What is the situation/progress with the proposed hotels in Kruger?

[Flutterby]

[Lisbeth]

I tried to find the article, but you have to buy the magazine to see it.

How is it possible that an article on Kruger National Park makes no mention of animal, flora, water nor conservation issues, when that's what it is all about. Here it is only about how many visitors can we stuff into Kruger and how much can we earn.

RP for having told them a few facts

I think I will follow your example and tell them some other facts, now that I have the article

[Lisbeth]

My e-mail sent to Country Life:


Dear Mr. Marshall,

Sanparks is thinking in such an innovative way, that it seems that they have forgotten their mandate, which is supposed be all about protecting and conserving flora, fauna and water and not about how many people they can get to visit the park no matter the means

I am one of the “Western noses” that Dr. Mabunda despises so much and who none the less are close to 25% of the park visitors. We cannot camp for logistic reasons and thus we are the ones, who spend the most in accommodation. The Conservation fee that we pay is four times the price that South African citizens pay. Most of the International visitors are visiting the Kruger park and other Sanparks of course in order to see the animals roaming free, the multitude of birds and the beauty of the parks in themselves, but also for the special atmosphere of the camps. The peace and absence of the everyday noises of modern life. We do not want noisy children racing on bicycles or parties going on next door, when we are in the park. We want only nature at its best and are willing to spend a small fortune every time we go to get just that.

If Dr. Mabunda’s commercialization plans go through, I for one is not going to visit Sanparks anymore; I will rather go to Botswana where they seem to care more for their National Heritage than in South Africa.

Kind regards
Lisbeth Sxxxxxxx, Switzerland
Member of http://www.sagr.co.za

[Flutterby]

[Toko]

This was in the Afrikaans (Rapport) today , 29/07/2012, more and more pressure on Sanparks management.

http://www.rapport.co.za/Weekliks/Nuus/ ... d-20120728

Here a comment by Dr. Mabunda
PDF - Speech by Dr Mabunda (CEO: SANPARKS) at the passing out parade of rangers at Sukuza on 31 July 2012

[Lisbeth]

"Tourism in parks is inextricably linked to conservation. The two are joined at the waist like Siamese twins. It
generates the other 87% funding required to employ the rangers that you see today, scientists,
veterinarians, pilots, technicians, cleaners, infrastructure maintenance and creates jobs. Everyday 11
000 people go to work in national park somewhere in our country. If tourism were to stop the entire
system would collapse and the mud would wash up to my doorstep and not that of the
“honourable” Mr Heiberg. I have a proposal for the Committee of 22: in 30 days from tomorrow (01
August) come and sign a legally binding agreement with us offering us R250m + CPIX pa for the next
20 years and we will reconsider some of the tourism development proposals in our parks. Our offices
are at 643 Leyds Str, Muckleneuck, Pretoria. "

The first phrase of the above quote is arguable and the second one is utter nonsense!

As far as I remember, Mr Heiberg has never said that there should not be any tourism at all in the parks, neither have Africa Wild nor other organizations, who are against the hotels in KNP. What we are against is a commercialisation that will be damaging for the biodiversity in the long run and ruin the delicate system of the south of Kruger which is already threatened.

The sarcasm of Dr. Mabunda is out-of-place and offensive especially in an occasion like the passing out parade of the rangers. Most of the persons present must have been rather puzzled, not having the slightest idea, what he was talking about, but it was an irresistible occasion for Dr. Mabunda and his conceit.

[Richprins]

The Country Life E-Zine has responded and noted our objections and promised they will be included in the next edition.

The Rapport letter writer has also responded to me...but Yahoo is down at the moment!

Both have presumably had a look here!

[Sprocky]

Regarding the agenda for the meeting on Friday...why is it noted as Aikona/Africa Wild and not Aikona and Africa Wild? The way it is place makes it look as if we are one.

[Richprins]

Regarding the agenda for the meeting on Friday...why is it noted as Aikona/Africa Wild and not Aikona and Africa Wild? The way it is place makes it look as if we are one.

No, that is not the case!

V&L know the difference!

We are just the two main parties!

About that, this meeting is more of a compulsory informal prelude to the final submission of the EIA for the Malelane hotel in November, with space for more publc comment until January 2013!

But the comments from this meeting will be included in the EIA, as I see it!

[Richprins]

Regarding Dr Mabunda's speech:

I find it utterly bizzare that after quoting the great successes of rangers in the past, and the "defeat of ivory poachers" etc. , he has lately decided that the hundred year-old recipe that has worked "so well" is now in need of a major refit!

Also, there is no reference to the fact that this year saw the first strike ever by Kruger rangers, and the longest by any SA organisation in the history of the country!

Also, the mandate of Kruger is now just conservation and tourism, conveniently, while there are now admittedly other departments tasked with job creation etc.

What happened to Kruger's "new" role of job creation, financially accommodating neighbouring communities, addressing land claims and what not, for which there are other departments too?

BTW...Dr Mabunda drives a very fancy car or two, and lives in a very "up-market" house or two!