Assessing Traditional Ecological Knowledge of Whale Sharks (Rhincodon typus) in eastern Indonesia: A pilot study with fishing communities in Nusa

Tenggara Timur

Report prepared for the

Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra

Tender: 2007/01363

Prepared by

Natasha Stacey1, Johanna Karam2, Dan Dwyer2, Conrad Speed2 and Mark Meekan3 School for Environmental Research

Charles Darwin University

Final Report: April 2008

1 School of Environmental Research, Charles Darwin University (email: natasha.stacey@cdu.edu.au) 2 School of Environmental Research, Charles Darwin University 3 Australian Institute of Marine Science, Darwin

© Commonwealth of Australia 2008 This work is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material in unaltered form only (retaining this notice) for your personal, non-commercial use or use within your organisation. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, all other rights are reserved. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to Commonwealth Copyright Administration, Attorney General’s Department, Robert Garran Offices, National Circuit, Barton ACT 2600 or posted at http://www.ag.gov.au/cca

The views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Australian Government or the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts or the Minister for Climate Change and Water.

ii

Contents Tables .......................................................................................................................................i Maps .........................................................................................................................................i Figures .....................................................................................................................................i Conventions.............................................................................................................................ii Abbreviations ..........................................................................................................................ii

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................................................................................1

2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..................................................................................................4

3 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................5

4 STUDY DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY .......................................................................7 4.1 Literature Review..........................................................................................................8 4.2 Ethnographic field survey of traditional ecological knowledge and threats to whale

sharks with Bajo fishers ................................................................................................8 4.3 Data Analysis ..............................................................................................................14

5 LITERATURE REVIEW OF WHALE SHARKS ..........................................................15 5.1 Review of scientific information on whale sharks from the Asia-Pacific and east

Africa (Indian Ocean) region ......................................................................................15 5.2 Biology ........................................................................................................................15 5.3 Distribution..................................................................................................................17 5.4 Population data............................................................................................................18 5.5 Aggregations ...............................................................................................................19 5.6 Migration.....................................................................................................................22 5.7 Threats to whale sharks ...............................................................................................22 5.8 Management and research...........................................................................................28 5.9 Local knowledge/TEK ................................................................................................29 5.10 Tourism .......................................................................................................................33 5.11 Conclusions .................................................................................................................38

6 FIELD RESEARCH IN INDONESIA: RESULTS SUMMARY ...................................40 6.1 Customary practices and beliefs concerning whale sharks .........................................40 6.2 Actual geographic locations where whale sharks have been sighted, or where they are

believed to aggregate or migrate and seasonal patterns ..............................................42 6.3 Information relating to human induced threats faced by whale sharks in Indonesia ..49

7 PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION OF WHALE SHARKS ...............................50 7.1 Reported sightings and photographic documentation of whale sharks .......................50 7.2 General comments on whale shark documentation.....................................................54

8 SUMMARY..........................................................................................................................55

9 RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................................................56

10 APPENDICES .....................................................................................................................58 10.1 Locations Visited.........................................................................................................58 10.2 Whale Shark Survey Questions (English/B. Indonesia/Sama Bajo) ...........................59

iii

10.3 Whale Shark Photographic - ID Information Sheets: English and Indonesian ...........63

11 REFERENCES....................................................................................................................67

i

Tables

Table 1: Project work plan .................................................................................................................. 7

Table 2: Countries where whale sharks are known to occur............................................................. 17

Table 3: Whale shark aggregation sites and peak observation seasons ............................................ 21

Table 4: National regulations on Whale Shark harvesting................................................................ 28

Table 5: Whale shark sightings ......................................................................................................... 52

Maps

Map 1: Locations of communities visited in NTT. ........................................................................... 10

Map 2: Approximate locations where whale sharks are sighted in Nusa Tenggara Timur and East Timor. ......................................................................................................................... 43

Figures

Figure 1: Bajo settlement of Tanjung Pasir and Pepela Bay, Roti Island. ........................................ 11

Figure 2: Tanjung Pasir, looking across to main village of Pepela, Roti Island. Bajo await crew on motorised boat (bodi) to land their catch. ..................................................................... 11

Figure 3: Bajo-Rotinese village of Oenggai, Roti Island. ................................................................ 12

Figure 4: Fishing boats at Namusein village, Kupang, Timor. ......................................................... 12

Figure 5: Approaching the eastern end of Kera Island, Kupang Bay, with the coast of Timor in the background. .................................................................................................................. 13

Figure 6: Bajo settlement on Kera Island.......................................................................................... 13

Figure 7: Whale Shark harvested by fishermen in 2005 from Lamalera, Lembata Island, NTT, Indonesia. ........................................................................................................................... 27

Figure 8: Bajo fishermen during an interview about whale sharks, Tanjung Pasir, Pepela Rote Island .................................................................................................................................. 41

Figure 9: Informal discussions with Bajo fishermen about whale sharks, Tanjung Pasir, Pepela, Roti Island. ......................................................................................................................... 41

Figure 10: From Kera Island, looking south-southeast into the Kupang Straits, with Timor island on the left and Semau Island on right ...................................................................... 44

Figure 11: Pak Nasseng Rabanna (right) while being interviewed about whale sharks on Kera Island, with Pak Haji Bili Nurulla from Namusein village (left) ....................................... 44

Figure 12: Oenggai village, looking southwest along the coast of Roti Island................................. 46

Figure 13: Oenggai fisherman indicating the area of coastal waters where they regularly see whale sharks. ...................................................................................................................... 46

Figure 14: Tanjung Pasir, Pepela looking northwest towards Tanjung Usu, Roti Timor. ................ 47

ii

Figure 15: Nemberala Beach, West Rote. ......................................................................................... 48

Figure 16: Fishermen from Ndao Island, on Nemberala beach, West Roti. ..................................... 48

Figure 17: Photographs of a whale shark, sighted approximately 3nm north of Kera Island, taken by Pak Anca, Sulamu village, Kupang Bay in late October..................................... 53

Figure 18: Pak Anca and crew from Sulamu village, Kupang Bay. ................................................. 54

Conventions

In this report different typefaces are used to indicate different languages. Words in italics are from Bahasa Indonesia, the Indonesian national language; those in a bold italic typeface are from Baong Sama, the Sama-Bajau (Bajo) language.

Abbreviations AIMS Australian Institute of Marine Science

ATSEF Arafura and Timor Seas Experts Forum CPUE Catch per unit effort CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

DEW Department of Environment and Water Resources

KKSP Kerukunan Keluarga Suku Bajo Sama Turu (Harmony for Bajo Families, Sama Turu)

KNP Komodo National Park LEK Local Ecological Knowledge NGO Non-governmental Organisation NTT Nusa Tenggara Timor (East Nusa Tenggara) Province TEK Traditional Ecological Knowledge

1

1 Executive Summary The aim of the pilot project was to investigate the traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) of whale sharks held by Bajo fishers from settlements in Timor and Roti Islands, located in the Province of Nusa Tenggara Timor (NTT), eastern Indonesia. The project’s objectives were to:

• Consider the TEK of whale sharks and other species with similar life histories through a literature review to assist in the identification of areas of knowledge about whale sharks;

• Investigate the TEK of whale sharks held by Bajo fishers from selected settlements in NTT, to a) inform us about whale shark ecology, migration, behaviour, and population numbers in Indonesia; and b) to determine whether whale sharks are subject to human threats in the locations where they migrate or aggregate, and the nature of those threats;

• Make recommendations for a more extensive study in eastern Indonesia, and to make preliminary recommendations to assist in the conservation and management of whale sharks across international borders.

The main research findings are as follows.

• Very little information exists in the published literature regarding TEK of whale sharks and specifically on Indigenous belief systems and cosmology regarding whale sharks.

• Bajo fishers from the settlements of Sulamu and Kera Island, Kupang Bay; Tanjung Pasir, Pepela; and Oenggai on Roti Island hold customary beliefs and practices (adat) regarding whale sharks (kareo dede). As a result Bajo do not hunt whale sharks as it is forbidden by customary law.

• Bajo, Rotinese and other fishermen regularly see whale sharks travelling through the

Timor Sea (and areas covered by the 1974 Memorandum of Understanding Box area regulating traditional Indonesian fishing in Australian waters), in waters around the island of Roti, in the Straits between the islands of Roti and Timor, in Kupang Bay and to the north, and in waters to the south of East Timor. In addition, whale sharks are sighted in waters around the islands of Sumba, Savu, Alor, Pantar, Lembata and further north into the eastern Indonesian archipelago.

• Whale sharks are commonly seen in the Timor-Roti area during the east monsoon season

– during approximately the months of August to November, and during the commencement of the rainy season in December. Whale sharks feed on the fry of various species of pelagic and benthic fish and their migration through the waters of Nusa Tenggara Timor appears to be directly related to the timing and location of fish spawning.

• In general, the threat to whale sharks in NTT from targeted commercial hunting is low.

This is due to a lack of demand and markets for whale sharks in Indonesia, traditional beliefs which forbid the capture of whale sharks, and a lack of appropriate available fishing technology. However in a few recent cases, fishermen in the Timor-Roti area have landed whale sharks incidentally and sold the products. Overfishing of whale shark

2

food sources in the Timor-Roti region could impact on whale shark migration patterns and population numbers.

• The only group in NTT and indeed Indonesia to target whale sharks are people from the

villages of Lamalera and Lamakera on the islands of Lembata and Solor respectively, as part of a traditional subsistence whaling fishery.

• Documentation activities of whale sharks in the Timor-Roti area have provided evidence

of the presence of whale sharks during the months of August to October and photographic evidence of a whale shark in Kupang Bay in October 2007. This not only confirms the presence of whale sharks in the region but more importantly, the role local people can play in ongoing documentation and monitoring of whale sharks in eastern Indonesia.4

This project has shown how a combination of local knowledge and new technology can lead to cost effective monitoring and good science. The following recommendations are derived from the research:

• There are demonstrated culturally driven constraints on the exploitation of whale sharks

among the Bajo who are one of the most widespread and dynamic maritime adapted ethnic groups in eastern Indonesia. These constraints should be encouraged through ongoing contact and development of economic incentives through support of paid involvement in activities such as whale shark photo identification, documentation and environmental monitoring.

• Apart from the barter exchange practices of the recognized artisan hunting villages of

Lamalera and Lamakera, there appear to be no developed economic markets for whale shark products in the Province of Nusa Tenggara Timur, (and perhaps other Provinces such as Nusa Tenggara Barat, Maluku, Sulawesi Tenggara) eastern Indonesia. This provides an opportunity to develop early intervention practices, such as public education that could help prevent the market gaining a stronger hold.

• Engaging fishers in the conservation and protection of whale sharks has added pay-offs in

developing both alternative (or supplementary) income opportunities for Bajo and other fishers who have operated in the now disrupted fishery of the Timor Seas. This could lessen the likelihood of their resuming illegal activities in the future, and support educational outcomes consistent with the policy directions of Australian and Indonesian fisheries management initiatives (e.g. Australia-Indonesia Joint Illegal Fishing Public Information Campaign).

• The engagement of the Bajo NGO KKSB Sama Turo and other groups of Rotinese fishers

in this pilot study is a significant outcome that should be developed subject to identification of resources to support a more substantial project for ongoing documentation, tagging and monitoring activities. There would need to be significant community consultation to develop an appropriate model for a future program involving local communities. It would include identifying an appropriate local organisation to be

4 Photographic images from the first camera returned are currently being assessed using photograph identification methods to determine if this particular whale shark has previously been recorded at Ningaloo Reef, WA.

3

employed to coordinate and manage the program, particularly providing assistance in financial management and community mobilisation. Consideration could be given to supporting a formal ‘sea ranger’ type group, ‘Sahabat Laut - Friends of the Sea’, within the Bajo NGO to undertake whale shark monitoring activities with support from the managing NGO. Activities including photo-identification would provide a cost-effective means of helping to further investigate the links between whale shark populations visiting Western Australia and those found moving seasonally through eastern Indonesia and Timor Leste.

• In turn the results of further research could be used to consider the feasibility of

establishing small-scale niche market whale shark ecotourism activities with local communities in NTT. In particular, Kupang Bay and Nemberala, Roti Island could offer potential for small-scale whale shark ecotourism given it is an established tourist destination and some infrastructure already exists. A range of potential benefits, costs and impacts exist in relation to marine ecotourism, both for the conservation of whale sharks and in improving the livelihoods of local communities. Therefore, any consideration of ecotourism activities should proceed with caution.

• Given the links between whale shark migration through NTT and food sources, further

research with local fishing communities and Indonesian fisheries researchers would assist in identifying the food sources of whale sharks and thus patterns of behaviour.

• Further ethnographic investigations into the traditional whale fishery in Lamalera,

Lembata should be undertaken to determine the numbers of whale sharks caught annually, as well as photographic identification and tagging activities to determine if individual sharks passing through waters off Lembata and Solor Islands are from the same population as those migrating to and from Ningaloo Reef in Western Australia (see Proposal submitted by CDU to DEW, 2007).

• Consideration should be given to replication of this pilot study to other provinces in

eastern Indonesia (e.g. Nusa Tenggara Barat, Southern Maluku and South and Southeast Sulawesi) and Timor Leste to further investigate traditional knowledge, and presence of whale sharks in key locations and local livelihood opportunities.

4

2 Acknowledgements This research project was funded by the National Heritage Trust through the Migratory and Marine Biodiversity Section of the Commonwealth Department of the Environment and Water Resources, Canberra (Tender 2007/01363). In kind research contributions were provided by the School for Environmental Research, Charles Darwin University and the Australian Institute of Marine Science, Darwin office. A heartfelt thanks to Bajo and Rotinese fishermen and their families from Namusein, Tanjung Pasir, Pepela, Oenggai, Sulamu and Pulau Kera for taking the time out of their livelihood activities to speak with us and share their beliefs and knowledge of whale sharks. In particular, we would like to thank Pak Sahrulla Narulla and Pak Nasseng Rabbana. Thanks to Pak Bili Nurulla and Pak Garham for facilitating our trip to Kera Island and to Pak Bili for coordinating the subsequent documentation activities. The authors would like to acknowledge the assistance of Chris Majors, Murdoch University and Pak Anda, Sampela village, WAKATBOBI Islands, Southeast Sulawesi for Indonesian and Bajo translations of whale shark questions. We are grateful for assistance provided by Dr Tom Therik, Kupang, and Professor James Fox, the Australian National University, with the whale shark photo identification activity in Kupang. Thanks also to Gillian Ainsworth for reviewing and formatting this report and to Ron Ninnis for preparing the maps. Cover photograph: Photograph of a whale shark, sighted approximately 3nm north of Kera Island, taken by Pak Anca, Sulamu village, Kupang Bay in late October.

5

3 Introduction In Australia, whale sharks are highly valued for ecotourism and a large tourism industry has built up around the aggregation of whale sharks at Ningaloo Reef in Western Australia (Colman, 1997). However, little is known about the migration of these populations beyond Australian waters. There is evidence to suggest that numbers and sizes of individual whale sharks visiting Ningaloo Reef have been decreasing in recent years (Bradshaw et al In Press). The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) has identified the need for improved knowledge of migration patterns of the whale sharks for management and conservation plans and to assess the likely impacts from overseas fisheries on this species (CSIRO 2002; see also DEW Whale Shark Recovery Plan). Tagged whale sharks from Ningaloo have been tracked into the coastal waters of Indonesia and Timor Leste (Eckert 2002, Wilson et al., 2006 http://www.cmar.csiro.au/tagging/whale/ningaloo.html). What is unknown however is the level of exploitation of whale sharks by various fishing populations in Nusa Tenggara Timur (NTT), eastern Indonesia (and perhaps other Provinces). For example, people from Lembata island in NTT have harvested whale sharks as part of a traditional whaling fishery since at least the 1980s (Hembree, 1980). In contrast, other groups such as Bajo (often refered to in the literature as ‘Bajau’ or ‘Bajau Laut’) scattered in settlements around eastern Indonesia revere whale sharks (know locally as kareo dede or ikan bodoh). There is some concern by Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) scientists that a potential increase in opportunistic hunting of whale sharks by fishing populations across eastern Indonesia is sufficient to cause a decline in populations in Australia, particularly those aggregating at Ningaloo Reef. This study complements research being undertaken by AIMS researchers to track whale shark movement in the waters north of Australia. The aim of the pilot project was to investigate the TEK of whale sharks held by Bajo fishers from Nusa Tenggara Timor, in eastern Indonesia. Specifically the project’s objectives were:

• to consider the TEK of whale sharks and other species with similar life histories through a literature review to assist in the identification of areas of knowledge about whale sharks;

• to investigate the TEK of whale sharks held by Bajo fishers, from selected settlements in NTT, to: inform about whale shark ecology, migration, behaviour, and population numbers in Indonesia; and to determine whether whale sharks are subject to human threats in the locations where they migrate or aggregate, and the nature of those threats; and

• to make recommendations for a more extensive study in eastern. Indonesia, and to make preliminary recommendations to assist in conservation and management of whale sharks across international borders.

The research addresses Australian government research priorities to maintain protection of whale sharks in Australian waters as well as to minimise human threats to whale shark populations in neighbouring countries, particularly Indonesia. This project addresses the DEW 2006/07 research priority area of “investigations into migration patterns and population dynamics of whale sharks populations” as well as supporting actions to achieve objectives of the DEW

6

Whale Shark Recovery Plan by contributing towards information gaps to develop appropriate conservation and management regimes for whale sharks in Indonesia. The project was undertaken as a pilot study on the basis that a larger study could be undertaken involving more extensive survey work in key sites across eastern Indonesia (identified during the pilot study) and to undertake research to support activities to reduce fishing pressures in selected communities (e.g. behavioural change campaigns, alternative enterprise development, ecotourism ventures etc). The project fits within the Arafura and Timor Seas Expert Forum (ATSEF) priority research areas including: a) sustaining fish stocks, marine habitats and coastal and marine biodiversity; b) assisting sustainable and or alternative livelihoods for coastal, traditional and indigenous communities; and c) improving capacity for data information, management and sharing between the littoral nations of the seas. Investigators’ organisations are members of ATSEF and this project has the potential in a second phase to involve extensive collaboration with Indonesian and/or Timor Leste partners.

7

4 Study Design and Methodology Bajo fishers of eastern Indonesia are renowned for their intimate relationship with the marine environment. They have a marine cosmology based on belief in and causal relationship with spirits that inhabit the seas. They depend almost exclusively on exploitation of the marine environment and maritime associated activities for their subsistence needs and economic livelihood. Activities are governed by customary law (adat) and specific members of communities are holders and teachers of specialised ritual and maritime knowledge (ilmu) passed down through generations. Of all maritime populations in eastern Indonesia, the Bajo have the largest ranging geographical coverage – there are settlements of Bajo communities scattered across eastern Indonesia from north Maluku across to Sulawesi, south in the Flores Sea and along the Lesser Sunda Islands. For centuries they have engaged in various forms of long distance fishing voyages around what is now the Indonesia archipelago including fishing voyages to north and north-western Australian waters (Stacey 2000; Stacey 2007). Bajo communities who originate from settlements in the WAKATOBI (Tukang Besi) Islands, Southeast Sulawesi are currently located at the villages of Pepela and Oenggai, Roti Island, Kera Island and Sulamu, Kupang Bay, West Timor. They therefore posed a logical starting point for this pilot study (see Map 1). The objectives of the project were achieved through a literature review of published and unpublished sources; a pilot field survey to Roti Island and Kupang, West Timor in the Province of Nusa Tenggara Timur (NTT), eastern Indonesia to interview Bajo fishermen; data analysis and write-up and communication of results (see Table 1). The project followed a standard social science qualitative research methodology with a multidisciplinary focus enabling ecological data and perspectives to be incorporated in the field survey design and results. Implementation of the project was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee at Charles Darwin University (‘Assessing Traditional Ecological Knowledge of Whale Sharks in eastern B. Indonesia’ - H07009: Stacey.).

Table 1: Project work plan

Activity undertaken start date finish date

Literature review (Desk top study) ( 5 weeks) February 07 April 07

Field survey design and planning (2 weeks) May 07 May 07

Field visit to Kupang Bay and Roti Island, West Timor for consultations with fishermen (1 week)

June 07 July 07

Transcription/translation of interview results (2 weeks) July 07 July 07

Analysis of results and preparing report (7 weeks) Aug 07 Dec 07

Preparation of final report and additional outputs Sept 07 Dec 07

8

4.1 Literature Review

The first phase of the study involved a review of published and unpublished literature pertaining to two major areas of interest:

a) review of TEK and “scientific” information on whale sharks from the Asia-Pacific and east Africa region; and

b) review of documented TEK of species with life histories similar to whale sharks (e.g. long-lived, migratory, marine species) to explore the ability of TEK to contribute to scientific research, impact assessment and ecological assessment of species.

The desk top review covered various disciplines including conservation biology, anthropology, marine ecology and conservation. The review was wider in geographical coverage than Indonesia to include the Asia-Pacific and Indian Ocean regions. Sources included published and unpublished literature garnered through library searchers via catalogues, databases and the internet. The results of the literature review were summarised according to key themes relating to whale shark ecology and migration, uses, threats and traditional ecological knowledge across geographic regions and cultural perspectives. The literature review (presented at section 5) was primarily a desk top textual analysis of information, identifying topics and analysing themes as well as establishing a framework for the study.

4.2 Ethnographic field survey of traditional ecological knowledge and threats to whale sharks with Bajo fishers

The results of the literature review were used to define the field survey design and key topics and interview questions. A field team (Dr Natasha Stacey, Dan Dwyer and Conrad Speed, CDU) undertook an 8 day field trip (30 June to 7 July) to interview Bajo fishers in selected villages in NTT. Questions and topics related broadly to the following themes:

• customary practices and beliefs concerning whale sharks (taboo, ritual, cosmology);

• actual geographic locations where whale sharks have been sighted, or where they are believed to aggregate or migrate and seasonal patterns; and

• information relating to human induced threats faced by whale sharks in Indonesia (e.g. subsistence or commercial fishing and trade of products).

The scope focused on information relating to whale sharks in the north-west Timor Sea and south-eastern Indonesian region, in particular around the waters of Roti Island, and West and East Timor. However given that Bajo are active across the Indonesian archipelago information relating to a wider geographical coverage was obtained.

The team visited three villages in Roti Island and the Bajo settlement on Kera Island in Kupang Bay. The field survey involved travelling from Darwin to Kupang, over-nighting in Kupang and then travelling by ferry to Ba’a, the capital of Roti Island and by car to the village of Pepela (and

9

Tanjung Pasir) for three days. The majority of consultations were held over a three-day period with Bajo and Rotinese fishers in the village of Pepela and the Bajo hamlet at Tanjung Pasir.5 From Pepela, the team travelled to the mixed Bajo-Rotinese village of Oenggai, population approximately 300, located in East Roti. A very brief reconnaissance visit was made to Nemberala village, a popular surfing/beach destination, and a group of fishermen from Ndao Island were interviewed on the beach. The team overnighted in Ba’a and returned to Kupang from Ba’a by ferry. A day trip to Pulau Kera, Kupang Bay was facilitated by members of the Bajo community living at Namusein village, Kupang and who are members of the Kerukunan Keluarga Suku Bajo Sama Turo. Members of the Bajo community (who come from Sulamu village and other Bajo villages in NTT and Sulawesi) living at Kera were interviewed. The Bajo community on Kera Island originate from many Bajo villages in eastern Indonesia, but the majority come from Sulamu. It is only in the past two to three years that Bajo have settled on Kera, although the island has been inhabited in the historical period. At the time of our visit there were 52 households and about 70 children. There are no facilities on the island, no school, no water, or electricity. Children that do attend school commute to the mainland village of Sulamu (See Map 1 and Figures 1-6 and Appendix 10.1 for locations visited). 6

5 The population of Tanjung Pasir varies from year to year but there are currently approximately 60 houses. 6 Information on the demographics of the communities visited can be found in Stacey (2007) and Fox, J. J and Sen, S. (2002).

10

Map 1: Locations of communities visited in NTT.

11

Figure 1: Bajo settlement of Tanjung Pasir and Pepela Bay, Roti Island.

(Photograph: C. Speed)

Figure 2: Tanjung Pasir, looking across to main village of Pepela, Roti Island.

Bajo await crew on motorised boat (bodi) to land their catch. (Photograph: D. Dwyer)

12

Figure 3: Bajo-Rotinese village of Oenggai, Roti Island.

(Photograph: C. Speed)

Figure 4: Fishing boats at Namusein village, Kupang, Timor.

(Photograph: N. Stacey.)

13

Figure 5: Approaching the eastern end of Kera Island, Kupang Bay, with the

coast of Timor in the background. (Photograph: D. Dwyer)

Figure 6: Bajo settlement on Kera Island.

(Photograph: C. Speed)

Standard ethnographic qualitative survey techniques were used. Seven key informant interviews (from 15-30 minutes to 1-2 hours) with respected Bajo elders and holders of traditional knowledge were conducted, as well as informal group discussions with other groups of fishermen living in the villages of Tanjung Pasir, Pepela, Oenggai, Nemberala and Kera Island.

14

The selection of key informants was based on Chief Investigators’ (Stacey) past experience and contacts and availability of these informants. During visits to villages, the team also approached as many fishers as possible to ask about whale sharks. These discussions were much more informal and opportunistic, based on whoever was around/available at the time. The team was also surprised by the low numbers of Bajo living in Tanjung Pasir, and had expected a larger number to be present. The reason for the decrease in population is directly related to the large number of Indonesian boat apprehensions in the Australian Fishing Zone over the last two years and the relocation of some family groups to other Bajo communities in eastern Indonesia.

A questionnaire was developed in English but translated to Bahasa Indonesia (all fishers are relatively fluent in the Indonesian language) and Sama Bajo. The questionnaire was used as a guide for semi-structured interviews (Appendix 10.2) (but was never administered officially as a questionnaire). The field interviews were largely conducted in Bahasa Indonesia. Two of the team, Stacey and Dwyer, are conversant in the Indonesian language and translated for the ecologist, Speed. The participation of Speed (who filled in for Investigator, Dr Mark Meekan), a graduate ecologist, enabled greater detailed information on the ecology of whale sharks to be explored with fishers. Two extended interviews with Bajo were recorded electronically and transcribed into English.

To assist with discussions with fishermen, three whale shark photograph books were prepared and available for fishers and their families to peruse. Cartographic maps (numbers 4603, 4722, 47, 21) of eastern Indonesia and northern Australia were also used to aid in identifying locations and migration patterns of whale sharks.

4.3 Data Analysis

The results of the literature review and field interviews were analysed qualitatively and written up as records of conversations in notebooks, as well as literal translations of interviews recorded digitally. Within the limitations of this brief pilot study, the information was cross checked between Bajo from various settlements, and information and identification of emerging common themes developed into summary results.

15

5 Literature Review of Whale Sharks

5.1 Review of scientific information on whale sharks from the Asia-Pacific and east Africa (Indian Ocean) region

Introduction

The whale shark, Rhincodon typus, is one of three filter feeding species of sharks and is the largest living fish. They are highly migratory and are known to inhabit tropical and warm temperate waters around the world (Campagno 1984; Norman 2005). However, relatively little is known about the biology and ecology of the whale sharks and where research has been done, it often only involves very small numbers of individuals (Wintner 2000).

There have been a number of literature reviews describing the ecology and biology of whale sharks (Campagno 1984; Colman 1997; Martin 2007; NHT 2005; Stevens 2007) so only a brief overview will be given here.

5.2 Biology

Taxonomy

The whale shark is the only member of the genus Rhincodon and its family, Rhincodontidae (called Rhinodontes before 1984), which is grouped into the subclass Elasmobranchii, class Chondrichthyes.

Reproduction

Very little is known about the biology, sex distribution, sex ratio and size at sexual maturity of whale sharks (Norman and Stevens 2007). Some studies have been conducted regarding growth rates of whale sharks (Wintner 2000) but there is no definitive information about the age at maturity or maximum age of the species. Research at Ningaloo Reef found that about 50% of males were sexually mature at approximately 8m of length and were estimated to be around 30 years of age (Norman and Stevens 2007). Unfortunately, is not possible to determine female sexual maturity by simple external observation (Norman and Stevens 2007). Large females and small newborns are uncommon around the Ningaloo region, therefore it is possible that breeding females occur in offshore waters where they are not easily observed (Bradshaw et al. 2007; Norman and Stevens 2007). Much of what is known about whale shark reproduction has come from a single female shark caught off Taiwan (Joung et al. 1996). This individual measured 10.6m in length and was found to contain over 300 embryos at various stages of development, the most ever found in any shark species. This catch confirmed that whale sharks are ovoviviparous. It is unknown whether whale shark mating is opportunistic or occurs at specific sites on a seasonal basis (Martin 2007).

16

Feeding

Whale sharks are versatile filter feeders, filtering large amounts of water over their specially adapted gills, catching planktonic and nektonic organisms (Jarman and Wilson 2004). At Ningaloo Reef, Western Australia, whale sharks have been found to feed on planktonic species such as krill (Taylor 2007), copepods, chaetognatha, decapod larvae and megapods (Campagno 1984). They are also known to eat small fishes such as sardines, anchovies, mackerels and small tunas, albacore and squids (Taylor 2007). Two major feeding strategies observed at Ningaloo Reef are passive sub-surface ram-feeding and active surface feeding (Taylor 2007). Passive feeding consists of swimming slowly at the surface with the mouth wide open. During active feeding sharks swim high in the water with the upper part of the body above the surface. The shark swims quickly about 10-15ms-1 with the mouth partially open. Whale sharks adapt their feeding behaviour to target particular prey species (Taylor 2007). Aggregations of whale sharks at Ningaloo Reef appear to be related to food availability but the majority of sharks observed at Ningaloo in the daytime have not been engaged in feeding activities. It is unclear if feeding is disturbed by approaching boats and divers (Norman 2000).

17

5.3 Distribution

The whale shark is known to occur in the waters of over 130 countries (Turnbull and Randell 2006b).

Table 2: Countries where whale sharks are known to occur

.

American Samoa Angola Anguilla Antigua and Barbuda Aruba Australia Bahamas Bahrain Barbados Belize Benin Bermuda Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Cambodia Cameroon Canada* Cape Verde Cayman Islands Chile China Christmas Island Colombia Comoros Congo Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica (Cocos I.) Cuba Côte d'Ivoire Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador (Galápagos) Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Fiji French Guiana French Polynesia (Marquesas; Tuamotu Is.) Gabon

Gambia Ghana Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Honduras Hong Kong India Indonesia Iran Iraq Israel Jamaica Japan Jordan Kenya Kiribati Korea Kuwait Liberia Macao Madagascar Malaysia Maldives Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Micronesia, Federated States Montserrat Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Netherlands Antilles (Curaçao)New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua

Nigeria Niue Northern Mariana Islands Oman Pakistan Panama Papua New Guinea Peru Philippines Portugal Puerto Rico Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Sao Tomé and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Seychelles Singapore Somalia South Africa Sri Lanka Sudan Taiwan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu United Arab Emirates United States United States Minor Outlying Islands (Johnston I.; Wake Is.) Vanuatu Venezuela Viet Nam Virgin Islands, British Virgin Islands, U.S. Wallis and Futuna Islands Yemen

18

* In 1997 one individual whale shark was sighted in the Bay of Fundy, Canada (Turnbull and Randell 2006b).

5.4 Population data

Information on the population size and structure of whale sharks found in aggregations around the world is patchy, however current photo-identification studies are helping to provide rough estimates. A lack of understanding of whale shark migration patterns and limited knowledge of aggregation sizes make it difficult to estimate the size of the global population. Population studies have only been site-specific and have not permitted inferences about the global population. Many of the whale shark populations aggregating in various sites around the globe demonstrate ontogenetic and/or sexual segregation (Graham and Roberts 2007). For example, the majority of whale sharks observed at in-shore aggregation sites at Gladden Spit, Belize from 1998 to 2003 were immature and of those where sex was able to be determined (521 individuals), 84% were immature males (Bradshaw et al. 2007; Meekan et al. 2006; Norman and Stevens 2007). A high level of sex segregation has also been observed at Ningaloo Reef (Norman and Stevens 2007) where approximately 85% of the 325 individual whale sharks observed from 1995-1997 that could be identified were male (Rowat and Gore 2007). All observed whale sharks that were greater than 9m of length were found to be male. Most females were in the 5-7m size range. Similarly, there appears to be a predominance of immature males constituting the population of whale sharks in the Seychelles aggregation (Cardenas-Torres et al. 2007). In Bahia de los Angeles, Mexico, it appears that male and female whale sharks are aggregating in even proportions (Graham and Roberts 2007). Observed segregation suggests that much of the research conducted to date such as tagging is unlikely to be effective as a means of making total population estimates because individuals at aggregation sites do not represent a functional population (only a part of the total population) (Taylor 2007). Population estimates for whale sharks are made all the more difficult because observations are generally made when the sharks swim close to the surface. However these surfacing episodes are generally brief and it has been unclear what portion of an individual’s time is spent at the surface (Taylor 2007). Recent tagging studies in Australian waters have indicated that whale sharks spend >40% of their time in the top 15m of the water column (Wilson et al. 2006a), which suggests individuals being recorded are likely to be representative of the population in the area at the time. Immature, male whale sharks in the Indian Ocean off Seychelles were found to spend up to 53% of their time in water of less than 10m in depth (Colman 1997; Maldives Whale Shark Expedition 2006; Norman 2005). Frequent surfacing and diving is probably related to whale sharks following diel movements of prey up and down the water column (Graham and Roberts 2007). The use of photo-identification of individual whale sharks, as discussed in Graham and Roberts (2007), Speed et al (2006), Meekan et al. (in prep.) and Rowat et al. (in prep.) have successfully identified individuals as well as provided information on population structure and survival estimates at different locations.

19

Population changes over time

Seasonal and inter-annual variability of whale shark populations and abundance make it very difficult to confirm a long-term trend in the size of populations visiting a particular site (Bradshaw et al. 2007). Some attempts have been made to estimate changes in populations at various sites around the world but results are generally far from conclusive. Results of recent research on whale shark populations visiting Ningaloo Reef in Western Australia suggest that these populations are decreasing (Taylor 1996), though the lack of reproductive data for whale sharks makes this difficult to confirm. Whale shark data collected in Western Australia during the 1980s suggest that whale shark numbers were steadily declining throughout this period (Bradshaw et al. 2007). Bradshaw et al. (In press; Speed et al. In review-a) and Speed et al (In review-a) provide some estimates of survival rates based on mark-recapture data. Results support the conclusion that the whale shark population visiting Ningaloo Reef each year is declining. Studies based on whale shark tour operator records have provided additional evidence to suggest that the number of whale sharks at Ningaloo Reef has declined by more than 40% over the past decade (Theberge and Dearden 2006). Likewise, population numbers of whale sharks in the Andaman Sea, Thailand have been observed to be declining, though from the data it is not clear if this is due to yearly variability in sea currents and plankton abundance or decreases in numbers is due to harvesting (Theberge and Dearden 2006). Harvest of whale sharks in India increased dramatically during the 1990s and these may be the same population that visits the west coast of Thailand (Graham and Roberts 2007). Anecdotal evidence from tour operators in south-east Asia and southern Africa suggests that local observations of whale sharks declined throughout the late 1990s (Young 1999). Research at Gladdon Spit in Belize from 1998 to 2003 was also unable to determine if whale shark populations were increasing, declining or stable (Graham and Roberts 2007). Whale shark population abundance at Gladden Spit, appears more dependent on migration in response to plankton abundance than to rates of shark births and deaths (Graham and Roberts 2007). Large movement ranges and a variety of biological and environmental factors, such as the difference in abundance of prey species and sea surface temperatures, can bias counts (Taylor and Pearce 1999).

5.5 Aggregations

Whale sharks have been found to aggregate in various locations around the world and some effort has been made to try to find common characteristics between these sites (Wilson et al. 2001). From published literature it appears that whale shark aggregations can be closely linked to food availability as well as other environmental factors such as the Southern Oscillation Index (SOI) (Rowat and Gore 2007). Known whale shark aggregations appear to occur at regular and predictable times of the year in various sites throughout the tropical waters of the world. A summary of the peak periods is provided in Table 3. Much published data suggest that whale sharks have a preference for regions with a surface water temperature of between 21 and 25°C (Rowat and Gore 2007). However, some studies have found them to frequent warmer waters such as those in the Maldives where all sharks were observed in water warmer than 29°C. Whale shark individuals tracked in the Indian Ocean off Seychelles were

20

found to spend approximately 90% of their time in waters with temperatures ranging from 25-35°C (Hsu et al. 2007b; Rowat and Gore 2006; Wilson et al. 2006a). Whale sharks have also been known to tolerate colder waters (>10° C) during deep dives (Turnbull and Randell 2006a) and have been found as far as 44° N in the Bay of Fundy on the eastern coastline of North America in waters (Jonahson and Harding 2007; Rowat et al. 2007; Taylor 1996; Taylor 2007). It appears that migration and aggregation correspond with aggregation of planktonic and nektonic food species (Heyman et al. 2001). Aggregations may also coincide temporally and spatially with spawning of large reef fishes such as observed at Gladden Spit in Belize (Hsu et al. 2007a). Whale sharks appear to take advantage of high prey densities dependent on currents and remain in a particular area to feed (Taylor and Pearce 1999). Offshore from Ningaloo Reef, the Leeuwin Current moves in a southward direction, but from September to mid-April this is countered by an inshore northward current which Taylor and Pearce (1999) dub the ‘Ningaloo current’. The circular movement of the opposing currents generates a recirculation of water in the region and may be important in retaining planktonic biomass (Taylor 1996). Whale sharks congregate at Ningaloo Reef at a time corresponding with local coral spawning, however the main aggregation site of whale sharks at Ningaloo Reef appears to vary between years, possibly in response to variations in this spawning (Cardenas-Torres et al. 2007). Bahia de los Angeles, Gulf of California in Mexico is another known whale shark aggregation site that is easily accessible and has regular and predictable aggregations (Cardenas-Torres et al. 2007; Rodriguez-Dowdell et al. 2007). Whale sharks are present in Bahia de los Angeles for up to seven months of the year from May to early December, though are most frequent and predictable between August and November, coinciding with periods of high plankton abundance (Norman and Stevens 2007). Segregation between whale shark sexes and age groups in many locations also suggests that aggregation is often related to feeding rather than reproduction (Graham and Roberts 2007; Heyman et al. 2001). Mature male and female whale sharks do not commonly frequent spawning aggregations at Belize (Graham and Roberts 2007), which may be because the fish spawn available in the area does not provide sufficient nutrients for adults sharks (Ramirez-Macias et al. 2007). Aggregation sites of whale sharks in the Gulf of California, Mexico also show segregation according to size though the degree of sexual segregation differs between local sites (Ramirez-Macias et al. 2007). Some near-shore sites are used as whale shark nurseries but research results suggest that the sharks were being born far off-shore. Segregation of juveniles and adults appears to be strongly related to environmental conditions and prey preferences (Speed et al. In review-a). Very little is known about the breeding grounds of whale sharks. Known aggregation sites are heavily biased as they are all inshore locations that are regularly frequented by humans. As whale sharks do not have a biological need to remain at the surface to breath, they may only be observed for a small portion of their time when surfacing. However, 36% of sharks participating in whale shark aggregations in Ningaloo, Seychelles and Mozambique display prominent scarring, much of which is due boat strikes that occur when whale sharks are on the surface (Taylor 2007). As mentioned above it is still unclear what portion of the whale shark’s time is spent at the surface (but see Duffy 2002; Wilson et al. 2006a).

21

Table 3: Whale shark aggregation sites and peak observation seasons

Location Reference(s) Sexual Segregation

Peak Observation Months

North-east New Zealand (Duffy 2002) Not recorded Feb Andaman Sea, Thailand (Theberge and Dearden 2006) No segregation Feb - May Donsol, Philippines (Quiros 2007) Mar-May

Ningaloo Reef, Australia (Taylor 1996; Wilson et al. 2006b)

Mostly immature males Mar - June

Gujarat, India (west coast) (Pravin 2000) Mar - June

Tamil-Nadu, India (east coast) (Pravin 2000) Jul - Oct

Gladden Spit, Belize (Graham and Roberts 2007; Heyman et al. 2001)

Majority immature males Apr-May

Seychelles, Indian Ocean (Rowat and Engelhardt 2007) (Beaver unknown; Cardenas-Torres et al. 2007);

Mostly immature males

Jul - mid Nov

Gulf of California, Mexico

(Cardenas-Torres et al. 2007; Nelson and Eckert 2007; Ramirez-Macias et al. 2007; Rodriguez-Dowdell et al. 2007)

Size segregation between sites. No mature males

Aug - Nov

Madagascar (Jonahson and Harding 2007) Oct - Dec

Gulf of Tadjoura, Djibouti (Rowat et al. 2007) Mostly immature males Oct - Feb

Maldives (Rowat 2007) Year round

22

5.6 Migration

Still very little is known about the global migration of whale sharks. Whale sharks appear to prefer different locations at different times of year but still little is known about the large-scale transoceanic movements in response to seasonal abundance of planktonic prey species (Eckert and Stewart 2001). Taylor (1996) and Rowat and Gore (2007) looked at whale shark movements at Ningaloo Reef and observed that the sharks swim parallel to the reef but found no clear evidence of a north-south migration. However, it is known that whale sharks can travel over vast distances between aggregation sites. One whale shark tagged in the Seychelles was relocated after 42 days having travelled 3,000 km to south of Sri Lanka and then located again 4 months later, a further 5,000 km away in the waters of Thailand (Hsu et al. 2007a). Long-distance movement of whale sharks frequenting Seychelles has been found to be influenced by the prevailing geotropic currents (Hsu et al. 2007a). Whale shark movements in the north-western Pacific Ocean are closely related to thermal fronts and upwelling. Hsu et al. (2007a) hypothesize that, based on migratory routes, populations in the north-western Pacific are different stocks than those in the north and south pacific and the Indian Ocean, however, more evidence is needed to confirm this (Hsu et al. 2007a). Results from a genetic study of whale shark mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) suggest that there is a population partition between the Atlantic and Indian-Pacific ocean basins, which probably would not be identifiable using current tracking techniques (Cardenas-Torres et al. 2007). This study also indicated that whale shark populations from some ocean basins are substantially interconnected, however the reasons for the genetic similarities are unclear. Juvenile sharks tracked in the north-western Pacific were found to spend much of their time in the open sea (Ramirez-Macias et al. 2007). It is unclear where the whale sharks that aggregate in Bahia de los Angeles go after leaving the Bay each year (Rowat and Gore 2007). Ramirez-Macias et al (2007) suggest that they may migrate locally between sites within the Gulf of California, but the absence of mature males at all locations throughout the Gulf suggests that there is movement to locations further away. Analysis of travel speeds indicate that whale sharks may make ocean crossings at speeds faster than those suggested by monitoring of localised movements (NHT 2005). Satellite tracking of whale sharks in Southeast Asia and Mexico has shown that whale sharks can cover distances of over 24 km in a single day (Norman and Stevens 2007). Sharks tagged in the north-western Pacific were also able to cover large distances in a single day, with speeds of between 28.34 and 34.63 km/day (Pauly 2002).

5.7 Threats to whale sharks

There is very little conclusive evidence about the main threats to whale sharks (Colman 1997). Whale sharks appear to be very slow growing and may take up to 30 years to reach sexual maturity (Rowat 2007), which makes them highly vulnerable to human induced mortality and probably not viable as a sustainable fisheries target species (Chen and Phipps 2002). Estimates of vulnerability have often been highly speculative as seasonal and inter-annual variability of whale shark populations and abundance make it very difficult to determine long-term

23

changes to populations or impacts of human activities (Graham and Roberts 2007). Whale sharks in the Indian Ocean are subjected to targeted fisheries and population numbers appear to have declined rapidly in recent years (Norman and Stevens 2007). Data from Taiwan’s Harvest Reporting System show that all whale sharks caught around Taiwan between January 2001 and March 2002 were less than 7 metres in length, averaging 4.65m (Eckert et al. 2002b; Eckert and Stewart 2001; Gunn et al. 1999; Hsu et al. 2007b). This is well below the predicted size at maturity for whale sharks. Likewise, the mean length of whale sharks observed at Belize between 1998 and 2003 (Chen and Phipps 2002) and those at Ningaloo Reef suggests the whale sharks are not yet sexually mature (Pauly 2002). Whale sharks swim slowly (between 1 and 3 km.h-1) (Eckert et al. 2002a) and feed on surface-swimming fish, which makes them very easy to catch with even very low-tech simple fishing equipment (Gudger 1940). Targeted fisheries could easily lead to a population collapse in the affected areas (Speed et al. In review-a). Lack of information about the migration distances of individual whale sharks means that the geographical range that will be affected by a particular shark fishery is unclear (Speed et al. In review-a). Boat strikes of whale sharks were well documented during the early nineteenth century (Rowat and Gore 2007), however the impact of mortalities from boat strikes today is unknown, though the frequency is likely to be higher given that shipping traffic has more than tripled over the past century (Heyman et al. 2001). Boat strikes have been reported as a major problem for whale sharks in the Indian Ocean (Johannes and Yeeting 2001), though it seems unlikely that boat strikes by small vessels are contributing to whale shark mortalities (Martin 2007). The large amount of time spent close to the surface, suggests that that depths of less than 50m are important for foraging. This makes them available for observation as part of ecotourism activities and it has been suggested that this also puts them in danger of death or injury through boat strikes (Beckley et al. 1997). However, based on the survival analysis for scarred and non-scarred animals from Ningaloo and Seychelles, it seems that death resulting from a ship strike by a small vessel (such as an eco-tour vessel) is unlikely. Whale sharks seem very resilient to scarring caused by small boat strikes. The concern is with ship strikes by container and bulk transport vessels weighing in excess of hundreds of thousands of tonnes and travelling >20 knots (Conrad Speed, pers. comm.). This has yet to be quantified. Whale sharks in Belize are known to feed on the eggs of spawning snapper, suggesting that over-fishing of snapper may also pose a threat to local whale shark populations (Speed et al. In review-b). In some coastal marine areas local communities may be losing their power to control who fishes in their region which may impact negatively on previously sustainable fisheries (Che-Tsung et al. 1997). Adult and adolescent whale sharks appear to be strong but slow swimmers whilst neonatal individuals appear to have limited swimming ability which, along with their smaller size would make them vulnerable to predation (Chen and Phipps 2002). Reports of whale shark strandings are relatively common in certain coastal areas of South Africa (Chen and Phipps 2002), though the reasons for these strandings are largely unknown. Two whale sharks have also been found stranded over the past 2 years in Australia, however these are the only confirmed records of strandings in Australia (Chen and Phipps 2002). Globally, whale shark strandings are quite rare; and whilst it has the potential to affect some localised population numbers, it seems unlikely that this is a major threat to the global population.

24

Markets

Whale shark markets exist in Southeast Asia, but as the vulnerability of the whale shark becomes better understood, some nations are making efforts to ban the sale of whale sharks. Despite an increasing number of countries banning the fishing of whale sharks (Table 4) it is evident that whale sharks continue to be targeted, but this may not be reported. Up until the mid 1990s, there did not appear to be a dedicated whale shark fishery in Taiwan, and whale sharks mostly seemed to be caught as by-catch of set net fisheries or opportunistically harpooned (Chen and Phipps 2002). However, the species became more popular at the end of the decade and began to be sold as a novelty meat in Taiwanese restaurants (Diaz-Amador 2005). Over recent years, Taiwan has steadily decreased the annual quota for the number of whale sharks that fishermen are allowed to catch. However, surveys of Taiwanese fish markets conducted during 2001 and 2002, showed that the amount of whale shark meat being sold in markets far exceeded the catch and import totals being officially reported (Rowat and Engelhardt 2007). Under-reporting of whale shark catches in Taiwan may be the result of increased restrictions on numbers to be caught, where fishermen fear they will be penalised if they declare true catch numbers (Jonahson and Harding 2007). Overall, export of shark meat increased rapidly in Taiwan between 1999 and 2001, but there is no clear species specific information available to determine if the sale of whale shark meat has also increased (Lack and Sant 2006). A complete ban on the take and trade of whale sharks in Taiwan will come into effect from 2008, which may help to reduce the rate of population decline. Whale sharks are not deliberately hunted in Mexico (Pravin 2000). The species is known to the local community of Seychelles but has never been targeted as a food source (Pravin 2000). In the waters around Madagascar, whale sharks are not a targeted fish species as they are not eaten and the fins do not fetch a high price, but there is no information available about incidental catch of the species (Pravin 2000). A report produced for TRAFFIC (CITES 2002), shows that of all the world’s nations, Indonesia caught the highest number of sharks in 2003, with a total of 14.1% of the world’s shark catch. This represented an increase from a total 73,000 tonnes caught in 1990 to more than 120,000 tonnes caught in 2003. Taiwan (7.87%) and India (7.38%) were the next two biggest shark fisheries. Once again this data is only available as a total for all shark species and does not indicate the number of whale sharks caught. Up until the early 1980s whale shark catches in India were mostly incidental but a large targeted fishery began in the late 1980’s. Prior to 1980, only the livers of whale sharks were used in India and the remainder of the carcass was discarded (Pravin 2000). It is estimated that approximately 1,000 whale sharks were caught off the Gujarat Coast of India during 1998 (CITES 2002). Cured whale shark meat and liver oil have a good market in India and fins, frozen meat and skins from whale sharks caught in India have good markets in Singapore, Korea and Taiwan (White and Cavanagh 2007). The price of whale shark meat ranges between 5 and 17 US dollars per kg, while the sale of whole sharks have reportedly sold for between 7,000 and 20,000 US dollars per shark (White and Cavanagh 2007). There has also been a report of a large whale shark fin being sold in China for as much as 15,000 US dollars in 1999 (White and Cavanagh 2007). However it is not known how widespread or common this practice is.

25

Whilst there have been large numbers of whale shark catches recorded in India, there is very little data on length measurements of sharks caught. It has been suggested that fishermen are reluctant to provide accurate information on whale shark catches for fear of their fishery being banned (NHT 2005). In a survey conducted by (Rowat and Engelhardt 2007) at various sites around Seychelles whale sharks were not generally targeted as they attract far less money than fins from other shark species. (Marine Conservation Society Seychelles 2006). There are reports of whale sharks being caught opportunistically in Indonesia using haul nets (White 20007). As part of an ACIAR funded project on chondrichthyan catches landed at various fish markets in eastern Indonesia carried out between April 2001 and March 2005, only one drying caudal fin specimen of a whale shark was observed at the fish landing site of Kedonganan on the northern end of Jimbaran Bay in southern Bali. Fishermen at the market reported that whale sharks were occasionally caught near the landing site, and that four animals had been caught between April and July. These were only finned, and carcasses discarded (White et al 2007). Thus, it is very difficult, if not impossible to determine the number of whale sharks caught in Indonesia as they are caught irregularly and are generally under-reported. Subsistence whale fishery at Lamalera

Lamalera, a community of approximately 2000 people, is located on the south coast of the island of Lembata in the province of NTT in Indonesia. It is one of only two villages in Southeast Asia that regularly hunts large whales, dolphins and other large marine creatures such as manta rays and whale sharks (Barnes 1996). The other community is Lamakera village on the nearby island of Solor (Barnes 1996). Only toothed whales such as the sperm (Physeter macrocephalus) and killer whales (Orcinus orca) are hunted, as there is a traditional taboo on hunting baleen whales (Barnes 1996). Subsistence whaling is permitted by International Whaling Commission regulations in Alaska, the USA, the USSR and Greenland. Indonesia is not, however, a signatory to the IWC (IWC 1981). The IUCN Cetacean Special Group and WWF have recorded catch information from Lamalera for the past 20 years which includes whales, whale sharks, and manta rays (Tony Cunningham, pers .comm.). The people of Lamalera are highly dependent on marine resources. Besides hunting and fishing at sea in boats, the community also collects shellfish and seaweed from the rocky coast line and fish from the shore. These villages are unique to the area where most communities rely on subsistence agriculture to support themselves (Barnes 1996). Bartering is the main type of trade in Lamalera, and whale meat the main currency for the community living on the coast (Severin 1999). The dried meat of whales, sharks and rays is exchanged for vegetables and other food sources in local markets with people from the mountainous region of Lamalera (Barnes 1996). People from the coastal region of Lamalera will also travel into the mountains to trade whale offal for fruit, rice and tobacco (Severin 1999). The sea hunters of Lamalera use traditionally made wooden outrigger boats of around 10 metres in length, which are propelled by a sail woven from palm leaves and paddles and oars (Barnes 1996; Dwyer 2000). Large prey are caught using hand-held harpoons which are thrust into the animal by an expert harpooner who leaps from a wooden platform at the front of the boat (Barnes 1996).

26

In the 1970s the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) supported a project where a Norwegian whale hunter spent three years in Lamalera trying to teach local hunters modern whale hunting techniques, including providing a modern motorised boat. This was intended to increase efficiency and transform subsistence whaling into a commercial industry (Barnes 1996; Severin 1999). The project was widely considered a failure and the local community returned to their previous practices as soon as the project ended (Barnes 1996; Severin 1999). Whale hunting in relatively small wooden boats is a dangerous activity and there are many records of injury or death to the sea hunters of Lamalera. Boats may be capsized and dragged down by whales (Barnes 1996; Severin 1999). There have also been reported drownings of harpooners who have speared manta rays (Severin 1999). Whilst there are no documented cases of deaths occurring while hunting whale sharks, the size of the creatures suggests that this would also be a potentially dangerous endeavour. Whaling occurs to some extent throughout the year, but the main annual sea hunting season begins with the dry season when there are calmer south-easterly winds (Barnes 1996). During the dry season, boats go out hunting daily but at other times of the year, boats will go out when whales or other suitable animals are sighted from shore (Barnes 1996; Severin 1999). The precise location for hunting depends on prevailing winds and currents. Boats used for hunting are owned and operated by a hereditarily determined corporation (Barnes 1986). Animals caught by the sea hunters are divided according to traditionally defined rules. Those that receive a share of the catch include members of the corporation associated with the boat that was used to catch the creature, the boat crew and the makers of the boat and harpoons. Allocation of animal products is done based on the role of individuals in terms of their social status, role in the actual hunt as well as their role in the construction or maintenance of the hunting boat (Barnes 1996), Dwyer 2000). When a whale shark is caught, it is divided up in a similar manner to whales but the person who first sighted the animal receives the gills (Barnes 1996). It is unclear if the traditional hunting activities of Lamalera pose a threat to the whale shark population as there are only intermittent data of whale, ray and shark catches at Lamalera (Barnes 1996). Sperm whales are the most sought after prey but the number of individuals caught of this prized species remains relatively small. In the late 1990s it was estimated that less than 40 sperm whales were being caught each year (Severin 1999). This is relatively unchanged from three decades earlier. Between 1965 and 1971 an average of 36 sperm whales were caught each year. From 1972 to 1979 this number was an average of only 24 whales per year (Barnes 1986). Lamalerans have been taking whale shark since at least the 1970s (Hembree 1980). In this report Hembree records whale shark amongst other fish caught either from the peledang [the whaling boats of Lamalera] or in nets in the region (Hembree 1980). In August 1993, while on a field survey to record traditional boats used in the whale fishery, Kim Akerman from MAGNT and Dan Dwyer, CDU, recorded a catch of 10 whale sharks for the year. It was reported to them that whale shark (iokiko) “have a soft sweet white flesh. Taken on quiet calm days. 10 taken to date in 1993” (Akerman, K. 1993. Lamalera Journal. Unpublished field notes from a visit to Lamalera, Lambata, August 1993). Records of shark catches in Lamalera do not indicate the species of shark. Without data on numbers of whale sharks caught it is not possible to determine whether hunting is increasing or decreasing.

27

During his stay in Lamalera, Severin (1999) was told of declining numbers of sharks being caught at Lamalera, though there was no specific information about whale shark numbers. Whale sharks are relatively easy to harpoon as they are slow moving and can be approached by boats (Barnes 1996). This was confirmed by fishermen at Lamalera who said that whale sharks were easy to catch as they don’t ‘run away’. Severin (1999) observed two ‘small’ whale sharks caught in one day. If a commercial market for whale sharks was established in the area, the local population of the sharks could be threatened. Other information exists on past whale shark landings in Lamalera. Visual footage of recent whale shark catches was shown on a Foreign Correspondent Program aired on ABC Television in 2005; in an ethnographic film titled ‘The Whale Hunters of Lamalera’ by J. Blake, produced in 1988. More recently a detailed photographic essay of whale shark hunt from 2005 depicts a large whale shark caught as part of the traditional fishery at Lamalera (see Figure 7).

Figure 7: Whale Shark harvested by fishermen in 2005 from Lamalera, Lembata

Island, NTT, Indonesia. Source:http://www.lightmediation.com/blog/podcast/february/whale_shark.pdf.

In recent years, tourists have begun visiting Lamalera to observe traditional whale hunting and some guests houses have been built to accommodate these visitors (Dwyer 2000; Severin 1999). Numbers of tourists are still relatively small. In 1999 it was estimated that around 40-50 tourists a year participated in whale hunting in Lamalera and fishermen had begun charging a fee for participation (Severin 1999). It is unlikely that a whale (or other marine life) watching enterprise could be established as an alternative. The hunting of whales, rays and whale sharks is steeped in centuries of tradition and forms a significant part of local culture. Infrastructure does not exist for large numbers of tourists and it is unclear what the effect of a sudden influx of cash would have on the barter economy of Lamalera.

28

5.8 Management and research

National Protection of Whale Sharks

Several countries that have known whale shark aggregations have now banned fishing of whale sharks (see Table 4). However these only represent a small number of the countries where whale sharks are known to occur (see Table 2).

Table 4: National regulations on Whale Shark harvesting (Cardenas-Torres et al. 2007)

State Action Effective date Belize Habitat protection 18 May 2000 Honduras Ban on fishing 28 October 1999 Maldives Ban on fishing 24 June 1995 Philippines Ban on fishing 25 March 1998 Thailand Ban on fishing 28 March 2000 India Ban on fishing 28 May 2001 Mexico Ban on fishing 2000 USA Ban on fishing on Eastern seaboard

Australia Protected in Commonwealth Western Australian and Tasmanian State waters (and the waters of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park in Queensland).

Taiwan Complete fishing ban from 2008 (Rowat and Gore 2007)

Until recently Taiwan allowed some fishing of whale sharks but has been incrementally reducing the official quota. The Taiwanese Government recently approved reducing the 2007 quota to 30, with these sharks to be tagged rather than killed (Jonahson and Harding 2007). Fishermen to be recompensed for their loss of income and all whale shark fishing will be banned from 2008. Using results of encounters with whale sharks to develop local encounter policies can contribute to development of appropriate legislation at a local level (Graham and Roberts 2007). Stakeholders in the ecotourism industry in Bahia de los Angeles, Mexico conclude that community-based projects are important for the long-term conservation of whale sharks in the region (Graham and Roberts 2007).

International management

Due to the highly migratory nature of whale sharks across political boundaries, international instruments are required to promote multilateral management and conservation of the species in addition to local and national measures (Graham and Roberts 2007). Wide ranging movements of whale sharks away from the Seychelles has been raised as a concern because these populations may pass through areas in the northern Indian ocean where they are targeted by the local fishing industry (Graham and Roberts 2007). There may be a similar concern

29

for those whale sharks visiting Ningaloo Reef and then heading north to Timor and the Lesser Sunda Islands in Nusa Tenggara Timor, including Lembata and Solor Islands. Individual whale sharks that have been sighted repeatedly in the coastal waters of different nations throughout the Indian Ocean demonstrate the need for collaborative management between Indian Ocean states and east Africa (Rowat 2007). Whale Sharks are listed under Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), a status which strictly regulates the trade of the species based on quotas and permits to prevent their unsustainable use.

Research Methods

Comparison of methods for measuring whale shark populations showed that photo identification was the most reliable method of estimating whale shark populations, as tagging produced very low tag retention/recovery rates (Gifford et al. 2007). However, whale sharks recorded through photo-identification may only represent a small portion of the total population (Jonahson and Harding 2007; Rowat 2007; Theberge and Dearden 2003). Additionally, photo-identification may not be effective where sharks are observed from different sides or when sighted below the surface in darker water or at times of the day when light is low (Huntington 1998). Ontogenetic and sexual segregation observed at whale shark aggregation sites in Belize, suggests that tagging is unlikely to be effective as a means of making population estimates as individuals at aggregation sites do not represent a functional population (only a part of the total population) (Mallory et al. 2006). As already mentioned, whale sharks are highly migratory so population estimates must therefore be addressed on a regional basis (Mallory et al. 2006; Moller et al. 2004). It is still extremely difficult to obtain data regarding long-term movement or migration of whale sharks and satellite tagging methods continue to be tried and refined in an attempt to obtain better data (Mallory et al. 2006; Moller et al. 2004). Collecting information from local communities who encounter whale sharks as part of their daily activities – for example fishers and marine-based tourism operators – can also provide a valuable source of information regarding the appearance and behaviour of whale sharks (López-Espinosa de los Monteros 2002; Walpole and Goodwin 2001).

5.9 Local knowledge/TEK

Huntington (Johannes and Yeeting 2001) describes TEK as “the system of experiential knowledge gained by continual observation transmitted along members of a community. It is set in a framework that encompasses both ecology and interactions of humans and their environment on physical and spiritual planes”. Local Ecological Knowledge (LEK) may also provide a useful alternative term, as current or recent observations may be just as important as ‘traditional’ knowledge (Huntington 1998), particularly when trying to detect changes over time up to the present. Fisheries management is one area where the use of LEK/TEK has been reasonably well demonstrated. Combining TEK and science can be a very effective strategy for sustainable co-management of traditional fisheries by Indigenous peoples (Drew 2005). Fisherman may have a

30

long-term connection with the local environment providing some historical perspective to monitoring of fisheries species populations (Jonahson and Harding 2007). Uses and value of TEK

Most published literature on the use of TEK and involvement of local stakeholders for marine conservation focuses on the establishment of marine protected areas (Fraser et al. 2006; Theberge and Dearden 2006) and management of targeted fisheries species (Moller et al. 2004). Documentation of TEK can provide valuable ecological information on marine species and incorporate important wildlife-human interactions that may not otherwise be revealed in published scientific descriptions of marine species (Finley 2001; Johannes and Yeeting 2001). Indigenous communities are often highly dependent on local natural resources and may therefore know about natural fluctuations in population size, habitat specificity, aggregation and migration patterns that are not yet recorded in scientific literature (Mallory et al. 2006). Interviews with local fishers and dive operators can be used to establish a logical baseline for subsequent surveys of whale sharks (Fraser et al. 2006). Whilst data collected by non-scientists may not always have the appropriate level of accuracy for some types of statistical analysis, it may be valuable in detecting trends in population numbers (Huntington et al. 2004). TEK can also identify possible local causes for changes in population abundance which can focus scientific investigation (Drew 2005). It can be argued that TEK can provide a cheaper and more holistic method of detecting changes in fish populations and that a precautionary approach based on this information may be more prudent than waiting for expensive, slow-coming scientific proof (Calamia 1999; Fraser et al. 2006). Local knowledge collected from traditional land users has been used in conjunction with scientific research to assist in the establishment of marine wildlife areas (Calamia 1999). TEK may be able to identify important breeding sites worthy of protection for the conservation of marine species (Calamia 1999). Previously, the integration of scientific and traditional knowledge generally has compared data collected on similar spatial scales to either confirm data already held or to fill gaps in either set of information (Calamia 1999). However, TEK should not just be used as a one-time activity to extract information for conservation, but should be just one step in developing collaboration and collating information (Costa-Neto 2000). Conservation measures developed using research that integrates the ecological knowledge of local stakeholders with scientific research is more likely to be recognised and accepted by these local communities (Johannes and Yeeting 2001) and therefore have a greater chance of success. In defining marine areas for protection, TEK may be able to provide important geographic information that may not be available if data collection is purely ‘science’ based. Many oral histories and traditional knowledge can provide valuable information about cultural significance of sites (Fraser et al. 2006), which will be very important for designing appropriate management strategies. Local resource users are generally in a better position to assess the true costs and benefits of development activities than researchers from outside, especially in areas where there is little recorded knowledge of local environments and local dependence on environmental resources (Costa-Neto 2000). When conducting environmental impact assessments, researchers must take into consideration not only direct environmental impacts of proposed development activities but also impacts that may occur to local users of environmental resources (Mymrin et al. 1999).

31

TEK of marine species

Whilst fisher knowledge is often limited to knowledge of target species (Jonahson and Harding 2007; Moller et al. 2004; Mymrin et al. 1999), this local knowledge has been shown to be highly valuable in the development of fisheries management strategies (Huntington et al. 1999). Examples of research demonstrating the usefulness of TEK of marine species for management purposes can be seen from throughout the world. Work with fishermen in Kiribati has provided valuable information about seasonal habits of a range of marine species. This information provided valuable insight into changes in fish behaviour and distribution over time, much of which was not known to the ‘scientific’ world (Mymrin et al. 1999). An investigation of TEK regarding population-level information about the salmonid fish, brook charr in Lake Mitissini, Canada provided important information at a small spatial scale and was able to provide an historic perspective of changes in brook charr populations (Mymrin et al. 1999). Research investigating the knowledge of traditional fishing communities in Brazil found that the community was able to provide accurate useful information relating to fish species abundance, distribution, behaviour and classification (Huntington et al. 2004). Their ichthyological knowledge was compatible with scientific ichthyological knowledge. Unfortunately, there are very few examples of information gathered from investigation of TEK of long-lived marine species. Huntington et al (Colman 1997) and Mymrin (Theberge and Dearden 2006) consider the life history of Beluga whales (Delphinus leucas) in the Arctic waters through interviews with traditional hunters fishing in the waters of Russia. Information collected was not only consistent with published scientific data on the whales but was able to add valuable detail which was not previously recognised. TEK was used to describe migratory and local movements, feeding, breeding, ecological interactions, and the impacts of interaction with humans on distribution and behaviour of Beluga whales in the Arctic waters of Russia (Jonahson and Harding 2007). It was found however, that in the Russian villages involved in the study, it was mostly older hunters who were able to provide useful information as they were more aware of historical context and change over time and began fishing in a time when hunting practices were not influenced by modern influences. The aging status of these hunters indicate that the valuable knowledge held by communities is facing extinction (Cardenas-Torres et al. 2007). Combining satellite telemetry data with traditional knowledge of Beluga whales in the Arctic waters of the Chukchi Sea off Alaska, was able to reveal connections between far separated ecosystems and provide a more complete picture of populations of a wild species (Martin 2007). The combination of information provides a greater understanding of the movements and conservation needs of a particular stock of Beluga whales. Local ecological knowledge (LEK) of whale sharks

High longevity, prohibitive levels of migration and sporadic appearance make it very difficult and expensive to collect long-term data on whale sharks (Theberge and Dearden 2003). Any group of people that regularly and frequently visits a location where whale sharks visit, may be able to provide valuable information on the sharks populations (Jonahson and Harding 2007; Rowat and Engelhardt 2007; Theberge and Dearden 2006).

32

It seems that there are little or no documented studies of ‘traditional’ ecological knowledge of whale sharks. Information collected from local communities in areas where whale sharks aggregate has mostly come from those currently involved in tourism or fishing activities that bring them into contact with the sharks. No documented information about specific traditional beliefs or cosmology associated with whale sharks was found in any of the literature reviewed for this report. The use of contemporary local ecological knowledge for increased understanding of whale sharks is somewhat different from LEK that is usually collected from fishermen because in many locations where the sharks are known to occur they are not a targeted fish species. Nonetheless, it can be highly beneficial to work closely with traditional fishermen to document data on whale sharks as small-scale fishers spend more time on the water and therefore have a higher chance of encountering whale sharks (Rowat and Engelhardt 2007). Much of the existing knowledge of whale sharks has come from tour operators and fishermen (Rowat 2007). The vast migration range of whale sharks makes it very expensive to study the long-term movements. Ecotourism operators and their clients can therefore provide valuable information about the aggregation, behaviour and movement of whale sharks (Cardenas-Torres et al. 2007).When collected in a consistent and systematic manner, data from non-specialist volunteers such as dive operators can provide useful long-term quantitative data (Theberge and Dearden 2006). These groups may be part of a tourism industry that is either based on whale sharks, or includes whale shark observations as part of their activities (Fowler 2000). Some projects have used questionnaires to gather information from stakeholders such as dive-boat operators to provide information regarding whale shark movements, seasonal appearance and aggregations (Diaz-Amador 2005). López-Espinosa de los Monteros (2002) describes a public outreach project launched in 2002 to bring together information from organisations with some sort of activity involving whale sharks throughout the Indian Ocean. Direct participation, support and cooperation of local tour operators has been vital to increasing understanding of whale sharks and analysis of potential human threats from interaction (López-Espinosa de los Monteros 2002). Off the west coast of Thailand, diver operators have been keeping notes on whale shark observations since 1992 (Rodriguez-Dowdell et al. 2007). Anecdotal evidence from whale shark tour operators in Southeast Asia and South Africa indicates that the numbers of whale sharks visiting local coastal sites decreased greatly in the last few years of the 1990s (Young 1999). However, it is not clear if this is due to declining local or global populations or a natural variation in distribution patterns. A survey of fishermen in the Holbox, Chiquila and Bahia de los Angeles in Mexico, (López-Espinosa de los Monteros 2002) showed that 75% of tour operators used to be fishermen and have been gradually shifting to tourism. Many survey participants said that they were making the shift because fish stock appeared to be declining and tourism was easier work than fishing. As whale sharks are generally not a targeted fisheries species in eastern Indonesia – aside from in Lamalera and Lamakera as described above – LEK documented as part of this project will most likely come from incidental association with the whale sharks and will not therefore allow the use of population monitoring parameters such as catch per unit effort (CPUE).

33

5.10 Tourism

Ecotourism ventures for marine conservation

López-Espinosa de los Monteros (Walpole and Goodwin 2001) describes ecotourism as tourism that fulfils the following principles:

1. Involves travel to natural destinations 2. Minimises negative impacts in both the environment and the local community 3. Builds environmental awareness 4. Provides direct benefits for conservation 5. Provides financial benefits and empowerment for local people 6. Respects local culture

Over the past two decades nature-based tourism has often been touted as a strategy for garnering public support for conservation efforts. However, there is still very little research investigating the characteristics of sustainable tourism and providing examples of where ecotourism has fulfilled its goals (López-Espinosa de los Monteros 2002). Some tour operators have long worked in the tourism industry while others are starting to divert fishing activities to tourism (Rowat and Gore 2007). Ecotourism may provide economic benefits in an environmentally friendly and non-consumptive way, but this may not necessarily be enough to deter local people from being involved in destructive use of resources (Young 1999), particularly if they cannot see the connection between the two types of activities. Assessment of the success of an ecotourism industry to contribute to conservation does not have to be limited to consideration of only economic benefits to conservation. Benefits may also come in the form of indicators relating to promotion (awareness raising) education and protection of ecosystems in which ecotourism activities are occurring (López-Espinosa de los Monteros 2002; Young 1999). A study of the impacts of attitudes towards ecotourism at Komodo National Park (KNP), Indonesia found that receipt of benefits from tourism may not necessarily result in improved attitudes towards conservation (López-Espinosa de los Monteros 2002). The term ‘ecotourism’ may be used by tour operators as a marketing tool even though there may be no appropriate regulation of the industry to ensure that operators comply with ecotourism principles that may bring conservation benefits to the region (Young 1999). If non-extractive uses can be found to be sustainable and economically viable, they may enhance conservation through aiding a move away from fishing (Young 1999). However, where ecotourism is not tightly regulated, it may also lead to conflict over common-use resources such as in Baja California, Mexico where conflict has arisen between local communities involved in tourism and tour operators from the United States competing for tourists and whales (Cardenas-Torres et al. 2007). Baja California, Mexico is popular as an ecotourism destination and several studies have been conducted to analyse whether this industry is providing any of the anticipated benefits in terms of conservation and benefits to local communities (Walpole and Goodwin 2001). Government and non-government organisations were involved in the establishment of a nature-based tourism industry in Baja California with the expectation that ecotourism would bring regional development and provide a strategy for supporting conservation activities (López-Espinosa de los Monteros 2002). In the latter half of the twentieth century the fishing industry increased several-fold in the area leading to the demise in regional fish stocks (Walpole and Goodwin 2001). Increased

34

popularity of whale watching activities coinciding with this fisheries decline saw a rush of local fishers shifting to this industry from the late 1980s (Walpole and Goodwin 2001). Whale shark based tourism continues to increase rapidly in Mexico and some local tour operators complement sports fishing activities with whale shark observation (Walpole and Goodwin 2001; Walpole and Leader-Williams 2002) It has been found that as tourism ventures become more successful in a particular area, those not receiving direct benefits are likely to become more displeased with the inequality or lack of access to benefits that tourism brings (Walpole and Goodwin 2001). Government agencies may not consider ecotourism activities to be successful as often it is the government that bares the cost of managing a marine protected area while the tour operators reap the benefits (Walpole and Leader-Williams 2002). If tourism is to provide opportunities for sustainable development then it must benefit the local stakeholders in an equitable manner and local communities must be supportive of the development of tourism (Orams 2002). It is also important for tour operators or local authorities to ensure that tourists are made aware of any social norms that must be respected when visiting tourism areas. In Komodo National Park (KNP) for example, when local residents were surveyed, most were concerned about the dress standards of tourists visiting the predominantly Muslim area (Orams 2002). Economic benefits/potential of whale shark tourism

Tourism based on a ‘flagship’ species may be easier to promote and can provide an incentive for people to visit developing countries to see such species. In Indonesia, the Komodo Dragon has become one such flagship species (Walpole and Leader-Williams 2002). Besides increasing local incomes by attracting tourists to the area, the presence of the dragons has also had conservation benefits as the Komodo National Park was established to protect the dragon but has also allowed the protection of other endangered species (Corkeron 2004). The success of tourism is generally dependent on accessibility of a tourism destination and the facilities available for tourists once they reach the destination (Cardenas-Torres et al. 2007). Tourism based on the Komodo Dragon demonstrates the willingness of foreign tourists to travel to a relatively remote and isolated locations to observe what is perceived as an unusual or rare flagship animal (Orams 2002; Walpole and Leader-Williams 2002). The rapid growth in whale-watching activities over the past 20 years provides another example of the power of popular mega-fauna to attract tourists to remote locations (Cardenas-Torres et al. 2007) and highlight conservation issues. Whilst protection of whale sharks may not necessarily have obvious impacts on the conservation of local biodiversity, a single species can provide an effective means of marketing local tourism (Rodriguez-Dowdell et al. 2007). Several reasons are often given for why whale watching is a useful tool for reducing whale hunting and the same rationale may be applied to tourism based on whale sharks. Such reasons include the assumptions that whale observation leads to conservation; that commercial vessels provide an opportunity for research; viewing animals in the wild is better than holding them in captivity; and whale watching is not compatible with whale hunting (Diaz-Amador 2005).

35

A large ecotourism industry based on whale sharks has been established in Bahia de los Angeles, Mexico. In recent years the number of foreign enterprises bringing tourists to see whale sharks has increased dramatically, thereby decreasing the benefits to local operators and increasing competition (Quiros 2005). Whale sharks in Bahia de los Angeles are easily accessible from shore allowing tourists to view the sharks using private boats or canoes. This leads to ‘benefit leakage’ and prevents proper regulation of human encounters with the whale sharks (Quiros 2005). Benefits from ecotourism based on whale sharks in Bahia de los Angeles have not translated into improvements in the quality of life for local communities. Reasons for this include the issue of free access to the whale sharks as natural capital, which is leading to resource saturation and visitors don’t have to use local services (Diaz-Amador 2005). Whale shark tourism may actually have negative impacts on the local community by increasing competition, tensions and disputes (Pauly 2002). It is important for the government to be involved to resolve community conflicts. Increases in whale shark observation activities in Mexico have also led to increased observations of injuries to sharks caused by contact with boats (Diaz-Amador 2005). Commercial sectors based on whale shark ecotourism in Donsol, Philippines and Placencia, Belize have thrived, resulting in the proliferation of small stores, restaurants and resorts (Graham and Roberts 2007). However, the economic benefits of increased tourism have only been felt by certain sections of the community. In Placencia, there are only a few licensed tour operators demanding high prices for tours while in Donsol, there are many more operators but fees charged to tourists are small and therefore have smaller benefits to operators (Rodriguez-Dowdell et al. 2007). Whilst tourism based on whale sharks may make some contribution to the local community in some sites in Mexico, communities that have benefited were not particularly poor prior to their involvement in the industry (Cardenas-Torres et al. 2007). Whilst it is not anticipated that whale sharks are targeted by Bajo fishermen working in eastern Indonesia, providing an alternative industry may reduce the potential for development of such a fishery, and assist local communities to become active protectors of the species. However, any activities based on eco-tourism must proceed with caution. Community dependence on tourism activities may be risky as the number of visitors can also be affected by factors outside the control of the industry (Cardenas-Torres et al. 2007) such as political instability that has had negative impacts on tourist numbers visiting Indonesia in recent years. Impacts and difficulties

Ecotourism based on whale sharks may not necessarily improve conservation of the species and would need to be carefully managed so as not to contribute to harm or indirect mortality of the sharks (Martin 2007). Through her research in Mexico, (Diaz-Amador 2005)identifies three main categories of threat to whale sharks as a result of increased tourism attention for the species. These were; a) threats from the local community relating to tourism practices (such as collision with boats) and habitat destruction; b) effects of actions by tourists acting independently; and c) the effects of ‘outsiders’ (private vessels and people from other communities). Wounds have been observed on whale sharks which appear to have been caused by boat strikes, such as at Gladdon Spit, Belize (Quiros 2007). Threats to whale sharks in the Bahia de los Angeles, Mexico as identified by tour operators were lack of organisation amongst operators and injuries to animals caused by collisions with tourists operating their own high-speed boats and tour operators

36

not adhering to the Code of Conduct. Tourists acting independently do whatever they want (Burks et al. 2006; Quiros 2007; Taylor 2007). As mentioned previously, analysis for scarred and non-scarred animals from Ningaloo and Seychelles, suggests that death resulting from a ship strike by a small vessel (such as an eco-tour vessel) is unlikely (Conrad Speed, pers comm.). Whilst collisions may not directly cause the death of whale sharks, encounters with boats may lead to changes in behaviour, which may be difficult to detect and quantify. Human related activities such as tourism may have a negative impact on the behaviour of whale sharks and therefore impact negatively on the tourism industry itself (Cardenas-Torres et al. 2007). Whale sharks have been observed avoiding boats by diving downwards, though they do not appear to change their swimming speed during these encounters (Cardenas-Torres et al. 2007). Martin (2007) also suggests that in high traffic areas, the low frequency noise of boat engines may interrupt whale shark migration paths. Tourism may affect whale shark appearance through the disturbance of prey species. Boats and the presence of divers have been observed to alter aggregation and spawning behaviour of fish species in Belize (Quiros 2005). If tourism is unregulated, disturbance of whale sharks during feeding activities could have long-term negative impacts on whale sharks as they divert their energy away from feeding to avoidance behaviour (Quiros 2007). Aggregation sites likely to be chosen as sites for tourism operations are also likely to be feeding sites for whale sharks (Quiros 2005). Besides direct negative impacts on whale sharks as a result of tourism, such an industry is also difficult to establish and maintain because in most locations differences in frequency of whale sharks appearance between years makes it difficult to promote whale shark ecotourism and decreases potential benefits (Nelson and Eckert 2007). One notable exception to this is the thriving tourism industry established at Ningaloo Reef in Western Australia. Such an industry may not however be replicable in other locations as the industry is based on expensive high technology infrastructure. Spotter planes are used to locate whale sharks and provide information regarding their location to tourist boats. This may not be possible in places such as eastern Indonesia where facilities are not available to attract tourists with travel budgets high enough to fund the use of aeroplanes to spot whale sharks. More appropriate locations for whale shark tourism may be those such as Bahia de los Angeles, where the animals are easily located from the shore using a boat and therefore there is no need for a spotter plane (Quiros 2007). Management

Management of an ecotourism industry based on whale sharks may be difficult to regulate, particularly when it is located in a nation where enforcement of government regulations may be weak. The tourism industry at Ningaloo Reef, off Western Australia may be seen as an example of a successful and well managed industry based on whale sharks. However, processes effective in Australia may not be transferable to other locations and management strategies need to be developed specifically to suit local conditions, taking into consideration local environmental and social conditions (Quiros 2007). In a complex physical and socio-political setting, prescribed measures such as guidelines to minimize negative effects of animal-human interaction are difficult to put into practice (Rodriguez-Dowdell et al. 2007). Even when appropriate regulations are in place they may not be adhered to by those formally working in the tourism industry and those who are not part of a commercial enterprise. Non-compliance by tour operators and tourists highlights ranging interpretations of guidelines and a lack

37

of enforcement of regulations (Diaz-Amador 2005). In many locations, limited resources for enforcement makes regulation difficult (Quiros 2007). Regulations have been put in place for the shark-based ecotourism industry in Bahia de los Angeles but these have been largely ineffective because of a lack of inspection and surveillance. There is also a lack of habitat protection (Pauly 2002). The local community of Bahia de los Angeles do not see whale sharks as having a high economic value but there is some value gained by the benefits the community derives from research in the area (Rowat and Engelhardt 2007). Several students from the United States of America visit the area for several weeks each year. Regulations have been developed to manage whale shark based ecotourism in Donsol, Philippines such as tour operators must control path obstruction and proximity of swimmers by proper positioning and thorough briefings for tourists to decrease disturbance to whale sharks. However this will not be effective if it is not paired with enforcement of regulations and proper education of tourists (Quiros 2007). Despite regulations, without education for tourists, operators may be pressured into allowing tourists to break the rules to get extra tips by keeping tourists happy (Quiros 2007). Regulations on Donsol, state that only one boat may observe an individual whale shark but this is unlikely on days when whale sharks are scarce as tour operators are unlikely to willingly disappoint paying tourists (Rodriguez-Dowdell et al. 2007). Ecotourism ventures based on whale sharks must ensure minimum interference with the animals to prevent possible indirect mortality (Diaz-Amador 2005). Local communities should be involved in the development of management strategies to ensure that they are able to receive some of the benefits from an ecotourism industry based on whale sharks. In the Seychelles, interest in whale sharks has been increasing rapidly in recent years prompting the community to be pro-actively involved in developing management strategies from the beginning (Rodriguez-Dowdell et al. 2007). At Donsol in the Philippines, clear guidelines have been established regarding interaction with whale sharks and researchers have found that overall compliance with these guidelines is around 80% (Rodriguez-Dowdell et al. 2007). The protocol most frequently contravened by tour operators and tourists is that of minimum distance from the sharks, where compliance was estimated at around 44% (Rodriguez-Dowdell et al. 2007). Tour operators and tourists did not believe that this lack of compliance was having a negative effect on the whale sharks, though researchers found that whale sharks were exhibiting avoidance behaviour such as deep diving or steeply banking away from swimmers. In other locations such as in Mexico, local tour operators blame outsiders seeking to benefit from a burgeoning industry and private visitors for non-compliance with regulations. Suggestions to increase compliance include recommendations from tour operators that the government force tourists with their own boats to use local operators (Rodriguez-Dowdell et al. 2007). In Holbox and Choquila, Mexico, boat captains participating in whale shark tourism activities must hire a guide to take care of tourists while they are in the water and make sure they don’t touch the sharks (Rodriguez-Dowdell et al. 2007). Tour operators recommended the issuance of permits to operate whale shark operations, giving a concession to local tour operators, allowing for the exclusion of foreign ventures and retaining economic benefits for the local community (Quiros 2005). Concessions could lead to participation through collective decision-making with the group and aid self-regulation through the development of a local management institution (Martin 2007).

38

Rodriguez-Dowdell et al. (2007) make several other recommendations regarding implementation of a whale shark management strategy. It is suggested that any such strategy should be based on property rights, with whale sharks and their habitat recognised as valuable natural capital. By recognising property rights, local operators are more likely to protect the resource for the future (Bradshaw et al. 2007). There needs to be a local committee of stakeholders to coordinate information and regulations (Rodriguez-Dowdell et al. 2007). Most tourism management plans do not allow resources for proper monitoring of impacts on wildlife, environment and community, so that managers are forced to seek external funding to allow proper monitoring (Diaz-Amador 2005). For example, in Bahia de Los Angeles, Mexico, whale shark ecotourism is rapidly increasing and it is therefore important to identify, monitor and manage ecologically important areas utilized by whale sharks within the bay to ensure the continued integrity of the habitat that supports whale shark presence (Quiros 2007). Sustainability

As mentioned previously, an ecotourism industry based on whale sharks may be difficult to sustain if the sharks do not appear in sufficient numbers every year to provide a reliable attraction for visitors. Where there are sufficiently reliable numbers of sharks appearing, management of the industry must ensure the well-being of the whale sharks to reduce the risk of animals being injured, killed or avoiding tourism locations because of disturbance. The development of ecotourism ventures based on whale sharks may have detrimental impacts on the whale sharks which could reduce the numbers of sharks appearing, and reduce the viability of a tourism industry. Quiros (2005) identifies three key requirements for improving sustainability of whale shark tourism. They are institutionalising ecotourism by changing rules and regulations, properly financing tourism management and constant monitoring of impacts of tourism. When assessing the sustainability of an ecotourism industry it may be necessary to ensure that the community is aware of the costs to the government associated with research and management of whale sharks to assist development of strategies for making the local ecotourism industry sustainable as demonstrated in the Seychelles (Rowat and Engelhardt 2007). Without such awareness communities may not have realistic expectations about support they may receive from government. The large migration routes of whale sharks mean that local regulation may not be enough to ensure a viable population of sharks visiting a particular location. Despite the tightly enforced regulation for whale shark conservation in the waters off the west coast of Australia, numbers and sizes of whale sharks appear to be declining (Bradshaw et al. 2007; Taylor 1996). Declines in the local population may be due to threats to whale sharks in other parts of their migration route, such as hunting or habitat destruction in south-east Asia.

5.11 Conclusions

Whale sharks are found throughout all the oceans of the world but still very little is known about the biology, ecology, population size and structure and reproductive history of the species. Further research is required to better equip authorities to develop appropriate management strategies.

39

Understanding of whale sharks should be increased through a combination of ‘western’ science and traditional/local ecological knowledge. Human interaction with whale sharks occurs where there are fishing activities and increasingly, in locations where whale sharks regularly aggregate and have become the basis of a nature-based tourism industry. Fishers and other boat operators can provide valuable information about the behaviour, migration and aggregation of whale sharks. Ecotourism is often cited as an alternative livelihood activity to replace destructive use of a species such as hunting. However, efforts to develop an ecotourism industry must proceed with caution and must be undertaken in close cooperation with local communities. Measures must be taken to ensure that local communities benefit from the industry and understand the importance of minimising the risk of harm or disturbance to the sharks. Whale sharks migrate large distances across international borders so management strategies must be carried out collaboratively between nations to be effective.

40

6 Field Research in Indonesia: Results Summary

6.1 Customary practices and beliefs concerning whale sharks

Bajo religious beliefs are syncretic whereby elements of Islam (Sunni) are fused with Bajo indigenous cosmology and ritual practice. This syncretism can be observed in various manifestations of Bajo practical religion - in their cosmology, their life cycle rituals, and other rituals to do with boats, fishing, housing, and health. Bajo have a marine cosmology based on belief in, and causal relationship with, spirits who inhabit the sea. Interactions with this spirit world and ritual activity require the services of someone with specialised knowledge (pangatonang/ilmu) (Stacey 2007).

The sea is the home of mbo madilao (the ancestors of the sea) 7, who are believed to be descended from the prophets (nabbi). There are seven original ancestors who are considered to be like humans and each possesses a different power. The ancestors are considered to be sacred and the Bajo are generally reluctant to speak of them outside the appropriate time or place; it is generally forbidden to mention their names in casual conversation. According to the Bajo, at some time in the past, the ancestors were all on one boat built by prophet Noah (nabbi Nuhung) that somehow became lost at sea and were never found again. This story is a Koranic version of the Flood Myth, where Indigenous cosmology is combined with Islamic teachings (Stacey 2007).

Ritual experts say that that each prophet is associated with a particular domain: Nabbi Hilir rules over the sea and fish for all Muslim people, but mbo madilao rule over the sea for the Bajo people alone. In the scale of things, the ancestors have a direct line to God through the prophets and therefore act as intermediaries between God and living Bajo (Stacey 2007). Hierarchically, Allah rules the universe, the prophets are the ‘lords’ of the natural realm, who in turn rule the more localised spirits (Endicott 1970). Bajo hold specialised customary practices (adat) concerning whale sharks (kareo dede). One Bajo fishermen interviewed in Tanjung Pasir stated ‘nenek moyang dilarang dapat hiu kareo’ [‘Our ancestors forbid us to catch whale sharks’] and ‘kalau dapat harus lepas’ [‘If you do catch one (e.g. by accident in a net), you must release it’]. As a result Bajo do not hunt whale sharks as it is forbidden by customary law. According to a Bajo elder from Sulamu village ‘ikan dijaga oleh dewa’ [the fish [whale shark] is guarded by a spirit]. Other large marine creatures such as whales are also guarded by spirits, and these can protect or come to the aid of fishermen in times of need or misfortune at sea. For example one of the fishermen from Kera Island recounted a story about a boat which had sunk near Savu Island. The crew were saved from drowning by a whale shark: they held onto its fin and it took them to safety. As a result of these beliefs, whale sharks (and other large fish) are considered taboo (pemali). Rotinese8 and Butonese fishermen from Pepela do not appear to have specialised beliefs about whale sharks.

7 Mbo also means grandparent and is a term applied to senior village members both living and dead. 8 Whale sharks are called hui teke in Rotinese.

41

Figure 8: Bajo fishermen, Pak Anetong and Pak Sahrulla during an interview

about whale sharks, Tanjung Pasir, Pepela, Rote Island (Photograph: C. Speed).

Figure 9: Informal discussions with Bajo fishermen about whale sharks, Tanjung

Pasir, Pepela, Roti Island. (Photograph: D. Dwyer)

42

6.2 Actual geographic locations where whale sharks have been sighted, or where they are believed to aggregate or migrate and seasonal patterns

Most Bajo and other fishermen reported that they usually see whale sharks swimming alone or in pairs when they are near the surface in particular locations in northern Australia, eastern Indonesia, and in the Seas that are now part of Timor Leste. Whale sharks are constantly moving, following the currents (the strongest currents move from north to south), on a seasonal basis in search of food. They are sighted most often during the east monsoon period from August until the beginning of the west monsoon in November-December. Fishermen rarely see whale sharks aggregate (berkumpul kumpul). Based on this they believe the sharks breed infrequently and only ever produce one or two offspring. However one fisherman from Tanjung Pasir, Pepela who has over 20 years of experience fishing in the Timor and Arafura Seas reported that he had previously seen five or more sharks together in offshore waters south of Sumbawa Island; a group in deeper waters towards Lombok Island and eight sharks north of Darwin when shark fishing in the Arafura Sea in the 1980s.

Bajo and other fishermen we spoke to on Tanjung Pasir, who have also fished in the Timor Sea and northwest region of Australia for decades, regularly sight whale sharks in Australian waters, in particular around the vicinity of Ashmore Reef, and further south towards Scott Reef. These same fishermen have sighted whale sharks in the NTT region - in the waters to south of Roti Island, in the Straits between Timor (Kupang) and Semau Island, in the waters around Kera Island, in the Mako Straits (between Adonara and Lomblem islands) and Lambardi Straits (between Lomblem and Pantar Islands), and in the Savu Sea between Timor and Flores (Map 2). Whale sharks are also sighted in the region of Southeast Sulawesi - around WAKATOBI islands and in the Buton Straits - and in the Arafura Sea close to West Papua. The migration patterns of whale sharks appear to be determined partly by their food source – whereby they follow and eat various types of pelagic (and possibly benthic) bait fish. It was reported by Rotinese fishermen from Pepela that during windy conditions whale sharks come to the surface of the sea and chase small fish (ikan halus). Fishermen reported that they most commonly see whale sharks while engaged in what Taylor (2007) terms ‘passive feeding’ where the whale shark swims slowly at the surface with its mouth open.

Bajo from Kera Island and Sulamu village reported that the whale sharks they see in the region target pelagic fish (fingerlings).9 Fishermen noted that about the time of our visit (July) the pelagic fish were just starting to spawn, coming in from deep waters, into Kupang Bay and north along the Timor coast. As the small fish developed in the shallow coastal waters during August -September-October,10 the whale sharks came in to feed on them. As the small pelagic fish grew bigger they moved off shore and the whale sharks also moved away, perhaps following the prey fish.

9 Species not identified but could include Clupeidae - mackerel, tuna etc. 10 In a phone conversation at the end of October, a Bajo from Kera Island informed us that the fish eggs had grown into fingerlings and moved (ikan sudah timbul) and that they would be unlikely to see many more whale sharks in the area for the remainder of the year.

43

Map 2: Approximate locations where whale sharks are sighted in Nusa Tenggara Timur, Indonesia and East Timor.

44

Figure 10: From Kera Island, looking south-southeast into the Kupang Straits,

with Timor Island on the left and Semau Island on right (Photograph: C. Speed)

Figure 11: Pak Nasseng Rabanna (right) while being interviewed about whale

sharks on Kera Island, with Pak Haji Bili Nurulla from Namusein village (left) (Photograph: C. Speed)

45

Kupang Bay has dozens of bagan fishing platforms. This fishing gear uses a net which is lowered to the seafloor. Fishing is done at night with a light which attracts small fish, and the net is then raised. This method typically targets small benthic fishes, like Gerreidae and small Pomadasyidae, (Barry Russell, MAGNT, pers. comm.). But it is possible that small pelagics may also be targeted by bagan fishermen. For example Paul Clark of the MAGNT collected a juvenile Mackerel Tuna Euthynnus affinis11 from a bagan in Kupang Bay, 12 April 1993. According to the fishermen on board the bagan that night this was the major species being caught that ‘month’ (Paul Clark, MAGNT, pers. comm.).12 If Mackerel Tuna are abundant in Kupang Bay, it is highly likely that other smaller baitfish (their food source) are also present at that time of the year (April). Thus it’s very likely that whale sharks are attracted to baitfish in the Bay of Kupang at certain times of year. However, we do not have any direct evidence of this (Barry Russell, MAGNT, pers. comm.). Further research with local fishermen in the Kupang area and Indonesian fisheries researchers to investigate the life cycles of pelagics would assist in identifying the food sources of whale sharks. Fishermen stated that normally whale sharks travel in deep water. Thus they only see them when they come to the surface, at certain times of year, in certain locations, under certain conditions usually, when whale sharks are chasing small fish. The most common time to see whale sharks is during the months of August to December, which coincides with Ningaloo Reef whale shark visitation and departures. Generally the sharks are not sighted during the early period of the east monsoon as the water is too choppy, but are seen with the onset of lighter wind conditions in late August and September. Bajo fishermen from Oenggai village in Roti Island see whale sharks in deeper water offshore from the village and in the region to the northeast (Map 2). Whale sharks are often seen when bait fish are present and often at the same time as manta rays. They usually see sharks in August but also at other times. The villagers know the whale sharks are not dangerous as they eat only small fish and prawns (prawns are a food source of manta rays). Bajo fishermen don’t harm the sharks and know whale sharks won’t harm people.

11 MAGNT register no # S.13635 – 001, 236-242 mm SL. 12 This species of Mackerel Tuna grows to about 100cm and forms multi-species schools by size with other scombrid species comprising from 100 to over 5,000 individuals. It is a highly opportunistic predator feeding indiscriminately on small fishes, especially on clupeoids and atherinids, also on squids, crustaceans and zooplankton (Fishbase).

46

Figure 12: Oenggai village, looking southwest along the coast of Roti Island.

(Photograph D. Dwyer)

Figure 13: Oenggai fisherman indicating the area of coastal waters where they

regularly see whale sharks. (Photograph: C. Speed)

Pepela fishermen reported that they often see large whale sharks in the region of West Roti, between Dana Island and the mainland and especially at Batu Heleana (a popular tuna fishing area that is protected from strong wind during the west monsoon), Landau Island and the village of Batu Tua.13 During the months of November and December, particularly once the rains begin, sharks

13 A number of fishermen and their families from Pepela reside in this area of West Roti.

47

come to surface to eat small bait fish (ikan halus -‘neri’). Fishermen also stated that if the wind is strong sometimes the whale sharks came to the surface in protected areas, especially near coral reefs. One fisherman stated he believed whale sharks were in the area all year round, but they only saw them when they came to the surface with the rains at the start of the west monsoon and in presence of smaller fish. Geographical features which may support the presence of whale sharks and their food source include the presence of a strait where strong currents create uplifts of nutrients that attract small fish and, during the west monsoon, an area protected from westerly winds. However whale sharks are also sighted in the area during the latter east monsoon months. One fisherman had reported seeing up to five whale sharks together in the West Roti area (Map 2). Fishermen from Pepela also stated they regularly saw whale sharks around Roti waters, off Pantai Roti, Tanjung Usu and Kambing Island, (north-east Roti), in waters near Tobololong, in the straits between Sulamu and Kera Island , and to the south of Sumbawa in deep waters.

Figure 14: Tanjung Pasir, Pepela looking northwest towards Tanjung Usu, Roti

Timor. (Photograph: C. Speed)

The crew of a boat (see Figure 15 & Figure 16) from Ndao Island at Nemberala reported that they saw whale sharks during the months of August to September in waters between West Roti and Ndao Island (Map 2). A fisherman from Sulamu reported that he had often seen whale sharks in waters off the south of Timor Leste – south of the district of Tim Tim Selatan – Kecamatan Suou, Kabubaten Korfu, prior to 1999.14 In this area, whale sharks visited to feed on ikan tembong (Map 2).

14 Prior to 1999, a Bajo community existed at Kampong Hera, Dili.

48

Figure 15: Nemberala Beach, West Rote.

(Photograph: C. Speed)

Figure 16: Fishermen from Ndao Island, on Nemberala beach, West Roti.

(Photograph: C. Speed)

49

6.3 Information relating to human induced threats faced by whale sharks in

Indonesia

The price of whale shark fins, meat and skin is generally low in NTT, and Indonesia (White 2007) thus it is not an attractive target species. In addition, most of the small boat or artisanal fishermen do not have the technology to hunt such large species of fish. However, occasionally whale sharks are caught accidentally (e.g. while fishing for sharks or netting for fish) by local fishermen (see also 5). We were informed by fishermen in Kera Island, Sulamu and Pepela that 2-3 whale sharks had been caught in the past 12 months. One shark was caught by a Pepelan fisherman approximately 3 months prior to our visit. The shark was caught in waters to the south of Roti Island, while the crew were sharking fishing for the purposes of finning15 from a small motorised boat (bodi) using long line gear. The whale shark, approximately three meters in length, was lashed to side of the boat and landed in Pepela. The skin and meat (total weight of 320kgs) were salted, dried and sold to a local trader in Pepela and shipped to Surabaya. The meat sold for Rp3,000 per kilo and the skin Rp2,500 per kilo. The fin was sold to a boss in Kupang for Rp80,000 per kilo (23 kg). The skin was said to be used to make purses and bags. Fishermen from Kera Island and Pepela reported that in 2005 or 2006 a whale shark was caught accidentally by Namusein fishermen while net fishing for tuna (lamparang) in Kupang Bay. The 11m shark was landed on the beach at Namusein. Department of Fisheries staff were alerted and instructed the fishermen to tow the whale shark out in the Bay and release it. A fisherman from Oenggai village on Roti Island had heard of a story of a whale shark being landed in the Sulamu (Kupang area). But after this, there was sickness in the village and since then no whale sharks have been caught.

15 Shark fins currently fetch Rp800,00 per kilo.

50

7 Photographic Documentation of Whale Sharks Following the field survey in July, the research team considered the idea of trying to confirm the presence of whale sharks in the area through visual sightings and photographic documentation with local fishermen. Such information would not only contribute towards feasibility analysis for the development of an ecotourism node for whale sharks in the Kera Island /Kupang Bay area but also potentially help identify whether the same whale sharks found in NTT are visiting Ningaloo Reef, using whale shark photo identification techniques and database searches. Building on the momentum and interest gained from the field survey, the team approached members of the Bajo community at Namusein village, Kupang who are hosting the newly formed Kerukunan Keluarga Suku Bajo (KKSB) Sama Turo, an NGO established to facilitate the education of Bajo children in NTT. The NGO is represented by Bajo members from five villages in Kupang and Roti Island (Namusein, Sulamu, Kera Island, Tanjung Pasir, Oenggai). With agreement to participate in the documentation activities, the KKSB Coordinator and Dr Therik decided on the terms of their engagement and the resources required to support the activities. The research team purchased 10 disposable Kodak underwater camera’s and prepared information sheets both in English and Indonesian (Appendix 10.3). Personal networks were used to deliver cameras to and from Darwin in August and September. The cameras were delivered to the Coordinator of the KKSB Sama Turo in Kupang with the assistance of Dr Tom Therik, a consultant anthropologist based in Kupang. The cameras were distributed to members of the Bajo community in Kera Island, Oenggai and Tanjung Pasir, and Rotinese at Batu Tua, West Roti. Fishers were briefed on how to take photos. Some funds were provided to help with the costs of camera distribution and boat fuel. Fishermen were informed that if they were successful in photographing a whale shark they would be rewarded with a financial ‘bonus’.

7.1 Reported sightings and photographic documentation of whale sharks

A list of reported whale shark sightings during the period from early August to late November is provided at

51

Table 5. Sightings of whale sharks in the Timor Straits region are indicative of the regular contact between the Coordinator and communities at Sulamu and Pulau Kera. The Coordinator also reported that in general fewer whale sharks have been seen this year due to unseasonal rough and turbid water and stronger than usual currents according to the fishermen from Sulamu and Kera Island. Results show that whale sharks are present and regularly sighted in the Timor-Roti area during September to November, as reported to us by fishermen during the field survey in July.

52

Table 5: Whale shark sightings

Place Date Source of Information Waters between Sulamu and Kera Island

Early August Fisherman from Sulamu who reported to actually hit a whale shark and damage to boat propeller sustained

Waters off Sulamu August A whale shark was caught in a net off Sulamu. The whale shark was released.

Waters between Sulamu and Kera Island

Early September Fisherman from Sulamu

Pantai Roti, Landau Early September Dr Tom Therik, Kupang Pulau Kambing (East Roti) Early September Dr Tom Therik, Kupang Tilandu, Roti Barat. September Two large whale sharks sighted at

Tilandu, Roti Barat. Fishermen thought may have been a male/female pair

Straits between Sulamu and Kera Island

Late September Sulamu fishers attempted to photograph a whale shark held in a net. Approx 3 depa (fathom) in length.

40-50m off beach at Oenggai, (near Pante Baru), Roti Island

Early October A number of Oenggai fishers have sighted whale sharks in the area in previous months and continue to do so (mid October)

Ti Landau, Roti Barat October Local fishermen reported sightings of whale sharks in the area as they move north

3 nm north of Kera Island Late October (3rd week) Sulamu fishers attempted photograph of 2 whale sharks, approx 2m long.

Waters off Sulamu 12 November Baby whale shark (approx. 1 metre long) was seen swimming alongside an adult whale shark. This pair was seen swimming around Sulamu for several days.

At the time of writing this report (November 2007) only one camera had been returned and the film developed in Darwin. A selection of photographs are provided at Figure 17. The photographs will be analysed by the research team in early December in order to determine whether a match can be made with any of the whale sharks visiting Ningaloo Reef using a photographic identification data base held by AIMS and CDU. In the meantime the team will retrieve as many cameras as possible from Kupang. Additional results will be provided to DEW in early 2008.

53

Figure 17: Photographs of a whale shark, sighted approximately 3nm north of

Kera Island, taken by Pak Anca, Sulamu village, Kupang Bay in late October.

54

Figure 18: Pak Anca and crew from Sulamu village, Kupang Bay, who

photographed the shark at Figure 17.

7.2 General comments on whale shark documentation

This documentation project was undertaken as a pilot activity in addition to the original aims and objectives of the project. However it is clear from the first collection of photographs along with the knowledge of whale sharks and reported sightings that significant potential exists to engage Bajo and Rotinese fishermen in a more detailed documentation and monitoring program in the future. Such a project would need to establish additional institutional mechanisms (see recommendations) and obtain resources to support activities and equipment (e.g. masks and snorkels, more sophisticated underwater camera’s, lighting etc).

55

8 Summary This project has considered the traditional ecological knowledge of whale sharks held by Bajo and other fishing groups from settlements in Nusa Tenggara Timur, eastern Indonesia. It involved a literature review, ethnographic interviews with fishermen in Indonesia and further documentation, including photographic, of whale sharks. Whale sharks are found in over 130 countries worldwide including Indonesia and Timor Leste. Global population numbers are difficult to estimate and there is little understanding of whale shark reproduction. Whale sharks feed on planktonic (krill) and nektonic organisms as well as small and juvenile fishes (ikan halus), and clear links have been identified between whale shark migration and aggregations with availability of food sources. Barely any information is available about whale shark population size and structure and aggregation sites in Indonesia. At Ningaloo Reef, Western Australia recent scientific research suggests that whale shark populations are declining. At Ningaloo Reef peak observation months for whale shark aggregations are March to June but little is known about the migration patterns of the shark population beyond Ningaloo. Recently however, tagged whale sharks at Ningaloo Reef have been tracked into the waters of Indonesia and Timor Leste. Very little information exists in the published literature regarding TEK of whale sharks and specifically on indigenous belief systems and cosmology relating to whale sharks. This research has documented knowledge of Bajo customary beliefs and practices concerning whale sharks. Customary law (adat) prohibits Bajo from harming or hunting whale sharks. These beliefs are part of a wider marine cosmology based on belief in, and causal relationship with, spirits who inhabit the sea. Bajo and Rotinese fishermen from settlements in Nusa Tenggara Timur commonly sight whale sharks in various locations in the Timor Sea, around islands in Nusa Tenggara Timor and beyond to other parts of Indonesia, and East Timorese waters. Sightings are most common during the months of August to December. Whale sharks are commonly sighted alone or in pairs when on the surface of the water feeding on small fish. They are rarely seen in larger groups. Their migration patterns appear to be directly related to the timing and locations of fish spawning. In Indonesia, it appears that there is no commercial fishery or established commercial markets for whale shark products. However, even without a market in Indonesia, external demand for whale shark products could stimulate harvest of the species. Reasons for lack of markets include lack of available local technology to harvest large animals, and post harvesting equipment such as freezers, as well as low prices for whale shark products such as flesh and skin. A very low level of incidental and/or opportunistic harvesting of whale sharks by local fishermen occurs both in NTT and beyond. Whale shark fin has been found in local markets such as in Bali. Overfishing of food sources may pose a threat to whale shark populations in NTT. Only two communities in eastern Indonesia appear to target whale sharks as part of a subsistence traditional whaling fishery and barter exchange economy – at Lamalera and Lamakera islands Lesser Sunda Island Chain in the Province of Nusa Tenggara Timur. Given that whale sharks have been targeted since at least the 1970s it is not known if the fishery in its current form is a threat to whale shark populations.

56

9 Recommendations This project has demonstrated how a combination of local knowledge and new technology can lead to cost effective monitoring. The following recommendations are derived from the research:

• There are demonstrated culturally driven constraints on the exploitation of whale sharks among the Bajo who are one of the most widespread and dynamic maritime adapted ethnic groups in eastern Indonesia. These constraints should be encouraged through ongoing contact and development of economic incentives through support of paid involvement in activities such as whale shark photo identification, documentation and environmental monitoring.

• Apart from the barter exchange practices of the recognized artisan hunting villages of

Lamalera and Lamakera, there appear to be no developed economic markets for whale shark products in the Province of Nusa Tenggara Timur, (and perhaps other Provinces such as Nusa Tenggara Barat, Maluku, Sulawesi Tenggara) eastern Indonesia. This provides an opportunity to develop early intervention practices, such as public education and targeted economic development that could help hinder the market gaining a stronger hold.

• Engaging the fishers in the conservation and protection of whale sharks has added pay-

offs in developing both alternative (or supplementary) income opportunities for Bajo and other fishers who have operated in the now disrupted fishery of the Timor-Arafura Seas. This could lessen the likelihood of their resuming illegal activities in the future, and support educational outcomes consistent with the policy directions of Australian and Indonesian fisheries management initiatives (e.g. Australia-Indonesia Joint Illegal Fishing Public Information Campaign).

• The engagement of the Bajo NGO KKSB Sama Turo and other groups of Rotinese fishers

in this pilot study is a significant outcome that should be developed subject to identification of resources to support a more substantial project for ongoing documentation, tagging and monitoring activities. There would need to be significant community consultation to develop an appropriate model for a future program involving local communities. It would include identifying an appropriate local organisation to be employed to coordinate and manage the program, particularly providing assistance in financial management and community mobilisation. Consideration could be given to supporting a formal ‘sea ranger’ type group, ‘Sahabat Laut - Friends of the Sea’, within the Bajo NGO to undertake whale shark monitoring activities with support from the managing NGO. Activities including photo-identification would provide a cost-effective means of helping to further investigate the links between whale shark populations visiting Western Australia and those found moving seasonally through eastern Indonesia and Timor Leste.

• In turn the results of further research could be used to consider the feasibility of

establishing small-scale niche market whale shark ecotourism activities with local communities in NTT. In particular, Kupang Bay and Nemberala, Roti Island could offer potential for small-scale whale shark ecotourism given it is an established tourist

57

destination and some infrastructure already exists. A range of potential benefits, costs and impacts exist in relation to marine ecotourism, both for the conservation of whale sharks and in improving the livelihoods of local communities. Therefore, any consideration of ecotourism activities should proceed with caution.

• Given the links between whale shark migration through NTT and food sources, further

research with local fishing communities and Indonesian fisheries researchers would assist in identifying the food sources of whale sharks and thus patterns of behaviour.

• Further ethnographic investigations into the traditional whaling fishery in Lamalera,

Lembata should be undertaken to determine the numbers of whale sharks caught annually, as well as photographic identification and tagging activities to determine if individual sharks passing through waters off Lembata and Solor Islands are from the same population as those migrating to and from Ningaloo Reef in Western Australia.

• Consideration should be given to replication of this pilot study to other provinces in

eastern Indonesia (e.g. Nusa Tenggara Barat, Southern Maluku and South and Southeast Sulawesi) and Timor Leste to further investigate traditional knowledge, and presence of whale sharks in key locations and local livelihood opportunities.

58

10 Appendices

10.1 Locations Visited

Date Location People Interviewed 1-3 July Tanjung Pasir and Pepela

village, Roti Timur, Roti Island Majida Sahrulla Anetong H. Nasser Hayum Asiz Obo Hussein Hassan Gani Hamda Sofyan

4 July Oenggai village, Roti Timur Moktar 4 July Nemberala village, Roti Barat Ndao fishermen 5 July Namusein, Kupang Bili

Narullah 6 July Kera Island, Kupang Bay Nasseng

Amon

10.2 Whale Shark Survey Questions (English/B. Indonesia/Sama Bajo)

1 May I ask you some questions about a particular type of shark, the whale shark? B. Indonesia: Boleh saya bertanya pada anda tentang hiu tipe tertentu, ikan bodoh? Bajo: Kole aku titilau ma kita tentang kareo dede? 2 Do you recognize this shark? (show photo) B. Indonesia: Apakah anda kenal hiu ini? (perlihatkan gambar) Bajo: katonangta kareo ma foto itu? (pakitaang gambar) 3 What do you call it in Bahasa Sama? B. Indonesia: Apa namanya dalam Bahasa Bajo? Bajo: Ai arangna ma baong sama? 4 When at sea do you see them often or just occasionally? B. Indonesia: Ketika melihat ikan bodoh di laut apakah itu sering atau kadang-kadang saja? Bajo: Takitata madilao’ soso’ atau jarah? 5 How many times can you recall seeing them? B. Indonesia: Berapa kali selama hidup yang anda ingat pernah melihatnya? Bajo: Selama illongta mendangai belle ngita iyya madilao’? 6 Where have you seen them? (e.g. 1. Australian waters, 2. Timor area; 3. Buton etc) B. Indonesia: Dimana saja pernah melihat ikan bodoh? (tambahkan informasi lain tentang lokasi seperti : 1. Perairan Australia, 2. kawasan Pulau Timor, 3. Perairan Buton, dan lain-lain) Bajo: Mengga tampa belle pangitaanta iyya? (tuppuang ta aku arang tampa/lokasi ma pangitaang ta iyya, darua ma dilao’ Australi, dilao’ Timor, Dilao Butong, atau dilao’ sadiriangna) 7 Are there any special sea-conditions when you see them (Calms? Deep water? Birds? Other fish? Something else? B. Indonesia: Apakah ada kondisi laut yang khusus saat anda melihatnya? (Musim teduh? Laut dalam? Burung? Ikan lain? Hal-hal lain?) Bajo: Ceritaan ta aku ma batingga dia/boe dilao’ baka bona takita ja ya? (Tiddo? Tarusang? Mamano’? Dayah sadiri ma sehena situhu’? Patandaan sadiri?) 8 Do you know where they come from or where they are going? B. Indonesia: Dari mana mereka datang dan kemana mereka pergi? Bajo: takatonangta mangga patikkaangna? Paputar ka engga je ya? 9 What do they eat? B. Indonesia: Apa yang mereka makan? Bajo: Ai intaangna? 10 Are there particular locations where whale sharks aggregate that you know of? B. Indonesia: Apakah ada lokasi tertentu yang anda tahu, dimana ikan bodoh selalu berkumpul? Bajo: Nia tampa takatonangta biasa ngita dede pupo’ boroh? 11 Are sightings seasonal or do you see them throughout the year?

60

B. Indonesia: Apakah melihat ikan bodoh pada musim tertentu saja atau sepanjang tahun? Bajo: Takita ta madilao’ tetempoang (jara musim tertentu) atau dataha taong? 12 Where/how do they breed/reproduce? Bajo: Mengga pangitaanta dede dinda baka dede lilla si ala (sibebelau)? Battingga elena si ala (sibebelau)? 13 Are they significant in any way to your beliefs, the beliefs of other Sama people or any other people you know? B. Indonesia: Apakah ikan bodoh signifikan dalam sistem kepercayaan suku bajo, atau masyarakat suku lain yang anda tahu? Bajo: Apakah dede termasuk binatah dipakabasar atau pamali madialang ada’ sama? Batingga ma ada’ bagai? 14 How are they significant? B. Indonesia: bagaimana menjadi penting, ceritakan? Bajo: Nginai bona ntah dipakkabasar, atau dipamaliang? 15 Do any Sama people have food prohibitions involving whale shark? B. Indonesia: Apakah dalam Suku Bajo ada larangan makan terhadap beberapa jenis makanan/binatang tertentu, termasuk ikan bodoh? Bajo: Nia ke ma Sama larangang nggai kole nginta andinta tertentu atau binatah tertentu (haram/pamali), apakah dede pasa’ adinta dilarangan? 16 Do you know how these prohibitions arose ? (Are there stories of people being saved by particular types of fish?) B. Indonesia: Bagaimana sehingga terjadi larangan tersebut (apa ada cerita tentang orang yang diselamatkan oleh ikan tertentu, kalau ada saya mengumpulkan cerita ini) Bajo: Batingga bona ntah nia larangang iru? (apakah nia cerita munusia dipasalama’ atau dituloh ele binatah madilao, lamong nia aku namupo’ cerita iru) 17 Or are there any special Sama stories, songs, or myths about whale sharks? B. Indonesia: Atau apakah ada cerita, lagu, atau mitos Bajo yang khusus tentang ikan bodoh? Bajo: Barah nia cerita pakkannaang, uya sama, ikiko, atau curita sama ma nusor tentang dede? 18 If you see them when sailing do they portent anything either good or bad for you? B. Indonesia: Ketika anda sedang berlayar dilaut dan tiba-tiba melihat ikan ikan bodoh, apakah hal itu anda rasa baik atau buruk? Bajo: Lamong sibitta lama’ bona ntah ngita dede, apakah iru anu ala’ atau anu raha’? 19 Does seeing them have any other meaning? B. Indonesia: Atau ada arti lain selain perasaan baik dan buruk? Apa? Bajo: Atau nia battuah sadirina lamong ngita dede? Ai? 20 Do Sama people you know have any ilmu (knowledge) related to these sharks or other sharks? B. Indonesia: Apakah masyarakat Bajo mempunyai ilmu dan pengetahuan khusus tentang ikan bodoh atau hiu jenis lainnya?

61

Bajo: Apakah nia ma sama pangatonang atau ilmu tentang dede atau ilmu-pangatonang tentang kareo sadiri ? 21 Are people able to transform themselves into whale sharks or other animals? B. Indonesia: Apakah manusia bisa menjadi ikan bodoh atau binatang lain ? Bajo: Kole ke manusia dadi atau mappadadi dirina dayah dede atau dadi binatah sadiri ? 22 Are people able to communicate with whale sharks? B. Indonesia: Apakah manusia bisa berkomunikasi dengan ikan bodoh? Bajo: Nia ke manusia kolena siboa baong, sipalau, atau berhubungan baka dede? 23 Are there any special rituals or beliefs involved in attempting to catch whale shark (check against other sharks)? B. Indonesia: Apakah ada upacara ritual khusus atau kepercayaan terkait dengan penangkapan ikan bodoh? (termasuk jenis hiu lain) Bajo: Nia ke ma Sama ada’ atau pamaduaiang anu di pugai lamo na nangka’ dede atau kareo sadiri? 24 Are there any rituals or actions performed when they are caught? B. Indonesia: Apakah ada upacara ritual atau aksi yang dibuat setelah menangkap ikan bodoh Bajo: Nia ke ma Sama ada’ atau anu dipugai lamo suda kole dede? 25 Is there something else you can tell me about whale shark and Sama people? B. Indonesia: Apakah masih ada hal lain yang ingin anda katakan pada saya tentang ikan bodoh dan Suku Bajo Bajo: barah nia masi anu na pabaongta ka aku tentang hubungang dede baka Sama? 26 Is there something else you can tell me about whale sharks and bagai (non-Sama people) Who else in Indonesiacatches whale sharks? B. Indonesia: Apakah masih ada hal lain yang ingin anda katakan pada saya tentang ikan bodoh dan bagai (masyarakat non-Bajo), suku lain di Indonesiayang juga menangkap ikan bodoh? Bajo: Barah nia masi anu na pabaongta ka aku tentang hubungang dede baka Bagai ma biasa nangka dede? 27 Have you ever caught a whale shark? B. Indonesia: Apakah anda pernah menangkap hiu ini? Bajo: belle kita palilibu mamia iyya? 28 Have you sold the fins? B. Indonesia: Apakah anda pernah menjual sirip dan ekornya? Bajo: Belle kita mabilli sere’ na? 29 How much are they worth? B. Indonesia: Berapa harganya per kilogram? Bajo: Dangai billiangna da kilo? 30 Who buys the fins (is it the same people who buy your other shark fins?) B. Indonesia: Siapa yang membeli siripnya? (Apakah dia orang yang juga membeli sirip hiu jenis lain milik anda?)

62

Bajo: Sai biasa pamilli sere’ dede? (Apakah padagah mamilli sere’ kareo milli sere’ dede du ya?) 31 How do you catch them? B. Indonesia: Bagaimana cara anda menangkapnya? Bajo: Batingga cara nangka’ dede? 32 Have you eaten the meat? What does it taste/smell like? B. Indonesia: Apakah anda pernah makan dagingnya? Seperti apa rasa dan baunya? Bajo: Belle kita nginta isi dede? Darua ai issana? Bauna? 33 Do you like eating them? B. Indonesia: Apakah anda suka makan dagingnya? Bajo: Kadampaang ta nginta iyya? 34 Do you sell the meat if you catch them? B. Indonesia: Apakah anda menjual daging jika menangkapnya? Bajo: Pabilliangta isina kalo nia anu kole ta? 35 Who buys the whale shark meat? B. Indonesia: Siapa yang membeli daging “ikan bodoh”? Bajo: Sai ma milli isi dede? 36 Is it for local consumption or is the shark meat taken to other places? B. Indonesia: Apakah daging ‘ikan bodoh’ hanya untuk konsumsi lokal atau dibawa ke tempat lain? Bajo: Isi dede iru jara diinta manusia laha’ itu atau diboa ka luaang laha’? 37 Where does it go? B. Indonesia: Dibawa kemana? Bajo: Diboa ka laha’ ai?

63

10.3 Whale Shark Photographic - ID Information Sheets: English and Indonesian

64

65

66

67

11 References Barnes, R. H. (1986) "Educated fishermen: social consequences of development in an Indonesian

whaling community." Bulletin de l’École Française d’Extrême-Orient, 75, 295-314. Barnes, R. H. (1996) Sea Hunters of Indonesia: Fishers and Weavers of Lamalera, Clarendon

Press, Oxford, 467pp Beaver, K. (unknown) "Seychelles Marine Ecosystem Management Project: Final Report."

GEF/SEYMEMP. Beckley, L. E., Cliff, G., Smale, M. J., and Compagno, L. J. V. (1997) "Recent strandings and

sightings of whale sharks in South Africa." Environmental Biology of Fishes, 50(3), 343-348.

Bradshaw, C. J. A., Fitzpatrick, B. W., Steinberg, C. C., Brook, B. W., and Meekan, M. G. (In

press) "The world's largest fish is getting smaller." Biological Conservation. Bradshaw, C. J. A., Mollet, H. F., and Meekan, M. G. (2007) "Inferring population trends for the

world's largest fish from mark-recapture estimates of survival." Journal of Animal Ecology (OnlineEarly Articles).

Burks, C. M., Driggers, W. B., and Mullin, K. D. (2006) "Abundance and distribution of whale

sharks (Rhincodon typus) in the northern Gulf of Mexico." Fisheries Bulletin, 104, 579-584.

Calamia, M. A. (1999) "A Methodology for Incorporating Traditional Ecological Knowledge

with geographic informatin systems for marine resource management in the Pacific." SPC Traditional Marine Resource Management and Knowledge Information Bulletin, #10, 2-12.

Campagno, L. J. V. (1984) FAO Species Catalogue. Sharks of the world. An annotated and

illustrated catalogue of sharks species known to date. Vol 4. Part 1. Hexanchiformes to Lamniformes, Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Rome, 249pp

Cardenas-Torres, N., Enriquez-Andrade, R., and Rodriguez-Dowdell, N. (2007) "Community-

based management through ecotourism in Bahia de los Angeles, Mexico." Fisheries Research, 84(1), 114-118.

Che-Tsung, C., Kwang-Ming, L., and Shoou-Jeng, J. (1997) "Preliminary Report of Taiwan's

Whale Shark Fishery." TRAFFIC Bulletin, 17(1). Chen, V. Y., and Phipps, M. J. (2002) "Management and Trade of Whale Sharks in Taiwan."

TRAFFIC East Asia, Taipei. CITES. (2002) "CITES (2002) "CITES Appendix II nomination of the Whale Shark, Rhincodon

typus. Proposal 12.35" (CITES Resolutions of the conference of the parties in effect after the 12th Meeting, Santiago, Chile, 2002)."

68

Colman, J. G. (1997) "A review of the biology and ecology of the whale shark." Journal of Fish

Biology, 51(6), 1219-1234. Corkeron , P. J. (2004) "Whale Watching, Iconography, and Marine Conservation."

Conservation Biology, 18(3), 847-849. Costa-Neto, E. M. (2000) "Sustainable development and traditional knowledge: a case study in a

Brazilian artisanal fishermen's community." Sustainable Development, 8(2), 89-95. Diaz-Amador, M. (2005). "Cross-scale institutional arrangements for whale shark (Rhincodon

typus) management and conservation: Opportunities for sustainable livelihoods," Master of Resource Studies, Lincoln University.

Drew, J. A. (2005) "Use of Traditional Ecological Knowledge in Marine Conservation."

Conservation Biology, 19(4), 1286-1293. Duffy, C. A. J. (2002) "Distribution, seasonality, lengths and feeding behaviour of whale sharks

(Rhincodon typus) observed in New Zealand waters." New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research, 36, 565-570.

Dwyer, D. (2000). "Two Model Pelédang: A study of lashed lug whaling boats from Lamalera,

Indonesia," BA (Hons), Northern Territory University, Darwin. Eckert, S. A., Dolar, L. L., Kooyman, G. L., Perrin, W., and Rahman, R. A. (2002a) "Movements

of whale sharks (Rhincodon typus) in South-east Asian waters as determined by satellite telemetry." Journal of Zoology, 257(1), 111-115.

Eckert, S. A., Dolar, L. L., Kooyman, G. L., Perrin, W., and Rahman, R. A. (2002b)

"Movements of whale sharks (Rhincodon typus) in South-east Asian waters as determined by satellite telemetry." Journal of Zoology, 257, 111-115.

Eckert, S. A., and Stewart, B. S. (2001) "Telemetry and satellite tracking of whale sharks,

Rhincodon typus, in the Sea of Cortez, Mexico, and the north Pacific Ocean." Environmental Biology of Fishes, 60(1-3), 299-308.

Endicott, K. M. (1970) An Analysis of Malay Magic, Oxford University Press, Singapore, 188pp Finley, K. J. (2001) "Natural history and conservation of the Greenland Whale, or Bowhead in

the northwest Atlantic." Arctic, 54(1), 55-76. Fowler, S. L. (2000) "Whale Shark (Rhincodon typus): policy and research scoping study."

Nature Conservation Bureau. Fox, J. J., and Sen, S. (2002) "A Study of Socio-Economic Issues Facing Traditional Indonesian

Fishers Who Access the MOU Box: A Report for Environment Australia, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies." Australian National University and FERM.

69

Fraser, D. J., Coon, T., Prince, M. R., Dion, R., and Bernatchez, L. (2006) "Integrating

traditional and evolutionary knowledge in biodiversity conservation: a population level case study." Ecology and Society [online], 11(2).

Gifford, A., Compagno, L. J. V., Levine, M., and Antoniou, A. (2007) "Satellite tracking of

whale sharks using tethered tags." Fisheries Research, 84(1), 17-24. Graham, R. T., and Roberts, C. M. (2007) "Assessing the size, growth rate and structure of a

seasonal population of whale sharks (Rhincodon typus Smith 1828) using conventional tagging and photo identification." Fisheries Research, 84(1), 71-80.

Gudger, E. W. (1940) "Whale sharks rammed by ocean vessels. How these sluggish leviathans

aid in their own destruction." New England Naturalist, 7, 1-10. Gunn, J. S., Stevens, J. D., Davis, T. L. O., and Norman, B. M. (1999) "Observations on the

short-term movements and behaviour of whale sharks (Rhincodon typus) at Ningaloo Reef, Western Australia." Marine Biology, 135(3), 553-559.

Hembree, E. D. (1980) "Biological Aspects of the Cetacean Fishery at Lamalera, Lembata."

World Wildlife Fund Project. Heyman, W. D., Graham, R. T., Kjerfve, B., and Johannes, R. E. (2001) "Whale sharks,

Rhincodon typus aggregate to feed on fish spawn in Belize." Marine Ecology-Progress Series, 215, 275-282.

Hsu, H.-H., Joung, S.-J., Liao, Y.-Y., and Liu, K.-M. (2007a) "Satellite tracking of juvenile

whale sharks, Rhincodon typus, in the Northwestern Pacific." Fisheries Research, 84(1), 25-31.

Hsu, H. H., Joung, S. J., Liao, Y. Y., and Liu, K. M. (2007b) "Satellite tracking of juvenile whale

sharks, Rhincodon typus, in the Northwestern Pacific." Fisheries Research, 84(1), 25-31. Huntington, H. P. (1998) "Observations on the utility of the semi-directive interview for

documenting traditional ecological knowledge." Arctic, 51(3), 237-42. Huntington, H. P., Communities of Buckland, Elim, Koyuk, Point Lay, and Shaktoolik. (1999)

"Traditional knowledge of the ecology of beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas) in the Eastern Chukchi and Northern Bering Seas, Alaska." Arctic, 52(1), 49-61.

Huntington, H. P., Suydam, R. S., and Rosenberg, D. (2004) "Traditional knowledge and

satellite tracking as complementary approaches to ecological understanding." Environmental Conservation, 31(3), 177-180.

Jarman, S. N., and Wilson, S. G. (2004) "DNA-based species identification of krill consumed by

whale sharks." Journal of Fish Biology, 65(2), 586-591. Johannes, R. E., and Yeeting, B. (2001) "I-Kiribati knowledge and management of Tarawa's

lagoon resources." Atoll Research Bulletin, 489, 1-24.

70

Jonahson, M., and Harding, S. (2007) "Occurrence of whale sharks (Rhincodon typus) in

Madagascar." Fisheries Research, 84(1), 132-135. Joung, S.-J., Chen, C.-T., Clark, E., Uchida, S., and Huang, W. Y. P. (1996) "The whale shark,

Rhincodon typus, is a livebearer: 300 embryos found in one 'megamamma' supreme." Environmental Biology of Fishes, '46(3), 219-223.

Lack, M., and Sant, G. (2006) "World shark catch, production and trade 1990-2003." Dept. of

the Environment and Heritage, Australian Government and TRAFFIC Oceania, Canberra, A.C.T.

López-Espinosa de los Monteros, R. (2002) "Evaluating ecotourism in natural protected areas of

La Paz Bay, Baja California Sur, Mexico: ecotourism or nature-based tourism?" Biodiversity and Conservation, 11(9), 1539-1550.

Maldives Whale Shark Expedition. (2006) "South Ari Atoll, Republic of Maldives: Site Fidelity

of Rhicodon typus to the Republic of Maldives." Maldives Whale Shark Expedition 2006 in Association with the Marine Research Centre Male,.

Mallory, M. L., Fontaine, A. J., Akearok, J. A., and Johnston, V. H. (2006) "Synergy of local

ecological knowledge, community involvement and scientific study to develop marine wildlife areas in eastern Arctic Canada." Polar Record, 42(222), 205-216.

Marine Conservation Society Seychelles. (2006) "Taiwan Whale Shark Fishery Closed -

Official." SAGREN: Seychelles Whale Shark Monitoring Newsletter Vol 4., No 4. Martin, R. A. (2007) "A review of behavioural ecology of whale sharks (Rhincodon typus)."

Fisheries Research, 84(1), 10-16. Meekan, M. G., Bradshaw, C. J. A., Press, M., McLean, C., Richards, A., Quasnichka, S., and

Taylor, J. G. (2006) "Population size and structure of whale sharks Rhincodon typus at Ningaloo Reef, Western Australia." Marine Ecology-Progress Series, 319, 275-285.

Moller, H., Berkes, F., Lyver, P. O. B., and Kislalioglu, M. (2004) "Combining Science and

Ecological Knowledge: Monitoring Populations for Co-management." Ecology and Science [online], 9(3), 2.

Mymrin, N. I., The Communities of Novoe Chaplino, Sireniki, Uelen and Yanrakinnot, and

Huntington, H. P. (1999) "Traditional Knowledge of the Ecology of Beluga Whales (Delphinapterus leucas) in the Northern Bering Sea, Chukotka, Russia." Arctic, 52(1), 62-70.

Nelson, J. D., and Eckert, S. A. (2007) "Foraging ecology of whale sharks (Rhincodon typus)

within Bahia de Los Angeles, Baja California Norte, Mexico." Fisheries Research, 84(1), 47-64.

NHT. (2005) "Whale Shark (Rhincodon typus) Recovery Plan Issues Paper." National Heritage

Trust, Department of the Environment and Heritage, Australian Government.

71

Norman, B. (2000) "Rhincodon typus. In: IUCN 2006. 2006 IUCN Red List of Threatened

Species." Norman, B. (2005) "The Whale Shark." MESA Information Sheet, Marine Education Society of

Australasia. Norman, B. M., and Stevens, J. D. (2007) "Size and maturity status of the whale shark

(Rhincodon typus) at Ningaloo Reef in Western Australia." Fisheries Research, 84(1), 81-86.

Orams, M. B. (2002) "Humpback Whales in Tonga: An Economic Resource for Tourism."

Coastal Management, 30(4), 361-380. Pauly, D. "Growth and mortality in basking shark Cetorhinus maximus, and their implications

for whale shark Rhincodon typus." Elasmobranch biodiversity: conservation and management. Proceedings of an International Seminar and Workshop held in Sabah, Malaysia., Sabah, Malaysia,2002, 199-208.

Pravin, P. (2000) "Whale Shark in the the Indian Coast - Need for Conservation." Current

Science, 79(3), 310-315. Quiros, A. (2005) "Whale Shark "Ecotourism" in the Philippines and Belize: Evaluating

conservation and community benefits." Tropical Resources Bulletin, 24, 42-48. Quiros, A. L. (2007) "Tourist compliance to a Code of Conduct and the resulting effects on

whale shark (Rhincodon typus) behavior in Donsol, Philippines." Fisheries Research, 84(1), 102-108.

Ramirez-Macias, D., Vazquez-Juarez, R., Galvan-Magana, F., and Munguia-Vega, A. (2007)

"Variations of the mitochondrial control region sequence in whale sharks (Rhincodon typus) from the Gulf of California, Mexico." Fisheries Research, 84(1), 87-95.

Rodriguez-Dowdell, N., Enriquez-Andrade, R., and Cardenas-Torres, N. (2007) "Property rights-

based management: Whale shark ecotourism in Bahia de los Angeles, Mexico." Fisheries Research, 84(1), 119-127.

Rowat, D. (2007) "Occurrence of whale shark (Rhincodon typus) in the Indian Ocean: A case for

regional conservation." Fisheries Research, 84(1), 96-101. Rowat, D., and Engelhardt, U. (2007) "Seychelles: A case study of community involvement in

the development of whale shark ecotourism and its socio-economic impact." Fisheries Research, 84(1), 109-113.

Rowat, D., and Gore, M. (2006) "Regional scale horizontal and local scale veritcal movements

of whale sharks in the Indian Ocean off Seychelles." Fisheries Research, 84, 32-40. Rowat, D., and Gore, M. (2007) "Regional scale horizontal and local scale vertical movements

of whale sharks in the Indian Ocean off Seychelles." Fisheries Research, 84(1), 32-40.

72

Rowat, D., Meekan, M. G., Engelhardt, U., Pardigon, B., and Vely, M. (2006) "Aggregations of

juvenile whale sharks (Rhincodon typus) in the Gulf of Tadjoura, Djibouti." Environmental Biology of Fishes.

Rowat, D., Meekan, M. G., Engelhardt, U., Pardigon, B., and Vely, M. (2007) "Aggregations of

juvenile whale sharks (Rhincodon typus) in the Gulf of Tadjoura, Djibouti." Environmental Biology of Fishes, 80(4), 465-472.

Rowat, D., Speed, C. W., Meekan, M., and Bradshaw, C. J. A. (in prep.) "Population and

apparent survival estimates of the Seychelles whale shark aggregation based on photo-identification."

Severin, T. (1999) In Search of Moby Dick: Quest for the white whale, Little, Brown and

Company (UK), London, 242pp Speed, C., Meekan, M., and Bradshaw, C. (2007) "Spot the match - wildlife photo-identification

using information theory." Frontiers in Zoology, 4(1), 2. Speed, C. W., Meekan, M. G., Rowat, D., Marshall, A. D., and Bradshaw, C. J. A. (In review-a)

"Scarring patterns and relative mortality rates of Indian Ocean whale sharks." Speed, C. W., Meekan, M. G., Russell, B., and Bradshaw, C. J. A. (In review-b) "First records of

strandings of whale sharks (Rhincodon typus) in Australia." Stacey, N. (2000) "Pearlers, Planes and People of the Sea: Early Bajo voyages to the north

Australian region." Bulletin of the Australian Institute of Maritime Archaeology, 24, 41-50.

Stacey, N. (2007) Boats to Burn: Bajo fishing activity in the Australian Fishing Zone. Asia-

Pacific Environment Monograph Series, ANU E Press, Canberra, http://epress.anu.edu.au/boats_citation.html

Stevens, J. D. (2007) "Whale shark (Rhincodon typus) biology and ecology: A review of the

primary literature." Fisheries Research, 84(1), 4-9. Taylor, J. G. (1996) "Seasonal occurrence, distribution and movements of the whale shark,

Rhincodon typus, at Ningaloo Reef, Western Australia." Marine and Freshwater Research, 47, 637-642.

Taylor, J. G. (2007) "Ram filter-feeding and nocturnal feeding of whale sharks (Rhincodon

typus) at Ningaloo Reef, Western Australia." Fisheries Research, 84(1), 65-70. Taylor, J. G., and Pearce, A. F. (1999) "Ningaloo Reef currents: Implications for coral spawn

dispersal, zooplankton and whale shark abundance." Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia, 82, 57-65.

Theberge, M. M., and Dearden, P. (2003) "An Approach to an Integrated Marine Fish

Monitoring Program - Mu Koh Surin Marine National Park, Thailand." Making Ecosystem Based Management Work: Connecting Managers and Researchers,

73

Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Science and Management of Protected Areas, 11-16, May 2003, Neil W.P. Munro, Phil Deardon, Tom B. Herman, Karen Beazley, and S. Bondrup-Nielsen, eds., SAMPAA, Wolfville, Nova Scotia, Canada.

Theberge, M. M., and Dearden, P. (2006) "Detecting a decline in whale shark Rhincodon typus

sightings in the Andaman Sea, Thailand, using ecotourist operator-collected data." Oryx, 40(3), 337-342.

Turnbull, S. D., and Randell, J. E. (2006a) "Rare occurrence of a Rhincodon typus (Whale shark)

in the Bay of Fundy, Canada." Northeastern Naturalist, 13(1), 57-58. Turnbull, S. D., and Randell, J. E. (2006b) "Rare occurrence of a Rhincodon typus (Whale shark)

in the Bay of Fundy, Canada." Northeastern Naturalist, 13, 57-58. Walpole, M. J., and Goodwin, H. J. (2001) "Local attitudes towards conservation and tourism

around Komodo National Park, Indonesia." Environmental Conservation, 28(2), 160-166. Walpole, M. J., and Leader-Williams, N. (2002) "Tourism and flagship species in conservation."

Biodiversity and Conservation, 11, 543-547. White, W. T., and Cavanagh, R. D. (2007) "Whale shark landings in Indonesian artisanal shark

and ray fisheries." Fisheries Research, 84(1), 128-131. Wilson, S. G., Polovina, J. J., Stewart, B. S., and Meekan, M. G. (2006a) "Movement of whale

sharks (Rhincodon typus) tagged at Ningaloo Reef, Western Australia." Marine Biology, 148, 1157-1166.

Wilson, S. G., Polovina, J. J., Stewart, B. S., and Meekan, M. G. (2006b) "Movements of whale

sharks (Rhincodon typus) tagged at Ningaloo Reef, Western Australia." Marine Biology, 148(5), 1157-1166.

Wilson, S. G., Taylor, J. G., and Pearce, A. F. (2001) "The seasonal aggregation of whale sharks

at Ningaloo reef, western Australia: currents, migrations and the El Nino/Southern oscillation." Environmental Biology of Fishes, 61(1), 1-11.

Wintner, S. P. (2000) "Preliminary Study of Vertebral Growth Rings in the Whale Shark,

Rhincodon typus, from the East Coast of South Africa." Environmental Biology of Fishes, 59(4), 441-451.

Young, E. H. (1999) "Balancing Conservation with Development in Small-Scale Fisheries: Is

Ecotourism an Empty Promise?" Human Ecology, 27(4), 581.