Africa Wild

wow a lot of activities... for me

Like they say if there is smoke there is fire......in this case a moerse fire

They will try anything to make more money at the expence of the animals what a bunch of morons

I think while we can we should visit Kruger as much as possible before it's all gone

IMO Sanparks forgot to tell the University which is doing the survey, what a NATIONAL PARK is and is supposed to be: The conservation of the flora, fauna and biodiversity leaving as few "foot prints" as possible!!!! .............just beeing kind and leaving them a loop hole

Lisbeth wrote:IMO Sanparks forgot to tell the University which is doing the survey, what a NATIONAL PARK is and is supposed to be: The conservation of the flora, fauna and biodiversity leaving as few "foot prints" as possible!!!! .............just beeing kind and leaving them a loop hole

Ja Lis, but I think they did it on purpose.....as I said on SP forum a few days ago, they don't care for concervation anymore all that they are interested in is to see how much money they can pocket

The same university had a survey indicating visitors rejected the idea of luxury Hotels in Kruger.

Why is "camping" an adventure activity?

Just a rubber stamp, this...

I agree with RobertT that the survey makes it impossible to differentiate between different types of parks. For instance, some soft adventure activities are inevitable in the likes of Table Mountain and Garden Route, and I don't object to some of those. But I object strongly to the same kind of activities in wilderness parks like Kgalagadi and Richtersveld.

I do think that the more people who engage with SANParks the better. Why don't those of you who think the survey slanted for a particular outcome send an email to David Mabunda saying so, and copy it to anyone else at SANParks you can find, as well as to the university prof whose email is listed on the survey? Get your point across somehow.

Agreed, annie, but this is too nebulous versus the KTP cycle thing, for example!

It has actually been a long time coming from SP's "vision and Mission statement" last year.

Could be new idiots in charge, or payback from one or two sulking about said challenge, hence the timeframe!

But we shall fight!

Unfortunately my efforts to engage with Sanparks have failed at every turn. I have emailed, brought discussion to the SP forum and if there is any whiff that you are critical of their vision and mission or ask for justification of certain policies you are treated as the enemy. I am sick of being abused for trying to be constructive. They have no idea on how to engage in open debate and discussion. I have been accused of being anti-sanparks, racist, negative and toxic among other things, all of which are totally untrue and un-called for. The sad thing is that I am a big supporter of South Africa's national park system. In general, compared to many other park systems in neighbouring countries, they are run extremely well.
Richprins summed it up in another thread - this sort of defensive attitude and PR failure and refusal to acknowledge any shortcomings or mistakes is really driving down their credibility and fuels discontent - at least for this little black duck.

Richprins wrote:
It has actually been a long time coming from SP's "vision and Mission statement" last year.

Even much, much earlier. Mabunda has explained it all in his PhD Thesis in Tourism. " An Integrated Tourism Management Framework For the Kruger National Park" South Africa 2003

http://upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/available/ ... 0front.pdf Only the table of contents, but even that shows, that it is all about business.

It's almost impossible to complete that questionnaire "fairly". As others have said, some activities are necessary in certain parks, but a definite no-no in others!