Kruger Park Rhino Levy

Mon Sep 04, 2017 8:42 am

Dear Valued Customer,

The sudden and steady increase in illegal wildlife trade and in particular Rhino Poaching since 2007, necessitated SANParks to implement weighty anti-poaching measures. The measures implemented have begun to deliver numerous successes, but at the same time have significantly increased the costs to the organisation, which, at current levels are not financially sustainable.

SANParks continues to receive financial support from Government, various Donors, NGO's, the SANParks Honorary Rangers and the public. Sadly, a lot of the funds raised by various organisations does not reach the ground level. Significant ongoing funding is required to support the replacement, maintenance and operational costs of the anti-poaching technologies and equipment and to cover the additional human capital costs. The expenditure required just to support the Ranger Services department over the past 10 years has escalated by 364%.

One of the ways to raise additional funds is to implement an anti-poaching fee on top of the existing conservation fee to the users of our national parks with rhinos. Funds would then be ring fenced under a specific project code so that it can be applied specifically to anti-poaching initiatives. It is anticipated that this fee will be temporary and will be removed at the point that wildlife crime is under control.

SANParks realises the impact that this initiative could have on visitors. As such, we would appreciate your honest feedback which will enable the organisation to make an informed decision. The survey will take 5 minutes or less to complete.

Click here to answer the survey now: Proposed anti-poaching fee in national parks with rhinos

Your feedback is most valued!


Kind regards,

Tourism Research
South African National Parks
Tel: (012) 426 5000
Email: tourism.research@sanparks.org
http://www.sanparks.org
http://www.wildcard.co.za

Re: SANParks latest idea...

Mon Sep 04, 2017 10:02 am

Sanparks does not say how much this extra fee will be. This is my good bye to the NPs! The wildcard for foreigners is already terribly expensive, with an extra on top it will just be too much. I already stay outside the park because the accommodations have become too expensive and now this 0*\

Re: SANParks latest idea...

Mon Sep 04, 2017 10:11 am

As a valued overseas customer, will I be invited to take part in the survey?

Re: SANParks latest idea...

Mon Sep 04, 2017 10:20 am

Where can we find the above? Please add the source.

Re: SANParks latest idea...

Mon Sep 04, 2017 10:24 am

Lisbeth wrote:Where can we find the above? Please add the source.


I received an email which included the link. PM me your email address and I'll forward it to you.

Re: SANParks latest idea...

Mon Sep 04, 2017 10:45 am

Thank you!

I wonder how they have chosen the recipients. It ought to be all Wildcard holders -O-

Strange that it is not on the Sanparks' web site :-?

Re: SANParks latest idea...

Mon Sep 04, 2017 11:51 am

So they have found another way to milk the people. The poaching is an emotive topic and the people can now be held to ransom. So they now ring fence this money for poaching and that releases other money for more hare brained ideas like hotels, spa's and all that other gumpf they did a survey on couple of months ago. O/ O/

Re: SANParks latest idea...

Mon Sep 04, 2017 2:30 pm

If you lot came to the UK for a holiday. You wouldn't have to pay more to visit Alton Towers, Buckingham Palace, Windsor Castle just because you are not British. I've never been happy with the huge differential that overseas visitors have to pay. If it goes up any more, the it will almost certainly be my 10th and last visit. :(

Re: SANParks latest idea...

Mon Sep 04, 2017 3:56 pm

The link to the survey: Proposed anti-poaching fee in national parks with rhinos

Re: SANParks latest idea...

Mon Sep 04, 2017 4:59 pm

This "survey" has very much same feel as Spa survey, fat load of good filling survey in, a decision is already made. They are just going through motions so they can say they had public participation and wanting to find out how much they can charge now. On Spa one even though they had more saying no, it was decided to go ahead and people saying no were passed off as just being negative. 0*\