ArticlePDF Available

Zeppel, H. & Muloin, S. (2008). Conservation Benefits of Interpretation on Marine Wildlife Tours. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 13, 280-294.

Authors:

Figures

Content may be subject to copyright.
This article was downloaded by: [University of Southern Queensland]
On: 24 February 2014, At: 16:31
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Human Dimensions of Wildlife: An
International Journal
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uhdw20
Conservation Benefits of Interpretation
on Marine Wildlife Tours
Heather Zeppel
a
& Sue Muloin
b
a
Tourism Program , School of Business, James Cook University
Cairns , Cairns, Queensland, Australia
b
Equity Officer , James Cook University Cairns , Cairns, Queensland,
Australia
Published online: 09 Jul 2008.
To cite this article: Heather Zeppel & Sue Muloin (2008) Conservation Benefits of Interpretation on
Marine Wildlife Tours, Human Dimensions of Wildlife: An International Journal, 13:4, 280-294, DOI:
10.1080/10871200802187105
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10871200802187105
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
280
Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 13:280–294, 2008
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1087-1209 print / 1533-158X online
DOI: 10.1080/10871200802187105
UHDW1087-12091533-158XHuman Dimensions of Wildlife, Vol. 13, No. 4, May 2008: pp. 1–31Human Dimensions of Wildlife
Conservation Benefits of Interpretation on Marine
Wildlife Tours
Conservation Be nefits of Marine Wildlife ToursH. Zeppel and S. Muloin
HEATHER ZEPPEL
1
AND SUE MULOIN
2
1
Tourism Program, School of Business, James Cook University Cairns, Cairns,
Queensland, Australia
2
Equity Officer, James Cook University Cairns, Cairns, Queensland, Australia
Marine wildlife tours provide a range of education and conservation benefits for visitors.
These benefits derive from interpretation programs and close personal encounters with
marine wildlife. Interpretive information covers the biology, ecology and behaviors of
marine species, best practice guidelines, and human threats to marine life. There has
been limited assessment of interpretation on marine wildlife tours to identify whether
these increase tourist knowledge and promote changes in environmental attitudes. This
article reviews the educational benefits of guided marine wildlife experiences with dol-
phins, whales, and marine turtles using Oram’s (1999) framework of outcome indica-
tors to manage marine tourism. The key indicators assessed in this article are
education/learning and attitude/belief changes in visitors that benefit marine wildlife.
This analysis found tourist learning during mediated encounters with marine wildlife
contributes to pro-environmental attitudes and on-site behavior changes, with some
longer-term intentions to support and engage in marine conservation actions. Areas of
research are suggested to examine the causal links between wildlife interpretation and
pro-environmental outcomes.
Keywords marine wildlife tours, interpretation, education benefits, environmental
attitudes, conservation actions
Marine wildlife tours provide a range of personal, education, and conservation benefits.
The educational benefits of marine wildlife tours include visitor learning and knowledge
from information presented about marine species and ocean environments. The conserva-
tion benefits include increased protection of marine species and habitats. This article eval-
uates the educational benefits of marine wildlife tourism experiences to identify
interpretive programs that increase tourist knowledge, promoting attitude shifts that aid
marine conservation and help to conserve marine wildlife. It reviews the education bene-
fits of guided marine wildlife experiences with dolphins, whales, and marine turtles using
Oram’s (1999) framework of outcome indicators to manage marine tourism. The key indi-
cators for tourists assessed in this article are education/learning and attitude/belief changes
that benefit marine species along with allied indicators of positive conservation outcomes
for the marine environment. This article analyzes whether tourist learning during mediated
encounters with marine wildlife contributes to pro-environmental attitudes and behavior
changes. Case studies focus on tourist experiences of whale- and dolphin-watching tours
in Australia and New Zealand, whale watching in the United States and marine turtle
encounters in Australia.
Address correspondence to Dr. Heather Zeppel, School of Business, James Cook University,
P.O. Box 6811, Cairns, Queensland, 4870 Australia. E-mail: heather.zeppel@jcu.edu.au
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 16:31 24 February 2014
Conservation Benefits of Marine Wildlife Tours 281
Marine Wildlife Tours
Marine wildlife tourism is defined as “any tourist activity with the primary purpose of
watching, studying or enjoying marine wildlife” (Masters, 1998). It includes marine wild-
life watching holidays; wildlife boat trips in marine or estuarine areas; guided island or
coastal walks; observing marine life from land viewpoints; visiting marine or coastal
nature reserves; participating in a marine life study tour or conservation holiday; and visit-
ing marine wildlife visitor centers and marine aquaria. This article focuses on mobile free-
ranging marine animals such as whales, dolphins, sea turtles, and penguins. Marine mam-
mals, in particular, are a key tourism attraction (Beasley, 1997; Birtles, Valentine, &
Curnock, 2001; Stokes, Dobbs & Recchia, 2002; Duffus & Dearden, 1993; Higham &
Lusseau, 2004; Orams, 2003, 2005; Muloin, 1998; Samuels et al., 2003; Valentine et al.,
2004). Popular marine mammals include dolphins (Orams, 1997a, 1997b), whales and
porpoise (i.e., cetaceans); dugong and manatee (Sorice, Shafer, & Ditton, 2006); and seals
and sea lions (i.e., pinnipeds) (Barton et al., 1998; Booth, 1998; Kirkwood et al., 2003;
Scarpaci, Nugegoda, & Corkeron, 2005). Other marine wildlife of tourist interest includes
whale sharks and other shark species (Birtles et al., 1996; Davis et al., 1997; Davis et al.,
2000; Dobson, 2006); fish and rays (Lewis & Newsome, 2003); sea turtles (Macgregor,
2006; Tisdell & Wilson, 2001a, 2001b; Wilson & Tisdell, 2001); and penguins, albatross,
gannet, and other seabirds. Worldwide, 500,000 divers a year now feed, photograph, and
swim with sharks (Topelko & Dearden, 2005). Nesting or rookery areas for seabirds and
marine turtles (Higham, 1998, 2001; Schanzel & McIntosh, 2000; Tisdell & Wilson,
2002) and haul-out areas for seals and sea lions (Orsini & Newsome, 2005) also attract
visitors. In Australia in 1999, there were over 70 marine species targeted for marine tour-
ism, from whales (e.g., humpback, southern right, and dwarf minke), dolphins, turtles, sea
lions and seals, to penguins, fish, sharks (e.g., reef, grey nurse, great white, and whale
sharks), rays, sea dragons, and cuttlefish (Birtles et al., 2001). A survey of 376 marine
tourism operators in New Zealand found viewing marine wildlife was a key attraction,
focusing on marine mammals (44%, with 22% on dolphins), sea birds (42%), fish (30%),
penguins (18%), and other marine wildlife (16%) (McKegg, Probert, Baird, & Bell, 1998).
Interpretation on Marine Wildlife Tours
Environmental interpretation is often promoted as a key element of sustainable visitor inter-
actions with wildlife (Blanchard, 1995; Foxlee, 2001; Moscardo, 1998; Orams, 1994, 1995a,
1995b, 1996a; Orams & Hill, 1998; Ham & Weiler, 2002; Moscardo, Woods, & Saltzer,
2004, Russell & Hobson, 2002; Schaenzel, 1998; Woods & Moscardo, 2003). Interpretation
activities or education programs in marine areas involve talks by tour guides, interpreters,
and rangers onboard boats or at shorelines, along with visitor centers, displays, signs, and
brochures. This information covers the biology, ecology, and behaviors of marine species,
best practice guidelines, and threats to marine life. Visitor benefits from interpretation of
marine wildlife tourism experiences can include enhanced educational and conservation out-
comes (Andersen & Miller, 2006; Ballantyne, Packer, & Hughes, 2006; Finkler & Higham,
2004; Heckel, 2001; Higham, 1998; Hughes & Saunders, 2005; Luck, 2003; Madin &
Fenton, 2004; Mayes, Dyer, & Richins, 2004; Muloin, 1998; Orams, 2000; Schanzel &
McIntosh, 2000; Tisdell & Wilson, 2005; Townsend, 2008). The personal benefits of view-
ing and learning about wildlife are the basis for conservation actions (Manfredo & Driver,
2002). On-site benefits of increased understanding or emotional responses to marine wildlife
encounters (Schanzel, 2004) may also lead to off-site benefits such as greater environmental
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 16:31 24 February 2014
282 H. Zeppel and S. Muloin
awareness, supporting nature conservation work, and protecting endangered species
(Amante-Helweg, 1996; Gralton, Sinclair, & Purnell, 2004; Orams, 1997b; Wilson &
Tisdell, 2003). This article explores the links between interpretation programs and educa-
tional benefits for visitors on selected marine wildlife tours. The impacts of wildlife interpre-
tation on the environmental attitudes and conservation actions of visitors are also examined.
Framework for Managing Marine Wildlife Tourism Experiences
This article follows the framework devised by Orams (1995c, 1999) that measures posi-
tive changes in both tourists and the marine environment for effective management of
marine tourism (Table 1). Indicators of tourist benefits from marine animal encounters
include enjoyment and learning contributing to pro-environmental attitude and behavior
changes, along with conservation benefits for marine environments and marine wildlife.
Indicators of conservation benefits include tourists reducing wildlife disturbance, protect-
ing habitats, and aiding the viability of marine ecosystems. The framework by Orams
(1999) was based on a previous model of experiential education in whale watching ecot-
ourism programs in Hawaii (Forestell, 1993; Forestell & Kauffman, 1990). This model
focused on the cognitive states or learning of visitors using interpretation in marine
settings to reduce impacts and promote pro-environmental behaviors on whale-watching
tours. Luck (2003) evaluated the key role of interpretation on swim with dolphin tours in
New Zealand, based on models by Forestell and Kaufmann (1990) and Orams (1997b).
Orams (1999) extended the three-step experiential education sequence of Forestell (1993)
into a four-stage sequence of desirable tourist outcomes from marine education programs
(Table 1). Mayes, Dyer, and Richins (2004) also adopt a model based on changing atti-
tudes, beliefs, behaviors, and actions through wildlife interaction and interpretation with
benefits for animals, the environment, and visitors. This article applies Oram’s (1999) key
outcome indicators of education/learning and attitude/belief change in visitors to review
the educational and conservation benefits of interpretation on marine wildlife tours.
Educational Benefits of Marine Wildlife Tours
The educational benefits of marine wildlife tours include visitor learning, knowledge, and
new information presented about marine species and marine or coastal environments. Positive
Table 1
Indicators for managing marine wildlife tourism
experiences
Tourist
1) Satisfaction/enjoyment
2) Education/learning
3) Attitude/belief change
4) Behavior/lifestyle change
Marine environment
1) Minimize disturbance
2) Improve habitat protection
Contribute to long-term health & viability of ecosystem
Source: Orams (1995c, 1999).
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 16:31 24 February 2014
Conservation Benefits of Marine Wildlife Tours 283
visitor interactions with wildlife lead to mindful, satisfied, and conservation-oriented visitors
(Moscardo, Woods, & Greenwood, 2001; Moscardo et al., 2004; Woods & Moscardo, 2003;
Zeppel & Muloin, 2008). A survey of 5,000 visitors at 15 wildlife sites in Australia and New
Zealand found a knowledgeable guide (19%) and wildlife information (18%) were strong
supporting factors to the close viewing of unique wildlife species behaving naturally in natu-
ral areas (Moscardo & Saltzer, 2004). A survey of 96 wildlife tour operators in Australia
found half (53%) considered education an important factor in protecting wildlife, with 36%
relying on information from scientists (Rodger, Moore, & Newsome, 2007).
Education and Learning Changes
Educational experiences were important for visitors on dwarf minke whale tours in the
northern Great Barrier Reef; at the Mon Repos turtle rookery in central Queensland; and
on swim with dolphin tours in New Zealand (Table 2). On the dwarf minke whale tours,
14% of visitors stated that learning about dwarf minke whales and marine life on the Great
Barrier Reef, the educational experience and research conducted about these whales were
highlights (Birtles et al., 2002). At Mon Repos, visitors learned about sea turtles at a visi-
tor center display and during interpretive talks on the beach about turtle egg laying or
turtle hatchlings. This included knowledge about the life cycle of turtles, their need for
protection and current threats to sea turtles (Tisdell & Wilson, 2002, 2005). Luck (2003)
found that, whereas most visitors on swim with dolphin tours increased their knowledge of
dolphins and wildlife (66–69%), both in general and from tour staff, only 29% strongly
agreed the dolphin tour was an educational experience. One dolphin operator did not have
a guide onboard and most visitors required more interpretation about dolphins, the marine
environment, and threats to wildlife (Luck, 2003). Visitors on whale watch tours in
Hervey Bay, Queensland, also wanted more information about the marine environment
(Foxlee, 2001). Interpreters or scientists educate visitors about cetacean biology and
marine conservation issues onboard many whale and dolphin watching boats (Andersen &
Miller, 2006; Birtles et al., 2002; Muloin, 1998; Russell & Hobson, 2002).
On wild dolphin feeding talks in Queensland, Australia, visitor knowledge about dolphins
increased by 81% at Tangalooma Resort on Moreton Island and by 47% at the small seaside
town of Tin Can Bay (Mayes et al., 2004). The educational benefits for visitors of the dolphin
interpretation and feeding interaction program at Tangalooma Resort have been well docu-
mented by Orams (1994, 1995b, 1996b, 1997a,b, 1999; Orams & Hill, 1998). The site
includes a Dolphin Education Center and a ranger giving nightly talks about dolphin biology
and behavior to both dolphin feeders and observers. Learning about the dolphins at Tanga-
looma motivated Australian tourists, whereas Japanese tourists wanted to touch and physically
interact with dolphins. Language barriers also impeded the Japanese visitors from understand-
ing the dolphin-feeding program or from adopting more environmentally responsible behav-
iors (Takei, 1998). Beasley (1997) found visitors on dolphin tours in Akaroa (New Zealand)
had short-term increases in their knowledge of marine mammals and ocean ecosystems. Some
55% of tourists swimming with wild dolphins at Bunbury, Western Australia, agreed that the
required pre-tour educational talk reduced inappropriate behaviors such as trying to touch or
follow the dolphins (O’Neill, Barnard, & Lee, 2004). On Penguin Island (Western Australia),
visitors learned about penguins, sea lions, and the marine ecology of the area from information
on signs, displays, pamphlets, and talks by rangers at a visitor center that houses orphaned or
injured little penguins. Rangers feed the penguins and give scheduled talks about their biology
and behavior. All tourists increased their knowledge of penguins after visiting this centre from
55% (pre-visit) to between 69% and 74% (post-visit) (Hughes & Saunders, 2005).
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 16:31 24 February 2014
284 H. Zeppel and S. Muloin
Table 2
Educational experiences and visitor learning on marine wildlife tours
Educational experiences
Total
themes*
%
Response
D
warf minke whale tours QLD (Birtles et al., 2002)*
More informed about minke whales 21 4.5
More informed about Reef (GBR) and marine life 15 3.2
Increased interest in info on (minke) whales—want to
learn more
91.9
A learning/educational experience (non specific) 9 1.9
More informed about/by research 8 1.7
Increased interest in info on marine life—want to learn more 4 0.9
Interested in recent discovery of species 1 0.2
Learned/understood whale watching guidelines 1 0.2
Total-YES-Educational 68 14.6
M
on Repos Conservation Park QLD (Tisdell & Wilson, 2002)^
Sea turtle viewing informative and educational 514 99
Sea turtle visitor center display 93
Interpretive talks (turtle hatchling behavior) 90
Interpretive talks (egg-laying process) 87
Life cycles of sea turtles 85
Need to protect sea turtles 82
Information on current threats to sea turtles
#
78
Amphitheatre 76
Visitor awareness of threats to sea turtles—additional
information
282 54
Visitor awareness of threats to sea turtles—first time 163 31
Swim with dolphin tours NZ (Luck, 2003)
+
Teach school courses on conservation of natural resources 72
Dolphin tour staff had good knowledge of dolphins 69
Learn new things/increase my knowledge (general) 66
Learn as much as we can about wildlife 66
Enjoy learning about wildlife on holidays 46
Dolphin tour was an educational experience 29
Learned a lot about dolphins on this tour 17
Learned a lot about other marine life 5
Notes: *Represents total coded themes or elements, not numbers of respondents. Total number of
coded themes/elements = 466.
^Reason to visit Mon Repos: Watch sea turtles (78%), study sea turtles (11%), entertain visitors
(9%), other (2%).
+
Responses to “Strongly agree” only; n = 733 questionnaires from 3 swim with dolphin tour oper-
ators (New Zealand).
#
Subscribe to a newsletter with updates on sea turtle conservation work, form a ‘friends of sea
turtles’ group, more access to (translated) material on sea turtles, current threats and conservation
measure, ban photography.
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 16:31 24 February 2014
Conservation Benefits of Marine Wildlife Tours 285
Attitude and Belief Changes
Several studies suggest that marine wildlife tours with a strong educational focus can
change the pro-environmental attitudes and beliefs of visitors (Christensen, Rowe, &
Needham, 2007; Finkler & Higham, 2004; Luck, 2003; Muloin, 1998; Tisdell & Wilson,
2002). Table 3 summarizes the changes in the environmental attitudes of visitors on whale
and dolphin tours. On swim with dwarf minke whale tours on the Great Barrier Reef, 27%
of tourists changed their attitudes to conservation, displaying a greater awareness of
whales, marine life, whaling, and other human impacts (Birtles et al., 2002). In the United
States, land-based whale watchers were more concerned than boat tourists about the
impacts of noise, boats and kayaks on killer whales (Finkler & Higham, 2004). Tourists’
desire for close encounters, then, was matched by awareness of their impacts on whales. A
survey of 229 land-based whale watchers in Oregon, USA, found that visitors who spoke
with volunteer whale interpreters at key coastal viewing points expressed stronger agree-
ment with protecting whales and awareness that human actions affected whales and
marine areas (Christensen et al., 2007). A survey of 236 whale watchers in Scotland found
a high level of environmental awareness, with 83% recycling items, 46% were members
of environmental or animal organizations, and 27% did voluntary environmental work
(Rawles & Parsons, 2005).
Visitors on wild dolphin feeding tours at Tin Can Bay and Tangalooma Resort felt
more strongly about conservation (81%), the state of marine areas (66%), and helping out
with conservation programs (52%) after their dolphin experience (Mayes et al., 2004).
They also disagreed with dolphins in captivity (59%) and indigenous people hunting
dolphins (68% of Australians) whereas 9% also disagreed with the practice of feeding
wild dolphins (Mayes et al., 2004). At the Penguin Experience visitor center (WA), rang-
ers feed orphaned or injured little penguins and give scheduled interpretive talks about
their biology. All visitors had more pro-environmental attitudes after this experience.
Exploration-focused visitors held an attitude of responsible conservation based on intrin-
sic natural values of the area, while recreation-focused visitors moved toward attitudes
that valued nature based on its usefulness to humans (Hughes & Saunders, 2005). A sur-
vey of 1,617 whale watch visitors at three locations around Vancouver Island, Canada,
found that “novice-generalist” visitors required interpretation about whale ecology and
marine habitat issues, whereas “expert-specialist” visitors were more receptive to
broader marine conservation messages (Malcolm & Duffus, 2002). Education, then, is a
key element of managing tourist-wildlife interactions, with the positive outcomes of
changing environmental attitudes and the potential to reduce visitor impacts on wildlife
(Higginbottom & Tribe, 2004; Higham & Carr, 2003; Orams, 1995b; O’Neill et al.,
2004; Schaenzel, 1998).
Discussion
This article identified a range of education and conservation benefits for visitors on
marine wildlife tours. The on-site benefits of increased understanding or emotional
responses to marine wildlife encounters can lead to off-site benefits such as greater
environmental awareness, supporting nature conservation work and protecting endan-
gered species. Empirical studies about the effect of interpretation on marine wildlife
tourism experiences were assessed against the framework devised by Orams (1995c,
1999) measuring positive changes in both tourists and the marine environment. Tourist
benefits from marine animal encounters include enjoyment and learning contributing to
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 16:31 24 February 2014
286 H. Zeppel and S. Muloin
Table 3
Changes in environmental/conservation attitudes on whale and dolphin tours
Environmental/conservation attitudes
Total
themes* % Response
D
warf minke whale tours QLD (Birtles et al., 2002)*
Greater awareness/concern/appreciation of
(marine) life/nature
48 10.3
Increased/reinforced conservation awareness 28 6.0
Greater awareness/concern/appreciation of whales 27 5.8
Greater awareness of whaling issues 9 1.9
Increased awareness of human impacts on marine
life/nature
61.3
Greater awareness of need for whale watching
guidelines
30.6
Greater awareness of need for sustainable ecotour-
ism
20.4
Greater awareness/appreciation of impacts of
humans on whales
20.4
Aware that wildlife needn’t be touched/fed to be
enjoyed
20.4
Increased awareness of effects of human coastal
development
10.2
Greater awareness of natural resource exploitation 1 0.2
Total – YES – Conservation Attitudes 129 27.7
Killer whale watching USA (Finkler & Higham, 2004) (land-based/boat-based)
Effects of noise on whales 74/54
Power boats placed in the path of whales 73/56
Disturbance of whales by (other) power boats 69/52
Impacts of kayaks approaching whales 27/18
D
olphin feeding QLD (Mayes, Dyer, & Richins, 2004)
+
Felt more strongly about conservation of the
environment generally
81
Felt they could make more of a difference to the
state of the (marine) environment
66–67
Felt more confident in assisting with conservation
programs
52
Disagreed with indigenous people hunting
dolphins (International visitors/Australians)
30/68
Disagreed with keeping dolphins in aquariums 59
Disagreed with feeding wild dolphins 9
Notes: *Represents total coded themes or elements, not numbers of respondents. Total number of
coded themes/elements = 466.
*Total: Yes—Conservation Attitudes (27.7%), Yes—Educational (14.6%), Yes—Personal
Experience (10.1%), Yes—Other (14.4%), No (33.3%). Questionnaires n=527 from 52 trips on 5
live-aboard dive boats in 1999/2000.
+
n = 105 questionnaires (54 Tangalooma, 51 Tin Can Bay) for visitors feeding wild dolphins.
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 16:31 24 February 2014
Conservation Benefits of Marine Wildlife Tours 287
pro-environmental attitude and behavior changes, and the longer-term intention to
engage in conservation actions that benefit marine wildlife and environments. Marine
wildlife tours with a strong educational focus and interpretation program can create atti-
tude, behavior, or lifestyle changes in visitors (Ballantyne, Packer, & Bond, 2007). This
review of visitor benefits from guided encounters with marine wildlife supports the
framework developed by Orams (1999) for managing marine tourism experiences and
the experiential education sequence model in marine ecotourism programs (Forestell,
1993). The learning benefits obtained from information about marine wildlife rein-
forced the emotional benefits of directly experiencing marine animals in their natural
habitats. There is some evidence that education benefits and visitor satisfaction differ
according to gender, level of previous experience (Neil, Orams, & Baglioni, 1996;
Muloin, 1998) and type of wildlife encounter such as boat, land-based, or in-water
activities with marine life (Birtles et al., 2002; Finkler & Higham, 2004). The level of
recreational involvement or specialization, intensity, and emotional aspects of marine
experiences can also influence environmental behaviors (Thapa, Graefe, & Meyer,
2005, 2006) and receptiveness to marine conservation messages (Malcolm & Duffus,
2002). Whale watch visitors with a strong biocentric orientation may already be more
inclined to participate in interpretation programs to learn about marine wildlife issues
(Christensen et al., 2007).
Quality educational experiences are important for visitors to increase their short-
term knowledge of marine species. Marine wildlife tours with a strong educational
focus changed the pro-environmental attitudes, beliefs, and behavior of visitors. On
whale and dolphin tours, tourists changed their attitudes to conservation, displaying a
greater knowledge of cetaceans and awareness of threats to marine life (Christensen
et al., 2007; Finkler & Higham, 2004; Luck, 2003; Mayes et al., 2004; Muloin, 1998).
Other changes in the personal behavior of visitors on a guided tour of turtle nesting
beaches at Jurabi included better overall adherence to minimal impact guidelines during
the Jurabi turtle experience (Smith, 2006). On-site signs at the turtle nesting beaches in
Jurabi Coastal Park and a brochure also outlined tourist behavior near turtles. Observa-
tions of 96 groups of unguided tourists over three months at Jurabi Park found 77% of
visitors breached at least one component in the turtle code of conduct such as shining
torches, not saying behind or being within three meters of a nesting turtle and walking
below the high tide mark (Waayers, Newsome, & Lee, 2006). In contrast, the structured
interpretive programs for visitors interacting with sea turtles at Mon Repos and dolphins
at Tangalooma Resort in Queensland reduced wildlife disturbance and influenced par-
ticipants to adopt short-term pro-environmental behaviors (up to 4 months later) such as
cleaning up beaches, recycling, and donating money to wildlife groups (Mayes et al.,
2004; Tisdell & Wilson, 2002, 2005). Other conservation benefits were enhanced appre-
ciation of marine wildlife and engaging in actions to reduce human threats or impacts on
wildlife (Howard, 2000). A post-visit survey of 140 visitors at Mon Repos 6 months
later also found support for behaviors supporting wildlife conservation (18%) and spe-
cific actions such as donating money and taking about conservation matters (9%)
(Ballantyne, Packer, Hughes, & Dierking, 2007). Close proximity to marine wildlife
during in-water encounters, near nesting turtles or shore-based feeding interactions with
dolphins magnified these environmental and personal benefits. The level or intensity of
the encounter with marine wildlife needed to change tourist attitudes was linked to
direct, close contact with animals more so than passive viewing from a boat or on land.
The quality of marine wildlife interpretation also influenced conservation outcomes and
other environmentally responsible behaviors as reported by visitors. Therefore, visitor
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 16:31 24 February 2014
288 H. Zeppel and S. Muloin
interactions with marine wildlife on guided tours increased environmental awareness,
changed attitudes, and modified on-site and some longer-term beneficial conservation
behaviors.
These personal, educational, and conservation benefits for visitors, however, depend on
sound management of marine animal encounters and interpretation programs that integrate
knowledge with the emotional aspects of observing marine wildlife. The level of visitors’
commitment to marine wildlife conservation related to impacts on their knowledge, atti-
tudes, and then behaviors. The personal impact of viewing marine turtles on nesting
beaches at Mon Repos and caring about their conservation related to knowledge and interest
(75–100%), understanding and attitude toward turtles (70–74%), general attitudes toward
wildlife and nature conservation (52–67%) and personal beliefs (34%) (Ballantyne et al.,
2007). The benefits for participants on marine wildlife tours are realized when the affec-
tive (emotional) benefits and excitement of seeing unique marine life are integrated with
the cognitive (education) benefits of learning new facts about marine wildlife. Thus, edu-
cational entertainment in marine life interpretation needs to include both cognitive and
affective aspects of experiential learning (Howard, 2000; Schanzel, 2004). Visitor learn-
ing for fun and enjoyment during leisure activities is an important part of tourism experi-
ences (Packer, 2006). Hence, marine wildlife interactions that involve making personal
connections with marine animals in a learning context can provide a range of conservation
and educational benefits. Marine wildlife tourism experiences that increase both environ-
mental awareness and positive feelings in visitors are more likely to generate environmen-
tal actions resulting in conservation benefits for marine wildlife.
Further Research
Further research is required on the causal links between marine interpretation programs
and the conservation benefits deriving from guided marine wildlife experiences. Much of
the research on marine wildlife tourism is site or species specific, focused on biological
impacts, and is limited to one type of encounter. Visitors at aquariums and seaworld parks
need to be surveyed about the conservation and education benefits of marine wildlife
encounters at these captive sites (Adelman, Falk, & James, 2000; Ballantyne, 2007;
Ballantyne et al., 2007; Evans, 1997; Saltzer, 2001; Spotte & Clark, 2004). The environmen-
tal attitudes of marine visitors in regard to whale watching and commercial or subsistence
whaling also require further investigation (Higham & Lusseau, 2007a,b; Orams, 2001),
along with cross-cultural attitudes to wildlife conservation in marine tourism settings
(Kellert, 1991; Takei, 1998; Teel, Manfredo, & Stinchfield, 2007). The conservation
attitudes and behavior of staff and operators of marine wildlife tours also need further
examination (Evans, 1997; Groff, Lockhart, Ogden, & Dierking, 2005), in addition to the
key role of scientists in providing information to tour operators and monitoring wildlife
(Rodgers et al., 2007). The content and effectiveness of marine conservation messages for
novice and specialist marine wildlife tourists needs to be assessed at different sites
(Christensen et al., 2007; Malcom & Duffus, 2002). Developing a standard set of mea-
surements to assess the impact of interpretive programs on visitors would extend the
application of Oram’s (1999) framework. These could identify which interpretive tech-
niques lead visitors from knowledge/learning to attitude/belief changes that affect conserva-
tion awareness and pro-environmental behaviors. Standard indicators are the basis of
environmental management planning tools to sustainably manage visitor impacts (Wight,
1998). Longer-term studies also need to measure ongoing actual conservation actions of
visitors one to five years after marine wildlife interactions, beyond self-reported intentions
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 16:31 24 February 2014
Conservation Benefits of Marine Wildlife Tours 289
to act environmentally. The wildlife experience itself in a scenic natural area may heighten
visitor concern and appreciation for marine wildlife but behavioral changes may not always
ensue. This more in-depth evaluation of educational programs in marine wildlife tourism
experiences will reinforce the types of interpretive experiences and settings that increase
tourist knowledge, change environmental attitudes, and aid conservation actions.
Conclusions
Close personal encounters with selected marine wildlife, especially marine mammals, pro-
vide a range of personal, educational, and conservation benefits for visitors. Marine wild-
life interpretation programs that highlight species biology and human impacts can also
influence visitor attitudes, beliefs, and conservation outcomes. These mediated encounters
on marine wildlife tours motivate visitors to respect marine life; foster environmentally
responsible attitudes and behaviors; and benefit marine conservation. Linking affective
and cognitive responses to marine wildlife increases environmental awareness; changes
visitor attitudes, modifies intentions to act pro-environmentally; and fosters conservation
appreciation and actions by tourists. Personal benefits for visitors also depend on the
intensity and frequency of tourist encounters with marine wildlife and the type of learning
experience provided. Visitors differ in their desired mix of personal, educational, and con-
servation benefits. Therefore, visitor benefits of interpretation, and the overall structure of
wildlife encounters, need to be considered by the managers and operators of marine wild-
life tourism experiences. Effective marine interpretation programs need to engage visitors
and deliver conservation messages about marine animals and ecosystems while also man-
aging the visitor desire for close interaction with marine wildlife. The causal links
between interpretation and environmental outcomes require further investigation.
References
Adelman, L., Falk, J. H., & James, S. (2000). Assessing the National Aquarium in Baltimore’s
impact on visitors’ conservation, knowledge, attitudes and behavior. Curator, 43(1), 33–61.
Amante-Helweg, V. (1996). Ecotourists’ beliefs and knowledge about dolphins and the development
of cetacean ecotourism. Aquatic Mammals, 22, 131–140.
Andersen, M. S., & Miller, M. L. (2006.) Onboard marine environmental education: Whale watch-
ing in the San Juan Islands, Washington. Tourism in Marine Environments, 2(2), 111–118.
Ballantyne, R. (2007). Post-visit ‘action resourcing’: Promoting and supporting visitor adoption of
environmentally sustainable behaviours. In I. McDonnell, S. Grabowski, & R. March (Eds.),
Proceedings of the CAUTHE 2007 Conference: Tourism-past achievements, future challenges.
Sydney: University of Technology Sydney [CD-ROM].
Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Hughes, K. (2006). Designing “Jonah” experiences: Developing
visitor conservation learning through whale watching. In Conference program: The 2nd
Australian Wildlife Tourism Conference, 13–15 August 2006 (p. 28). Perth, WA: Promaco
Conventions.
Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Bond, N. (2007). The impact of a wildlife tourism experience on visi-
tors’ conservation knowledge, attitudes and behaviour: Preliminary results from Mon Repos
turtle rookery, Queensland. In I. McDonnell, S. Grabowski, & R. March (Eds.), Proceedings of
the CAUTHE 2007 Conference: Tourism-Past Achievements, Future Challenges. Sydney: Uni-
versity of Technology Sydney [CD-ROM].
Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., Hughes, K., & Dierking, L. D. (2007). Conservation learning in wildlife
tourism settings: Lessons from research in zoos and aquariums. Environmental Education
Research, 13(3), 367–383.
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 16:31 24 February 2014
290 H. Zeppel and S. Muloin
Barton, K., Booth, K., Ward, J., Simmons, D. G., & Fairweather, J. R. (1998). Tourist and New
Zealand fur seal interactions along the Kaikoura coast. Tourism Research and Education Centre
Report No. 9. New Zealand: Lincoln University.
Beasley, I. (1997). Marine mammal tourism: Educational implications and legislation. Diploma of
Wildlife Management thesis, University of Otago, Dunedin.
Birtles, A., Cuthill, M., Valentine, P., & Davis, D. (1996) Incorporating research on visitor experiences
into ecologically sustainable management of whale shark tourism. In H. Richins, J. Richardson, &
A. Crabtree (Eds.), Taking the next steps: Ecotourism Association of Australia Conference Pro-
ceedings (pp. 195–202). Brisbane: Ecotourism Association of Australia.
Birtles, A., Valentine, P., & Curnock, M. (2001). Tourism based on free-ranging marine life:
Opportunities and responsibilities. Wildlife Tourism Research Report No. 11. Gold Coast: CRC
for Sustainable Tourism.
Birtles, A., Valentine, P., Curnock, M., Arnold, P., & Dunstan, A. (2002). Incorporating visitor
experiences into ecologically sustainable Dwarf Minke Whale tourism in the northern Great
Barrier Reef. Technical Report No. 42. Townsville: CRC Reef Research Centre.
Blanchard, K. A. (1995). Seabird conservation on the north shore of the Gulf of St. Lawrence,
Canada: The effects of education on attitudes and behaviour towards a marine resource. In J.
Palmer, W. Goldstein, & A. Curnow (Eds.), Planning education to care for the earth (pp. 39–50).
Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.
Booth, K. (1998). The tourist experience of New Zealand fur seals along the Kaikoura coast,
New Zealand. In J. Kandampully (Ed.), New Zealand Tourism and Hospitality Research Confer-
ence 1998: Advances in Research Part 2. Canterbury: Lincoln University.
Christensen, A., Rowe, S., & Needham, M. D. (2007). Value orientations, awareness of conse-
quences, and participation in a whale watching education program in Oregon. Human Dimen-
sions of Wildlife, 12, 289–293.
Davis, D., Banks, S., Birtles, A., Valentine, P., & Cuthill, M. (1997). Whale sharks in Ningaloo
Marine Park: Managing tourism in an Australian marine protected area. Tourism Management,
18(5), 259–271.
Davis, D., Banks, S., Birtles, A., Valentine, P., & Cuthill, M. (2000). Whale sharks in Ningaloo
Marine Park: Managing tourism in an Australian marine protected area. In C. Ryan & S.
Page (Eds.), Tourism management: Towards the new millennium (pp. 281–299). Oxford:
Pergamon.
Dobson, J. (2006.) Sharks, wildlife tourism, and state regulation. Tourism in Marine Environments,
3(1), 15–23.
Duffus, D. A., & Dearden, P. (1993). Recreational use, valuation, and management of killer whales
(Orcinus orca
) on Canada’s Pacific coast. Environmental Conservation, 20(2), 149–156.
Evans, K. L. (1997). Aquaria and marine environmental education. Aquarium Sciences and Conser-
vation, 1, 239–250.
Finkler, W., & Higham, J. (2004). The human dimensions of whale watching: An analysis based on
viewing platforms. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 9(2), 103–117.
Forestell, P. H. (1993). If leviathan has a face, does Gaia have a soul?: Incorporating environmental
education in marine eco-tourism programs. Ocean & Coastal Management, 20, 267–282.
Forestell, P. H., & Kaufman, G. D. (1990). The history of whalewatching in Hawaii and its role in
enhancing visitor appreciation for endangered species. In M. L. Miller & J. Auyong (Eds.), Pro-
ceedings of the 1990 Congress on Coastal and Marine Tourism Vol. 11 (pp. 399–407). Newport,
OR: National Coastal Resources Research & Development Institute.
Foxlee, J. (2001.) Whale watching at Hervey Bay. Parks and Leisure Australia, 4(3), 17–18.
Gralton, A., Sinclair, M., & Purnell, K. (2004). Changes in attitudes, beliefs and behaviour: A criti-
cal review of research into the impacts of environmental education initiatives. Australian Journal
of Environmental Education, 20(2), 41–52.
Groff, A., Lockhart, D., Ogden, J., & Dierking, L. D. (2005). An exploratory study of the effect of
working in an environmentally themed facility on the conservation-related knowledge, attitudes
and behavior of staff. Environmental Education Research, 11(3), 371–387.
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 16:31 24 February 2014
Conservation Benefits of Marine Wildlife Tours 291
Ham, S., & Weiler, B. (2002). Interpretation as the centerpiece of sustainable wildlife tourism. In R.
Harris, T. Griffin, & P. Williams (Eds.), Sustainable tourism: A global perspective (pp. 35–44).
Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Heckel, G. (2001). Workshop on sustainable tourism and whale watching in America: A Baja-to-
Bering case study. Journal of Environment & Development, 10(3), 290–295.
Higginbottom, K., & Tribe, A. (2004). Contributions of wildlife tourism to conservation. In
K. Higginbottom (Ed.), Wildlife tourism: Impacts, management and planning (pp. 99–123).
Altona, Victoria: Common Ground/Sustainable Tourism CRC.
Higham, J. E. S. (1998). Tourists and albatrosses: The dynamics of tourism at the Northern Royal
albatross colony, Taiaroa Head, New Zealand. Tourism Management, 19(6), 521–531.
Higham, J. E. S. (2001). Managing ecotourism at Taiaroa Head Royal Albatross colony. In M.
Shackley (Ed.), Flagship species: Case studies in wildlife tourism management (pp. 17–31).
Burlington, VT: The International Ecotourism Society.
Higham, J. E., & Carr, A. M. (2003). Sustainable wildlife tourism in New Zealand: An analysis of
visitor experiences. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 8, 25–36.
Higham, J., & Lusseau, D. (2004). Ecological impacts and management of tourist engagements with
marine mammals. In R. Buckley (Ed.), Environmental impacts of ecotourism (pp. 171–186).
Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing.
Higham, J. E. S., & Lusseau, D. (2007a). Urgent need for empirical research into whaling and whale
watching. Conservation Biology, 21(2), 554–558.
Higham, J. E. S., & Lusseau, D. (2007b). Slaughtering the goose that lays the golden egg: Are whal-
ing and whale-watching mutually exclusive? Current Issues in Tourism, 11(1), 63–74.
Howard, J. (2000). Research in progress: Does environmental interpretation influence behaviour
through knowledge or affect? Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 15/16, 153–156.
Hughes, M., & Saunders, A. M. (2005). Interpretation, activity participation, and environmental atti-
tudes of visitors to Penguin Island, Western Australia. Society and Natural Resources, 18, 611–624.
Kellert, S. R. (1991). Japanese perceptions of wildlife. Conservation Biology, 5(3), 297–308.
Kirkwood, R. et al., (2003). Pinniped-focused tourism in the southern hemisphere: A review of the
industry. In N. Gales, M. Hindell & R. Kirkwood (Eds.), Marine mammals: Fisheries, tourism
and management issues (pp. 257–272). Collingwood: CSIRO.
Lewis, A., & Newsome, D. (2003). Planning for stingray tourism at Hamelin Bay, Western Austra-
lia: The importance of stakeholder perspectives. International Journal of Tourism Research, 5,
331–346.
Luck, M. (2003). Education on marine mammal tours as agent for conservation—but do tourists
want to be educated? Ocean & Coastal Management, 46(9), 943–956.
Macgregor, K. (2006). Commerce, community and conservation: A collaborative approach to man-
aging a sustainable marine turtle tourism industry. In Conference program: The 2nd Australian
Wildlife Tourism Conference (pp. 139–148). Perth, WA: Promaco Conventions.
Madin, E. M. P., & Fenton, D. M. (2004). Environmental interpretation in the Great Barrier Reef
Marine Park: An assessment of programme effectiveness. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 12(2),
121–137.
Malcolm, C. D., & Duffus, D. A. (2002). The case for site-specific education strategies in ecotour-
ism management: Whale-watching on Vancouver Island, BC. In E. L. Jackson (Ed.), Abstracts of
Papers Presented at the Tenth Canadian Congress on Leisure Research, May 22–25, 2002.
Canadian Association for Leisure Studies.
Manfredo, M. J., & Driver, B. L. (2002). Benefits: The basis for action. In M. J. Manfredo (Ed.), Wildlife
viewing: A management handbook (pp. 70–92). Corvallis: Oregon State University Press.
Masters, D. (1998). Marine wildlife tourism: Developing a quality approach in the highlands and islands.
A report for the Tourism & Environment Initiative and Scottish Natural Heritage. May 1998. Visit
Scotland, Sustainable Tourism Unit. http://www.greentourism.org.uk/publications.html
Mayes, G., Dyer, P., & Richins, H. (2004). Dolphin-human interaction: Pro-environmental attitudes,
beliefs and intended behaviours and actions of participants in interpretation programs: A pilot
study. Annals of Leisure Research, 7(1), 34–53.
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 16:31 24 February 2014
292 H. Zeppel and S. Muloin
McKegg, S., Probert, K., Baird, K., & Bell, J. (1998). Marine tourism in New Zealand: A profile. In
M. L. Miller & A. Auyong (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1996 World Congress on Coastal and
Marine Tourism (pp. 154–159). Corvallis: Oregon State University.
Moscardo, G. (1998). Interpretation and sustainable tourism: Functions, examples and principles.
The Journal of Tourism Studies, 9(1), 2–13.
Moscardo, G., & Saltzer, R. (2004). Understanding wildlife tourism markets. In K. Higginbottom
(Ed.), Wildlife tourism: Impacts, management and planning (pp. 167–185). Altona, VIC:
Common Ground/Sustainable Tourism CRC.
Moscardo, G., Woods, B., & Greenwood, T. (2001). Understanding visitor perspectives on
wildlife tourism. Wildlife Tourism Research Report Series No. 2. Gold Coast: CRC for
Sustainable Tourism.
Moscardo, G., Woods, B., & Saltzer, R. (2004). The role of interpretation in wildlife tourism. In
K. Higginbottom (Ed.), Wildlife tourism: Impacts, management and planning (pp. 231–251).
Altona, VIC: Common Ground/Sustainable Tourism CRC.
Muloin, S. (1998). Wildlife tourism: The psychological benefits of whale watching. Pacific Tourism
Review, 2, 199–212.
Neil, D. T., Orams, M. B., & Baglioni, A. J. (1996). Effect of previous whale watching experi-
ence on participants knowledge of, and response to, whales and whale watching. In K. Colgan, S.
Prasser, & A. Jeffrey (Eds.), Encounters with Whales 1995 Proceedings (pp. 182–188).
Hervey Bay, Queensland, July 26–30, 2005. Canberra: Australian Nature Conservation
Agency.
O’Neill, F., Barnard, S., & Lee, D. (2004). Best practice and interpretation in tourist/wildlife
encounters: A wild dolphin swim tour example. Wildlife Tourism Research Report Series No. 25.
Gold Coast: CRC Sustainable Tourism.
Orams, M. B. (1994). Creating effective interpretation for managing interaction between tourists and
wildlife. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 10(2), 21–34.
Orams, M. B. (1995a). Using interpretation to manage nature-based tourism. Journal of Sustainable
Tourism, 4(2), 81–94.
Orams, M. B. (1995b). Development and management of a feeding program for wild bottlenose dol-
phins at Tangalooma, Australia. Aquatic Mammals, 21(2), 137–147.
Orams, M. B. (1995c.) Towards a more desirable form of ecotourism. Tourism Management, 16, 3–9.
Orams, M. B. (1996a) A conceptual model of tourist-wildlife interaction: The case for education as a
management strategy. Australian Geographer, 2 (1), 39–51.
Orams, M. B. (1996b). Cetacean education: Can we turn tourists into ‘greenies.’ In K. Colgan, S.
Prasser, & A. Jeffrey (Eds.), Encounters with Whales 1995 Proceedings (pp. 167–178). Hervey
Bay, Qld, July 26–30. Canberra: Australian Nature Conservation Agency.
Orams, M. B. (1997a). Historical accounts of human-dolphin interaction and recent developments in
wild dolphin based tourism in Australasia. Tourism Management, 18, 317–326.
Orams, M. B. (1997b). The effectiveness of environmental education: Can we turn tourists into
“greenies”? Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Research, 3(4), 295–306.
Orams, M. (1999). Marine tourism: Development, impacts and management. London: Routledge.
Orams, M. B. (2000). Tourists getting close to whales, is it what whale watching is all about? Tourism
Management, 21, 561–569.
Orams, M. B. (2001). From whale hunting to whale watching in Tonga: A sustainable future? Journal
of Sustainable Tourism, 9(2), 128–146.
Orams, M. B. (2002). Feeding wildlife as a tourism attraction: A review of issues and impacts. Tourism
Management, 23, 281–293.
Orams, M. B. (2003). Marine ecotourism in New Zealand: An overview of the industry and its man-
agement. In B. Garrod & J. C. Wilson (Eds.), Marine ecotourism: Issues and experiences (pp.
233–248). Clevedon: Channel View.
Orams, M. B. (2005). Dolphins, whales and ecotourism in New Zealand: What are the impacts and
how should the industry be managed? In C. M. Hall & S. Boyd (Eds.), Nature-based tourism in
peripheral areas: Development or disaster? (pp. 231–245). Clevedon: Channel View.
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 16:31 24 February 2014
Conservation Benefits of Marine Wildlife Tours 293
Orams, M. B., & Hill, G. J. E. (1998). Controlling the ecotourist in a wild dolphin feeding program:
Is education the answer? Journal of Environmental Education, 29, 33–38.
Orsini, J. P., & Newsome, D. (2005). Human perceptions of hauled out Australian sea lions (Neophoca
cinerea) and implications for management: A case study from Carnac Island, Western Australia.
Tourism in Marine Environments, 2(1), 23–37.
Packer, J. (2006). Learning for fun: The unique contribution of educational leisure experiences.
Curator: The Museum Journal, 49(3), 329–344.
Pearce, D. G., & Wilson, P. M. (1995). Wildlife-viewing tourists in New Zealand. Journal of Travel
Research, 34(2), 19–26.
Rawles, C. J. G., & Parsons, E. C. M. (2005). Environmental motivations of whale-watching tourists
in Scotland. Tourism in Marine Environments, 1(2), 129–132.
Rodger, K., Moore, S. A., & Newsome, D. (2007). Wildlife tours in Australia: Characteristics, the
place of science and sustainable futures. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(2), 160–179.
Russell, C. L., & Hodson, D. (2002). Whalewatching as critical science education? Canadian Journal
of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 7, 54–66.
Saltzer, R. (2001). Understanding visitor wildlife interactions: Seaworld visitor survey. Data
Summary Report December 2001. CRC for Sustainable Tourism. http://www.crctourism.com.au/
CRCBookshop/Documents/WT_Seaworld.pdf
Samuels, A., Bejder, L., Constantine, R., & Heinrich, S. (2003). Swimming with wild cetaceans, with a
special focus on the southern hemisphere. In N. Gales, M. Hindell, & R. Kirkwood (Eds.), Marine
mammals: Fisheries, tourism and management issues (pp. 277–303). Collingwood: CSIRO.
Scarpaci, C., Nugegoda, D., & Corkeron, P. J. (2005). Tourists swimming with Australian fur seals
(Arctocephalus pusillus) in Port Philip Bay, Victoria, Australia: Are tourists at risk? Tourism in
Marine Environments, 1(2), 89–95.
Schaenzel, H. (1998). The effectiveness of environmental interpretation: Understanding the values
gained from wildlife viewing tourism experiences. Environmental Perspectives, 21, 10–13.
Schanzel, H. A. (2004). Educational entertainment: The emotive and personal context of environ-
mental interpretation. In K. A. Smith & C. Scott (Eds.), Proceedings of the New Zealand Tourism
and Hospitality Research Conference (pp. 348–356). Wellington, 8–10 December. Wellington:
Victoria University of Wellington.
Schanzel, H. A., & McIntosh, A. J. (2000). An insight into the personal and emotive context of wild-
life viewing at the Penguin Place, Otago Peninsula, New Zealand.
Journal of Sustainable Tour-
ism, 8(1), 36–52.
Smith, L. (2006). Evaluating the effectiveness of the Jurabi turtle experience. In Conference Pro-
gram: The 2nd Australian Wildlife Tourism Conference, 13–15 August 2006 (pp. 165–174).
Perth, WA: Promaco Conventions.
Sorice, M. G., Shafer, C. S., & Ditton, R. B. (2006). Managing endangered species within the use-
preservation paradox: The Florida manatee (Trichechus manatus latirostris) as a tourism attrac-
tion. Environmental Management, 37(1), 69–83.
Spotte, S., & Clark, P. (2004). A knowledge-based survey of adult aquarium visitors. Human
Dimensions of Wildlife, 9, 143–151.
Stokes, T., Dobbs, K., & Recchia, C. (2002). Management of marine mammal tours on the Great
Barrier Reef. Australian Mammalogy, 24, 39–49.
Takei, A. (1998). A cross-cultural assessment of the effectiveness of the interpretive program at the
dolphin provisioning program, Tangalooma, Australia. Diploma in Marine Science thesis,
University of Queensland. http://www.tangalooma.com/dolphinweb/research.asp
Teel, T. L., Manfredo, M. J., & Stinchfield, H. M. (2007). The need and theoretical basis for explor-
ing wildlife value orientations cross-culturally. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 12(5), 297–305.
Thapa, B., Graefe, A. R., & Meyer, L. A. (2005). Moderator and mediator effects of scuba diving
specialization on marine-based environmental knowledge-behavior contingency. The Journal of
Environmental Education, 37(1), 53–67.
Thapa, B., Graefe, A. R., & Meyer, L. A. (2006). Specialization and marine based environmental
behaviors among SCUBA divers. Journal of Leisure Research, 38(4), 601–615.
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 16:31 24 February 2014
294 H. Zeppel and S. Muloin
Tisdell, C., & Wilson, C. (2001a). Wildlife-based tourism and increased support for nature conser-
vation financially and otherwise: Evidence from sea turtle ecotourism at Mon Repos. Tourism
Economics, 7(3), 233–249.
Tisdell, C., & Wilson, C. (2001b). Tourism and the conservation of sea turtles: An Australian case
study. In. C. Tisdell, Tourism economics, the environment and development: Analysis and policy
(pp. 356–368). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Tisdell, C., & Wilson, C. (2002). Economic, educational and conservation benefits of sea turtle
based ecotourism: A study focused on Mon Repos. Wildlife Tourism Research Report Series
No. 20. Gold Coast: CRC for Sustainable Tourism.
Tisdell, C., & Wilson, C. (2005). Perceived impacts of ecotourism on environmental learning and
conservation: Turtle watching as a case study. Environment, Development and Sustainability,
7(3), 291–302.
Topelko, K. N., & Dearden, P. (2005). The shark watching industry and its potential contribution to
shark conservation. Journal of Ecotourism, 4(2), 108–128.
Townsend, C. (2008). Interpretation and environmental education as conservation tools. In B. Garrod &
S. Gossling (Eds.), New frontiers in marine tourism: Diving experiences, sustainability, manage-
ment (pp. 189–200). Oxford: Elsevier.
Valentine, P. S., Birtles, A., Curnock, M., Arnold, P., & Dunstan, A. (2004). Getting closer to
whales—passenger expectations and experiences, and the management of swim with dwarf
minke whale interactions in the Great Barrier Reef. Tourism Management, 25, 647–655.
Waayers, D., Newsome, D., & Lee, D. (2006). Observations of non-compliance behaviour by tour-
ists to a voluntary code of conduct: A pilot study of turtle tourism in the Exmouth region, Western
Australia. Journal of Ecotourism, 5(3), 211–222.
Wight, P. (1998). Tools for sustainability analysis in planning and managing tourism and recreation
in the destination. In C. M. Hall & A. Lew (Eds.), Sustainable tourism: A geographical perspec-
tive (pp. 75–91). Harlow: Addison Wesley Longman.
Wilson, C., & Tisdell, C. (2001). Sea turtles as a non-consumptive tourism resource especially in
Australia. Tourism Management, 22, 279–288.
Wilson, C., & Tisdell, C. (2003). Conservation and economic benefits of wildlife-based marine tourism:
Sea turtles and whales as case studies. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 8(1), 49–58.
Woods, B., & Moscardo, G. (2003). Enhancing wildlife education through mindfulness.
Australian
Journal of Environmental Education, 19, 97–108.
Zeppel, H., & Muloin, S. (2008). Marine wildlife tours: Benefits for participants. In J. Higham & M.
Luck (Eds.), Marine wildlife and tourism management (pp. 19–48). Wallingford: CABI.
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 16:31 24 February 2014
... In the specific case of dolphin ecotourism, many studies highlight the benefits of increased nature connection and awareness facilitating attitudinal and behavioural change (e.g. Kortenkamp & Moore, 2001;Mayes et al., 2004;Orams, 1997a;Zeppel, 2008;Zeppel & Muloin, 2008). Visitor education research demonstrates that as humans experience and learn more about marine mammals, they increase their connection, value and positive attitudes towards them (Mayes et al., 2004). ...
... Positive ecotourism outcomes for dolphins are influenced by both internal and external factors (Moscardo, Woods, & Saltzer, 2004). In terms of internal factors, the visitor's prior experiences (Neil, Orams, & Baglioni, 1996), beliefs (Amante-Helweg, 1996) and expectations (Mayes et al., 2004), as well as the emotional connection formed with the animal, (Ballantyne et al., 2011;Milstein, 2008;Neil et al., 1996;Zeppel & Muloin, 2008) influence whether an individual's attitudes and/or behaviour will be impacted by the experience. Externally, the quality of the ecotour experience (Birtles et al., 2002) and the interpretation provided on the tour (Mayes & Richins, 2009), are also determining factors in lasting attitudinal and/or behavioural change (Orams, 1997a;Orams & Hill, 1998). ...
... Despite this, Mayes et al. (2004) found that highly managed and structured interpretative programs did have an impact on subsequent visitor intent for pro-environmental behaviour. Furthermore, a number of researchers maintain that high quality education needs to incorporate cognitive reflection and emotional connection to wildlife, particularly empathy, in order to facilitate change (Ballantyne et al., 2011;Neil et al., 1996;Orams, 1994;Zeppel, 2008;Zeppel & Muloin, 2008). Therefore, produced from a human-based viewpoint, with potential to be mutually beneficial, these effects are only possible under certain circumstances, with the human as the determiner of the effects. ...
... A variety of factors may influence the formation of tourists' perceived efficacy of PCB (PEPCB), including personality and experiential characteristics. Previous work has shown that factors such as engagement with onsite interpretation (Marschall et al., 2017;Zeppel & Muloin, 2008), tourists' Environmental Identity (EID) score (Clark et al., 2019;Clayton et al., 2021), and tourists' past performance of PCB positively correlated with higher PCB intentions (Apps et al., 2018;Mellish et al., 2019). Thus, it can be argued that wildlife tourism can positively impact tourists' perceptions of PCB. ...
Article
A proposed benefit of wildlife tourism is tourists’ participation in proconservation behaviors (PCB). Diffusion theory proposes that one’s perceived efficacy of a behavior will influence rates of behavior adoption. However, empirical data on factors that influence wildlife tourists’ perceived efficacy of PCB (PEPCB) are lacking. This study evaluated experiential elements’ influence on tourists’ PEPCB, and the role of social media as an emerging PCB. Data were collected from in situ and ex situ wildlife tourists (n= 475), presenting a systems-level view of wildlife tourism. Engagement with interpretation, attitudes, and past PCB performance did not influence PEPCB. Data suggests PEPCB are favorable and existing PCB are diffused throughout the wildlife tourism community. Data did support tourists’ use of social media as an emerging PCB, which is not widely diffused. Management recommendations for existing and future PCB are discussed.
... Ecotourism is an economic tool for wildlife conservation [23,24]. Previous studies involving wildlife conservation through ecotourism highlighted conservation learning that focused on captive wildlife, such as in zoos or aquariums [25][26][27][28], and conservation interpretation [29][30][31][32][33][34]. According to Myers [35], tourists are agents in wildlife conservation. ...
Article
Full-text available
If responsible ecotourists stay in a local homestay, this will benefit local people economically and lead to improved wildlife conservation. This study aims to examine the mediator roles of attitudes between anticipated emotion and intention. It was conducted in Penang National Park, Malaysia, and a stratified sampling method was used for collecting the data. In all, 320 sets of questionnaires were analysed using the SPSS Amos 24.0 Statistical Software Package to test the Structural Equation Modelling. The findings show that economically responsible ecotourist attitudes to staying in local homestays for wildlife conservation partially mediate the relationship between anticipated emotion and intention to stay in a local homestay for wildlife conservation. This study suggests that players in the ecotourism industry should incorporate emotional elements in their marketing strategies to promote local homestays to responsible ecotourists, which would benefit local economies.
... Some of the international research has paid attention to tour guides as potential agents of change (see Zillinger et al., 2012;Jonasson et al., 2013;Rokenes et al., 2015;Vold, 2015;Weiler and Black, 2015;Jonasson and Smith, 2017) and there is evidence of a growing research focus on "the relationship between face-toface interpretation/tour guiding and sustainability" (Weiler and Black, 2015, p. 76), at least in wildlife tourism (see Zeppel and Muloin, 2008;Ballantyne et al., 2009). ...
Article
Full-text available
This paper investigates how tourists and guides perform sustainability during adventure tourism trips in natural environments. The paper draws on empirical data from an ethnographic study of five different multi-day trips in Norway, each of which used skiing, hiking, or biking as the mode of travel. In our analysis, we focus on how the different actors understood, operationalized and practiced elements of sustainability in their everyday lives while on the trips. The paper applies a micro-sociological perspective to the nature-based adventure tourism scene where the interplay between tourists, guides, adventure activities and nature is understood as multiple dialectic performances co-produced by the different actors. Goffman's dramaturgical metaphors, and concepts of frames, appearance, and manner saturate recent research on tourism and nature guiding. This paper builds on the “performance turn” as a theoretical point of departure for understanding sustainability in nature-based adventure tourism experiences. In participant observations and post-trip interviews with Norwegian and international tourists and their guides, we found that sustainability performances were not a major aspect of the trips. We did find some performances of mainly “light” sustainability and, among them, elements of ambivalence and ambiguity. Our data indicate that some guides tread a fine line between enhancing and deepening tourists' experiences of nature and sustainability or negatively impacting the perceived enjoyment imperative of the trip. International tourists expressed deeper sustainability overall. We reflect on the relative explanatory strengths of Goffman's “frames” and interaction order, and Persson's “framing,” for understanding the interplay between guide and tourist sustainability performances and conclude with pointers for teasing out the complexities we identify.
... The examples of benefits attributed to visitation and Tourism in protected areas are diverse and can be grouped into: (1) environmental benefits, such as the direct conservation of biodiversity (Gallagher et al., 2015;Pennisi et al., 2004); facilitate the provision of environmental education and interpretation (Zeppel & Muloin, 2008), enhance natural resources through experience (Powell & Ham, 2008), support research and development of good environmental practices (Oh & Ditton, 2008;Walpole & Goodwin, 2001); (2) diversify the local economy, increasing the jobs and the income of residents (Brunnschweiler, 2010;Ohl-Schacherer et al., 2008), encourage the local manufacture of goods and the provision of services (Ocampo-Peñuela & Winton, 2017) and provide financial support to protected areas through the payment of tourist fees and charges (Heagney et al., 2019;Whitelaw et al., 2014); and (3) social benefits, such as valuing local culture (Banerjee, 2012), improving intercultural understanding through social contact (Eagles et al., 2002), promoting values related to well-being (Das & Hussain, 2016), improve physical health through recreational exercises (Keniger et al., 2013) and reduce the population's stress and fatigue (Nyaupane & Poudel, 2011); among others. ...
Article
Full-text available
The creation of protected areas is one of the main strategies used for the conservation of natural resources. In the Amazon, they have suffered from illegal deforestation, causing damage, most of which is irreversible. In this sense, it is necessary to investigate the relationship between public visitation and the suppression of forest cover in the biome. Multiple linear regression by Weighted Least Squares (WLS) was used, with cutting data from the conservation units of the Amazon, to develop a Linear Probability Model for the occurrence of deforestation due to the existence of visitation and other explanatory aspects. The results highlighted that the existence of managed public visitation in a conservation unit represents a reduction in the probability of deforestation, suggesting that this may be an important strategy for the protection of forest cover and, consequently, regional biodiversity.
... Local communities of artisanal fishers who participate in this economic activity benefit by diversifying from their traditional fishing activities, which allows them to increase their sources of income as fishing resources decrease (Parsons et al., 2003;Garrod and Wilson, 2004;Hoyt and Iñíguez, 2008;Guidino et al., 2020). One consequence of this is greater environmental consciousness, which stimulates interest in the conservation and protection of the marine fauna and their habitat (Higginbottom and Tribe, 2004;Zeppel and Muloin, 2008;, both on the part of consumers (general public) and those who provide the services (e.g., fishers, researchers, businessmen) (Filby et al., 2015;. ...
Article
Full-text available
Whale-watching (WW) is an activity which has been increasing worldwide due to the great interest of tourists and the economic benefits it provides to local communities. However, it has been reported that this activity affects the behavioral patterns of some cetaceans, although for some species such as the fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) this has not been extensively studied. To identify the effects of WW on the behavioral patterns of this species, we studied its traveling and resting behaviors in a locality of north-central Chile from 2015 to 2018. Using a theodolite, we calculated the response variables of swim speed, directness index, and reorientation for each behavior. We used the number of WW boats and the WW scenarios of “before”, “during”, and “after” the presence of boats as possible factors to explain the differences in the response variables of the whales, along with the factors of year, month, group size, and distance from the observation point. Reorientation increased significantly and the directness index decreased significantly for both traveling and resting behaviors from “before” to “during” WW scenarios, indicating more erratic and sinuous movements in the presence of boats. These changes in movement patterns are a commonly reported evasion response of cetaceans to the presence of WW boats. For traveling behavior, the swimming speed significantly increased, and trends showed increased reorientation and a decrease in the directness index in the “after” WW scenario, which suggests perturbation of the whales potentially associated with the speed and the direction in which the boats left. During resting behavior, the trajectories of the fin whales became straighter (decrease in reorientation) as the number of boats increased, thus evasion (more erratic and sinuous movements) is a behavior used less by fin whales as the number of boats increases. Notwithstanding the fact that tourism development in the study area is small in scale, we found that WW generates adverse effects that are reflected in changes in the whales’ movement patterns. This kind of information is valuable to the adjustment and/or design of management strategies for the species, which is fundamental for WW to continue to be a sustainable activity.
... Third, this study found no significant difference in behavioural intentions between those who were exposed to interpretation about the fragility of the GBR and those who were not. Thus, this study does not support research stating that interpretation is a powerful precursor to inciting conservation behaviours amongst visitors Ballantyne & Packer, 2009;Lee & Moscardo, 2005;Tisdell & Wilson, 2005;Zeppel & Muloin, 2008). Perhaps being exposed to the sheer beauty of this natural environment was enough to make participants want to protect the reef, making the need for additional interpretive content obsolete. ...
Article
Full-text available
Nature-based tourism experiences have the potential to inspire visitors to adopt conservation behaviours that protect natural environments; however, to have global effect on environmentally sensitive areas such as the Great Barrier Reef, we may need to expand this influence to beyond just visitors. One way to reach large audiences is through digital technology. Virtual reality is becoming increasingly popular due to its ability to replicate reality effectively, accordingly, this study employed a quasi-experimental design (N = 114) to compare the impact of a real versus a virtual nature-based marine tourism experience on participants’ intentions to engage in conservation behaviours. The study reveals that a nature-based tourism experience delivered via 360-degree VR technology has the potential to be as effective as a real-life experience when seeking to influence conservation behaviours. Further, this study reveals that the effectiveness of both types of experiences is not enhanced by the addition of interpretive content. Implications for the design of both virtual and real nature-based experiences targeting behaviour change are presented, and suggestions for future research exploring the design and delivery of interpretation discussed. The potential for using VR to engage wider audiences and prompt widespread behaviour changes is also highlighted.
... Both academics and respondents to this survey describe such changes as beneficial without necessarily pointing to a concrete mechanism explaining how or why these effects significantly impact wildlife conservation (e.g. Hughes et al., 2011;Zeppel & Muloin, 2008). However, unlike in the scientific literature around tourism, survey respondents made negligible mention of the potential of wildlife tourism to generate positive, pro-environmental behavioral change among participating tourists. ...
Article
An online survey of the American public (n = 500) was used to explore perceptions of the effects of tourism on wildlife and definitions of key tourism terms. Results show that the public’s assessment of the impacts of tourism are relatively nuanced and reflective of trade-offs discussed in the literature, and that there is broad recognition of the potential for wildlife to experience both harms and benefits resulting from tourism. We also collected data about how the American public defines key terms associated with wildlife tourism, including ecotourism, sustainable tourism, and nature tourism. Findings indicate that definitions of these terms are not well understood by the public, and that the specific criteria which typically define ecotourism in the academic literature are not widely known or recognized. This suggests there may be inherent limitations to the use of ecotourism terminology in driving responsible consumer behavior and positive conservation outcomes.
... The effect of nature-based tourism on wildlife has been the focus of much attention Newsome, Moore, & Dowling, 2012) as the industry continues to flourish (Blanc, Guillemain, Mouronval, Desmonts, & Fritx, 2006;Woodroffe, Thirgood, & Rabinowitz, 2005). On the one hand, wildlife tourism provides financial rewards to local economies and has the potential to raise public awareness of conservation issues (García-Cegarra & Pacheco, 2017;Higham, Bejder, & Williams, 2014;Lopez & Pearson, 2017;Zeppel & Muloin, 2008). On the other hand, it may affect the biology and the conservation status of the targeted species (Christiansen, Lusseau, Stensland, & Berggren, 2010;Gannier & Petiau, 2006;Higham et al., 2014;Lusseau, 2004;Tyne, Christiansen, Heenehan, Johnston, & Bejder, 2018;Woodroffe et al., 2005). ...
Article
Full-text available
The effect of nature-based tourism on wildlife has been the focus of much attention. Studies have demonstrated how boat-based cetacean-watching tourism can cause both short-term and long-term effects on targeted populations. However, limited attention has been given to the effect of swim-with activities on humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae). This study was to quantify whale responses to swim-with activities off Reunion Island during the 2018 humpback whales breeding season. We used both under-and above-water videos collected from social media outlets, commercial whale-watching operators and audiovisual professionals. We documented a high rate of agonistic whale behaviors (during 42.1% of all observations (n=164)) towards swimmers within videos containing swim-with events. We documented seven agonistic behaviors including threat, attack or defense behaviors that were predominantly exhibited by mother/calf groups (73.8%; n=121) and on singletons (16.5%; n=27). Pectoral shears (27.4%) and fluke trashes (23.2%) were the most exhibited agonistic whale behaviors aimed towards swimmers, both of which pose a danger and serious injury to swimmers. During swim-with attempts whales changed their behavioral state (82.3%, n=159) and used avoidance tactics to avoid swimmers (56.1%, n=92). Whales exhibited a higher rate of agonistic behaviors when swim groups were active and dispersed, in contrast to when they were quiet and compact. To mitigate whale disturbance and improve swimmer safety, we recommend avoiding swimming with whale groups containing a calf. Our findings support the implementation of strong regulations and educational tools to ensure a sustainable practice of whale watching off the Reunion Island.
Book
Full-text available
The complete collection of papers from the research topic "Whale-watching impacts: science, human dimensions and management"
Article
Interpretation is frequently seen as effective in managing tourist-wildlife interactions because it increases awareness about a species and encourages a conservation ethic (Beckmann 1991, Moscardo 1998). Interpretation has been advocated as the most effective management strategy for wildlife encounters (Orams 1996). Implicit in this belief is that by changing people's attitude, interpretation will change their behaviour (Roggenbuck 1992). Petty et al. (1997) define an attitude as an evaluation of an object (eg. people, animal, etc.) that exists along a dimension ranging from positive to negative. In reflecting on attitude change it helps to conceptualise an attitude as comprised of three main components: affect, cognition, and behaviour. The affective component consists of a person's feeling towards an object, the cognitive component consists of a person's knowledge and understanding of an object and the behavioural component involves a person's actual behaviour towards the object (Knudson et al. 1999). Although attitude is conceptualised as having three main components, most past research on interpretation has focused on changes in cognition (Beckmann 1991). Howard (1998) suggested that as people attend interpretive programs at leisure affective realms are important, and as such, mood theory might improve our understanding of: the intrinsically rewarding feelings that characterise this type of leisure experience; and how interpretation may influence people's behaviour. The influence of affective realms on interpretive programs is poorly understood and not well researched (Howard 1998). This paper contributes to our understanding of cognition and affect in interpretive setting by providing the results of a preliminary study conducted at Mon Repos Conservation Park.
Article
In recent decades there has been an increase in opportunities for people to view wildlife in tourism settings such as wildlife tours, national parks and captive environments such as zoos. This in turn has provided increasing opportunities to educate people of all ages about the value of wildlife and their habitats. One concept useful for enhancing learning is that of mindfulness. This concept suggests characteristics of interpretation that attract and sustain the focused attention of visitors. Using open-ended descriptions of best wildlife experiences from 790 respondents, this study found that 84% of descriptions contained at least one element consistent with the mindfulness concept. This paper argues that a mindfulness model can be used to understand visitor responses to wildlife tourism and direct the design of experiences that enhance learning and enjoyment.