Environmental Management of Wildlife Tourism

A CASE STUDY IN NELSON BAY, PORT STEPHENS NSW AUSTRALIA

Corazon C. Sinha
College of Science, Technology and Environment
School of Environment and Agriculture
Hawkesbury Campus
University of Western Sydney
Email: c.sinha@uws.edu.au

and

Robyn Bushell
College of Science, Technology and Environment
School of Environment and Agriculture
Hawkesbury Campus
University of Western Sydney
Email: r.bushell@uws.edu.au

ABSTRACT

A case study of wildlife tourism in Nelson Bay, Port Stephens at New South Wales was conducted to determine the factors relevant to the sustainability of marine mammal watching. Informed by the results of the case study, a management framework, called the 7E Management Framework, was developed as a planning guide for wildlife tourism that seeks to support biodiversity conservation. The framework takes into account the integration of the following elements:

• Enforcement- implementation and monitoring of legislative and other control measures;
• Education -improving understanding about the environment, the focal species and their interactions;
• Enquiry- conducting research through scientific enquiry on the technical and social implications of tourism on wildlife conservation;
• Economics- promoting financial profitability without destroying or depleting the natural capital;
• Environment- assessment of the impacts of human-wildlife interactions;
• Engagement- actively involving local/host community in planning and decision making; and
• Experience- enhancing tourist experience and knowledge.

The framework also incorporates the cyclical and iterative nature of the planning process, which is regularly informed by field experience, monitoring and evolving knowledge about the physical and biological environments, tourism practice and conservation status of wildlife. The proposed framework ultimately aims to achieve a balance between sustainable use of wildlife in tourism and the conservation not only of the target species but also of the ecological system in which it is a part of.

Key words: tourism planning, dolphin/whale watching, management framework, biodiversity conservation

INTRODUCTION

The effectiveness of an environmental management action is judged against the integration of the social, economic and environmental goals established for a particular place at a particular scale. The use of the integrated approach to the development and management of tourism is the central theme of the International Guidelines for Sustainable Tourism developed for the Convention on Biological Diversity (UNEP, 2002). In the recently concluded World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, it was agreed that the tourism industry including the tourists and the relevant sectors of society must be socially responsible and environmentally accountable for their actions by maintaining the cultural and environmental integrity of tourist destination areas (WSSD, 2002).

The management of nature-based tourism in conjunction with wildlife conservation can be achieved by incorporating the knowledge and experiences gained from various disciplines in the social, natural and physical sciences as well as by incorporating the perceptions of the local community into the management of tourism (UNEP, 2001). However, Norse (1993: 179) states that "fragmented decision making is probably the least-recognized major impediment to effective marine conservation".

Australia's Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism emphasised the need for a coordinated and holistic approach to wildlife tourism to sustain the long-term viability of the industry (Higginbottom et al., 2001). With respect to tourism based on free-ranging marine wildlife, Birtles, Valentine and Curnock (2001:2) state that "there has been little attempt yet to provide a coherent framework to guide future development of sustainable tourism in this sub-sector".

This paper presents the outcomes of a case study exploring the various aspects of sustainable wildlife tourism, particularly in boat-based observation of marine mammals. It demonstrates the importance of the concerted effort of the local community, the private sector and government bodies in ensuring that the ecological integrity of the ecosystems and waterways, which are habitats of marine mammals, is supported by the sustainability of wildlife tourism activities.

METHODS

The case study was conducted in Port Stephens in September 2001 and August 2002 during the whale watching season. A combination of field observation and interviews were conducted to determine the environmental factors that are being addressed in pursuing a sustainable tourism practice at Port Stephens, a popular destination area for marine mammal watching, recreational fishing, and other marine-based tourism activities. Boat- based dolphin watching was assessed by joining tours on a sailing catamaran (called Imagine) and interviewing its captain and tour operator.

Interviews, followed up by phone calls, were also directed to the Environmental Management staff at Port Stephens Council at Raymond Terrace and the Visitor Information Centre at Nelson Bay. Local and overseas visitors (N=15) who were willing to be interviewed were asked about their tourism experience.

Table 1 lists the guide questions used during the interview, field observation and literature review. Official reports of public consultation conducted by the council regarding catchment management planning were reviewed to identify the major concerns and values people attached to nature and the local environment (CDTRS, 2000). Based on the results of the field study and literature review, a management framework, called the 7E Management Framework was developed to serve as a guide for environmental planning that seeks to balance wildlife-based tourism and biodiversity conservation.

STUDY AREA

Nelson Bay, the holiday centre of Port Stephens, is found at the northern fringe of Port Stephens Estuary, which is situated 200 km. north of Sydney. The Estuary was inscribed on the Register of the National Estate on October 27, 1998 because of its significant natural values. It has a surface area of over 100 km 2 or about three times the size of Sydney Harbour. It contains the largest mangrove area and the second most extensive seagrass beds in New South Wales (AHC, 2002). The remaining ecosystems in the Estuary are considered representative biodiversity assets in northern NSW. This includes the Cabbage Tree Island, an ecologically significant site, because it supports the globally threatened seabird, the Gould's petrel (Pterodroma inexpectata).

Marine mammal watching is one of the many popular tourist attractions in Nelson Bay, drawing both domestic and international tourists throughout the year. Adjunct tourism attractions include water-based recreation, theme parks, historic sites and gardens. With an annual population growth of 3.25% (or 58,000 residents) in 2001 and increasing popularity as a tourist destination, Port Stephens is confronted with major issues that could undermine the sustainability of the coastal environment (Port Stephens Council, personal communication, 2003).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Two of the major wildlife tourism drawcards of Port Stephens are the dolphins and the migrating whales. The popularity of whale watching, usually in conjunction with dolphin watching, has grown rapidly in Australia and various parts of the world (Coughran, 1993; Birtles et al., 2001).

The National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS), which has the legal obligation to manage marine mammals in New South Wales, lists Port Stephens as one of the key areas for marine mammal watching in the State. Observations of free-ranging marine mammals in Port Stephens can be categorised as shore-based (e.g. from Tomaree National Park headland) and boat-based. Visitors participating in marine mammal watching cruises within Port Stephens consist of approximately 60% domestic tourists from Sydney and the Hunter Region, about 20% domestic tourists from other states, and 20% international tourists. This varies with some having up to 80% overseas participation in cruises (Frank Future, personal communication, 2003).

Whale tourism

Tourism facilities for boat- based marine mammal watching in Port Stephens are concentrated in Nelson Bay, which is part of the important migratory pathway of whales. At least 10-12 licensed tour operators offer opportunities for close encounters with free-ranging marine mammals through day tours and cruises (Port Stephens Tourism, 2003).

The most commonly sighted whales in Port Stephens are the baleen humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), which is listed vulnerable in the IUCN Red Book, and the lesser-known southern right whale (Eubalaena australis) (IUCN, 2002). Both species are protected throughout Australia and listed as vulnerable under the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act. It has been reported that a large congregation of humpbacks (about 3,000-4000 individuals), together with some mixed species of less abundant whales, pass through the waters of Port Stephens in late May to July and later in September to November of each year (Tour operator, personal communication, 2002; Port Stephens Tourism, 2003). Whales are known to migrate every year from their feeding habitats in the Antarctic Region to their breeding grounds in the tropical waters of Queensland and south Pacific islands (Chittleborough, 1965; Clapham, 2000).

Dolphin tourism

Port Stephens (Nelson Bay) is being marketed as the 'dolphin capital' of Australia because of the year-round presence of about 112-200 bottlenose dolphins (Port Stephens Tourism, 2003; NPWS 2002c). The bottlenose dolphins are widely distributed in tropical and temperate waters in the world. They are found both in coastal and pelagic waters. In coastal areas, bottlenose dolphins are usually sighted in bays and tidal creeks and sometimes reported to swim up rivers (Reeves et al., 2003).

Although the bottlenose dolphins are the most studied dolphins and the most common cetaceans in aquaria (Connor & Smolker, 1985), the local population at Port Stephens is not well researched. Allen and Moller (1999) indicated that Port Stephens Estuary supports two near-shore species of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops aduncas and Tursiops truncatus) and an off-shore species, the common dolphin (Delphinus delphis). The NPWS Wildlife Atlas, however, listed only Tursiops truncatus, Delphinus delphis and an unidentified dolphin in Port Stephens (NPWS, 2003).

Values placed on nature

Based on the analysis of reports from the Port Stephens Council on the outcome of previous public consultations (CDTRS, 2000), it was evident that the local community is concerned with the state of the waterways including the value of marine mammals. Using Kellert's (1996) value classification, the perceived values about the natural environment of Port Stephens can be categorised as ecologic-scientific, aesthetic, naturalistic, utilitarian, and symbolic. The perceived economic and social values of nature are interfaced with the scientific/ecologic aspects of biodiversity (Table 2).

Table 2. Values placed by local community of Port Stephens' on nature

¹ Classification scheme from Kellert (1996).

To reduce the pollution of the receiving waters from urban waterways, the local Council in consultation with the community developed a stormwater management strategy, which was compatible with the values placed by the local community on nature. The consultation reconfirms the need to maintain the quality of stormwater as well as that of the receiving waters of Port Stephens within the acceptable level set by the Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council for fresh and marine waters (ANZECC, 1992).The insights of the community have helped in moulding the notion of sustainable development into the appropriate management of stormwater and waterways, which in turn affects the quality of the coastal environment and therefore the viability and quality of marine-based tourism.

Management for sustainable marine mammal tourism

Informed by the data collected from field observations, interviews and literature review, a management framework (Figure 1) was developed to demonstrate how an integrated approach to management can help sustain the practice of wildlife tourism and support biodiversity conservation. The management framework illustrates the interrelationships of the physical, biological, social, political and economic elements of the environment in planning and management as well as the dynamic and iterative nature of the whole process. The ultimate management goal is to achieve a condition wherein wildlife tourism and biodiversity conservation are mutually linked and supportive of each other.

Figure 1. Environmental management for sustainable tourism and biodiversity conservation

The case study shows how sustainable wildlife tourism in Port Stephens addresses each of the elements in the proposed 7E Management Framework.

1. Enforcement of laws, regulations and codes of conduct

1.1 State and Federal regulations

The state of New South Wales is anticipating the passage of a legislation -- The National Parks and Wildlife Amendment (Conservation of Marine Mammals) Bill 2002-- that regulates commercial watching of marine mammal (e.g.whales, dolphins, porpoises) (NPWS, 2002a). The bill was triggered by the increasing frequency of sightings of marine mammals, particularly whales, along the NSW coast and the proliferation of commercial tours for watching marine mammals. If the bill is passed, NSW will join the states of Western Australia, South Australia, Victoria and Queensland, all of which have already similar regulations in place, in the management of more than 200 marine mammal watching operators in Australia. However, the implementing guidelines for compliance and monitoring is wanting.

A substantial portion of the bill pertains to the delineation of minimum approach distances for whales, dolphins, and porpoises. These restrictions will apply to both recreational and commercial vessels. According to the study of Janik and Thompson (1996), bottlenose dolphins are sensitive to boat traffic. They observed that dolphins tend to dive for longer periods of time when a tour boat was near than when non-tour boats just passed through or when no boats were present at all.

The proposed legislation is consistent with the National Guidelines for Cetacean Watching adopted by ANZECC (EA, 2003). It will be harmonised with the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act of 2000 that provides for the protection of cetaceans in all Australian waters. It will further amend the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Act of 1974 with respect to mammal watching and strengthen the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act of 1995 with respect to the protection of vulnerable/threatened species. The marine mammal tourism industry in Port Stephens is involved in the consultative review process ensuring that the proposed legislation and its implementing guidelines will consider the local marine tourism situation.

1.2 Local Council's regulations

The role of local councils in promoting sustainable tourism is paramount particularly in land use planning, development control, and community involvement. The regulations of marine-based tourism under the auspices of the Port Stephens Council are limited to the issuance of development approvals to commercial boats operating within the Waterways Zone under the Port Stephens Local Environmental Plan 2000. Development consent is required for commercial activities, such as cruising and marine mammal watching. The Port Stephens Estuary Management Committee is currently looking into various mechanisms to monitor boat movements and their potential impacts on the aquatic ecosystem within the zone (Steve Wilson, personal communication, 2003).

While the local Council collaborates with NPWS with respect to the conservation of marine flora and fauna and with the Environment Protection Authority for the protection of waterways from pollution, it does not seem to have a direct role in the day-to-day monitoring of the operations of tourism in the waterways except for the issuance of permits to more than 100 boats including tour boats anchored in the Port for more than 20 days in a year (Port Stephens Council, 1999a). However, the Council responds to complaints pertaining to environmental problems, such as oil leaks or illegal pollution discharge and take appropriate actions in accordance with existing legislations. The Council also allocates limited funds for marketing tourism and for the upkeep of the harbour and the surrounding area (Steve Wilson, personal communication, 2003).

To stop the discharge of untreated waste into the waterways from motorboats, several sewage pump-out facilities were installed in Port Stephens, one of which is located in Nelson Bay (2 others are located at Soldier Point and Tea Gardens). Sewage from recreational motorboats can be discharged into this facility at no cost to motorboat owners, some of whom are yet to be educated to use it properly.

1.3 Voluntary code of conduct

In the absence of clear and specific State regulations on marine mammal tourism, the Port Stephens Commercial Dolphin Watch Association developed a code of conduct in 1995 to sustain dolphin watching experience and self-regulate the industry (Frank Future, personal communication, 2003). The code focuses only on dolphin watching in regard to approach distance of tour boats, frequency of cruises, time sharing among boats, and duration of observation. Because codes of conducts are voluntary in nature, the success of their implementation depends heavily on the goodwill and ethos of the tour operators and tourists and their willingness to monitor each others' compliance.

It is expected that the experience of the tour operators in Port Stephens regarding the implementation of their code of conduct will inform the development of the NPWS legislative implementing guidelines on marine mammal watching within the State.

2. Education

To improve the compliance of the public to legal requirements including the codes of conduct, education and interpretation have been suggested as powerful strategies to minimise tourism impacts on the environment (Boo, 1990; Orams, 1994; 1995). The study of Orams and Hill (1998) revealed that the negative behaviour of tourists, such as touching and feeding dolphins was significantly reduced after the implementation of an educational program held in Moreton Island, Queensland. Appropriate interpretation in wildlife tourism can enhance tourist enjoyment, promote wildlife conservation and local employment, and influence on-site behaviour of tourists (Ham & Weiler, 2002). Good environmental interpretation provides interest in a range of values- scientific, aesthetic, cultural and scientific which can enhance better appreciation and concern for conservation (Staiff & Bushell, 2003).

Compliance to the regulations on marine mammal watching in offshore situations may be difficult to enforce because infringement might be hard to prove. It is therefore essential to educate both tourists and tour operators about the importance of protecting biodiversity upon which marine tourism is dependent on. However, changing tourist behaviour is not always an easy task because of the complex inter-relationships of visitors' values, motivations, satisfaction levels, and norms (Orams & Hill, 1998; Roggenbuck, 1992).

In collaboration with the NPWS, Macquarie University and the Foundation for National Parks, the dolphin watch operators in Port Stephens initiated a conservation program, known as DREAM (Dolphin Research Education and Management) in 1998. One of the aims of the program is to increase public awareness about the value of dolphin in tourism and conservation. Tour operators can also be trained in appropriate guiding procedures in marine mammal watching and be made aware of the dynamic yet sensitive nature of wild marine mammals.

3. Enquiry

Research is needed to inform policy and management actions. Monitoring the impacts of tour boats on the general behaviour of cetaceans has been identified as a research and management priority in marine mammal tourism (Janik & Thompson, 1996). The identification and measurement of disturbance indicators can be translated into specific management protocols. For example, the impacts of the approach distance of boats on dolphins can be measured by determining the frequency and duration of dives of dolphins, their swimming speed, and the changes in the swimming direction and nature of the disassociation of pod members. Likewise, identification of individual cetaceans using natural marks, coloration and tags was found to be effective in monitoring individual behavioural patterns and local population movement within their distributional range.

Research is also necessary to develop mechanisms to enhance quality interactions between tourists and wildlife without diminishing the value of biodiversity. For instance, it is important to determine which set-up or positioning of water marker, barriers, and/or buffer zones can effectively regulate human access into the refuge of wild animals while at same time providing a safe and enjoyable wildlife-tourist interaction (Edington, 1986).

Through the DREAM conservation program, research on the impacts of tourism on Port's dolphin populations and their habitats is being conducted to form the basis of a plan of management. The DREAM program also aims to strengthen efforts in improving tourism practice and ensure that tourism becomes a tool for the conservation of marine mammals. The dolphin operators at Port Stephens (e.g. Imagine) help fund this university-based research program. Collaborative research, which encourages stakeholders to participate in research, is also exemplified in the involvement of the local community in the census of dolphin populations at Port Stephens, an on-going activity supported by the NPWS (NPWS, 2002c).

4. Economics

The estimated revenue from whale watching around the world was estimated to be over than US$1billion and attracting more than 9 million participants a year. In Australia the number of whale watchers increased during the period 1991 to 1998 from 330,000 to 730,000 visitors (Hoyt, 2000 as cited in Birtles et al., 2001).

Tourism is considered a major industry in Port Stephens. It generates an income of more than $180 million from more than 900,000 visitors who have stayed for about 2.7 nights during the period 1999-2000. In 2002, the Visitor Information Centre at Port Stephens responded to 45, 411 general tourism inquiries and booked day trips amounting to $710, 221 (an increase of 14% from 2001). This is in addition to a total of 197,134 visitors (an increase of 10 % from 2001) who visited the Centre in the same year (Port Stephens Visitor Information Centre, personal communication, 2002).

As provided for in the proposed NSW legislation on marine mammal observation, a mandatory conservation and education levy will be imposed on tour operators licensed to undertake commercial marine mammal watching. The levy will be collected from each passenger (probably $2-3 per adult) participating in the tour/cruise. The collected duty will be used for research, education and administration under a proposed Conservation and Education Fund scheme to be administered by the NPWS. This scheme is based on the 'users-pay principle' wherein monetary compensation is linked to the use of marine biodiversity (De Fontaubert, Downes, & Agardy, 1996).

Unfortunately, biodiversity conservation is often compromised by the economic demands driven by the short-term benefits of tourism (Davis & Tisdell, 1995; Tisdell, 1999). Conservation is generally viewed as a peripheral issue by many entrepreneurs (van der Duim & Caalders, 2002). Arguments that heavily favour the economic sustainability of commercial tourism ventures seem to dominate in many debates that promote biodiversity conservation. For example, the idea of limiting the number and duration of daily trips of each tour operator for marine mammal watching as well as limiting the total number of vessels cruising the waterways within a given period of time may make ecological sense to conservationists because of the precautionary spirit that underpins it. However, it can stir hot reactions from affected tour operators who would like to maximise profits during the tourism peak seasons. The proposed 'cap' in the upcoming legislation (NPWS, 2002b) will not only regulate this practice in heavily concentrated ports, such as the one in Nelson Bay, but also minimise the adverse impacts of tour boats on marine mammals.

Despite the monetary worth of tourism, it has been argued that the direct economic value from tourism is less than the total economic value of biodiversity (Pearce & Moran, 1994). Furthermore, the intangible benefits from wildlife tourism (e.g. aesthetic, naturalistic) can be expressed in terms of the whole recreational experience rather than in terms of the economic value alone. Therefore, protecting the environment and biodiversity is more important than maximising profits from wildlife tourism. There are many other arguments that support limiting boat-based viewing of marine wildlife including concern for the welfare of the mammals and the enjoyment of people who wish to observe the bay and its wildlife without the obstruction of fleets of commercial users.

5. Environment of marine species -- Threats facing cetaceans

Understanding the biology of marine mammals including their interactions with humans is important in the proper management of marine-based tourism. Most of the recreational impacts on wildlife are associated with the improper behaviour/attitude of tourists as well as the type, intensity and frequency of their activities (Graefe et al., 2000; Sinha, 2001).

Cetaceans all over the world are facing threats from human activities (Whitehead et al., 2000). The tendencies of the humpback whales and bottlenose dolphins to swim near the shore, particularly in bays and lagoons, and to concentrate around sheltered insular coasts and on offshore reef system to breed have predisposed them to further stress from human disturbances (Brown & Corkeron, 1995; Clapham, 2000; Connor et al., 2000).The perceived impacts of feeding wild animals as part of the tourism attraction include the alteration of their feeding habits and behaviour, increased dependency and habituation on humans, increased aggression when food is deprived, and increased incidence of mortality and malnutrition specially among the young (Orams, 1997; 2002). Fortunately, deliberate feeding and touching of cetaceans is greatly opposed in Port Stephens.

Noise from vessels and aircrafts can cause major disruption of the behaviour and critical activities of cetaceans, such as the abandonment of habitats and young, reduced growth and reproduction, and the alteration of migration routes, group size and cohesion. Noise has been blamed for the disruption or masking of the whales' communication repertoire and echolocation patterns especially during migration and breeding (Richardson et al., 1995).

The water quality of Port Stephens is an important resource for water-based recreation. However, recreational boats can cause serious impacts on the waterways. The Port Stephen Council confirms that the pollutants, such as grease, oil, and litter as well as the discharge of human sewage from boats not equipped with effluent holding tanks are potentially serious threats to the waterways (Port Stephens Council, 2000; Steve Wilson, personal communication, 2002).

6. Engagement of the local community

Involvement of the local community in planning and implementation for tourism is a dynamic and complex process. Nevertheless, programs and policies designed in close collaboration with the local community tend to receive strong support and are likely to be more successful than those designed without community consultation (Western & Wright, 1994).

The community of Port Stephens had expressed its concerns and commitment to sustainable tourism during various public fora (Port Stephens Council, personal communication, 2002). The residents have a long history of vigilance in protecting their environment. In the 1980s, the local residents took the Council and the developer of the then proposed Anchorage Marina to the Land and Environment Court to ensure that appropriate measures were in place to protect the waterways during the development of the marina (Commonwealth of Australia, 1997). In 2002, the residents together with some local non-government organizations were also successful in halting the establishment of a proposed 94-hectare pearl oyster farm in the Port's pristine waters, which could potentially affect the over-all quality of the waterways and marine biodiversity including the sustainability of marine tourism and other sources of livelihood, such as small-scale oyster farming and fishing.

7. Experience of tourists

High quality visitation provides a long-lasting experience for tourists, which can lead to repeat visits and direct promotion of such experience to friends and relatives. Tour operators often reinforce the expectation of tourists regarding direct wildlife interaction while on a cruise. For instance, some tour operators in Port Stephens provide a considerable refund if a particular cruise fails to observe marine mammals. One promotional material even specifies a "99% chance to meet the dolphins" or else the return fare is free. Despite the high probability of sighting the dolphins at Port Stephens, some tour operators ensure that the expectations of tourists are kept within realistic level. In situations when encounters with dolphins and whales are minimal, tour operators can still sustain high quality experience by making visitors enjoy the many other sites and aspects of the marine experience.

SUMMARY/CONCLUSION

The charisma of cetaceans to tourists is not surprising. For years, humans have been attracted to large animals of the sea, particularly large cetaceans because they seem to have human-like intelligence and, like humans, they are warm-blooded and have strong parental instinct and social kinship. Using Kellert's (1996) value classification, the perceived values about the natural environment of Port Stephens can be categorised as ecologic-scientific, aesthetic, naturalistic, utilitarian, and symbolic. The perceived economic and social values of nature are interfaced with the scientific/ecologic aspects of biodiversity.

Port Stephens is an example of a biodiversity rich area wherein the local community is aware of the values of coastal areas, waterways and wildlife. It is recognized that management of marine-based tourism is place and scale specific. For instance, in Port Stephens, boat-based cetacean watching is incorporated into the local stormwater management strategy and the integrated coastal area management framework. The draft report on open space and recreational study (Port Stephens Council 1999b) can be revisited to ensure that sustainable marine mammal tourism is linked with current initiatives and new legislative measures. The passage and subsequent implementation of the proposed State legislation on marine mammal observation will be an effective mechanism to sustain marine mammal watching as conservation conscious flagship sector in the tourism industry in the Hunter Region.

To achieve sustainable marine-based tourism, this study has proposed a management framework, called the 7E Management Framework, which aims to integrate seven elements in planning, implementation and monitoring: These elements are: Enforcement- implementation and monitoring of legislative and other control measures; Education -improving understanding and appreciation about the environment, the focal species and their interactions; Enquiry- conducting research through scientific study of the technical and social implications of tourism on wildlife conservation; Economics- promoting financial profitability without destroying or depleting the natural capital; Environment- assessment of the impacts of human-wildlife interactions; Engagement- actively involving local/host community in planning and decision making; and Experience- enhancing tourist experience and knowledge.

The management framework ultimately aims to achieve a balance between sustainable wildlife tourism and biodiversity conservation. As in other management and planning frameworks (e.g. TOMM, VIM), the 7E Management Framework has also incorporated the cyclical and iterative aspect of the management process, in which planning is regularly informed by growing knowledge and experiences from monitoring and research about the local environment, trends in tourism practice, perspectives of the local community and the tourists, and the conservation status of the target species in wildlife tourism and the ecological system where it plays a significant role.

The proposed framework supports a holistic and adaptive approach to the management of wildlife tourism. The insights from this case study can provide a theoretical foundation for sustainable tourism, in general, and for marine mammal observation, in particular.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Steve Wilson, the Environmental Projects Officer of Port Stephens Council and Frank Future, Manager of Imagine Cruises at Nelson Bay provided valuable support and information during the field study and constructive comments on the manuscript. The spirited and exciting discussions with our students in Wildlife Tourism (EH322A) at the University of Western Sydney were inspirational and helpful in the conduct and development of the study

LITERATURE CITED

Allen, S. J., & Moller, L. M. (1999). Port Stephens bottlenose dolphin population survey. Unpublished Report to NSW-NPWS, Hunter District, 40pp.

Australian Heritage Commission (2002). Register of National Estate Database. [Online] www.ahc.gov.au/register/ Accessed on 15 June 2002.

Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (1992). Australian water quality guidelines for fresh and marine waters. Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council.

Birtles, A., Valentine, P., & Curnock, M. (2001). Tourism based on free-ranging marine wildlife: Opportunities and responsibilities.CRC Research Report Series No.11. CRC for Sustainable Tourism Pty. Ltd.

Boo, E. (1990). Ecotourism: The potentials and pitfalls. Washington, D. C.: World Wildlife Fund.

Brown, M. R., & Corkeron, P. J. (1995). Pod characteristics of migrating humpback whales. Behaviour, 132, 163-179.

Commonwealth of Australia (1997). Coastal tourism: A manual for sustainable development. Department of the Environment, Sport and Territories: Canberra.

Commonwealth Department of Transport and Regional Services (2000). Pathways to a sustainable Hunter: Hunter Region sustainability indicator report card. Hunter Region Organization of Councils: Maitland, NSW.

Chittleborough, R. G. (1965). Dynamics of two populations of the humpback whale, Megaptera novaeangliae (Borowski). Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research, 16, 33-128.

Clapham, P. J. (2000). The humpback whale; Seasonal feeding and breeding in a baleen whale. In Mann, J., Connor, R., Tyack, P., & Whitehead, H. (Eds.), Cetaceans Societies: Field studies of dolphins and whales, (pp. 173-198). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Connor, R. C., & Smolker, R. A. (1985). Habituated dolphins (Tursiops sp.) in Western Australia, Journal of Mammalogy, 66, 398-400.

Connor, R.C., Wells, R.S., Mann, J., & Read A. J. (2000). The bottlenose dolphin: Social relationships in a fission-fusion society. In Mann, J., Connor, R., Tyack, P., & Whitehead, H. (Eds.), Cetaceans Societies: Field studies of dolphins and whales, (pp. 91-126). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Coughran, D. K. (1993). Marine mammal interaction. An overview of the whale watching industry in Western Australia 1989-1992. In Postle, D. & Simmons, M. (Eds.), Encounters with whales (pp. 45-72). Workshop Series No.20, Townsville, Queensland, Australia: Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority.

Davis, D. C., & Tisdell, C. A. (1995). Recreational scuba diving and carrying capacity in marine protected areas. Ocean and Coastal Management, 26, 19-40.

De Fontaubert, A. C., Downes, D. R., & Agardy, T. S. (1996). Biodiversity in the seas: Implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity in marine and coastal habitats. IUCN: Gland and Cambridge.

Edington, J. M. (1986). Ecology, recreation and tourism. Cambridge: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.

Environment Australia.2003. Australian national guidelines for cetacean observation [On line]. www.ea.gov.au/coasts/species/cetaceans/guidelines.html. Accessed 26 July 2003.

Graefe, A. R., Thapa, B., Confer, J. J., & Absher, J. D. (2000). Relationships between trip motivations and selected variables among Allegheny National Forest visitors. USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-15, 4, 107-112.

Ham , S. H., & Weiler, B. (2002). Interpretation as the centrepiece of sustainable wildlife tourism. In R. Harris, T.Griffin, & P. Williams (Eds.), Sustainable tourism: A global perspective. Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford.

Higginbottom, K., Rann, K., Moscardo, G., Davis, D., & Mulion, S. (2001).Status assessment of wildlife tourism in Australia: An overview. CRC Research Report Series No.1. CRC for Sustainable Tourism Pty. Ltd.

International Union for the Conservation of Nature (2002). 2002 IUCN Red list of threatened species. [Online] www.redlist.org/search Accessed on 24 July 2003.

Janik, V. M., & Thompson, P. (1996). Changes in surfacing patterns of bottlenose dolphin in response to boat traffic. Marine Mammal Science, 12 (4), 597-602.

Kellert, S. R. (1996). The value of life; Biodiversity and human society. Washington D.C. Island Press.

National Parks and Wildlife Service (2003). Atlas of New South Wales wildlife. [Online]. www.wildlifeatlas.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/wildlifeatlas. Accessed on 6 July 2003.

National Parks and Wildlife Service (2002a). Conservation of marine mammals-Bill 2002. Exposure Draft. Hurstville: NPWS.

National Parks and Wildlife Service (2002b). Proposed regulation of commercial marine mammal watching-Tour industry. NSW Government Discussion Paper. Hurstville:NPWS.

National Parks and Wildlife Service (2002c). Second-community dolphin census for Port Stephens needs volunteers.[Online] www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/. Accessed on 23 July 2003.

Norse, E. A. (1993). Global marine biological diversity: A strategy for building conservation with decision making. Washington DC: Island Press.

Orams, M. B. (2002). Feeding wildlife as a tourism attraction: A review of issues and impacts. Tourism Management, 23, 281-293.

Orams, M. B., & Hill, G. (1998). Controlling the ecotourist in a wild dolphin feeding program: Is education the answer? The Journal of Environmental Education, 29, 3, 33-38.

Orams, M. B. (1997). Historical accounts of human-dolphin interaction and recent developments in wild dolphin based tourism in Australasia. Tourism Management, 18, 317-326.

Orams, M. B. (1995). Development and management of a wild dolphin feeding program at Tangalooma, Australia. Aquatic Mammals, 21, 39-51.

Orams, M. B. (1994). Creating effective interpretation for managing interaction between tourists and wildlife. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 10, 21-34.

Pearce, D., & Moran, D. (1994). The economic value of biodiversity. Earthscan: London.

Port Stephens Council. (2000). Comprehensive State of the Environment Report. Raymond Terrace: Port Stephens Council.

Port Stephens Council. (1999a). Draft Environmental Management Plan. Raymond Terrace: Port Stephens Council.

Port Stephens Council (1999b). Open space and recreation study. Draft Final Report. Raymond Terrace: Port Stephens Council.

Port Stephens Tourism. (2003). Port Stephens. [Online] www. portstephens. org. au. Accessed 22 June 2003.

Reeves, R.R., Smith, B. D. Crespo, E. A., & Notarbartolo di Sciara,G.(compilers). (2003). Dolphins, whales and porpoises: 2002-2010 conservation action planfor the world's cetaceans. IUCN/SSC Cetacean Specialist Group,IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

Richardson, W. J., Greene, C. R. Jr., Malme, C. I., & Thomson, D. H. (1995). Marine mammals and noise. San Diego: Academic Press.

Roggenbuck, J. W. (1992). Use of persuasion to reduce resource impacts and visitor conflicts. In M. J. Manfredo (Ed.), Influencing human behaviour (pp.149-208). Illinois: Sagamore Publishing Inc.

Ryan, C. (2002). Equity, management, power sharing and sustainability - issues of the 'new tourism'. Tourism Management, 23, 17-26.

Sinha, C.(2001). Wildlife tourism: A geographical perspective. Tourism geography: Issues, challenges and the changing nature of contemporary tourism. University of Western Sydney, National Parks and Wildlife Service (CD-ROM).

Staiff, R.,& Bushell, R. (2003). Travel knowledgably: The question of content in heritage interpretation. In Black, R., & Weiler, W. (Eds.), Interpreting the land down under. Australian Heritage Interpretation and Tour Guiding Golden, Col. Fulcrum Publishing.

Tisdell, C. (1999). Biodiversity, conservation and sustainable development. Principles and practices with Asian examples. Massachusetts: Edward Elgar Publ. Inc.

United Nations Environment Programme (2002). Biological diversity and tourism: International guidelines for sustainable tourism [Online] www.uneptie.org/pc/tourism/policy/about_prinicples.htm Accessed on 20 September 2002).

United Nations Environment Programme (2001, January). Principles for implementation of sustainable tourism. Final version for governing Council-21 [Online]. www.unep.org. Accessed on 20 September 2002.

Van der Duim, R., & Caalders, J. (2002). Biodiversity and tourism: Impacts and interventions. Annals of Tourism Research, 29 (3), 743-761.

Western, D., & Wright, R. M. (1994). Natural connections: Perspectives in community-based conservation. Island Press: Washington, D. C.

Whitehead, H., Reeves, R., & Tyack, P. L. (2000). Science and the conservation, protection and management of wild cetaceans. In Mann, J., Connor, R., Tyack, P., & Whitehead, H. (Eds.), Cetaceans Societies: Field studies of dolphins and whales, (pp. 308-332). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

WSSD. (2002).World Summit on sustainable development: Plan of implementation [Online].www.world-tourism.org/sustainable/wssd/implementation.htm. Accessed on 6 November 2002.