Boater beware

The local headline news: Boat hits whale near Whidbey Island

The news story above is infuriating. This isn't a case of a recreational boat owner just getting a little too close to the whales - this is a case of complete and utter disregard for safe and intelligent boat handling.

I've talked to various boat owners over the years about what they think of the current regulations governing whale encounters are and, to be frank, I've gotten more shrugged shoulders and laissez-faire comments than an acknowledgement that the regulations should be complied with.

I get it. I really do. I've been a boat out on the water that suddenly finds itself surrounded by surfacing Orcas. I've been a boat that wasn't exactly sure what 200 yards looked like over the water and I've been on whale watching boats that 'accidently' get a little too close. I've also been that boat that didn't slow down as I saw whales and their entourage of sightseers off in the distance.

That was before. Here's the thing: I've learned over the years WHY those regulations are critically important. I've also learned that we humans may have already done enough to ensure that the Southern Resident Killer Whales won't survive at all. Gray whales have been doing better as a whole but it sure doesn't help to have boat running over them while they are trying to feed and rest.

Most recreational boaters care. They want to see whales and catch fish and enjoy the beautiful inland waters of the Salish sea. In order to enjoy all those sights and flavors of this amazing marine environment also means that recreational boaters also need to be leading the efforts of responsible stewardship. These inland waters may look vast. This sea - this fjord (because that is what the puget sound is) may look like no one is going to notice a leaky holding tank or care if you catch one too many crabs - but with over 7 million people living along the Salish sea, that impact of one person ripples out into the ability of many species to survive.

Ecotourism - a dilemma

 When I was sitting in the first class for my marine naturalist training, the speakers that day talked about Place. Place in the San Juan Islands is predicated on the unique ecosystem that is found here. One of the speakers talked briefly about ecotourism as an important part of the local economy. She spoke about ecotourism as a positive force that helps people appreciate aspects of the natural environment. In the San Juan Islands this has everything to do with the killer whales, our resident (and transient) Orcas. But I wondered about the increasing impact of the tourist industry in this area just as I wondered what qualified any tour operator to be "ecotourist" friendly.
So I started doing some research on ecotourism as an industry.

As you can imagine, promoting travel based on the natural environment, native species/habitat, or indigenous populations has had - and can have - incredible impact on those resources, cultures, and communities. Look back to the early days of Yellowstone National Park, the Galapagos Islands more recently, and any number of regions that promote tourist activity today in and near awe-inspiring ecosystems, and we see loss of those resources, damage and erosion, and irrevocable changes brought on by the infrastructures needed to support the tourist activities. And yes, we see conservation, education and research dollars created as well.

Governance and management over these resources are doing their best to balance protecting the resources and helping the public engage with that resource. Engagement is critical to the protection of these natural resources because people support (with their dollars) what they have a connection to - what they feel part of. However, it is equally impossible to keep large numbers of humans from having a detrimental impact on those resources.

Ecotourism - just the word itself - causes part of the problem. No one agrees on a definition. And yet, everyone (who benefits from its marketing power) uses the term to get people to use their services. Ecotourism often means one thing to a customer (tourist) and something else to the service provider. Also, Ecotourism is socially constructed - which basically means that it is a term that is going to mean something different in varied corners of the country and larger world.

As I sat pondering ecotourism in the San Juan Islands, especially how it relates to  unique habitats and species that make their homes here, I wondered what our regional definition is.

The International Ecotourism Society (TIES) put this definition out in 2015:
Ecotourism is "responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment, sustains the well-being of the local people and involves interpretation and education."

One of the main principals that TIES puts out is that authentic ecotourism has minimal impact on the resources that are the subject of the tourist activity. It is also interesting to note that "interpretation and education" are explicitly highlighted as key to ecotourism.

How then, can the whale watching industry claim to be an ecotourism activity? Sure, they have naturalist often on board to educate - but their impact is not minimal. (UW News Summary).

This is a dilemma: On the one hand, the efforts to engage the public in appreciating the various whales that use the Salish Sea as prime habitat has promoted changes in policy and protection for not only whales but salmon species and other habitats throughout our region. Naming the whales, promoting research and sharing that research has brought in critical funding to protect the whole ecosystem. Standing on the bow of a whale watching tour boat and seeing the orcas breaching and playing in the waters off San Juan Island is something most people never forget. I've had folks straight off the tour coming to the Whale Museum and 'adopting' the whale that they had seen with their own eyes. We humans love stories - and these whales now have histories and stories along with names.

On the other hand: All of that continued research has also given us irrevocable proof that boat engine noise is putting continual stress on the pods of whales as they try to find the decreasing supply of salmon. Whale researchers are the first to acknowledge that they don't know all there is to know yet about the Southern Resident Killer Whales (SRKW) and their habits but what they are learning about the impact of boat traffic is troubling.

"A variety of human interactions, such as exploitation, habitat degradation, and pollution, are known to have negative effects on wildlife populations, while even non-lethal human disturbance, such as wildlife viewing, can be perceived by observed animals as a predation risk and result in energy costs and effects on survival and reproduction [4]. Therefore, it is important to better understand the extent of human use of the environment so that negative consequences on animal populations can be assessed and mitigated." (Research Article) * 

"Such ship noise has the potential to mask odontocete signals, especially in coastal environments where shipping lanes are close enough to the shoreline (<10 km) that high frequency sound is not fully absorbed. In the summertime habitat of the endangered SRKWs ship noise may interfere not only with SRKW communication (vocalizations) but also foraging and navigation (echolocation clicks)"(Link to study) **

Both of the above studies took place in the last five years. What has spurred the flurry of research?

The whale watching industry has increased exponentially in the last ten years and Haro Strait freighter traffic (including oil tankers) has increased as well. While the U.S. registered tour boats follow the regulations regarding distance and sound, the Canadian tour operators don't have the same rules. With the Orcas traversing the boundary waters between Washington State and British Columbia as their primary hunting grounds, there is only so much regulation that can be enforced. We could also talk about all the pleasure boat captains who don't think those regulations apply to their yachts - and suddenly what is being marketed as a major part of an eco tour destination is anything but.

The more we learn about killer whale behavior and feeding strategies, the more it becomes obvious that boat traffic is detrimental to an already endangered species ability to thrive (see above articles). Maybe that statement goes farther than some folks in our area would put out there, but we are talking about a species population (SRKW) that is less than 100 and has yet to recover from the exploitation and capture of population back in the 70's. Sure we have other pods of killer whales in the area that seem to be doing well, but our resident killer whales are struggling. How do the varied tour companies manage which pods they follow? Can they? Would they?

It is a hard balancing act in the face of the research. How do we continue to promote engagement with the natural world (which whale watching tours can do in a wonderful way) while also promoting sustainable conservation? I've talked to park rangers and enviromentalists all over the west in regards to this question and the answers aren't unanimous.  People want to connect to the natural world and people want to make a living guiding those experiences - and other people want to utilize some of the funds created from that partnership for research and conservation. We could probably expand out that list to include all the varied industry and services that profit from supporting the desire to see our extraordinary world. If you have been to Moab, UT over the last thirty years, you understand what I'm talking about when a community explodes to exploit all the tourists coming in to wander through Arches and Canyonland National Parks.

From my own experiences over the years, I would wish for two things:

• A guiding definition of Ecotourism that establishes a certificate with a list of criteria for any company wishing to use that designation for marketing purposes. If a tour operator wants to market itself as ecotourist friendly then they will have to comply with a list of principals as set forth by the certificate. This is done in so many other industries  - and I think there are folks out there trying to do this - but enforcing it has been difficult. It's got to mean something to the consumer of this product. The National Park Service, as a regulatory management practice, tries to do this in its own backyard, but outside of their jurisdiction, how do we really craft ecotourism that actually works? We first and foremost have to educate the consumer in regards to why it is so important to follow guidelines that promote conservation with minimal impact. We, as consumers, have to buy-in to the importance behind changing some of our behaviors in order to preserve the resources/habitats/species that we are there to appreciate.
• My other wish has everything to do with moderation. Our voracious consumerism is a cultural paradigm that needs to shift in order to sustain our ecosystems. We, as the consumer, need to shift our expectations because no industry out there is going to shift their priorities regarding profit. Again, the consumer needs to look for the tour operators who embrace sustainability, conservation and education equally. Corporate america doesn't work that way. Small, independent businesses might be able to -  and, perhaps, also market themselves accordingly. 

My opinion?

Ecotourism, right now, is a catch phrase used to entice a certain segment of the tourist population into 'feel good' travel. How it is defined by the operator and the customer don't have to line up to capture a market share of ecologically minded travelers. The onus is on us, the traveler to do our research and ask questions of the various providers of these tourist activities.

Here in the Salish Sea, it is going to become increasingly important that educators and stewardship programs like Soundwatch host a conversation with service providers regarding sustainability and oversight. They are working hard, hand in hand with so many great tour operators here in our area to create a community of stewardship. It is too bad that a few less mindful groups and private boaters make it harder for everyone to help keep these resources accessible.

Here is a list of principals for ecotourism*** that we can all watch for:

• Minimize physical, social, behavioral, and psychological impacts.
• Build environmental and cultural awareness, and respect.
• Provide positive experiences for both visitors and hosts.
• Produce direct financial benefits for conservation.
• Generate financial benefits for both local people and private industry.
• Deliver memorable interpretative experiences to visitors that help raise sensitivity to host countries' political, environmental, and social climates.
• Design, construct and operate low-impact facilities.
• 
  

Citations
*Houghton J, Holt MM, Giles DA, Hanson MB, Emmons CK, Hogan JT, et al. (2015) The Relationship between Vessel Traffic and Noise Levels Received by Killer Whales (Orcinus orca). PLoS ONE 10(12): e0140119. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0140119

** Veirs S, Veirs V, Wood JD. (2016) Ship noise extends to frequencies used for echolocation by endangered killer whales. PeerJ 4:e1657 https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1657

*** TIES 2015 annoucement of revised principals for ecotourism 

Humpback, Gray, and Blue Whales - oh my!

Did you know that they can identify Humpback whales by the underside of the flukes (the whale tail)?

Did you know that you can see where the gray whales are feeding off of Everett Washington on Google earth?

The 2017 Lecture Series hosted by Friends of Skagit Beaches started on Friday, January 20th with research biologist John Calambokidis who works with the Cascadia Research Collective.

Dr. Calambokidis put on a great presentation detailing some of the latest findings on the other whales that utilize the Salish Sea.

Regarding Humpback Whales:

The SPLASH study - Structure of Populations, Levels of Abundance, and Status of Humpbacks -  involved over 400 researchers from 10 different countries between 2004 and 2006 in the Pacific Oceans. It was the largest collaborative study of its kind and its goal was to expand the working knowledge around migratory patterns for Humpback whales. Using photo identification (those flukes) and genetic studies some very interesting data was unearthed.

For your own reading: SPLASH study information

First of all, the study identified approximately 20,000 animals.  Dr. Calambokidis described one of the primary patterns that they discovered was that humpback "herds" stayed loyal to certain feeding areas. You might have multiple "herds" in Hawaii but they would travel to different areas in Alaska or the Bering Sea for feeding.

Researchers have been able to identify 14 distinct populations around the world. Some of these populations have been delisted from the Endangered Species Act, while some are listed as threaten or endangered. As an example, the Hawaii population has been delisted, while the Mexico population is listed as "threatened" and the Central Americal population is listed as "Endangered." All of these population migrate north and feed in the cold waters off of Alaska.

A question: How do we apply conservation where it is needed?

Another question that has arisen due to the fact that the number of whales seems to have leveled off - has the Pacific reached its carrying capacity for Humpbacks?

As a matter of fact, there have been areas of expanded territories - which includes San Francisco Bay and the Salish Sea. In the Salish Sea, the estimated abundance has gone from about 100 - 500 from 1995 to 2016.

The fact is, however, that the humpbacks are returning to the Salish Sea - they were here before. They were abundant enough that in the early 1900s there was a whaling station off the south end of Vancouver Island. That whaling station decimated the humpback population. It is hypothesized that it has taken this long for the humpback whales to recolonize this region.

More on Humpback whales

And then there are the Gray Whales:

The Eastern Pacific gray whales breed off the coast of Baja and travel up along the coast to the Artic waters. There are many subsets of this group that are designated by their feeding areas. The subset of most interest to us here in the Salish sea has the designation PCFA (Pacific Coast Feeding Aggregation) - but the feeding areas are further broken down into SJF (Strait of Juan de Fuca), NWA (North Washington Coast), and SVI (Southern Vancouver Island). Only a small number - estimated around 200 - gray whales are sticking around the Salish Sea over the summer months (sighted between June 1 and November 30th) while most migrate much farther north. Read the study.
(And if I have some of my facts wrong or confused, let me know!)

A question the Macah tribe needs to currently answer is which population they can take their yearly quota of whales from.

One of the most interesting activities Dr. Calambokidis talked about was the high risk feeding strategy that some gray whales are engaged in here. Off the east side of Whidbey Island where the muddy sediment is rich with ghost shrimp, these gray whales are feeding in sometimes six feet of water.

Gray whale feeding pits off of Everett courtesy of Google Earth

Findings have found that the years when the number of gray whales is higher who practice this off-migration feeding corroborates data on gray whale strandings and mortality events. This makes sense given how shallow the waters are in the specific area where the whales are feeding. Dr. Calambokidis and his team were asked to come in and determine whether the whales were feeding in any other areas and through the use of tag sensor data, they found out that the gray whales were exclusively going after the ghost shrimp in the shallow waters.

One of the things that seemed to come out of this gray whale study - or at least the impact I felt - was that by collecting data on the activity of the whales helped answer a very specific question regarding the needs of the animal - and helped humans craft a response.

Dr. Calambokidis then spent some time talking about different tagging strategies that have been used. Satellite tags are anchored in muscle and last longer but the the data collected is very limited. Limpet tags have a more medium duration and again, are invasive - thru the skin. There are concerns and issues with both of these types of tags especially after one of the southern killer whales washed up on shore after being tagged with the limpet tag. Dr. C and his team use suction cup tags that record a ton of data but may only stay on for a day at most. Retrieval has been tricky on a few tags but the amount of archival data - including video - has been phenomenal.

Here's a video of his team tagging a humpback - with video off the whale's tag: Video Tag Deployment



Dr. C, in talking about the different types of tags, says you have to consider whether or not the impact of the tag is worth the invasiveness; you have to weigh the worth of what you are trying to learn against that impact.

He talked about some of the work they've done with the NRDC and the Navy regarding sonar and whales. I've got some ready to do on those studies. Another way that the collection of data has led to some limited human change was done in a study of blue whales off the coast of Los Angeles. The areas that the blue whales feed and travel was directly under the shipping lanes. After determining that the whales were not responding to shipping traffic by getting out of the way - and they travel quite slowly - the shipping lanes were moved a kilometer. Same in San Francisco. Small steps - but at least they responded.

The takeaways from the lecture, in Dr. C's words were this:

• Migration patterns are much more complex than we have known. 
• Humpback whales stay loyal to regions and will switch prey before leaving those regions while...
• Gray whales move with the krill and respond to conditions - which is why some of them practice the high risk ghost shrimp strategy.

My takeaways:

• There are ways to incorporate the needs of other species into our human world of shipping lanes and naval maneuvering. 
• We can't do that without the research and data that groups like Cascadia Research provide.
• When we see the complexity of behavior in another species, it becomes increasingly difficult to not see how our human actions impact these amazing creatures. It becomes very difficult to relegate other species to the 'dumb animal' category.
• It also becomes increasingly difficult to simply shrug the shoulders and say - these animals will simply adapt to changing conditions. By studying behavior and the ecosystem within which they move, we see how some species may attempt new adaptation strategies - but are hamstrung by human behavior such as noise pollution, sonar, toxins in the water.
• Basically, the more we know about these complex creatures and the ecosystems that overlap with our own the more we humans can understand how we are just one of many creatures who depend on a healthy environment to thrive. 

Sources:
Calambokidis, J., J.L. Laake, and A. Klimak. 2010. Abundance and population structure of seasonal gray whales in the Pacific Northwest, 1998-2008. Paper SC/62/BRG32 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee.