Feeding wild fish for tourism—A systematic quantitative literature review of impacts and management

Abstract

Feeding wildlife for the purpose of tourism is a contentious issue with for and against arguments being raised by tour operators, non‐governmental organisations, researchers, and managers. Despite this situation, there is a growing trend in the feeding of marine wildlife to guarantee visitors an exciting up‐close experience. This review investigates the scope and key findings of research conducted on the impacts and social aspects of tourism related wild fish feeding. This systematic quantitative literature review identified 58 peer‐reviewed articles on feeding wild fish for tourism. Of those articles, 35 (60%) reported on ecological impacts on the fish. Only 14 articles explored fish feeding tourism from a social perspective, and of those only 9 (15%) investigated the perspectives of visitors. This review highlights that the impacts and management of complex human‐wildlife interactions, such as feeding wild fish, are case and species specific. The impacts of feeding wild fish for tourism include changes in species distribution and behaviour, negative health effects, increased predation of some fish species, and risk of injury to tourists. There is less research on social aspects such as visitor attitudes and satisfaction with fish feeding operations. Further studies are required on visitor demand and interests, and the ecological implications of provisioning to ensure the scenarios in which fish feeding occur are sustainable, maximizing the tourism experience while minimizing negative impacts on fish populations. It is important that progress is made towards developing appropriate codes of conduct and nationally and internationally accredited standards of practice.

To Feed or Not to Feed? Coral Reef Fish Responses to Artificial Feeding and Stakeholder Perceptions in the Aitutaki Lagoon, Cook Islands

“…In lieu of a ban, it would be relevant to (1) work on transferring the perceptions of snorkellers to operators of snorkeling tours, (2) inform tour operators and dive guides on how the bread may impact fish behavior and function, and (3) involve education programs for tourists (Wiener et al, 2009;Patroni et al, 2018). Environmental education during tourism activities will result in positive attitudes of visitors toward wildlife conservation (Higginbottom et al, 2001), and may thus assist in a voluntary reduction of feeding (Bessa et al, 2017a).…”

“…Further, maintaining profitability will guide the attitudes and behaviors of local tour operators (Vaske and Manfredo, 2012). Whether the perceptions of tour operators regarding the added value of artificial fish feeding match the actual levels of satisfaction tourists obtain from such activity, however, remains uncertain (Patroni et al, 2018). As drivers and consequences of food provisioning for wildlife touch the realms of social as well as ecological sciences (Newsome, 2017), approaches that consider both ecological implications of artificial fish feeding and stakeholder perceptions are crucial to guide conservation and management actions (Ziegler et al, 2015;Patroni et al, 2018).…”

Preprint: Data from a Systematic Review of Crowdsourcing of Research Data from Wildlife Tourism Photographs and Comments Shared on Social Networking Sites

“…Wildlife tourism is a global industry that has evolved from the inherent human desire to see and interact with wildlife in natural environments [1][2][3][4][5]. Wildlife tourism is, generally, regarded as a non-consumptive activity, with human-wildlife interactions ranging from observing and feeding wildlife thorough to photographing free roaming wild animals [7][8][9][10]. As the economic and social significance of wildlife tourism and ecotourism continues to grow [5,[11][12][13], understanding the ecological and social interface of these experiences is critical for achieving long-term sustainability [14,15].…”

Preprint: Data on Peer Reviewed Papers about Recreational Disturbance of Coastal Avifauna

“…Similar to the methods reported in the MDPI published reviews of Parker, Patroni, Walker and others [21][22][23][24] and the Data Descriptor of Simpson and others [25,26], the data reported in this data descriptor was gathered as part of a systematic quantitative literature review that was based on the approach of Pickering and Byrne [27] and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) guidelines [28].…”