y o

u r

k

n o

w l e

d g

e p a

r t

n e

r

Kruger National Park: Tourism

development and issues of social

carrying capacity in the management

of large numbers of tourists

Sanette Ferreira & Alet Harmse

y o

u r

k

n o

w l e

d g

e p a

r t

n e

r

Real world problem

Day visitor numbers

have increased and

congestion of tourist

traffic over weekends

and certain public

holidays has intensified

in the Marula south part

of KNP with

concomitant impacts on

the wildlife-viewing

experience

y o

u r

k

n o

w l e

d g

e p a

r t

n e

r

Wildlife experience on a public holiday

in Marula-South, KNP

On the Sunday morning a family of

about 70 elephants moved from the

Sabi riverbank across the road and

the subsequent ‘wildlife spectacle

engrossed’…

Most of the other tourists who could

not share in the scene and experience

were visibly frustrated, having to sit in

their cars under the African sun… and

wait impatiently and annoyed for their

unpleasant and prolonged experience

to end.

y o

u r

k

n o

w l e

d g

e p a

r t

n e

r

Complaints voiced by tourists in the

Marula-South area, KNP

~ Not enough staff at the reception area or gate

~ Waiting in queues despite having made reservations to

enter the park

~ OSV vehicles blocking sightings, inconsideration of

others and rude guides

~ Other visitors alighting from their vehicles

~ Litter along the roads, especially during peak season

~ Not enough ablutions – cannot accommodate winter-

season pressures

~ Ablutions not cleaned timeously

~ Inappropriate behaviour of tourists at sightings

Source: KNP visitor feedback

y o

u r

k

n o

w l e

d g

e p a

r t

n e

r

Kruger road rage incident : February 2014

…a guide alighted from a safari-vehicle…and screamed at an elderly

Couple…walk around the vehicle and open the door…

y o

u r

k

n o

w l e

d g

e p a

r t

n e

r

To determine what has changed in tourism

infrastructure and superstructure, and visitors’

management since 1997 vis-à-vis the large numbers of

day visitors, the allocation of access (Wild Cards for

local visitors) and the changes in the landscape matrix

on the south-western border of KNP

• Changes in management philosophy,

• The mechanisms for managing the TCC of the park

• The wildlife attraction value of the southern part

(Marula-South) and the tourism developments adjacent

to the park that contribute to tourist crowding

Overarching aim

y o

u r

k

n o

w l e

d g

e p a

r t

n e

r

Visitors’ experiences and the degree of satisfaction

provided by the experiences are crucial to deciding on

appropriate management actions.

• Common trade-offs are likely to occur between: • maintaining low visitor densities and providing ready access by the public to

wildlife;

• between low disturbance levels to wildlife and close proximity between visitors

and wildlife;

• and between providing a ‘natural’ and a strong ‘managerial footprint’

(Whittaker,Vaske & Manfredo, 2002; Higginbottom, 2004).

• Wildlife tourism should be planned and managed to maximise net

benefits to society and other stakeholders as well as to prevent

disturbance to wildlife (Manfredo & Driver, 2002; Newsome & Rodger,

2012).

Wildlife viewing experience

y o

u r

k

n o

w l e

d g

e p a

r t

n e

r

Methodology

Secondary information:

Published and unpublished sources, including master plans on

tourist policy, park zonation maps and semi-structured interviews.

Primary information:

• Popular tourist roads, waterholes and picnic spots were

monitored during four different time windows in 2013 (mid-week

days, weekends, public holidays and school holidays in June-

July).

• The number of vehicles and tourists entering the park at specific

gates was obtained from the SANParks central database at the

Pretoria headquarters.

• Semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten members of

park management representing different sections inside and outside

the park (development and planning, conservation, tourism

operations, and tourism development marketing).

y o

u r

k

n o

w l e

d g

e p a

r t

n e

r

Interviewees were asked about

• New infrastructural and super-structural

developments

• Tourist traffic

• Tourist-vehicle collisions with wildlife

• Changes in visitor management-policies and

changes over the last 14 years

• Scenarios on tourism development

• Challenges currently experienced

• How visitors expectations are met now and in

the future

• External developments on the southern and

south-western borders of the park

• congestion of tourists in the park on certain

days in specific seasons

y o

u r

k

n o

w l e

d g

e p a

r t

n e

r

YEAR TOTAL NUMBER

OF GUESTS

1928 650

1938 38 014

1948 58 739

1958 122 227

1968 306 347

1978 391 512

1988 625 772

1998 948 732

2008 1 326 054

2012 1 450 481

y o

u r

k

n o

w l e

d g

e p a

r t

n e

r

Day visitors to KNP

GATE QUOTA 1998 QUOTA 2012

Crocodile Bridge Gate 300 550

Malelane Gate 500 550

Numbi Gate 500 550

Phabeni Gate *** 550

Kruger Gate 750 750

Orpen Gate 500 550

Phalaborwa Gate 500 550

Punda Maria Gate 300 330

Pafuri Gate 300 330

Giriyondo Gate *** 275

TOTAL 3650 4985

y o

u r

k

n o

w l e

d g

e p a

r t

n e

r

Capacity limits

y o

u r

k

n o

w l e

d g

e p a

r t

n e

r

Day visitors and vehicles to KNP during the Easter School

holiday, Easter weekend and Freedom Day/Workers’

y o

u r

k

n o

w l e

d g

e p a

r t

n e

r

Day visitors during the December school holiday and the Christmas

weekend 2012

y o

u r

k

n o

w l e

d g

e p a

r t

n e

r

Study Area: Marula South

y o

u r

k

n o

w l e

d g

e p a

r t

n e

r

Most conflicts in carrying capacity do not solely revolve

around resource questions, but involve value issues

• Tourist carrying capacity change when management objectives

are altered or when user populations change radically (Manning,

2011).

• This has happened over the last 14 years in KNP. Whereas

many of the new policies in South Africa promote the sustainable

development of the nation's resources, political pressure

compels KNP (and other national parks and recreation areas) to

make the areas more available to broader segments of the

population.

• The challenge is how to manage this larger number of tourists,

especially day visitors to Marula-South, and whether park

managers have the political will to adopt and apply formulated

policy.

y o

u r

k

n o

w l e

d g

e p a

r t

n e

r

A step in the right direction is that the park forms part of the integrated

development frameworks of the municipalities adjacent to the park. • A three-kilometre buffer zone outside the park’s borders

• A beneficial symbiotic relationship is essential between the park and its

neighbours

The mechanisms used by KNP to prevent overcrowding have in

practice, been largely unsuccessful in Marula-South.

• Private OHVs not being considered part of the daily quota per gate suggest that

financial priorities take precedence.

• Regarding African national parks, this emphasis on profitability is pivotal

where tourism potential is in danger of being over-exploited (Henry, 1980;

Gilbert, Penda & Frielet al., 1994).

• Given that road to vehicle ratios and daily quotas per gate have been adapted

while the ‘channel system’ (the roads) for self-drive tourists have stayed almost

the same confirm the pressures to accommodate more visitors and not to restrict

access on ‘flooded weekends’.

• This had led to ‘a creeping incremental development of tourist facilities’

within the park, as well as ‘changing the profile of the visitor towards those

more tolerant of intensive uses’ (Butler, 1996: 291).