Business models for boat-based whale watching in South Africa 18
Page 3: BOAT-BASED WHALE WATCHING IN SOUTH
Page 6 and 7: owners, who felt that a smaller, fa
Page 8 and 9: TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION..
Page 10 and 11: 1. INTRODUCTION The whale watching
Page 12 and 13: the main whale watching season. All
Page 14 and 15: 3. WHALE WATCHING: AN INTERNATIONAL
Page 16 and 17: location. Most cetaceans spend the
Page 18 and 19: 3.2 South Africa in perspective Boa
Page 20 and 21: Table 3.3 excludes countries where
Page 22 and 23: west coast up to February or March
Page 24 and 25: The designated areas also include a
Page 28 and 29: The majority of permitted operators
Page 30 and 31: Two very large boats excluded, a ty
Page 32 and 33: November. This is probably due to a
Page 34 and 35: holder, with a total of just over 3
Page 36 and 37: Based on rack rates and the estimat
Page 38 and 39: 5.12 What determines success Based
Page 40 and 41: impact along the Garden Route, anot
Page 42 and 43: 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20
Page 44 and 45: 6.2 Western Cape The Western Cape P
Page 46 and 47: Equipment and infrastructure The fu
Page 48 and 49: around 30 to 35 passengers were per
Page 50 and 51: advertising material which offered
Page 52 and 53: generally variable in their length,
Page 54 and 55: Non-permitted activity One dedicate
Page 56 and 57: Equipment, trip characteristics and
Page 58 and 59: 6.4 KwaZulu-Natal KwaZulu-Natal cur
Page 60 and 61: visitors can be accommodated before
Page 62 and 63: Run on its way past Durban. Trips w
Page 64 and 65: Operators in Area 25 also offered d
Page 66 and 67: 6.5 Summary of legal and illegal ac
Page 68 and 69: 7. FUTURE POTENTIAL OF THE INDUSTRY
Page 70 and 71: Overall demand is heavily influence
Page 72 and 73: The most important enabling criteri
Page 74 and 75: The Cape Metro area is a major tour
Page 76 and 77:
focused on harbour trips and until
Page 78 and 79:
Wetland Park, Pondoland, the Greate
Page 80 and 81:
8.3 The permit system, conditions a
Page 82 and 83:
Monitoring will also be vital for e
Page 84 and 85:
15. Data collected by operators and
Page 86 and 87:
Woods-Ballard, A.J., Parsons, E.C.M
Page 88 and 89:
11. APPENDIX 2. SUMMARY OF COMMERCI
Page 90 and 91:
used for whale watching must be acc
Page 92 and 93:
Both the National and state governm
Page 94 and 95:
effort to be controlled through res
Page 96 and 97:
not is broached several times each
Page 98 and 99:
11.5 South America 11.5.1 Ecuador T
Page 100 and 101:
The Dominican Republic has strict c
Page 102 and 103:
12. APPENDIX 3: NOTIFICATION OF PER
Page 104 and 105:
4. Applicants must be willing to si
Page 106 and 107:
SIMONSTOWN AREA Cape Point Lighthou
Page 108 and 109:
PLETTENBERG BAY AREA The Western Bo
Page 110 and 111:
(iii) the extent to which the appli
Page 112 and 113:
Table I. Rating of the whale resour
show all

Download PDF (2.5MB) - Anchor Environmental

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?