[Paddlewise] "Sharing" A tree-hugger responds!

From: kayak001 <kayak001_at_earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 98 00:56:25 -0500
As an unabashed tree-hugger, some of the comments recently made in the 
threads about "Sharing" disturb me greatly...some points to ponder: 

In an article that I recently read, Bob Otis, a behavioral psychologist 
from Ripon College in Wisconsin, is studying the impact of boats on the 
behavior of the Orcas that travel through Haro Strait, between Vancouver 
and Washington.  One of his main concerns is the growing number of boats 
around these orcas. While his main concern was with powerboats, he also 
addressed the problems of kayakers specifically.

I'm quoting him here:  "Whales also tend to act unusual around kayakers, 
who frequently speed out to get closer to the passing animals. It's easy 
for kayaks and smaller boat to sneak up on orcas," he says, "and we've 
witnessed whales skipping or cutting short a breathing cycle when 
encountering kayakers."

The full text can be read at this URL: 
http://elpc54136.lboro.ac.uk/orcas/boating.html

I myself have witnessed boaters chasing dolphins here on the coast of 
Texas in Galveston Bay. Under the American Marine Mammal Protection Act 
(MMPA) of 1972 establishes guidelines that prohibit boaters -- including 
kayaks and inflatable crafts -- from actively approaching cetaceans 
closer than 100 yards. 

Another researcher (Dr M. Markus in South Africa) has had to abandon his 
behavior research on the Great White shark due to eco-tourism 
disturbances. 

Replying to some specific points previously made, on 4/22/98 12:55PM, R. 
Walker wrote:

>Rights are legal constructs.  People have a right to kayak / travel
>on navigable waterways [legal definition].  Thats just the way it
>is.

Try navigating the Grand Canyon without a permit-if you get caught, 
you'll be fined (and boats and gear confiscated) and that's really the 
way it is.

>I also wonder what kind of waterfowl you have that flee at a range
>of close to 1000 yards.   Waterfowl of all sorts down here on the 
>gulf coast routinely ignore boaters and people up till you get within
>50 yards or so.  This isn't just kayakers, its jet skies, bass boats,
>pontoon boats, etc.  In a kayak I can often get within 10 yards 
>before they even bother to react, and even then its a "jee, I guess
>I'll swim a few feet" as opposed to "alert! alert! flee!!!"  

I'm also on the Gulf Coast-in fact, as I am writing this, I'm in a hotel 
room in Gulfport, Ms overlooking a portion of the beach declared 
off-limits to humans because the least terns are nesting here at this 
time of the year.  And they are nesting here with a highway, hotels, 
casinos, etc. only a few yards away.  

Superficially this looks great for the tourists, but when you investigate 
deeper, this same beach area was once the nesting area of over 20 other 
species of water birds, none of which nest here anymore because they 
can't compete with man's intrusion into their habitat. Diversity of 
species is a barometer of a healthy habitat. 

And yes it's true, some species here on the Gulf coast ignore boaters and 
people, but these are the species that are becoming increasingly 
commensal with man, like laughing gulls.  The more environmentally 
sensitive species have long since vacated the area or have otherwise been 
extirpated from this portion of their original ranges. 

And your statement about "Jee, I guess I'll swim a few feet" is typically 
anthropocentric.  As I remember, a study done by Texas A&M University 
students suggests that Great Blue Herons will abandon a hunting territory 
if repeatedly disturbed when they are not used to human intrusion.  As 
you may or may not know, Great Blues are territorial and when disturbed 
by boaters, will casually fly a few yards upriver and then land again.  
They will continue to do this until the boater reaches the end of the 
heron's territory. The heron then will circle back behind the boater to 
the beginning of their territory. So, you may think the heron is not 
disturbed because he only flies a few yards away and lands again, but 
actually, he's trying to hold on to his territory against an intruder and 
he is very much disturbed.

>Lets put it this way, you can have ecotourism in kayaks, or you
>can have ecotourism in cruise ships and helicopters.  Choose your
>poison.  Cause you aren't going to be able to eliminate ecotourism.
>And you certainly aren't going to be able to ban boats on navigable
>waterways, whether kayak or 400 hp inboard/outboard driven go-fasts.

This is not a black and white issue.  As noted before, the public beach 
area here on the Coast of Mississippi is closed to human intrusion.  Some 
wildlife management areas are closed at environmentally sensitive times 
also.  The closing of wildlife habitat to all human intrusion is not 
unprecedented

Permits are also (sadly) becoming a way of life.  And I'm not sure even 
those work as I discovered while backpacking once during tourist season 
in Yellowstone.  The back-country looked like a backpacking convention.  
And even in spite of licensing procedures by the Texas Dept of Parks and 
Wildlife, the shrimping industry in Texas was badly damaged in the '70's 
when the Vietnamese refugees began shrimping along with the Texas natives 
and severely depleted the available resource.

Re-iterating, there are no easy answers here.  We definitely need more 
studies done by objective parties to determine just how much human 
intrusion an environmentally sensitive habitat can stand, but 
unfortunately, there's not a lot of funding for this sort of research.

On 4/22/98 18:05PM, Rich Kulawiec wrote:

>But until then, your ire is misplaced.  You are pointing the finger
>at a small segment of the population whose activities have minimal
>impact, who are generally quite environmentally aware, *and* who are
>often responsible for calling attention to problems (e.g. pollution
>in the Cheat River Canyon) and dealing with them (e.g. the Ridley Creek
>cleanup here last Saturday).  You *should* be pointing the finger at
>the Exxons and Weyerhausers of the world -- but they're not so small
>and easy to pick on, are they?

We are all guilty and probably like the rest of the subscribers to this 
list, I am not willing to give up the joy of paddling a river-to 
paraphrase a popular bumper sticker here in the south, you'll get my 
paddle when you pry it from my cold, dead hand!  And yes, I even drive to 
the put-in point in a GMC Jimmy SUV, which are not the most 
fuel-efficient vehicles on the road.  

But, the nature of our sport allows us the freedom to go into more 
environmentally sensitive areas than larger watercraft, and I believe 
that with this freedom comes a responsibility to leave nothing but foot 
prints on the shore and to take nothing but pictures.

 On 4/22/98 14:18PM, James Lofton wrote:

>Dave Forman said something to the fact that..there should be places that 
>have no maps. If you wanted to enter you had to do so on natures terms. 
>No rescues if you screwed up or anything like that. No whinning and 
>filing sute if you were hurt in an accident or run over by a moose or 
>mauled by a bear. Make a decision thats wrong and pay the price. REAL 
>unspoiled wilderness!

I'm down with this!  It worked for John Wesley Powell AND Hayduke!

-------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Neil Harrison-Houston, Texas
          email: nil_at_nol.net   (_at_ _at_)  web: www.nol.net/~nil/   
----------------------------ooO~(_)~Ooo----------------------------
                      100% recycled electrons

***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List
Submissions:     paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net
Subscriptions:   paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net
Website:         http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/
***************************************************************************
Received on Wed Apr 22 1998 - 23:09:49 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:29:56 PDT