Argentina: Península Valdés, Chubut A multi-stakeholder, multi-faceted, adaptive approach to regulation of whale-watching

History and context

Whale watching in the Península Valdés region of Patagonia began in the mid-1970’s when boat owners took tourists out in small groups at irregular intervals to view southern right whales using the area¹. At the time, southern right whales were severely depleted after years of hunting, and it was initially rare to see mothers and calves in the bays surrounding Península Valdés. However, as more industry and more tourists came to the region, whale watching activities steadily grew up through 1987, when the government first started to track statistics on the industry.1 At the time, Argentina’s participation in the International Whaling Commission and the 1974 declaration of the provincial marine park of “Golfo San José” (via Provincial Law No. 1238), were the only regulations in place to protect whales in the area.

Right whales were first protected by the 1931 Convention for the Regulation of Whaling, which was implemented from 1935 onward. Following this, and the global moratorium on whaling (1986), the southern right whale population off the coast of Argentina began to increase rapidly. By 1980 it was estimated that 168 breeding females were using the area, increasing to 328 by 19902. The rate of population increase was estimated to be 7%, and there was a shift in the whales’ distribution to the inside of the Golfo Nuevo, off the coast of El Doradillo3, where densities were as high as 6.5 whales/km2.  This rendered whale watching activities more reliable and more rewarding for tourists. Five local operators were in place by 1987, a year in which government statistics documented 5,214 whale-watch tourists. Over the next 13 years, the number of whale watch tourists increased by an average of 6,275 tourists per year to reach nearly 70,000 by the year 20001. Although the southern right whales are only present between June and December, a variety of other marine mammal species attract tourists in the “off season”: acrobatic dusky and other dolphins; elephant seals and sea lions; and the now -famous killer whales that launch themselves onto the beach to catch sea lion and southern elephant seal pups. Due to the nearshore (or onshore) distribution of many of these marine mammals, tourists can enjoy land-based wildlife watching activities as well as boat-based whale-watching. In 2006, 80% of visitors to Peninsula Valdes arriving between June and December engaged in whale-watch tourism, and over 61 million USD of revenue was generated either directly or indirectly for Argentina through whale watching tourism.⁴

Return to Top ↑

Lessons learned: Strengths and weaknesses of regulatory measures over time

On paper, the development of the whale-watch tourism industry in Argentina has many strengths, and appears to serve as an excellent model for regulation of whale watching in new areas.  These strengths include:

• The early establishment of regulations and limits on the number of providers allowed to run tours in the region:  The establishment of clear guidelines and limits while the numbers of operators were still low (5), prevented the unregulated growth of the industry.  It would have been nearly impossible to close down businesses once they had been established.  Similarly, the limits on the number of vessels each operator could run, and the maximum number of tourists per vessel, precluded an increase of vessel traffic and disturbance before it could occur.
• The establishment of protected areas through both national and international measures clearly defined the critical habitat for whales, and established clear boundaries for conservation measures and regulations designed to protect the whales.  Whale watching operators and tourists are perhaps more willing to comply with regulations when they feel that they are privileged to be engaging in their activity in an internationally recognised area of importance.  The protected area status has also ensured that the  terrestrial area surrounding the bays has remained pristine and attractive to tourists⁴. The clear geographical boundaries of the protected area may have also made it more practical and feasible to develop management plans and regulations that could be administrated and enforced on a local, rather than a national scale.
• The involvement of many stakeholders in a consultative process to draft guidelines and regulations.  The continued and direct involvement of the tour operators themselves in the drafting of regulations is viewed as a key strength, ensuring industry buy-in and acceptance of the guidelines, and their perception that these are reasonable and fair⁹.
• The establishment of clear regulatory authorities with the mandate to administrate licencing, permitting, and fees associated with whale-watching, and the clear designation of how any revenue collected from licensing will benefit the conservation of the whales and their ecosystem.  This is backed by a clear mandate for the Coast Guard to help monitor and enforce compliance with the law.
• The continual evaluation of the potential impact of whale watching tourism on whales (and dolphins) in the area, and the assessment of findings against the adequacy of current regulations and their enforcement.

At the same time, however, there are some concerns about the system and its implementation on the ground, which may not be as perfect as it appears on paper.  A recent study interviewed roughly 50% of the specialist guides working on whale watching tours, and learned that many tour operators find it difficult to respect the prohibition on approaching mothers and calves of the year before August 31st¹.   Because mothers and calves are generally found closer to shore, they are more readily encountered by tour boats, and are too tempting to approach, especially on rough weather days, when operators worry about tourists’ comfort and expectations.  There is a perception that, in view of the population increases that have taken place since the original regulations were put in place, the ban on approaching mothers and calves should be relaxed1.  It is not at all clear whether this would be supported by the research and conservation community, or the regulatory authorities.  Nonetheless, the implementation of the study and its publication can be seen as a healthy review of the system in place, a respect for the tour operators’ concerns, and the system’s ability to adapt to new circumstances if and when necessary. 

Since this case study was published in 2018, a new study has been published.  See:  https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0141113619303253?via%3Dihub

Return to Top ↑