Whale Watchers Demand Exemption

[IronNoggin]

A West Coast whale watching collective is demanding closer access for its members to more abundant killer whale populations after the federal government imposed a 200-metre viewing distance limit to protect the endangered southern resident orcas.

https://www.cheknews.ca/whale-watch...r-orcas-as-feds-set-200-metre-limit-3-467821/

No Surprise...

Nog

 

[wildmanyeah]

Go pace out 200m, their is almost no point in going to watch whales. Maybe they will supply their costumers with binoculars.

This just guarantees leap frogging the whales.

I suspect all this will do is change them from their typical 50m now to go to 100m

I don’t see a reason why whale watchers in the north where their is abundant killer whale populations need such a blanket regulation.

Brood measures is harmful to any resource user

 

[searun]

Some of the scientific papers I have read indicate that acoustic disturbance carries for some distance under water. In fact, 400m is often the range where it becomes less harmful. While I appreciate the significance of trying to observe whales from 400m, if we actually care about protecting their ability to acquire food/prey, then we have to get serious about taking steps to reduce acoustic and physical disturbances.

I was fishing Barkley Sound a few days ago, and observed a single humpback whale feeding. It was surrounded by whale watching boats who were edging ever closer to get their clients a better vantage. Based on my estimates some of the boats where well under the 200m. I think 400m assures that one cannot claim they had difficulty judging the 400m buffer or bubble zone. 200m leaves it up to interpretation and IMO allows close contact errors to develop.

The rec boats that did approach, did so not realizing the whale was actually there. As soon as they did, the boats quickly trolled in the opposite direction. Rec anglers with fishing gear deployed can't afford to get close to whales. Whale watching by its very design requires the operator to position the vessel to acquire the best possible vantage point - therein is the challenge with the 200m regulation.

 

[wildmanyeah]

Some of the scientific papers I have read indicate that acoustic disturbance carries for some distance under water. In fact, 400m is often the range where it becomes less harmful. While I appreciate the significance of trying to observe whales from 400m, if we actually care about protecting their ability to acquire food/prey, then we have to get serious about taking steps to reduce acoustic and physical disturbances.

Yeah so ban whale watching boats from watching SRKW or apply different measures.

We wouldn’t like broad measures like these applied to our fishery

IMO it’s not the way to manage resources. It’s like reducing the wcvi fishery over concerns with Campbell river chinook. They have nothing to do with each other

NRKW, Biggs and humpback whale populations are all doing fairly well.

They are asking for different regulations for different populations. I think that’s fairly reasonable.