tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3970777878498844654.post7961136111007684851..comments2023-09-28T21:53:43.293-07:00Comments on Orca Watcher: New Proposed Vessel Guidelines for Southern Residents - Time to Chime InMonikahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10442975942250078450noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3970777878498844654.post-16718276490498916942010-02-26T21:11:15.062-08:002010-02-26T21:11:15.062-08:00Great post. I was just talking to my husband about...Great post. I was just talking to my husband about this tonight. I'm happy to hear that legal initiatives have been taken.Rachel Elizabethhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07050119457229635051noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3970777878498844654.post-84674897141230744392009-08-28T11:17:58.536-07:002009-08-28T11:17:58.536-07:00The K - Thanks for your thoughtful comments. You&#...The K - Thanks for your thoughtful comments. You're right, I do see a lot of value to the intent of the proposal, but I think the conclusions are off the mark.<br /><br />Carole - It sure is a lot to think about, isn't it? It took me a while to organize my thoughts into something coherent. I totally agree with you that lack of enforcement is the biggest issue about vessel management right now. That's why I think its ridiculous to implement more laws when even the current ones aren't complied with. There is a lot of value to your idea of a license fee - a lot have people have been talking about the benefits of a permit-based system for all commercial operators. It would generate funds for enforcement and guarantee that commercial boats, at least, are complying to the laws, because the threat wouldn't just be a monetary fine but a removal of your license to operate at all. NOAA has, as far as I can tell, disregarded this idea because of the difficulty of implementing the infrastructure required to manage a permit-based system. I think that's a silly reason - if its the best option, we should do that, regardless of whether or not its the easiest solution.Monikahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10442975942250078450noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3970777878498844654.post-60948293727008847792009-08-28T11:06:59.358-07:002009-08-28T11:06:59.358-07:00Excellent article, Monika. I have been mulling all...Excellent article, Monika. I have been mulling all of this over since I first read the proposed new regulations.<br /><br />After spending Memorial Day weekend at Lime Kiln Park for many hours, I feel that a big part of the problem is the lack of funds to enforce the regulations we have at present. I was actually standing on the rocks yelling at the boats as they were coming so close to the orcas. I know Soundwatch didn't have the funds to be able to be out there until mid-June. So there was no one out there protecting the orcas. In my opinion, one of the things they should consider is that all whale watch boats, kayak companies, etc. would have to pay a license fee to operate. This could be based on the size of the boat and/or it's capacity of how many people it could hold. So larger boats would pay more than smaller ones. Also, boats from across the border would pay a non-resident fee to operate in US waters. This money would be channelled into Soundwatch, Fish & Wildlife, and NOAA for the specific purpose of making sure the boats stay far enough away. When I've been out on a boat, the orcas are more often than not more than 100 feet away, unless they choose to come closer. I have seen a few zodiacs go too close, and they should be fined. I was, quite frankly, surprised when I recently found out that the whale watch boats do not have to pay a license fee to operate. Even if they change the regulations, there will still be a problem of enforcement. And I think that needs to be addressed first. Laws are no good unless there is someone there who can ticket boats on the spot.Carole Mayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07457642359184272462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3970777878498844654.post-68949011162578079902009-08-27T18:44:04.975-07:002009-08-27T18:44:04.975-07:00Excellent posting. I read it last last night and ...Excellent posting. I read it last last night and then proceeded to wade through your link to the overly wordy and redundant NOAA proposal. And I read both your post and parts of NOAA proposal again today. I agree with what your valid points are. But, I also see some valid attributes, if not with the actual NOAA proposal, then at least with the intent of it.<br /><br />Given there are 3 problems to solve: toxins, salmon supply, and behaviour interference, 2 of which are hard and one of which is relatively easy, which does one tackle first? The hard ones or the easy one? At the risk of seemingly doing nothing the NOAA proposal takes on the easy one. I think you might agree that if we all left the SRKW completely alone they might come to a different result than if we continued to observe them. Unfortunately, the NOAA proposal doesn't do that even though that's the intent. They do not remove commercial, research, etc., etc. vessels from coming close. And the kayak thing is just preposterous in terms of the impact attributed to them. <br /><br />I think often we attribute too much wisdom to mankind. We are a part of nature and the environment. Our behaviour and actions are as natural as any other organisms. When a beaver builds a dam, its okay. When man builds a dam, it ruins the environment. When seals watch the Orcas, its okay. When man watches the Orcas, its invasive. I don't think that's right. But that's the common wisdom.<br /><br />Kudos to you for distilling these salient points and posting them. You've given me a lot to think about (as you usually do). I'll noodle about this some more before posting on the public comment site.The Khttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06060223096702629591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3970777878498844654.post-79380673530367878252009-08-27T11:28:47.195-07:002009-08-27T11:28:47.195-07:00Julie - Thank you for your comments. They're m...Julie - Thank you for your comments. They're much appreciated.<br /><br />Dave - The pollution/salmon issue is of course intertwined, but in an interesting way. The main pollutants of concern (PCBs and PBDEs) are bioaccumulants, so the higher you are on the food chain the more of them are stored in your fatty tissue. A whale only metabolizes the chemicals when they metabolize the fat - in other words, when they're not getting enough to eat and are relying on their fat reserves.<br /><br />Our transient whales are considered to be more toxic than the residents since they are one step higher on the food chain by eating mammals, but their population is actually doing better and in fact on the increase because their main prey - harbor seals, harbor porpoise, Steller sea lions - are all very abundant right now. What this means is the lack of salmon issue is compounded by the pollution issue, and if the residents were getting enough to eat, they would still be full of toxins but it would be having less of an immediate impact.<br /><br />Local salmon runs were all way overfished throughout the 1900s, but there are tight restrictions on sport fishing and commercial fishing is only a shadow of what it used to be due to such limited seasons. Despite these restrictions, the salmon still haven't rebounded, which I take to mean that the next issue to tackle is their spawning grounds - or the degradation thereof. Dams block off entire arms of rivers and development and agriculture make what would be accessible habitat unsuitable. Fish farms further worsen the issue with escaped Atlantic salmon introducing parasites and outcompeting the native Pacific stocks. Here is where all the real problems for the orcas lie, in my (not so) humble opinion.Monikahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10442975942250078450noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3970777878498844654.post-32731216595885271052009-08-27T09:00:35.528-07:002009-08-27T09:00:35.528-07:00Missed a line out - everyone knows PBs eat seals t...Missed a line out - everyone knows PBs eat seals that have eaten the toxic fish - sorry; wound up thinking faster than I can type!<br /><br />DLancs and Lakes Outback Adventure Wildlife Safarishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08299788091742592953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3970777878498844654.post-48520982581448750582009-08-27T08:58:28.688-07:002009-08-27T08:58:28.688-07:00Hi Monika - I would suggest that first the polluti...Hi Monika - I would suggest that first the pollution issue has to be sorted. Just read that Polar Bears are the most polluted mammals in the world all obtained from their diet of fish who got it from the water. Same probably applies to your orcas - less pollution may mean more, or better quality, fish. Also need to sort out any over fishing issues. So now you're up against big industry and the fishermen so no wonder a few boats are being targetted - easy prey - as for kayaks ludicrous! I have only ever been in one once but would image them to be the best and safest way - for the whales - to observe them; slow, barely any noise, easily manoeverable - what's the problem. Or is all this being a bit too cynical!<br /><br />Good luck - I've a worrying feeling you'll need it<br /><br />DaveLancs and Lakes Outback Adventure Wildlife Safarishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08299788091742592953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3970777878498844654.post-54200755442470055682009-08-26T21:35:07.623-07:002009-08-26T21:35:07.623-07:00monika,
this is one of the most well-thought...monika, <br /> this is one of the most well-thought out and well-expressed opinions i have read on this whole issue, and you are absolutely right on every point. as a biologist who cares very much for the welfare of these animals, it deeply concerns me that the real threats are shoved to the back of the line in order to make a few people feel better with a band-aid type answer, which i believe will have little to no impact at all on the population size. i appreciate your insight and hope you have the opportunity to share at the upcoming meetings. juliejulienoreply@blogger.com