Mannequin for wildlife tourism | EurekAlert! Science Information

IMAGE: The great white shark cage diving industry on the Eyre Peninsula in South Australia supports three operators that accommodate up to 10,000 passengers and generate approximately $ 8 million annually.
view More

Photo credit: Andrew Fox / Rodney Fox Shark Expeditions

Wildlife tourism, including cage diving with great white sharks, is growing in popularity, but these industries are controversial among tourists, conservationists, and scientists alike.

Many raise concerns about the possible negative impacts – especially when targeting potentially dangerous animals – while proponents cite the socio-economic benefits justifying wildlife tourism activities.

The reality is that wildlife tourism is complex and requires managers to weigh the pros and cons to determine what is acceptable for such industries.

To answer this question, “Is wildlife tourism good or bad?”, Scientists at Flinders University, Georgia Aquarium, and Southern Cross University, with the help of environmental, marine parks, and scientists, developed a tool to evaluate these industries, South Australian Department of Tourism Managers of the South Australian Department of Tourism Environment and water as well as a veterinarian / animal welfare officer from the university.

The resulting framework, published in Conservation Letters, uses 26 factors to assess tractability, socio-economic values, and the industry’s impact on conservation, animal welfare, and the impact on the ecosystem, says lead researcher Dr. Lauren Meyer of the Southern Shark Ecology Group at Flinders University and Georgia Aquarium.

Bringing these five different categories together into one framework allows for a more comprehensive assessment that combines the various advantages and disadvantages typical of the wildlife tourism industry.

“The latest study provides an inventory of relevant factors spanning a range of different industries, current knowledge, and research needs,” says Charlie Huveneers, co-author and Flinders Associate Professor.

To test the new framework, the authors applied it to the great white shark cage diving industry on the Eyre Peninsula in South Australia. Three operators take up to 10,000 passengers here and generate around 8 million US dollars annually.

The industry is well regulated, with limits on the number of licenses they can have, the days they can operate, and the amount of attractants they can use.

Recent research by Dr. Meyer found that while food-based attractants (Bait and Berley) did not affect the diet of the great white sharks (they still swim around and eat their normal prey), they can affect the diet of the fish and rays that passed through them before Coastal animals live islands.

The framework also allowed the costs and benefits of great white sharks to be compared with the other fish and rays, which highlighted the holistic acceptance of the industry and identified key areas for improvement.

The results show that public opinion about diving in cages with great white sharks varies, but the contribution to public education and awareness as well as scientific research is high, says Dr. Meyer.

“Conservation results for target and non-target species are high because of the conservation status of the Neptune Islands Group’s Marine Park Sanctuary Zone, which the industry operates in,” she says.

Unsurprisingly, the industry offers significant regional economic benefits. Although the effects on the great white shark have been well controlled, the welfare of fish and rays has been found to require further attention.

Associate Professor Charlie Huveneers, who has been studying the behavior and ecology of sharks, including great white sharks for more than 10 years, says the new framework shows how effective collaboration between scientists, managers, and industry will help reduce negatives To minimize the impact on great white sharks, it also highlighted areas that could be further improved.

In particular, the framework identified key priorities for future research into biological, socio-economic and cultural heritage in order to ensure comprehensive management of a divisive industry.

###

The article “A Multidisciplinary Framework for Assessing Sustainability and Adoption of Wildlife Tourism” (2021) by L. Meyer, K. Apps, S. Bryars, T. Clarke, B. Hayden, G. Pelton, B. Simes, LM Vaughan, SK Whitmarsh and C. Huveneers, was published in Conversation Letters (Wiley) DOI: 10.1111 / conl.12788 The Society for Conservation Biology (wiley.com)

Thanksgiving:

The researchers thank the cage diving industry for continued support, industry management assistance, and engagement in discussions.

Disclaimer: AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the correctness of the press releases published on EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of information via the EurekAlert system.