Wildlife-based tourism & increased support for nature conservation financially and otherwise: evidence from sea-turtle ecotourism at Mon Repos

The arguments of most conservationists supporting ecotourism have been based on the view that it is environmentally friendly as a resource-use and that receipts from it can counter demands to use the natural resources involved for more extractive economic purposes. But wildlife-based ecotourism can also have positive impacts in itself on the willingness of tourists to pay for wildlife conservation, strengthen the pro-conservation attitudes of tourists, and foster personal actions by them that contribute to wildlife conservation. These aspects are explored in this article on the basis of a survey of tourists visiting Mon Repos Beach near Bundaberg, Queensland, for the purpose of watching marine turtles. The results enable several of the conservation impacts of this experience on tourists to be quantified, and highlight important relationships between specific socio-economic variables and the willingness of tourists to pay for the protection of sea turtles. Furthermore, it is shown that the on-site experiences of ecotourists have positive impacts on the willingness of tourists to pay for the conservation of wildlife, and that willingness to pay is sensitive to whether or not wildlife is seen. It is suggested that in situ ecotourism is likely to be a more powerful force for fostering pro-conservation attitudes and actions among visitors than ex situ wildlife-based tourism in aquaria and zoos.

Sea turtles as a non-consumptive tourism resource especially in Australia

There is substantial economic potential for exploiting wildlife resources for non-consumptive wildlife-oriented recreation (NCWOR) tourism and this type of tourism if well managed, can result in the long-term conservation of wildlife resources. This is especially important in cases where wildlife resources are declining due to habitat destruction, poaching and other human threats, as is so for sea turtles. In this paper, relevant ecotourism literature outlining the economic values of NCWOR activities is reviewed to show that a significant potential exists for developing sea turtle-based tourism. Duffus and Dearden's (1990. Biological Conservation, 53, 213-231) conceptual framework for the development of wildlife tourism and its extension and application by Higham (1998. Tourism Management, 19 (6), 521-531) is analysed to see if it might be applied to sea turtle-based ecotourism in Australia at Mon Repos Conservation Park. Threats to sea turtle populations are growing especially as a result of human activities and these underline the importance of finding an economic rationale to conserve the remaining species. Economic benefits from turtle-based tourism can provide such a rationale. However, such tourism must be managed appropriately if it is to be sustained. Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service has adopted management strategies at Mon Repos Conservation Park with this in mind and these strategies are outlined. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

International childcare practices study: Infant sleeping environment

Background: The International Child Care Practices Study (ICCPS) has collected descriptive data from 21 centres in 17 countries. In this report, data are presented on the infant sleeping environment with the main focus being sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) risk factors (bedsharing and infant using a pillow) and protective factors (infant sharing a room with adult) that are not yet well established in the literature. Methods: Using a standardised protocol, parents of infants were surveyed at birth by interview and at 3 months of age mainly by postal questionnaire. Centres were grouped according to geographic location. Also indicated was the level of SIDS awareness in the community, i.e. whether any campaigns or messages to “reduce the risks of SIDS” were available at the time of the survey. Results: Birth interview data were available for 5488 individual families and 4656 (85%) returned questionnaires at 3 months. Rates of bedsharing varied considerably (2–88%) and it appeared to be more common in the samples with a lower awareness of SIDS, but not necessarily a high SIDS rate. Countries with higher rates of bedsharing appeared to have a greater proportion of infants bedsharing for a longer duration (>5 h). Rates of room sharing varied (58–100%) with some of the lowest rates noted in centres with a higher awareness of SIDS. Rates of pillow use ranged from 4% to 95%. Conclusions: It is likely that methods of bedsharing differ cross-culturally, and although further details were sought on different bedsharing practices, it was not possible to build up a composite picture of “typical” bedsharing practices in these different communities. These data highlight interesting patterns in child care in these diverse populations. Although these results should not be used to imply that any particular child care practice either increases or decreases the risk of SIDS, these findings should help to inject caution into the process of developing SIDS prevention campaigns for non-Western cultures.