Skip to content

SANParks new fee structure: Questions and Answers

The new fee structure

  1. Why is it necessary to offer SA Residents discounted conservation fees?
    South African residents pay taxes, a small portion of which goes to SANParks in the form of subsidies. It is only fair, therefore, that South African residents pay less.
  2. Is this not open to abuse?
    If the application of new fees is not properly managed it is open to abuse. It is for this reason that visitors to the parks must provide identification in an individual capacity on entering the parks and another reason for introducing the Wild loyalty card system.
  3. Isn’t calling the increases a “conservation fee” just a PR stunt? It’s not as if the proceeds are all going into conservation, is it?
    The term has been carefully chosen. It’s to bring home to users of the national parks a clear understanding that virtually every aspect of the parks’ running costs – and this includes the maintenance of tourist facilities – can be attributed to the parks’ primary aim, which is the conservation of South Africa’s natural heritage.
  4. Why should the public have to pay a conservation fee for being in one of our South African National Parks?
    • Every single person entering a park uses park infrastructure and public facilities such as roads, toilets, running water, picnic facilities, hides, day walks etc. on a daily basis. He uses these resources every day, and these require upkeep.
    • There is not only the question of maintenance but also expansion. If the organisation is to carry out its mandate – and this costs money - this can only be achieved through targeted access programmes e.g. Geelbek (West Coast); Wilgenhof (Golden Gate); Skukuza; we want facilities like these in every park.
    • Ensuring the effective conservation of a park carries with it operational costs such as veld management, game capture programmes, innoculations, alien-veld clearing, anti-poaching costs, game guard salaries etc.
    • SANParks has a responsibility to involve communities adjacent to parks in conservation efforts and to provide tangible benefits for them. Local residents have been alienated from parks in the past and do not have the means to enjoy them in the way visitors can. National parks are for all South Africans and local residents should be able to realise benefits from them.
    • More importantly though, is the question of equity. A person who stays at the park for more than one day should pay accordingly.
  5. What will my money be used for?
    • To meet critically important conservation objectives that are currently under-financed.
    • To expand and consolidate the portfolio of National parks to bring South Africa’s Protected Areas - currently 6% of the countries territory - closer to the internationally recommended benchmark of 10% (1% more will cost R1 billion)
    • To develop and implement a comprehensive programme of re-connecting the nation with conservation through conservation awareness
    • To market national parks as desirable tourist destinations especially to those who were historically excluded by racial legislation.
    • Practical examples of costs are:
      • Disease surveillance (especially TB) – KNP needs a minimum of R1 million a year to cover buffalo herds. There is currently no funding
      • Translocation of animals
        - One elephant costs R15 000 to translocate and the park is moving between 100 and 200 annually. (Elephants are more costly because of the specialised equipment required.)
        - The white rhino requires maintenance facilities amounting to R1 000 per rhino per year (and there are 100 white rhino); translocation costs for these are R10 000 per rhino.
        - The mass capture of buffalo costs R5 000 per buffalo – around 200 to 300 a year. There is also the operational expense of the disease-free buffalo project, which costs R0.5 million a year (linked to the disease surveillance).
        - Antelope costs R2 000 per animal and the park moves between 3000 and 5000 head of game a year.
      • Fencing (e.g. To fence an area in the Addo park cost R3.5 billion; R40 000 a kilometre)
      • Roads infrastructure (R30 0000 per road for good road – Refer R90 million to gravel 160 km stretch of road in the Kalahari
      • Poaching is serious in parts of the KNP – it differs from year to year and from one section to another. It’s difficult to allocate an exact cost, as anti-poaching costs are included in the whole biodiverse conservation budget, which includes erosion control, environmental impact assessment, research. In the past the SANParks budget for KNP was R60 million and there was additional funding from other conservation agencies including Limpopo, Mpumlanaga Parks Board, NGOs.
      • Land costs (R1 billion per 1% increase – and this is only to purchase, not to manage)
      • Rehabilitation costs (R3000 a hectare – using Marakele example), which is equivalent to the land price. So the parks pay R3 000 to buy a hectare of land and R3 000 to rehabilitate it.
      • Note: Alien invasive plants (clearing) – This is dealt with by Working for Water, which receives some funding from DEAT (Dept of Environmental Affairs and Tourism) and DWAF (Dept of Water Affairs & Forestry)
  6. Based on two days in the Kruger, for example, what will the new conservation fee represent as an increase in percentage terms over the current admission fee for a) locals and b) non-locals?
    • The new fee for the domestic market is still equitable through the introduction of the Wild card and the special rates and packages on offer. Previously, two days at Kruger would have cost a visitor R54 (a once-off R30 entry fee, plus the R24 vehicle fee). For the same period he will now pay R60 (2 days at R30 per day). A 3-day visit will cost R90 (3 days at R30 per day). But for an additional R105, the visitor has unlimited access to all the national parks for a full year. Depending on the computations relating to the packages on offer the fee is approx ¼ of the new standard fee for SA residents and approx ½ for SADC nationals)
    • For the international visitor, the increase is, in some parks, quadruple the old fee. But although we are increasing prices, we are realizing less in dollar terms. If one compares the cost in relation to 1994, in dollar terms, the new cost, with the increase, is still less.
  7. Why does the conservation fee vary between parks?
    The size of each park varies and each has its own location, features, facilities, etc that enhance visitor experience differently. The Kruger National Park and Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park, for example, have a variety of tourist facilities, like campsites and lodges. Marakele National Park, on the other hand, has a tented camp, a camping and caravan park and a bush camp. Also the parks have different costs; KNP requires more management structures than Marakele. Fees will, therefore, vary according to the facilities on offer and what infrastructure is required.
  8. Why the large difference between foreign and local fees?
    1) SANParks gets partial funding through the fiscus
    2) The prices are market related (refer other countries)
    3) They are still cheaper than for other holiday destinations
    4) It is a comparable product – compared to similar product offerings in, for example, Kenya, Tanzania and Botswana, SA remains cheaper
    5) Comparative prices – for example, Tanzania charges 30 US dollars a day and SA 15 US dollars a day (in Rands).
  9. Why such short notice to implementation of this new pricing strategy?
    We feel two month’s notice is reasonable and we are honouring existing bookings made prior to the announcement.
  10. What’s the logic behind giving nationals of SADC states a concessionary rate between that for locals and that for residents of other countries?
    Broadly speaking, it’s an act of good neighbourliness in the sub-continent. It’s part of our efforts to promote transfrontier relations and regional tourism. [Refer Mavuso]
  11. Do national parks with concessionary pricing structures in neighbouring countries give South African residents similar benefits?
    In some instances, yes. Zimbabwean national parks, for example, operate a 3-tier rate – a Zimbabwean will pay the least, a regional African visitor (which includes all African countries) slightly more, and an international visitor the most.
  12. Can visitors expect conservation fees to go up every year, probably at least by the prevailing inflation rate?
    Annual increases are probable, and are likely to be in line with general cost increases and market conditions.
  13. Is the fact that differential pricing seems to be working in other countries really an argument for introducing a concessionary structure here? Aren’t the circumstances somewhat different in South Africa where we may have less of a reputation for “exploiting” tourists?
    Exploitation is not our objective. Prices are market-related, and are determined in accordance with industry norms in Africa and the rest of the world. We have a large domestic market which we would like to broaden, and, as such, we are offering concessionary rates.
  14. When were entrance/conservation fees to the parks last increased, and by how much?
    The last was a 50% increase from R20 to R30 per person (KNP), which took place in 1999 and even then was out of line with the market.
  15. How are you going to attract more people from previously disadvantaged communities to the parks?
    The introduction of the Wild loyalty card, offering special rates and packages is one incentive. Admittedly, we have barely scratched the surface in making the national parks accessible as recreational attractions to previously disadvantaged communities. However, the organisation is currently embarking on a constituency-building drive to spread the conservation message to all South Africans and to encourage visits to the park. We are looking at additional marketing strategies to encourage all South Africans to visit i.e. we believe we will be more effective if we target their children. We would like to have an environmental centre in each park, which caters for schoolchildren. Our targeted access strategy focuses on the experience of, and exposure to, conservation issues.
    Within the next five years we would like to see 250 000 previously disadvantaged schoolchildren visit the parks.
    For every four fee-paying visitors we are in a position to subsidise one child – and bear in mind that there are in excess of 1 million visitors to the KNP annually.
  16. Are you going to increase other tariffs – accommodation for example – in the foreseeable future, and if so, by how much?
    The price structure review is unrelated to accommodation rates, which are reviewed annually as per industry norms.
  17. Why separate the conservation fee as opposed to including it with the cost of accommodation?
    The two are not the same and should not be mixed. Many people experience the park and enjoy its facilities without necessarily taking up accommodation in it. It is an act of transparency. People entering each park must know that the fee is their contribution to furthering the conservation objectives of the organisation.
  18. Just HOW widely did you consult about the price increase? And was it actual consultation, or did you really just tell people you were going to do it?
    There has been extensive consultation with interested and affected parties – in most cases through representative bodies – extending over several weeks. Broadly speaking, those consulted have supported SANParks’ position. Some thought it was long overdue, while others were cautious. We took their concerns into account, the major one being sensitivity in handling the issue. Of course, had we not had this kind of general support, we would have reviewed the process.
  19. Wouldn’t it have been more acceptable to introduce the new structure and loyalty card system by piloting the system first?
    Table Mountain National Park took the initiative with the successful introduction of their Go Green card and their experience and recommendations have been invaluable. Some other conservation bodies have indicated a willingness to follow the SANParks pioneering lead of the new structure.
  20. Isn’t this thing going to be an administrative nightmare, people having to show proof of residence, the introduction of the Wild loyalty card, parks staff getting to grips with new systems etc. ?
    No, we don’t think so. South Africans residents are well accustomed to keeping their identity documents on them at all times. Travellers from other countries expect to have to keep their passports on them and to produce them on request in foreign countries.
    With the introduction of our Wild loyalty card system in partnership with Infinity, we will be benefitting from their loyalty programme management experience and expertise. Logistically, the systems are being upgraded and staff is being trained to full capacity.
  21. Aren’t you worried about cancellations and just generally bad PR, going forward?
    It would be naïve of us not to expect that news of the new structure is likely to be received badly by some. Price restructuring, let’s face it, is seldom universally accepted. With the introduction of the Wild card and its benefits to South African residents and SADC nationals We are absolutely confident, however, that when people compare what they will have to spend on a SANParks’ experience now with both local and international alternatives, they will be quite easily persuaded that the former remains unique and still represents excellent value for money.
  22. Why has it taken South Africa so long before committing to the new conservation fees?
    SANParks is no longer able to rely solely on government funding and we are having to adopt a more commercially-orientated approach.
    The timing is now right in the light of current smart-card technology which will enable us to run the parks in a much more efficient and sustainable manner.
  23. Government Subsities: What is the position with Government conservation subsidies to SANParks?
    In 1994 the subsidy was R40.9 million. Five years later it was R50 million and now it is R51.6m. Taking inflation into account, this represents a decline. Going forward R48.7m is indicated for the year 2003.
    The roads grant in 1994 was R9.6 million. In 1998 it was R12.8 million. It was suspended in 1999 and reinstated in 2002 at R12 million. The 2003 roads grant is also R12 million.
    There has been an increase in the number and the size of parks, therefore costs have gone up and additional finances have been required. But there hasn’t been a corresponding increase in operational subsidies.
    We do, however, at times benefit from substantial developmental subsidies e.g. poverty relief funds, flood relief funds
  24. What percentage of SANParks’ income came from Government subsidies, say five years ago, and what is it now by comparison?
    The Government Grant and Roads Grant represented 29.1% of total income in 1994. Five years later it represented 17.1%, and in 2001 it was 15.6%. Fortunately this has been increased to R63.7m in 2002, or 20.2%. The increase is due mainly to the re-instatement of the roads grant.
    The Government Grant and Roads Grant amounts to R60.7 million for the year 2003. This represents 19.9 % of total income, which is almost in line with 2002.
  25. What’s the Government’s rationale?
    This is best articulated by Government. However, there is a view, supported by SANParks, that the parks’ tourist facilities should be fully self-supporting. The challenge is to find the right level of Government subsidisation for conservation and growth.
  26. What particular areas of the parks’ operations have suffered as a result of static government subsidies?
    Maintenance of existing infrastructure has been delayed and we have been slower at bringing on stream new parks, products and services. We have exhausted those initiatives designed to improve efficiencies and we now need to change our business model.
  27. Conservation Objectives: What do you mean when you say that the additional revenue generated will be put into “conservation objectives”?
    The internationally prescribed average percentage of a country’s surface area under formal state protection is 10%. South Africa, with such a rich biological diversity, should arguably exceed this average, yet currently only around 6% of our surface area is under appropriate state protection. While certain habitat types, such as the arid savannah of the Kalahari or the bushveld of the Kruger Park, are adequately protected, certain habitats of biological importance or even uniqueness to the country do not have adequate protection. Examples of these include the upland grasslands of Mpumalanga; North East Free State and North Western KwaZulu Natal where species, such as the wattled crane and the blue swallow, are on the brink of extinction; the succulent Karoo; and crucially the fynbos and renosterveld habitats of the endemic Cape Floral Kingdom.
  28. What are these “conservation objectives”?
    The objectives are particular to each park and fall under two headings:

1. Biodiversity

  • Maintaining the biological diversity characteristic of all national parks, for example, the Lowveld in all its facets and fluxes (Kruger Park);
  • Maintaining viable populations of endangered animal species (Species Parks). An example is the endangered Cape mountain zebra as a source of individuals to establish in other parts of their historical range (Mountain Zebra National Park);

2. Cultural Resource Management

  • Maintaining the cultural/historical heritage of all sites, which would include the tangible and intangible experiences.
    The former refers to sites, structures, places of historic and pre-historic significance and the latter refers to its oral history, indigenous knowledge (myths, legends etc.), related to neighbouring communities and the pre-colonial history of a region. Examples would be Mapungubwe in Mapungubwe National Park and Thulamela in Kruger National Park.
    The total conservation budget is allocated to these and is supplemented by funding from outside agencies, like private organisations and donors.
  1. What, amongst them, are the big cost items?
    Land acquisition and land rehabilitation, which includes the restocking of species. One high cost activity is the management of large mammal populations. Animals need to be captured in areas where they are sufficiently abundant, for relocation to other areas (for example, the translocation of elephants from Kruger National Park to the Limpopo National Park in Mozambique). This requires aircraft and specialized capture equipment, which are costly to procure and maintain. Another high-cost activity is anti-poaching programmes and disease research e.g. foot and mouth disease, anthrax and bovine tuberculosis (BTB).
  2. Aren’t tourism and conservation at odds with each other?
    Eco-tourism is the enabler of conservation and vice versa – it is a reciprocal relationship. Tourism is the mechanism through which people get to visit the park. So tourism can’t be divorced from conservation. In recognition of this and as eco-tourism has increased, SANParks has upgraded the tourist facilities e.g. Lower Sabie, Tamboti (in KNP), Kgalagadi.
  3. But some would argue that the standards and facilities are actually declining.
    Some areas need attention but if we don’t have finances we’re not going to be able to attract on-going tourism – it’s a chicken and egg scenario. There are cases where the parks are receiving compliments – in fact; there has been an increase in the number of compliments over the number of complaints.
  4. How would you rate SANParks' success to date in attaining these “conservation objectives”?
    To quote Minister Valli Moosa:
    “Our 20 national parks are one of our greatest assets for both biodiversity and tourism in this country. A little known fact is that more new national parks have been proclaimed or existing parks expanded since the first democratic elections in 1994 than at any other comparable period in the history of South African National Parks.”
    But we still have a long way to go until we are satisfied.
    Southern Africa is currently a world “hotspot” in the field of transfrontier conservation. Six major transfrontier protected areas are being planned and developed between South Africa, Botswana, Namibia, Mozambique, Lesotho and Zimbabwe. SANParks has a major commitment to five of these and is a roleplayer in the sixth.
    Going back further in our history, our national parks played a key role in saving the bontebok and the Cape mountain zebra from extinction. SANParks continues to promote the build-up of numbers of these and numerous other rare species such as the black rhino, wild dog and roan antelope.
    Our marine parks are critical as sources of fish and other species to replenish stocks that are subject to exploitation. The Tsitsikamma was the first one proclaimed on the African continent, and there are other bodies of water set aside for marine parks.
  5. How, exactly, will visitors benefit from the meeting of these conservation objectives; in other words, what added value will visitors get from their payment of daily conservation fees?
    There will be more parks – already there are an additional four more to visit, more things to see: e.g. the extension of Addo. South Africa is internationally recognized as a country rich in biological diversity. With nearly 25 000 species, it has the richest temperate floras in the world. One in 10 of the world’s known plant species occurs in South Africa.
    In addition, 15 per cent of the world’s marine fish species can be found along the South African coastline, and its water bodies include some 11 per cent of the freshwater fishes.
    With over 800 species, South Africa has more than 10 per cent of the world’s bird species. This rich heritage is an economic and cultural asset for our country and the world in general. Our parks offer opportunities to explore the marvellous diversity of our natural heritage. The visitors who come to experience this heritage first hand effectively take ownership of its future. Their role is vital to ensure that it will be maintained for future generations.
  6. Land Acquisition: Why does SANParks want more land for parks?
    South Africa has less than 6 % of its land area under state conservation doctrine. The internationally advocated minimum is 10%. A representative sample of each eco-system indigenous to South Africa needs to be conserved within the system of the country’s national parks. Priorities for conservation are the Cape Floristic Kingdom, Succulent Karoo and Montane Grasslands.
  7. How does SA’s ratio of 6% of state-protected territory allocated to conservation compare with state conservation in other African countries?
    • In Kenya 7.79 % of total land area is under state conservation
    • In Mozambique 8.89%
    • In Zimbabwe 12.79%
    • Namibia 13.61%
    • Botswana 18.26%
    • Tanzania 27.95%
    • Zambia 30.09%
  8. What is the definition of a Protected Area?
    There has been some confusion in the past on the criteria for protected areas. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) guidelines of 1994, on the definition of Protected Areas and a National Park, state:
    “…an area of land and/or sea especially dedicated to the protection and maintenance of biological diversity, and of natural and associated cultural resources, and managed through legal or other effective means”
    All categories of protected areas conform to this global definition. However, the purpose for which protected areas are managed may differ greatly. It is on the basis of primary management objective that the IUCN recognises the following categories:

i. Strict protection (i.e. Strict Nature Reserve/Wilderness Area)
ii. Ecosystem conservation and recreation (e.g. National Park)
iii. Conservation of natural features (i.e. Natural Monument)
iv. Conservation through active management (i.e. Habitat/Species Management Area)
v. Landscape/seascape conservation and recreation (i.e. Protected Landscape or Seascape)
vi. Sustainable use of natural ecosystems (i.e. Managed Resource Protected Area)
N.B. The IUCN notes that assignment to a category is not a commentary on management effectiveness.

  1. How much more land does it need?
    We need another 3 million hectares to reach the benchmark figure of 10% - that is equivalent to one and a half times the size of the Kruger park.
  2. Where, exactly, does it need more land?
    At a macro level, there is an important case to be made for the declaration of completely new parks. There are significant gaps in the overall framework of eco-system conservation in South Africa. For example, we do not have national parks that conserve a substantial grassland eco-system, the Bushmanland eco-system or a large wetland eco-system. Over and above, existing national parks require additional land in order to make them more ecologically sustainable. For example, land recently added to Addo Elephant National Park, consolidated the Nama Karoo, mountain forest, valley bushveld, coastal forest, sand dune and coastal island eco-systems. Consolidation is critical because it ensures that important transitional zones between eco-systems, rich in bio-diversity themselves, are included.
  3. How much is this land likely to cost?
    A one percent increase in land will cost R1 billion to purchase. While a significant part of our land acquisition programme is funded through donations, we cannot be solely reliant on this source. We must anticipate some level of internal funding for land acquisition going forward.
  4. The National parks have expanded since 1994. To what extent?
    Some have increased in size; some remained static, whilst others have been created.
    i. The Addo Elephant National park has increased by 28 000 hectares to 80 000 hectares.
    ii. Augrabies Falls has increased by almost 30 000 hectares to just over 41 500.
    iii. Marakele NP by 17 000 to 54 000
    iv. Mountain Zebra NP by 18 000 to just over 24 500
    v. Tankwa Karoo by 12 000 to almost 51 000
    vi. The West Coast by almost 4 000 to 36 000
    vii. The Karoo NP has increased by 36 000 hectares to 77 000.

Those that have remained the same size are:
i. Bontebok at just under 3 000 hectares.
ii. The Kalahari gemsbok (now Kgalagadi Transfrontier) is just under 100 000 hectares
iii. Knysna National Lakes Area is 15 000 hectares
iv. |Ai-|Ais/Richtersveld NP just under 27 000 hectares
v. Tsitsikamma just under 64 000
vi. Vaalbos around 22 5000
vii. West Coast NP at 36 000.
Those that have been created are:
i. Agulhas NP covering almost 6 000 hectares
ii. Mapungubwe 5000
iii. Wilderness around 10 500 hectares.
The total area added since 1994 is 311 000 hectares, taking the total amount to just over 3.5 million hectares.

  1. Why does the land have to be state-protected? Can’t the private sector look after it?
    It’s a question of risk – basically one can’t guarantee the sanctity of the land e.g. a private person who might have financial difficulties may sell to an unscrupulous buyer. The private landowner may also not have the same conservations objectives; it has been known for private owners to manipulate the ecosystem, to, for example, attract predators, which in turn attract the tourists, or to grant hunting rights.
    The point is that land under state protection should be a national asset, not an individual one.
  2. Who is SANParks buying the land from?
    We buy land from private owners.
  3. Is it having to pay premiums to get the land, and if so, how much of a premium, and why?
    In some instances, it isn’t possible to avoid paying premiums. Sad but true, when word gets out that we’re looking at acquiring land in a particular area, the market price rises.
  4. Why doesn’t the Government just expropriate the land SANParks needs?
    Expropriation is an option available to us but, needless to say, it’s a last resort.
  5. Is SANParks buying land from the Government, and if so, why? Why doesn’t the Government simply donate the land needed?
    SANParks does not buy land from the Government. In fact, SANParks is the conservation custodian of State land on behalf of the people of South Africa.
  6. Why is the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) benchmark of 10% held as the ideal? Surely, different countries have different needs in terms of the amount of land dedicated to conservation?
    The IUCN’s benchmark is exactly that. It isn’t cast in concrete. Given South Africa’s rich bio-diversity, it could be argued that we need more than 10%.
  7. What are the recommendations about land, which should be reserved for conservation?
    1. Consolidate state land in the project areas under SANParks
    2. Transfer of assets and budgets to accompany land transfer
    3. Prevent further biodiversity loss in identified areas
    4. Develop land to prevent land speculation
    5. Develop participatory opportunities for communities and private landowners that incentives such participation.
    6. Develop sustainable funding strategies.
  8. Constituency and community capacity building: What do you mean when you talk of constituency building programmes?
    Primarily we are spreading the conservation message to our constituencies and encouraging a country-wide interest in our national parks. A secondary aim is to market our national parks as desirable tourist destinations to all South Africans.
  9. What is community capacity building?
    Essentially it is the economic upliftment of communities surrounding our parks.
    Notwithstanding the fact that our parks have been very effectively managed from the viewpoint of nature conservation, a seriously damaging consequence of their creation was the eviction of local communities from their land and their separation from their natural resources, skills, traditional roles social standing and means of survival. This social dislocation led to impoverishment and low standards of living, literacy and education, high infant mortality, crime and unemployment.
    The time has come for more change to restore the balance. SANParks’ Social Ecology Department was established specifically to develop and nurture good relations with communities adjacent to national parks by initiating mutually beneficial dialogues with them, by working in partnership with them and by ensuring that the Parks’ existence is a direct benefit to them. This way, the communities get to understand and welcome SANParks’ conservation efforts.
  10. What have you done with regard to community capacity-building programmes?
    So important do we regard the need for the above, that we have recently created the post of Director of Constituency Building, whose task it will be to plan the strategy.
  11. What results are you getting?
    Our resources limit us, so in order to see positive results we have to increase our resources. SANParks’ has been on a steep learning curve. On the one hand, we haven’t been as “hands-on” as we should have been; on the other, though, we have had to contend with a climate of dependence that has arisen in some instances. The way forward, we believe, is to continue to work with the communities around our parks in respect of business opportunities and environmental education, but we are cognisant now of the need to cast our nets wider.
    While we shall continue to encourage conservation awareness amongst regular patrons of the parks, we need to reach out to the broader South African public, particularly the previously disadvantaged. We must understand why they don’t patronise our parks currently and then seek to encourage them to do so through various environmental education interventions and awareness programmes. This work all costs money, of course.
  12. Do you anticipate spending more on these, and if so, how much?
    We do expect to spend more; however, until the Director of Constituency Building is appointed, we cannot be specific at this stage.
  13. Does government help you with these?
    Government does fund development through various subsidy systems. It supports entrepreneurs and contractors, who have skills transfers programmes to empower communities surrounding our parks.
    Conservation, important though it is, comes well down the list of priorities, and we understand that. The reinstatement of the roads subsidy by Government is an enormous help to us, however. A major portion of it will go to empowering emerging contractors.
    Funds we would have had to allocate to roads maintenance can now be liberated for other purposes – some for community development. As we have said, community development will also receive some of the additional revenue generated from increased conservation fees.
  14. Isn’t it a bit of a cheek to expect tourists to fund community development?
    We don’t. We try and engage communities in the conduct of our business, to give them access to tourists.
  15. If you had to cite some of your successes, which ones stand out?
    a. The one contractual park in Makuleke region in the Kruger National Park has been particularly successful. [Mavuso]
    b. At Kruger’s Numbi and Phalaborwa gates, the arts and crafts markets have been successful. These are genuinely multi-cultural; with people either make their wares on the spot or at their homes in nearby towns and villages.
    c. The “Know Your Local Park” campaign at Addo stands out. This campaign has been going since 1998 and to date has trained around 30 local teachers in environmental awareness. They go back to their communities and pass on what they have learned, not only to schoolchildren but to the adult population as well.
    d. Also at Addo, the Eyethu Hop-on Guides programme has been very successful. The programme has been running since 1999 and has produced eight trained field guides from the community. From an office at the park gate, they are available, for a fee, to “hop on” and give tourists a guided tour of the park.
    e. At West Coast National Park, we have had a particularly heartening experience, working with the local Police Forum. The idea was to get young people off the streets and into conservation.
    f. The Morula Kids Project is an on-going national competition on environmental awareness. It focuses on primary school children between grades 1 and 7. Last year over 700 schools took part; this year it was down to 62 on account of the World summit and a number of other competitions, which were being held. The winning group (of between 1 and 10 pupils) receives a Kodak hamper as well as a trip to one of the parks.
    g. The Imbewu Project is a 4-day camp for high school children or for disadvantaged children in homes etc. It’s a joint programme with the Wilderness Foundation, exclusive to Kruger, Addo and Tsitsikamma (a fourth park is still to be identified), which gives the children Wilderness experience. The programme uses retired rangers, combining their conservation knowledge with Afro centric cultural issues. The programme caters for around 16 children in Kruger and 8 in the other parks, and runs every Friday to Monday between March and October. SANParks conducts a screening process with schoolteachers to identify pupils who will attend the camps.
    The above are all national initiatives but each park, which has a social ecologist, will run its own programme.
  16. The McKinsey Investigation: What, in short, were the main findings of the McKinsey investigation?
    The main finding was that SANParks needs to generate more revenue from tourism in order to meet its objectives. The main solutions identified were:
    • Constituency building
      - Building a strong constituency for conservation by:
      Ø effectively managing existing parks to protect biodiversity
      Ø creating new parks to protect biodiversity within SA

    • Ø To enhance public views, benefit and enjoyment of national parks
      Ø To maximize contributions from tourism operations
      Ø To create appropriate opportunities for tourism operations
      Ø To create benefits for local communities
      Ø To create opportunities for academic research
    • Building a constituency for conservation by:
      Ø Improving the demographics of park visitors to include all South Africans
      Ø Promoting environmental education in SA
      Ø By consolidating support from current constituencies
      Ø Building good relations with local communities
      Ø Building support amongst staff
    • Fundraising
      - We recognize that we are currently under-exploiting donor funding
      - We should actively pursue funds from agencies
      - To do this we should develop an internal fund-raising department to access international funding and to promote fund-raising
    • Conservation and Maintenance
      - Identify best practices
      - To undertake a gap analysis, to ascertain our current practices versus best practices
      - Develop organizational structure and management planning to achieve best practice
      - Roll out implementation of the plan
    • Revenue Improvement Opportunities
      - How can we optimise current consumer market?
      - How can we increase penetration within the current market and expand it other markets? To this end we looked at pricing and product offerings and marketing and concession opportunities
    • Change management programme
      - In the near term implement strategic objectives
      - In the long term examine crucial issues:
      Ø Develop marketing and commercial development
      Ø Revamp current IT system for more positive functionality
      Ø Improve collective performance by developing a strong performance programme
      Ø Improve efficiencies
  17. Were alternatives to the new conservation fee structure considered, and if so, what were they?
    Various options were considered, for example: the three-tier differentiation fee; hard currency charges; reduction in tour operator commissions; capturing of tour operator surpluses.
  18. What did McKinsey cost SANParks?
    McKinsey has a corporate philosophy for doing pro bono work during low demand periods. SANParks wanted confirmation that it was on the right track in terms of international best practice in the field, compared to other international conservation agencies.