Case Study - Network for Business Sustainability

Engaging the Community: Teaching Case 

A teaching case entitled “Sustaining the Orca Whales through Community Engagement in the Pacific 

Northwest” designed to illustrate the key concepts investigated in the Knowledge Project on Engaging 

the Community. 

Team Members 

Renay Eng-Fisher, Research Associate, Tourism Area 

Dr. Irene Herremans, Associate Professor, Accounting and Tourism Areas, and IRIS 

Dr. Frances Bowen, Associate Professor, Strategy and Global Management Area, and Director, 

International Institute for Resource Industries and Sustainability Studies (IRIS) 

Contact Details 

Dr. Irene Herremans 

Haskayne School of Business, University of Calgary, 2500 University Dr NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4 

Ph: (403) 220 8320 

Email: irene.herremans@haskayne.ucalgary.ca 

More Information 

This case was developed as part of a Knowledge Project funded by the Network for Business 

Sustainability (www.nbs.net). A guide for teachers is available for faculty (email: info@nbs.net). 

1

Engaging the Community: A Knowledge Project 

Sustaining the Orca Whales through Community Engagement in the 

Pacific Northwest 

Introduction 

Commercial whale watching on a global scale has grown significantly since the early 1990s. It is 

estimated that more than 10 million people worldwide take part in tours every year, resulting in an 

industry with annual revenues of over $1 billion (Hoyt, 2001). The financial benefit to coastal 

communities created by this activity is substantial, particularly in light of the ongoing decline of fishing 

stocks in many areas. It also provides an important opportunity for the public to learn more about these 

fascinating creatures in their natural environment. 

As whale watching and marine eco-tourism have grown, so have concerns about the possible negative 

effects of touring vessels frequently approaching and observing whales. Although some studies have 

suggested that whales may suffer negative effects from this activity, the scientific evidence at this time 

is far from conclusive. Because of media exposure, which is sometimes unsubstantiated, mutual feelings 

of distrust are common among some commercial whale watch operators, research scientists, certain 

NGO groups, local communities and the media. 

To succeed commercially, tour operators face the challenge of avoiding undue stress to whales while 

still providing passengers with a satisfying viewing experience. Legal and regulatory guidelines are 

insufficiently developed to secure this balance. In response, in 1994 the International Whale Watch 

Operators Association Northwest (WWOANW) adopted a code of conduct for the business operations of 

its members in the absence of government legislation. The Best Practices Guidelines developed by 

WWOANW were intended to organize viewing activities on the water and reduce the possibility of 

negative effects that might result from certain whale watching activities. The WWOANW Guidelines 

have been one of the most important ways for the industry to provide information about whale 

watching to the public and to regulate themselves, while maintaining support for their industry from the 

broader community. 

What Do Whale Watching Tour Operators Do? 

Recreational whale watching tour operators provide opportunities for the public to observe whales and 

other marine wildlife in their natural habitat. Passenger education about killer whale biology and 

behaviour is a key component of the tours. Customers receive information not only about killer whales 

but about the history of the area, and other species of mammals, birds and fish that inhabit the area. 

One tour operator indicated: 

“We talk about the pressures the whales have in the environment…like the toxins being in a 

populated area and about whale watching boaters. We explain conservative whale watching 

and how we are going to approach animals.” 

2


The key focus on the tour is the whales; however, operators or their guides often discuss the entire 

ecosystem and how it supports the whales. This discussion might include stellar sea lions, seals, grey 

whales, and killer whales, kelp beds, the interaction between the salmon species and the bears, the 

trees and the forest, and even how the salmon DNA ends up in certain trees through the bears. The 

guides might also discuss environmental concerns, logging, and fish farms, depending on the 

passengers’ interests. Tour operators also have pamphlets for the guests. 

There are approximately 45 boats operating in the Gulf Islands waters adjacent to Vancouver Island, 

British Columbia and the San Juan Islands of Washington State at present, with up to 8 or 10 boats 

arriving to view whales approximately every 15 minutes. Over the years there have been changes in the 

manner in which whales are observed and changes to the WWOANW guidelines. Although the 

experience and education level among tour operators varies, some have been in the business for ten or 

more years, and it is not uncommon to find operators with a post secondary education. Most are 

devoted full time to whale watching tours and/or ocean wildlife tours. Many of the operators are 

interested in furthering their education, as well as their clients’ education, regarding whales and their 

behavior. The Whale Museum in Friday Harbour, WA offers courses on whales, and some tour 

operators attend these courses. A few have worked with well known scientists with their research. 

Tour operators who are members of WWOANW take conservation efforts seriously. Their members 

understand that if there are no whales, there will be no industry. The whale watcher operators see their 

role, in part, as introducing the public to whales and to educate people to be respectful, to take action, 

and to conserve other marine species and the environment as a whole. They feel that their tours are an 

effective way to raise awareness of killer whales and issues relating to their biology, behaviour and 

proper management. As gatekeepers of the whale watching experience, tour operators are in a unique 

position to transfer knowledge to the public about whales, their habitat and ocean conservation. 

Learning about killer whale biology and behaviour through the educational content provided on whale 

tours may encourage greater public support for whale conservation and their protection from 

potentially negative impacts. 

The challenge for the industry is to provide these services within an uncertain scientific and regulatory 

context. 

Background 

Each summer southern resident killer whales are seen regularly in the inshore waters of the Strait of 

Georgia, Puget Sound, Haro Strait, and off the southern tip of Vancouver Island in the Strait of Juan de 

Fuca. Prior to 1976 commercial whale watching in this region was almost unknown. For decades killer 

whales had been regarded as dangerous and a threat to fishing as evidenced by the installation of a 

machine gun at the entrance to Pender Harbour in the 1960s. Over the past twenty years there has been 

a dramatic change in the nature of the public interest in killer whales and significant growth has 

occurred in recreational and commercial whale watching in the waters off the coast of British Columbia 

and Washington State. 

3


Figure 1: Range Map of Southern Resident Killer Whales (Ford, Ellis & Balcomb (2000)) 

During the mid 1960s, after the first census, the population of southern resident killer whales was 

estimated at 100 (Wiles, 2004). Since 1973 the Centre for Whale Research has taken an annual census 

and has identified three notable declines. The first occurred between 1967 and 1973 when killer whales 

were regularly captured for aquariums leading to a 30% reduction in their numbers. The second, a 

decline of 12%, took place between 1980 and 1984. The third happened between 1996 and 2000 with a 

further decline in the numbers of adults and juveniles of 12.8%. 

Although conclusive evidence of the cause or causes of these declines is not yet available 1 , some 

researchers have attributed this to a variety of human activities such as dredging in Puget Sound, 

shoreline development, increased pollution, factory ship trawling, excavation of the sea floor and global 

climate change. Other studies have suggested that declines in the killer whale population may be 

attributable to a decline in the availability of chinook salmon, a principal food source for killer whales, 

1 For further details on the scientific evidence on the decline of killer whales, see Taylor & Platter, 2001 and Baird, 

1999. 

4


and high concentrations of toxins such as PCB’s and DDT in waters inhabited by southern resident killer 

whales. Another possible factor in the population decline that has been identified recently is whale 

watching. As the volume of this activity has increased so have concerns about possible whale 

disturbance impacts which may threaten their conservation. 

The Effects of Whale Watching 

Research on the ecological impacts on whales is increasing, but the findings are mixed 2 . Some 

researchers have interpreted certain behavioural changes in whales as signs of stress, including 

increased swim speeds, longer dive times, changes in swim patterns, and surface-active behaviours. 

Other researchers have noted that when boats are present, whale behaviour is so variable that no 

unequivocal signs of behaviour changes can be determined. 

Although numerous short-term whale behavioural responses to the presence of touring vessels have 

been documented, “no study has yet demonstrated any long-term adverse effects of whale watching on 

the health of the killer whale populations in the northeastern Pacific” (Trites & Bain, 2000, p. 2). Some 

researchers have suggested that the studies which purport to identify behavioural changes have serious 

methodological problems and questionable validity. Others have noted that the resident whale 

populations have shown strong site fidelity to their traditional summer ranges despite more than 25 

years of whale watching activity. Because of the lack of clarity between cause and effect, Baird (1999) 

suggests that a precautionary management approach should be used. In 1997 the International Whaling 

Commission (IWC) recognized that precautionary measures in whale watching were necessary to avoid 

negative impacts to whales and other cetaceans and to promote their survival. The Oceans Act of 

Canada reflects this same view and advocates an integrated management approach based on 

sustainability and precautionary strategies. 

The precautionary approach shifts the onus of proof in relation to the environmental effects of human 

activity. It requires that the exploitation of a resource proceed no faster than knowledge about the 

impact of the exploitation, which suggests caution to avoid environmental harm, when the research as 

to cause and effect is unclear. The precautionary approach involves a balance between the assessment 

of the risks associated with a given action and the need to act. Rules and regulations governing whale 

watching activities that reflect a precautionary approach have been effective in many of the places 

where whale watching occurs. Such regulations frequently include the minimization of vessel speeds, 

avoidance of abrupt changes in speed, direction or noise, minimization of noise, avoidance of pursuit, 

and the avoidance of encirclement or the splitting of groups. They also include specifying appropriate 

approach angles and length of exposure, considering cumulative impacts on the animals from numerous 

vessels, and allowing whales to control the nature and duration of the interaction with a whale watching 

vessel. 

For sustainable management of the killer whales, long term research is needed, and researchers have 

encouraged the commercial whale watching industry and private boaters to contribute to recording and 

2 See Erbe 2002; Trites & Bain, 2000; Williams, Bain, Ford & Trites, 2002 

5


monitoring the effects of whale watching on whales. The challenge, however, will be to ensure that the 

persons assisting in this research receive sufficient training in scientific methods of capturing data such 

as population size, habitat, and behaviour. Sustainable management of the whale watching industry can 

best be achieved through continuing co-operation between research, conservation, and commercial 

interests. Research, education, and monitoring are essential parts of a sustainable whale watching 

industry and these activities will assist in determining whether the southern resident killer whale 

population is in fact declining and whether it is threatened by whale watching or other activities. 

The knowledge possessed by whale watch tour operators represents a significant resource. Most tour 

operators spend hundreds of hours on the water during the whale watching season and are often the 

first to become aware of the arrival of killer whales in the inland waters of BC and the San Juan Islands. 

They have information about whale sightings, feeding locations, and patterns of habitat that may be 

very useful to researchers and conservation efforts. 

Government Regulation 

Government action has increased in response to a heightened public sense of the importance of proper 

whale watching management. The regulation of behaviours impacting killer whales in the San Juan 

Islands and Straight of Georgia is further complicated by the human boundary between Canadian and 

U.S. waters. In the U.S. marine mammals are managed by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) 

which has sole jurisdiction and supersedes any state or local government. In Canada, the Department of 

Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) is responsible for marine mammal conservation through the Marine 

Mammal Regulations (MMR) of 1993 passed under the Fisheries Act of 1993, and the Species At Risk Act 

(SARA) of 2004 (see Table 1 for details). 

Government involvement in regulating whale watching industry practices has been slow to develop. In 

Canada, the DFO has not been a significant enforcement presence in the BC region apart from a few 

high profile cases of prosecutions under the harassment regulations of the Marine Mammal Act, nor has 

it historically taken a major role in shaping whale watching industry practices in the BC region. In the 

State of Washington there is a minimum approach distance regulation of 100 yards. However, in British 

Columbia there are no specific marine wildlife viewing regulations. 

There has been some collaboration between US and Canadian authorities. For example, the U.S. 

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife teamed 

up with DFO (Pacific Region) to provide more water coverage during peak whale watching months in 

high traffic areas. The DFO has instructed fisheries enforcement officers to spend a portion of their 

water time observing whale watch activities in Canadian waters. While the enforcement is largely for 

observing and providing additional support for the education and monitoring programs, it is also there 

to uphold existing U.S. MMPA, and Canadian MMR and SARA regulations. 

The whale watching industry is not comprehensively monitored through government regulation in either 

the U.S. or Canada. As a result the industry has turned to self-regulation, particularly through the 

WWOANW Best Practice Guidelines. As outlined below, non-governmental organizations such as 

6


Soundwatch and M3 continue to play a very large role in the management of whale watching activities 

in southern BC. 

Jurisdiction Date Key Legislation, Events and Provisions 

USA 1972 Federal Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) passed 

Protection of marine mammals managed by the National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS) which has sole jurisdiction and supersedes any state or local 

government. 

USA 2002 NMFS listed killer whales in Pacific Northwest as “depleted” 

Washington 2004 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife listed killer whales as 

State, USA 

“endangered” 

USA 2005 NMFS develops “Proposed Conservation Plan for the Conservation of Killer 

Whales (Orcinus Orca)” 

Canada 1993/4 Federal Fisheries Act passed 

Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) made responsible for marine 

mammal conservation through the Marine Mammal Regulations (MMR). 

MMR prohibits “harassment” of killer whales. 

MMR amended to protect all species of marine mammal (including killer 

whales) under Appendix A of the regulations 

Canada 1999 “Human/ Marine Mammal Interaction” joint workshop by the DFO and the 

University of Victoria 

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) 

declared local populations of killer whales in the area as “threatened,” but 

had no formal legal status 

Canada 2004 Federal Species At Risk Act (SARA) passed 

Canadian government decisions about inclusion on the List of Wildlife 

Species at Risk are now based on COSEWIC evaluations. 

COSWEIC lists southern resident killer whales listed as a ‘species at risk’ 

under SARA 

Canada 2004 Regina v. Fossum (2004), and Regina v. Maya (2004) 

Two operators prosecuted for behavior contrary to voluntary guidelines 

intended to prevent harassment. 

Sets Canadian precedent for tour operators to strictly observe voluntary 

guidelines and ensure that they are in compliance with MMR 

Canada 2005 DFO develops “Southern Resident Killer Whale Recovery Strategy” 

Table 1: Key Legislation, Events and Provisions of Canadian and US regulations 

7


Industry Self-Regulation 

By the early 1970s researchers suspected that noise from vessels was negatively affecting killer whales. 

Therefore, they developed an unofficial code of conduct while working around whales. Subsequently, 

growing public interest in killer whales led to an increasing concern by the developing whale watching 

industry, NGO environmental groups, and the scientific community, especially given a lack of sufficient 

regulations by American and Canadian governments. 

In 1988 The Whale Museum in Friday Harbor, WA initiated a community-based adaptive management 

process for generating voluntary best practices for wildlife viewing that supported and enhanced the 

federal guidelines in each country. These guidelines set out specific vessel distances, vessel speeds, and 

the orientation of vessels relative to whales for viewing and approach practices for commercial 

operators. They also included matters that were not addressed by the U.S. Marine Mammal Protection 

Act and the Canadian Fisheries Act regulations which merely prohibited the harassment of whales. 

Since the development of the guidelines, the international WWOANW, to which most operators in 

southern British Columbia belong, has been one of the most important ways for the industry to provide 

information about whale watching to the public and to regulate themselves in the absence of 

government legislation. The Best Practices Guidelines are seen as “the most comprehensive and 

detailed whale watching guidelines in the world” (Malcolm, 2003, p. 94). See Appendix for the 2006 

WWOANW Best Practices Guidelines. 

Each year WWOANW holds membership meetings to discuss current issues and to adopt a new set of 

working guidelines to meet changing cetacean and human use conditions. The WWOANW consults with 

community groups such as the Whale Museum in Friday Harbor, WA, commercial tour operators, local 

residents, and regional scientists. At annual meetings the members are updated on guideline changes, 

new scientific findings on potential whale impacts, and other information. Recommendations from 

these sources often result in adjustments to the Best Practices Guidelines. The Association also holds 

international driver trainings each spring to keep drivers updated on guideline changes, and in the case 

of new drivers to educate them on the Best Practices Guidelines. 

In 1993, due to the lack of government enforcement, The Whale Museum in Friday Harbor, WA began 

operating the Soundwatch Boater Education Program (“Soundwatch”) in the boundary waters of the 

southern Vancouver Island and the San Juan Islands of Washington State. This area is the busiest killer 

whale watching region in the world. Soundwatch began distributing whale watching information and 

viewing guidelines to recreational boaters from patrol vessels operating in the area. Soundwatch has 

also provided Feedback Reports to WWOANW members concerning individual vessels that are piloted in 

ways that are contrary to the guidelines. The Feedback Reports are intended to help drivers improve 

their behaviour and to provide a basis for evaluating the effectiveness of the current guidelines. This 

program has operated mainly on the basis of private grants with some additional funding given 

inconsistently by WWOANW and the 2002 Canadian Marine Mammal Monitoring Project (M3). M3 is 

presently managed by the Veins of Life Watershed Society, a non-profit organization from Victoria, BC 

8


with principal funding from the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans. M3 was modeled after 

and partnered with Soundwatch. M3 and Soundwatch function as trans-boundary counterparts, 

working together to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of both on-the-water-education and 

monitoring efforts. 

In 2001, a cooperative effort by Soundwatch, M3, the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the 

Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) and the WWOANW resulted in the development of 

a set of voluntary guidelines for private boaters known as the Be Whale Wise Guidelines. These 

guidelines were revised and endorsed by the DFO and NMFS in 2002. 

WWOANW is generally willing to adopt precautionary principles. An example of this occurred in relation 

to the practice of “leapfrogging.” This is a manoeuvre that involves a whale watching vessel moving in a 

direction parallel to the movement of a whale pod but at a greater rate of speed. The leapfrogging 

vessel then turns and places itself across the anticipated path of the whales. Some researchers have 

suggested that creating a significant noise source directly in front of whales creates a risk of masking 

echolocation and reducing the whales’ foraging efficiency. While the full impact of leapfrogging remains 

uncertain, WWOANW chose to amend its guidelines and its members have changed their practices 

accordingly. 

However, like many other improvements in commercial whale watching, this change needs to be 

adopted by non-commercial whale watchers to be fully effective. There are considerably more private 

whale watchers than commercial ones and the evidence suggests that few of them are aware of the 

code of ethics developed by WWOANW. To effectively manage whale watching only through self- 

imposed guidelines, every vessel, whether commercial or recreational, must comply with the same 

rules. Even though the guidelines have been readily accepted by most commercial whale watching 

operators and drivers, they do not appear to bring about compliance among non-commercial boaters. 

Creating a uniform pattern of compliance among all users of the whale watching resource continues to 

be a challenge for both the industry and government. While further regulation, monitoring and 

enforcement may bring this about, education of the public is also likely to be effective. 

An important landmark in the acceptance of WWOANW Best Practice Guidelines occurred in Canada in 

2004 when two tour operators were prosecuted for behavior contrary to the voluntary guidelines 

intended to prevent whale harassment. The Fossum and Maya cases (see Table 1) set a Canadian 

precedent for tour operators to strictly observe voluntary guidelines and ensure that they are in 

compliance with MMR. Since the prosecutions in the Fossum and Maya cases in Canada, both Canadian 

(DFO) and US (NMFS) enforcement officers have undergone Guideline Training Workshops and have met 

with WWOANW to make sure there is a general acceptance and understanding of them. The increased 

participation by government was demonstrated by the joint endorsement of the newest version of the 

voluntary guidelines by both NMFS and DFO. 

Operators’ Perspectives on the Industry and Regulation 

The peer pressure provided by Soundwatch and to some extent M3 helps to ensure compliance with the 

guidelines. Soundwatch and M3 are seen as excellent voluntary policing resources to ensure compliance 

9


by the operators. They are visible on the water and act as an enforcement body. One operator 

explained: 

“We are now going to be getting a monthly report. We will have access so we can determine the 

number of incidents that month. I think there should be someone, if not our President, asking 

why this company has six incidents. Is there a problem?” 

Soundwatch is an avenue for data collection even though it was not originally designed for this purpose. 

However, tour operators see it as serving a purpose for scientists, management, and government. 

Operators now have a trend of number of infringements of their own guidelines, and they value that. 

From Soundwatch data, operators know that they are outside their guidelines less than .05% of the 

time. Operators also feel that there is pressure to conform. One operator told of his experiences: 

“There are lots of us and we don’t tolerate it, if someone does something *wrong+. Pretty soon there 

will be a big zodiac right up beside you …and we’ll pass the federal guidelines to them on board …and 

explain that this is how we make our living and to be respectful.” 

Operators, for the most part, are wary of government regulation of the whale watching industry. Their 

concerns include the government’s inadequate experience with whale watching and lack of knowledge 

about the behaviour and biology of whales, the possibility of unjust or arbitrary enforcement and the 

prospect of high costs for licensing. In spite of this, they feel that the industry needs to have a more 

effective way to deal with repeat offenders who ignore the guidelines. For example: 

“Repeat violators need some type of penalty …there needs to be some type of system for 

reprimand whether that’s within the whale watch operator’s association or guidelines become 

federal law in both countries. It also requires an enforcement agent from either government...a 

ticket for repeated violations. 

If the government has a role to play, the operators would like to see the DFO to be more visible and 

enforce compliance. There needs to be a body with teeth to prosecute; that being the DFO. One tour 

operator suggested that “They just need to be out on the water more often. Their role should basically 

be for policing. The DFO should step in and prosecute not just stand on shore and take a picture and 

then prosecute.” 

Tour operators also feel that the whale watching association should be invited to participate in decision 

making about whale watching activities. An effective management plan with regulated guidelines should 

reflect their experience and expertise based on two decades of self-regulated practices. One operator 

explained: 

“I think that we have been influencing government. We are the ones that continue to modify 

our guidelines. We are out there setting an example….We feel that we are under attack a lot of 

times but in reality…our guidelines have held together and continue to evolve.” 

10


Another suggested: 

“As a group we ought to get together and lobby and attend meetings, lobby for input into the 

regulations. I think as individuals we need to pressure them and as an organization we have to 

show them that we are willing as a group of businesses to get together to make sure we are 

doing the right thing.” 

Regarding the government’s role, the operators have some suggestions on how the government could 

be more environmentally responsible toward the whales, other than regulating the operators. 

“If the governments were acting in the best interests of the whales they would be spending 

significantly more time and energy and money restoring salmon habitat because it’s their food 

source and without it whales are going to continue to decline.” 

“Noise impacts their hearing as the whales use sonar to echolocate their food…there are a lot of 

vessels out there, commercial, pleasure crafts, kayaks and Navy ships. It can get quite busy on 

the water.” 

“The U.S. government has listed the killer whales as an endangered species…look at Puget 

Sound and the toxins that already exist in the water. The government needs to clean these 

up….contamination from heavy metals and chemicals…PCBs and fire retardant chemicals. Will 

the government do this? I don't think so, because they will have to spend billions and billions of 

dollars.” 

The operators take a certain pride in the development of the guidelines which appear to have been 

effective in creating equal sustainable opportunities among business competitors, serving the long term 

interests of the whale population, and appeasing the public’s growing interest in whale conservation. 

Other associations in the world are using the guidelines as a model to develop their own guidelines. 

They see their guidelines as a proactive instrumental in ensuring that some rules are followed. One 

operator explained: “If there were not whale watching guidelines there would not be guidelines, no 

regulations…we set up in the late 80s, early 90s.” 

Several of the operators express the view that the whale watching industry has brought order to the 

care and management of the killer whale population through their examples and education of their 

clients. 

“We teach respect for animals. People go home with their pictures and a higher regard for 

animals…and how special they are. You hope that one out of every five people will make some 

type of step towards conservation.” 

11


“There are people who drop money in The Whale Museum because they sign up on one of these 

trips. I think there would not be all this thought and protection if there had not been whale 

watching tours.” 

Conclusion 

The purpose of the WWOANW guidelines and managing practices is to protect killer whales while 

providing opportunities for the public to observe them in their natural habitat rather than in an 

aquarium or zoo. While there are legitimate concerns about the rapid growth of whale watch touring 

and a need for monitoring and proper management, the tour operators and drivers feel they are 

working to make whale watching safe for whales in the long term so that this form of eco-tourism may 

be enjoyed by future generations. The Best Practices Guidelines developed by the industry are a positive 

factor in the conservation of killer whales. 

If it were not for the steps taken by the industry, an effective form of management might not be in 

place. DFO (Pacific Region) continues to perform an important monitoring role with respect to potential 

instances of harassment, which is prohibited by regulations under the Fisheries Act. However, it 

continues to provide support to the industry rather than assuming regulatory control. As a result, DFO 

(Pacific Region) has recognized the guidelines as a suitable model as evidenced by their participation 

with WWOANW to design programs that may increase compliance. Though private recreational boaters 

and non-member touring companies or individuals are not subject to the guidelines, member operators, 

Soundwatch, and M3 challenge other vessels’ inappropriate behaviour that might be due to ignorance 

rather than an intention to harm. 

Members of WWOANW take conservation efforts seriously. Their members understand that if there are 

no whales, there will be no industry. The whale watcher operators see their role, in part, as introducing 

the public to whales and to educate people to be respectful, to take action, and to conserve other 

marine species and the environment as a whole. They feel that their tours are an effective way to raise 

awareness of killer whales and issues relating to their biology, behaviour, and proper management. As 

gatekeepers of the whale watching experience, tour operators are in a unique position to transfer 

knowledge to the public about whales, their habitat and ocean conservation. Learning about killer whale 

biology and behaviour through the educational content provided on whale tours may encourage greater 

public support for whale conservation and their protection from potentially negative impacts. 

12


References and Further Reading 

Baird, R.W. (1999). Status of Killer Whales in Canada. Species Status Report: Committee on the Status of 

Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). Canadian Field-Naturalist 115(4), 676-701. 

Erbe, C. (2002). Underwater noise of whale-watching boats and potential effects on Killer Whales 

(Orcinus orca) based on an acoustic impact model. Marine Mammal Science. 18(2), 394-418. 

Ford, J.K.B., Ellis, G.M., & Balcomb. K.C. (2000). Killer Whales. Vancouver: UBC Press. 

Hoyt, E. (2001). Whale Watching 2001. Worldwide tourism numbers, expenditures, and expanding 

socio-economic benefits. A special report for the International Fund for Animal Welfare. 

Conference held in Yarmouth Port, MA. 

Koski . K.L., & Osborne, R.W. (2005). The evolution of adaptive management practices for vessel-based 

wildlife viewing in the boundary waters of British Columbia and Washington State: From 

voluntary guidelines to regulations. Conference held in Puget Sound Georgia Basin Research 

Conference. 

Lawrence, T.B., Phillips, N., & Hardy, C. (1999). Watching whale watching exploring the discursive 

foundations of collaborative relationships. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. 35(4). 

Taylor, M. & Platter, B. (2001). Population viability analysis for the southern resident population of the 

killer whale (Orcinus orca). The Center for Biological Diversity. 

The Whale Museum (2005). The Whale Museums's Soundwatch Boater Education Program Activities 

Report 2005. Retrieved January 16, 2006 from Web site: http://www.whalemuseum.org/downloads/soundwatch/2005%20SW%20Program%20Activities%20Report.pdf 

The Whale Museum (2006). Whale Watching Guidelines. Friday Harbor, WA. Retrieved January, 16, 2006 

from Web site: http://www.whale-museum.org/education/library/whalewatch/wwlinks.html 

Trites, A.W., & Bain, D.E. (2002). Short and long-term effects of whale watching to killer whales (Orcinus 

Orca) in British Columbia. Retrieved June 15, 2006 from 

http://faculty.washington.edu/dbain/whalewatch.PDF 

Wiles, G. J. (2004). Washington State Status Report for the Killer Whale. Olympia, Washington 

Department of Fish and Wildlife. Retrieved May, 5, 2005 from Web site: 

http://wdfw.wa.gov/wlm/diversty/soc/status/orca/final_orca_status.pdf 

Williams, R., Bain, D.E., Ford, J. K.B., & Trites, A.W. (2002). Behaviour responses of male killer whales to a 

'leapfrogging' vessel. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management. 

13


Appendix 

2006 Guidelines and Best Practices for 

Commercial Whale Watching Operators, WWOANW 

Whale Watching 

1. BE CAUTIOUS and COURTEOUS: Approach areas of known or suspected marine mammal activity with extreme 

caution. Look in all directions before planning your approach or departure. If a vessel operator is unaware of the 

whales' location he must maintain a vigilant watch for whales at all times. Mere observation of whale watching 

vessels in the distance does not fulfill this responsibility as individual whales may be encountered anywhere and 

at any time. Maintaining a vigilant watch often includes significant speed reductions. 

2. SLOW DOWN: reduce speed to less than 7 knots when within 400 metres/yards of the nearest whale. Avoid 

abrupt course changes. A vessel approaching the vicinity of whales - within ½ mile (880 yards) of a whale - is 

considered to be in the slow-down zone and must gradually reduce speed such that vessel speed is no more than 

7 knots. This speed transition shall also be observed when disengaging the vicinity of whales. 

3. AVOID approaching closer than 100 metres/yards to any whale. As the vessel approaches, the distribution of 

whales and the positioning of other viewing vessels should be assessed. Communication with other member 

vessels is strongly encouraged at this point (on the designated marine radio frequency or cell phone). 

4. If your vessel is unexpectedly within 100 metres/yards of a whale, disengage engines IMMEDIATELY and allow 

the whales to pass. 

5. AVOID approaching whales from the front or from behind. Always approach and depart whales from the side, 

moving in a direction parallel to the direction of the whales. A vessel approaching the vicinity of whales from 

ahead must apply the Stop & Wait Viewing Sequence once inside ½ mile (880 yards) of the nearest whale or 

within ¼ mile (440 yards) of a vessel maintaining its priority sequence and waiting for the whales to arrive. A 

vessel approaching the vicinity of whales from behind or the side must apply the Parallel Viewing Sequence once 

inside ½ mile (880 yards) of the nearest whale or within ¼ mile (440 yards) of a vessel maintaining its priority 

paralleling sequence. A vessel may disengage the area to reposition at any time. (See Parallel Viewing Sequence). 

A vessel shall not approach a resting whale from behind, leaving a minimum clearance of 1/8th mile (220 yards). 

6. KEEP CLEAR of the whales' path. Avoid positioning your vessel within the 400 metre/yard area in the path of 

the whales. If engaging in Stop and Wait sequence, do so at least 400 metre/yards ahead of the whales. 

7. When whales are moving in a predictable direction, do not park or maneuver between the whales and the 

nearest shoreline (if they are within 1 mile of a shoreline). 

8. Resting Whales: A vessel in the vicinity of a resting whale shall always employ the Parallel Viewing Sequence. 

The Stop & Wait Viewing Sequence shall not be utilized at anytime when whales are resting in the vicinity, unless 

the vessel is maneuvered in such a manner that the nearest whale passes the vessel a minimum of 100 metres. 

14


9. Whenever a vessel is upwind of and in the vicinity of a whale, engine exhaust emissions are to be minimized, 

either by shutting down one or more main and auxiliary engines. 

10. All sonar, depth sounders, fish finders and other underwater transducers should be shut off whenever a 

vessel is in the vicinity of whales. Ongoing acoustical research is inconclusive, however sound reduction measures 

are addressed as a precaution to insure optimum acoustic environment. 

Parallel Viewing Sequence 

1. Vessels should travel in a direction parallel to the direction the whales are traveling, maintaining a minimum 

distance of 100 metres. 

2. A vessel's speed should be the same as the whale's speed when engaged in parallel viewing. When 

disengaging, angle vessel away from the nearest whale, thereby relinquishing your priority sequence. 

3. Vessels in more favorable positions should limit their time in that position to 15 minutes and then allow other 

vessels engaged in viewing that more favorable position. 

Stop & Wait Viewing Sequence or Silent Set-Up 

1. When approaching a whale or a group of whales from ahead the vessel operator must ensure his vessel enters 

the sequence of viewing vessels such that the operator does not block the views of the already set-up vessels. 

Once the vessel is in viewing sequence, it must stop, shut down engines. 

2. A vessel engaged in the Stop & Wait Viewing Sequence may have whales approach inside 100 yards (300 feet) 

only if it has followed all relevant procedures. 

3. Each whale must be allowed to pass a minimum of 1/4th mile (440 yards) before re-starting engines. 

4. Repositioning is most relevant to vessels utilizing the Stop & Wait Viewing Sequence. A vessel should proceed 

on a course perpendicular to the current course of the particular whales at a maximum speed of 7 knots until it is 

at least ½ mile (880 yards) away from the nearest whale 

after which point it can make the speed transition. When re-engaging, vessels must slow to 7 knots at ½ mile. 

5. Maintain 100 yards between vessels engaged in Stop and Wait or Silent Set-Up. 

6. Do not attempt to park directly in the path of the whales. If obviously in the path and the situation allows, 

attempt to move further back. (Never engage engines within 100 yards of whales). 

7. STAY on the OFFSHORE side of the whales when they are traveling close to shore. Remain at least 200 

metres/yards offshore at all times. Vessels shall ensure a boat-free foraging zone for the whales by maintaining a 

position seaward of the whales and not positioning within 1/8th mile (220 yards) of any shoreline when whales 

are in the vicinity. Vessels are not to position within ¼ mile of shore between Eagle Pt. and Mitchell Pt. on the 

west side of San Juan Island. Vessels are not to position within ½ mile of Lime Kiln Lighthouse. 

8. LIMIT your viewing time to a recommended maximum of 30 minutes for one particular group of whales. This 

will minimize the cumulative impact of many vessels and give consideration to other viewers. A vessel shall limit 

its cumulative time in the vicinity of whales on any one tour to a maximum of 33% of the scheduled tour length. 

For a 3-hour tour this is a maximum of 1 hour spent in the vicinity of whales. 

15


9. DO NOT swim with or feed whales. 

10. A vessel's speed shall never exceed 30 knots when it is within ½ mile (880 yards) of any shoreline or known 

wildlife viewing areas (Hein Bank, Middle Bank, Constance Bank, etc) at any time during a tour. 

11. Report any observations of disturbance or harassment to the WWOANW executive in charge (V.P. US or V.P. 

Canada). Please use courtesy reminder form. 

Operations vessels around Transient Killer Whales or Baleen Whales 

1. All Best Practices Guidelines as they relate to resident killer whales are applicable and must be followed with 

the following modifications: Allow 220 yards between vessel and Transient Orca when in the process of a kill. 

Porpoises and dolphins: 

1. OBSERVE all guidelines for watching whales. 

2. DO NOT drive through or circle groups of porpoises or dolphins for the purpose of bow-riding. Should dolphins 

or porpoises choose to ride the bow wave of your vessel, HOLD COURSE AND SPEED or REDUCE SPEED gradually 

and avoid sudden course changes. 

Seals, sea lions and birds on land: 

1. AVOID approaching closer than 100 metres/ yards to any marine mammals or birds. 

2. SLOW DOWN and reduce your wake/wash and noise levels. Vessels should slowly pass by without stopping in 

order to remain predictable. 

3. PAY ATTENTION and slowly back away at the first sign of disturbance or agitation. 

4. BE CAUTIOUS AND QUIET when around haul-outs and bird colonies, especially during breeding, nesting and 

pupping seasons (generally May to September). Inform passengers to avoid loud noises, pointing, and sudden 

movements. 

5. DO NOT swim with or feed any marine mammals or birds. Rafts of birds on the water should be given as wide 

a berth as is practical at cruising speed. Cormorants and Peregrine Falcons are particularly sensitive to 

disturbances when nesting. Extra caution should be exercised during nesting periods. Vessels should approach 

very slowly, with no wake, no P.A. system, cautioning guests to refrain from making loud noises, and remain at 

least 100 yards from rookeries. 

Viewing wildlife within Marine Protected Areas, Wildlife Refuges, Ecological Reserves and Parks: 

1. CHECK your nautical charts for the location of various protected areas. 

2. ABIDE by posted restrictions or contact a local authority for further information. 

16


Race Rocks 

1. Vessels will slow their approach to Race Rocks such that speed at 1/8th mile (220 yards) from any rock or 

landmass is reduced to minimal wake and wash, when practical. This Go Slow Zone extends 800 yds/m around 

every rock and landmass in the Race Rocks area. 

2. Vessels in the Go Slow Zone will remain as close to mid-channel as is practicable between the major rock 

outcroppings known as North Race Rock, West Race Rock and Helicopter Rock. 

3. While in the Go Slow Zone vessels will transit the area with the current whenever conditions are suitable to do 

so. 

4. Vessels will remain outside all of the Go Slow Zone whenever Resident, Transient or Off Shore Killer Whales 

are present. 

Active Pass 

Vessels engaged in whale watching in Active Pass should use the Parallel Viewing sequence, not the Stop & Wait 

sequence in the Pass (due to heavy currents and ferry traffic) from Helen Pt. to the Galiano Ferry Terminal. 

Watching Whales in Inclement Weather 

1. Heavy Seas: effects are relative to the size of the vessel. Obey all guidelines when possible. Safety of 

passengers and vessel takes priority over guidelines. 

2. Heavy Fog: If engaged in wildlife viewing in heavy fog, observe all guidelines when possible. If vessel is in an 

unpredictable position regarding whale locations, shut down (when possible) and drift until whale locations can 

be determined. Safety of passengers and vessel takes priority over guidelines. 

3.Heavy Current: Not an excuse to violate guidelines. If pushed into an unpredictable position, shut down (when 

possible) until whales are at a safe distance. Re-engage using the parallel viewing sequence or stop and wait 

sequence. 

Radio Etiquette 

1. Vessels engaged in viewing or in the vicinity of whales will monitor the Marine VHF Radio frequency 

designated from time to time by this Association. 

2. Radio transmissions should be courteous, helpful, to the point, use appropriate language and be brief. 

3. Use low power on VHF radios. 

17

Case Study - Network for Business Sustainability

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

Delete template?

Save as template?