Download PDF (2.5MB) - Anchor Environmental

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Non-permitted activity One dedicated non-permitted operator was identified in Area 15, offering a wide range of boat-based activities including charter fishing, diving and various island trips in conjunction with whale watching. This operator has been offering pleasure boat trips, including a significant whale watching element, since 1997. This operator was described as accounting for 50% of total boat-based whale watching income in the area. The non-permitted operator in Area 15 indicated that they had made numerous applications to MCM for a permit, as far back as the initial inception of the permit system, with limited response at this stage. Other non-permitted operators were reported to have been present in the past but these were largely opportunistic and failed to sustain themselves for more than one season. Area 16 was identified as having at least two opportunistic non-permitted operators, one at Kenton and another at Port Alfred though their level of activity was low to minimal. Five charters were identified as operating out of Port Alfred, focusing primarily on fishing charters, with pleasure trips increasing in importance as more foreign tourists passed through. It was indicated that tourist enquiries over whale watching were increasing but this was currently a minimal part of any tours being offered. At least one operator was claimed to derive their clients from a local guesthouse. The remainder of operators advertised via word of mouth and this accounted for the low level of activity at the current time. The operator at Kenton was similarly described to have a low level of activity due to a lack of active marketing. All operators however indicated they kept a “safe distance” from the whales they observed. One commented that many foreign guests were very environmentally aware and would object to any harassment of whales. Operators also appear to monitor each other. Policing by MCM inspectors was reported at Area 15, where the non-permitted operator claimed to have been the focus of investigations, though no charges were made following the submission of a detailed statement on the history and extent of his activities. It was indicated that approaches made to whales nearer shore were better monitored, due to the presence of shore-based observers such as tourists. Further away from shore, policing was described as minimal. Description and use of infrastructure The capacity of operators at Port Elizabeth ranged from 12 to 21 passengers. Operators in Area 16 tended to have a single ski-boat of around 8-10m. While Port Elizabeth and Port Alfred operators can make use of a habour, the lack of mooring facilities at Kenton necessitated beach launching. The permit holder in Area 15, as noted above, had access to infrastructure and other resources via the Ocean Safaris entity though only one boat and a vehicle were currently used. The majority of operators were based out of home offices. Trip characteristics Trips usually varied from 2 to 3 hrs, occasionally 4 hours, although trips in Area 16 were generally shorter (1-2hrs). Operators in Area 15 both offered a pre-trip orientation and fully-guided trip starting at Port Elizabeth and passing St Croix to see penguins and seabirds. With increased public awareness of the Sardine Run, this phenomenon was also becoming an important attraction on boat tours in the area. Trips were charged at R450 per trip by both operators, though discounts were offered to South Africans subject to minimum numbers on a trip by the non-permitted operator. The permitted operator also offered discounted “dolphin” trips at a reduced rate which viewed whales from greater distances. All trips included the viewing of dolphins and other marine attractions. One operator included a post trip lunch and debriefing session. Trips in Area 16 were less structured, with a simple safety briefing and guided tours based on what was sighted. Seasonality and demand Whales were reported to be present year round in Area 15, with migratory whale species present in June/July to November/December, while non-migratory species such as Minke and Bryde’s whales were regularly encountered on other trips during the remainder of the year. Overall, the area was described as having a lower density of whales than the Garden Route. Operators differed in their perception of the tourist season. The long-time non-permitted operator indicated that tourist demand was divided, with internationals accounting for up to 90% of clients between October and April and domestic tourists being more prevalent in holiday periods. The permit holder indicated a typical whale watching season of July to November. 45
In Area 16, whales were reportedly encountered regularly from October and as late as March, though densities and numbers were described as relatively less than in Area 15. Actual demand by tourists wishing to undertake pleasure trips, but not necessarily whale watching, was focused during October, December and March corresponding to school holidays. This supports statements that boat-based tourism in the area is not yet specialised and is based on generalised pleasure boat trips aimed at domestic tourists. Perceived trends and opportunities Both operators in Area 15 indicated that boat-based whale watching was currently at a slow growth phase due to a levelling off of tourist numbers and the devaluation of the rand, though overall demand was expected to continue growing. This was also linked to increased investment in marketing and use of more popular launching areas which would attract “walk on” clientele. While larger boat capacity is facilitated by the existence of mooring facilities at the harbour, beach launching was being investigated as a potential means to access more popular beach areas and thus raise the profile of boat-based whale watching. The presence of a large concentration of tourists at beaches was envisaged to offer an opportunity to capitalise on a significant “walk on” tourism segment in the region. This specific operator did however indicate that the existence of mooring facilities did give them a good capacity fro further growth in boat size and passenger capacity should it become viable. The non-permitted operator felt that there was scope for a second permit holder, though the current permit holder indicated this was unjustified based on the current level of demand. Both operators agreed that tourist numbers were not sufficient to allow them to be supported by whale watching alone. . Indeed, other non-permitted operators had been unable to sustain their operations outside of peak tourist seasons. Though numbers in Area 16 are currently too low to support a viable operation, it was suggested that increasing tourist numbers may improve the potential in this area. One operator indicated that they would seriously consider applying just for the sake of having the permit and thus being in a position to capitalise on the opportunity when the market was ready. 6.3.2 Border Kei Region (Area 17; Permits: 0 of 1) Area 17 is centred on the East London area. The Border-Kei region (Area 17) is similar in many characteristics to the Woody Cape area, but with a slightly less sheltered coast as it grades into the harsher environments found along the Wild Coast. In addition to the town of East London, the Border Kei region is characterised by estuary-mouth resorts which are largely frequented by domestic tourists on a highly seasonal basis. Status of permits No application has been made for the available permit in this region. Non-permitted activity Very little boat-based whale watching occurs in the Border-Kei – Wild Coast region, with no visible signs of marketing of this activity. Researchers posing as tourists wanting to go whale watching flummoxed the tourism agents, and were advised to try fishing charter boats. Indeed, there is fairly little in the way of marine tours at all. In East London, two charter boats are available for cruises and fishing, but do not advertise whale watching as part of the attraction. There is more of an expectation of dolphins which sometimes enter the estuary, but whales can be sighted and do sometimes approach the harbour wall. Further afield, almost no marine tours are on offer, apart from a handful of fishing boats which can be chartered. Tour operators were not very well acquainted with the regulations governing boat-based whale watching, one claiming to be ignorant as to the minimum distance of approach, and only having vague knowledge of the existence of permits. It was reported that the advantage of a large boat is the better height for viewing. Nevertheless, one of the operators was not afraid of ‘sneaking up’ on whales, and claimed there was no enforcement at all. The main operator did not believe a whale watching permit would be viable or add value to the business. 46
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 26 and 27: 5. PERMIT-HOLDER CHARACTERISTICS, S
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 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?