Water Trail Traveler's Forum

I have been fortunate enough to paddle along W SJI with Orcas present. It was a magnificent experience, marred only by the fog of boat exhaust that hovered on the water surface in the very zone that the whales breathe from. I wholeheartedly support the proposed regulations, and though I will miss paddling with these majestic animals, I will bear in mind that they are highly endangered and my pleasure is secondary to their continued survival. I would rather see them from afar than not at all.

It is to be expected that those who have a financially vested interest in the commercial kayak tour industry will be voicing opinions in opposition to NOAA's new proposed -increased distance for the whales- federal regulations.

Over the past few weeks kayak business owners have been spreading emails on every paddling listerve & blog- from Seattle to Bellingham- trying to rally support for them, not the whales, and fight against NOAA's new protection attempt for our beautiful, yet very Endangered, Southern Resident Orca whales....

Most of the reactionary support expressed online in these message forums has been w/ these business owners & against NOAA's....Very pro-freedom = 'keeping our launching rights'- political sorta opinions....even though i reckon most of these  'mainlanders' folks expressing their angst about the increased 'no-go zone' and loss of citizenary launching rights from the W-side SJI seasonally, would really only probably be effected once a year themselves, if that....

As a former whale-watch boat deckhand & naturalist as well as current long distance paddler, spending 30-40 days & nights a year kayak-camping around the San Juan islands, my intimate connection with the complex Salish Sea environment leads me to support the need for increased distance regulations for the resident Orcas, as well as the resident Minkes, passing transients, Humpbacks & Grays...

In the past year I have sat along the shores of San Juan & Lopez islands, as well as been paddling in Rosario Strait and on these multiple occasions, witnessed fellow paddlers blatantly & completely disrespecting the whales & the current Whale wise guidlines, by paddling directly at the incoming whales- (presumably assuming that their kayaks gave them super-invisible-power shields to the whales ?!)

I spent a week last summer camped on a tiny island across from the Robson Bight Orca Sanctuary -aka No Go Zone- up in Johnstone Strait, and did not feel like I lost anything, but rather incredibly gained- as we were woken up by the blows and/or visited by closely passing pods of Northern Resident Orcas every 3-4 hours, for the entire week!!  On the flip side, on the same trip I also witnessed a kayak guide lead his tour of about 5-6 boats directly into the path of an oncoming MASSIVE bull. 
(*These kayak guides & w/w boat captains do this because- Better, close up whale sightings by customers = better tips for the guides & tour boat crews)

Through these experiences, as well as my continued involvement as a volunteer with the Orca Network, Central Puget Sound Marine Mammal Stranding Network & the People for Puget Sound, I fully support  the need for increased regulations, and allowing the Southern Resident Orcas to have...

  ~JUST ONE PLACE TO HAVE SOME SPACE~

For their own reasons, the Southern Resident Orcas  really like the waters & shorelines of the west side of San Juan island, as the Northern Resident Orca whales mysteriously like rubbing their bodies on the rocks on the sea floor at Robson Bight up north a bit in neighboring British Columbia waters-

1,000's of kayaks a year launch- mostly commercial tour customers rather than independent paddling tourers-right into an Endangered Orcas favorite place in our local waters-the westside of San Juan island-

As paddlers, we cannot be selfish any longer.  It is not about us, it's critically a time when it needs to be about the Endangered Southern Resident Orcas. 

Land-based views are just as great- REALLY!! 

nbz

Analysis of Research used by NOAA to support banning kayaks from Haro Strait – the research does NOT support this
Hi ,
I’m sending you (posting)  my analysis of the full text of research cited by NOAA to “justify” including  kayaks in their proposed Haro Strait No-Go Zone. The research does NOT support the statements they make, and  actually supports kayaks in many ways. The  No-Go-Zone  extends half a mile out Haro Strait from Mitchell Bay to Eagle Point, which eliminates access to the kayak launch facilities at San Juan County Park and landing facilities at Dead Man’s cove  (some of the only public launch and landing facilities on San Juan Island) and  essentially bans kayaks  from Haro Strait. I’ve included my analysis below for anyone who wants to refer to it in their comments to NOAA and at the public meetings at Seattle Aquarium Sept 30 7-9 or the Fridaty Harbor Grange Hall October 5th .

I’m a private kayaker who loves to paddle in Haro Strait.  I have a great respect for the orcas and follow the viewing guidelines of Soundwatch when orca whales or other wildlife are present. If orca whales appear while I am kayaking it is a magnificent surprise among the many marvelous pleasures of kayaking in Haro strait. I do not agree that kayaks should essentially be banned from kayaking in Haro Strait.
THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS STATE THAT:

While kayaks are small and quiet, they have the potential to disturb whales as obstacles on the surface, and they may startle whales by approaching them without being heard (Mathews 2000). Some kayakers may be less likely  to follow rules (Jelinski et al. 2002) and more likely to approach wildlife closely because they may be more apt to overestimate distance because of their low aspect on the water, and to assume they are less likely to disturb wildlife than other vessels (Mathews 2000).

These statements are NOT supported by the cited research.
THE MATHEWS 2000 RESEARCH:
Studied vessel approach to Stellar sea lions hauled out on an island in Glacier Bay Alaska. A total of 90 vessels were observed over 23 days – among these were 7 kayaks -  3 of the kayaks approached the haul out closer than 100 yards (the regulation) and 4 stayed more than 100 yards from the haul out.No conclusions can be drawn based on 3 kayaks, with a different species in a different setting. Orcas  are a  different species, not sitting on an island or rock in Haro strait,  in constant motion, and they  echolocate) Full text of Mathews 2000 can be found at:
http://www.nps.gov/glba/naturescience/u … essels.pdf

Regulation:
“Kayaks … have the potential to disturb whales as obstacles on the surface” (Mathews 2000)
Research:
The Mathews research does not even look at whales – it is looking at stellar sea lions hauled out on an island

Regulation:
“Kayaks … may startle whales by approaching them without being heard (Mathews 2000).
Research:
The Mathews research does not look at whales – it is observing  stellar sea lions hauled out on an island.  Orca whales  locate objects by echo location and are very aware of where kayaks and other objects are in the water.

Regulation:
“Some kayakers may be … more likely to approach wildlife closely because they may be more apt to overestimate distance because of their low aspect on the water, and to assume they are less likely to disturb wildlife than other vessels (Mathews 2000).
Research:
Pure conjecture, no supporting data offered.  Addiionally, Mathews observed a total of 7  kayaks out of 90 vessels  over a 23 day period, 3 of these approached the island closer than the 100 yard limit. No conclusions or generalizations about the behavior of kayaks can be drawn based on 3 kayaks out of 90 vessels over a 23 day period breaking 1 ruled, which the auther states they were probably not aware of.  Mathews stated that kayaks are  more likely to be unfamiliar with the 100 yard rule  in Glacier Bay than other vessels and suggested education as a solution, citing the success of educational efforts in Washington state at keeping kayaks and other vessels over 100 yards from a sea lion haul out. “Mathews stated that (kayaks) “are more likely to be unfamiliar with the haulout, and less aware of NPS and MMPA regulation…. Diisturbances of sea lions by vessels could be reduced by increasing the 100 yard distance and improving compliance with regulations through visitor education and increased enforcement. Mathews further states that In Washington state, rates of disturbance at a harbor seal haulout were significantly reduced after: 1) a local newspaper published an article on the problem, 2) signs and a float line were placed around the perimeter of the haulout, and 3) the Marine Mammal Protection Act was enforced (Calambokidis et al. 1991)”.
JELINSKI ET AL. 2002

The Jelinski  study looked at encounters between orca whales and seven types of whale-watching vessels (including kayaks, charter and pleasure craft) in and near the Robson Bight–Michael Bigg Ecological Reserve in Johnstone Strait (British Columbia )in order to determine if specific types of vessels and types of behavior had a significant impact on killer whales. This would allow whale viewing guidelines to be based on “impact based activities that clearly demonstrate the relationship between the wildlife viewers and the focal species” rather than a blanket ban of all vessels and activities”. They stated that “a primary objective of a whale-protection area should be to provide a safe environment free from harassment and disturbance while, ideally, allowing humans to enjoy a wildlife-watching experience”.
The full reference is:Jelinski, D. E., C. C. Krueger, and D. A. Duffus. 2002. Geostatistical analyses of interations between killer whales (Orcinus orca) and recreational whale-watching boats. Applied Geography. Volume 22, pages 393 to 411

The (Jelinski et al. 2002) research was cited to support the statement in the proposed regulations that:
“Some kayakers may be less likely  to follow rules “

The  research ACTUALLY SAYS  that :
    Differences between vessels in reserve boundary violation were not statistically significant
o    “ variation in reserve boundary violation when boats were classified by method of propulsion (motorized vs non-motorized) and vessel size (small and large) were not found to be statistically significant (p 11)
In other words, the statement that “Some kayakers may be less likely  to follow rules “ is NOT supported by the research. One rule was being dicussed, reserve boundary violation, not “the rules”.  Reserve violation was high by all vessel types, and although it was stated that reserve violation was more frequent by kayaks, it was also stated that there was NO  STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE between kayaks and other vessels in reserve boundary violation. In other words, no difference that stands up scientifically.

In addition, the Jelinkski research found that:

    Kayaks and small sailing craft were the only vessels that DID NOT  demonstrate tracking behavior of the Orcas
o    “Kayaks and small pleasure sailing craft had unidirectional paths, leading to the conclusion that for them whale -watching is mostly opportunistic; they did not show regular changes in course direction in response to changing directions by killer whales (beyond following whales into the reserve)”.
    Kayaks spent an average of 2 minutes with orca whales as opposed to charter vessels that spent an average of 73 minutes
    kayaks were NOT more likely than other vessels to violate the reserve boundary,
    kayaks and small sailing craft were the only vessels that  did not track whales
    Kayakers spent an average of only 2 minutes with the whales as opposed to charter vessels, who spent and average of 73 minutes with the whales
As a kayaker, this makes sense. Whether I kayak or not depends on the wind, the current, the waves, and the overall weather.  If orca whales appear while I am kayaking it is a magnificent surprise among the many marvelous pleasures of kayaking in Haro strait. I follow the viewing guidelines of Soundwatch when orca whales or other wildlife are present. I could not stalk, track, or chase an orca whale if I wanted to. Like most coastal kayakers, I paddle an average of 2-3 knots. I don’t have a whale spotting service and if I did I could not launch my kayak and then zoom over to the whales happen to be, and continue to travel with them as  they moved.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY  (JELINSKI ET AL. 2002):
“The findings “challenged the effectiveness of the reserve” because “reserve violation is (was) high among all user groups, as(and)  there is minimal evidence of vessels actively avoiding the sanctuary and its boundaries.”
Why is NOAA proposing a reserve when this has proved ineffective in the Robson Bight–Michael Bigg Ecological Reserve in Johnstone Strait , not far north of Haro Strait., home of the northern resident orca whales?

Since the reserve was found to be ineffective, they recommended instead:
We support the recommendations of Erbe (2002) for killer whale-watching, which were based on acoustic analysis of whale-watching and suggest that slow cruising boats should approach no closer than 50 m to avoid hearing loss and changes in behaviour, and that a cruising speed of about 10 km h–1 is recommended within a few hundred metres of killer whales. Where possible, motors should be turned off rather than left to idle. Finally, when there are a number of boats (e.g. five or more), superimposed noise levels may cause permanent hearing  damage over prolonged exposure, though this can be avoided if boats stay at a minimum distance of 400 m.

Kayaks have no motors, they make no noise, and are not an acoustical threat  to a whale’s hearing. Threats to a whale’s hearing are direct threats to a whale’s survival – hearing is used for hunting food, social interactions, navigation, and virtually all aspects of a whale’s life.
THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS GO ON TO STATE THAT:

In studies comparing effects of motorized and nonmotorized vessels on dolphins, the type of vessel did not matter as much as the manner in which the boat moved with respect to the dolphins (Lusseau 2003b).  Some dolphins’ responses to vessels were specific to kayaks or were greater for kayaks than for motorized vessels (Lusseau 2006, Gregory and Rowden 2001, Duran and Valiente 2008). Several studies that have documented changes in behavior of dolphins and killer whales in the presence of vessels include both motorized and nonmotorized vessels in their analysis (Lusseau 2003b, Nichols et al. 2001, Trites et al. 2007, Noren et al. 2007, In Press
(Lusseau 2006, Gregory and Rowden 2001, Duran and Valiente 2008). Several studies that have documented changes in behavior of dolphins and killer whales in the presence of vessels include both motorized and nonmotorized vessels in their analysis (Lusseau 2003b, Nichols et al. 2001, Trites et al. 2007, Noren et al. 2007, In Press
             
Summary:
Essentially, these studies found that  whenever any vessel violated the rules, ( primarily approaching too close) they effected the animals’ behavior, often triggering an avoidance response. Any vessel can violate rules governing movement in the presence bottlenose dolphins, orca whales… whether they are in a no go zone or not. That is why the proposed regulations include rules governing movement of boats in relation to orca whales in addition to a no go zone.

The fact that the research cited above is used in attempt to justify including kayaks in the no-go zone shows a fundamental lack of knowledge of the nature of kayaks. The nature of kayaks self-limits their chance of being in the presence of orca whales as well the amount of time they will spend in the presence of orcas compared to motorized vessels, and their ability to track orcas.  Soundwatch data supports this, showing that Kayaks have a very low rate of accompanying orcas per month, both in real numbers and percentages, as well as a very small percentage of vessel incidents in the presence of orca whales than other boats.

SOUNDWATCH DATA, MAY – SEPT 2008

Chart created using data from Figure 31: 2008 Soundwatch Observed Vessel Incident Percentages by Vessel Type.p.22  The Whale Museum Contract # CN-0221/ Task 007 Soundwatch Public Outreach/Boater Education Update Report 2008

4%     kayak
8%     aircraft
8 %     Commercial  boats (not kayaks)
3%     research boats
60%     Private boats(not kayaks) 

Kayaks have a very low percentage (4%) of incidents, only 1% higher than research boats (3%) and half the percentage of airplanes (8%).  Private boaters were observed committing 60% of incidents, and the most of all types of vessel incidents.

Kayaks also have a very low rate of accompanying orcas per month, both in real terms and percentages

Average Number of Kayaks  Accompanying Orcas By Month 2008

May    June    July    August    Sept
7    5    5    4    3

Chart created using data from Figure 23: 2008 Soundwatch Observed Vessel Incident Percentages by Vessel Type.p.22  The Whale Museum Contract # CN-0221/ Task 007 Soundwatch Public Outreach/Boater Education Update Report 2008

Kayaks by their nature cannot track whales, they travel far too slow (avg 2-3 knots) to chase or pursue whales even if they wanted to. They are far more vulnerable to wind waves currents and the weather than motoried vessels. When a kayaker finds her or his self  in the presence of orca whales in Haro Strait it is statistically and in reality (confirmed by Soundwatch data) an infrequent occurrence, as opposed to motor boats with a whale spotting service who zoom over to the Orcas wherever they may be n the Salish Sea, in most weather and current conditions .

The Jelinski research, conducted in Johnstone strait British Columbia found that
    kayaks and small sailing craft were the only vessels that  did not track whales
    Kayakers spent an average of only 2 minutes with the whales as opposed to charter vessels, who spent and average of 73 minutes with the whales
Jelinski, D. E., C. C. Krueger, and D. A. Duffus. 2002. Geostatistical analyses of interations between killer whales (Orcinus orca) and recreational whale-watching boats. Applied Geography. Volume 22, pages 393 to 411