Controversial rezoning approved?

[Toko]

More development = more tourists = less wilderness =

[Mel]

Haven't read the whole of the document yet... But does one really have to?
The maps are quite expressive and from what I have scanned over,
it's the same line of arguments we have heard for a long time - accumulated
in one document...

I had planned to visit Kruger one more time before the hotels get reality.
Looking at the planned developments, not sure if it's a good idea at all...

This is devastating.

[Flutterby]

What I'm still trying to understand is why the Kruger National Park is responsible for the 3 million people living on its borders. I know that there are a lot of very poor people there, but the Park already provides a certain amount of employment for these communities and brings in 1000s of tourists every year who themselves spend money in and around the park. It is a NATIONAL PARK.....not a community upliftment scheme!!! Surely these 3 million people are the government's responsibility...the government that they wanted and keep voting for. Or am I being too simplistic?

[Lisbeth]

That's what many of us have been trying to get through also on the SPF, but many seem to think that it's all right I find it completely wrong and simplistic. Let's see how much will change for those people? It will only touch a tiny part and will upset many more and also a whole ecosystem.

9 more picnic sites I can only imagine the "value" they are going to bring to the park

[Flutterby]

This was posted on Facebook by Colin Windell:

SANParks acknowledges that millions of people live in squalid settlements dotting the boundaries of Kruger NP and are pinning their hopes for improved fortunes on land claims they've lodged in the Park, as they're entitled to under land restitution law. In the case of Kruger National Park 60% of its area has been gazetted as legitimate restitution claims that must still be settled.

[Richprins]

Ask Colin why this is now suddenly a major problem after more than a decade and where he gets his figures from, and if he knows that claimed land must remain conservation land?

[Flutterby]

Will do RP!

[Richprins]

QUESTION NO. 2628
INTERNAL QUESTION PAPER NO. 28 NW3079E
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 09 September 2011

Mr G R Morgan (DA) to ask the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs:

(1) (a) How many unresolved land claims exist in each of the parks administered by the South African National Parks (SANParks) and (b) what is the (i)(aa) size of each land claim in hectares and (bb) size of each land claim as a percentage of the total land mass of the relevant park and (ii) current status of each of the claims;
(2) whether any efforts are being made by SANParks to help resolve land claims in a way that maintains the existing integrity of the national parks; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

Mr G R Morgan (DA)
SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENT
HANSARD
PAPERS OFFICE
PRESS

2628. THE MINISTER OF WATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ANSWERS:

(1) (a) According to our records, there are 7 National Parks affected by land claims. However, the responsibility for administration verification of the land claims rest with the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform. The Department of Environmental Affairs is therefore not in a position to confirm the sizes and percentage of land mass under claim.

(2) Yes, co-operation between SANParks and the Restitution Commission in the settlement of land claims in National Parks ensures a very delicate balance between interests of the claimants and government’s other objectives in preserving these uniquely valuable sensitive areas in perpetuity. This approach is articulated in the “policy on settlement of Restitution claims on protected areas, world heritage sites and state forests under national government.

[Richprins]

28 January 2009

Cabinet has approved the use of equitable redress as the only option for the settlement of outstanding land claims in the Kruger National Park (KNP). The Directors-General of the departments of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) and Land Affairs (DLA) jointly informed the affected community leaders of the claimants in Limpopo and Mpumalanga provinces on 23 January 2009 of the cabinet decision taken on 3 December 2008.

The decision not to restore the land rights in the Kruger National Park, which is considered a national and international asset, was taken after careful consideration and is intended to strike a balance between the rights of the claimant communities and the interests of society as a whole.

Equitable redress refers to the awarding of alternative land and/or financial compensation in settlement of a valid land claim lodged against the State by an individual or a community. The State will retain title to the land within this national park.

[Richprins]

Then July 2009 (After " new "government:....heeh heeh!)


The Mail & Guardian understands senior Cabinet ministers, including Environment Minister Buyelwa Sonjica, supported the decision, which was driven by her predecessor, Marthinus van Schalkwyk.

But a hearing two weeks ago highlighted the continued unhappiness of the land claims commission over the Cabinet decision.

The Minister of Rural Development and land reform, Gugile Nkwinti, told Die Burger that a new proposal could be made to the new Cabinet to have the decision reversed. Nkwinti said the government should be more sensitive to the needs of claimants.

"We don't want another Khutsong," he said. "The previous Cabinet took a decision and we will abide by it until a different decision is made, but it is an issue that has to be resolved."

The dispute reportedly involves about 400 000ha, with 38 communities lodging 19 claims. The land claims commission told Parliament that it would need R20-billion to compensate the claimants and that it did not have the money.

David Mabunda, chief executive of South African National Parks (SANParks), did not want to comment on the parliamentary debate this week, but said the park still aligned itself with the December Cabinet decision. He said half the communities claiming land in the park were happy with the Cabinet's decision.


Notice claims down to 19, and area down to maybe 20%....