Download PDF (2.5MB) - Anchor Environmental

Permitted activity
There is currently only one permit holder, based in St Lucia in Area 24. This operation is extremely
well marketed and dominates boat-based whale watching in the region. The operator estimated that
80% of his annual income from his permitted boat was attributable to boat-based whale watching.
The remainder was from deep-sea fishing charters, marine mammal trips and occasional training of
skippers. The permit holder focuses primarily on a range of wildlife tour-based activities in the region,
owning a number of boats and vehicles. The main proportion of annual income (70%) was shared
equally between hippo and crocodile tours on St Lucia Lake, which occur all year round, and boatbased
whale watching. The importance of boat-based whale watching is substantial considering that
it is able to equal the income from trips on a tour that is throughout the year, in half the time. Boatbased
whale watching had only been offered in the last 6 years, though the overall business had been
in operation for around 14 years. This aspect of the business has improved markedly due to its
association with existing hippo and crocodile tours, which are well known in the area, and has
facilitated their capturing of the tour bus market through offering a regularly scheduled boat trip
(hippos and crocodiles) throughout the year. The potential for whale watching thus adds value to an
existing marketed tour. A further advantage has been the use of large boats on the lake tour, which
can accommodate a full busload of passengers per trip, allowing further opportunities to market the
whale watching aspect of the company and maximise number of trips during brief tour bus visits.
The permit for Area 25 (Sodwana Bay) was allowed to lapse due to inactivity, and the operator is
believed to have left the country. There is currently no permitted boat-based whale watching in the
area. As in the remainder of KZN, Humpback Whales are the main attraction with other dolphin
species and whale sharks frequently encountered.
Non-permitted activity
A number of potential or non-permitted operators were identified in the region. At least four to five
operators were claimed to have existed in Area 24 prior to the establishment of the permit system.
However, it turned out that most non-permitted operators interviewed had only been offering boatbased
whale watching for 5-6 years, which suggests they began this at about the same time as the
new regulations came into being. Some claimed that their levels of activity had decreased to about 1-
2 trips per season, while two were still relatively active. These operators consisted of fishing charters
which offered pleasure trips and opportunistically included boat-based whale watching during periods
of high demand. Their minimal or complete lack of marketing indicated that they probably benefit
from efforts by the permit holder to attract clients to the area. Non-permitted operators received
limited bookings through some tourist offices but priority was usually given to the permit holder.
Furthermore, their level of activity in comparison to the permit holder is minimal with a maximum of
10% of annual boat-based income being attributed to boat-based whale viewing by one active
operator. This indicates that non-permitted activity was fairly minor in this area. Their impact on the
permit holder is probably limited, especially since the permit holder appears to be more constrained
by boat capacity than lack of demand. It is possible that the lower prices charged by non-permitted
operators may limit potential price increases by the permit holder. All non-permitted tours were sold
largely as pleasure trips and not as specific boat-based whale watching tours, although two operators
indicated they were interested in obtaining or had previously applied for permits.
Further north in Maputaland, at least two, and up to four, potential operators were identified, although
in this case subsidiary income was based primarily on diving and associated tourism activities. Most
operators claimed whale watching was limited to opportunistic sightings of whales during a
generalised “open ocean excursion” trip but at least two operators indicated that they did view whales
as a major attraction on their trips. One admitted efforts were made to approach whales during tours,
for photographic research, and claimed up to 80% of their non-diving pleasure trips were of the “open
ocean excursion” variety. These trips were sold mostly to professional filmmakers and photographers
who sought out whales for various reasons. The second operator claimed these excursions only
made up 10% of his non-diving trips, and focussed on general holidaymakers. Microlites were often
hired by the more active operator in order to locate whales and dolphins during these trips but costs
were occasionally shared by both based on benefits they gained. Whale watching or “open ocean
excursions” contributed around 20% of their monthly boat-based income during the whale watching
season. These operators claimed this could be increased if they were allowed more advertising
focusing on whale watching, but currently any form of pleasure boat trip, including whale watching,
was not considered the main source of income.
54