SANPARKS - Paradox of Note

Information and Discussions on Management Issues in SANParks
Post Reply
Poplap
Posts: 1436
Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 10:53 pm
Location: Daar waar die bobbejane hul borshare kam...
Contact:

SANPARKS - Paradox of Note

Post by Poplap »

Sun Nov 20, 2011
Poplap wrote:It is amazing that so many people all over the world blindly support SANPARKS and what they seemingly - yes, seemingly stand for, so perhaps it is a good idea to point out a few paradoxes.

Let me start...

Taken from the SANPARKS website:

Enabling Legislation: The Protected Areas Act

The Protected Areas Act No. 57 of 2003 gives SANParks its legal mandate.

What are the important provisions of the Protected Areas Act?

The Protected Areas Act establishes that the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity are important objectives to be achieved in national parks.


Is sustainable use synonymous with commercialisation. Since when? And if so, why not state it here for all to see? Why hide the fact behind words such as sustainable?


The Protected Areas Act promotes participation by stakeholders in the planning of national parks. In accordance with the Act SANParks will consult with affected parties in drawing up plans for national parks.

Really? How many have been consulted before a monstrocity of a conference centre was erected in Skukuza? Really? How many have been consulted before plans were finalised for the building of more hotels (there are upmarket concessions in place for a number of years) in the KNP?

What is biodiversity? In the Biodiversity and Protected Areas Acts biodiversity is defined as “the variability from among all sources including terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part and also includes the diversity within species, between species and ecosystems.”

Really? Is that why SANPARKS is keen to develop a hotel in the KNP, wiping out current balanced ecological complexes and ecosystems?


Conserving nature since 1926.

Really? And that is why they have agreed to coal mining almost on top of Mapungubwe? Really? And that is why they are harvesting yellow wood giants? Really?


It would be great if AW members can highlight other paradoxes. Let's use this thread to highlight all those paradoxes in missions and visions and what else....


User avatar
Lisbeth
Site Admin
Posts: 67235
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
Country: Switzerland
Location: Lugano
Contact:

Re: SANPARKS - Paradox of Note

Post by Lisbeth »

Poplap wrote:SANParks Regulations
& other useful information
ParksRegulationsReservationAttachments_V3.1_22/09/2011 1
The function of SANParks is to protect, conserve and control the national parks and other
protected areas assigned to it and that you are subject to the conditions set in terms of Section 86
of the National Environmental Management Act (107 of 1998) and the National Environmental
Act: Protected Areas Act (Act 57 of 2003) for the duration of your stay in the National Park.

http://www.sanparks.org/assets/docs/tou ... ations.pdf



-O -O -O


The function has seemingly changed as per the new mission on the SANPARKS' website:

To develop and manage a system of national parks that represents the biodiversity, landscapes, and associated heritage assets of South Africa for the sustainable use and benefit of all.

http://www.sanparks.org/about/vision.php


The word 'manage' now in bold. No longer conserve, preserve, custodian, but manager.

O/ O/ O/


User avatar
Lisbeth
Site Admin
Posts: 67235
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
Country: Switzerland
Location: Lugano
Contact:

Re: SANPARKS - Paradox of Note

Post by Lisbeth »

Richprins wrote:Another paradox is that one now has to be a logged on member of the Sanparks Forum website in order to read the section where the hotels, culling, poaching etc. are discussed.

This after five years!

Why?
Poplap wrote:The biggest marketing tool does not want to taint their white lily image? -O -O -O
Lisbeth wrote:The transformation chapter is very interesting:?

http://www.sanparks.org/about/transformation.php

Is this whole part new? I never saw it before and I have been in those pages more than once :?
Poplap wrote:Who knows? A good website always contain dates on info, when done, when uploaded, etc. A good one. :twisted: To enable comparisons, empirical research, etc. :roll: :?
Richprins wrote:development of the SANParks as a public agency in the service of the South African society and the world at large by ensuring the full ownership of it by a democratic nation.

Seems little place for the animals and plants, then? :?
Lisbeth wrote:
Poplap wrote:Who knows? A good website always contain dates on info, when done, when uploaded, etc. A good one. :twisted: To enable comparisons, empirical research, etc. :roll: :?
That is a defect that I have always critisized on the SP homepage, even the media releases are/were without a date :evil:
Poplap wrote:
Richprins wrote:development of the SANParks as a public agency in the service of the South African society and the world at large by ensuring the full ownership of it by a democratic nation.

Seems little place for the animals and plants, then? :?

Yep, no service to fauna and flora, that's for sure. :evil: :evil: Lis, yep, indeed. :?
Flutterby wrote:Thanks for highlighting these "paradoxes of note" guys!! \O \O
leachy wrote::) :) :) :)

yes ................ indeed !!!!!

thank you for highlighting these for all those who visit the green forum to see..

\O/ \O/
iNdlovu wrote:I stand open to correction here, but isn't the Dr (CEO SanParks) qualified in the tourism industry and not in conservation? If this is so we can see his stamp on the way things are going in our parks. 1st comes tourism...last comes conservation O/
Lisbeth wrote:iNd, if you have a look at his thesis you will clearly see the future of Sanparks :evil:
Flutterby wrote:
iNdlovu wrote:I stand open to correction here, but isn't the Dr (CEO SanParks) qualified in the tourism industry and not in conservation? If this is so we can see his stamp on the way things are going in our parks. 1st comes tourism...last comes conservation O/
These are his qualifications:

Dr David Madoda MABUNDA is the Chief Executive Officer of South Africa National Parks.

Mabunda taught at various primary and high schools and lectured at Mgwenya College before becoming the youngest Inspector of Education at the age of 31. In 1994 he left education for land reform and spearheaded the restitution process in Mpumalanga. In 1998 he joined the Kruger National Park as its first black director and he is credited for turning it around financially and transforming it from being an apartheid dinosaur to an organization for all South Africans.

Mabunda is currently Chief Executive of South African National Parks since 01 November 2003. He serves in many Boards including the Lowveld Chamber of Business and Tourism (LCBT), which awarded him, among many under his belt, the LCBT Tourism Personality Award for 2003 in recognition of his contributions to tourism in the region whilst he was Director of the Kruger National Park.


Doesn't look like he has any qualifications in conservation/wildlife management! :roll:
Flutterby wrote:
iNdlovu wrote:I stand open to correction here, but isn't the Dr (CEO SanParks) qualified in the tourism industry and not in conservation? If this is so we can see his stamp on the way things are going in our parks. 1st comes tourism...last comes conservation O/
These are his qualifications:

Dr David Madoda MABUNDA is the Chief Executive Officer of South Africa National Parks.

Mabunda taught at various primary and high schools and lectured at Mgwenya College before becoming the youngest Inspector of Education at the age of 31. In 1994 he left education for land reform and spearheaded the restitution process in Mpumalanga. In 1998 he joined the Kruger National Park as its first black director and he is credited for turning it around financially and transforming it from being an apartheid dinosaur to an organization for all South Africans.

Mabunda is currently Chief Executive of South African National Parks since 01 November 2003. He serves in many Boards including the Lowveld Chamber of Business and Tourism (LCBT), which awarded him, among many under his belt, the LCBT Tourism Personality Award for 2003 in recognition of his contributions to tourism in the region whilst he was Director of the Kruger National Park.


Doesn't look like he has any qualifications in conservation/wildlife management! :roll:


User avatar
Lisbeth
Site Admin
Posts: 67235
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
Country: Switzerland
Location: Lugano
Contact:

Re: SANPARKS - Paradox of Note

Post by Lisbeth »

Lisbeth wrote: From Who'sWho
Poplap wrote:SanParks to expropriate the Sentinel

The Sentinel, the privately-owned mountain at the entrance to Hout Bay, is to be expropriated and incorporated into Table Mountain National Park....


Today in LegalBrief... http://www.legalbrief.co.za/article.php ... 8094002807


Anyone knows what this is about?
Poplap wrote:Interesting read with interesting questions raised:


http://www.africanconservation.org/foru ... s-ceo.html
Lisbeth wrote:Here is more!!
Poplap wrote:Tx Lis.


Here is more interesting reading:


http://www.africanconservation.org/foru ... -kill.html
Lisbeth wrote:News from " 2 Years, 3 Months ago" (4.08.2009) :?
Lisbeth wrote:Unfortunately the written word cannot be trusted 100% these days. A feather becomes 10 hens :wink:
Poplap wrote:True. :lol: :lol: But where there is smoke, there's fire. :lol: :lol: :P Or someone smoking. :lol: :lol: :twisted: :P


That's why I posted it here. Perhaps someone knows if it is goose or eiderdown. :wink:
Poplap wrote:Government subsidy towards Sanparks has been reduced, and thus hotels are needed to make up for this.

First and foremost I cannot understand nor comprehend why the Government cannot see that tourism is way more its weight in gold than actual gold. I cannot understand the following either:


http://niger1.com/?p=30823


The DA’s spokesman on international relations, Kenneth Mubu, MP, said the party’s calculations indicated that, had the minister used commercial airlines, she would have saved taxpayers R9.6m.


10 million in 15 blinking months?????????? Say what??! Say what??!! :evil: :evil: :evil: O/ O/ O/ In a country where people are dying of hunger, the 'elite' gets poorer, the poor even poorer??? O/ O/ O/ O/ Our rhinos getting poached left, right and centre, and we need to raise private funds to protect them from the onslaught of poachers. O/ O/ O/ O/
Poplap wrote:Another mind boggling paradox:


http://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/ ... -1.1165261



But in his Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement presented to Parliament yesterday, Finance Minister Gordhan called on his colleagues to “continuously remind ourselves that the money we use and the money we spend is the money of our citizens, not our own… We have to address inefficiency, extravagance and waste in public administration…”



Whilst our people are unemployed, living in disgraceful circumstances, sleeping on the streets, no access to running water and electricity and sewerage systems in some places??? O/ O/ O/
Poplap wrote:Mind boggling is not the words here:


http://www.citizen.co.za/citizen/conten ... ial-planes


“The fact is that it is simply wrong to spend R1,6 billion on business jets when millions of people in our country do not have housing, health or access to basic services,” Democratic Alliance Member of Parliament, David Maynier said.

He added: “It is an outrageous extravagance for Zuma and Motlanthe to each have dedicated long- range business jets.”

The Independent Democrats’ Parliamentary Leader, Joe Mcgluwa echoed the sentiments.

“Although we cannot allow the safety of the first and second citizens of South Africa to be in jeopardy, it is equally important that the government has reasonable costing projections,” he said.



May I add: It is simply wrong to spend R1,6 billion on jets when Sanparks apparently has to build hotels in sanctuaries to foot the bill due to reduced Government subsidies.
Poplap wrote:In fact, here words really-really fail me:


ANC centenary 'costly' - 8 November
The ANC's centenary birthday celebrations will cost more than R100 million, the party said on Tuesday. "It will not cost less than R100 million, it is costly", ANC national chairwoman Baleka Mbete told reporters in Joburg. "It is not cheap but we believe . . . it is worth it. Future and younger generations need to know where we come from".

'ANC centenary to cost more than R400m' - 10 November
Taxpayers will fork out more than R400 million for the ANC's centenary birthday celebration in the Free State if spending on infrastructure is included, the Beeld newspaper reported on Thursday. This cost was in addition to at least R100m budgeted by the African National Congress at national level, according to the report.



http://www.lawlibrary.co.za/notice/upda ... africa.htm
Poplap wrote:ANC to bill taxpayers R400 million for party - 10 November
Taxpayers will have to shell out more than R400 million for the ANC's centenary celebrations in Bloemfontein. This is on top of the R100 million that the ANC has already budgeted for next year's big party. But this amount is petty cash compared to the money that will be spent to ready infrastructure in the Free State to host the big bash. Taxpayers have already paid R150 million for the Philip Sanders-resort just outside the city. The resort will be the headquarters of the bash. A further R35 million has been budgeted to restore the Methodist church in Waaihoek, where the ANC was founded in 1912. To renovate the Seisa Ramabodu stadium in Mangaung a further R200 million has been allocated.The official house of Free State premier Ace Magashule will get a facelift costing R15 million, while millions will also be spend to restore the historic Mapikela home and the Winnie Mandela home in Brandfort. - The Witness website
iNdlovu wrote:And all of the above is just piggy bank money when put up against the daily theft from tax payers coffers.
Here's a thought...we shake our heads and bemoan the fact that ANC followers blindly vote for the biggest criminals in the country (sadly they will never be convicted) whilst they themselves suffer untold hardships, but we must remember one thing, most of them don't pay taxes, so what's the problem? It's not their money that's being stolen.
Amoli wrote:My dad always said : search for the solution before you complain...

Shucks..... I really do have this question in my mind with all this knowledge on hand...

WHAT CAN I DO !! :cry:
Lisbeth wrote:Amoli, exactly my thoughts, what can be done?

Maybe what they are doing all over the world at the moment, get together in the main squares and protest. Get into the world press!
Isn't there some bright guy in the opposition to organise a few sit ins or walking around in front of parliament and other government buildings. Can be done temporarily in Cape Town and Pretoria!!!!

The bigger shots seem to not care a damn for their citizens. And the above is only what is known to the public, Imagine the rest O/ O/
Poplap wrote:
iNdlovu wrote:And all of the above is just piggy bank money when put up against the daily theft from tax payers coffers.
Here's a thought...we shake our heads and bemoan the fact that ANC followers blindly vote for the biggest criminals in the country (sadly they will never be convicted) whilst they themselves suffer untold hardships, but we must remember one thing, most of them don't pay taxes, so what's the problem? It's not their money that's being stolen.

iNd, we all suffer direct consequences from this. The money could have been used for worthwhile causes (too many to mention), job creation, subsidised old age homes, potholes, no toll roads, etc etc etc. The fight against rhino poaching. Not building MORE hotels on pristine sanctuary soil to sustain conservation. Education. Higher policing, less crime. In fact, the list is endless. There are millions begging for jobs (including the so-called 'elite') but who cannot find it. That needs employment. Needs it in order to make an honest living. Who wouldn't mind paying taxes to the State coffers (which in turn is used for lining pockets, for extravagant, exorbitant lifestyles by those who is suppose to be there for the sole purpose of there people?? Celebration parties??!! Parties??!! Say what??!!!!!!)


Amoli, I have the same questions and probably way more. You must remember that you are an 'elitist' and anything you do/say/raise will be construed as something completely different.


I was up till 04:00 this morn', looking at this and other things happening in our beloved country.


"Pretoria - National Police Commissioner General Bheki Cele has been suspended pending the outcome of an investigation into "unlawful" police lease agreements, President Jacob Zuma announced on Monday. ... "He will, during the period of suspension, be entitled to his full salary, allowances, privileges and benefits, in terms of Section 8(3)(b) of the Act."


http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Polit ... a-20111024


Ok, so this is our current Police Commissioner. Now let's have a look at our previous Commissioner:


jackie selebi trial on News24
www.news24.com/Tags/Topics/jackie_selebi_trial
Former police chief Jackie Selebi has so far cost the taxpayer R14.5m in legal fees as he fights corruption charges, says Police Minister Nathi Mthethwa...


R14.5 million!!! (SABC news says it is R17.5 million!!)

SABC News.com - Selebi hospitalised after appeal ruling:Friday 2 ...
http://www.sabc.co.za/.../Selebi-hospit ... g-20111202
2 Dec 2011 – Former national police commissioner Jackie Selebi has been admitted ... the state to recover the R17.4 million it paid to fund Selebi's legal fees. .. Selebi also received an estimated R1.5m salary until his contract ran out in July 2009.

Look here what we have been paying other alleged corrupt/maladministrating officials: http://www.sundaytribune.co.za/state-pa ... -1.1182088


Ok, so these are the top officials of Police... Need I say more?


So yes, despite the fact that I feel I must do something, I need to realise that this is your and my Government of our beloved country I am making referencing to.
iNdlovu wrote:Absolutely correct Poppie, soo much could have been done with the money that has already been stolen from state coffers. And I do mean stolen with a capital S. Anybody that abuses state funds to the extent that these people do, is stealing and that makes them out & out criminals in my book. My point above is that to the average citizen, it means nothing because it's not money out of their pockets, they didn't pay taxes so no problem to keep on voting these criminals into positions of trust and everything else. Now there's the paradox. People in positions of trust are the biggest thieves in the country (not all, but the vast majority).
What can we do????? Talk to very south african citizen whether they live in the towns, townships or rural areas with facts and figures and what could have been done for them if they hadn't voted the thieves into power in the first place. :evil: Talk to your house angel, your gardiner, your petrol attendants, supermarket staff...whoever. Maybe some kind of flyer could be distributed, let's get Helen Zille onto this forum.
This thread takes us way passed conservation, but imagine if the government just contributed 10% of what they have squandered to Sanparks :evil: :evil: :evil:
Lisbeth wrote:There is one thing that I do not understand. If a police officer is accused of unfaithful fulfillment of his duty, why does the state pay for his defense? Isn't the state the prosecutor? :? :?
serval wrote:Just to refresh our memories and to inform those not "in the know" as to why we are so negative concerning the wasteage , corruption , confusion etc in the government who do not have enough budget for Sanparks but enough for town name changes , refurbishment of the gallows ... etc . etc .

http://www.amabhungane.co.za/
Lisbeth wrote:Outrageous! :shock: and nothing is being done? No complaint? No accusation of embezzlement, misappropriation? :evil: :evil:
Poplap wrote:
Penga Ndlovu wrote:
Lisbeth wrote:Amoli, exactloy my thoughts, what can be done?

Maybe what they are doing all over the world at the moment, get together in the main squares and protest. Get into the world press!
Isn't there some bright guy in the opposition to organise a few sit ins or walking around in front of parliament and other government buildings. Can be done temporarily in Cape Town and Pretoria!!!!

The bigger shots seem to not care a damn for their citizens. And the above is only what is known to the public, Imagine the rest O/ O/
Sorry to say this Lis as I wish it was otherwise, but it would never succeed as we have the wrong color. :cry: :cry:

It has nothing to do with race or creed - it would be insulting to assume that only 'whites' have a problem with this. The problem is lack of action/protest.
Amoli wrote:Poplap, I cannot agree more. - Lack of action/protest.

It is one thing to compile all these problems,
it is another thing to have the wisdom to work at them....
and I am not pointing fingers at any one,
but I some times feel that even the opposition party is stuck with no anwers to this arrogance.

We don't toi-toi... so what now.???
Poplap wrote:I agree, Amoli. Like a Cul de Sac.


Perhaps it is time that we (any and all SA citizen that oppose this outrage) don our toi-toi boots? I recall suggesting a march to the Sanparks H/O to protest against hotels months ago on the dark side. I had one response to my request. Just shows you. Easy to complain, easy to summarise, easy to voice an opinion, easier to do nothing (including myself).


... That's probably why I'm still in awe about this Forum. At least someone (you know who) had the guts to... do something. \O
Amoli wrote:That is true.

We were taught to be ladies... we were taught to walk the moral high ground....

I sometimes feel I could've done without the being 'proper'.

Is staying home, keeping the peace and putting quiet time aside enough ?? O/
Geza wrote:
Richprins wrote:development of the SANParks as a public agency in the service of the South African society and the world at large by ensuring the full ownership of it by a democratic nation.

Seems little place for the animals and plants, then? :?
I have my doubts about the democratic process. Yes, in theory, KNP (or all the national parks) belongs to everyone. But not everyone uses it. It would be relatively simple for example, to get votes to build a hotel in KTP, supported by the unemployed and uneducated masses, if it was put forward that such a development would lead to work for thousands of people. Therefore, it would be supported by many more than would possibly benefit from employment possibilities and the sad thing here is that the support voters, would have no clue as to how tis may impact on the actual nature that MUST be protected under the protected areas act.

In the long run, if it wipes out the protected area, then what would be the long term benefit? Do the voting majority understand or care about this? I think not. The immediate benefit is work for someone now and they would probabaly vote in support of this notion.

Same thing was done with the immediate local pops of KNP. They were promised jobs and thus support the madness. While those opposed to it are labeled troublemakers and elitist.

By logical deduction then, this makes those who use the KNP elitist and yet, they are the ones who bring in the money. The ones who support conservation by utilising the resources responsibly and don't want radical changes are the troublemakers.

Very paradoxical.

Same as the term "government organisation" is an oxymoron. (I have often wondered why it's called an oxymoron. Could this have anything to do with the fact that it is often a moron who runs the show?)
Richprins wrote:Theoretically, National Parks are and were created simply to protect wildlife and ecosystems, worldwide. Some exist without any tourists ever entering.

Tourism actually came later, for the populace to appreciate the above, and commercialisation WAAAY later! :?
Poplap wrote:
Richprins wrote:Theoretically, National Parks are and were created simply to protect wildlife and ecosystems, worldwide. Some exist without any tourists ever entering.

Tourism actually came later, for the populace to appreciate the above, and commercialisation WAAAY later! :?
Exactly! \O
Lisbeth wrote:
Richprins wrote:Theoretically, National Parks are and were created simply to protect wildlife and ecosystems, worldwide. Some exist without any tourists ever entering.

Tourism actually came later, for the populace to appreciate the above, and commercialisation WAAAY later! :?
I'd prefer never to see a wild animal, but know that they are there and surviving, all of them \O
Poplap wrote:
Lisbeth wrote:
Richprins wrote:Theoretically, National Parks are and were created simply to protect wildlife and ecosystems, worldwide. Some exist without any tourists ever entering.

Tourism actually came later, for the populace to appreciate the above, and commercialisation WAAAY later! :?
I'd prefer never to see a wild animal, but know that they are there and surviving, all of them \O

Agree \O
Poplap wrote:Would you expect a rubbish dump on the outside of a city or town?


Yes.


Would you expect a rubbish dump between Skukuza and Lower Sabie (H1-4), unmanned, burning, polluting?

No! (Alpha loop from Skukuza on the right hand side).


Image


Image


Image


Image


Image


Shocking!!! What an absolute disgrace!!! :evil: :evil: :evil:
Flutterby wrote:Shouldn't this go into the "Needs Attention" thread?
Lisbeth wrote:
Flutterby wrote:Shouldn't this go into the "Needs Attention" thread?
It certainly should! Let's hear where the pics come from and then we will copy them over there \O
Poplap wrote:Theuns and I took these photos during our January 2012 holiday. We drove past this eye-sore every day. Needless to say, I was freaked out and very :evil: :evil: :evil: to say the least with what I picked up on the binocs. There's also a 'heavy vehicle' (read dumping truck) sign next to the road. On the third day, when we saw smoke covering the whole vicinity, we drove past the no-entry sign. We are law abiding citizens, but were fearful that a fire was raging that SANParks might have been unaware of. Clearly not. :evil: :evil: :evil:

If I am not mistaken, Theuns raised this issue on the other side, but the thread was locked immediately 'awaiting feedback'. Which will obviously never come.

Now, I don't need to say this, but let me focus your attention on the following:


1. Plastic type fittings in abundance. Building rubble of some sort. Not (easily) bio-degradable.
2. Smouldering fire with wildlife around it.
3. "Dam" like shape due to erosion - I'm sure this rubbish washed away into the Sabie during recent floods. I'm sure water dammed up here. Animals drinking from it????
4. Unmanned smouldering fire - perhaps working towards SANParks (irrational) fire policy???
5. Smoke pollution. Probably unsafe due to toxins released in the atmosphere.
6. And then the Good Doc attends COP...
Poplap wrote:Here's more photographic evidence of the destruction by the custodian:


Image


Image


Image


A clearer picture of the 'dam structure'. The last two photos were taken from the gravel road...
Poplap wrote:
Lisbeth wrote:BTW, what has become of that spot? I remember the pic of a huge bare spot of land....is that the one?

Yep, and I spoke out against that too. (RP was very excited about it!) :twisted: Clearly he has no problem with rubbish dumps cum picnic spots. I have. Every inch of soil you eradicate and pollute, is an inch gone forever. And Lis, you are right. Instead of spending thousands to go and see how other countries do it (with a delegation from SANParks), perhaps we should have taken the money and the management to manage rubble in a conservation area.


And I reiterate - this is nowhere near a camp. It is on the road to LS - far away from LS and quite close to the green bridge. UNACCEPTABLE!!!!!
Lisbeth wrote:It is very dangerous to become accustomed to all the things that do not work.

I have just come back from countries where they dump the rubbish outside the door or in the river and I can assure you that it is not a nice sight...nor a nice smell with an annual medium temprature of 30° and humidity around 80°. Can you imagine what kind of pollution of the soil, the water, the air etc.?

One day on an excurtion on the Tonle Lap Lake in Cambodia on our way to a bird santuary we sailed past a floating village and I noticed the difference right away....no platic bags hanging from the trees, no platic bottle floating around. The guide exlained that the eco-organization OSMOSE, working with the National park and the floating village teaching the woman how to make carpets, boxes and many other useful things, from dried water hyacinth, had started a separate refuse collection from this village and taught the population how to manage the thing. It was fantastic to see the boats that brought the various items to the town. One with bottles divided in glass, can and plastic. Another with paper and other biodegradables etc. It was incredible to see the difference from this village and the others on the river. One day I hope that they will all have learnt how easy it is to create and live in a healthy and clean environment that does not hurt nature either. Afterall they live on the river and from the river.

Maybe Sanparks needs an OSMOSE to teach them how to deal with rubbish!!
TheunsH wrote:Off-topic...on-topic...off-topic...on-topic!! :shock: :shock: Do you now also have those strict rules here!! -O -O -O -O -O -O

Poplap will not be charged/fined, I will because I was driving, but only if the State decides to institute criminal charges against me and be able to proof such an offence. I have nothing to hide. In any case that dump is clearly visible from the public road. Do you know where that dump is and if so, have you seen it?

I have started a similar thread on the SANParks forum asking what's up with the dump. I haven't received any reply yet, but that is besides the point. Wouldn't any reasonable man also investigates smoke and fire next to a public road to see if it holds a potential thread to his heritage and if so reports it?
Richprins wrote:Ja, I was wondering what to say when they ask me who to fine! :lol:

I was at the dump a few days after you, Theuns...lion sighting!

It seems the other end of the road does/did not have a no-entry sign, so that may be acceptable?

Unless the horsefly had bitten me by then! -O
Lisbeth wrote:Don't worry Theuns, nobody is going to charge you for anything, because that would mean opening up on all the rubbish dumps in Kruger. If there is one in a place far from a camp imagine how many others there must be around. Disgraceful, disgusting and dangerous (for the animals) :evil:


User avatar
Richprins
Committee Member
Posts: 75833
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 3:52 pm
Location: NELSPRUIT
Contact:

Re: SANPARKS - Paradox of Note

Post by Richprins »

Another bizarre aspect of SANParks is the address they have been using for the past year or so in official correspondence...


For example:


Reynold "Rey" Thakhuli
General Manager: Media, Events & Stakeholder Relations
South African National Parks, Groenkloof, Tshwane/Pretoria


The naming of Pretoria remains a controversial and ongoing POLITICAL discussion, and is far from finalised.

Tshwane is the municipal metro area incorporating other towns too!

Now why would a conservation organisation have a Metro area as part of it's address? -O-


Please check Needs Attention pre-booking: https://africawild-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=322&t=596
User avatar
Richprins
Committee Member
Posts: 75833
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 3:52 pm
Location: NELSPRUIT
Contact:

Re: SANPARKS - Paradox of Note

Post by Richprins »

For example...here's the Department of Environmental Affairs' address! =O: =O: =O:

315 cnr Pretorius & Lilian Ngoyi Street (previosuly Van Der Walt Street)
Fedsure Forum Building
North Tower
2nd Floor (Departmental reception) OR
1st Floor (Departmental information center)
Pretoria, 0001
South Africa






Postal Address
Private Bag X447
Pretoria
0001
South Africa


Please check Needs Attention pre-booking: https://africawild-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=322&t=596
Post Reply

Return to “General Management Issues - SANParks”