Stakeholder Meeting - Pretoria, Thursday 25 May, Venue Changed Premier Hotel 09h00

[Flutterby]

KNP MANAGEMENT PLAN REVIEW SESSIONS AT MAJOR CITIES SCHEDULED

Dear Valued stakeholders
The meeting scheduled to take place in Durban on Wednesday, 17 May 2017 is postponed until further notice, due to a request by stakeholders to allow them sufficient time to make arrangements to attend the meeting.
To broaden the consultation process for the Management Plan review, the Kruger National Park (KNP) will hold structured meetings at major cities in the country from 24 to 27 May 2017 and would like to invite interested members of the public to come and give input. This follows up on the public sessions which took place in the local communities bordering the Park from 18 April to 4 May 2017. It is a requirement of the National Environment Management: Protected Areas Act No 57 of 2003 that all protected areas must have management plans and review them every 10 years.
“SANParks vision which reads “a sustainable National Park system connecting society” is the cornerstone of the Park Management Plan and serves as a guideline for our engagements with stakeholders. Our first Park Management Plan was approved in 2008 and the consultation process was a bit limited as it concentrated on mainly the two provinces in which the Park is found. This time we would like to include as many people as possible hence we will be visiting more provinces; because it is important that their input gets included on the plan which will serve as a policy in the next 10 years”, said the KNP Managing Executive, Glenn Phillips.
Five Stakeholder meetings at four major cities will take place at the venues as follows:
Date Venue Forum/Area Time
24 May 2017 Strand Tower Hotel Cape Town 09:00
25 May 2017 -NB Venue Changed Premier Hotel 09:00
26 May 2017 Aviator Hotel Kempton Park 08:00
27 May 2017 Ingwenyama Lodge White River 09:00
Those who may not be able to attend the sessions but would like to register as a stakeholder and give input, can still do so through the SANParks website on https://www.sanparks.org/conservation/park_man/ or enquire from Dudu Letswele on telephone: 013 735 4102 between Monday and Friday during office hours. Stakeholders can also send an email to andre.spies@sanparks.org
Ends
Issued by
South African National Parks: Communications & Marketing Department – Kruger National Park.
Media enquiries:
William Mabasa, Acting Head of Communications - SANParks. Contact: Tel: 013 735 4363/012 426 5170, cell: 082 807 3919 or email: william.mabasa@sanparks.org
User avatar
RogerFraser
Site Admin

Dear stakeholders,

Please take note that the venue for the Pretoria meeting has changed. The new venue is the Premier Hotel located at 573 Stanza Bopape Street (Church Street), Arcadia.

Regards

André Spies
Manager: Park Planning and TFCA Coordination
South African National Parks
Tel: 012 426 5212
Fax: 012 426 5508
Cell: 083 630 4575
andre.spies@sanparks.org
http://www.sanparks.org

[Richprins]

https://africawild-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=342&t=7618

[H. erectus]

Would be challenging to be pres sent by 9.00 AM Thursday,
then also do Friday in Kempton only to witness how they plan
the logistics here!! Then White river, the very next day,.. Just
cannot be the same team of Sanparks representatives!!

Could become very interesting in as much what the elbow may
think about what the foot may be up to!!!

I'm ok for Kempton,..challenged!!!

[Richprins]

Challenge accepted, H.!

[RogerFraser]

All

Please note change of venue in the first post .

[H. erectus]

OH Gawd, Sanparks in a flat spin again!!!

[Richprins]

Wim Scheepers
1 hr
FEEDBACK ON SANPARK'S TEN-YEAR MANAGEMENT MEETING HELD IN PRETORIA.
Good evening members.
I have just returned from an all-day 10-year management meeting with SANpark's held in Pretoria.
Firstly, Sanpark's management told us about their ten-year strategy. That discussion contained the usual bones of contention and the floor was then opened for discussion.
Culling: The latest version is that the culling is done and meat distributed in order to show goodwill towards the community as they, according to Sanpark's, are the future communities to build ties with and an undeniable part of SANpark's problems and solutions. Sanpark's denies any culling for the sake of feeding the communities of any notion of a "protein farm" effect. SANpark's do not foresee the creation of a culture of dependency with which point of view I disagree.
Pretoriuskop tents: Legal processes are under way to put an end to the operator's tents hogging the fence. Originally, the operator paid long term for permanent accommodation according to SANpark's.
The ten year plan is presently presented for public commentary. Hence only input required as to the strategic viability thereof. No further projects apart from those mentioned will be undertaken without stakeholder consultation.
After a lengthy explanation by yours truly on democratic processes, Sanparks eventually understood that consultation entails more than an environmental impact study and DEA approval.
I equally explained the legal parameters within witch SANpark's are to exercise their mandate which met with no further response.
I mentioned objecting to SANpark's assuming the role of social engineers which view was noted.
The notion of a regular informal meeting between representatives from opposing groups and SANpark's is a reality for the future and to be implemented.
The notion of independent stakeholder representation on board level was discussed but understandably met with legal practicalities which may be overcome in time.
I got the impression that SANpark's are willing to start listening to opposing views and adhering to democratic processes. Sanpark's however does not quite understand what is required in terms of the associated finer details . I offered them lectures which may very well just materialize.
I explained that stakeholders equally, apart from the auditor -general. are entitled to transparency and scrutiny in terms of information and finances.
SANpark's view that real trivial issues need not be subject to Stakeholder consultation is understandable.
The famed "gate and highway" issue in the North will be subject to further consultation.
Yes, it was a good and constructive session and only after the expected initial mutual distrust.
The afternoon concluded into an amicable pleasant, yes pleasant, informal off-camera discussion of democratic processes and the mutual desire for cooperation between opposition groups and SANpark's.
We seem to be cleansing SANpark's of their notion that Stakeholders are a nuisance which (previous) notion they will never admit to,
My overall view is that we can work with SANPark's in a mutual give and take depending on the issue including scientific matters provided arguments are well motivated.
I ended up with visitors cards from core members and a sincere invitation to rather talk than fight. SANpark's objects to speculation in newspapers and social media with regard to "irresponsible" journalism.
So yes, I suggest we engage with SANPARK'S and cautiously build a mutual feeling of trust. As a starting point we need not compromise our present positions but Saturday "pap en vleis" may just work towards a better understanding and mutual cooperation.
Kind regards.
Wim.