Conservation and economic benefits of wildlife-based marine tourism: Sea turtles and whales as case studies

Tourism development can have positive and/or negative impacts on wildlife. However, if tourism is developed in accordance with the basic tenets of wildlife tourism such an activity can be sustainable and can aid the conservation of species. Based on two case studies in Queensland, Australia, this article outlines the various economic and conservation benefits arising from wildlife-based tourism. Some of the benefits are direct, such as tangible economic benefits, others are less tangible, such as increased visitors’ willingness to pay in principle for the conservation of species. Wildlife-based tourism is shown to foster political support for the conservation of species utilized for such tourism by various mechanisms. Non-consumptive uses of wildlife are not only sustainable, but may provide a viable alternative to consumptive uses.

The public's knowledge of and support for conservation of Australia's Tree-Kangaroos

After providing some brief background on Dendrolagus species in Australia, two consecutive surveys of Brisbane’s residents are used to assess public knowledge of tree-kangaroos and the stated degree of support for their conservation in Australia. The responses of participants in Survey I are based on their pre-survey knowledge of wildlife. The same additional set of participants completed Survey II after being provided with information on all the wildlife species mentioned in Survey I. Changes in the attitudes of respondents and their degree of support for the protection and conservation of Australia’s tree-kangaroos are measured, including changes in their contingent valuations and stated willingness to provide financial support for such conservation. Reasons for wanting to protect tree-kangaroos are specified and analyzed. Furthermore, changes that occur in the relative importance of these reasons with increased knowledge are also examined. Support for the conservation of tree-kangaroos is found to increase with the additional knowledge supplied. Furthermore, support for the conservation of Australia’s less well-known tropical mammals is shown to increase relative to better known mammals (icons) present in temperate areas, such as koalas and red kangaroos with this increased knowledge. Possible implications of the results for government conservation policies in Australia are examined.

Visitor profiles and environmental attributes, especially of birds, attracting visitors to Lamington National Park: Tourist attitudes and economic issues

Uses a sample of 622 day and overnight visitors to the O’ Reilly’s/Green Mountains site of Lamington National Park, Queensland, Australia, to identify their socio-economic and other pertinent characteristics and the main reasons and attributes that attract them to the site. Particular attention is given to birds and their attributes as attractions. The primary economic injection accruing locally as a result of visits is examined and the difference that the presence of birds makes to local expenditure by visitors is explored. The extent of support for and objection to the introduction of a fee for entering Lamington National Park is estimated. The many suggestions received from visitors for environmental improvements at this site are discussed. It is suggested that unless a way can be found to regulate the number of visitors to this site and obtain extra funds to finance improvements at this site, the magnitude of many of these problems will grow. This will necessitate a fresh look at the desirability or otherwise for charging entry fees to Lamington National Park.

Attitudes to entry fees to National Parks: Results and policy implications from a Queensland case study

Examines visitor attitudes and whether visitors are willing to pay to enter Lamington National Park and under what circumstances they would do so. First a sample of visitors is asked a general (normative) question as to whether visitors should pay to visit Lamington National Park and in another question (positive) they are asked whether they would be more willing to pay if the money collected would be invested in the park to improve visitor facilities and for conservation work. The results show that visitors are more willing to accept the ‘user-pays’ principle if the money will be used for the benefit of the national park and its visitors. It was found that foreigners are more in support for a ‘user-pay’ fee than Australians, and among Australians, those visitors from Queensland are the least willing to accept the idea of a user-pay fee to enter the park. The results indicate that if visitors can be shown the benefits (both for visitors and for conservation) of charging an entry fee, then visitors are more likely to support such a concept than when they are unaware of the benefits of a user-fee. The study shows that on average foreigners are willing to pay more than Australians. Finally, the regression results identify significant factors influencing visitors’ attitudes and suggested amounts to visit the national park.

Economics of wildlife tourism

After introducing the importance of the topic, we examine the economic impacts of wildlife tourism on income and employment as an indicator of the importance of this form of tourism. While such indicators can be important politically and to particular interest groups, they are shown to be an inadequate guide to the economic use and conservation of resources, including wildlife used in tourism. One reason for this (amongst others) is that total economic value must be taken into account in determining economic resource use and this is shown to be quite important in the case of wildlife species. Empirical procedures, such as use of the travel cost method and stated preference methods (for example, contingent valuation) are outlined and the way in which they can be used for determining the optimal economic allocation of land and other resources for wildlife tourism is explained. Economic implications and limitations of some empirical estimates of the importance of wildlife tourism are discussed. This leads on to a consideration of the purpose and usefulness of using economic instruments to manage wildlife tourism.

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.

What role does knowledge of wildlife play in providing support for species' conservation?

Conservation of biodiversity is a complex issue. Apart from the creation of nature reserves, there is a plethora of other factors that are part of this complex web. One such factor is the public knowledge of species. Since public funding is imperative for the conservation of species and creation of reserves for them it is important to determine the public’s awareness of species and their knowledge about them. In the absence of such awareness and knowledge, it is possible that the public may misallocate their support. In other words, resources may be provided for species that do not need support urgently. We show how availability of balanced information about species helps the public to make rational decisions and to allocate support (e.g. monetary) to species that need it most. Other implications of a ‘wildlife knowledgeable’ public are also discussed.

Tooth Replantation After Use of Euro-Coffins Solution or Bovine Milk as Storage Medium: A Histomorphometric Analysis in Dogs

Purpose: Euro-Collins solution was developed for the preservation of organs for transplantation, whose characteristics have raised interest for its use as a storage medium for avulsed teeth before replantation. This study evaluated histologically and morphometrically the healing process of dog teeth replanted after storage in Euro-Collins solution or bovine milk. Materials and Methods: Eighty roots of 4 young adult mongrel clogs were randomly assigned to 4 groups (n = 20) and the root canals were instrumented and obturated with gutta-percha and a calcium hydroxide-based sealer. After 2 weeks, the teeth were extracted and subjected to the following protocols: GI (negative control), replantation immediately after extraction; GII (positive control), bench-drying for 2 hours before replantation; GIII and GIV, immersion in 10 mL of whole bovine milk and Euro-Collins solution at 4 C, respectively, for 8 hours before replantation. The animals were sacrificed 90 days postoperatively. The pieces containing the replanted teeth were subjected to routine processing for histologic and histometric analyses under light microscopy and polarized light microscopy. Results: Root resorption was observed in all groups. GII exhibited the greatest loss of dental structure (P < .01), and inflammatory resorption was predominant in this group. Storage in milk showed poorer results than immediate replantation and storage in Euro-Collins solution (P < .01). The teeth stored in Euro-Collins solution presented similar extension of root resorption and periodontal ligament reorganization to those of immediately replanted teeth. Conclusions: The findings of this study suggest that the Euro-Collins solution is an adequate storage medium for keeping avulsed teeth for up to 8 hours before replantation. Crown Copyright (C) 2010 Published by Elsevier Inc on behalf of American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. All rights reserved. Oral Maxillofac Surg 68:111-119, 2010