Elephant attack on vehicle
- Lisbeth
- Site Admin
- Posts: 67384
- Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
- Country: Switzerland
- Location: Lugano
- Contact:
Re: alleged elephant attack on vehicle
The irresponsible and reckless will always be around
"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
- Sprocky
- Posts: 7121
- Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:29 pm
- Country: South Africa
- Location: Grietjie Private Reserve
- Contact:
Re: alleged elephant attack on vehicle
I was thinking more of an induction video, with a few questions to be answered. Much the same as getting access to a mining area. The video (with sound) points out all the rules and dangers that could be encountered and various emergency procedures. Followed by a few questions, once you "pass", you sign and you on your way. Should you book online, you save time having done the "KNP induction" before you arrive, no hold up. This should be valid for one year, thereafter you need to redo the induction.
There is not much difference when it comes to safety, health and environment, between visiting a reserve or a gold mine. There are dangers and safety issues that could affect you and the environment in both scenarios.
This type of exercise would benefit both SANParks and the visitors, should something go wrong.
There is not much difference when it comes to safety, health and environment, between visiting a reserve or a gold mine. There are dangers and safety issues that could affect you and the environment in both scenarios.
This type of exercise would benefit both SANParks and the visitors, should something go wrong.
Sometimes it’s not until you don’t see what you want to see, that you truly open your eyes.
- Richprins
- Committee Member
- Posts: 75960
- Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 3:52 pm
- Location: NELSPRUIT
- Contact:
Re: alleged elephant attack on vehicle
I think the lady was driving, Rob, but the man should have had more experience, being local?RobertT wrote:All depends on whether it is ignorance or bravado that is driving the moment. Think this last one the Boykie was trying to show off to his bokkie just how good in the wild he is.
Please check Needs Attention pre-booking: https://africawild-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=322&t=596
Re: alleged elephant attack on vehicle
My opinion.
In the past 4 weeks so much has been said and written , both in praise as well as in condemnation of the action taken by SP in putting down the elephant . And , so far , just about everything said about the tourists were negative .
The dust is settling , and whatever happened is in the past , and there is nothing anyone can do about it .
Everybody agree , the tourists were wrong , and there are calls for them to be punished , from calling for them to be fined , or banned , etc .etc .
However , let us look at it from another angle . Yes, they were wrong , but are there extenuating circumstances . Yes , they should have moved away , but with little or no experience about animal , and specifically elephant behaviour , is it really fair to expect from them to have taken appropriate action ? Not necessarily so IMO !
I have read many times that one should remain still , etc when approached by ellies such as that , but personally , I am not prepared to take the chance , so , I stay a healthy ( IMO ) distance from them . But one cannot necessarily expect the average , inexperienced tourist to always know , and to keep their distances .
Take for instance the elephants in Addo National park . In general those ellies appear and act as docile as tame milk-cows , ( keeping in mind , that the original surviving lot there were wild and wild as can be ) !
Now , my point is this . Imagine a tourist first visiting Addo , and experiencing those ellies walking around his vehicle , grazing , rumbling almost within touching distance . What an experience . Wow .
Now , that same tourist then drives to Kruger , and finds himself right in the middle of a breeding herd of ellies , grazing on both sides of the road .
Now , is it then unreasonable for him to have the impression that all ellies are alike ? Makes you think , hmmmmm ???
Now we come to the other side of the coin – that of shooting the animal . Firstly , many of us agree that it was probably not necessary to do so . And now , after all the hoo-hah , Sanparks resent the criticism against them . Obviously they are not happy , and understandably so .
But , this side of the coin actually has more than one imprint . One , is the issue of “ to do it , or not to do it “ .
And a second issue is nagging matter of moral responsibility . In other words , “ are we responsible , and could we have done something to prevent this happening ? “
My philosophy and advice to my managers , have always been to make their decisions only after weighing up all their options , and then to stand by such decisions ,and as such of course , take responsibility for it .
And furthermore , whatever happens afterwards , not to regret such decision at any later date , because that decision was RIGHT at that time !
Now , in the case of this elephant , I think we should now let the matter come to rest . Sanparks made their decision at the time , and we must accept that they felt it was right at that time . Certainly , they are not having regrets , because for them , at that time , the decision was right , and we should respect that .
However , they must then also accept the responsibility for that action . Firstly , there is the MORAL responsibility of the matter , which obviously they do . And again we should respect that they accept that responsibility .
However , secondly , there is also their CULPABLE responsibility to be considered , and here , we must question whether they took sufficient and adequate steps to prevent this incident .
We accept that there will always be people who transgress the rules . After all , are rules and laws not made to be broken ? Without it we will not have any criminals in our jails !
To my mind however , I feel that SP can do much more to promote those rules . The little pamphlet you receive when you enter the park is very very far from adequate to warn visitors about the dangers posed by wild animals . It is as if SP feel embarrassed about it , and rather than pointedly and loudly proclaim the rules , they rather keep quiet , and then afterwards they use all kinds of excuses of why they cannot monitor all visitor behaviour .
There is nothing wrong in fining people if they overstep the mark , and there is nothing wrong in banning for very serious or repeated offences , but it is very wrong to sit back and hope that people will naturally read and obey the fine print on their admission tickets . Because we know , and Sanparks know that people are natural transgressors , and that makes them CULPABLE responsible to ensure that their visitors know and understand the rules , and that action will be taken against them where necessary .
And this is where they fail dismally !
It is Sanparks responsibility to MAKE SURE that each and every visitor is completely and fully informed . By merely giving the visitor a shortened version of rules and regulations does not lift that responsibility , and in fact still makes them fully culpable for anything that may happen to that visitor.
And , as far as visitors are concerned , certainly they should be held responsible too . If the transgress , then they should be fined etc . And if their actions are the cause of damages , such as in this case , their carelessness in not adhering to rules , then they should be prosecuted , etc . in the same way for instance where a person goes missing in the mountains , and he is searched for and rescued by emergency rescue service , then he gets lumbered with the bills for the cost thereof .
In the past 4 weeks so much has been said and written , both in praise as well as in condemnation of the action taken by SP in putting down the elephant . And , so far , just about everything said about the tourists were negative .
The dust is settling , and whatever happened is in the past , and there is nothing anyone can do about it .
Everybody agree , the tourists were wrong , and there are calls for them to be punished , from calling for them to be fined , or banned , etc .etc .
However , let us look at it from another angle . Yes, they were wrong , but are there extenuating circumstances . Yes , they should have moved away , but with little or no experience about animal , and specifically elephant behaviour , is it really fair to expect from them to have taken appropriate action ? Not necessarily so IMO !
I have read many times that one should remain still , etc when approached by ellies such as that , but personally , I am not prepared to take the chance , so , I stay a healthy ( IMO ) distance from them . But one cannot necessarily expect the average , inexperienced tourist to always know , and to keep their distances .
Take for instance the elephants in Addo National park . In general those ellies appear and act as docile as tame milk-cows , ( keeping in mind , that the original surviving lot there were wild and wild as can be ) !
Now , my point is this . Imagine a tourist first visiting Addo , and experiencing those ellies walking around his vehicle , grazing , rumbling almost within touching distance . What an experience . Wow .
Now , that same tourist then drives to Kruger , and finds himself right in the middle of a breeding herd of ellies , grazing on both sides of the road .
Now , is it then unreasonable for him to have the impression that all ellies are alike ? Makes you think , hmmmmm ???
Now we come to the other side of the coin – that of shooting the animal . Firstly , many of us agree that it was probably not necessary to do so . And now , after all the hoo-hah , Sanparks resent the criticism against them . Obviously they are not happy , and understandably so .
But , this side of the coin actually has more than one imprint . One , is the issue of “ to do it , or not to do it “ .
And a second issue is nagging matter of moral responsibility . In other words , “ are we responsible , and could we have done something to prevent this happening ? “
My philosophy and advice to my managers , have always been to make their decisions only after weighing up all their options , and then to stand by such decisions ,and as such of course , take responsibility for it .
And furthermore , whatever happens afterwards , not to regret such decision at any later date , because that decision was RIGHT at that time !
Now , in the case of this elephant , I think we should now let the matter come to rest . Sanparks made their decision at the time , and we must accept that they felt it was right at that time . Certainly , they are not having regrets , because for them , at that time , the decision was right , and we should respect that .
However , they must then also accept the responsibility for that action . Firstly , there is the MORAL responsibility of the matter , which obviously they do . And again we should respect that they accept that responsibility .
However , secondly , there is also their CULPABLE responsibility to be considered , and here , we must question whether they took sufficient and adequate steps to prevent this incident .
We accept that there will always be people who transgress the rules . After all , are rules and laws not made to be broken ? Without it we will not have any criminals in our jails !
To my mind however , I feel that SP can do much more to promote those rules . The little pamphlet you receive when you enter the park is very very far from adequate to warn visitors about the dangers posed by wild animals . It is as if SP feel embarrassed about it , and rather than pointedly and loudly proclaim the rules , they rather keep quiet , and then afterwards they use all kinds of excuses of why they cannot monitor all visitor behaviour .
There is nothing wrong in fining people if they overstep the mark , and there is nothing wrong in banning for very serious or repeated offences , but it is very wrong to sit back and hope that people will naturally read and obey the fine print on their admission tickets . Because we know , and Sanparks know that people are natural transgressors , and that makes them CULPABLE responsible to ensure that their visitors know and understand the rules , and that action will be taken against them where necessary .
And this is where they fail dismally !
It is Sanparks responsibility to MAKE SURE that each and every visitor is completely and fully informed . By merely giving the visitor a shortened version of rules and regulations does not lift that responsibility , and in fact still makes them fully culpable for anything that may happen to that visitor.
And , as far as visitors are concerned , certainly they should be held responsible too . If the transgress , then they should be fined etc . And if their actions are the cause of damages , such as in this case , their carelessness in not adhering to rules , then they should be prosecuted , etc . in the same way for instance where a person goes missing in the mountains , and he is searched for and rescued by emergency rescue service , then he gets lumbered with the bills for the cost thereof .
Enough is enough
- Sprocky
- Posts: 7121
- Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:29 pm
- Country: South Africa
- Location: Grietjie Private Reserve
- Contact:
Re: alleged elephant attack on vehicle
Good post okie!! Thank you.
Sometimes it’s not until you don’t see what you want to see, that you truly open your eyes.
- Lisbeth
- Site Admin
- Posts: 67384
- Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
- Country: Switzerland
- Location: Lugano
- Contact:
Re: alleged elephant attack on vehicle
Okie
Excellent idea!okie wrote: I think we should now let the matter come to rest . .
"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge