46 



industry, conservation management, and scientific community as described in the 

 Environmental Assessment (EA). A number of issues were in general agreement at 

 the workshop, such as providing special consideration to severely endangered spe- 

 cies (e.g. right whales) or for special cases such as calving grounds. It was suggested 

 that interim reflations for these unique cases would be appropriate, pending fur- 

 ther investigation and scientific data. The majority of the attendees also rec- 

 ommended a strong public education program be implemented to educate the pri- 

 vate boat owners about marine mammal protection. Most importantly, it was agreed 

 that whalewatching in different regions of the country, had a number of factors (ves- 

 sel traffic, calving grounds, proximity to land, acoustical relationships to bottom to- 

 {)ography, etc.). This resulted in the workshop recommending that regional guide- 

 ines be considered instead of a blanket, national regulation. Following that work- 

 shop, the NMFS Northeast region did hold a meeting (12/19/89) that concluded with, 

 "All agreed that there are no data available to show either short-term or long-term 

 impacts on whales by vessels, when they follow the Northeast regional guidelines 

 (100 feet)." NMFS-Northeast recommended that the same guidelines continue. 



//. Envirvnmental Assessment (EA): A number of written comments have been 

 sent to you referring to quotes m the EA that are taken out of context, or edited 

 so tightly that key points have been omitted. None of the references cited by the 

 EA support the statements m the EA. For example, the EA refers to "The Recovery 

 Plan" (NMFS 1991a: Humpback Whales) quoting "Since whale watch trips and sci- 

 entific research trips frequently operate at locations where humpback whales aggre- 

 gate for feeding or reproduction, such activities might displace whales from impor- 

 tant habitat." In actuality, the cited document continues to say * * *" This does not 

 appear to have happened during more than a decade of intensive commercial whale 

 watching near Cape Cod, Massachusetts." In fact, the recommended management 

 actions in this document never even mention management of the whale watching 

 industry. It further states, "The harm of possible disturbance or behavioral 

 habituation should be weighed against the potential benefits of commercial whale 

 watching, which include the availability of platforms of research at no cost to sci- 

 entists, the opportunity for members of the public to learn about humpback whales 

 and other aspects of marine biology, and stimulation of public support for whale 

 conservation" (p. 29). Similar references that the EA makes to specific whale popu- 

 lations or behaviors can also be refuted, due to the lack of details that the EA omits. 



///. Marine Mammal Approach Regulations: The proposed new regulations are 

 being offered as a solution to protect marine mammals, when there is not any sci- 

 entific evidence to indicate that this is a priority. The relationship of marine mam- 

 mals is not a simple one that can be handled through convenient regulations that 

 NMFS would like to use, to help with "enforcement. It is clearly evident that re- 

 gional behaviors and tolerances of whales to vessels should be studied further. Fu- 

 ture research should also pursue acoustic components along with vessel size, speed, 

 changes in gears, etc. It should be noted that scientific evidence on humpback 

 whales in the Northeast region indicates strong population growth during the past 

 two decades, concurrent with the growth of whale watching. Therefore, proposing 

 standard national guidelines is applying a "'band-aid" approach to a problem that 

 is missing the "cut altogether. If NMFS is clearly interested in protecting whales 

 and dolphins, then the priority should be addressing where the real injuries and fa- 

 talities lie, which is from discarded and active fishing gear from the large commer- 

 cial fishing fleets, and hits from large shipping vessels. The majority of whale res- 

 cues that nave been entangled in fishing gear nave been found through commercial 

 whale watching companies. It is these vessels that have assisted autnorities in lo- 

 cating, and supporting whale releases from gear. Our protests extend not only to 

 proposed minimum approach distance regulations, but also to the interpretation of 

 Harassment behavior (General Prohibition 218. C. 3). Research has shown that many 

 of the Usted behaviors are often part of the normal repertoire, and not inherently 

 indicative of vessel disturbance. 



Well over a million people participate in whale, ;watches every year in the North- 

 east region. The memoers of NEWWA provide the best symbiotic relationship that 

 can exist to support whale researchers (who act as naturalists on the boats), and 

 to foster a greater appreciation and awareness of the plight of marine mammals to 

 the public. In addition to these benefits, it should be noted that whale watching sup- 

 ports the coastal communities with significant employment and economic benefits. 

 The representatives of NEWWA clearly want to participate with the NMFS in any 

 guidelines that are needed to protect marine mammals, as long as they are legiti- 

 mate and justified. It is recommended that further study be done in this region to 

 elucidate the response of whales to vessel approach and man-made noise. Once some 

 scientific conclusions can be reached, then appropriate regulations should be devel- 



