Tourist Characteristics Inﬂuence Outcomes When Feeding Australian

Humpback Dolphins in South East Queensland, Australia

Ximena Arango-Estevez

, R. W. (Bill) Carter

and Christine Jacobson

Institute Sustainability Research Centre, University of the Sunshine Coast Innovation Centre, 90 Sippy Downs Drive, Sippy

Downs, Queensland 4556, Australia

Keywords:

Australian humpback dolphins, dolphin feeding tourism, visitor perspectives, satisfaction, behavioral inten-

tions.

Abstract:

This study of visitor response to a dolphin-feeding tourism experience showed that satisfaction with closeness

to the dolphins is an expectation and desired outcome of the experience, and should be considered in terms

of best practice, better management and in re-thinking existing experience structure and design. If wildlife

experiences are not well structured and within a context of a code of best practice, and guidance is not given

in situin how to behave after participation, it is likely that the conservation beneﬁts of the experience will be

lost. Experiences should be orientated to deliver adequate closeness to the wildlife with effective interpreta-

tion, which, in turn, can be inﬂuential on visitor satisfaction and enjoyment and in the long term, can bring

conservation beneﬁts for the wildlife and associated environment.

1 INTRODUCTION

The social and physical environment where people

interact with a phenomenon have an inﬂuence on

their behavioral and psychological processes (Alt-

man, 1987). When applied to dolphin feeding experi-

ences, Interactional Theory (Altman, 1987), (Powell

et al., 2009) suggests that visitor characteristics in-

teract dynamically with features from the setting to

inﬂuence human responses to a phenomenon. This

study explored visitor characteristics and their in-

ﬂuence on potential outcomes from organizedtourist

feeding Australian humpback dolphins (Sousa sahu-

lensis). Tourists’ socio-demographic characteristics

and expectations of the dolphin feeding experience

affected knowledge attained, experience satisfaction,

and reported intentions to behave and act to conserve

wildlife and/or dolphins and their environment.

2 METHODS

This case study encompasses the dolphin feeding

tourism activity occurring in the township of Tin Can

Bay, South East Queensland. This is the only place

in Australia, to our knowledge, where the hand feed-

ing of S. sahulensis takes place. It is a small com-

munity of 2,242 inhabitants (abs, 2016), located 218

km north of the state capital Brisbane, on a peninsula

between Snapper Creek and the Great Sandy Strait.

A questionnaire (adapted from (Mayes et al., 2004))

was used to identify dolphin-feeder perspectives after

their participation in the dolphin feeding activity. The

questionnaire included (a) visitor socio-demographic

characteristics (age, gender, level of education, na-

tionality, number of visits to the site and how long

ago) and closed-ended questions with a Likert scale

design for (b) expectations, (c) overall satisfaction,

(d) satisfaction with particular aspects of the expe-

rience, (e) self-reported pre and post-participation

knowledge, (f) intended pro-environmental behaviors

and (g) intended pro-environmental actions. Statisti-

cal analysis (Chi square test) was used for comparison

of pairs of variables.

3 RESULTS

Data from 217 questionnaires were used for the

analyses. Most respondents were female (63.7% fe-

male; 28.7% males, n=206), aged in the categories

of 25-34 and 35-44 years (31.4% and 30.9%, respec-

tively; n=208), with high levels of education (uni-

versity, 52.9%, n=206; high school, 17.5%, n=205).

Most were domestic visitors (81.6%, n=208), trav-

elling mainly as family groups (43.5%, n=209) and

Arango-Estevez, X., Carter, R. and Jacobson, C.

Tourist Characteristics Inﬂuence Outcomes When Feeding Australian Humpback Dolphins in South East Queensland, Australia.

DOI: 10.5220/0009867302050213

In Proceedings of the International Conference on Creative Economics, Tourism and Information Management (ICCETIM 2019) - Creativity and Innovation Developments for Global

Competitiveness and Sustainability, pages 205-213

ISBN: 978-989-758-451-0

205

couples (22.9%, n=208). Most respondents were ﬁrst

time visitors (80.3%, n=217) or had visited between

two and four times (15.2%, n=217). Of repeat visi-

tors, the majority had fed the dolphins between 1 and

5 years ago (8.5%, n=43).

3.1 Expectations

All individual items used to measure the variable

‘Visitor expectations with aspects of the interaction’

were considered ‘important’ to ‘extremely important’

by most participants. The most important expecta-

tions were opportunity to see the dolphins (91.5%,

n=223) and seeing the dolphins in their natural en-

vironment (90.5%, n=222). These were followed by

being able to get close to the dolphins (87%, n=223),

seeing dolphins easily (85.2%, n=223) and interesting

information about the dolphins (78.7%, n=223), avail-

ability of knowledgeable guides/staff (74.3%, n=222)

and opportunity to feed the dolphins (73.9%, n=222).

Gender had signiﬁcant effects on the importance of

three expectations: opportunity to see the dolphins,

seeing dolphins easily and being able to get close

to the dolphins (Figure 1). These three expectations

were ‘important’ to ‘extremely important’ for most of

the visitors (92.2%, n=190).

Figure 1: Statistically signiﬁcant differences between visi-

tor expectations with aspects of the interaction, and gender,

nationality and number of visits.

Visitor nationality signiﬁcantly affected the im-

portance given to receiving interesting information

about the dolphins (Figure 1). Domestic visitors

found this expectation ‘important’ to ‘extremely im-

portant’ (83.3%, n=174) in contrast to international

visitors (16.7%, n=174). The number of times that re-

spondents had visited the area (ﬁrst time, between 2-4

times and between 5-10 times) had a signiﬁcant ef-

fect on the importance given to expectations for hav-

ing the opportunity to feed the dolphins (Fisher’s Ex-

act Test, p<0.05) (Table 1). Most ﬁrst-time visitors

(82%, n=161) and a small number of visitors who

had come to Tin Can Bay between 2-4 times (18%,

n=161) found opportunity to feed the dolphins ‘im-

portant’ to ‘extremely important’.

3.2 Satisfaction

Satisfaction with aspects of the experience. Most of

participants were ‘satisﬁed’ to ‘extremely satisﬁed’

with all aspects of the experience. The aspects with

highest percentages were how close I could get to the

dolphins (92.3%, n=223) and the hygiene practices I

followed (85.1%, n=223), followed by the natural be-

havior of the dolphins (75.5%, n=223), space avail-

able for the dolphins (71.2%, n=222), number of peo-

ple in the water (59%, n=223), and the number of ﬁsh

I could feed the dolphins (57.8%, n=218). Gender,

age, level of education, number of times visited and

how long ago had no signiﬁcant effect on satisfac-

tion. However, visitor nationality did affect satisfac-

tion with the number of people in the water (Table 2).

A high proportion of domestic visitors were very sat-

isﬁed (87%, n=131), in contrast to international visi-

tors (13%, n=131).

Overall satisfaction. Most visitors reported ‘high’

overall satisfaction (60.2%) with the experience, fol-

lowed by ‘moderate’ satisfaction (33.7%). Gender,

age, level of education and nationality did not signiﬁ-

cantly affect overall satisfaction (Fisher’s Exact Test,

p > 0.05).

However, the number of times visited had a sig-

niﬁcant effect (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Statistically signiﬁcant differences between satis-

faction with aspects of the experience and overall satisfac-

tion with nationality and number of visits, respectively.

3.3 Pro-environmental Intended

Behaviors

Through participation in the dolphin feeding activity,

most visitors ‘agreed’ to ‘strongly agreed’ that ‘from

my experience today’, I now feel more strongly about

supporting conservation of marine wildlife generally

(77.1%, n=223) and supporting conservation of the

ICCETIM 2019 - International Conference on Creative Economics, Tourism Information Management

206

marine environment generally (76.2%, n=223). These

were followed by supporting conservation of dolphins

(74.9%, n=223), helping to conserve the marine en-

vironment (72.5%, n=222) and assisting marine con-

servation programs (59.2%, n=223). Gender, age,

level of education, nationality, number of times vis-

ited and how long ago had no effect on visitor inten-

tions to support conservation of marine wildlife gen-

erally (Fisher’s Exact Test, p > 0.05).

3.4 Pro-environmental Intended

Actions

Respondents felt that their participation in feeding

dolphins had between ‘considerable’ and ‘high’ ef-

fect on their level of motivation (intention) to: re-

move beach and ocean litter that could harm wildlife

and/or dolphins (68%, n=223), decrease the amount

of my personal water pollution (67%, n=223), and

assist in the protection of dolphins where possible

(64.4%, n=223). In descending order, other moti-

vations affected were to: tell others about the need

to conserve oceans and animals (62.3%, n=220), be-

come more involved in marine conservation issues

(40.5%, n=222), donate to an environment organiza-

tion (38.2%, n=220), donate time to assisting with

wildlife conservation (37.4%, n=219), and join a

wildlife or dolphin conservation organization (26.5%,

n=219). Two items had ‘no’ or ‘low’ consequences

for motivation to join a wildlife or dolphin conserva-

tion organization (35.6%, n=219) and donate time to

assist with wildlife conservation (32.4%, n=219).

Visitor gender, age and nationality did not signiﬁ-

cantly affect intentions to remove beach and ocean lit-

ter that could harm wildlife and/or dolphins (Fisher’s

Exact test, p¿0.05). Although level of education sig-

niﬁcantly affected intentions to donate to an environ-

ment organization. For university graduates (62%,

n=69), participation in dolphin feeding had a ‘mod-

erate’ effect on their intention to donate to an envi-

ronment organization.

Also, for the highly educated visitors (48.7%,

n=78), followed by visitors with high school educa-

tion (28.2%, n=78), participation in the dolphin feed-

ing had a signiﬁcant effect on the intention to become

more involved in marine conservation issues (Figure

3).

Figure 3: Statistically signiﬁcant differences between pro-

environmental intended actions and level of education and

number of visits to the dolphin feeding experience.

The number of times (ﬁrst time, between 2-

4 times, between 5-10 times) visitors attended the

feeding of dolphins signiﬁcantly affected four pro-

environmental actions intentions (Fisher’s Exact test,

p¡0.05). It inﬂuenced intentions to: (a) become

more involved in marine conservation issues (Figure

3), with most respondents being ﬁrst time visitors

(71.6%, n=88), followed by those who had visited

between 2-4 times (23.9%, n=88); (b) decrease the

amount of personal water pollution (Table 3) for most

respondents (67%, n=215), especially ﬁrst-time visi-

tors (78.5%, n=144); (c) tell others about the need to

care for our oceans and animals (Figure 3) for most re-

spondents (62.1%, n=214), with the majority of these

being ﬁrst-time visitors (78.2%, n=133); and (d) do-

nate to an environment organization (Table 3), again,

this particularly applied to ﬁrst time visitors (86.8%,

n=76), followed by visitors who had been in the area

between 2-4 times (10.5%, n=76).

3.5 Knowledge Change

The comparison of self-assessed knowledge pre- and

post the feeding experience indicated that most visi-

tors (72.9%, n=217) considered they had ‘low’ knowl-

edge change, followed by those who reported ‘mod-

erate’ (24.0%, n=217) and ‘high’ change (2.8%,

n=217). Of those who reported ‘low’ knowl-

edge change, most were the tertiary trained (62.8%,

n=145), followed by high school educated respon-

dents (18.6%, n=145) and visitors with techni-

cal/TAFE education (10.3%, n=145). Gender, age,

nationality, number of times visiting, and last time

Tourist Characteristics Inﬂuence Outcomes When Feeding Australian Humpback Dolphins in South East Queensland, Australia

207

Figure 4: Statistically signiﬁcant relationships between

variables

visited had no signiﬁcant effect on knowledge change

(Fisher’s Exact test, p > 0.05). However, level of

education did signiﬁcantly affect knowledge change

(X2(n=199) =19.981, p=0.001, φ=0.332).

3.6 Implications of Statistically

Signiﬁcant Correlations between

Variables

Signiﬁcant correlations (Chi square) between vari-

ables suggest several implications for how visitors re-

spond to elements of the wildlife feeding experience

(Figure 4). Females had particularly strong expecta-

tions. They expected to see the dolphins, see them

easily and get close to them; nevertheless, further re-

search is needed to conﬁrm gender differences.

However, that gender differences exist suggests

that knowing the type of visitor attending wildlife

tourism activities and their expectations may help in

designing experiences and/or re-orienting them to ful-

ﬁl expectations. These ﬁndings have implications for

the management of wildlife feeding, highlighting the

relevancy of adjusting current operations. Domestic

visitors had a greater interest in learning as part of

their wildlife tourism experience. Learning and edu-

cation(Espinosa Abascal et al., 2015), (Moscardo and

Pearce, 1999), (Ryan and Huyton, 2000),(Ryan and

Huyton, 2002), have been investigated as a motive

for visiting an attraction. Which aspects of learn-

ing the dolphin-feeder domestic visitor is interested

in (e.g. personal growth) and where their motivations

for learning lie (e.g. desires or beliefs) would be valu-

able to clarify.

Feeding the dolphins was more important for ﬁrst-

time feeders than for those who hadvisited previ-

ously. First-time respondents were more likely to

gain higher levels of satisfaction from their dolphin-

feeding experience than those who had participated

previously. That is, repeat visitors appeared to be

more discriminating when evaluating their satisfac-

tion of their visit. The ﬁrst exposure to dolphin feed-

ing also appears to be the more inﬂuential in stimu-

lating intentions to act pro-environmentally, and de-

clines on subsequent visits. This has implications for

conservation because it shows that it would be useful

to increase engagement with ﬁrst time visitors to mo-

tivate them to return to the wildlife experience. When

visitors are in situ for the ﬁrst time, they are open to

suggestions to join a conservation organization and

act on the experience. Post visit communication with

visitors might reinforce messages and precipitate in-

tentions to join a conservation organization; however,

this needs to be explored. Additionally, a higher rate

of visitor return would have positive economic impli-

cations. It can bring extra revenue to the local area;

however, the locality’s carrying capacity needs to be

considered.

While the dolphin-feeding experience did moti-

vate visitors to act with some immediacy to support

marine conservation, it is not known whether the ex-

perience motivated a long-term commitment. The

dolphin-feeding experience also motivated intentions.

Higher educated visitors were more inclined to donate

to environmental organizations. This reﬂects avail-

ability of discretionary expenditure, but this was not

explored in this study. The higher educated also were

less likely to report a change in knowledge. Thus,

information and interpretation provided during the

feeding was perceived not to add to the knowledge

of visitors. This suggests that education and inter-

pretation elements of the experience were ineffective;

alternatively, visitors may have been already highly

informed about dolphins. The former explanation for

this result is more probable. Respondents were will-

ing to support conservation generally;however, socio-

demographic haracteristics appear not to be associ-

ated with intentions to behave to beneﬁt the environ-

ment. Other factors may be involved.

4 DISCUSSION

Visitor characteristics (e.g. gender, nationality and

number of visits to the site) appear to be related to

speciﬁc factors important for the visitors. Level of

education and number of visits inﬂuenced motivation

to adopt speciﬁc pro-conservation actions. There was

ICCETIM 2019 - International Conference on Creative Economics, Tourism Information Management

208

an interplay between gender differences and expec-

tations of being close to the dolphins and sighting

them, which was more important to a higher propor-

tion of females than males. This concurs with the

literature since attitudes (precursors of expectations)

toward animals have been reported as being valued

differently by males and females (Kellert and Berry,

1987). While females tend to perceive animals from

the affective domain, males value animals for more

practical and recreational reasons (Kellert and Berry,

1987). Nevertheless, all visitors tended to value see-

ing and being close to the dolphins. Gender differ-

ences were less prominent with respect to outcomes

of the dolphin feeding experience (e.g. knowledge

change, satisfaction, pro-conservation behaviors and

actions). This contrasts with previous research where

gender was a strong predictor of behavioral intentions

and changes in environmental knowledge (Kellert and

Berry, 1987), (Stern et al., 1993).

A relationship was found, although weak, be-

tween visitor nationality and expectations of acquir-

ing information related to dolphins. This aligns

with a New Zealand study (Amante-Helweg, 1996)

that found eco-tourists attending a swimming-with-

dolphins program were interested in acquiring dol-

phin related information. The New Zealand study

concluded that visitor typology tends to change over

time, even at wildlife tourist attractions (Amante-

Helweg, 1996), (Duffus et al., 1990). In the be-

ginning, visitors are explorers and specialized (e.g.

birdwatchers). With time, a combination of both ex-

perts and generalists are attracted, and ﬁnally gen-

eralists dominate (Duffus et al., 1990). The re-

sults in this reported study showed a greater propor-

tion of domestic (Australian) dolphin feeder visitors

(81%) who had highereducation (52%), like whale-

watching tourists in West Scotland (63%) (Parsons

et al., 2003) and swimming-with dolphins’ visitors

in New Zealand (40.9%) (L

uck, 2003). They ex-

pected to improve their knowledge about cetaceans

through participation in the experience. These re-

sults emphasize the importance of developing struc-

tured wildlife programs that realistically contribute to

visitor knowledge given their inherent interest when

attending wildlife tourism experiences. Should the

animals fail to show up for a short or permanent pe-

riod, signiﬁcant consequences are likely to be expe-

rienced by the tourism operator and the local com-

munity. Wildlife tourism experiences, when occur-

ring in natural settings, cannot guarantee the presence

of fauna. Thus, when designing wildlife experiences,

managers and practitioners would be prudent to con-

sider a wide range of educational resources and not

emphasize and encourage appreciation of only one

species and/or a speciﬁc number of individuals. A

successful example of this design is Tangalooma in

Moreton Island, Australia where the feeding experi-

ence is strongly promoted; however, there are alterna-

tives, such as visiting or participating in activities at

the education center (personal observation). Despite

the positive predisposition of most Tin Can Bay dol-

phin feeders to pro-environmental behaviors, further

exploration of this relationship was not possible. It

would have involved a longitudinal study of visitors’

actual behavior after they have left the site. How-

ever, the predisposition suggests managers and opera-

tors might consider providing in situ opportunities to

join conservation organizations, initiatives, or cam-

paigns or to participate in local, regional and/or na-

tional activities associated with conservation organi-

zations. This could be done by providing information

on how to be active in conserving and/or protecting

wildlife and its habitats or providing the opportunity

on-site to join these organizations.

4.1 Highest Scoring for Individual

Variables

This study showed that a high proportion of visi-

tors expected and considered as ‘important’ to ‘ex-

tremely important’ the sighting of the dolphins (92%)

in their natural environment (91%) and being close

to them (87%), ahead of being educated (79%) and

feeding them (74%). These results reﬂect the afﬁnity

that humans have towards nature, despite it not be-

ing clear if this is an innate and/or learned response

(Wilson, 1984), (Knopf, 1987), (Kaplan, 1995). They

also reﬂect a general response to attractive and/or

charismatic species (Arango et al., 2007) such as dol-

phins (Bentrupperbaumer, 2005) and, in this case, the

qualities of S. sahulensis. This attraction to observe

has been called aesthetic appeal (Kellert, 1996), an

anthropomorphic character attributed to some verte-

brates (Amante-Helweg, 1996), (Bentrupperbaumer,

2005), as well as species rareness (Reynolds and

Braithwaite, 2001). Regardless of why people have

an afﬁnity towards some wildlife species, efforts to

improve understanding of the species seems wise in

terms of sustaining the wildlife tourism experience,

because without visitor support, the viability of the

activity in the long term is unlikely (Moscardo and

Pearce, 1999). This study shows that sighting the dol-

phins tended to be more important, for most visitors,

than the feeding. This suggests opportunities exist

to develop alternatives that can shift visitor attention

away from the feeding component, which is associ-

ated with ethical and conservation concerns. The re-

sults also suggest how a supplementary perspective

Tourist Characteristics Inﬂuence Outcomes When Feeding Australian Humpback Dolphins in South East Queensland, Australia

209

and tourism product might buffer community impacts

should the dolphins depart the setting. Moreover, the

community of Tin Can Bay, while not economically

dependent on dolphin feeding, is vulnerable to its loss

due to the input that this activity brings to employ-

ment and ﬁnancially for a community composed by

retirees (Arango-Estevez, 2018).

Given most visitors (60%) reported they were

‘very’ or ‘extremely’ satisﬁed with the dolphin feed-

ing experience, it seems to have met expectations;

however, there is still room for improvement. This re-

sult contrasts with an earlier study of dolphin feeding

in Tin Can Bay (Mayes et al., 2004), which found that

90 per cent of visitors reported being ‘very’ and ‘ex-

tremely’ satisﬁed. The drop in the percentage may be

associated with differences in the time spent close to

the dolphins and/or the physical distance between vis-

itors and dolphins. It might also be related to the level

of education1, since a higher proportion (approxi-

mately 58%) of visitors had university level educa-

tion in comparison to a lower proportion (about 40%)

of highly educated visitors in the previous study. An-

other possibility for the difference may be related to

the presence of more generalist visitors, who, while

more educated, have higher expectations. This re-

sult gives insight to the evolution status of the site,

which may be reaching a ﬁnal stage of development,

where visitors become generalists and more demand-

ing (Duffus et al., 1990).

A substantial majority of visitors indicated ‘high’

satisfaction, especially with closeness to the dolphins,

but also with the dolphins’ natural behavior and hy-

giene practices followed. Expectations are indicators

of quality perception of services, products and ex-

periences that are developed after a visitor is moti-

vated with a holiday scenario or a wildlife experience

(Gnoth, 1997). Therefore, it seems that closeness to

the dolphins and on-site procedures followed are rele-

vant motivators for dolphin feeding participation and

therefore should be considered in terms of manage-

ment of wildlife tourism experiences. While close-

ness to the dolphins is facilitated by feeding, there are

two elements to closeness in the dolphin-feeding ex-

perience in Tin Can Bay. The ﬁrst relates to when

visitors are close to the dolphins over an extended pe-

riod (pre-feeding) but without feeding them; the sec-

ond occurs during the short feeding period. This ﬁnd-

ing was not explored in this study, but it would be

useful to know whether satisfaction with closeness to

the dolphins is more associated with the ﬁrst moment,

the second, or a combination. Understanding the in-

ﬂuence of these elements of closeness would inform

management of the contentious issue of the public

hand-feeding dolphins.

Despite most visitors being highly satisﬁed with

being close to the dolphins, this was not the case for

satisfaction with the time spent with the dolphins and

the number of ﬁshes used in feeding; only about half

of the visitors felt highly satisﬁed. A limitation here is

that we cannot know whether this drop-in percentage

of visitors with high satisfaction, due to the amount of

time spent with the dolphins, occurred because they

only fed the dolphins and may have not spent time

with them in the pre-feeding moment. The other drop

in percentage of visitors highly satisﬁed was due to

the amount of ﬁshes given to the dolphins. This result

suggests a lack of structure (Newsome and Rodger,

2008) and understanding about the practice of feed-

ing dolphins. As suggested previously (Newsome and

Rodger, 2008), (O’Neill et al., 2004), best practices

and on-site interpretation can help to make visitors

more aware, responsible and knowledgeable about the

risks versus beneﬁts of hand-feeding wildlife. With

improvement in education (interpretation messages)

and appropriate management (e.g. re-structure of

crowds and location) of dolphin feeding in Tin Can

Bay, an improvement in visitor satisfaction might be

expected in a wider variety of aspects of the feeding

experience.

Visitors were satisﬁed with hygiene practices.

This conﬁrms that explained management proce-

dures, and their beneﬁts, leads to support for the prac-

tices (Kessler and Harcourt, 2010). In previous re-

search on swimming-with-dolphins, despite a mis-

match between visitors’ initial elevated expectations

of the activity, and a posteriori application of guide-

lines within a Code of Practice, the management pro-

cedures were supported by tourists (O’Neill et al.,

2004). In the present study, it appears that restruc-

ture of the current operation in Tin Can Bay to a best

practice standard is possible without affecting visitor

satisfaction, whether explanation is provided or not.

Such changes may enhance beneﬁts for visitors and

reduce potential detrimental impacts on S. sahulen-

sis (although there is no current empirical evidence

that the feeding has negative impacts on the species

and its population in the Great Sandy Strait). How-

ever, some tourism operators are reluctant to imple-

ment changes due to fears associated with visitor re-

action to new rules and the possibility of a reduc-

tion in their attendance to the wildlife experiences

(cf. (Moscardo and Saltzer, 2004)). The results sug-

gest that these fears may be unfounded if effective

interpretation is provided. Thus, conservation agen-

cies or private organizations managing wildlife inter-

action experiences should develop strategies to show

evidence to tourism operators and visitors of the ben-

eﬁts for themselves and the wildlife when new man-

ICCETIM 2019 - International Conference on Creative Economics, Tourism Information Management

210

agement practices are implemented. Most visitors

reported low knowledge acquired after participation

in the dolphin feeding and, coincidently, most were

highly educated. This suggests that either interpreta-

tion messages delivered in Tin Can Bay do not meet

the expectations of the well-educated clientele or that

visitors are specialized and knowledgeable in subjects

related to cetaceans and speciﬁcally dolphins. The

ﬁndings indicate that the interpretation messages de-

livered in situ are basic and not to the standard ex-

pected by educated visitors. This suggests that on-site

interpretation can be improved. However, some cau-

tion is advisable, because participants self-reported

knowledge change, rather than an assessment of ac-

tual knowledge change. In addition, whether the feed-

ing experience is reaching a ﬁnal stage of develop-

ment where generalists, although highly educated, are

dominating the clientele is worth further investigation

(Amante-Helweg, 1996), (cf. (Duffus et al., 1990)).

This is likely to be relevant in creating dolphin feeder

proﬁles that would inform development of best prac-

tice guidelines that focus on interpretation and educa-

tion to targeted audiences. This could then improve

visitor satisfaction by prioritizing enjoyment from the

whole experience ahead of feeding as entertainment:

the emphasis being placed on fostering respect, ap-

preciation and ethical values relating to wildlife and

nature in general (see (Newsome and Rodger, 2008)),

(Garrod et al., 2007).

In the study previously conducted in Tin Can Bay,

47 per cent of visitors reported, post experience, that

their knowledge about dolphins had ‘increased a lot’

((Mayes et al., 2004), p.46); whereas inthe present

study, only 2.8 per cent reported high knowledge

change. Divergent results may be related to educa-

tion levels and improved access to dolphin-related in-

formation through the internet, social networks (e.g.

Facebook, Twitter) and television2. However, these

results indicate that wildlife tourism participants are

seeking value-added learning, but opportunities are

missing due to the lack and delay of implementa-

tion of best practices that emphasize education, sat-

isfaction and safety. Visitors reported intentions and

motivation to practice pro conservation behavior af-

ter participation in dolphin feeding. They ‘agreed’

to ‘strongly agreed’ to support conservation of ma-

rine wildlife (77%) and their environment (76%) and

speciﬁcally in conservation of dolphins (75%), and

helping and assisting in conserving the marine en-

vironment and marine conservation programs (59%).

Intentions to undertake speciﬁc actions were also very

positive. However, most visitors were more motivated

to undertake actions that required less effort (e.g. re-

moving potentially harmful litter for wildlife and/or

dolphins (68%) and decreasing personal amount of

water pollution (67%). These results match the ﬁnd-

ings of (Mayes et al., 2004)(Orams, 1997), where ac-

tions requiring more effort had a lower proportion of

visitors intending act in this way (e.g. becoming more

involved in environmental issues and donating money

to environmental organizations).

4.2 Outcomes of the Dolphin Feeding

Experience and Interactions

While information and interpretation presented in Tin

Can Bay, at the time of this study, was limited and

unstructured (personal observation), it seems to have

had an inﬂuence on some visitor outcomes (overall

satisfaction and intention to collect dolphin-harming

beach and ocean litter). As found by others, the

dolphin-feeding tourism experience encouraged vis-

itors to undertake speciﬁc actions beneﬁcial to the en-

vironment and the species (cf. (Orams, 1997)). In the

context of an Interactional Theory approach, dolphin-

feeding tourism in Tin Can Bay does evoke short term

and in situ positive outcomes in visitors (e.g. overall

satisfaction, self-perceived conﬁdence in intentions

to adopt pro-conservation behaviors, and speciﬁc in-

tentions such as becoming active in conservation of

wildlife and their environment). Current management

of dolphin feeding in Tin Can Bay, including oper-

ation design and information and interpretation de-

livery, appears to have limited inﬂuence on motivat-

ing active roles in conservation, which is likely to be

diluted after visitors leave the setting. Best practice

tourism wildlife interactions demand that visitors take

home a strong conservation message beyond what can

be engendered, haphazardly, by the emotion-evoking

feelings of enjoyment of the experience.

5 CONCLUSIONS

Visitors’ socio-demographic characteristics (e.g. gen-

der, nationality, number of visits to the site), with di-

rect exposure to, and interaction with dolphins in nat-

ural settings, were shown to inﬂuence visitor expec-

tations of the experience. Level of education, number

of visits and expectations of the experience can inﬂu-

ence outcomes from the experience (e.g. knowledge

change, overall satisfaction, pro-environmental be-

haviors and speciﬁc pro-environmental actions). Gen-

der inﬂuenced expectations of seeing the dolphins,

seeing them easily and being close to them. Na-

tionality inﬂuenced expectations of receiving infor-

mation about the dolphins. More educated and ﬁrst-

time visitors recognized the knowledge acquired dur-

Tourist Characteristics Inﬂuence Outcomes When Feeding Australian Humpback Dolphins in South East Queensland, Australia

211

ing dolphin feeding was limited. However, increased

knowledge still inﬂuenced intentions to be more ac-

tive donors to environmental organizations. Num-

ber of visits to the dolphin feeding activity, espe-

cially for ﬁrst-time visitors, inﬂuenced intentions to

be more pro-active towards the environment (e.g. do-

nating money, giving time) including making changes

at personal levels (e.g. decreasing personal water

pollution). The ﬁrst-time visit also seems to be an

important stimulus inﬂuencing overall satisfaction in

visitors. This study showed that satisfaction with

closeness to the dolphins is a desired outcome of

the dolphin feeding experience and should be con-

sidered in terms of best practice and better manage-

ment of the experience and in re-thinking existing

experience structure and design. If wildlife experi-

ences are not well structured and within a context of

a code of best practice, and guidance is not given in

situ in how to behave after participation, it is likely

that the conservation beneﬁts of the experience will

be lost. Experiences should be orientated to deliver

adequate closeness to the wildlife and effective inter-

pretation, which, in turn, can have strong positive in-

ﬂuence on visitor satisfaction and enjoyment and in

the long term, can bring conservation beneﬁts for the

wildlife and associated environment.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors are grateful to volunteers and visitors of

the dolphin feeding activity in Tin Can Bay for their

support for and participation in this research; to the

Sustainability Research Centre and the University of

the Sunshine Coast, Australia for the funding and con-

tinuous support, and to CONICYT (BECAS-Chile)

for the PhD scholarship to the ﬁrst author.

REFERENCES

(2016). Census quickstats,tin can bay, code ssc32854 (ssc).

Altman, I. (1987). World views in psychology: trait, inter-

actional, organismic, and transactional perspectives.

Handbook of environmental psychology.

Amante-Helweg, V. (1996). Ecotourists’ beliefs and knowl-

edge about dolphins and the development of cetacean

ecotourism. Aquatic Mammals, 22(2):131–140.

Arango, X., ROZZF, R., Massardo, F., Anderson, C. B.,

and Ibarra, T. (2007). Descubrimiento e imple-

mentaci

on del p

ajaro carpintero gigante (campephilus

magellamcus) como especie carism

atica: una aproxi-

maci

on biocultural para la conservaci

on en la reserva

de bi

osfera cabo de hornos. Magallania (Punta Are-

nas), 35(2):71–88.

Arango-Estevez, X. (2018). Socio-economic response to

the touristic feeding of australian humpback dolphins:

The case of tin can bay, south east queensland.

Bentrupperbaumer, J. M. (2005). Human dimension of

wildlife interactions. Channel View Publications.

Duffus, D. A., Dearden, P., et al. (1990). Non-consumptive

wildlife-oriented recreation: a conceptual framework.

Biological conservation, 53(3):213–231.

Espinosa Abascal, T., Fluker, M., and Jiang, M. (2015).

Domestic demand for indigenous tourism in australia:

Understanding motivations, barriers, and implications

for future development. Journal of Heritage tourism,

10(1):1–20.

Garrod, B. et al. (2007). Marine wildlife tourism and ethics.

Marine wildlife and tourism management: Insights

from the natural and social sciences, pages 257–271.

Gnoth, J. (1997). Tourism motivation and expectation for-

mation. Annals of Tourism research, 24(2):283–304.

Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative beneﬁts of nature: To-

ward an integrative framework. Journal of environ-

mental psychology, 15(3):169–182.

Kellert, S. (1996). The value of life: Biological diversity

and human society (washington. DC: Island.

Kellert, S. R. and Berry, J. K. (1987). Attitudes, knowledge,

and behaviors toward wildlife as affected by gender.

Wildlife Society Bulletin (1973-2006), 15(3):363–371.

Kessler, M. and Harcourt, R. (2010). Aligning tourist, in-

dustry and government expectations: A case study

from the swim with whales industry in tonga. Marine

Policy, 34(6):1350–1356.

Knopf, R. C. (1987). Human behavior, cognition, and affect

in the natural environment. Handbook of environmen-

tal psychology, 1:783–825.

uck, M. (2003). Environmentalism and the on-tour expe-

rience of participants on swim-with-dolphins tours in

new zealand. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Department of

Tourism, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.

Mayes, G., Dyer, P., and Richins, H. (2004). Dolphin-

human interaction: Pro-environmental attitudes, be-

liefs and intended behaviours and actions of partici-

pants in interpretation programs: A pilot study. An-

nals of Leisure Research, 7(1):34–53.

ICCETIM 2019 - International Conference on Creative Economics, Tourism Information Management

212

Moscardo, G. and Pearce, P. L. (1999). Understanding eth-

nic tourists. Annals of tourism research, 26(2):416–

434.

Moscardo, G. and Saltzer, R. (2004). Understanding

wildlife tourism markets. Common Ground Publish-

ing.

Newsome, D. and Rodger, K. (2008). To feed or not to

feed: A contentious issues in wildlife tourism. Royal

Zoological Society of New South Wales.

O’Neill, F., Barnard, S., and Lee, D. (2004). Best prac-

tice and interpretation in tourist/wildlife encounters:

A wild dolphin swim tour example.

Orams, M. B. (1997). The effectiveness of environ-

mental education: can we turn tourists into” gree-

nies’? Progress in tourism and hospitality research,

3(4):295–306.

Parsons, E., Warburton, C., Woods-Ballard, A., Hughes, A.,

Johnston, P., Bates, H., and L

uck, M. (2003). Whale-

watching tourists in west scotland. Journal of Eco-

tourism, 2(2):93–113.

Powell, R. B., Kellert, S. R., and Ham, S. H. (2009). In-

teractional theory and the sustainable nature-based

tourism experience. Society and Natural Resources,

22(8):761–776.

Reynolds, P. C. and Braithwaite, D. (2001). Towards a con-

ceptual framework for wildlife tourism. Tourism man-

agement, 22(1):31–42.

Ryan, C. and Huyton, J. (2000). Who is interested in aborig-

inal tourism in the northern territory, australia? a clus-

ter analysis. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8(1):53–

88.

Ryan, C. and Huyton, J. (2002). Tourists and aboriginal

people. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(3):631–647.

Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., and Kalof, L. (1993). Value orien-

tations, gender, and environmental concern. Environ-

ment and behavior, 25(5):322–348.

Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia harvard university press

cambridge.

Tourist Characteristics Inﬂuence Outcomes When Feeding Australian Humpback Dolphins in South East Queensland, Australia

213