Land Claims:
Phillips states:
if people were not part of the National Park ‘ecosystem’, they would not have formed the strong bonds that they have with our National Parks – emotional bonds that echo those between parents and children.
These "strong bonds" are emotional, and I would add cultural too! However, it is a bit of a dichotomy to decree that National Parks now claim rights to a long history of conservation amongst all cultures in SA? Conservation has been happening in various tribal traditions over the ages, regarding a realisation that nature is a partner in life, long before SANParks.
The strongest bond at the moment is financial...not just according to SANParks, but simply economically. While communities have been happy to reap the benefits of tourism in the Lowveld, and I'm not just talking black communities...the WHOLE Lowveld, it would seem erroneous to state that Kruger needs to "Prove itself financially", so to speak! It simply doesn't make sense.
Currently it costs over a billion rand annually to run the National Parks effectively, and over 80% of the funding is self-generated. Land under the management of South African National Parks (SANParks) continues to grow and with that growth comes significant costs
SANParks takes, and has been taking on, extra land in non-profitable areas around the country, relying mostly on Kruger to fund these ventures. Which is excellent, and in line with our conservation mandate! It begs the question, though, as to why "communities" readily give up such land to be incorporated into Parks if land is at such a premium?
558 000 hectares of land placed under the custodeanship of SANParks since the year 2000 (sic)
Then the zinger, right near the beginning of this diatribe:
Land claims on significant parts of various National Parks are challenging SANParks management to find ways of redress to communities that were removed when the Parks were created.
Firstly, it is not SANParks' problem to address that issue. That is the problem of the Department of Land Affairs, and I know for a fact most claims are defunct and passed their sell-by dates many years ago, while others were corrupt!
Secondly, logic would suggest that 20 years into the new dispensation these pressing matters would have been addressed by now at national level? If not, I would be perfectly happy to see communities marching into Kruger and other Parks if they feel that is the right way to go, and see the reaction. What's right is right and what's wrong is wrong, and settle it! But it must be settled and not used as an excuse for commercialisation of our Parks.
A detailed look here:
viewtopic.php?f=78&t=487
Next: Zoning
Please check Needs Attention pre-booking: https://africawild-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=322&t=596