PetitionOnline.uk
Browse Petitions Contact the petition author Contact Us Languages Manage your signatures Log in
Start a Petition

KRUGER NATIONAL PARK ANTI HOTEL DEVELOPMENT GROUP

Contact the author of the petition

Guest#26 Jun 06, 2011, 09:11
We have a responsibility to protect the few remaining areas of true nature as it was designed to be. Please leave Kruger ( and all the conservation parks as they are.) Kruger is a special place and it needs to keep this identity.
Dan#27 Jun 06, 2011, 09:57

There is no need for hotels in Kruger. There are more than enough luxury spaces already available inside the park in the form of the lodges as well as the Hotels and lodges that are running all along the border of Kruger. SANPARKS will do better to rather try to maintain the level of service inside the Park visitors got used to in the past, but they lost a lot of customers to the lodges already due to bad service and standards. Do that and they'll make money galore with the already established and growing number of tourists they see every year. The park is going to develop in a town instead of a wildlife sanctuary at this rate.

Guest#28 Jun 06, 2011, 10:06

Re:

#26: -

Anyone who would like to join the AIKONA Group - objectors to these hotels are requested to please send me thair Email addresses and I will forward details to you: [email protected].

Questions may also be posted on the SANPARKS website the topic Questions and Answers about hotel development on the Forum Indaba.

Please assist us in stopping these ventures by a Board that feels the need to convert a Nature Reserve called the Kruger National Park into just another holiday resort.

 

Guest#29 Jun 06, 2011, 10:37
Suggest removal
Guest#30 Jun 06, 2011, 10:39

Post 29

Please advise what it is you suggest removal of. I will entertain your request.
Guest#31 Jun 06, 2011, 11:05
Do not allow the love of money destroy our heritage! Wake up before there is nothing left to save.
Russell Robinson#32 Jun 06, 2011, 11:25

One small request and one comment.
My thanks to everyone who has signed this petition so far.
Request, please would everyone be so kind as to check their contact lists and send the link to as many as possible to get support for this.
It started out as a link on my face book page and it has already grown to this level. Can we take it up a level or 10?
The complete irony is that SANPARKS forum censored one of my posts that linked to a similar thing and this made me sufficiently angry enough to begin this as a crusade in support of the Aikona group.
It is a joint venture with them.
I hope I can count on more support going forward.
Thanks once again.

Edit:

If anyone wants to link up with me on Face Book, follow my e-mail address and use it in the search criteria. [email protected]

Guest#33 Jun 06, 2011, 11:46
KNP is the heritage of our children and supposed to be a safe haven for the animals. What about the resident rhino's? The people that are going to dig foundations are not interested in conservation - if they see rhino's it would be a case of how they can get hold of them to earn money not about conservation.
Guest#34 Jun 06, 2011, 11:58
Good one
Gogo Ria#35 Jun 06, 2011, 14:54

Kruger Park Hotels

Don't mess with the inheritance of the future generations.

Only when the last tree has died and the last river poisoned and the last fish caught will we realise that WE CAN'T EAT MONEY!

Anonymous#36 Jun 06, 2011, 14:59
Here is a link to the debate thread to has taken place on the SANPARKS forum. The accuracy of the posts or the exact intent of the poster cannot be guaranteed due to censorship and over moderation on the forum. This may or may not be the fault of the moderators but rather the mandate of SANPARKS on said moderators.

http://www.sanparks.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=73&t=42431
Russell Robinson#37 Jun 06, 2011, 16:58

NAME CHANGE

I have been requested to change the name of the petition since the name may not have had the desired impact. Everything else remains exactly the same.
Guest#38 Jun 06, 2011, 17:31
No complaints about the proposed airfield next to the S100?
Guest#39 Jun 06, 2011, 17:45

Airstrip.

As far as I know, that airfield already exists. Saw a google earth picture a short while ago so it would indicate that the airstrip has been in existence for a few years already.
Guest#40 Jun 06, 2011, 19:08
conservation not commercial development should be the prime motivation of the National Parks Board
Jose#41 Jun 06, 2011, 19:52

I strongly support this petition, but...

No offence guys, but please run a spell checker over your appeal. ;-) It will take you up several notches on the credibility scale...
Sorry, but once an editor, always an editor. :-S In the meantime I am and will keep sending to friends and (former) colleagues. The latter including national NL media.
RP#42 Jun 06, 2011, 20:23
Working on spelling!
Guest#43 Jun 06, 2011, 21:12

Re: I strongly support this petition, but...

#41: Jose - I strongly support this petition, but... 

 

Point taken Jose, but I want some kind of legal opinion on how this may affect the legality of this petition. Even small cosmetic changes may render the document inadmissible and then all this will be for naught. That would suck. Big time.

 

RP#44 Jun 06, 2011, 21:25

Re: Re: I strongly support this petition, but...

At the moment the petition is quite small,  so rather get everything right for the future!

 

Log is being kept about when changes are made, ie the title change at 220 replies.

Guest#45 Jun 06, 2011, 22:55

Re: Re: Re: I strongly support this petition, but...

#44: RP - Re: Re: I strongly support this petition, but... 

 Thanks RP, will effect chages tomorrow. Want to drop me line with suggested chages and I'll set up a notofication and anyne who wants to can delete theri signaute although I don't think anyone will. Chat soon.

 

Pro!#46 Jun 06, 2011, 23:38
Get real and step back. When Tsendze was planned... No comment at all, except people looking forward to it. (It has been voted as best camp since a few times.) We all know that a few more camps like that are being considered.
Meaning more cars, more... Shall I be evil? More drunk campers? The ones the most complaints were about? Cause the drunks now being "banned" are not the people staying in the bungalows.
So what this group wants is only for campers? No one else? First timers that have no clue what selfdrive is about are not welcome? People with a bit more money who'd like to be pampered are to be shunned?
We want broken beds, goggas to plague us, and no comfort (read: reason to complain)? Back to the 1920's?
Guest#47 Jun 07, 2011, 00:14

Re:

What has a campsite like Tsendze with very limited provisions and where you need to adhere to the rules and regulations of SAN-parks regarding peace and quiet in common with a hotel with conference centre, bar, restaurant, spa etc which runs 24/7....? Sorry, this remark does not make sense to me......#46: Pro! -  

 

Guest#48 Jun 07, 2011, 01:17
against this.
Anonymous#49 Jun 07, 2011, 09:11
#46. Perhaps this is so. This is not however, a debate about whether or not the development of hotels has merit. It's simply a petition against the idea.
Guest#50 Jun 07, 2011, 09:15
The proposed development will not advance preservation of wildlife.