[ch4s3]

You could make a compelling argument that no one with any real power would care about the reefs if they weren't regularly visited by relatively wealthy tourists that have at least some connection to those in power and the broader public. Yellowstone wouldn't exist without people like John Muir. Travel helps people connect with the physical world and the people who inhabit physically and culturally remote places.

[RRL]

I've heard this used as the line of thinking for why we still have zoos as well. To help conservation. If animals are out of sight and out of mind then they're out of my concern. So, let's keep the zoos to keep wild animals on top of mind, and hopefully around a little longer.

[ch4s3]

I'm somewhat ambivalent about zoos, but they are important for education and as centers for wildlife conservation efforts.

[popcube]

let me indicate that most scientists work on these animals are working in zoo -- only they know how to cure, take care and saving wildlife in this world.

[nerdponx]

Hunters were the first American conservationists with any success.

[paulryanrogers]

In the sense that they destroyed most megafauna within a few centuries of arrival? Or in the sense that modern hunters are now regulated so they don't drive their choice species extinct?

[ch4s3]

No, he means people like Roosevelt. The North American megafauna that went extinct all died off at the end of the Pleistocene during a period of rapid warming, it isn't know how much humans contributed in North America.

[nerdponx]

Neither. Teddy Roosevelt was famously a conservationist in part because he was a hunter.

[t-3]

You will rarely meet someone who cares more about the environment than people who choose to spend days/weeks up a tree watching for animals for fun.

[matthewmcg]

Interestingly, some of the more effective environmental activist organizations are groups that started to protect the outdoor recreation activities of wealthy people. Trout Unlimited is a good example.