Africa Wild

Richprins wrote:
Money is going to be stolen here!!!!!!

Probably like everywhere else Think about the socalled community levy fee - 1 % - you cannot find out what and where they spend the money .
it seems the last time they released a a Social Investments report was for 2012

Richprins wrote:Are there any members beside Sprocky who received an invitation to partake in this "survey"?

I did and I told them what I thought off their ideas and the stupid hotels and new gates and corruption

18 September 2017-SANPARKS

Good Day

REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION AROUND AND RESULTS OF INTERNET SURVEY REGARDING SANPARKS RHINO POACHING LEVY PROPOSAL

We are an internet wildlife lobbying group with 750 local and intrenational members, as well as 3500 facebook members, and would kindly request the following:

Could we please receive the detailed results that include the 5000 responses to the internet survey conducted by surveymonkey.com, as well as the dates between which this survey was conducted?

Could it be clarified as to how SANParks customers were informed of the existence of this survey, or if this was done on a random or selective basis? In this regard, was the survey publicised on SANParks' website, internet forum or social media platforms?

Would the rhino levy apply only to Kruger National Park visitors, or to all SANParks visitors, even including Table Mountain National Park?

What is the estimated annual revenue expected to be generated by this levy?

What were the costs of this survey?

We thank you and trust that you find the above in order in the interests of transparency and in terms of access to public knowledge relating to a National Asset.

We would like a response by close of business on Tuesday 19 September.

Regards


The Africa Wild Committee

Email : info@sagr.co.za

No reply there...which is unfortunately the norm but a little rude, IMO.

It still boggles the mind that this multi-million Rand proposal has not appeared on official SANParks channels at all?

Maybe someone can query that on the SANParks website...

Many of us have been banned there...latest is RobertT, after a good 10-year run!

Hello, Rob!

I still have membership there but will be spiteful!!!

Razz to them!!!!

Ironically, was thinking about updating my
bird count spotted, there, why should I cut
off my nose to spite the face!!!

Richprins wrote:
It still boggles the mind that this multi-million Rand proposal has not appeared on official SANParks channels at all?

That's exactly what bothered me, when the topic was first posted here and I went straight to the Sanparks web site and did not find anything. Moreover the limited number of survey requests sent out

H. erectus wrote:I still have membership there but will be spiteful!!!

Razz to them!!!!

Go, H.! You are the last one left!

But seriously, it is important for transparency, especially in current climes. It seems people are scared, to put it simply.

One of our facebook members responded with these details to Fluts post on the AW page :

Duane Jacobsz I quote Ira Larivers: "I took the following off of Accurate Reloading - www.accuratereloading.com this morning.

"MBOMBELA – A survey among SANParks visitors, as to whether they would be willing to pay an additional anti-poaching fee for visiting national parks, was recently concluded by the SANParks Tourism Research Unit. Ike Phaahla, media specialist of the organisation, confirmed that the survey received 5 000 responses.

The study was conducted with SANParks clients only. According to the hosting website (www.surveymonkey.com), the survey has now been concluded. Phaahla said the research unit embarked on this initiative to gauge the response of overnight visitors and Wild Card members to the suggestion for such a levy. Members of a private forum who lobby to “keep conservation areas pure, natural and green” aired concerns about such a levy, foreigners alleging that the wild card for them “is already terribly expensive, with an extra on top being just too much”.

Some stated that they already stay outside the park because the accommodations have become too expensive, and that they would not be able to visit the parks if they had to pay another levy. Phaahla emphasised that there is a lot of pressure on SANParks due to criminal elements plundering natural resources including the elephant and rhino – two of the Big 5 animals that drive tourism and are important to the ecosystem."

I am leaning more and more to the school of thought that the private sector is one of the best ways to go to combat poaching. Of course the government must be involved, because they are the ones with the statutory authority, but they are also weighed down with unwieldy bureaucracy and corruption. And in the case of countries like Kenya and South Africa, much of the government's policy is already driven through the purse strings by First World activist groups as much as it is by properly-qualified ecologists.

As an interesting BTW, Hemmersbach Rhino Force is already heavily active in the Kruger. Private sector "conservation PMCs", of course, source their own funding. So it sounds to me as if this proposed levy is as much about creating a new slush fund as it is combating poaching.

Just sayin'."

H. erectus wrote:I still have membership there but will be spiteful!!!

Razz to them!!!!

Not sure if I am still a " member " there I am still able to login , but have not done so in ages , so does that still make me a " member "