Population: 7,400,000.

Land area: 48,442 sq km.

Tourist arrivals by air: 2,211,394 (+14.8% on prev. yr.)

Tourist arrivals by cruise ship: 270,830 (+144.1% on prev. yr.)

Total Tourist Expenditures: $2,079.9 million USD.

Tourism Budget: Not reported.

GDP at factor cost: $14,870.2 million USD.

1994 figures on whale watching: 15,200 people and $3 million USD in total

revenues.

1998 figures on whale watching: 22,284 people and $5.2 million USD in total

revenues.

Whale-watching ports (current or potential): Samaná, Las Galeras, Cayo

Levantado, Caleton, and Plaza Simi Baez; Puerto Plata; Luperón.

Land-based viewing sites: January to March, but especially February for whales at

Cabo Samaná, Cueva de Agua, Punta Balandra, Cabo Francés Viejo and Cape

Engano; year-round for dolphins in SE DR from Parque Nacional del Esté.

Whale-watching potential: Outstanding.

Whale watching in the Dominican Republic started with fanfare and great potential

in 1985. In 1986, president Joaquin Balagaer designated the Silver Bank Humpback Whale

Sanctuary. This gave the country an international lustre and appeal as the location of the

first humpback marine protected area — a place where many of the 10,000+ humpbacks

from all over the North Atlantic come to sing, mate, calve and raise their young. As

millions of Americans in New England ventured out of the Boston and Cape Cod area to

meet the humpbacks as they fed in northern waters, they were intrigued to learn about

where they went in winter: the warm waters of the DR. Even more enticing, the whales

could be seen from shore and within a half hour boat trip from Samaná Bay. It had the

potential to be the perfect tourism campaign for visiting the DR in winter.

Since the late 1980s, the DR has been one of the fastest growing tourism

destinations in the Caribbean. With good beaches and a hotel capacity of 38,000 hotel

rooms (1997), the highest in the Caribbean and climbing, the DR has become one of the

key package holiday destinations for Germans, Italians, and many others. But for the most

part, they are not coming for the whale watching. In fact, whale watching occupies a minor

role in attracting people to the DR. For most of the mid- to late-1990s, whale watchers

have numbered around 15,000-20,000 people a year. It is true that this is larger than

anywhere else in the Caribbean, but for a place that has such overwhelming promise, it

might also be considered disappointing. The expectation of the operators themselves in the

mid-1990s was for at least 30,000 people a year. The level is estimated to have reached

30,000 whale watchers in 1996 before falling back to around 20,000. It could have gone

even higher — perhaps to 50-75,000 by 1998 — and still be supported by the existing

infrastructure. These are still modest numbers compared to the 200,000+ that go whale

watching around Maui, Hawaii, or the 80,000 who go to Hervey Bay, Australia, during

similar limited seasons for humpbacks.

What has happened to constrain whale watching in the DR? First I will outline the

problems, make some comments, and then talk about the various initiatives already

underway. Finally I will make some additional recommendations.

The problems fall in several areas: (1) the overall structure of the DR tourism

industry, (2) safety, boat-size, and whale watch practices, (3) naturalists and educational

components, and (4) image and marketing.

1. The overall structure of the DR tourism industry is based on package holidays

with tourists buying 'all inclusive' fixed intineraries with minimal flexibility. This

means as a practical matter that the tourist will only be able to take a whale watch

trip if it is included in the holiday or if they book it from a tour company or

22

through the local representative of the international tour operator at the hotel

where they are staying. In this way, the foreign tour operator or large tour agency

take the lead in the marketing and sales (and both do very little at all in the case

of whale watching) and then take a big cut. In early 1999, the rates tourists paid

for a whale watch tour at their hotel were about $60 USD but the whale watch

company received as little as $30 USD. The other $30 USD leaks out of the local

whale watch communities. Whilst some of it probably stays in the country, most

goes to the international guides (an estimated 20-30% of the total) and that ends

up back in the international companies' home country.

2. Safety, boat-size and whale-watch practices: Worldwide, whale watching has a

very good safety record. Considering that more than 5 million people a year have

been going whale watching in recent years, the accidents have been few and far

between. Every few years, however, there has been a serious accident and even

some fatalities. One of these occurred in Samana Bay on March 2, 1995, when an

overloaded boat's upper deck collapsed as the boat rolled after being hit by a

wave. Twenty four passengers fell into the water, some receiving light injuries,

and one Italian tourist was killed. This event contributed to the largest German

tour operator, TUI, among others, refusing to include whale watching in their

itineraries. Indeed, TUI was already concerned about the small size of many of

the whale watch boats, the lack of safety equipment, and the lack of effective

regulations for whale watching; the accident confirmed their fears.

3. The almost complete absence of naturalists and educational components have

exacerbated the problem with safety and regulations, and have diminished the

success of marketing through word of mouth. While at least one operator in

Samaná regularly offers narrated whale watch tours of a high educational

standard and several others offer tours with a modest educational standard, many

boats offer none at all. At a recent international whale watch workshop on

education, it was determined that the single most important element to ensure a

high quality enjoyable tour was the presence of a qualified naturalist (see IFAW,

WWF, and WDCS 1997). Further, an educational programme gets the tourists

and the community involved and provides an experience that can be talked about,

setting up a word-of-mouth situation that helps build the success of a whale

watch community.

4. Image and marketing: The image of a whale watch industry is wrapped up partly

in its reputation for safety and the charisma of the operator and naturalist guides.

Perhaps the great image conferred on the DR from the start with the Silver Bank

Sanctuary spoiled the local whale watching and tourism industry. They did not

have to bother with international marketing as it seemed to have been done for

them. In any case, it is now necessary for operators, the local community, tourism

officials and NGOs to take a pro-active role in creating a unique, high quality

whale watch 'product' complete with a supporting community and overseas

marketing programme. Kaikoura, New Zealand, created such a product and

community, with 40 new businesses, in a small depressed town over a 5-6 year

period, attracting 100,000+ tourists to go whale watching. Of course, the DR has

only a seasonal business whereas Kaikoura's is almost year round and includes

dolphins as well as humpback whales. But the humpback whale season is in the

main tourist high season, and enterprising operators could also expand to dolphin

watching and other ecotourism involving nearby Los Haitises National Park with

its mangrove forests and cave paintings of whales. The season could be extended

considerably.

Through attention to items 2-4, the first item, the existing overall structure for

selling the tours, can, I believe, be modified and in many cases overcome. If a high quality,

special product can be developed and provided consistently to customers, a product which

includes strong educational components and has the right image and marketing, then

people will start to come to the Dominican Republic specifically to go whale watching.

There will still be the package tourists who sometimes take the trips, but the point is that

23

the high value that dedicated whale watchers would put on seeing whales would create a

much more valuable industry, with local companies able to charge more and earn more —

even if visitor numbers stay largely the same or do not increase by much.

In terms of marketing and image, there is much that can be done within the

country. In July 1996, law no. 233-96 made Samaná Bay part of a new 'Marine Mammal

Sanctuary of the Dominican Republic' which included Silver Bank, Navidad Bank and the

waters connecting the three areas. Conservationists were jubilant. But a year later, the law

was revoked which reduced the protected area to the original Silver Bank alone. There is a

great deal to be said for protected areas and wildlife. At minimum, protected areas are a

statement of intention to protect wildlife and its habitat. At best, real protection is afforded,

with habitat set aside where needed and multiple use including tourism and light industry

and fishing encouraged where possible. But most important of all to tourism and marketing

is that a protected area provides an instant 'brand name' with a lustrous appeal. It

immediately becomes a reason for visiting a country, a place to go and enjoy, or even a

place just to know about. The number of tourists who take cruises to Alaska largely or at

least in part because of the promise of protected wilderness and national parks with grizzly

bears, eagles, humpback whales and orcas is very high; the number who actually see all or

even some of the above is much smaller. Yet by visiting the waters and forests of Alaska,

the average tourist feels part of the mystique of the place.

It is interesting to note that while the Turks & Caicos Islands continue to designate

more and more marine reserves, the pioneer in marine reserves in the Caribbean, the DR,

appears to have moved backwards by reversing proposed designations. The prospective

ecotourist, diver, nature lover, and/or whale watcher sees a message here, although the

result is difficult to measure in year-by-year tourism figures. However, over time, the

erosion of a country's image can alter those figures and the change may well be difficult to

reverse. One thing is certain: as the world's green and blue areas are increasingly paved

and destroyed, the value of land- and marine-based parks and wilderness becomes greater

and greater. The increasing urbanisation of the world and the laws of supply and demand

make pristine areas more valuable every year.

Idelisa Bonnelly de Calventi and other members of the Intergovernmental

Management Committee for the Silver Bank Marine Sanctuary (Comisión Rectora) have

fulfilled a key role in terms of encouraging marine conservation in all its aspects including

whale watching and not only at Silver Bank, their orginal remit, but also in Samaná Bay.

The Comisión Rectora was originally set up to administer the Silver Bank Sanctuary but

their positive influence has extended to marine mammals all over the Dominican Republic.

In 1997, responding to the whale watching accident and other criticisms from

foreign tourist operators, the Comisión Rectora stepped in to take the lead in establishing

an organised system for the whale watching at Samaná. They established a permit system,

a boat-size payment system, and gave the boat captains lectures and training. Special

training was also developed for three whale watching 'inspectors' for the area. A page was

established on the Internet to give information on whale watching, the sanctuary and

marine mammals. The Comisión set up a dialogue with TUI, the largest German tour

operator, to try to convince them to return to the DR for whale watching, based on the

comisión's efforts to redirect it. At the same time, they began to encourage more of an

interest in the local people to visit the whales through TV and radio interviews. A Festival

de las Ballenas was planned for 1998 and a seminar with the University of Valencia in

Spain to feature scientific trips. All of this was accomplished with essentially volunteer

help.

Another NGO called CEBSE, which has been working in the Samaná Bay area

since the early 1990s, has recently begun to play a greater role with whale watching.

Initially working in close partnership with the Center for Marine Conservation (CMC),

CEBSE (whose Spanish name roughly translates as the Centre for the Conservation and

Ecodevelopment of the Bay of Samaná and its Environment) took over the job of coordinating

the co-management of whale watching in the 1998 whale watch season. Their

work is being done in coordination with the Association of Boat Owners, the director of

National Parks, and the Secretary of Tourism. The Dominican Navy is the supporting

institution charged with implementing regulations. In 1992 whale watching guidelines

were introduced to Samaná Bay, but the compliance and enforcement were unsatisfactory.

In 1997, after the Comisión Rectora's organisational work, it was agreed that in 1998

CEBSE would take over the co-ordination of whale watching.

24

So far, CEBSE has promoted a code of conduct with a revision of the previous

guidelines based on those used in other areas of the world. It has helped organise regular

meetings (8 in 1998) with all the boat owners and other stakeholders to discuss various

matters and to help implement the regulations and an educational programme. At the same

time, National Parks have co-ordinated the issuing of permits. CEBSE appears to have

made a start toward successful management, but there are many more challenges ahead,

especially if whale watching starts to expand.

With a permit licensing system for the boats, the boat owners are now responsible

for working toward fulfilling the guidelines which stipulate certain minimum distances and

maximum number of boats to be near the whales and the amount of time each boat may

spend with the whales. All of these are sensible traffic management rules which, if

consistently followed, will improve the situation. The procedure for enforcement is to give

a first violation warning for an observed violation, followed by a one day prohibition or a

fine of 200 pesos (less that $15 USD) for a second offense. A third violation would result

in losing the permit, depending on the kind of violation. In 1998 the most common

violations noted were excess speed and too many boats in the observation area at the same

time (three is maximum). For repeat violations, the boat owners were sanctioned with

minor penalties, losing a day on the water. There were only two serious violations

observed. Unfortunately, however, CEBSE has no boat to monitor the situation, and is

reliant on going to sea as observers who are of course known to all. However, some

volunteers have assisted in the monitoring from the Centre for Marine Conservation

(CMC) and the German Service of Social Tehnical Cooperation (DED) who have worked

in the area the past few years. There has also been some monitoring from land at Punta

Balandra where it is possible to see almost the entire area where the whale watching

occurs using binoculars. In future, with the addition of theodolites from land, it may be

possible to do studies of whales and whale watching as well as more effective monitoring

for management.

The whale watching at Samaná takes place from six different ports: Samaná, Las

Galeras, Cayo Levantado, Caleton, and Plaza Simi Baez. There are 21 companies involved

and the total number of boats used is 39. The boats range in capacity from 7 passengers to

125 passengers. 20 of the boats (51%) carry 12 passengers or less, while 9 boats carry

between 13 and 25 passengers (23%). Only 10 boats (26%) are of the optimum size for

whale watching, carrying 26 passengers or more.

CEBSE is currently trying to regulate the boat size as there are recurring accidents

with the small boats, and whale watching from a small boat can be unpleasant in a slightly

rough sea. CEBSE plans to improve the licensing system to ensure that the boats are larger

and safer. For this, they are working closely with the Association of Boat Owners. At

present, 24 (62%) of the 39 boats that have permits are registered as members of the

association. The cost of the boat permits varies by size: 1-12 passengers = 1,500 RD ($100

USD); 13-25 passengers = 3,000 RD ($200 USD); and 26 passengers or more = 5,000 RD

($350 USD). The funds are used to pay for whale watch monitors and the operational

expenses for the management scheme. The 1998 budget spent 93,875 RD ($6,600 USD)

and this came from boat income of 107,000 RD ($7,500 USD), 11,650 ($800) of which

had yet to be paid by boat owners at the end of the year.

The total capacity for all the boats from the six departure ports on Samaná Bay is

1,081 passengers. The biggest port and centre of the whale watching is the town of

Samaná itself, with 17 boats from 9 companies, with a capacity of 766 passengers (see

Table 3). Here, the changes due to whale watching are especially noticeable: new

restaurants, gift shops, plus the increase in the numbers of boats, boat companies, and

tourism guides.

One of the biggest continuing challenges will be education. A naturalist training

programme, coupled with mandatory provisions for naturalists on every boat, would help

considerably. Because of the various languages of tourists to the DR, more diverse than in

many whale watch locales in the world, it will be necessary for guides to be bilingual or

even trilingual. Key languages required are Spanish, English, German and Italian, though

French and even Japanese are also useful. To experience a multi-lingual naturalist

education programme in action, DR operators could visit Hvalsafari, the whale watch

company in Andenes, Norway (see IFAW, WWF & WDCS 1997).

Another need to be addressed is to educate the international tour guides who

effectively 'sell' the tours or arrange the tours for tourists. Much could be done to improve

25

the communication and general knowledge of the tour guides regarding whale watching. If

they are to be the main (or one of the) representatives of whale watching to the public, they

must at least be better informed and interested in whale watching. Currently, little

communication exists between the international tour companies and their guides and the

local community operators who run the tours.

Finally, education needs to be promoted even more in the community and there

should be a budget to encourage these activities. The Comisión Rectora has done an

excellent job in this regard throughout the country on essentially no money. It has helped

to develop children's materials and to put them into the school curriculum, as well as the

other things mentioned above. The hope is that there could be a regular programme to take

school children in the Dominican Republic whale watching.

The other big challenge is to include science in the trips. In the late 1980s and early

1990s, the Center for Coastal Studies helped to train various DR students into photo-ID

researchers with exchange programmes that operated in New England and DR waters, at

both ends of the humpbacks' range. But currently there is only one student working on the

humpback songs and no one is going out on the boats regularly to do research. There is so

much more that could be achieved and this too would help draw the interest of tourists as

well as put whale watching on a sounder ecological footing.

Little has been said about infrastructure. For the most part, the DR has the support

base of hotel rooms, restaurants, roads and docks necessary for further whale watch

development. The Samaná area is not developed like the capital at Santo Domingo or other

large cities in the country. There have been substantial efforts to develop the Samaná area

for tourism in recent years and a new airport is now half complete. However, as in other

areas of the Caribbean, maintaining the balance between necessary development and

sustaining a quality environment is always a challenge.

The work of the Comisión Rectora, CEBSE, the National Parks, the Ministry of

Tourism and its partners, over the next few years, will be the major task in the Dominican

Republic with regard to whale watching. At the same time, there are several exciting

possibilities which might lead to more diversification and further development of the

industry. These could be developed and promoted by private industry or NGOs:

1. Land-based whale watching. This is an important way to educate visitors about

whales as well as provide a way for visitors to see whales without increasing any

pressure on them. In some parts of the world (South Australia, South Africa,

California, Québec), land-based whale watching makes a significant economic

contribution by charging for land-based tours with naturalists and providing

special lookout facilities.

Currently there is one recently established facility for terrestrial whale

observations. Located at Cabo Samaná, it is called Moby Dick and is operated by

the company Go Caribic. A one-day excursion which includes lunch, jacuzzi and

use of the facilities is approximately $35 USD. Nearby, at Cueva de Agua, a new

project has been started with the assistance of an Italian organisation of

volunteers called Panteras Grises (Grey Panthers) to set up terrestrial observation

of the humpback whales.

The third area is at Punta Balandra, and this is perhaps the most central

point for a panoramic view of the area including where the majority of the whales

are concentrated. In the past, this point was used for scientific monitoring as part

of the YONAH project. CEBSE has considered developing land-based whale

watching from this point but further development would require trying to buy or

lease the land which may be costly. CEBSE has said it will look at the economic

contribution from land-based whale watching at the other two sites to see

whether further development might be feasible at Punta Balandra.

There are additional prime lookout areas at Cabo Francés Viejo and Cape

Engano, either of which could also be developed for land-based whale watching.

Cabo Francés Viejo is near Cabrera, east along the coast from Puerto Plata; Cape

Engano is located at Barbaro resort. At minimum, attractive all-weather

information plaques situated in prime locales could help advertise one of the

DR's prime whale watching attractions. If land-based tours with good naturalist

guides (following the South African, Irish and South Australian models) can be

provided, then the economic contribution could be substantial, even if there is no

26

infrastructure or other building. A land-based component would also serve to

promote whale watching by boat, as many tourists who see whales from land

then want a closer look.

2. Dolphin watching is virtually unexplored in the Dominican Republic. Dolphins

are sometimes seen on the whale watch trips in Samaná Bay. The species sighted

are mainly spotted dolphins with occasional pilot whales.

At Parque Nacional del Este, in the southeastern part of the DR, there is a

group of dolphins resident year-round. These dolphins could be considered for

ecotour possibilities. As they live inshore, there may also be a potential landbased

component. There are also bottlenose dolphins found to the northwest of

Puerto Plata, but they have not been studied. Dolphins are no doubt found in

other areas, but surveys would need to be conducted — perhaps by the national

parks as part of biodiversity inventories.

3. The third suggestion is to expand the whale-watching boat tours to include

dolphins, land-based whale watching and ecotourist explorations of nearby places

such as Los Haitises National Park, on the south shore of Samaná Bay, where

there are ancient whale paintings on the cave walls. This would create a more

well-rounded cultural and ecological whale watch tour and provide a bigger

reason for tourists to go whale watching.

At the sanctuary on Silver Bank, whale watching has grown slowly since the

sanctuary was established due to its offshore location which requires much longer trips

than at Samaná. It is 50 miles (80 km) from the north coast of the Dominican Republic.

Most boats leave from Puerto Plata but others have left from the Turks & Caicos or even

from Florida ports. Besides a few thousand humpbacks which spend the winter there,

whale watchers can sometimes see bottlenose, spotted and spinner dolphins, pilot whales

and even Bryde's whales and various beaked whales. The season for humpbacks is January

to March. In 1993 about 200 people were going whale watching on Silver Bank, and this

has climbed slowly and was approaching 500 in 1998.

In recent years, there have been persistent reports from Silver Bank of aggressive

approaches by boats dropping off swimmers to encounter the whales. In the early 1990s, it

had been recommended by Silver Bank's scientific advisors that no swimming be allowed

with the whales because of the safety concerns of too many people in the water with

whales on their mating grounds. The surface active groups of humpback whales often

behave without apparent concern for other whales, tail lashing and charging at each other,

and there was concern for the humans who might get caught in the water and not have

enough time to return to their boats. Dominican conservationists and marine researchers

have repeatedly voiced their fears about this happening due to the difficulty of policing

this offshore area. The remote location of Silver Bank means that it is difficult to monitor,

but the remoteness has at least served as a cap on the number of people watching or

swimming with whales there. Still, some action clearly needs to be taken before whale

watching and swimming with whales results in a serious accident, which could result in

loss of human life, tarnishing the reputation of whale watching as well as possibly having

an impact on the conservation of the whales.

Most whale watch locales of any size develop growing pains, though the

Dominican Republic has certainly had a little more than its share. But these struggles have

produced positive change and new ideas. The Dominican Republic has the potential to

become a world class humpback whale watching centre, putting its unique brand on whale

watching and promoting the local cultural experience. Within a few years, with a focusing

of effort and continued improvement, the potential for doubling the existing numbers and

economy based on whale watching is definitely there.

As this report was being completed in early May, the announcement came that the

DR government, after considerable national and international pressure, has decided to

restore the 1996 marine mammal sanctuary (subsequently revoked in 1997) that had

included not only Silver Bank, but Navidad Bank and the Samaná area. The new

presidential decree designating the 'Marine Mammal Sanctuary of the Dominican

Republic' is No. 136-99. On May 5, 1999, the first meeting of the new Comisión para la

27

Protección de los Mamíferos Marinos took place — a great and optimistic day for whale

watching and whale conservation in the Caribbean.

Jan. Feb. Mar. Total 1998

Number of boat excursions 249 662 372 1,283

Total w/w visitors 3,657 11,682 6,445 21,784

Courtesy: CEBSE statistics

Port: No. of boats Companies Capacity

Samaná 17 boats 9 companies 766 people

Plaza Simi Baez 8 boats 1 company 122

Las Galeras 3 boats 2 companies 32

Cayo Levantado 2 boats 2 companies 20

Carenero 3 boats 3 companies 29

Caleton 6 boats 5 companies 112

Adapted from CEBSE statistics for 1998.

1991 900+

1994 15,300

1996 30,000

1997 20,000

1998 21,784

______________________________________________________________

Whale watching guidelines in the Dominican Republic grew out of a Whale

Tourism Workshop in 1992 organised by CEBSE, the Samaná-based NGO, and Centro de

Investigaciones de Biologia Marina (CIBIMA), a scientific group working on humpback

whales. In 1994, the guidelines were adopted by the boat owners conducting the whale

watch tours, with the agreement of various sectors of the community involved with whale

watching. However, partly due to lack of compliance, these original guidelines have

recently been modified and expanded, and new provisions for monitoring have been put

in place. As of 1998, CEBSE has been placed in charge of monitoring and coordinating the

management of whale watching at Samaná, according to a co-management agreement

signed by CEBSE, the Association of Boat Owners, the Natural Park Directorate, and the

Tourism Ministry (CEBSE, Bonnelly de Calventi, Entrup, pers. comm.). Following are the

1999 whale watching guidelines:

1. No more than one large boat (greater than 30 ft/9 m) and 2 small boats (less than

30ft/9m and larger than 23 ft/7 m) are allowed to observe a whale or group of whales at

the same time. Each whale watch vessel must have a permit from the National Parks

Directorate (DNP).

28

2. Vessels must stay at least 270 feet (80 m) from a group of whales that includes a calf and

165 feet (50 m) from adult whales.

3. Vessels waiting to observe a whale or group of whales must maintain a distance of 1500

ft (500 m).

4. When a vessel reaches the regulated distance, the engine must be put in neutral, and it

must wait. The engine must be left running at all times.

5. A vessel may not stay with a whale or group of whales for more than thirty minutes.

6. After passing Cayo Levantado, the velocity of the whale watching vessels should not

exceed 5 knots (9 km/h). If a vessel encounters whales further into the Bay (before Cayo

Levantado) its speed should be immediately lowered to 5 knots.

7. It is prohibited to swim or dive with the whales.

As part of the enforcement procedure, there is a licensing system regarding the vessels

which are allowed to offer whale watching trips. The owners are responsible to work

toward the guidelines mentioned above. Observed violations will be treated as follows:

• first violation — warning (noted by CEBSE)

• second violation — a possible one day prohibition to whale watch or fees of about 200

Pesos (less than $20 USD)

• third violation — losing the permit; but this depends on the kind of violation.

______________________________________________________________

The Intergovernmental Management Committee for the Silver Bank Marine

Sanctuary (Comisión Rectora) is the institution responsible for the administration of the

Silver Bank Sanctuary and for the protection of the humpback whales and other marine

mammals (Decree No. 319, 1986) (Carlson 1998).

1.0 Visits to the Silver Bank Sanctuary

1.1. In order to visit the sanctuary for research, education, recreation (whale

watching), sport fishing, or other purposes, all vessels must have a permit from the

Sanctuary Committee. This permit must be authorized by the Executive Director and the

Secretary of the Sanctuary Committee (see Internal Regulations of the Governing

Committee).

1.2 The persons responsible for the vessel must fill in an application that includes

information on the purpose of the visit, the time that will be spent in the Sanctuary, the

number of passengers on the vessel, dates, as well as any specific activities included in the

trip.

1.3 The application form can be obtained in the headquarters of the Sanctuary

Committee as well as in the premises of the different Delegations of the Committee.

1.4 The vessels must display, in a visible place, a copy of their permit and the

regulations of the Sanctuary Committee of the Silver Bank Humpback Whale sanctuary.

1.5 Given the case that the purpose of the visit is a research and/or study project,

the visitor(s) must deliver a report of the activities and the results to the Sanctuary

Committee, as well as a copy of any publication, video, etc. elaborated during the study.

1.6 The Sanctuary Committee will establish a visitation fee dictated by the Internal

Regulations of the Committee.

1.7 The Sanctuary Committee may limit the number of vessels present

simultaneously in the area.

1.8 The vessel that visits the Sanctuary for whale watching must, when possible,

take on a representative of the Committee with the purpose of collaborating in whale

research and conservation.

1.9 The use of the Polyxeni as lodging for people is not permitted.

1.10 The Port Authority will not dispatch any vessel to visit the Silver Bank

Sanctuary if it lacks the permits of the Sanctuary Committee.

1.11 All vessels must attain to marine safety and navigational regulations

predisposed by Dominican law.

2.0 Protective Measures for Whales and Other Marine Mammals in the Sanctuary

29

2.1 The capture, hurting, killing, persecution or harassment of any mammal is

prohibited.

Note: It is understood that by harassment is meant any activity that affects the

normal behavior of the whales. This infers that the animal is being harassed when any

sudden change occurs in its behavior, such as:

a) radical changes in swimming direction

b) changes in breathing intervals

c) abandonment of area where first observed

d) evasive conduct

2.2 The discharge or deposition of any contaminants, explosives, or electrical

equipment, as well as their use for fishing is prohibited.

2.3 The dredging, perforation, or any type of activity that distrubs the ocean floor,

as well as the construction of any structure different to those used for auxilliary

navigation, is prohibited without the corresponding permit from the Sanctuary

Committee.

2.4 Flights of any nature cannot be made at heights under 300 m (1000 feet) when

at a maximum horizontal distance of 300 m away from the whale.

2.5 Hydroplane landing is not permitted in any area where a whale is present.

2.6 Fishing activities by national vessels is permitted. Nets may not be used from

November to May in the Sanctuary area as well as in the adjacent zones occupying a

diameter of 10 nautical miles away from the limits of the Sanctuary.

3.0 Whale Watching Regulations

The Silver Bank is an important reproduction and weaning area for the North Atlantic

humpback (Megaptera novaeangliae). The Sanctuary Committee has established a set of

rules or regulations designed to protect this endangered species and to guarantee the

security of the people interested in observing them.

3.1 Whale season. The humpback whale season extends every winter from

December to April.

3.2 The vessels visiting the Sanctuary must obey the following regulations.

3.2.1 The vessel and/or their occupants must not come any closer than 50

m from where the whales are found, and less than 80 m when in the presence of mothers

with their calves.

3.2.2 In the whale watching area, only one vessel may be observing the

whales. The presence of various vessels together, be they small or large, confuse the

whales.

3.2.3 Each vessel must not stay longer than thirty minutes with any given

group of whales.

3.2.4 Each vessel must not make any sudden changes in direction and/or

speed when near the whales.

3.2.5 No objects may be thrown into the water, and no unnecessary noise

may be made when near the whales.

3.2.6 If the whales come closer than 100 m from the vessel, the motor must

be put in neutral until the whales are seen receding from the vessel.

3.2.7 The vessel cannot interfere with the swimming direction or the

natural behavior of the whales. (Whales can leave their natural habitat if harassed).

3.2.8 If any vessel violates the regulations in any way, the Sanctuary

Committee will ask the Fisheries Department of the Ministry of Agriculture and the Navy

Secretariat Headquarters to retain their permit for fishing or access to the Sanctuary for a

determined time period, and in the case the felony is repeated, to cancel the vessel's

permit.

Note: The protection of the humpback whales will always be in effect while they

are in Dominican waters.

______________________________________________________________

30

Acknowledgments: Idelisa Bonnelly de Calventi (FUNDEMAR, Comisión Rectora), Niki

Entrup, Carole Carlson, Kim Beddall, CEBSE, IFAW, WWF and WDCS 1997, special

thanks to Kim, Monica and Patricia Lamelas for sending CEBSE's comprehensive report

on whale watching for 1998, CTO 1997.