Does ecotourism contribute to sea turtle conservation? Is the flagship status of turtles advantageous?

There is little doubt that marine turtles are a flagship species for wildlife tourism. In some cases, this has turned out to be liability for sea turtle conservation, but in other cases, where for example turtle-based ecotourism has been developed, it has made a positive contribution to turtle conservation. Examples of both cases are given. Particular attention is given to the development of turtle-based ecotourism at Mon Repos Beach near Bundaberg, Australia. This development is set in its historical context and its contribution to conservation is discussed. Headstart projects for sea turtles in Sri Lanka are a tourist attraction. While they are promoted as having positive conservation consequences and a survey indicates that visitors are on the whole convinced of this, their effects on turtle conservation is uncertain. The farming of sea turtles provides a basis for tourism and can contribute to turtle conservation in ways outlined. It is argued that insufficient attention has been given to legends, culture and history associated with sea turtles in the promotion of turtle-based tourism. This is supported by Australian evidence. Insufficient use has been made of the connections of indigenous Australians with sea turtles in turtle-based tourism. Beneficial scope exist for developing connections between man and turtles further than at present in promoting turtle-based tourism. This could add further to the role of turtle-based tourism in promoting turtle conservation.

Genetic and environmental contributions to cannabis dependence in a national young adult twin sample

Background. This paper examines genetic and environmental contributions to risk of cannabis dependence. Method. Symptoms of cannabis dependence and measures of social, family and individual risk factors were assessed in a sample of 6265 young adult male and female Australian twins born 1964-1971. Results. Symptoms of cannabis dependence were common: 11(.)0% of sample (15(.)1% of men and 7(.)8% of women) reported two or more symptoms of dependence. Correlates of cannabis dependence included educational attainment, exposure to parental conflict, sexual abuse, major depression, social anxiety and childhood conduct disorder. However, even after control for the effects of these factors, there was evidence of significant genetic effects on risk of cannabis dependence. Standard genetic modelling indicated that 44(.)7% (95% CI = 15-72(.)2) of the variance in liability to cannabis dependence could be accounted for by genetic factors, 20(.)1% (95 CI = 0-43(.)6) could be attributed to shared environment factors and 35(.)3% (95% CI = 26(.)4-45(.)7) could be attributed to non-shared environmental factors. However, while there was no evidence of significant gender differences in the magnitude of genetic and environmental influences, a model which assumed both genetic and shared environmental influences on risks of cannabis dependence among men and shared environmental but no genetic influences among women provided an equally good fit to the data. Conclusions. There was consistent evidence that genetic risk factors are important determinants of risk of cannabis dependence among men. However, it remains uncertain whether there are genetic influences on liability to cannabis dependence among women.