leagal aspects of the whale watching.pdf - International Fund for ...

6.7 Means of enforcement: penalties and other sanctions
Some of the means of enforcement can be found among the examples of national whale watching regulations and
guidelines given in section 6.1. It is apparent that there are a variety of ways of looking at enforcement problems but
that no means of identifying any single clear solution exists. The participants did, however, review the advantages
and disadvantages of various means.
Some provincial states maintain surveillance at sea and enforce regulations there by use of patrol boats, as is the
case in Queensland, Australia. Its recently concluded Act, The Nature (Whale and Dolphin) Conservation Plan 1997,
will be enforced by, amongst other means, patrol boats. Staff from the Department of Wildlife at present fulfil the
enforcement role at sea, a role which will increasingly be delegated to the National Fisheries Service. Staff receive
training for this task at the James Cook University in Queensland. Stringent maximum penalties have been
established by the Act, expressed in terms of "penalty units" valued at a fixed amount of Australian dollars per unit,
which will be reviewed from time to time and increased as necessary (see Section 6.1).
The Canary Islands’ Autonomous Government, having adopted 2249 Decree 320/1995 of the 10th November 1995
regulating whale watching activities (Carlson 1996), established a permit system for whale watching in 1997, a code
of conduct for the boats concerned and required that a monitor or guide, who has been trained for this purpose, be
carried on board. In 1996, a programme of surveillance and control was instituted using an inboard motor patrol
boat which surveyed the areas concerned daily, relaying information on the observance of the code and any
infractions. More than 60 sanction procedures were reported to have been instituted, though it should be noted
that problems with evidence may inhibit prosecution here and in some other countries. It is considered that this
programme is making a significant contribution to compliance. It should be noted that it is easier for patrol vessels
to enforce established regulations that prohibit entry to protected areas than to obtain evidence of specific violations
of detailed whale watching regulations as long as the protected area concerned is not too extensive. Random
inspections, however, can be an effective deterrent.
The permit system, on which the New Zealand and the Australian provincial legislation is based, provides a powerful
sanction, since termination of an operator’s permit may result in considerable loss of income. However, this
deterrent is not available for unlicensed, non-commercial operations, e.g. private boats and other unlicensed means
of whale watching. It might, however, be possible to seize or confiscate an offending vessel and its gear. A gaol
sentence might be an option in some jurisdictions.
Effective compliance can also be achieved through public education and awareness of the need for and purposes of
the protective regulations or guidelines 3 . As noted in Section 6.2, a high percentage of compliance is voluntary.
Education also encourages people to monitor the operators of whale watching vessels, their crews and the activities
of the general public and to report violations of regulations or guidelines.
3 See IFAW, WWF and WDCS 1997. Report of the International Workshop on the Educational Values of Whale Watching. Provincetown,
MA,USA. 40pgs. ISBN 1-901002-02-0
21