BEST PRACTICE AND INTERPRETATION IN

TOURIST/WILDLIFE ENCOUNTERS:
A WILD DOLPHIN SWIM TOUR EXAMPLE

Fleur O’Neill, Sam Barnard & Diane Lee

WILDLIFE TOURISM RESEARCH REPORT SERIES: NO. 25

 RESEARCH REPORT SERIES
The primary aim of STCRC's research report series is technology transfer. The reports
are targeted toward both industry and government users and tourism researchers.
The content of this technical report series primarily focuses on applications, but may
also advance research methodology and tourism theory. The report series titles
relate to STCRC's research program areas. All research reports are peer reviewed by
at least two external reviewers. For further information on the report series, access
the STCRC website [www.crctourism.com.au/bookshop].

Wildlife Tourism Report Series, Editor: Dr Karen Higginbottom

This series presents research findings from projects within the wildlife tourism
subprogram of the STCRC. The subprogram aims to provide strategic knowledge
to facilitate the sustainable development of wildlife tourism in Australia.

National Library of Australia Cataloguing in Publication Data

O'Neill, Fleur.
Best practice and interpretation in tourist-wildlife encounters: a wild dolphin swim tour
example.

Bibliography.
ISBN 1 920704 77 9 (pbk)
ISBN 1 920704 78 7 (pdf)

1. Wildlife watching industry - Western Australia - Koombana Bay. 2. Ecotourism -

Western Australia – Koombana Bay. I. Lee, Diane. II. Barnard, Sam. III. Cooperative
Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism. IV. Title. (Series : Wildlife tourism research
report series ; no. 25).

338.47919412

Copyright © CRC for Sustainable Tourism Pty Ltd 2004

All rights reserved. Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of study, research, criticism
or review as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part of this book may be reproduced
by any process without written permission from the publisher. Any enquiries should be
directed to Brad Cox, Director of Communications [brad@crctourism.com.au] or Trish
O’Connor, Publishing Manager [trish@crctourism.com.au].

ii
CONTENTS
PREFACE _________________________________________vi

SUMMARY ________________________________________vii

1 INTRODUCTION ______________________________________1
1.1 Ecotourism ______________________________________2
1.2 Wildlife Tourism __________________________________2
1.2.1 Marine tourism ____________________________3
1.2.2 Marine mammal tourism ____________________3
1.2.3 A fascination with dolphins __________________4
1.2.4 Wild dolphin swim tours ____________________5
1.3 Examining The Wildlife Tourist Experience ____________5
1.3.1 Tourist motivation and expectation ___________5
1.3.2 Satisfaction with wildlife tourism _____________6
1.4 Managing Marine Mammal Tourist Interaction ________7
1.4.1 Impacts of marine mammal tourism___________7
1.4.2 Impacts of wild dolphin swim tour programs ___8
1.4.3 Managing for impacts ______________________8
1.4.4 Best practice guidelines for ecotourism ________9
1.4.5 Education and interpretation _______________10
1.4.6 Education programs and sustainable tourism
experiences ______________________________12
1.4.7 Satisfaction with best practice management
procedures_______________________________13
1.5 Aims ________________________________________14

2 SITE DESCRIPTION: DOLPHIN DISCOVERY CENTRE______15

2.1 History ________________________________________15
2.2 Present Day_____________________________________15
2.2.1 Interpretive centre ________________________16
2.2.2 Boat based tours__________________________16
2.2.3 Artificial provisioning area: interaction zone
(license) _________________________________16
2.2.4 Wild dolphin swim tours ___________________17
2.2.5 Wild dolphin swim tour code of practice _____17

iii
 3 METHOD ________________________________________19
3.1 Questionnaire Development _______________________19
3.2 Swim Tour Surveys_______________________________19
3.2.1 Distribution of surveys _____________________20
3.2.2 Sample population ________________________21
3.3 Video ________________________________________21
3.4 Best Practice Industry Manual _____________________22

4 RESULTS OF SWIM TOUR SURVEYS ___________________23

4.1 Description Of Swim Tour Participants ______________23
4.2 Tourist Expectations______________________________23
4.2.1 Wild dolphins ____________________________23
4.2.2 Dolphin interaction________________________24
4.2.3 Education and interpretation _______________25
4.2.4 Touching dolphins ________________________26
4.3 Tourist Satisfaction_______________________________27
4.3.1 Dolphin sightings _________________________27
4.3.2 Closeness________________________________28
4.3.3 Return __________________________________28
4.4 Effectiveness Of Management Procedures ___________28
4.4.1 Education________________________________29
4.4.2 Minimal impact procedures _________________29

5 DISCUSSION ________________________________________32
5.1 Creating Realistic Expectations_____________________32
5.2 Satisfaction With Seeing Dolphins During The Tour ___33
5.3 Satisfaction With Management Procedures __________34
5.4 Sustainable Tourism Experiences ___________________35

6 CONCLUSION _______________________________________37

APPENDICES
I: Swim Tour Questionnaire ______________________________38
2: Description of Swim Tour Video by Phil Coulthard
and Lorna Kaino _____________________________________49

REFERENCES ________________________________________52

AUTHORS ________________________________________60

iv
FIGURES
1: Expected/estimated closeness (in metres) to wild dolphins___27
2: Tourist satisfaction with the procedures that prevented
touching of dolphins __________________________________30
3: Impact of the snorkel lines on swim tour experience _______30

TABLES
1: Characteristics of dolphins (pre-tour) ____________________23
2: Changed perception of dolphin characteristics (post-tour)___24
3: What tourists were looking forward to (pre-tour) __________24
4: Factors contributing to enjoyment (pre-tour) ______________25

v
 1
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PREFACE
This report was written with the cooperation and support of a
number of organisations and people. We would like to acknowledge
this support with very special thanks to the following people: Holly
Smith, Elizabeth Kerr, Merrlyn Braden, Debra Slater, ‘English’ Karen,
Liz Sharpe, Rhonda & Vicki of the Bottlenose Café, Rochelle
Constantine, Amy Samuels, Lorna Kaino, Karuna Gurung, Roger
Porter, Andrew Horan and Phil Coulthard.

The report would also not have been possible without the co-
operation of the following organisations and groups:
• Department of Conservation and Land Management (license)
• 2000 Save Our Shores Board of Directors
• YHA Bunbury
• Naturaliste Charters
• BTG media
• Bunbury Tourism Board
• Murdoch University Tourism students
• Edith Cowan Bunbury Campus staff and students
• Bunbury TAFE staff and students.

And of course the Koombana Bay dolphins, including Sharkie, Thinfin,

Slapper (Stumpy) & Lumpy, contributed immensely.

vi
 1
1. SUMMARY
Tourism involving human/wildlife interaction appears to be increasing
as people continue to seek authentic encounters with wild animals in
their natural habitat. One such place where this occurs is the Dolphin
Discovery Centre (DDC) in Koombana Bay, Bunbury, Western
Australia. The centre is a non-profit organisation focused upon
interaction with the wild and habituated bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops
spp) that reside within Koombana Bay. Under licenses issued by the
State Department of Conservation and Land Management (CALM),
tourists are able to interact with the dolphins in a variety of ways
including wild dolphin swim tours, boat-based dolphin watching tours
and a shore based area where dolphins are hand fed a small offering,
known as the Interaction Zone.

The increasing popularity of the dolphins has raised issues concerning

the possible impacts that may be imposed on them by continual tourist
activity. Although limited, results from recent studies are showing that
interaction, mainly in the form of swimming and feeding, can have a
detrimental effect upon targeted wild dolphin populations.

In theory, it is said that for wildlife tourist interactions to be

sustainable, the activity must benefit both the wildlife and the tourist,
as the wildlife will remain healthy and the tourist will remain happy,
prolonging the life of the tourist operation. However, providing
satisfying wildlife experiences whilst endeavouring to protect the
species and/or its environment can become a difficult task. One
method of doing this is to provide education about the wildlife,
increasing knowledge and possibly appreciation leading to an increase
in protection. Another is to employ best practice techniques by
developing management guidelines, and to interpret guidelines to
tourists with the aim of increasing understanding and acceptance,
helping to reduce short-term impacts of the activity.

In order to achieve sustainable tourism, it is necessary for wildlife tour

operators to know if their best practice techniques are both effective
and satisfactory for the tourist. It is also necessary for the operator to
know if their best practice techniques are benefiting the wildlife,
however this is a much more difficult task, requiring intricate biological

vii
 knowledge and many years of study. The former, assessing tourist
satisfaction, is less difficult to examine and is the focus of this report.

The use of education and interpretation has been viewed favourably

as a ‘solution’ to the ever-growing ‘problem’ of sustainability
regarding nature-based tourism, as it attempts to change tourists’
behaviour in a positive way that results in tourist satisfaction as well
as benefits to the animal or environment (Moscardo, 1998). This study
focuses on the examination of tourist satisfaction to determine if the
management (education and interpretation of guidelines
implemented through a Code of Practice) changes the tourists’
behaviour in a positive way that results in satisfaction. In order to do
this, the study aims to:
• Examine visitor perception of wild dolphin characteristics and
wild dolphin interaction before and after the tour;
• Analyse visitor motivation, expectation and satisfaction levels
with various components of the swim tour, and
• Assess the effectiveness of, and satisfaction with, the
management strategies (DDC Code of Practice) used to reduce the
potential for tourist impacts upon dolphins. Education and
interpretation form part of the management and are therefore
examined in detail.

To conduct the study, both pre-swim and post-swim surveys were

developed through funding by the Cooperative Research Centre for
Sustainable Tourism (CRCST) under the wildlife tourism sub-program.
Wild dolphin swim tour participants, 223, were surveyed during the
summer months of February to April 2000.

Overall, survey results show a high level of tourist satisfaction with the
DDC management procedures. This was surprising given results from
pre-swim surveys that demonstrated people’s distorted perceptions of
wild dolphins, and the high expectations they have about swimming
with these wild animals. Results show that specific guidelines within the
Code of Practice, known as Minimal Impact Procedures were effective
in reducing the tourist impacts (or presumed impacts as it is unknown
exactly how swimmers impact dolphin populations) and successful in
achieving tourist satisfaction. It is assumed that education, which
interpreted management procedures prior to swimmers entering the

viii
water, was somewhat responsible for participant acceptance of, and
overall satisfaction with the Code of Practice.

To continue to improve expectation and satisfaction, tourists must be

provided with factual and accurate information about wild dolphins.
Education of this kind will help them understand that the dolphins are
wild animals, and sightings along with the dolphins interest in
humans, cannot be guaranteed. (In this particular study however,
there were no instances where dolphins were not sighted, so
satisfaction based on this factor cannot be measured.) DDC wild
dolphin swim tour operators must continue to interpret guidelines
and educate people about the potential impacts that swimming can
have on the dolphins. This will aid compliance with management
practices, and possibly assist future wildlife interactions, independent
of the DDC wild dolphin swim tours.

Written in conjunction with this Technical Report is an industry

focused Best Practice manual reporting specifically on the procedures
of dolphin swim-tour operations. This manual is based on the
ANZECC Best Practice guidelines also outlined in this report, and
provides specific guidelines based on the principles of Best Practice in
sustainable ecotourism with a strong focus on education, visitor
satisfaction and safety. An educational video has also been produced
from results of surveys and has been used by the DDC during wild
dolphin swim tours.

This report focuses on one component of a wider study of tourist-

dolphin interaction. The wider study consisted of a quantitative
survey, with a sample of 1300 shore and boat-based visitors, and a
population survey and 230 swim tour participants. It also included
qualitative input from staff members at the DDC with regards to
management issues, and the artistic input of ‘Media Studies’ Honours
level students.

ix
 1
1. INTRODUCTION
Tourism and the natural environment are two concepts that appear to
have become closely associated due to the increasing desire for
tourists to visit natural areas, and ‘tourism, like the natural
environment, needs to be managed to be sustainable’ (WATC &
CALM 1997, p2).

Unfortunately the natural environment often comes into conflict with

an economy driven tourism industry that seeks to utilise natural
resources for economic benefit, ultimately exploiting them in the
process. However, stakeholders within the tourism industry are
starting to take more conservation-based approaches to managing
the increase in tourists seeking nature-based settings. The emergence
of nature-based tourism, and particularly ecotourism, are products of
this (Dowling 1996).

The focus of this study is based on a specific component of nature-

based tourism, which is tourism involving interaction with wildlife.
The wildlife in question is marine mammal species Tursiops, or the
animal commonly known as the bottlenose dolphin. One way of
managing wildlife/tourist interaction is the establishment of Best
Practice guidelines. In order for a nature-based tourist operation to be
managed effectively, social, environmental and economic goals must
be set and methods of best practice implemented to ensure that these
goals are met. In addition, according to Orams (1996) and Moscardo
(1998) management of tourist-wildlife operations requires indirect
techniques such as education and interpretation, which attempt to
appeal to the tourists’ ‘caring’ side, therefore encouraging them to
take an active role in protecting the environment.

This study explored the issue of ‘best practice’ within the wild dolphin
swim tour program at the Dolphin Discovery Centre (DDC) in Bunbury,
Western Australia. In 1999 a Code of Practice was developed by the
tour licensee to reduce the potential for negative impacts of swimmer
activity upon the local dolphin population. Surveys (pre and post tour)
were developed to examine tourist satisfaction of certain guidelines
within the Code of Practice. This examination included assessing
tourist expectation, satisfaction and effectiveness of the education

1
 and interpretation methods used to manage the tour. The practical
outcome will be to provide an Industry Manual and video of Best
Practice guidelines for use by Dolphin Swim Tour operations.

1.1 Ecotourism

Ecotourism is a concept that many tourists are familiar with, yet they
may not fully understand its meaning. A number of attempts have
been made to define the term, yet it can be said that the most
accurate definitions of the term incorporate an educational and
interpretive component (Ryan 1998). Dowling’s definition is
particularly useful when thinking about interpretation, he states:
‘Ecotourism can be defined as nature based tourism that involves
education and interpretation of the natural environment and is
managed to be ecologically sustainable’ (1997, p2).

While sustainable tourism proponents of ecotourism claim that it is

tourism with the best interests of the environment at heart, some
sceptical theorists suggest that it is simply nature-based tourism
‘dressed-up’, and ‘may well be nothing more than a new marketing
gimmick which dresses up existing tourism attractions in an attempt
to increase market share’ (Orams 1999, p94). With the inclusion of
interpretation and educational strategies to complement the
economical, ecological and social benefits of an ecotourism
experience, the differences between an ecotourism product and a
marketing gimmick for existing nature-based tourism can be
highlighted (Fennell 1999). Such strategies may be implemented
along with the provision of guidelines to portray the right messages
to tourists and tour operators alike: messages that promote the well
being of the environment through an understanding of the adverse
affects of careless actions toward it and its wildlife.

1.2 Wildlife Tourism

Worldwide, wildlife based tourism is one of the fastest growing forms

of tourism (Muloin 1998; Reynolds & Braithwaite 1999). Globally,
wildlife tourism is estimated to generate a revenue of US$47-$155
billion/year (Ceballos-Lascurain 1996). Wildlife tourism is a broad
concept in that it incorporates relatively non-consumptive forms of
tourism such as viewing and photography, to consumptive forms like

2
recreational fishing (Higginbottom, Rann, Moscardo, Davis and
Muloin 2001). The opportunities for people to interact with wildlife
are many, and the demand for these opportunities is predicted to
increase dramatically over the next decade (Shackley 1997).

Higginbottom et al. (2001) suggest that a noticeable trend in wildlife

tourism is the increase in the number of species being viewed in a
wider range of environments. For example, species that were once
only viewed in zoos are now accessible in their natural environment.
This is a result of an increase in the demand to experience wild
animals in their natural habitat, as opposed to those in captive or
semi-captive situations (Duffus & Dearden 1990; Gauthier 1993;
Kellert 1980; Pearce 1991). The trend in society to place greater value
on wildlife in its natural habitat may be due to people’s increasing
awareness of the environment and interest in the concept of ecology
(Sagoff 1986; Duffus & Wipond 1992).

1.2.1 Marine tourism

The marine environment provides many opportunities for tourists to

view wildlife in a natural setting. Activities may range from small-scale
beachcombing to large-scale luxury boat cruises. Tours may be
dedicated to one particular species or may rely upon opportunistic
sightings of a range of wildlife. According to Birtles, Valentine and
Curnock (2001), the growth in recreation and tourism use of marine
environments over the last part of the millennium has been rapid.
Birtles et al. (2001) also point out that future growth of the marine
recreation industry depends heavily on the continuing abundance and
diversity of marine life, hence it is of utmost importance that this
resource is maintained. Negative impacts upon marine life and habitats
can be hard to assess as often little is known about the animals or their
environment. The potential for impacts however must be taken into
account, especially if the industry is experiencing rapid growth.

1.2.2 Marine mammal tourism

A popular form of marine wildlife tourism is marine mammal tourism.

Marine mammals include animal species from the orders, Cetacea
(whales, dolphins and porpoises), Pinnipedia (seals and sea lions) and
Sirrenia (dugong and manatee). In the last decade there has been an

3
 increasing desire for humans to interact with marine mammals and an
increase in tour opportunities (Hoyt 2001). As a result tourism based
upon viewing and interacting with these creatures in their natural habitat
has experienced rapid growth on a global basis (Constantine 1998).

In 1990, Forestell and Kaufman wrote, ‘While recognising that

tourists select recreational activities that are enjoyable and attractive,
we have been conscious of the awakening interest in whales and
dolphins’ (p410). Today, viewing of whales, dolphins and or porpoises
in their natural habitat is a billion dollar (US$) industry, occurring in
over 80 countries and territories and over 9 million participants (Hoyt
2001). In Australia alone there are over 220 licensed operators and
over 730,000 marine mammal tourists/year (Hoyt 2001).

1.2.3 A fascination with dolphins

Dolphins, in particular bottlenose dolphins, have been a source of

human fascination for centuries. Accounts of fishermen befriending
and feeding dolphins in the wild extend back into the first century,
around 70 AD (Busnel 1973). The fascination of interacting with
dolphins in their natural environment still remains today. Dudzinski
(1999) writes, ‘the lure of the dolphins smile combined with their
assumed intelligence is likely to attract an exponentially increasing
number of visitors to various locations worldwide: all bearing the
same desire to experience these creatures ‘up close and personal’.

Fabled stories of lone wild dolphins interacting with boats and

humans, trained performances in marine parks, media portrayal such
as ‘Flipper’ and the production of new-age or well-being texts are no
doubt greatly responsible for the popularity and ‘friendly, gentle,
positive’ impressions people have formed of dolphins. These
impressions rarely seem to encompass fact and biological concept. In
addition, dolphin behaviour and social structure are often interpreted
with both anthropomorphism and anthropocentrism (Amente-
Helweg 1996).

In a study conducted into eco-tourists beliefs and knowledge about

dolphins, eighty percent of respondents were found to believe that
the ‘dolphins enjoyed their company’. Tourists had agreed with
statements such as these about dolphins, ‘being tolerant and fond of

4
people’, and ‘eager to approach boats’ (Amente-Helweg 1996).
Eleven percent of participants agreed that dolphins were ‘present for
their enjoyment’. Almost all participants (99%) perceived dolphins to
be intelligent, and a factor analysis revealed many people’s beliefs
were based upon dolphins having spiritual, and philanthropic
attributes (Amente-Helweg 1996).

1.2.4 Wild dolphin swim tours

Regular boat-based dolphin watching tours have taken a back seat as

the demand for swim-with-wild dolphin tours increase at an
exponential rate (Wursig 1996). An article in a community newspaper
stated that: ‘Ecotourists are jumping at the chance to swim with
dolphins in the wild’ (Petersen, September 9, 2001, p13). Swimming
with wild dolphins is now a well-known form of wildlife tourism,
occurring in Australia, New Zealand, Japan, the United States, South
America, Bahamas, French Polynesia, etc. (Samuels, Bejder & Heinrich
2000). In Australia, Swim-with-Wild Dolphin programs exist in Victoria
and Western Australia only. At present Victoria has five licensed
operators and Western Australia has three. The remaining Australian
States and Territories do not support swim programs (Gales 1999).

1.3 Examining The Wildlife Tourist Experience

Examining the tourist experience can provide operators with

information on what factors contribute to satisfaction. It may also help
determine how the interaction is managed. According to Duffus and
Dearden (1992), management of tourists’ behaviour with wildlife is
simpler if the motivation, satisfaction and nature of demand are known.

1.3.1 Tourist motivation and expectation

Motivation is seen as the driving force that gives value and direction
to travel choice, behaviour, and experience (Pearce 1988). A wildlife
tourist may have multiple motivations for choosing a certain activity.
Wildlife and wilderness can provide the opportunity for people to
relax and detach themselves from their normal lifestyles (Duffus &
Winpond 1992). These people may be intrinsically motivated, having
the desire to escape their everyday activities (Mannel & Iso-Ahola
1987). Some wildlife tourists may be attracted to places where they

5
 can encounter wildlife under natural conditions (Duffus & Dearden
1990). Such tourists might be attracted by the unpredictable nature
of wild animals. Rolston (1987, cited in Duffus and Winpond 1992),
observed that people recounting their wildlife experiences tend to
‘highlight the surprises’ (p 341).

The desire to view a particular animal may be fuelled by the image the
person has developed from previous association (Duffus & Dearden
1990). This may come from actual involvement with the animal or
through association with characters, pictures, personal conversation,
and advertising. Amente-Helweg (1996) writes: ‘Individuals form
impressions of animals which strongly motivate their desire to
experience these preconceptions’ (p 132).

Motivations of the wild dolphin tourist

Dolphins, along with other large marine life have been referred to as
‘charismatic mega fauna’ (Marsh, Arnold, Limpus, Birtles, Breen,
Robins & Williams 1997). Wanting to see them in the wild could be
due to psychological, spiritual or intellectual needs. Watching
dolphins may evoke feelings of inspiration or awe, possibly enjoyment
and connection with nature. Animals that are considered aesthetically
attractive; of having presumably higher intelligence; and are seen as
being aware (such as dolphins) seem most capable of creating feelings
of emotion and conservation (Kellert 1987). Motivation to see
dolphins may also be basic, such as photography, continuation of
support for environmental causes and organisations. According to
Amente-Helweg (1996) Some wildlife tourists engage in tourism to
improve their education, there are also those who come simply
because they are curious.

1.3.2 Satisfaction with wildlife tourism

In order to provide satisfying wildlife experiences, managers should

have an understanding of the nature of the tourists’ satisfaction.
Satisfaction will rise as the match between the visitors’ expectations
and the characteristics of the site improves (Duffus & Winpond 1992).
Expectations are pre-experience attitudes (Pearce 1988), and
satisfaction will occur when the actual experience equals the
expectations. Pearce and Moscardo (1985) refer to this as, ‘the nature

6
of the fit between visitor expectations and visitor experiences’ (p.302).
The fit is matching the tourists’ needs with the resources of a location.

According to Shackley (1997) the highest quality of experience for a

wildlife tourist often comes with active participation where, ‘the
visitor feels that he or she is achieving some kind of temporary affinity
with a different species or its environment’ (p 60). Duffus and
Winpond (1992) find tourists are satisfied by just visualising an animal
and refer to this as the ‘aesthetic experience’ writing, ‘much of what
is unique in the aesthetics of wildlife encounters is the spontaneity
and motion in their form’ (p.340).

For tours based upon wildlife in the natural habitat, the wildlife is not
always available on demand. Operators need to know if such features
affect satisfaction levels. A study conducted into boat based watching
of Humpback whales, revealed that 35 per cent of respondents were
satisfied with their marine experience even when whales weren’t
sighted, and that satisfaction was not dependent upon proximity to
whales (Orams 2000). Such insight into the tourists experience can
help reveal features, other than seeing or interaction, which influence
satisfaction levels. For example, a study into the viewing of Orcas off
the Canadian Pacific Coast found that education and scenic backdrop
helped create satisfactory experiences (Duffus & Dearden 1993).

1.4 Managing Marine Mammal Tourist Interaction

1.4.1 Impacts of marine mammal tourism

Recent research suggests that marine mammals in the wild are at risk
of being disturbed, displaced or injured by tourists demanding such
interactive experiences (Spradlin, Barre, Lewandowski & Nitta. 2001).
These days interactive experiences may be in the form of commercial
feeding operations, commercial dolphin swim tour operations,
habituated animals soliciting food from commercial and recreational
vessels, habituated single dolphins that seek out interactions with
humans and one off or chance encounters with unhabituated
dolphins (Flanagan 1996; Samuels, Bejder & Heinrich 2000).

Often the impression is given that a form of tourism that cultivates

environmental principles will have limited impact upon the

7
 environment or species in which it is promoted (Boyd & Butler 1996),
however this is not always guaranteed. Tourism based upon wildlife
has a high potential for negative impacts because of the very need to
seek out the animal for viewing or interaction (Green 1999).
According to Shackley (1997) even the best wildlife tourist can have a
discernible impact upon the species and or habitat that he/she is
watching. People who want to view marine mammals often approach
areas important for breeding or resting, creating a negative impact on
the very animals they wish to see.

1.4.2 Impacts of wild dolphin swim tour programs

Placing of swimmers in the water and actual swimming can also lead
to disturbance, often indicated by a sudden change in the dolphin(s)
direction, speed, activity and group composition. When boats and
swimmers approach, dolphins are forced to respond and consequently
change their activity and energy budget (Weir, Dunn, Bell & Chatfield
1997). It is difficult to assess if these short-term impacts will become
detrimental to the long-term survivability of the dolphin and/or dolphin
population. Long-term impacts may include lower reproductive success
and possibly relocation to less used areas. Animals that remain in the
area may become accustomed to human presence, possibly losing their
natural wariness to humans. Assessing both short and long term
impacts of wild dolphin swim tours is a difficult task requiring
specialised knowledge of the dolphin population. However even
without adequate data, swim tours that are based upon unhabituated
dolphins are considered to be invasive and in a recent report they were
described as ‘harassment’ as defined by the US Marine Mammal
Protection Act (Samuels, Bejder & Heinrich 1999).

1.4.3 Managing for impacts

As the marine mammal tourism industry continues to grow without

clear scientific knowledge of impacts, operators must take the
precautionary approach. Implementation of Best Practice through
development of guidelines or ‘Codes of Practice’ for both the
operator and participants, and the use of education programs, are
increasingly being used by operators to help minimise impacts.

8
1.4.4 Best practice guidelines for ecotourism

When looking at the issue of Best Practice, Sirakaya (1997, p.921)

states that ‘Many leaders of the tourism industry have become well
aware of their potential impacts in ecologically and culturally sensitive
destinations and the value of conservation…They have also realised
the need to set industry codes of practice for their tour operations in
these ecologically sensitive sites by producing various industry and
visitor guidelines.’

Achievement of long-term goals relating to successful management

of an ecotourism operation can be assisted through the development
of ‘best practice’ in the form of set guidelines for both visitors and
operators. Dowling (1997, p.2) notes that ‘establishing best practice
ecotourism techniques’ is one important aspect of the significant
progress ecotourism has made in Australia over the last few years.

Guidelines for best practice in relation to ecotourism management

may come in a variety of forms. They may be directed at tour
operators such as pre and post-tour routines and business
management or directed at tourists by outlining the correct behaviour
towards a specific natural site or wildlife species.

The Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation

Council (ANZECC) discuss ‘best practice’ in relation to education and
interpretation for park management. A summary of their five-step
model aimed at tour operators is provided below (ANZECC, 2001):
1. Define
Clearly define interpretation and education objectives, services
required, mission statements and broader corporate objectives;
incorporate all relevant community, customer, environmental,
heritage or scientific values into goals.
2. Develop
Integrated and documented procedures for identifying programs,
messages, target audiences and approaches to be used; and setting
measurable Key Performance Indicators.
3. Deliver
Recognising the value of in-house staff in delivering interpretation
and education; using Performance Plans after assigning roles and
responsibilities for all stages of education and interpretation.

9
 4. Evaluate
Evaluate performance of education and interpretation services using
Key Performance Indicators using a suitable method and systematic
procedure.
5. Support
Having documented procedures to support communication,
evaluation, data analysis and performance reporting, while
identifying, training, monitoring and maintaining core skills for the
interpretation and education service levels.

This five-step model has been used within the Best Practice Industry
Manual produced in conjunction with this report. This manual is
specifically focused on guidelines for tour operators and participants
during dolphin-swim tour operations. As well as using the ANZECC
model, the manual also integrates its own specific examples relating
to dolphin swim tour guidelines.

1.4.5 Education and interpretation

Using education as a tool for managing tourists can be an effective

means of reducing negative impacts upon the animal (Orams 1995).
In order to shape visitor behaviour the education program should
include factual information about the animal, potential impacts from
the tourist activity and information about the guidelines used to
manage impacts. It is then assumed that tourists will be motivated to
adhere to guidelines in order to reduce their impacts.

According to the National Guidelines for Cetacean Observation 2000,

visitor education is an extremely important issue that provides tourists
with an understanding of why it is necessary to obey guidelines, helping
to make them more effective in following them (Environment Australia
1999). Orams & Hill (1998) demonstrated that the implementation of
an education program significantly reduced inappropriate tourist
behaviours such as touching, and state that ‘education is an important
strategy when compliance with management regulations is necessary
to protect wildlife in ecotourism settings’ (p33). Such education
programs are an indirect way of managing tourist behaviour in the short
term, and are often termed ‘interpretation’.

10
Interpretation as an effective management strategy
The word ‘interpretation’ was traditionally used when referring to the
transfer of one spoken language to another (Orams 1999). However,
interpretation can now be thought of as ‘a special kind of
communication that is particularly relevant to tourism and recreation’
(Moscardo 1998). One of the first instances in which the term was
used for this purpose is indicated by Tilden (1957), he states that
‘Interpretation is an educational activity which aims to reveal
meanings and relationships through the use of original objects, by
first hand experience, and by illustrative media, rather than simply to
communicate factual information’ (Source: Orams 1999, p85).

Another definition that is particularly useful in terms of visitor

satisfaction, states: ‘Interpretation is the process of explaining to
people the significance of the place or object they have come to see,
to that they enjoy their visit more, understand their heritage and
environment better, and develop a more caring attitude towards
conservation’ (Society for Interpreting Britain’s Heritage, in Moscardo,
1998, p.3).

Moscardo (1998) supports the argument for interpretation further,

explaining that interpretation can create economic sustainability as
well as enhancing the quality of the experience for visitors and
encouraging continued interest in the activity. Moscardo (1998) goes
on to explain that there are three main ways that interpretation can
enhance visitor satisfaction:
1. ‘Providing information on alternatives and options’ (so that visitors
are free to make their own choices).
2. ‘Providing information to encourage safety and comfort’ (in the
case of wild dolphin swim tours, visitors expect issues of safety i.e.
presence of life jackets to be addressed; along with issues of
comfort such as possible seasickness and emergency procedures).
3. ‘Creating the actual experience’ (learning new things and possibly
having their behaviour changed in a positive way as a result of
the experience).

Possible pitfalls
While it may seem that interpretation is the ‘answer’ to all of
ecotourism’s problems, it would be short-sighted to neglect the
possible downfalls of applying the concept to management situations

11
 (Orams 1999). Looking at the negative aspects of interpretation may
highlight things to watch out for in future approaches to tourism
management, so that they can be prepared for or avoided. Most
tourist operations, although they claim to employ environmental
protection strategies are still largely market driven and economic
profit remains the top priority. Bramwell and Lane (1993) are two
theorists who recognise this as being a downfall of interpretation in
tourism settings, below are a few points that they suggest as negative
aspects of interpretation.

Interpretation may:
• provide simplified information that may imply that the tourist is
less educated than they actually are;
• be in danger of over-interpretation in such a way that it becomes
intrusive to the tourist, and may diminish the sense of mystique
about a place; or
• increase disappointment if tourists’ expectations are not met after the
interpretation, this may occur in dolphin/tourist interaction situations
as dolphins are wild animals and sightings cannot be guaranteed.

Keeping these points in mind, Bramwell and Lane do not dismiss the
idea of using interpretation as a management strategy, and realise the
great potential it may pose to ecotourism’s future. They suggest that
recognition of the pitfalls of interpretation will assist in making it ‘less
prone to distortion and more likely to make tourism more sustainable’
(1993, p.76).

1.4.6 Education programs and sustainable tourism experiences

Education and interpretation are by definition essential parts of eco-

tourism (Alcock 1991; Bramwell & Lane 1993) and are seen as critical
for ensuring nature based activities become ecologically sustainable
ones (Burgess 1992). This is because education may generate long-
term protection for the environment and/or species by increasing
knowledge and awareness about conservation issues (Burgess 1992;
Roggenbuck 1992). In support of this argument, there are an
increasing number of cetacean tourism studies that look to education
and interpretation as the answer for creating sustainable tourism
experiences (Dickson 2001; Jackson & Osmond 1996; Neil, Orams &

12
Baglioni 1995b; Orams 1995, 1996, 1999; Shanzel & McIntosh 2000;
Weiler & Crabtree 1996; Wursig 1996).

Many studies that examine the long-term effectiveness of education,

do not examine tourist satisfaction with the education, which includes
satisfaction with guidelines used by the operator to minimise impacts.
Tourist satisfaction is an essential part of sustainable tourism.
According to the Tourism Working Group for Ecologically Sustainable
Development (1991), tourism will be ecologically sustainable only if it
makes the best use of the environmental resources it is based upon
and considers the quality of experiences offered.

1.4.7 Satisfaction with best practice management procedures

Wildlife interactions need to be heavily managed due to the

unpredictable nature of wild animals. However, in order to be
ecologically sustainable operators need to manage both for wildlife
impacts and for the quality of the tourist experience (Boyd & Butler
1996; Tourism Working Group for Ecologically Sustainable
Development 1991). Operators should therefore be aware of how the
management used to minimise impacts upon the wildlife affects the
quality of the experience.

One of the most important factors to be considered if the

implementation of a management strategy is to be successful is to
ensure that tourist satisfaction is achieved. For this, operators must
know what participants think of management strategies and actions
and what makes for effective interpretation. Examining this may
provide operators with information about which wildlife interaction
management procedures are beneficial (and sustainable) to both the
tourist and wildlife. An example of this is results from a study into the
dwarf minke whale swim tour industry, results revealed that tourists
enjoyed being close to animals however did not want to touch,
attempt to touch or chase whales as they found it more satisfying to
interact in a benign manner (O’Neill 1999). This allowed managers to
implement procedures that were satisfactory to the tourist, and
beneficial to the animal.

13
 1.5 Aims

The broad aims of this report are to examine the issue of Best Practice
in enhancing the tourist/wildlife interaction experience, and are
summarised as follows:
• To present findings from an evaluation of wild dolphin swim tour
participants.
• To link these findings to the production of an interpretive video to
be viewed by DDC swim tour participants prior to the tour.
• To provide a manual of Best Practice guidelines for operators
involved in sustainable tourism and dolphin/tourist interaction that
utilises the ANZECC model previously reviewed.

The specific aims of this report are to assess how some specific
findings of the research may assist future management of wild
dolphin swim tours, and are summarised as follows:
• To examine visitor perception of dolphin characteristics before and
after the tour.
• To analyse visitor expectation and satisfaction levels with various
components of the swim tour.
• To assess the effectiveness of, and satisfaction with, the education
and interpretation strategies used by the DDC to manage the
interaction, in order to help determine which procedures are
effective in achieving ecologically sustainable interactions.

The following sections of this report provide a site description for the
study, the methodologies applied in the study, results of the swim tour
evaluation and a conclusion of the issue of Best Practice guidelines.

14
 2
1. SITE DESCRIPTION: DOLPHIN DISCOVERY CENTRE
The Dolphin Discovery Centre (DDC) is situated on Koombana Bay
Beach in Bunbury, Western Australia (33 19’ S, 115 39’ E). Bunbury is
approximately 180 kilometres south west of Perth City. The Centre was
opened in 1994, and is managed by the Bunbury Dolphin Trust - a non-
profit, community-based establishment. The four main objectives of
the Centre are Education, Conservation, Research and Tourism.

2.1 History

The first reported human dolphin interaction in the area occurred in

the early 1960's, when local Bunbury resident 'Mrs Smith' began
feeding a mother and calf from a local fishing jetty. The event became
very well known, featuring in both State and local newspapers and
drawing daily crowds of more than 200 people. Regular feeding of
the dolphins ceased upon Mrs Smith's death in 1975.

In 1989 the Bunbury Dolphin Trust was formed with the intention of
restoring human dolphin interaction within the bay. A license from the
Department of Conservation and Land Management was issued and
a dolphin interaction area was developed in 1990. The Centre
building was established and officially opened in 1995.

2.2 Present Day

Approximately 70,000 people visit the Centre each year and on-site
facilities include a café, souvenir shop and a marine interpretive centre
(Horan 2001, pers.comm). Tourists visiting the Centre are able to
interact with dolphins via boat-based dolphin watch tours, swim with
wild dolphin tours or the shore based Interaction Zone.

The team of DDC staff includes a Centre Manager, Dolphin

Interaction Supervisor (responsible for overseeing tourist-dolphin
interaction) and several café staff. Like many not-for-profit
organisations, the DDC utilises the services of volunteers. Volunteers
are either long-term local Bunbury residents or short-term
international tourists (minimum stay of 3 months). A short training
and orientation course is run each year, upon completion volunteers

15
 help to educate tourists and assist the Dolphin Interaction Supervisor
(DIS) in managing tourists during interactions.

2.2.1 Interpretive centre

The Interpretive Centre comprises several informational displays about

West Australian marine mammals, the local Koombana Bay
bottlenose dolphins and other marine related conservation issues. The
Interpretive Centre also features a small theatre playing a short
documentary on social behaviour of the Koombana Bay dolphins. At
the time of the survey an entry fee of $5 for adults and $3.50 for
children was charged.

2.2.2 Boat based tours

The boat-based dolphin-watch tours are operated by a private operator

and run twice daily from the DDC. Interpretation of the dolphin
experience is limited, with the focus of the educational content on
marine safety issues. The tours run for approximately one and a half
hours, depending on sea conditions and success of dolphin sightings.

2.2.3 Artificial provisioning area: interaction zone (license)

The Interaction Zone (IZ) is a 200 square metre (50m x 40m)

rectangular area positioned in the shallow waters of Koombana Bay,
discernible by buoys. An interaction occurs when a dolphin swims
inside the markers and stays for a period of longer than one minute.
There is no set time for dolphins to visit the IZ. During dolphin visits
people are able to stand waist deep in the water, or float on the
surface using mask and snorkel. This activity is free of charge.

A marine mammal interaction license, issued by the Department of

Conservation and Land Management, permits a maximum of 500
grams of fish to be fed, per dolphin within the zone, per day. There is
no designated time for feeding. Only the DIS or trained volunteers are
licensed to feed, no members of the public are permitted. This differs
to the internationally popular tourist site 'Monkey Mia' in Shark Bay,
Western Australia where three adult females are fed a maximum of
2kg per day, and rangers select approximately three tourists from the
crowd to assist.

16
Since 1998 only two adult male dolphins 'Sharkie' and 'Iruka' have
made consistent visits to the IZ. In a 1999 review of management
procedures it was suggested that these two animals and an adult
female, who has been visiting since 1992, remain the only provisioned
dolphins (O’Neill pers comm., December 1999).

The dolphins visit the IZ on approximately 150 days of the year. Visits
are seasonal, with the summer months of November through to
February experiencing the most per year. During this period, dolphins
visit approximately two to three times per day. The average duration of
a dolphin visit is 19 minutes (range one minute to 92 minutes). Seventy
five percent of visits occur between the morning hours of 7-11am.

The IZ is managed through a specific set of guidelines and educational

activities aimed at tourists.

2.2.4 Wild dolphin swim tours

In 1999, the DDC was issued with a license from the state
Department of Conservation and Land Management allowing them
to begin conducting wild dolphin swim tours within Koombana Bay.
Marketed as ‘take a swim on the wild side’, the first trial season of
swim tours commenced in November 1999 and concluded in early
April 2000. The cost of the tour during the surveying period was
AUD$70, this price included necessary equipment of wetsuit,
buoyancy vest, mask, snorkel and small fins.

Wild dolphin swim tours run during the summer months (November
through April) and are dependent upon tourist demand and weather
conditions. Each tour takes a maximum of ten swimmers and is only
1.5 hours in duration. Upon sighting, staff assess the dolphins
location and behaviour and, if deemed suitable, swimmers are
permitted to enter the water.

A system of ‘snorkel lines’ (formerly known as ‘mermaid lines’) is used

to minimise swimmer impact on dolphins. These lines are provided for
the swimmer in the water to hold on to and be slowly towed along
by the vessel. The aim of the lines is to prevent the swimmers from
chasing or trying to touch dolphins and allow the dolphin to initiate
approaches rather than the swimmer.

17
 2.2.5 Wild dolphin swim tour code of practice

To help minimise the potential impact that boat and swimmers may
have upon the Koombana Bay dolphins, the DDC had developed a
voluntary Code of Practice. Guidelines within the code were more
specific than the set of CALM license conditions and included the
following:
Maximum of 1 tour per day -
• Maximum of 10 swimmers per tour
• 1.5-2 hour duration (maximum in-water time 60 minutes)
• Compulsory tourist educational brief
• Snorkel refresher course
• 5 Minimal Impact Procedures

The set of ‘Minimal Impact Procedures’ included -

• Boat approach guidelines
• Assessment of dolphin behaviour
• Limit to the number of swimmer attempts
• No touching
• Use of snorkel lines

The Code of Practice, including the minimal impact procedures, is

described in full detail in the Best Practice Manual produced in
conjunction with this report.

18
 3
1. METHOD

3.1 Questionnaire Development

Oppenhiem (1992) provides a useful source of information of the

design of questionnaires. He discusses the style and order of questions
and the ‘naturalness’ of the questionnaire design to be attractive,
interesting and straightforward for participant responses. Pearce,
Moscardo and Ross (1996) further discuss methodological issues in
determining collective attitudinal responses (social representations),
including use of language of the community, the need for a research
approach and the utilisation of previous research from a wide base. In
the case of the DDC, no prior research in this subject area had been
conducted.

This study also provided the first opportunity for the DDC to
investigate its feasibility as a sustainable wildlife tourist site. In order
to examine this, two different surveys were developed:

1. ‘Shore based’ survey, which examined a number of components

including marketing, education, satisfaction with site facilities, service,
interaction zone and boat-based dolphin watching experience.

2. ‘Swim tour survey’ containing both a pre and post section and
focusing specifically upon the DDC’s new wild dolphin swim
tour operation.

For the purposes of this report, only the second survey – that of the
swim tour participants – will be utilised. Both surveys were voluntary
and written only in English; hence all non-English speaking visitors
were excluded from the two sample populations.

3.2 Swim Tour Surveys

The swim tour survey was developed primarily to examine the viability
of the swim tour code of practice, its effect upon the tourist experience
and the overall feasibility of the tour. To do this both pre and post-swim
questionnaires were developed to give insight into both expectation
and satisfaction. Each respondent was asked to complete both

19
 components of the survey, which were then matched, so that their pre-
tour experience could coincide with that of the post-tour.

The pre-swim questionnaire aimed to explore tourist motivation,

socio-demographic information, which included looking at prior
experience, and to examine tourist expectation with wild dolphins
and wild dolphin swim tours (please refer to Appendix I for full
questionnaire). Examination of pre-experience attitudes were
necessary in order to address those factors that might influence
people’s satisfaction with the experience. An example of this was
research done by Neil, Orams & Baglioni, (1996) who found the
expectations of whale watching participants who had previously been
whale watching before and who had prior knowledge of the whales,
were consistently lower than for those with no previous experience.

In addition to this, motivations for people vary and each person may
have a range of motives that contributed to their decision to
undertake the trip (Pearce 1988). In the case of DDC tours, interacting
with wild dolphins may not have been important to the value or the
motivational systems of every person. If the tourist does not
particularly value the swimming with wild dolphin experience, then
there is no guarantee they will be satisfied.

The post swim section of the survey examined satisfaction with wild
dolphin interaction, tourist enjoyment with various tour features other
than interaction, and the satisfaction with certain swim tour
management guidelines. Through a series of exploratory questions
the survey also examined tourists satisfaction with the education used
to implement management guidelines.

3.2.1 Distribution of surveys

Swim tour surveys were distributed between the months of late

February to mid April 2000. The surveys were only distributed to those
participating in the wild dolphin swim tours.

Upon arrival the DIS, a Murdoch University research assistant or a DDC

volunteer greeted swim tourists. They were then informed of the
study, its overall aims, and were asked if they would mind completing
a pre-swim questionnaire. To ensure accurate representation of

20
expectations, it was stressed that questionnaires had to be completed
and retuned to staff before the commencement of the Education
Brief. To do so, each guest was given a pen, clipboard and an extra 10
minutes to finish the survey.

During the education brief tourists were asked if they would be

willing to complete a post swim survey after the swim tour. Upon
return, those who had agreed were given a survey, pen and clipboard.
Free coffee or tea from the café was also provided to ensure guests
sat down to thoroughly go through the survey. Each guest then
handed in the survey to DDC staff.

3.2.2 Sample population

Sample size for the swim tour surveys consisted of 254 matched pre
and post swim surveys. They consisted of all people on tour at the
time, which represented 56 per cent for the season. The sample size
was dependent upon passenger numbers for each tour as all tourists
participating in a swim tour during the period late February to mid
April were asked to complete surveys. The sample used for the data
collection was therefore a ‘non-random accidental’ or ‘convenience
sample’. The sample size represents 56 per cent of the total swim tour
season population, as 195 tourists were not sampled during the
months of November to early February.

Of the 254 surveys obtained, 31 were incomplete in pre and post

matching due to unforeseen changes in the weather causing an early
return and often no swimming opportunities. The resultant 223
surveys were used for the analysis, which was conducted using
content analysis and coding and utilising the Statistical Package for
Social Sciences (SPSS). The sample was primarily female (60%), aged
between 12 and 76 years old with an average age of 31. Most
participants were from overseas (60%) and 23 per cent of Australian
visitors coming from origins outside of Western Australia, only 2
participants (.9%) regarded themselves as being local to the region.

3.3 Video

Major findings from the sustainable tourism survey formed the basis
for the development of an interpretive/educational video to be utilised

21
 by the DDC for pre-trip education of participants. Two media honours
students, Karuna Gurung and Roger Porter from Edith Cowan
University (Bunbury campus) participated in the development of an
educational video for visitors to view prior to commencing the swim
tour (Refer Appendix II for brief discussion of video development).
Their brief was simply to ‘Get from initial project application’.
Following Oppenheim's (1992) naturalness approach, the producers
of the video had a natural community understanding of the DDC
interaction opportunities. They undertook qualitative research for the
requirements of the project and utilised key survey findings in their
production. The educational video was used for a period during the
swim tour program and proved to be useful, however at present, the
DDC no longer utilises the video to educate swim tour participants
due to the constant changes in procedures (see Appendix II).

3.4 Best Practice Industry Manual

The DDC staff and researchers contributed to an existing manual of

Best Practice for dolphin wild swim tours (initiated by O’Neill 1999).
This report acts to consolidate and formalise approaches that have
been previously semi-documented by the DDC. O’Neill, as the original
Swim Tour licensee, proposed a swim tour Code of Practice for the
DDC. Some questions in the swim tour survey were aimed at
evaluating some of the procedures within the Code of Practice.

22
 4
1. RESULTS OF SWIM TOUR SURVEYS

4.1 Description Of Swim Tour Participants

The majority of swim tour participants were female (60%) with a

mean age of 30 years and ages ranging from as young as 12 years old
to 76 years old. International tourists accounted for 60 per cent of the
participants with most of them coming from the United Kingdom. Of
the Australians, 75 per cent were from Western Australia, however
only two were local Bunbury residents.

Ten respondents had prior experience of a dolphin swim tour, and a

further seventeen had participated in various forms of marine wildlife
based tours. Most (88%) of the respondents had snorkelled before;
however, almost half rated their snorkelling ability as merely average
or below average. These results suggest a low level of previous
experience in the marine environment.

4.2 Tourist Expectations

4.2.1 Wild dolphins

The pre-swim questionnaire asked participants to list three

characteristics of a wild dolphin and 211 people responded. In line
with the Amante-Helweg (1996) findings participants held a very
anthropomorphic view of wild dolphins, with a large percentage of
respondents seeing the animals as friendly, smiley and happy, playful
and joyful. Only 2.4 per cent of the respondents referred to wild
dolphins as non-human interactive animals. Table 1 shows the top
three characteristics of dolphins listed by participants prior to the tour.
These characteristics can be seen to be positive human-like attributes.

Table 1: Characteristics of dolphins (pre-tour)

CHARACTERISTICS % OF CASES (n=211)

Friendly, kind, smiley 43
Happy, playful, joyful 40
Intelligent, wise 35

23
 After the tour, almost one third (30%) of the respondents said their
understanding of a wild dolphin had changed. Table 2 shows the
results of the same question asked in the post-tour survey.

Table 2: Changed perception of dolphin characteristics (post-tour)

CHARACTERISTICS % OF CASES
Unpredictable, wild 48
Not always friendly to humans 43
Playful 28
Aggressive, fighting 22

As Table 2 illustrates, almost half of the changes in understanding

included the unpredictable nature of wild dolphins and 43 per cent of
the respondents found dolphins to be ‘not so friendly’. Some
respondents wrote about the playful side of dolphins, while others
referred to their ‘aggressive nature’.

4.2.2 Dolphin interaction

To obtain insight into expectations about interaction, an open-ended
question was used within the pre-tour survey asking participants to
write 3 features they were looking forward to when swimming with
wild dolphins. Content analysis revealed many themes, which are
summarised in Table 3.

Table 3: What tourists were looking forward to (pre-tour)

FEATURES OF TOUR % OF CASES

(n=210) (n=210)
Close up view 47
Swimming in water with dolphin(s) 46
Seeing dolphins 30
Fulfilling a dream 23
Observing dolphin-to-dolphin behaviour 14
Touching dolphins 14
Hearing noises, sound 13
Learning 3

24
The pre-swim tour survey also listed 13 different features of the tour
and asked participants to rate, using a five point Likert scale, the
importance of each to their enjoyment of the upcoming tour (with 1
= ‘not at all important’ and 5 = ‘very important’). The features and
their mean importance score are detailed in Table 4.

Table 4: Factors contributing to enjoyment (pre-tour)

FEATURES OF TOUR n MEAN IMPORTANCE

Ensuring no harm done to dolphins 220 4.9
Not having a negative impact on the dolphins 220 4.8
Seeing dolphins underwater 219 4.4
Feeling safe whilst in the water 220 4.4
Personal safety briefing 220 4.2
Seeing dolphins from the boat 220 4.1
Educational brief from crew 219 4.1
Feeling comfortable with snorkelling equipment 221 4.1
Good weather conditions 217 3.9
Opportunity to learn new information 221 3.9
Educational material in Interpretation Centre 219 3.6
Accompanying friend/s family 218 3.3
Touching a dolphin 221 2.8

In Table 4 it can be seen that the most important feature believed to

aid enjoyment of the tour was ‘ensuring no harm to dolphins’. The
second most important feature believed to affect enjoyment was
‘seeing dolphins underwater’. Using a paired sample t-test, results
showed that ‘seeing dolphins underwater’ was significantly more
important to enjoyment than ‘seeing dolphins from the boat’. The
feature considered the least important to enjoyment by the majority
of respondents before their tour was ‘touching dolphins’.

4.2.3 Education and interpretation

Table 3 shows that only three per cent of participants were looking
forward to ‘learning’ as a feature of the tour, yet Table 4 reflects a
different outlook. The majority of respondents (79%) noted that an

25
 ‘educational brief from the crew’ was important or very important for
their enjoyment (mean importance = 4.1), with the ‘opportunity to
learn new information’ being important or very important to 72 per
cent of tour participants. Furthermore, over half the respondents
(53%) felt that the ‘educational material in the interpretation centre’
was important to very important to the enjoyment of their experience.

4.2.4 Touching dolphins

Questions relating to the issue of touching dolphins presented mixed

and almost contradictory results. Table 3 shows ‘touching dolphins’ as
one of the three features visitors were looking forward to prior to
swimming with wild dolphins. Table 4 shows that ‘to be able to touch
a dolphin’ was regarded as the least important factor for enjoyment of
the experience. However, almost a third of respondents (30%)
considered ‘touching a dolphin’ as important or very important to their
enjoyment. The contradicting visitor desires to both protect yet touch
dolphins appears to be a key issue for management. Education and
interpretation offer the best potential for managing this conundrum.

In relation to ensuring no harm is done to dolphins, swim tour

participants were initially asked how close they expected to get to a
dolphin (in the pre-tour survey) and then later asked to provide an
estimate of how close they actually got during their swim tour (post-
swim survey). Figure 1 displays the expected and actual levels of
closeness. Results show that 96 per cent of respondents expected to
get within 0-5 metres to a dolphin during a swim tour. Further
exploration of the results shows that on average, swimmers actually got
closer to the dolphins than they expected to (mean expectation was 3.8
metres whilst mean estimate of actual closeness was 3 metres).

26
Figure 1: Expected/estimated closeness (in metres) to wild
dolphins
100

expected n=195
80
estimated n=194
valid % of responses

60

40

20

0
0-5m >5-10m >10-20m >20m
distance categories

4.3 Tourist Satisfaction

4.3.1 Dolphin sightings

Results from the post swim survey showed that all respondents sighted
dolphins during the tour. According to respondent estimations:

• Over half (55%) of respondents (n=221) saw dolphins underwater;

the mean number that people sighted underwater was two.

• More again (69%) sighted dolphins from the surface of the water
(as opposed to underwater), the mean number of dolphins sighted
was 10.

• Most people (91%) sighted dolphins from the boat, the mean
number of dolphins sighted in this case was 17.

The post swim questionnaire listed 13 features of the tour and asked
respondents to rate how satisfied they were with each feature (Refer
Appendix 1, Post Swim survey Q10). The tour feature that the majority
of respondents were unsatisfied with was ‘Seeing dolphins from
underwater’. The tour feature most respondents were very satisfied
with was ‘seeing dolphins from the boat’. Further analysis of results

27
 showed that participants were significantly more satisfied with seeing
dolphins from the boat, than with ‘seeing dolphins underwater’.

The post-tour survey also asked participants to name three of the

worst things about the dolphin swim tour. The most common
response was ‘underwater visibility’ which was noted by 37 per cent
of respondents. Thirty per cent referred to the ‘weather and cold
water temperature’, and 17 per cent said that ‘not seeing dolphins
close enough’ was one of the worst aspects.

4.3.2 Closeness

Figure 1 shows that 85 per cent of respondents estimated they had

come within 0-5 metres of a dolphin. It is important to note that this
distance is not necessarily from the water – it may have been on the
boat or from the surface of the water. Further analysis of the post-
swim responses showed that of those who came within 5 metres of a
dolphin, almost half did not consider this close enough.

4.3.3 Return

When the tourists were asked if they would participate in a wild

dolphin swim tour again, almost half (49%) of respondents replied
definitely, 30 per cent probably, 16 per cent were unsure and 4 per
cent said no. This represents a positive outlook for the DDC regarding
repeat visitor numbers, particularly when noting that 60 per cent of
the participants are from overseas and only 27 per cent were from
within Western Australia.

4.4 Effectiveness Of Management Procedures

Tourists were asked if they thought the tour had had a negative
impact upon the dolphins. Of those who responded (n=217) 80 per
cent said no, two per cent said yes and 18 per cent of respondents
were unsure.

When asked if their behaviour would have differed in the water, had
they been on an unmanaged tour, 55 per cent of respondents replied
yes (n=212). When asked how their behaviour would have differed,
the majority wrote ‘would have tried to touch the dolphins’ and

28
others admitted they would have tried to follow or chase the
dolphins. This information supports the pre swim results, which
indicated that, whilst the majority of tourists wanted to ensure that
no harm came to the dolphins, 14 per cent of participants looked
forward to touching the dolphins and a further 30 per cent felt that
touching dolphins would be important to the enjoyment of the tour.

4.4.1 Education

Post swim results showed that 93 per cent were satisfied with the
educational brief from crew and 74 per cent were satisfied to very
satisfied with the opportunity to learn new information. Analysis of
question 12 in the post swim tour survey revealed that 21 per cent of
the tour participants had wanted more information about dolphin
habits and behaviour.

4.4.2 Minimal impact procedures

Participants were asked to rate how effective they thought the

minimal impact procedures (MIP’s) were in reducing impacts upon the
dolphins. Of those who responded (n=203), almost three quarters
(74%) believed them to be effective to very effective in reducing
impacts only 2 respondents (1%) considered MIP’s ineffective in
reducing impacts.

After the tour, participants were asked if they could recall the MIP’s.
The respondents listed all MIP’s in various orders, although the one
specific guideline recalled by the majority of respondents, (83.5%)
was ‘no touching’.

Touching dolphins
When asked how satisfied they were with the procedures that
prevented touching dolphins (educational brief and snorkel lines),
Figure 2 demonstrates that majority of respondents (n=210) were
‘satisfied’ through to ‘very satisfied’.

29
 Figure 2: Tourist satisfaction with the procedures that
prevented touching of dolphins

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Very Unsatisfied Neutral Satisfied Very
unsatisfied satisfied

Snorkel lines
When asked about the effect of the snorkel lines upon their
experience, just under half of those who responded said it improved
their experience (n=206). When asked how the lines improved their
experience, analysis revealed that most respondents said it had made
them feel safer (n=122). Figure 3 shows the responses of participants
when asked about their experience with snorkel lines.

Figure 3: Impact of the snorkel lines on swim tour experience

35

30
valid % of responses

25

20

15

10

0
Greatly Reduced Made no Improved Greatly
reduced difference improved

30
Other reasons why the snorkel lines improved people’s experience
included that it made the tour more ‘fun’; it was perceived by the
tourists to be ‘good for the dolphins’ and that it was less effort, i.e.
they didn’t have to swim. Some reasons why participants felt that the
snorkel lines hindered their experience included the fact that they
made people feel restricted and uncomfortable.

31
 5
5. DISCUSSION
Overall tourist satisfaction was high, with nearly 80 per cent of
participants saying they definitely or most likely would return. Various
aspects contributed to satisfaction especially the opportunity to see
dolphins and obtain a close up view of dolphins. Satisfaction was high
no doubt due to the fact that everyone sighted dolphins during the
tour, however the majority were sighted from the boat, as opposed to
the water. People had not considered education as a particularly
important component of the tour, however satisfaction with the
procedures within the Code of Practice suggest education was an
important part and beneficial to creating satisfactory experiences.

5.1 Creating Realistic Expectations

Pre-swim results demonstrated that participants view wild dolphins

the same way they may view trained animals in a marine park –
friendly, kind, happy etc. This misconception is risky, Birtles et al.
(2001) note the potentially dangerous situation that may arise where
tourists’ perceptions of wildlife are inappropriate, the
anthropomorphism of wild life as being ‘cute’, ‘smiley’, ‘friendly’ etc.
removes the notion of unpredictable (perhaps dangerous) wild
animals. The situation is often made worse by the advertising and
marketing information used by operators to attract tourists. Positive
anthropomorphic perceptions and unrealistic expectations about wild
dolphins may lead to dissatisfaction. Surprisingly this was not the case
for the DDC wild dolphin swim tours. It is assumed that the education
offered by operators during the brief helped to create realistic
expectations, and hence enabled tourists to be more satisfied with
their experiences.

These results highlight the need for operators to utilise the tour
opportunity wisely, by providing educational material that
incorporates both the likely behaviour of the animal in the wild and
the procedures required to manage interactions. Providing accurate
and informative material will develop informed and supportive
participants, which will encourage development of realistic
expectations of encounters. This will avoid disappointment and
pressure for increasingly risky behaviour (International Whaling

32
Commission 1996). This is in accordance with the Action Plan for
Australian Cetaceans which states ‘That the whale watching industry
be encouraged to produce promotional and educational materials to
high standards of factual accuracy and presentation’ (Bannister,
Kemper & Warneke 1996, section 5.6) In addition to this, the
education offered must be based upon fact. Education is not going to
be of benefit to the animal if it is based upon misconceptions. Wursig
(1996) refers to this as bridging the warm-fuzzy feeling, and Bannister
et al. (1996) believe cetacean conservation issues must be balanced
and scientifically accurate.

5.2 Satisfaction With Seeing Dolphins During The Tour

Pre-swim survey results demonstrated that the majority of participants

were looking forward to getting a close up view and/or swimming with
dolphins. Results show the majority of participants also expected to get
within close proximity to dolphins. On the issue of closeness, it appears
that most participants had their expectations met, with 96 per cent
expecting to and 85 per cent actually getting within 0-5 metres of a
wild dolphin. However, the fact that this distance is not based entirely
upon in-water sightings, supports the suggestion that boat-based
interaction within Koombana Bay is equal to or more satisfying than in-
water interaction. This is further supported by post swim results
showing that participants were significantly more satisfied with seeing
dolphins from the boat, than with ‘seeing dolphins underwater’. This
result is interesting given that prior to the tour ‘seeing dolphins from
underwater’ was of high importance to tourist enjoyment, significantly
more so than seeing dolphins from the boat.

The fact that satisfaction for boat-based viewing was significantly

higher than underwater viewing could be due to the fact that more
people sighted more dolphins from the boat (as opposed to surface
and underwater), and that underwater visibility was rated the worst
feature of the tour. This therefore implies that operators must take
into account the physical characteristics of their tourist site.
Koombana Bay on a good day has approximately three meters
underwater visibility (O’Neill pers. obs 1999-2000). This no doubt
affects people’s ability to sight dolphins underwater, which in turn
may affect their satisfaction.

33
 5.3 Satisfaction With Management Procedures

Although education played a minor role in a tourist’s motivation and

expectation of the swim tour, it seemed to have played a major role
in tourist satisfaction. Results show that participants felt strongly
about ensuring no harm to dolphins, hence providing education that
included both information about dolphin biology and behaviour and
then an interpretation of the guidelines used to reduce harmful
impacts upon dolphin biology and behaviour, may have increased the
tourists acceptance of guidelines and therefore helped in creating
satisfactory experiences. Support for this can be seen from results of
post swim questions that focused upon the minimal impact
procedures.

Prior to the tour a small number of participants had been looking

forward to touching dolphins. To manage this both snorkel lines and
education were used. Education was provided during the brief and
included both a rationale of the snorkel lines (reduced ability to chase
and touch) and information about the risks and harmful impacts of
touching. After the tour approximately 15 per cent of participants
admitted they would have tried to touch dolphins if management
strategies had not been in place. Results suggest that Best Practice
Guidelines must continue to be implemented to ensure that all
tourists behave appropriately during wildlife interactions, as it appears
to be a consequence of human nature that people feel they need to
have a hands-on experience with nature. Results also reflect the
success of interpretation as a management tool, as 80 per cent of
tourists said they had been satisfied to very satisfied with the
procedures used to prevent touching of dolphins. It would be
interesting to examine tourist satisfaction if interpretation had not
been used to explain the purpose of such management guidelines.

Another interesting point, contradictory in the findings, was the use of

snorkel lines. Snorkel lines were originally used to reduce the potential
for impacts upon dolphins (mainly touching and chasing by
swimmers). It was thought that lines would benefit the animals but
decrease the experience for the tourists. Surprisingly, swimmers’
satisfaction was not an issue as results show the snorkel lines increased
the quality of experience for many swimmers. Further analysis of open-

34
ended responses revealed snorkel lines had made people feel safer and
reduced the physical effort required for swimming. This is fitting given
almost half of the swim tour participants regarded themselves as
average or below average snorkellers.

In contrast, anecdotal observation by DDC staff, found snorkel lines

to be potentially impacting upon dolphins. The placing of lines in the
water, slow dispersal of swimmers along the line, towing of lines by
the boat during repositioning and retrieval from the water, seemed to
create avoidance responses by dolphins. In the Annual Report to
CALM it was recommended that free swimming combined with
detailed education about the risks of touching dolphins be used in
future DDC wild dolphin swim tours (O’Neill, unpublished report
2000). To maintain tourist satisfaction however, snorkel lines should
be kept on the boat and used if a swimmer is experiencing difficulty.

5.4 Sustainable Tourism Experiences

As more studies are beginning to show that even strict guidelines may
not be effective in reducing impacts (Constantine 2001) it is becoming
more important to evaluate and discuss current examples of best
practice application in wildlife tourism settings. This report has aimed
to explore the DDC experience of wild dolphin swim tours as an
example of Best Practice for ecologically sustainable wildlife tourism.
The DDC developed a Code of Practice with the aim of reducing
impacts upon dolphins in a tourism setting. It is argued that the DDC
tours utilise Best Practice principles through the application of
education and interpretation, achieving the dual aim of reducing
negative impacts upon the wildlife whilst also enhancing the
satisfaction of the tourist.

For cetacean swim tours to continue, there must be a balance

‘between minimising impacts, allowing for commercial and non-
commercial activities and utilising opportunities to educate
participants (Constantine 2001, p8). For wild dolphin swim tours to
continue at the DDC and other centres management guidelines and
minimal impact procedures need to be developed and critiqued.

The temporal nature of research into this area of tourism is

acknowledged. Best Practice examples provide a basis for further

35
 knowledge based management applications. A co-operative
approach to research through biological and social sciences in the
tourism/wildlife nexus is imperative. It is anticipated that this report
provides the basis for exploration of the impacts of wildlife tourism for
both wildlife and tourists.

36
 6
1. CONCLUSION
This report details the characteristics of a small population of dolphin
swim tour participants at a particular peripheral destination. The site
evaluated is not a mass tourism site and has its own unique set of
variables. However, as a base line, pre and post tour surveys offer
unique insights into the usefulness of interpretation and education as
tools to improve visitor satisfaction whilst maintaining wildlife
integrity within existing bounds of knowledge.

The information from the survey was used to produce an educational

video that has been utilised over two seasons. An operator’s Best
Practice manual has been researched both as an input (in the form of
a Code of Practice) into the survey and as output adjusted by the
findings of the research.

It is proposed that this research contributes to a continuum of

management applications of tourism management, particularly
wildlife tourism management that can never be regarded as a finite or
static issue. This report began with review, experience and intuition, a
quantitative (but limited) survey aimed to explore benefits and
challenges of existing tourism opportunities. It has provided some
outputs that require continuing evaluation and monitoring.

Whilst this report aims to provide current examples of Best Practice

that may be widely applicable, the report also reflects opportunities
for further research, such as:

• Further evaluation of wildlife swim tour characteristics.

• The effectiveness of video as an educational tool.
• The applicability of Best Practice in swim tour applications to
generic dolphin swim tour situations.

Finally, whilst our applications are site specific, as a result of our

applied research methodologies it is anticipated that the validity,
reliability, and replicability of the methods will support the notion of a
wider application of the results. This report aims to provide Best
Practice guidelines that are spatially and temporarily appropriate.
With critique and further development the knowledge base will grow.
We have acted to provide a base for this growth.
37
 1. APPENDIX 1: SWIM TOUR QUESTIONNAIRE

Dolphin Interaction -
Tourism Management and Best Practice
Dolphin Discovery Centre, Murdoch University & CRC Tourism

We are undertaking research for the CRC for sustainable tourism with a
focus on wildlife / human interaction. Our aim is to work towards tourism
development of wildlife opportunities in a manner that will both improve
visitor satisfaction with their experience whilst aiming for minimal impact
on wildlife. We have the support and interest of the government, the
Tourism industry and those interested in wildlife conservation.

Your ability to contribute to this research is extremely valuable and it

will take about 10 minutes of your time. As students of Tourism
studies we value your choice to refuse, if you are not able to
contribute to this research it is important for us to note your reason.
If you are able to contribute, may I continue with the interview?

We hope to interview 2000 visitors who will provide information for

dolphin / human interaction sites not only around Australia, but also
worldwide. Results of this research should be available in early 2001,
if you wish to receive information or would like to discuss the research
further, please contact:

Diane Lee Tourism Program, Murdoch University

Ph: 08 9360 7018
Fax: 08 9360 7091
Email: dlee@central.murdoch.edu.au
OR
Fleur O’Neil Dolphin Discovery Centre
Ph: 08 9791 3088
Fax: 08 9791 3420
Email: fleuroneil@dolphindiscoverycentre.asn.au

38
 SECTION 1: PRE-SWIM TOUR QUESTIONNAIRE

SURVEYOR INFORMATION
Please complete for each survey

Surveyor’s ID

Survey ID

Date of survey

Day of survey (tick one)

" Monday " Tuesday " Wednesday " Thursday " Friday
" Saturday " Sunday

Time of survey (tick one)

" Early Morning (8am - 10am)

" Mid Morning (10am - 12noon)

" Lunch (12noon - 2pm)

" Afternoon (2pm - 4pm)

Weather (tick two)

i) " Sunny " Cloudy

ii) " Cool " Warm " Hot

Approach

" Successful?

" Unsuccessful?

Ask to record why " No time

" Not interested

" Holidays/relaxing

" Rude Comment

" Other - list

Name of volunteer present at time of survey

39
 SECTION 2: PRE-SWIM TOUR QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Sex

" Male " Female

2. Year of birth 19

3. Name of your usual country of residence

(if Australia please include post code)

4. Are you a local to the Bunbury Region or are you a visitor to the region?
(Please tick appropriate box)

" Local - Go to Q.8

" Visitor - Go to Q.5

5. Where did you stay last night?

Town

Accommodation

Where will you stay tonight?

Town

Accommodation

6. What was the main purpose of your trip to Bunbury?

7. How long are you planning to stay in Bunbury on this visit?

8. How did you find out about the Dolphin Discovery Centre Swim Tours?

9. Have you participated in a swim with dolphin program before?

" No " Yes (If YES continue with Q9A)

9A. Where was the swim tour?

9B. When was the first time you went on a swim tour?

9C. How many swim tours have you been on?

40
10. Have you been on any swim tours focusing on other large marine life (whales, whale
sharks, manta rays etc.)?

" No " Yes (If YES continue with Q10A)

10A What was the marine focus?

10B Where as the swim tour?

10C When was the first time you went on a swim tour?

10D How many swim tours have you been on?

11. List three things that you are most looking forward to when swimming with wild dolphins?

12. When you think about wild dolphins, what are the three main characteristics that come
to mind?

13. How close do you expect to get to a dolphin/s during the swim tour?

1 2 3 4 5
Do not expect Close enough
to get close to touch

14. How close in metres do you expect to get to a dolphin?

41
 15. How important is each of the following to the enjoyment of your experience today
(please tick the response which best describes how you feel about each item)

NOT AT ALL NOT VERY FAIRLY IMPORTANT VERY

IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT
Ensuring that I do not
harm the dolphins
Seeing dolphins from
the boat
Seeing dolphins
underwater
Educational Brief
from crew
To be able to touch
a dolphin
Briefings about
personal safety
Good weather conditions
Feeling comfortable in the
snorkelling equipment
Feeling safe whilst in
the water
Accompanying friend/s
family during trip
Educational material in
the Interpretation
Opportunities to learn
new information
Ensuring that I do not
harm or have a negative
impact upon the dolphins

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND INPUT.

YOUR RESULTS ARE EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO THE DOLPHIN DISCOVERY CENTRE
AND MURDOCH UNIVERSITY. PLEASE ENJOY YOUR TOUR

42
 SECTION 1: POST SWIM TOUR QUESTIONNAIRE

SURVEYOR TO COMPLETE FOR EACH SURVEY

Surveyor ID

Survey ID
(must match
Date of survey with pretest)
Day of survey (tick one)

" Monday " Tuesday " Wednesday " Thursday " Friday
" Saturday " Sunday

Time of survey (tick one)

" Early Morning (8am - 10am)

" Mid Morning (10am - 12noon)

" Lunch (12noon - 2pm)

" Afternoon (2pm - 4pm)

Weather (tick two)

i) " Sunny " Cloudy

ii) " Cool " Warm " Hot

Approach

" Successful?

" Unsuccessful?

Ask to record why " No time

" Not interested

" Holidays/relaxing

" Rude Comment

" Other - list

Name of volunteer present at time of survey

43
 SECTION TWO: POST SWIM TOUR QUESTIONNAIRE

1. How would you rate the sea conditions during your trip?

1 2 3 4 5
Extremely rough Extremely calm

2. How would you rate the underwater visibility?

1 2 3 4 5

Extremely unclear Extremely clear

3. Had you ever snorkelled before this trip?

" No " Yes

4. Did the snorkelling brief affect your enjoyment of the dolphin swim tour today?

" No " Yes (please specify how)

5. At what level do you rate your snorkelling ability?

1 2 3 4 5
Basic Competent

6. Did you see a dolphin during the swim tour? (can tick more than 1 box)

" No (please go to Q.9)

" Yes from underwater

" Yes from the boat

" Yes from the water but only from the surface

6a. Please make an estimate of how many dolphins you saw.

i) From the boat

ii) From the water but only at the surface

iii) Underwater

7. How close did you get to a dolphin/s during the swim tour?
Please rate how close on the following scale:

1 2 3 4 5
Did not get Close enough
close enough to touch

44
8. How close (in metres) did you get to a dolphin? m

9. How satisfied were you with your experience today?

Please tick the appropriate response for each tour feature.

VERY UNSATISFIED NEUTRAL SATISFIED VERY

UNSATISFIED SATISFIED
Understanding any
impact I may have had
on the dolphins
Seeing dolphins from
the boat
Seeing dolphins
underwater
Procedures which prevent
the touching of dolphins
Educational brief
from crew
Briefings about personal
safety
Good weather conditions
Feeling comfortable in the
snorkelling equipment
provided by the DDC
Feeling safe whilst in
the water
Educational material in
the Interpretation Centre
Opportunities to learn
new information

10. How do you feel about the level of information provided by the staff on this tour?
Please rate your satisfaction level on the following scale:

1 2 3 4 5
Very unsatisfied Very satisfied

11. Is there anything in particular you would have liked more information on:

45
 12. Having completed your dolphin swim tour, has your understanding of wild dolphins
changed?

" No (go to Q 15) " Yes (go to Q14 )

13. Recalling your earlier survey could you now name 3 characteristics of wild dolphins
which reflect this change?

14. Did you see any human-dolphin interaction which may have had a specific impact on
the dolphins. Please explain in the following space.

15. Do you believe the swim with dolphin tour you participated in caused harm or had a
negative impact upon the dolphins today?

" No " Yes " Unsure

If YES please explain,

16. Can you name four minimal impact procedures undertaken by the Dolphin Discovery
Centre, as outlined in the briefing.

17. On the following scale please rate how effective you feel the minimal impact
procedures were in reducing human impact to the dolphins.

1 2 3 4 5
Very effective Not at all effective

18. This question has been designed to discover how you feel about the minimal impact
procedures which you were required to follow during your swim tour today.
Please circle the number which best reflects the way you feel:

1 2 3 4 5
Too strict Not strict enough

46
19. Were there any procedures which you felt were:
i) inappropriate, ii) unsuitable or iii) unnecessary?

Procedure Reason (please note which of i), ii), iii) apply)

i.

ii.

iii.

20. If you were not on a supervised swim tour would you have behaved differently?

" No (go to Q 23) " Yes (go to Q22)

21. In what manner would behave differently?

22. Why do you think you would behave the same?

23. What were the three best things about your dolphin swim tour this morning?

24. What were the three worst things about your dolphin swim tour this morning?

47
 25. This question is designed to discover how you felt about the mermaid lines used during
the swim tour. Do you believe the mermaid line:

" Greatly reduced the quality of your experience

" Reduced the quality of your experience
" Made no difference to your experience
" Improved the quality of your experience
" Greatly improved the quality of your experience

26. Please specify how the mermaid line affected your experience (if applicable)

27. Would you participate in a wild dolphin swim-tour again?

" No " Don’t know " Probably " Definitely

THE END

The Dolphin Discovery centre and Murdoch Universitywould like to thank you once again,
for taking the time to participate in this survey.

Your contribution is very valuable and greatly appreciated.

48
1. APPENDIX 2: DESCRIPTION OF SWIM TOUR VIDEO BY
PHIL COULTHARD AND LORNA KAINO

Description of DDC swim tour video as outlined by Phil Coulthard

(DIS – DDC)

Last year (2001) students from the Edith Cowan Media Department
produced a Swim Tour Video for the Dolphin Discovery Centre (DDC). The
purpose of the video was to educate tourists participating in the swim
tour highlighting the procedures established at the time of production.

The actual use of the video as an educational tool worked very well
with some excellent and real footage of the wild dolphins of
Koombana Bay displaying a number of natural behaviours, which are
often seen on the tours. It was also a very useful introduction to the
basic biology and social structure of the dolphin population.

Giving the participants the opportunity to watch the video clearly

demonstrating how the swim tour works allowed the guide and easy,
low effort instructional source that increased the understanding and
efficiency of the anticipated tour and the associated low-impact
procedures. Slow and clear narration also helped to break down any
potential confusion or misunderstanding experienced by foreign
visitors. Hence, I do feel that the use of the video for instructional
purposes certainly helped create an efficient level of understanding
that may not have been achieved through guide instruction alone.

Unfortunately, since the video was produced, a number of changes to

both the procedures and protocols of the actual tour have occurred,
resulting in the ineffective use of the video as an instructional tool.
This is our major problem relating to the use and application of the
video in its current format for this and future seasons. There may be
no real answer to this problem simply because procedures may
constantly be changed to improve the operation. Examples on the
changes in the procedures that need attention include:
1. The use of life jackets is no longer compulsory (footage and
narration change)
2. Explanation of personal item security and storage procedures
(footage and narration inclusion)

49
 3. We don’t have practice snorkel sessions before departure (footage
and narration change)
4. Swimmers must carry their own mask, fins and snorkel onto boat,
we don’t (footage and narration)
5. We don’t split the swimmers into 2 separate groups (footage and
narration change)
6. We don’t use the mermaid lines anymore (footage and narration
change)
7. Certain hand signals are not useful (footage and narration changes)
8. Entry and exit procedures have changed
9. Explanation of Swim tours as research expeditions (footage and
narration inclusion).

Another problem that existed concerned footage of dolphins in and

around the area of the swimmers while in the water. There was potential
for the video to create a level of expectation that may not be reached on
that particular day. I suggest that footage involving tours interacting with
any wildlife be carefully produced so that such a problem can be
avoided. As far as the protocols and procedures are concerned, there is
no need to include the actual wildlife in a shot to get the point across.
The dolphin swim tours for example, experience a 50 per cent success
rate in relation to an interaction, so to actually include dolphins in most
shots creates a level of exaggerated expectation.

Hence I do feel that the use of an instructional video certainly helped

create an effective level of understanding that may not be achieved
through guide instruction alone. However, the material presented on
the video definitely needs to be adapted to allow operational changes
to be made, and the actual footage adjusted to avoid creating and
unrealistic level of expectation.

Phil Coulthard (Marine Biologist)

Dolphin Interaction Supervisor Dolphin Discovery Centre
Koombana Drive Bunbury, WA 6230 (08) 9791 3088

50
Report on an Educational Video made for a project titled
‘Dolphin Interaction – Tourist Management and Best Practice’

By Dr Lorna Kaino - Lecturer in Media, ECU, Bunbury

Two ECU Bunbury media students, Karuna Gurung and Roger Porter
completed an educational video for the above project in 2001. The project
was credited as an Independent Study unit towards their Arts degree, and
was sponsored by Edith Cowan University South West Campus.

The project entailed considerable consultation; firstly with Fleur

O’Neill and then Dr Diane Lee, Lecturer in Tourism, Murdoch
University. Roger and Karuna consulted extensively with both parties,
as well as the Manager of the Dolphin Discovery Centre in Bunbury.
They were also briefed with reports from Murdoch psychology
students and a paper forwarded by Fleur O’Neill.

I consider that the process of consultation about the educational

content as well as the protocols for producing such a video was a
valuable learning experience for Karuna and Roger. Both consulted
extensively about the best times to shoot film, the most effective way
of presenting visual instruction and cultural sensitivities that may be
involved in understanding the instructional dialogue on the video.

For first-time documentary makers, I believe that the experience of

producing, directing and editing this documentary has been valuable.
Shots of dolphins are, of course, difficult to get, and I think they did
well in this respect. The voice-over was disappointing. However,
overall, I was pleased with the result and I trust that it serves its
purpose well.

I would like to thank Dr Diane Lee, Fleur O’Neill and the staff at the
Dolphin Discovery Centre for the opportunity to participate in this project.

Dr Lorna Kaino
13 June 2002

51
 REFERENCES
Alcock, D. (1991). Education and extension: Management’s best
strategy. Australian Parks and Recreation. 27(1), 15-17.
Amante-Helweg, V. (1996). Ecotourists beliefs and knowledge about
dolphins and the development of cetacean ecotourism. Aquatic
Mammals. 22: 131-140.
ANZECC , (2001). Best Practice Interpretation and Education [Online].
Available: http://www.ea.gov.au/cooperation/anzecc/index.html [2001,
November 9].
Bannister, J., Kemper, C. & Warneke, R. (1996). Australian Cetacean Action
Plan. Australian Nature Conservation Agency, Canberra. [Online].
Available: htpp://www.ea.gov.au/coasts/species/cetaceans/actionplan/index.html
[2002, October 3].
Birtles, A., Valentine, P. and Curnock, M. (2001). Tourism based on
free-ranging marine wildlife: opportunities and responsibilities,
Wildlife Tourism Report Series: No. 11, Status Assessment of
Australian Wildlife Tourism. CRC for Sustainable Tourism,
Australia.
Boyd, S.W., & Butler, R.W. (1996). Managing ecotourism:
development of the Ecotourism Opportunity Spectrum (ECOS).
Tourism Management. pp 556- 565.
Bramwell, B. & Lane, B. (1993). Interpretation and Sustainable
Tourism: The Potential and the Pitfalls. Journal of Sustainable
Tourism, 1(2) 71-79
Burgess, J. (1992). Softly, softly minimising the impacts of ecotourism
in Tasmania. In B. Weiler (ed). Ecotourism incorporating the global
classroom. 1991 International Conference Papers (pp 89-93).
Bureau of Tourism Research, Canberra.
Busnel, R.G. (1973). Symbiotic relationship between man and
dolphins. Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences 35:
112-131.
Ceballos-Lascurain H. (1996). Tourism, ecotourism and protected
areas: The state of nature-based tourism around the world and
guidelines for its development. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, and
Cambridge, UK.
Chirgwin, S. & Hughes, K. (1997). Ecotourism: The Participants’
Perceptions, The Journal of Tourism Studies, 8(2): 2-7.

52
Constantine, R. (1998). Effects of tourism on marine mammals in New
Zealand. Science for Conservation 106. Department of
Conservation, Wellington, New Zealand.
Constantine, R. (2001). Increased Avoidance of swimmers by wild
bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) due to long-term
exposure to swim-with-dolphins tourism. Marine Mammal
Science, 17(4): 689-702.
Davies, M. (1990). Wildlife as a tourist attraction. Environment 20 (3):
74-77.
Dickson, E & Benham, D. (2001). Wildlife Tourism in the Moray Firth,
Scotland: Do dolphins change lives?. Poster presented at the 14th
Biennial Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals,
Vancouver, B.C. Canada.
Dowling, R. (1997). Ecotourism in Australia and Western Australia.
Touristics 13(2) 2-3.
Dowling, R.K. (1996). The Implementation of ecotourism in Australia.
Paper presented at the 2nd International Conference of the
Ecotourism Association of Australia – The Implementation of
ecotourism: Planning, Developing and Managing for Sustainability.
18-21 July 1996, Ambassador Hotel, Bankok, Thailand.
Dudzinski, K.M. (1999). Learning dolphin ‘etiquette’ by
understanding their rules of behaviour and interaction. In K.M.
Dudzinski, T.G. Frohoff, and T.R. Spradlin, (eds). Wild Dolphin
Swim Program Workshop, Maui, Hawaii.
Duffus, D. A. & Dearden , P. (1993). Recreation use, valuation and
management of killer whales (Orcinus orca) on Canada’s pacific
coast. Environmental Conservation 20 (2): 149-156.
Duffus, D.A. & Dearden, P. (1990). Non-Consumptive Wildlife-
Orientated Recreation: A Conceptual Framework. Biological
Conservation. 53. pp 213-231.
Duffus, D.A. & Dearden, P. (1992). Whales, science and protected area
management in British Columbia, Canada. Forum 9 (3/4). pp 79-87.
Duffus, D.A. & Widpond, K.J. (1992). A Review of the
Institutionalisation of Wildlife Viewing in British Columbia,
Canada. The Northwest Environmental Journal, 8 (2).
Environment Australia, (2000). Australian National Guidelines for
Cetacean Observation.
Flanagan, P. (1996). Why interacting with marine mammals in the wild
can be harmful. Whale Watcher, Third Quarter: 26 - 30.

53
 Forrestell, P.H., & Kaufman, G.D. (1990). The history of whale
watching in Hawaii and its role in enhancing visitor appreciation
for endangered species. In Auyong, J. & Miller, M.L. (Eds).
Proceedings of the 1990 Congress on Coastal & Marine Tourism.
Vol. #1 pp 475-487. May 1990 Honolulu, Hawaii USA.
Gales, N. (1999). An overview of the management of commercial
swim-with-dolphin programs in Australia. In K.M. Dudzinski, T.G.
Frohoff, and T.R. Spradlin, (eds). Wild Dolphin Swim Program
Workshop, Maui, Hawaii.
Gauthier, D.A. (1993). Sustainable development, tourism and wildlife. In
R. Butler, J.G. Nelson & G. Wall, (Eds). Tourism and Sustainable
Development: Monitoring, Planning, Managing. (Publication series #
37). pp 97-107. Department of Geography, University of Waterloo.
Green, R. (1999). Negative effects of wildlife viewing on wildlife in
natural areas. In K. Higginbottom, and M. Hardy. (eds). Wildlife
Tourism Discussion Document.
Higginbottom, K. & Hardy, M. (1999) (eds) In Wildlife Tourism
Discussion Document. CRC for Sustainable Tourism: Australia.
Higginbottom, K. , Rann, K., Moscardo, G., Davis, D., and Muloin, S
(2001). Status Assessment of Wildlife Tourism In Australia: An
overview. Part I: Descriptive overview of wildlife tourism and Part
II: Status Assessment. Wildlife Tourism Report Series: No. 1, Status
Assessment of Australian Wildlife Tourism. CRC for Sustainable
Tourism: Australia.
Hoyt, E. (2001). Whale Watching 2001: Worldwide tourism numbers,
expenditures, and expanding socio-economic benefits.
International Fund for Animal Welfare, Yarmouth Prot, MA, USA.
International Whaling Commission, (1996). Report of the whale
watching working group. Report of the International Whaling
Commission, Cambridge.
Iso-Ahola, S. E. & Mannell, R.C. (1987). Psychological nature of
leisure and tourism experience. Annals of Tourism Research, 14:
314-331.
Jackson, G. & Osmond ,M. (1996). National perspectives on whale
watching: an industry perspective. In Colgan, K., Prasser, S., &
Jeffery, A. (eds) Encounters with whales 1995 proceedings.
Australian Nature Conservation Agency. pp 17-20.
Kellert, S.R. (1987). The contribution of wildlife to human quality of
life. In D.K. Decker & G.R. Goff (eds). Valuing wildfire: economic
and social perspectives. Westview Press: Boulder.

54
Marsh, H., Arnold, P.W., Limpus, C.J., Birtles, A., Breen, B., Robins, J.,
& Williams, R. (1997). Endangered and charismatic megafauna. In
GBR Science, Use and Management: A national conference. Great
Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Volume1. pp unnumbered
Mieczkowski, Z. (1994). Environmental Issues of Tourism and Recreation.
University Press of America, Inc. Cahham, New York, London.
Moscardo, G. (1998). Interpretation and Sustainable Tourism:
Functions, examples and principles. Journal of Tourism Studies
9(1): 2-13.
Moscardo, G.M. & Pearce, P.L. (1986). The Concept of Authenticity in
Tourist Experiences A.N.Z.J.S. 22(1): 121-132.
Muloin, S. (1998). Wildlife Tourism: The Psychological Benefits of
Whale Watching. Pacific Tourism Review, 2 199-212
Neil, D., Orams, M. B., & Baglioni, A. (1995a). Effects of previous
whale watching experience on participants knowledge of, and
response to, whales and whale watching. In I., Colgan, K., Prasser,
S., & Jeffery, A. (eds) Encounters with whales 1995 proceedings.
Australian Nature Conservation Agency. pp 182-188.
Neil, D.T., Orams, M.B. and Baglioni, A.J. (1995b) The influence of
content in interpretive commentary on environmental attitudes
and intentions of whale watch participants. Encounters With
Whales ’95. Hervey Bay, Queensland, July 26-30.
O’Neill, F. (1999). Ecologically Sustainable Management of tourist-
minke whale interaction: visitor experiences with dwarf minke
whales in the far northern section of the Great Barrier Reef,
Queensland. Unpublished Masters of Tourism (Interpretation)
Thesis. James Cook University of North Queensland.
O’Neill, F. and Lee, D. (2000) . Dolphin Interaction – Tourism
Management and Best Practice. Survey distributed to the Dolphin
Discovery Centre.
Oppenheim, A.N. (1992). Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and
Attitude Measurement. London: Printer Publishers.
Orams, M. (1995). Using Interpretation to Manage Nature-based
Tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 4 (2) 81-92
Orams, M.B. (1996a). A conceptual model of tourist-wildlife
interaction: the case for education as a management strategy.
Australian Geographer, 27 (1): 39-49.

55
 Orams, M.B. (1996b).Cetacean education: can we turn tourists into
‘greenies’. In Colgan, K., Prasser, S., & Jeffery, A. (eds) Encounters
with whales 1995 proceedings. Australian Nature Conservation
Agency. pp 167-178.
Orams, M. (1999). Marine Tourism: Development, Impacts,
Management. London: Routledge
Orams, M. (2000). Tourists getting close to whales, is that what whale-
watching is all about? Tourism Management, 21 (6) 561-569.
Orams, M. & Hill, G.J.E (1998). Controlling the Ecotourist in a wild
dolphin feeding program: Is education the answer?. The Journal of
Environmental Education, 29(3): 33-38.
Pearce, P. L. (1988). The Ulysses factor: evaluating visitors in tourist
settings. Springer-Verlag: New York Inc.
Pearce, P.L. no date. The fundamentals of Tourist Motivation.
unpublished manuscript.
Pearce, P.L., Moscardo, G., and Ross (1996) Tourism Community
Relationships. Elsevier Science Ltd: Oxford, United Kingdom.
Petersen, S. 2001. Riding on a Natural High. The Sunday Times,
September 9, 2001 p13.
Reynolds, P. & Braithwaite, D. (1999). Towards a conceptual
framework for Wildlife Tourism. In Molby, J. and Davies, J. (eds)
Tourism & Hospitality: Delighting the senses 1999. Part 1
Proceedings of the 9th Australian Tourism and Hospitality Research
Conference, CAUTHE National Research Conference, Adelaide,
South Australia.
Roggenbuck, J.W. (1992). Use of persuasion to reduce resource
impacts and visitor conflicts. Manfredo, M.J. (eds) Influencing
Human Behaviour: theory applications in natural resource
management. Sagamore Publishing Inc, Champaign, Illinois. pp
149-209
Ryan, C. (1998). Dolphins, Canoes and Marae. In Embracing and
Managing Change in Tourism Eds. Laws, E., Faulkner, B.,
Moscardo, G. London: Routledge
Samuels, A., Bejder, L. and Heinrich, S. (2000). A review of the
literature pertaining to swimming with wild dolphins. Report
prepared for the Marine Mammal Commission.
Shackley, M. (1997). Wildlife Tourism. International Thomson Business Press.
Sirakaya, E. (1997). Attitudinal Compliance with Ecotourism
Guidelines. Annals of Tourism Research 24(4): 919-950.

56
Society for Interpreting Britain’s Heritage (1998). Interpret Britain.
Interpretation, 3(2) 27
Spradlin, T.R., Barre, L.M., Lewandowski, J.K. and Nitta, E.T. (2001).
Too Close for Comfort: Concern about the growing trend in public
interactions with wild marine mammals. In T. R. Spradlin, E.T. Nitta,
J.K. Lewandowski, L.M. Barre, K. Brix and B. Norberg, (eds)
Viewing Marine Mammals in the Wild: A workshop to discuss
responsible guidelines and regulations for minimising disturbance.
Vancouver, B.C., Canada.
Tilden, F. (1997). Interpreting our Heritage, 3rd Edition. Chapel Hill:
North Carolina Press.
Tourism Working Group for Ecologically Sustainable Development
(1991). Final Report – Tourism. Canberra: Australian Government
Publishing Service.
WATC & CALM. (1997). Nature based Tourism Strategy for Western
Australia. Government of Western Australia, Perth.
Weiler, B & Crabtree, A. (1996). Education in whale watching: current
status and needs in ecotourism education and training. In Colgan,
K., Prasser, S., & Jeffrey, A. (eds) Encounters with whales 1995
proceedings. Australian Nature Conservation Agency. pp 75-79.
Weir, J., Dunn, W., Bell, A., & Chatfield, B. (1997). An investigation
into the impact of ‘Dolphin-swim ecotours in Southern Port Phillip
Bay’. Dolphin Research Project Inc.
Wursig, B. (1996). Swim with dolphin activities in nature: weighing
the pros and cons. Whale watcher. 30 (1) 11-15.

57
 Fleur O’Neill
Fleur O’Neill completed her Masters of Tourism at James Cook
University on the Dwarf Minke Whale swim industry on the Great
Barrier Reef. Fleur was employed as the Research and Education
Officer for the Dolphin Discovery Centre during the time of the
research. She is currently acting the role of field assistant for
cetacean/human interaction studies. Email: fleur_on@yahoo.com

Sam Barnard
Sam Barnard has recently completed a Bachelor of Arts majoring in
Communication Studies and Tourism at Murdoch University. She is
now working as a research assistant within the Murdoch University
Tourism Program and has a keen interest in undertaking postgraduate
study on wildlife tourism such as penguin/human interaction on
Penguin Island, Western Australia.
Email: sbarnard@central.murdoch.edu.au

Dr Diane Lee
Diane Lee completed her Ph.D through the James Cook University
Tourism Program and is a Lecturer in the Tourism Program in the
School of Social Sciences at Murdoch University. Diane has been
involved in the marketing of marine tourism in the Great Barrier Reef
and currently teaches in areas of sustainable and indigenous tourism.
Email: dlee@central.murdoch.edu.au

58
 Wildlife Tourism Report Series

Technical reports in the wildlife tourism series • Rangeland Kangaroos: a world class
are listed below and can be ordered via the wildlife experience – Croft
online bookshop • Assessment of Opportunities for
[www.crctourism.com.au/bookshop]. International Tourism Based on Wild
• Status Assessment of Wildlife Tourism in Kangaroos – Croft & Leiper
Australia: an overview Parts I & II – • Evaluation of Organised Tourism involving
Higginbottom, Rann, Moscardo, Davis & Wild Kangaroos – Higginbottom, Green,
Muloin Leiper, Moscardo, Tribe & Buckley
• Understanding Visitor Perspectives on • Kangaroos in the Marketing of Australia:
Wildlife Tourism – Moscardo, Woods & potentials and practice – Chalip, Arthurson
Greenwood & Hill
• Role of Economics in Managing Wildlife • Economic, Educational and Conservation
Tourism – Davis, Tisdell & Hardy Benefits of Sea Turtle Based Ecotourism: a
• Host Community: social and cultural issues study focused on Mon Repos – Tisdell &
concerning wildlife tourism – Burns & Wilson
Sofield • A Biological Basis for Management of
• Negative Effects of Wildlife Tourism on Glow Worm Populations of Ecotourism
Wildlife – Green & Higginbottom Significance – Baker
• Positive Effects of Wildlife Tourism on • International Market Analysis of Wildlife
Wildlife – Higginbottom, Northrope & Tourism – Fredline & Faulkner
Green • Trout Tourism: comparative study of New
• A Tourism Classification of Australian Zealand and Tasmanian trout fisheries –
Wildlife [+ excel spreadsheet on disk] – Franklin
Green, Higginbottom & Northrope • Best Practice and Interpretation in
• Indigenous Interests in Safari Hunting & Tourist/Wildlife Encounters: wild dolphin
Fishing Tourism, Northern Territory: assess swim tour [includes industry manual] –
key issues – Palmer O’Neill, Lee & Barnard
• Terrestrial Wildlife Viewing in Australia – • Tasmanian Wildlife Tourism Inventory –
Higginbottom & Buckley Kriwoken, Lennox & Ellis
• Birdwatching Tourism in Australia – Jones & • Behavioural Responses of Dingoes to
Buckley Tourists on Fraser Island – Lawrance &
• Tourism Based on Free-Ranging Marine Higginbottom
Wildlife: opportunities and responsibilities – • Reducing the Incidence of Wildlife Roadkill:
Birtles, Valentine & Curnock improving the visitor experience in
• Fishing Tourism: charter boat fishing – Tasmania – Magnus, Kriwoken, Mooney &
Gartside Jones
• Recreational Hunting: an international For more information on these titles, contact
perspective – Bauer & Giles Trish O’Connor, Publishing Manager –
• Captive Wildlife Tourism in Australia – Tribe Ph: +61 7 5552 9053 or
Email: trish@crctourism.com.au
• Indigenous Wildlife Tourism in Australia:
wildlife attractions, cultural interpretation
and Indigenous involvement – Muloin,
Zeppel & Higginbottom
 DARWIN CAIRNS BRISBANE
NT Coordinator NQ Coordinator Tourism Infrastructure and
Ms Alicia Boyle Prof Bruce Prideaux Engineering Environments
Ph: + 61 8 8946 6084 Ph: +61 7 4042 1111 Research
alicia.boyle@ntu.edu.au bruce.prideaux@jcu.edu.au Dr David Lockington
Ph: +61 7 3365 4054
d.lockington@uq.edu.au

GOLD COAST
National Network Manager
Mr Brad Cox
Ph: +61 7 5552 8116
brad@crctourism.com.au

LISMORE
Regional Tourism Research
Mr Dean Carson
Ph: +61 2 6620 3785
dcarson@scu.edu.au
NATIONAL NETWORK

SYDNEY
NSW Coordinator
Dr Tony Griffin
Ph: +61 2 9514 5103
tony.griffin@uts.edu.au
PERTH ADELAIDE
WA Coordinator SA Coordinator CANBERRA
Dr Diane Lee Prof Graham Brown ACT Coordinator
Ph: + 61 8 9360 7018 Ph: +61 8 8302 0313 Dr Brent Ritchie
d.lee@murdoch.edu.au graham.brown@unisa.edu.au Ph: +61 2 6201 5016
Brent.Ritchie@canberra.edu.au

MELBOURNE LAUNCESTON
VIC Coordinator TAS Coordinator
Prof Betty Weiler Prof Trevor Sofield
Ph: +61 3 9904 7104 Ph: + 61 3 6324 3578
Betty.Weiler@BusEco.monash.edu.au trevor.sofield@utas.edu.au