conservation benefits of interpretation on marine wildlife tours

This article was downloaded by: [Wilfrid Laurier University]On: 14 September 2013, At: 08:28Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Human Dimensions of Wildlife: AnInternational JournalPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uhdw20

Conservation Benefits of Interpretationon Marine Wildlife ToursHeather Zeppel a & Sue Muloin ba Tourism Program, School of Business, James Cook UniversityCairns, Cairns, Queensland, Australiab Equity Officer, James Cook University Cairns, Cairns, Queensland,AustraliaPublished online: 09 Jul 2008.

To cite this article: Heather Zeppel & Sue Muloin (2008) Conservation Benefits of Interpretation onMarine Wildlife Tours, Human Dimensions of Wildlife: An International Journal, 13:4, 280-294, DOI:10.1080/10871200802187105

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10871200802187105

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uhdw20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/10871200802187105

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10871200802187105

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

280

Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 13:280–294, 2008Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1087-1209 print / 1533-158X onlineDOI: 10.1080/10871200802187105

UHDW1087-12091533-158XHuman Dimensions of Wildlife, Vol. 13, No. 4, May 2008: pp. 1–31Human Dimensions of Wildlife

Conservation Benefits of Interpretation on Marine Wildlife Tours

Conservation Benefits of Marine Wildlife ToursH. Zeppel and S. Muloin HEATHER ZEPPEL1 AND SUE MULOIN2

1Tourism Program, School of Business, James Cook University Cairns, Cairns,Queensland, Australia2Equity Officer, James Cook University Cairns, Cairns, Queensland, Australia

Marine wildlife tours provide a range of education and conservation benefits for visitors.These benefits derive from interpretation programs and close personal encounters withmarine wildlife. Interpretive information covers the biology, ecology and behaviors ofmarine species, best practice guidelines, and human threats to marine life. There hasbeen limited assessment of interpretation on marine wildlife tours to identify whetherthese increase tourist knowledge and promote changes in environmental attitudes. Thisarticle reviews the educational benefits of guided marine wildlife experiences with dol-phins, whales, and marine turtles using Oram’s (1999) framework of outcome indica-tors to manage marine tourism. The key indicators assessed in this article areeducation/learning and attitude/belief changes in visitors that benefit marine wildlife.This analysis found tourist learning during mediated encounters with marine wildlifecontributes to pro-environmental attitudes and on-site behavior changes, with somelonger-term intentions to support and engage in marine conservation actions. Areas ofresearch are suggested to examine the causal links between wildlife interpretation andpro-environmental outcomes.

Keywords marine wildlife tours, interpretation, education benefits, environmentalattitudes, conservation actions

Marine wildlife tours provide a range of personal, education, and conservation benefits.The educational benefits of marine wildlife tours include visitor learning and knowledgefrom information presented about marine species and ocean environments. The conserva-tion benefits include increased protection of marine species and habitats. This article eval-uates the educational benefits of marine wildlife tourism experiences to identifyinterpretive programs that increase tourist knowledge, promoting attitude shifts that aidmarine conservation and help to conserve marine wildlife. It reviews the education bene-fits of guided marine wildlife experiences with dolphins, whales, and marine turtles usingOram’s (1999) framework of outcome indicators to manage marine tourism. The key indi-cators for tourists assessed in this article are education/learning and attitude/belief changesthat benefit marine species along with allied indicators of positive conservation outcomesfor the marine environment. This article analyzes whether tourist learning during mediatedencounters with marine wildlife contributes to pro-environmental attitudes and behaviorchanges. Case studies focus on tourist experiences of whale- and dolphin-watching toursin Australia and New Zealand, whale watching in the United States and marine turtleencounters in Australia.

Address correspondence to Dr. Heather Zeppel, School of Business, James Cook University,P.O. Box 6811, Cairns, Queensland, 4870 Australia. E-mail: [email protected]

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Wilf

rid

Lau

rier

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:28

14

Sept

embe

r 20

13

Conservation Benefits of Marine Wildlife Tours 281

Marine Wildlife Tours

Marine wildlife tourism is defined as “any tourist activity with the primary purpose ofwatching, studying or enjoying marine wildlife” (Masters, 1998). It includes marine wild-life watching holidays; wildlife boat trips in marine or estuarine areas; guided island orcoastal walks; observing marine life from land viewpoints; visiting marine or coastalnature reserves; participating in a marine life study tour or conservation holiday; and visit-ing marine wildlife visitor centers and marine aquaria. This article focuses on mobile free-ranging marine animals such as whales, dolphins, sea turtles, and penguins. Marine mam-mals, in particular, are a key tourism attraction (Beasley, 1997; Birtles, Valentine, &Curnock, 2001; Stokes, Dobbs & Recchia, 2002; Duffus & Dearden, 1993; Higham &Lusseau, 2004; Orams, 2003, 2005; Muloin, 1998; Samuels et al., 2003; Valentine et al.,2004). Popular marine mammals include dolphins (Orams, 1997a, 1997b), whales andporpoise (i.e., cetaceans); dugong and manatee (Sorice, Shafer, & Ditton, 2006); and sealsand sea lions (i.e., pinnipeds) (Barton et al., 1998; Booth, 1998; Kirkwood et al., 2003;Scarpaci, Nugegoda, & Corkeron, 2005). Other marine wildlife of tourist interest includeswhale sharks and other shark species (Birtles et al., 1996; Davis et al., 1997; Davis et al.,2000; Dobson, 2006); fish and rays (Lewis & Newsome, 2003); sea turtles (Macgregor,2006; Tisdell & Wilson, 2001a, 2001b; Wilson & Tisdell, 2001); and penguins, albatross,gannet, and other seabirds. Worldwide, 500,000 divers a year now feed, photograph, andswim with sharks (Topelko & Dearden, 2005). Nesting or rookery areas for seabirds andmarine turtles (Higham, 1998, 2001; Schanzel & McIntosh, 2000; Tisdell & Wilson,2002) and haul-out areas for seals and sea lions (Orsini & Newsome, 2005) also attractvisitors. In Australia in 1999, there were over 70 marine species targeted for marine tour-ism, from whales (e.g., humpback, southern right, and dwarf minke), dolphins, turtles, sealions and seals, to penguins, fish, sharks (e.g., reef, grey nurse, great white, and whalesharks), rays, sea dragons, and cuttlefish (Birtles et al., 2001). A survey of 376 marinetourism operators in New Zealand found viewing marine wildlife was a key attraction,focusing on marine mammals (44%, with 22% on dolphins), sea birds (42%), fish (30%),penguins (18%), and other marine wildlife (16%) (McKegg, Probert, Baird, & Bell, 1998).

Interpretation on Marine Wildlife Tours

Environmental interpretation is often promoted as a key element of sustainable visitor inter-actions with wildlife (Blanchard, 1995; Foxlee, 2001; Moscardo, 1998; Orams, 1994, 1995a,1995b, 1996a; Orams & Hill, 1998; Ham & Weiler, 2002; Moscardo, Woods, & Saltzer,2004, Russell & Hobson, 2002; Schaenzel, 1998; Woods & Moscardo, 2003). Interpretationactivities or education programs in marine areas involve talks by tour guides, interpreters,and rangers onboard boats or at shorelines, along with visitor centers, displays, signs, andbrochures. This information covers the biology, ecology, and behaviors of marine species,best practice guidelines, and threats to marine life. Visitor benefits from interpretation ofmarine wildlife tourism experiences can include enhanced educational and conservation out-comes (Andersen & Miller, 2006; Ballantyne, Packer, & Hughes, 2006; Finkler & Higham,2004; Heckel, 2001; Higham, 1998; Hughes & Saunders, 2005; Luck, 2003; Madin &Fenton, 2004; Mayes, Dyer, & Richins, 2004; Muloin, 1998; Orams, 2000; Schanzel &McIntosh, 2000; Tisdell & Wilson, 2005; Townsend, 2008). The personal benefits of view-ing and learning about wildlife are the basis for conservation actions (Manfredo & Driver,2002). On-site benefits of increased understanding or emotional responses to marine wildlifeencounters (Schanzel, 2004) may also lead to off-site benefits such as greater environmental

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Wilf

rid

Lau

rier

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:28

14

Sept

embe

r 20

13

282 H. Zeppel and S. Muloin

awareness, supporting nature conservation work, and protecting endangered species(Amante-Helweg, 1996; Gralton, Sinclair, & Purnell, 2004; Orams, 1997b; Wilson &Tisdell, 2003). This article explores the links between interpretation programs and educa-tional benefits for visitors on selected marine wildlife tours. The impacts of wildlife interpre-tation on the environmental attitudes and conservation actions of visitors are also examined.

Framework for Managing Marine Wildlife Tourism Experiences

This article follows the framework devised by Orams (1995c, 1999) that measures posi-tive changes in both tourists and the marine environment for effective management ofmarine tourism (Table 1). Indicators of tourist benefits from marine animal encountersinclude enjoyment and learning contributing to pro-environmental attitude and behaviorchanges, along with conservation benefits for marine environments and marine wildlife.Indicators of conservation benefits include tourists reducing wildlife disturbance, protect-ing habitats, and aiding the viability of marine ecosystems. The framework by Orams(1999) was based on a previous model of experiential education in whale watching ecot-ourism programs in Hawaii (Forestell, 1993; Forestell & Kauffman, 1990). This modelfocused on the cognitive states or learning of visitors using interpretation in marinesettings to reduce impacts and promote pro-environmental behaviors on whale-watchingtours. Luck (2003) evaluated the key role of interpretation on swim with dolphin tours inNew Zealand, based on models by Forestell and Kaufmann (1990) and Orams (1997b).Orams (1999) extended the three-step experiential education sequence of Forestell (1993)into a four-stage sequence of desirable tourist outcomes from marine education programs(Table 1). Mayes, Dyer, and Richins (2004) also adopt a model based on changing atti-tudes, beliefs, behaviors, and actions through wildlife interaction and interpretation withbenefits for animals, the environment, and visitors. This article applies Oram’s (1999) keyoutcome indicators of education/learning and attitude/belief change in visitors to reviewthe educational and conservation benefits of interpretation on marine wildlife tours.

Educational Benefits of Marine Wildlife Tours

The educational benefits of marine wildlife tours include visitor learning, knowledge, andnew information presented about marine species and marine or coastal environments. Positive

Table 1Indicators for managing marine wildlife tourism

experiences

Tourist1) Satisfaction/enjoyment2) Education/learning3) Attitude/belief change4) Behavior/lifestyle change

Marine environment1) Minimize disturbance2) Improve habitat protection

Contribute to long-term health & viability of ecosystem

Source: Orams (1995c, 1999).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Wilf

rid

Lau

rier

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:28

14

Sept

embe

r 20

13


visitor interactions with wildlife lead to mindful, satisfied, and conservation-oriented visitors(Moscardo, Woods, & Greenwood, 2001; Moscardo et al., 2004; Woods & Moscardo, 2003;Zeppel & Muloin, 2008). A survey of 5,000 visitors at 15 wildlife sites in Australia and NewZealand found a knowledgeable guide (19%) and wildlife information (18%) were strongsupporting factors to the close viewing of unique wildlife species behaving naturally in natu-ral areas (Moscardo & Saltzer, 2004). A survey of 96 wildlife tour operators in Australiafound half (53%) considered education an important factor in protecting wildlife, with 36%relying on information from scientists (Rodger, Moore, & Newsome, 2007).

Education and Learning Changes

Educational experiences were important for visitors on dwarf minke whale tours in thenorthern Great Barrier Reef; at the Mon Repos turtle rookery in central Queensland; andon swim with dolphin tours in New Zealand (Table 2). On the dwarf minke whale tours,14% of visitors stated that learning about dwarf minke whales and marine life on the GreatBarrier Reef, the educational experience and research conducted about these whales werehighlights (Birtles et al., 2002). At Mon Repos, visitors learned about sea turtles at a visi-tor center display and during interpretive talks on the beach about turtle egg laying orturtle hatchlings. This included knowledge about the life cycle of turtles, their need forprotection and current threats to sea turtles (Tisdell & Wilson, 2002, 2005). Luck (2003)found that, whereas most visitors on swim with dolphin tours increased their knowledge ofdolphins and wildlife (66–69%), both in general and from tour staff, only 29% stronglyagreed the dolphin tour was an educational experience. One dolphin operator did not havea guide onboard and most visitors required more interpretation about dolphins, the marineenvironment, and threats to wildlife (Luck, 2003). Visitors on whale watch tours inHervey Bay, Queensland, also wanted more information about the marine environment(Foxlee, 2001). Interpreters or scientists educate visitors about cetacean biology andmarine conservation issues onboard many whale and dolphin watching boats (Andersen &Miller, 2006; Birtles et al., 2002; Muloin, 1998; Russell & Hobson, 2002).

On wild dolphin feeding talks in Queensland, Australia, visitor knowledge about dolphinsincreased by 81% at Tangalooma Resort on Moreton Island and by 47% at the small seasidetown of Tin Can Bay (Mayes et al., 2004). The educational benefits for visitors of the dolphininterpretation and feeding interaction program at Tangalooma Resort have been well docu-mented by Orams (1994, 1995b, 1996b, 1997a,b, 1999; Orams & Hill, 1998). The siteincludes a Dolphin Education Center and a ranger giving nightly talks about dolphin biologyand behavior to both dolphin feeders and observers. Learning about the dolphins at Tanga-looma motivated Australian tourists, whereas Japanese tourists wanted to touch and physicallyinteract with dolphins. Language barriers also impeded the Japanese visitors from understand-ing the dolphin-feeding program or from adopting more environmentally responsible behav-iors (Takei, 1998). Beasley (1997) found visitors on dolphin tours in Akaroa (New Zealand)had short-term increases in their knowledge of marine mammals and ocean ecosystems. Some55% of tourists swimming with wild dolphins at Bunbury, Western Australia, agreed that therequired pre-tour educational talk reduced inappropriate behaviors such as trying to touch orfollow the dolphins (O’Neill, Barnard, & Lee, 2004). On Penguin Island (Western Australia),visitors learned about penguins, sea lions, and the marine ecology of the area from informationon signs, displays, pamphlets, and talks by rangers at a visitor center that houses orphaned orinjured little penguins. Rangers feed the penguins and give scheduled talks about their biologyand behavior. All tourists increased their knowledge of penguins after visiting this centre from55% (pre-visit) to between 69% and 74% (post-visit) (Hughes & Saunders, 2005).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Wilf

rid

Lau

rier

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:28

14

Sept

embe

r 20

13


Table 2Educational experiences and visitor learning on marine wildlife tours

Educational experiencesTotal

themes*%

Response

Dwarf minke whale tours QLD (Birtles et al., 2002)*More informed about minke whales 21 4.5More informed about Reef (GBR) and marine life 15 3.2Increased interest in info on (minke) whales—want to

learn more9 1.9

A learning/educational experience (non specific) 9 1.9More informed about/by research 8 1.7Increased interest in info on marine life—want to learn more 4 0.9Interested in recent discovery of species 1 0.2Learned/understood whale watching guidelines 1 0.2Total-YES-Educational 68 14.6

Mon Repos Conservation Park QLD (Tisdell & Wilson, 2002)^Sea turtle viewing informative and educational 514 99Sea turtle visitor center display 93Interpretive talks (turtle hatchling behavior) 90Interpretive talks (egg-laying process) 87Life cycles of sea turtles 85Need to protect sea turtles 82Information on current threats to sea turtles# 78Amphitheatre 76Visitor awareness of threats to sea turtles—additional

information282 54

Visitor awareness of threats to sea turtles—first time 163 31Swim with dolphin tours NZ (Luck, 2003)+

Teach school courses on conservation of natural resources 72Dolphin tour staff had good knowledge of dolphins 69Learn new things/increase my knowledge (general) 66Learn as much as we can about wildlife 66Enjoy learning about wildlife on holidays 46Dolphin tour was an educational experience 29Learned a lot about dolphins on this tour 17Learned a lot about other marine life 5

Notes: *Represents total coded themes or elements, not numbers of respondents. Total number ofcoded themes/elements = 466.

^Reason to visit Mon Repos: Watch sea turtles (78%), study sea turtles (11%), entertain visitors(9%), other (2%).

+Responses to “Strongly agree” only; n = 733 questionnaires from 3 swim with dolphin tour oper-ators (New Zealand).

#Subscribe to a newsletter with updates on sea turtle conservation work, form a ‘friends of seaturtles’ group, more access to (translated) material on sea turtles, current threats and conservationmeasure, ban photography.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Wilf

rid

Lau

rier

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:28

14

Sept

embe

r 20

13


Attitude and Belief Changes

Several studies suggest that marine wildlife tours with a strong educational focus canchange the pro-environmental attitudes and beliefs of visitors (Christensen, Rowe, &Needham, 2007; Finkler & Higham, 2004; Luck, 2003; Muloin, 1998; Tisdell & Wilson,2002). Table 3 summarizes the changes in the environmental attitudes of visitors on whaleand dolphin tours. On swim with dwarf minke whale tours on the Great Barrier Reef, 27%of tourists changed their attitudes to conservation, displaying a greater awareness ofwhales, marine life, whaling, and other human impacts (Birtles et al., 2002). In the UnitedStates, land-based whale watchers were more concerned than boat tourists about theimpacts of noise, boats and kayaks on killer whales (Finkler & Higham, 2004). Tourists’desire for close encounters, then, was matched by awareness of their impacts on whales. Asurvey of 229 land-based whale watchers in Oregon, USA, found that visitors who spokewith volunteer whale interpreters at key coastal viewing points expressed stronger agree-ment with protecting whales and awareness that human actions affected whales andmarine areas (Christensen et al., 2007). A survey of 236 whale watchers in Scotland founda high level of environmental awareness, with 83% recycling items, 46% were membersof environmental or animal organizations, and 27% did voluntary environmental work(Rawles & Parsons, 2005).

Visitors on wild dolphin feeding tours at Tin Can Bay and Tangalooma Resort feltmore strongly about conservation (81%), the state of marine areas (66%), and helping outwith conservation programs (52%) after their dolphin experience (Mayes et al., 2004).They also disagreed with dolphins in captivity (59%) and indigenous people huntingdolphins (68% of Australians) whereas 9% also disagreed with the practice of feedingwild dolphins (Mayes et al., 2004). At the Penguin Experience visitor center (WA), rang-ers feed orphaned or injured little penguins and give scheduled interpretive talks abouttheir biology. All visitors had more pro-environmental attitudes after this experience.Exploration-focused visitors held an attitude of responsible conservation based on intrin-sic natural values of the area, while recreation-focused visitors moved toward attitudesthat valued nature based on its usefulness to humans (Hughes & Saunders, 2005). A sur-vey of 1,617 whale watch visitors at three locations around Vancouver Island, Canada,found that “novice-generalist” visitors required interpretation about whale ecology andmarine habitat issues, whereas “expert-specialist” visitors were more receptive tobroader marine conservation messages (Malcolm & Duffus, 2002). Education, then, is akey element of managing tourist-wildlife interactions, with the positive outcomes ofchanging environmental attitudes and the potential to reduce visitor impacts on wildlife(Higginbottom & Tribe, 2004; Higham & Carr, 2003; Orams, 1995b; O’Neill et al.,2004; Schaenzel, 1998).

Discussion

This article identified a range of education and conservation benefits for visitors onmarine wildlife tours. The on-site benefits of increased understanding or emotionalresponses to marine wildlife encounters can lead to off-site benefits such as greaterenvironmental awareness, supporting nature conservation work and protecting endan-gered species. Empirical studies about the effect of interpretation on marine wildlifetourism experiences were assessed against the framework devised by Orams (1995c,1999) measuring positive changes in both tourists and the marine environment. Touristbenefits from marine animal encounters include enjoyment and learning contributing to

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Wilf

rid

Lau

rier

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:28

14

Sept

embe

r 20

13


Table 3Changes in environmental/conservation attitudes on whale and dolphin tours

Environmental/conservation attitudesTotal

themes* % Response

Dwarf minke whale tours QLD (Birtles et al., 2002)*Greater awareness/concern/appreciation of

(marine) life/nature48 10.3

Increased/reinforced conservation awareness 28 6.0Greater awareness/concern/appreciation of whales 27 5.8Greater awareness of whaling issues 9 1.9Increased awareness of human impacts on marine

life/nature6 1.3

Greater awareness of need for whale watching guidelines

3 0.6

Greater awareness of need for sustainable ecotour-ism

2 0.4

Greater awareness/appreciation of impacts of humans on whales

2 0.4

Aware that wildlife needn’t be touched/fed to be enjoyed

2 0.4

Increased awareness of effects of human coastal development

1 0.2

Greater awareness of natural resource exploitation 1 0.2Total – YES – Conservation Attitudes 129 27.7

Killer whale watching USA (Finkler & Higham, 2004) (land-based/boat-based)Effects of noise on whales 74/54Power boats placed in the path of whales 73/56Disturbance of whales by (other) power boats 69/52Impacts of kayaks approaching whales 27/18

Dolphin feeding QLD (Mayes, Dyer, & Richins, 2004)+

Felt more strongly about conservation of the environment generally

81

Felt they could make more of a difference to the state of the (marine) environment

66–67

Felt more confident in assisting with conservation programs

52

Disagreed with indigenous people hunting dolphins (International visitors/Australians)

30/68

Disagreed with keeping dolphins in aquariums 59Disagreed with feeding wild dolphins 9

Notes: *Represents total coded themes or elements, not numbers of respondents. Total number ofcoded themes/elements = 466.

*Total: Yes—Conservation Attitudes (27.7%), Yes—Educational (14.6%), Yes—PersonalExperience (10.1%), Yes—Other (14.4%), No (33.3%). Questionnaires n=527 from 52 trips on 5live-aboard dive boats in 1999/2000.

+n = 105 questionnaires (54 Tangalooma, 51 Tin Can Bay) for visitors feeding wild dolphins.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Wilf

rid

Lau

rier

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:28

14

Sept

embe

r 20

13


pro-environmental attitude and behavior changes, and the longer-term intention toengage in conservation actions that benefit marine wildlife and environments. Marinewildlife tours with a strong educational focus and interpretation program can create atti-tude, behavior, or lifestyle changes in visitors (Ballantyne, Packer, & Bond, 2007). Thisreview of visitor benefits from guided encounters with marine wildlife supports theframework developed by Orams (1999) for managing marine tourism experiences andthe experiential education sequence model in marine ecotourism programs (Forestell,1993). The learning benefits obtained from information about marine wildlife rein-forced the emotional benefits of directly experiencing marine animals in their naturalhabitats. There is some evidence that education benefits and visitor satisfaction differaccording to gender, level of previous experience (Neil, Orams, & Baglioni, 1996;Muloin, 1998) and type of wildlife encounter such as boat, land-based, or in-wateractivities with marine life (Birtles et al., 2002; Finkler & Higham, 2004). The level ofrecreational involvement or specialization, intensity, and emotional aspects of marineexperiences can also influence environmental behaviors (Thapa, Graefe, & Meyer,2005, 2006) and receptiveness to marine conservation messages (Malcolm & Duffus,2002). Whale watch visitors with a strong biocentric orientation may already be moreinclined to participate in interpretation programs to learn about marine wildlife issues(Christensen et al., 2007).

Quality educational experiences are important for visitors to increase their short-term knowledge of marine species. Marine wildlife tours with a strong educationalfocus changed the pro-environmental attitudes, beliefs, and behavior of visitors. Onwhale and dolphin tours, tourists changed their attitudes to conservation, displaying agreater knowledge of cetaceans and awareness of threats to marine life (Christensenet al., 2007; Finkler & Higham, 2004; Luck, 2003; Mayes et al., 2004; Muloin, 1998).Other changes in the personal behavior of visitors on a guided tour of turtle nestingbeaches at Jurabi included better overall adherence to minimal impact guidelines duringthe Jurabi turtle experience (Smith, 2006). On-site signs at the turtle nesting beaches inJurabi Coastal Park and a brochure also outlined tourist behavior near turtles. Observa-tions of 96 groups of unguided tourists over three months at Jurabi Park found 77% ofvisitors breached at least one component in the turtle code of conduct such as shiningtorches, not saying behind or being within three meters of a nesting turtle and walkingbelow the high tide mark (Waayers, Newsome, & Lee, 2006). In contrast, the structuredinterpretive programs for visitors interacting with sea turtles at Mon Repos and dolphinsat Tangalooma Resort in Queensland reduced wildlife disturbance and influenced par-ticipants to adopt short-term pro-environmental behaviors (up to 4 months later) such ascleaning up beaches, recycling, and donating money to wildlife groups (Mayes et al.,2004; Tisdell & Wilson, 2002, 2005). Other conservation benefits were enhanced appre-ciation of marine wildlife and engaging in actions to reduce human threats or impacts onwildlife (Howard, 2000). A post-visit survey of 140 visitors at Mon Repos 6 monthslater also found support for behaviors supporting wildlife conservation (18%) and spe-cific actions such as donating money and taking about conservation matters (9%)(Ballantyne, Packer, Hughes, & Dierking, 2007). Close proximity to marine wildlifeduring in-water encounters, near nesting turtles or shore-based feeding interactions withdolphins magnified these environmental and personal benefits. The level or intensity ofthe encounter with marine wildlife needed to change tourist attitudes was linked todirect, close contact with animals more so than passive viewing from a boat or on land.The quality of marine wildlife interpretation also influenced conservation outcomes andother environmentally responsible behaviors as reported by visitors. Therefore, visitor

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Wilf

rid

Lau

rier

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:28

14

Sept

embe

r 20

13


interactions with marine wildlife on guided tours increased environmental awareness,changed attitudes, and modified on-site and some longer-term beneficial conservationbehaviors.

These personal, educational, and conservation benefits for visitors, however, depend onsound management of marine animal encounters and interpretation programs that integrateknowledge with the emotional aspects of observing marine wildlife. The level of visitors’commitment to marine wildlife conservation related to impacts on their knowledge, atti-tudes, and then behaviors. The personal impact of viewing marine turtles on nestingbeaches at Mon Repos and caring about their conservation related to knowledge and interest(75–100%), understanding and attitude toward turtles (70–74%), general attitudes towardwildlife and nature conservation (52–67%) and personal beliefs (34%) (Ballantyne et al.,2007). The benefits for participants on marine wildlife tours are realized when the affec-tive (emotional) benefits and excitement of seeing unique marine life are integrated withthe cognitive (education) benefits of learning new facts about marine wildlife. Thus, edu-cational entertainment in marine life interpretation needs to include both cognitive andaffective aspects of experiential learning (Howard, 2000; Schanzel, 2004). Visitor learn-ing for fun and enjoyment during leisure activities is an important part of tourism experi-ences (Packer, 2006). Hence, marine wildlife interactions that involve making personalconnections with marine animals in a learning context can provide a range of conservationand educational benefits. Marine wildlife tourism experiences that increase both environ-mental awareness and positive feelings in visitors are more likely to generate environmen-tal actions resulting in conservation benefits for marine wildlife.

Further Research

Further research is required on the causal links between marine interpretation programsand the conservation benefits deriving from guided marine wildlife experiences. Much ofthe research on marine wildlife tourism is site or species specific, focused on biologicalimpacts, and is limited to one type of encounter. Visitors at aquariums and seaworld parksneed to be surveyed about the conservation and education benefits of marine wildlifeencounters at these captive sites (Adelman, Falk, & James, 2000; Ballantyne, 2007;Ballantyne et al., 2007; Evans, 1997; Saltzer, 2001; Spotte & Clark, 2004). The environmen-tal attitudes of marine visitors in regard to whale watching and commercial or subsistencewhaling also require further investigation (Higham & Lusseau, 2007a,b; Orams, 2001),along with cross-cultural attitudes to wildlife conservation in marine tourism settings(Kellert, 1991; Takei, 1998; Teel, Manfredo, & Stinchfield, 2007). The conservationattitudes and behavior of staff and operators of marine wildlife tours also need furtherexamination (Evans, 1997; Groff, Lockhart, Ogden, & Dierking, 2005), in addition to thekey role of scientists in providing information to tour operators and monitoring wildlife(Rodgers et al., 2007). The content and effectiveness of marine conservation messages fornovice and specialist marine wildlife tourists needs to be assessed at different sites(Christensen et al., 2007; Malcom & Duffus, 2002). Developing a standard set of mea-surements to assess the impact of interpretive programs on visitors would extend theapplication of Oram’s (1999) framework. These could identify which interpretive tech-niques lead visitors from knowledge/learning to attitude/belief changes that affect conserva-tion awareness and pro-environmental behaviors. Standard indicators are the basis ofenvironmental management planning tools to sustainably manage visitor impacts (Wight,1998). Longer-term studies also need to measure ongoing actual conservation actions ofvisitors one to five years after marine wildlife interactions, beyond self-reported intentions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Wilf

rid

Lau

rier

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:28

14

Sept

embe

r 20

13


to act environmentally. The wildlife experience itself in a scenic natural area may heightenvisitor concern and appreciation for marine wildlife but behavioral changes may not alwaysensue. This more in-depth evaluation of educational programs in marine wildlife tourismexperiences will reinforce the types of interpretive experiences and settings that increasetourist knowledge, change environmental attitudes, and aid conservation actions.

Conclusions

Close personal encounters with selected marine wildlife, especially marine mammals, pro-vide a range of personal, educational, and conservation benefits for visitors. Marine wild-life interpretation programs that highlight species biology and human impacts can alsoinfluence visitor attitudes, beliefs, and conservation outcomes. These mediated encounterson marine wildlife tours motivate visitors to respect marine life; foster environmentallyresponsible attitudes and behaviors; and benefit marine conservation. Linking affectiveand cognitive responses to marine wildlife increases environmental awareness; changesvisitor attitudes, modifies intentions to act pro-environmentally; and fosters conservationappreciation and actions by tourists. Personal benefits for visitors also depend on theintensity and frequency of tourist encounters with marine wildlife and the type of learningexperience provided. Visitors differ in their desired mix of personal, educational, and con-servation benefits. Therefore, visitor benefits of interpretation, and the overall structure ofwildlife encounters, need to be considered by the managers and operators of marine wild-life tourism experiences. Effective marine interpretation programs need to engage visitorsand deliver conservation messages about marine animals and ecosystems while also man-aging the visitor desire for close interaction with marine wildlife. The causal linksbetween interpretation and environmental outcomes require further investigation.

References

Adelman, L., Falk, J. H., & James, S. (2000). Assessing the National Aquarium in Baltimore’simpact on visitors’ conservation, knowledge, attitudes and behavior. Curator, 43(1), 33–61.

Amante-Helweg, V. (1996). Ecotourists’ beliefs and knowledge about dolphins and the developmentof cetacean ecotourism. Aquatic Mammals, 22, 131–140.

Andersen, M. S., & Miller, M. L. (2006.) Onboard marine environmental education: Whale watch-ing in the San Juan Islands, Washington. Tourism in Marine Environments, 2(2), 111–118.

Ballantyne, R. (2007). Post-visit ‘action resourcing’: Promoting and supporting visitor adoption ofenvironmentally sustainable behaviours. In I. McDonnell, S. Grabowski, & R. March (Eds.),Proceedings of the CAUTHE 2007 Conference: Tourism-past achievements, future challenges.Sydney: University of Technology Sydney [CD-ROM].

Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Hughes, K. (2006). Designing “Jonah” experiences: Developingvisitor conservation learning through whale watching. In Conference program: The 2ndAustralian Wildlife Tourism Conference, 13–15 August 2006 (p. 28). Perth, WA: PromacoConventions.

Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Bond, N. (2007). The impact of a wildlife tourism experience on visi-tors’ conservation knowledge, attitudes and behaviour: Preliminary results from Mon Reposturtle rookery, Queensland. In I. McDonnell, S. Grabowski, & R. March (Eds.), Proceedings ofthe CAUTHE 2007 Conference: Tourism-Past Achievements, Future Challenges. Sydney: Uni-versity of Technology Sydney [CD-ROM].

Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., Hughes, K., & Dierking, L. D. (2007). Conservation learning in wildlifetourism settings: Lessons from research in zoos and aquariums. Environmental EducationResearch, 13(3), 367–383.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Wilf

rid

Lau

rier

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:28

14

Sept

embe

r 20

13


Barton, K., Booth, K., Ward, J., Simmons, D. G., & Fairweather, J. R. (1998). Tourist and NewZealand fur seal interactions along the Kaikoura coast. Tourism Research and Education CentreReport No. 9. New Zealand: Lincoln University.

Beasley, I. (1997). Marine mammal tourism: Educational implications and legislation. Diploma ofWildlife Management thesis, University of Otago, Dunedin.

Birtles, A., Cuthill, M., Valentine, P., & Davis, D. (1996) Incorporating research on visitor experiencesinto ecologically sustainable management of whale shark tourism. In H. Richins, J. Richardson, &A. Crabtree (Eds.), Taking the next steps: Ecotourism Association of Australia Conference Pro-ceedings (pp. 195–202). Brisbane: Ecotourism Association of Australia.

Birtles, A., Valentine, P., & Curnock, M. (2001). Tourism based on free-ranging marine life:Opportunities and responsibilities. Wildlife Tourism Research Report No. 11. Gold Coast: CRCfor Sustainable Tourism.

Birtles, A., Valentine, P., Curnock, M., Arnold, P., & Dunstan, A. (2002). Incorporating visitorexperiences into ecologically sustainable Dwarf Minke Whale tourism in the northern GreatBarrier Reef. Technical Report No. 42. Townsville: CRC Reef Research Centre.

Blanchard, K. A. (1995). Seabird conservation on the north shore of the Gulf of St. Lawrence,Canada: The effects of education on attitudes and behaviour towards a marine resource. In J.Palmer, W. Goldstein, & A. Curnow (Eds.), Planning education to care for the earth (pp. 39–50).Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

Booth, K. (1998). The tourist experience of New Zealand fur seals along the Kaikoura coast,New Zealand. In J. Kandampully (Ed.), New Zealand Tourism and Hospitality Research Confer-ence 1998: Advances in Research Part 2. Canterbury: Lincoln University.

Christensen, A., Rowe, S., & Needham, M. D. (2007). Value orientations, awareness of conse-quences, and participation in a whale watching education program in Oregon. Human Dimen-sions of Wildlife, 12, 289–293.

Davis, D., Banks, S., Birtles, A., Valentine, P., & Cuthill, M. (1997). Whale sharks in NingalooMarine Park: Managing tourism in an Australian marine protected area. Tourism Management,18(5), 259–271.

Davis, D., Banks, S., Birtles, A., Valentine, P., & Cuthill, M. (2000). Whale sharks in NingalooMarine Park: Managing tourism in an Australian marine protected area. In C. Ryan & S.Page (Eds.), Tourism management: Towards the new millennium (pp. 281–299). Oxford:Pergamon.

Dobson, J. (2006.) Sharks, wildlife tourism, and state regulation. Tourism in Marine Environments,3(1), 15–23.

Duffus, D. A., & Dearden, P. (1993). Recreational use, valuation, and management of killer whales(Orcinus orca) on Canada’s Pacific coast. Environmental Conservation, 20(2), 149–156.

Evans, K. L. (1997). Aquaria and marine environmental education. Aquarium Sciences and Conser-vation, 1, 239–250.

Finkler, W., & Higham, J. (2004). The human dimensions of whale watching: An analysis based onviewing platforms. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 9(2), 103–117.

Forestell, P. H. (1993). If leviathan has a face, does Gaia have a soul?: Incorporating environmentaleducation in marine eco-tourism programs. Ocean & Coastal Management, 20, 267–282.

Forestell, P. H., & Kaufman, G. D. (1990). The history of whalewatching in Hawaii and its role inenhancing visitor appreciation for endangered species. In M. L. Miller & J. Auyong (Eds.), Pro-ceedings of the 1990 Congress on Coastal and Marine Tourism Vol. 11 (pp. 399–407). Newport,OR: National Coastal Resources Research & Development Institute.

Foxlee, J. (2001.) Whale watching at Hervey Bay. Parks and Leisure Australia, 4(3), 17–18.Gralton, A., Sinclair, M., & Purnell, K. (2004). Changes in attitudes, beliefs and behaviour: A criti-

cal review of research into the impacts of environmental education initiatives. Australian Journalof Environmental Education, 20(2), 41–52.

Groff, A., Lockhart, D., Ogden, J., & Dierking, L. D. (2005). An exploratory study of the effect ofworking in an environmentally themed facility on the conservation-related knowledge, attitudesand behavior of staff. Environmental Education Research, 11(3), 371–387.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Wilf

rid

Lau

rier

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:28

14

Sept

embe

r 20

13


Ham, S., & Weiler, B. (2002). Interpretation as the centerpiece of sustainable wildlife tourism. In R.Harris, T. Griffin, & P. Williams (Eds.), Sustainable tourism: A global perspective (pp. 35–44).Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Heckel, G. (2001). Workshop on sustainable tourism and whale watching in America: A Baja-to-Bering case study. Journal of Environment & Development, 10(3), 290–295.

Higginbottom, K., & Tribe, A. (2004). Contributions of wildlife tourism to conservation. InK. Higginbottom (Ed.), Wildlife tourism: Impacts, management and planning (pp. 99–123).Altona, Victoria: Common Ground/Sustainable Tourism CRC.

Higham, J. E. S. (1998). Tourists and albatrosses: The dynamics of tourism at the Northern Royalalbatross colony, Taiaroa Head, New Zealand. Tourism Management, 19(6), 521–531.

Higham, J. E. S. (2001). Managing ecotourism at Taiaroa Head Royal Albatross colony. In M.Shackley (Ed.), Flagship species: Case studies in wildlife tourism management (pp. 17–31).Burlington, VT: The International Ecotourism Society.

Higham, J. E., & Carr, A. M. (2003). Sustainable wildlife tourism in New Zealand: An analysis ofvisitor experiences. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 8, 25–36.

Higham, J., & Lusseau, D. (2004). Ecological impacts and management of tourist engagements withmarine mammals. In R. Buckley (Ed.), Environmental impacts of ecotourism (pp. 171–186).Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing.

Higham, J. E. S., & Lusseau, D. (2007a). Urgent need for empirical research into whaling and whalewatching. Conservation Biology, 21(2), 554–558.

Higham, J. E. S., & Lusseau, D. (2007b). Slaughtering the goose that lays the golden egg: Are whal-ing and whale-watching mutually exclusive? Current Issues in Tourism, 11(1), 63–74.

Howard, J. (2000). Research in progress: Does environmental interpretation influence behaviourthrough knowledge or affect? Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 15/16, 153–156.

Hughes, M., & Saunders, A. M. (2005). Interpretation, activity participation, and environmental atti-tudes of visitors to Penguin Island, Western Australia. Society and Natural Resources, 18, 611–624.

Kellert, S. R. (1991). Japanese perceptions of wildlife. Conservation Biology, 5(3), 297–308.Kirkwood, R. et al., (2003). Pinniped-focused tourism in the southern hemisphere: A review of the

industry. In N. Gales, M. Hindell & R. Kirkwood (Eds.), Marine mammals: Fisheries, tourismand management issues (pp. 257–272). Collingwood: CSIRO.

Lewis, A., & Newsome, D. (2003). Planning for stingray tourism at Hamelin Bay, Western Austra-lia: The importance of stakeholder perspectives. International Journal of Tourism Research, 5,331–346.

Luck, M. (2003). Education on marine mammal tours as agent for conservation—but do touristswant to be educated? Ocean & Coastal Management, 46(9), 943–956.

Macgregor, K. (2006). Commerce, community and conservation: A collaborative approach to man-aging a sustainable marine turtle tourism industry. In Conference program: The 2nd AustralianWildlife Tourism Conference (pp. 139–148). Perth, WA: Promaco Conventions.

Madin, E. M. P., & Fenton, D. M. (2004). Environmental interpretation in the Great Barrier ReefMarine Park: An assessment of programme effectiveness. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 12(2),121–137.

Malcolm, C. D., & Duffus, D. A. (2002). The case for site-specific education strategies in ecotour-ism management: Whale-watching on Vancouver Island, BC. In E. L. Jackson (Ed.), Abstracts ofPapers Presented at the Tenth Canadian Congress on Leisure Research, May 22–25, 2002.Canadian Association for Leisure Studies.

Manfredo, M. J., & Driver, B. L. (2002). Benefits: The basis for action. In M. J. Manfredo (Ed.), Wildlifeviewing: A management handbook (pp. 70–92). Corvallis: Oregon State University Press.

Masters, D. (1998). Marine wildlife tourism: Developing a quality approach in the highlands and islands.A report for the Tourism & Environment Initiative and Scottish Natural Heritage. May 1998. VisitScotland, Sustainable Tourism Unit. http://www.greentourism.org.uk/publications.html

Mayes, G., Dyer, P., & Richins, H. (2004). Dolphin-human interaction: Pro-environmental attitudes,beliefs and intended behaviours and actions of participants in interpretation programs: A pilotstudy. Annals of Leisure Research, 7(1), 34–53.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Wilf

rid

Lau

rier

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:28

14

Sept

embe

r 20

13


McKegg, S., Probert, K., Baird, K., & Bell, J. (1998). Marine tourism in New Zealand: A profile. InM. L. Miller & A. Auyong (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1996 World Congress on Coastal andMarine Tourism (pp. 154–159). Corvallis: Oregon State University.

Moscardo, G. (1998). Interpretation and sustainable tourism: Functions, examples and principles.The Journal of Tourism Studies, 9(1), 2–13.

Moscardo, G., & Saltzer, R. (2004). Understanding wildlife tourism markets. In K. Higginbottom(Ed.), Wildlife tourism: Impacts, management and planning (pp. 167–185). Altona, VIC:Common Ground/Sustainable Tourism CRC.

Moscardo, G., Woods, B., & Greenwood, T. (2001). Understanding visitor perspectives onwildlife tourism. Wildlife Tourism Research Report Series No. 2. Gold Coast: CRC forSustainable Tourism.

Moscardo, G., Woods, B., & Saltzer, R. (2004). The role of interpretation in wildlife tourism. InK. Higginbottom (Ed.), Wildlife tourism: Impacts, management and planning (pp. 231–251).Altona, VIC: Common Ground/Sustainable Tourism CRC.

Muloin, S. (1998). Wildlife tourism: The psychological benefits of whale watching. Pacific TourismReview, 2, 199–212.

Neil, D. T., Orams, M. B., & Baglioni, A. J. (1996). Effect of previous whale watching experi-ence on participants knowledge of, and response to, whales and whale watching. In K. Colgan, S.Prasser, & A. Jeffrey (Eds.), Encounters with Whales 1995 Proceedings (pp. 182–188).Hervey Bay, Queensland, July 26–30, 2005. Canberra: Australian Nature ConservationAgency.

O’Neill, F., Barnard, S., & Lee, D. (2004). Best practice and interpretation in tourist/wildlifeencounters: A wild dolphin swim tour example. Wildlife Tourism Research Report Series No. 25.Gold Coast: CRC Sustainable Tourism.

Orams, M. B. (1994). Creating effective interpretation for managing interaction between tourists andwildlife. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 10(2), 21–34.

Orams, M. B. (1995a). Using interpretation to manage nature-based tourism. Journal of SustainableTourism, 4(2), 81–94.

Orams, M. B. (1995b). Development and management of a feeding program for wild bottlenose dol-phins at Tangalooma, Australia. Aquatic Mammals, 21(2), 137–147.

Orams, M. B. (1995c.) Towards a more desirable form of ecotourism. Tourism Management, 16, 3–9.Orams, M. B. (1996a) A conceptual model of tourist-wildlife interaction: The case for education as a

management strategy. Australian Geographer, 2 (1), 39–51.Orams, M. B. (1996b). Cetacean education: Can we turn tourists into ‘greenies.’ In K. Colgan, S.

Prasser, & A. Jeffrey (Eds.), Encounters with Whales 1995 Proceedings (pp. 167–178). HerveyBay, Qld, July 26–30. Canberra: Australian Nature Conservation Agency.

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

Orams, M. B. (1997b). The effectiveness of environmental education: Can we turn tourists into“greenies”? Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Research, 3(4), 295–306.

Orams, M. (1999). Marine tourism: Development, impacts and management. London: Routledge.Orams, M. B. (2000). Tourists getting close to whales, is it what whale watching is all about? Tourism

Management, 21, 561–569.Orams, M. B. (2001). From whale hunting to whale watching in Tonga: A sustainable future? Journal

of Sustainable Tourism, 9(2), 128–146.Orams, M. B. (2002). Feeding wildlife as a tourism attraction: A review of issues and impacts. Tourism

Management, 23, 281–293.Orams, M. B. (2003). Marine ecotourism in New Zealand: An overview of the industry and its man-

agement. In B. Garrod & J. C. Wilson (Eds.), Marine ecotourism: Issues and experiences (pp.233–248). Clevedon: Channel View.

Orams, M. B. (2005). Dolphins, whales and ecotourism in New Zealand: What are the impacts andhow should the industry be managed? In C. M. Hall & S. Boyd (Eds.), Nature-based tourism inperipheral areas: Development or disaster? (pp. 231–245). Clevedon: Channel View.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Wilf

rid

Lau

rier

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:28

14

Sept

embe

r 20

13


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

Orsini, J. P., & Newsome, D. (2005). Human perceptions of hauled out Australian sea lions (Neophocacinerea) and implications for management: A case study from Carnac Island, Western Australia.Tourism in Marine Environments, 2(1), 23–37.

Packer, J. (2006). Learning for fun: The unique contribution of educational leisure experiences.Curator: The Museum Journal, 49(3), 329–344.

Pearce, D. G., & Wilson, P. M. (1995). Wildlife-viewing tourists in New Zealand. Journal of TravelResearch, 34(2), 19–26.

Rawles, C. J. G., & Parsons, E. C. M. (2005). Environmental motivations of whale-watching touristsin Scotland. Tourism in Marine Environments, 1(2), 129–132.

Rodger, K., Moore, S. A., & Newsome, D. (2007). Wildlife tours in Australia: Characteristics, theplace of science and sustainable futures. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(2), 160–179.

Russell, C. L., & Hodson, D. (2002). Whalewatching as critical science education? Canadian Journalof Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 7, 54–66.

Saltzer, R. (2001). Understanding visitor wildlife interactions: Seaworld visitor survey. DataSummary Report December 2001. CRC for Sustainable Tourism. http://www.crctourism.com.au/CRCBookshop/Documents/WT_Seaworld.pdf

Samuels, A., Bejder, L., Constantine, R., & Heinrich, S. (2003). Swimming with wild cetaceans, with aspecial focus on the southern hemisphere. In N. Gales, M. Hindell, & R. Kirkwood (Eds.), Marinemammals: Fisheries, tourism and management issues (pp. 277–303). Collingwood: CSIRO.

Scarpaci, C., Nugegoda, D., & Corkeron, P. J. (2005). Tourists swimming with Australian fur seals(Arctocephalus pusillus) in Port Philip Bay, Victoria, Australia: Are tourists at risk? Tourism inMarine Environments, 1(2), 89–95.

Schaenzel, H. (1998). The effectiveness of environmental interpretation: Understanding the valuesgained from wildlife viewing tourism experiences. Environmental Perspectives, 21, 10–13.

Schanzel, H. A. (2004). Educational entertainment: The emotive and personal context of environ-mental interpretation. In K. A. Smith & C. Scott (Eds.), Proceedings of the New Zealand Tourismand Hospitality Research Conference (pp. 348–356). Wellington, 8–10 December. Wellington:Victoria University of Wellington.

Schanzel, H. A., & McIntosh, A. J. (2000). An insight into the personal and emotive context of wild-life viewing at the Penguin Place, Otago Peninsula, New Zealand. Journal of Sustainable Tour-ism, 8(1), 36–52.

Smith, L. (2006). Evaluating the effectiveness of the Jurabi turtle experience. In Conference Pro-gram: The 2nd Australian Wildlife Tourism Conference, 13–15 August 2006 (pp. 165–174).Perth, WA: Promaco Conventions.

Sorice, M. G., Shafer, C. S., & Ditton, R. B. (2006). Managing endangered species within the use-preservation paradox: The Florida manatee (Trichechus manatus latirostris) as a tourism attrac-tion. Environmental Management, 37(1), 69–83.

Spotte, S., & Clark, P. (2004). A knowledge-based survey of adult aquarium visitors. HumanDimensions of Wildlife, 9, 143–151.

Stokes, T., Dobbs, K., & Recchia, C. (2002). Management of marine mammal tours on the GreatBarrier Reef. Australian Mammalogy, 24, 39–49.

Takei, A. (1998). A cross-cultural assessment of the effectiveness of the interpretive program at thedolphin provisioning program, Tangalooma, Australia. Diploma in Marine Science thesis,University of Queensland. http://www.tangalooma.com/dolphinweb/research.asp

Teel, T. L., Manfredo, M. J., & Stinchfield, H. M. (2007). The need and theoretical basis for explor-ing wildlife value orientations cross-culturally. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 12(5), 297–305.

Thapa, B., Graefe, A. R., & Meyer, L. A. (2005). Moderator and mediator effects of scuba divingspecialization on marine-based environmental knowledge-behavior contingency. The Journal ofEnvironmental Education, 37(1), 53–67.

Thapa, B., Graefe, A. R., & Meyer, L. A. (2006). Specialization and marine based environmentalbehaviors among SCUBA divers. Journal of Leisure Research, 38(4), 601–615.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Wilf

rid

Lau

rier

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:28

14

Sept

embe

r 20

13


Tisdell, C., & Wilson, C. (2001a). Wildlife-based tourism and increased support for nature conser-vation financially and otherwise: Evidence from sea turtle ecotourism at Mon Repos. TourismEconomics, 7(3), 233–249.

Tisdell, C., & Wilson, C. (2001b). Tourism and the conservation of sea turtles: An Australian casestudy. In. C. Tisdell, Tourism economics, the environment and development: Analysis and policy(pp. 356–368). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Tisdell, C., & Wilson, C. (2002). Economic, educational and conservation benefits of sea turtlebased ecotourism: A study focused on Mon Repos. Wildlife Tourism Research Report SeriesNo. 20. Gold Coast: CRC for Sustainable Tourism.

Tisdell, C., & Wilson, C. (2005). Perceived impacts of ecotourism on environmental learning andconservation: Turtle watching as a case study. Environment, Development and Sustainability,7(3), 291–302.

Topelko, K. N., & Dearden, P. (2005). The shark watching industry and its potential contribution toshark conservation. Journal of Ecotourism, 4(2), 108–128.

Townsend, C. (2008). Interpretation and environmental education as conservation tools. In B. Garrod &S. Gossling (Eds.), New frontiers in marine tourism: Diving experiences, sustainability, manage-ment (pp. 189–200). Oxford: Elsevier.

Valentine, P. S., Birtles, A., Curnock, M., Arnold, P., & Dunstan, A. (2004). Getting closer towhales—passenger expectations and experiences, and the management of swim with dwarfminke whale interactions in the Great Barrier Reef. Tourism Management, 25, 647–655.

Waayers, D., Newsome, D., & Lee, D. (2006). Observations of non-compliance behaviour by tour-ists to a voluntary code of conduct: A pilot study of turtle tourism in the Exmouth region, WesternAustralia. Journal of Ecotourism, 5(3), 211–222.

Wight, P. (1998). Tools for sustainability analysis in planning and managing tourism and recreationin the destination. In C. M. Hall & A. Lew (Eds.), Sustainable tourism: A geographical perspec-tive (pp. 75–91). Harlow: Addison Wesley Longman.

Wilson, C., & Tisdell, C. (2001). Sea turtles as a non-consumptive tourism resource especially inAustralia. Tourism Management, 22, 279–288.

Wilson, C., & Tisdell, C. (2003). Conservation and economic benefits of wildlife-based marine tourism:Sea turtles and whales as case studies. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 8(1), 49–58.

Woods, B., & Moscardo, G. (2003). Enhancing wildlife education through mindfulness. AustralianJournal of Environmental Education, 19, 97–108.

Zeppel, H., & Muloin, S. (2008). Marine wildlife tours: Benefits for participants. In J. Higham & M.Luck (Eds.), Marine wildlife and tourism management (pp. 19–48). Wallingford: CABI.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Wilf

rid

Lau

rier

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

8:28

14

Sept

embe

r 20

13