TOURISTS visiting the Great Barrier Reef may be willing to pay a small levy towards improving water quality in the marine park.

A survey of 2743 people conducted by James Cook University and compiled by the Reef and Rainforest Research Centre found visitors valued environmental “drawcards” over other factors, such as quality accommodation.

Respondents felt a clean ocean, healthy reefs and fish, and no visible rubbish were important – more so than cheap ticket prices.

They also indicated a willingness to pay about $14.50 per visit to improve water quality on the Reef, which researchers say suggests substantial additional revenue could be raised.

Canberrans Tim and Helena Steen and their children Emily, 8, and Jacob, 12, were thrilled with their first trip to the Reef yesterday.

They said they would be prepared to shoulder some responsibility for its conservation.

“We paid $500 for the day and thought that was really good,” Mr Steen said.

“If there was a levy or something on there to say it was going towards the preservation of (the Reef) then I reckon $50 per family would be fair enough.”

Tourism Tropical North Queensland chief executive officer Alex de Waal said Reef operators went “above and beyond” to protect the environment they worked in, employing marine biologists and conducting their own conservation and research programs.

“What is especially gratifying is that many of the visitors our operators share the Great Barrier Reef with are keen to know about this stewardship and help wherever possible,” he said.

Researchers found residents shared similar values to visitors, perceiving the “productive” immediate uses of the Reef, such as fishing and boating, to be less important than its long-­term health.

Both groups were likely to be resistant to development projects that placed the Reef at risk, with a 10 per cent reduction in water visibility estimated to cost the tourism industry $430,000 across the catchment each year.

They surveyed 1592 people living near the Reef to frame scientists’ understanding of how the marine park, and the economies associated with it, interact to determine which economic variables were the most important to monitor, and how to interpret changes in those variables over time.

Respondents’ age, gender, occupation and education affected their attitudes towards Reef health.

Project leader Professor Natalie Stoeckl said it was clear residents recognised a healthy Reef was needed to support recreation and commercial purposes.

“Our results show that by protecting the reef, we are protecting important industries (tourism and commercial fisheries); and that we are protecting a lifestyle which so many residents have clearly come to know and love,” she said.