iNdlovu wrote:and if the hotel allows them to recoup the costs of the failed conference centre, I say go for it.
, When we, as individuals, embark on money making business practice,
but fail, there is no pity out there for us!! Why should Sanparks be excluded?
Surely they should face their music much the same as we have too.
iNdlovu wrote:Skuks is a monstrous city anyway
, Seems Skuks has gone too far and is beyond saving as a
retreat for the bush crazies. Are going too write it off as lost.
iNdlovu wrote:The trouble is that they might see this as a go ahead to build anywhere and everywhere.
Might?, they have already done so. Why employ two different EAP only
to leave them dangling???
Are the Malelane EAP's entitled to legal process and then why employ
more practitioners based on another outset/outlet???
In my book of life I always get two options with one choice!!! .Gov always
seems better off with both in hand!!!
By retracting the boundaries, in order too accommodate bad management
is no long term solution for the well being of heritage. More so what I
believe should be classed as International Heritage!!!
Kruger does not only belong too South Africans, rather it belongs too the world
out there. Those fighting crime in the parks are probably doing it more for
foreign interest rather than local!!
Like the rest Skuks, in my opinion, remains subject too a proper publicly based
EIA, without question!!!
Skuks, too my mind, is leaving a rather lousy footprint in nature!!