I'm not sure about that Lisbeth. Setting the new management plan aside for a moment: The poaching needs are partially covered by various NGOs, a few big brands and the odd very well-off individual. But these are mainly in the form of donations of food, equipment and so on. The actual running costs of the anti-poaching effort are huge and these have to be met by SANParks - petrol for long daily hauls; ammunition; veterinary requirements; all the extra staff; aviation fuel; legal; overtime and so on. So I can understand that, together with the day-to-day expenses of running a huge area like Kruger and the need to overhaul the infrastructure ( and really, at this stage, forget about why it requires such a huge cash injection; the point is that it does . . .) plus the need to get the surrounding, poverty-stricken communities on board before they devastate the park, management has a massive headache in the form of balancing the budget. So, yes, something needs to be done.
Back to the management plan.I'm not saying I like it - I don't. It will, in the long run destroy Kruger as we know it, but new generations wont know that and will probably accept it as it is - as sort of fun cross between Disneyworld and a nature park. Some of us tried to avert this by making other suggestions - which were totally ignored/the voicing of them was deliberately not facilitated - but we weren't strong enough and there were not enough of us. As soon as the effects begin to impinge on us (and I'm speaking personally now), we shall stop going to Kruger, as I am sure, will very many others. There are other places to love. Tthe hole that we leave will be filled by hordes of a different kind of tourist. So enjoy it while we can is my approach.
I know that words will not change anything, but at least I get it off my chest for a moment.
I agree - a real change in government attitude is necessary.