Shangoni Gate & Camps Kruger National Park

[Richprins]

Feb 2016

It is also worth mentioning that we are in the process of upgrading the following roads from gravel to tar:
•Ga-Phasha, Mampuru, Tukakgomo to MakgabaneMmotwane/Legolaneng, Mohlalotwane, Moeding, Serithing to Ramogwerane
•Makuya to Masisi
•Apel to Mmabulela
•Morebeng to Sekgosese
•Matsakale, Altein to Shangoni Kruger National Park Gate
•Marken, Segole to Gilead; and
It is also my pleasure to announce that by the 1st of April 2016 the contractors of some of the remaining “Bermuda” roads will be on site.

http://www.gov.za/speeches/fifth-limpop ... -2016-0000

[Richprins]

18 March 2016

In his first state of the nation address in 2009, Zuma said Muyexe, which is about 20km from Giyani, would be turned into a model of rural development. Zuma reiterated the government's plans for Muyexe again when he launched the comprehensive rural development programme in August 2009.

Colin Maluleke, chairman of Muyexe's council of stakeholders, said the community had mixed feelings about progress so far.

"They started building that stadium in 2010 but it's just bare with no grass and grandstands. The brick-making project, which was supposed to provide employment, has not gotten off the ground. We still don't have the road to Kruger Park's Shangoni Gate that would cut travel time by 50km for people coming from Giyani," he said.

Maluleke also said the water purification system had ground to a halt after its electric cables were stolen months ago.

sifilel@sowetan.co.za
http://www.sowetanlive.co.za/news/2016/ ... t-on-track

[Richprins]

To compare, the R-81 between Polokwane and Giyani, roughly the same distance, took 3 years from 2010 t0 2013 and cost R245 million in THOSE rands!

https://www.africawild-forum.com/viewto ... 9&start=90

[Lisbeth]

We know that any forecast from Sanparks when it comes to time and expense has to be taken with a grain of salt

[H. erectus]

Road construction and upgrading thereof, outside the park,
all fair and well!! Inside the park another story!! Whether
local authority there and sanparks ever will come round to
such deliverance in all good faith, remains questionable.
Had a well informed conversation today, with a person in
the know regarding EIA's. Our national parks require funding
and that without question!!! However my concern be from what
source toward which source???!! To my mind the National Parks
are a .GOV asset and therefore require top priority attention and
support!! In converse it was mentioned that the KZN parks salary
package exceeds the .gov grant by 160%. Therefore external funding
will be required to secure the future of those parks!!!

It boiled down to the ambitious proposals that .gov, Tourism put
to the table, the 54 investment projects!!!! My reply was that then
.gov should squander less elsewhere! Also that even foreign investment
will go lost in a meaningful effort,...

the reply, "welcome to South Africa!!"

[PennyinSA]

15 September 2017
Interested and Affected Party DEA Ref: 14/12/16/3/3/1/1/1730
Dear Sir / Madam
NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORISATION FOR THE SHANGONI GATE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE KRUGER NATIONAL PARK, LIMPOPO PROVINCE.
Notice is hereby given in terms of the National Environmental Management Act (Act No 107 of 1998), as amended, that South African National Parks (SANParks) has received Environmental Authorisation from the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) for the construction of the Shangoni Gate Development within the Kruger National Park, Limpopo Province. The Environmental Authorisation for this project was granted by DEA on 05 September 2017 and received by Envirolution Consulting on 08 September 2017.
REASONS FOR DECISION
The DEA is satisfied, on the basis of information available to it and subject to compliance with the conditions contained in the environmental authorisation. In reaching its decision the DEA considered the following into consideration:
 The listed activities as applied for in the amended application received on 12 July 2017.
 The information contained in the final BAR dated July 2017.
 Comments received from the National Department of Environmental Affairs: Directorate responsible for Protected Areas Planning, Legislation, Compliance and Monitoring, Greater Giyani Local Municipality, LIM 345 Local Municipality, SAHRA and various registered Interested and Affected Parties as included in the final BAR dated July 2017.
 Mitigation measures as proposed in the final BAR and the EMPr.
 The information contained in the specialist studies contained within the appendices of the final BAR dated July 2017.
 A sufficient public participation was undertaken by the applicant has satisfied the minimum requirements as prescribed in the EIA Regulations, 2014, as amended, for public involvement.
PO Box 1898 • Sunninghill 2157
Vista Place Suite 1a & 2, No 52
Cnr Vorster Avenue & Glen Avenue
Glenanda, 2091
Tel: 0861 44 44 99
Fax: 0861 626 222
Email: info@envirolution.co.za
www.envirolution.co.za
Envirolution Consulting (Pty) Ltd
Reg No 2001/029956/07
K Govender B Sc (Hons) (Wits) Pr. Sci. Nat
In addition to the above, key factors considered by DEA in making the decision:
 The need for the project aims to:
 Provide the neighbouring areas and communities an easier access to the Kruger National Park.
 The proposed development will provide much needed employment and business opportunities to the surrounding communities.
 This development will stimulate socio-economic development among communities in the region.
Please note that a copy of Environmental Authorisation will be furnished on request and can be accessed by sending an email to thabang@envirolution.co.za. Interested and Affected Parties wishing to formally appeal must follow the procedure, in accordance with Chapter 2 of the National Appeal Regulations 2014 as follows:
Appeal Submission
1. (a) An appellant must submit an appeal to the Appeals Administrator, and a copy of the appeal to the applicant, any registered interested and affected party and any organ of state with interest within 20 days from:
(b) the date that the notification of the decision for an application for an environmental authorisation was sent to the registered interested and affected party by the applicant.
(c) the date that the notification of the decision was sent to the applicant by the competent authority, issuing authority, in the case decisions other those referred to in paragraph (a)
2. An appeal submission must be -
a) submitted in writing in the form obtainable from the appeal administrator: and
b) accompanied by –
(i) a statement setting out the grounds of appeal;
(ii) supporting documentation which is referred to in the appeal submission and;
(iii) a statement including supporting document, by the appellant to confirm compliance with regulation 4(1) of these regulations
PO Box 1898 • Sunninghill 2157
Vista Place Suite 1a & 2, No 52
Cnr Vorster Avenue & Glen Avenue
Glenanda, 2091
Tel: 0861 44 44 99
Fax: 0861 626 222
Email: info@envirolution.co.za
www.envirolution.co.za
Envirolution Consulting (Pty) Ltd
Reg No 2001/029956/07
K Govender B Sc (Hons) (Wits) Pr. Sci. Nat
Responding statement
3. The applicant, decision maker, interested and Affected Parties and Organ of State must submit their responding statement, if any, to the appeal authority and the appellant within 20 days from the date of receipt of the appeals submission.
Should you wish to appeal any aspect of the decision, you must within twenty (20) days of the date of notification of the decision submit your appeal including supporting documentation by no later than (Monday, 09 October 2017) to the appeal administrator by any of the following means:
By email: Appealsdirectorate@environment.gov.za
By post: Private Bag X447, Pretoria, 0001
By hand: Environment House, 473 Steve Biko Road, Arcadia, Pretoria.
Your appeal must be submitted in the prescribed appeal form obtainable from Mr Z Hassam, Director: Appeals and Legal Review (Appeals) at email address: AppealsDirectorate@environment.gov.za. The appeal form is also available from the Departments website: https://www.environment.gov.za/document ... orisations. Should you have queries or require additional information regarding the appeal process, you can contact the appeal administrator or any of the mentioned contact details.
Copies of the above mentioned appeal documents should also be submitted to Envirolution Consulting (Pty) Ltd, Attention: Thabang Sekele, Fax: 086 162 6222, E-mail:thabang@envirolution.co.za.
Yours sincerely
Thabang Sekele
(Project Manager)
For Envirolution Consulting
thabang@envirolution.co.za

[Richprins]

Mabasa said it will go ahead in April already:


To KNP via Shangoni Gate ‘will happen’
The plans for the Shangoni Gate is at a “no-turning-back stage,” according to the park’s Communication Manager, William Mabasa.
April 26, 2017

LIMPOPO – When completed, the gate will boost Giyani Municipality’s local economy through the anticipated influx of tourists that will enter the Kruger National Park (KNP) via this municipality.

Responding to the questions with regard to the progress on the implementation of the gate during the park’s consultative public meeting held in Giyani on Friday, Mabasa said the Shangoni Gate plans were at an advanced stage and “will prevail this time,” after years of failure and trying.

“Those who know the project from way back will tell you that it started in 1976 but failed, and then again in 1993, 1994 and 1995, with no success, however, currently things look promising,” he said.

“I say this because a lot has been done already, the province has started tarring the roads that lead up to the gate such the one that comes via Malamulele,” he explained.

He added that he believed that in the next financial year the province might begin tarring the roads that come via Mninginisi in Giyani.

Inside the park itself the feasibility study has already been done, according to him, and a consultant has already made a final submission to the Department of Environmental Affairs for approval.

“Some of you were part of those that our consultant spoke to at the Mopani Rest Camp last month, before making a final submission to the Department of Environmental Affairs.”

He explained that they would be invited again when the department released its final report for go-ahead approval.

“We are at the stage where we are only waiting for the department to guide us on the way forward, once that is done the construction work will commence,” Mabasa said as a supportive crowd clapped hands and cheered.

http://reviewonline.co.za/205518/to-knp ... ll-happen/

[Richprins]

This is the sort of nonsense:


Shangoni gate plan marred by infighting
The opening of Shangoni gate into Kruger National Park (KNP) via the Greater Giyani Municipality is under threat as the community of Altein village in the new Lim345 Municipality disagree on the ‘preferred gate’.
March 29, 2017
Hlengani Chauke, who represents the Peni Nghotse community in Malamulele, disputes the location of the Shangoni gate at the Kruger National Park.

LIMPOPO – During a public meeting at Mopani Rest Camp in KNP on Thursday, the gate was initially planned for Muyexe or Mninginisi village, both of which fall under Greater Giyani Municipality.

This apparently changed when the Development Forum suggested that there be alternative gates, hence the introduction of the ‘Alternative gate 2’ at Altein village, an area that falls under the Lim345 Municipality in Malamulele.

However, when a final feasibility report aimed at paving way for the start of the construction of the gate was presented for final comments by stakeholders before it was presented to the Department of Environmental Affairs for final approval, the community from the Lim345 Municipality argued the ‘preferred gate’ which the report has suggested as viable, was new to them.

They argued the gate should be opened at Altein village because there is already an existing gate which is being used by rangers, while those that fall under Greater Giyani Municipality argued that the preferred gate was correct because it was situated in one of the originally identified areas.

One of the people who was more vocal in the meeting, Hlengani Chauke who represented the Peni Nghotse community in Malamulele, argued there was a proclamation, R11709/90, which states the gates (KNP gates) should be 65 km apart, meaning the old gate currently being used by rangers in Altein village should be the prepared one.

“Unless there is an amendment of that proclamation, the gate should stay where it is otherwise somebody might have to account in the Constitutional Court,” he threatened. Another person from the Lim345 Municipality, Joe Mtititi, also expressed his support for the old gate to be considered.

“This ‘preferred gate’ is new to us. In all the meetings we had it was never considered to be a gate, we only had option one (Muyexe gate) and ‘Alternative gate 2’,” he said. However, this was disputed by other speakers.

“I don’t understand why there are so many complaints about where the gate should be located because that is an old issue. Everybody knows the original locations of the gate, it cannot be changed by this meeting,” responded Muyexe Development Committee Chairperson, Mafemani Maluleke.

The argument carried on so long that the Chairperson of the meeting, Erika du Plessis, from African Stakeholder Engagement Consulting, had to end the meeting for the sake of time, as the argument of where the gate should be intensified.


http://capricornreview.co.za/109137/inf ... gate-plan/

[Richprins]

Make no mistake, AW has been actively involved as stakeholders for many years now, and that will not end. But all these processes are smokescreens, unfortunately, and politics and financial implications are so intertwined with major developments that it becomes an obviously futile exercise sometimes.

One need only read on the hotel threads how the previous "appeals processes" were shamelessly manipulated or ignored.

This whole saga is here, initially denied by SANParks, which partly contributed to my banning from their Forum:


https://africawild-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=301&t=6489

[okie]

I agree with you RP Just a lot of smokescreen , infighting and general bunfight , basically over who will benefit from the 100's of millions of Rands to be wasted on this gate .
Their main argument is that the Giyani area will benefit from " increased " tourism into KNP .
The park is already generally fully utilised tourist-wise , and therefore any increased tourist activity at one gate , means a corresponding DECREASED tourist activity at another gate . In other words , increased tourist activity in Giyani , will mean decreased tourists at Punda gate ( Malamulele area )