In recent years there has been significant interest in modelling cumulative effects and the population consequences of individual changes in cetacean behaviour and physiology due to disturbance. One potential source of disturbance that has garnered particular interest is whale-watching. Though perceived as 'green' or eco-friendly tourism, there is evidence that whale-watching can result in statistically significant and biologically meaningful changes in cetacean behaviour, raising the question whether whale-watching is in fact a long term sustainable activity. However, an assessment of the impacts of whale-watching on cetaceans requires an understanding of the potential behavioural and physiological effects, data to effectively address the question and suitable modelling techniques. Here, we review the current state of knowledge on the viability of long-term whale-watching, as well as logistical limitations and potential opportunities. We conclude that an integrated, coordinated approach will be needed to further understanding of the possible effects of whale-watching on cetaceans.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Orcinus orcais a cosmopolitan species and the most widely distributed marine mammal. Its diet includes over 140 species of fish, cephalopods, sea birds and marine mammals. However, many populations are specialised on certain specific prey items. Three genetically distinct populations have been described in the North Atlantic. Population A (that includes the Icelandic and Norwegian sub-populations) is believed to be piscivorous, as is population C, which includes fish-eating killer whales from the Strait of Gibraltar. In contrast, population B feeds on both fish and marine mammals. Norwegian killer whales follow the Norwegian spring spawning herring stock. The only description in the literature of Norwegian killer whales feeding on another cetacean species is a predation event on northern bottlenose whales in 1968. Daily land-based surveys targeting sperm whales were conducted from the Andenes lighthouse using BigEyes^®binoculars (25×, 80 mm). The location of animals at sea was approximated through the use of an internal reticule system and a graduated wheel. On 24 June 2012 at 3:12 am, an opportunistic sighting of 11 killer whales was made off Andenes harbour. The whales hunted and fed on a harbour porpoise. Despite these species having overlapping distributions in Norwegian waters, this is the first predatory event reported in the literature.

Aquatic bushmeat can be defined as the products derived from wild aquatic megafauna (e.g. marine mammals) that are used for human consumption and non-food purposes, including traditional medicine. It is obtained through illegal or unregulated hunts as well as from stranded (dead or alive) and bycaught animals. In most South American and West African countries aquatic mammals are or have been taken for bushmeat, including 33 small cetaceans and all three manatee species. Of these, two cetacean species are listed in the IUCN red list as “near threatened”, and one as “vulnerable”, as are all manatee species. Additionally, 22 cetacean species are listed as “data deficient”, hence some of these species may also be at risk. No reports (recent or otherwise) were found for some countries, however caution is needed in concluding that aquatic bushmeat is not utilized in these nations. Moreover, although aquatic bushmeat is mostly obtained opportunistically and was likely originally taken only for local consumption, directed catches occur in most countries and may have reached unsustainable levels in some areas. For example, in Peru and Nigeria, thousands of small cetaceans are illegally hunted annually. Reliable, recent data and a better overall understanding of the drivers of aquatic bushmeat will be essential in the development of effective mitigation measures.

Oceans are complex systems and problems preventing a sustainable future require complex solutions. This can be achieved through innovative blends of natural and social sciences, with input from stakeholders. There is growing expectation that early career researchers (ECR), especially conservationists, should be more than natural scientists. ECR are expected to have skills in several domains, not all important to the quality of their work. Scientific skills range from knowledge of complex statistics to programming, and experience in different scientific fields. It is not only impossible to master all such tasks in a lifetime, much less as an ECR, but most importantly, attempting to do so means an ECR cannot master any single skill. This is especially true for minorities, non-native English speakers, and those who must juggle doing science with little or no funding, while having other jobs and family commitments. ECR are also expected to participate in activities that, while important for conservation, do not necessarily improve their scientific skills. These are social skills and range from policy engagement to science communication. This can contribute to developing mental health issues as it hinders having a healthy work-life balance. This expectation of engaging in extracurricular activities can overwhelm people with social anxiety and other difficulties with social interactions (e.g., people in the autism spectrum). Through collaborations, we can effectively draw on the more specialized skills of various people. Building an inclusive scientific community for ECR, therefore, calls for seeing diversity of skills, thoughts, and personality traits as its strength.