http://allafrica.com/stories/201401170891.html


Zimbabwe: Save Valley Conservancy to Be Indigenised
BY HERBERT MOYO, 17 JANUARY 2014



THE long-running saga in Zimbabwe's Save Conservancy, widely regarded as the richest and largest private wildlife sanctuary in the world which was invaded in 2012 by top Zanu PF officials, is set to end after government decided to indigenise it and establish a national park in the conservancy.

In a telephone interview with the Zimbabwe Independent, Wilfried Pabst, a German investor who is also vice-chairperson of the conservancy, said the conservancy operators had signed a memorandum of understanding with the National Parks Authority to establish the national park.

He said they were also close to concluding negotiations with Environment, Water and Climate minister Saviour Kasukuwere to finalise details.

Kasukuwere disclosed government's plans last Sunday claiming among other things that the development is going to result in the establishment of "a significant national park".

"We are moving ahead to indigenise Save Valley Conservancy and this is going to lead to the creation of a significant national park. I will provide specifics later but you can rest assured that it will be indigenised," said Kasukuwere.

While confirming Kasukuwere's comments, Pabst however emphasised that the indigenisation would not affect foreign-owned properties in the conservancy, nor would it be a "freebie" where government or locals just grab properties for free.

"About 35% of the conservancy is foreign-owned and this will not be affected by the indigenisation," he explained adding that "another 34% will not be affected because it is already in indigenous hands. However the 51% to be indigenised will come from the remainder which is currently in the hands of white Zimbabweans."

"Another criterion for these investors is that all those who already own a farm will not be considered," said Pabst.

He said Germany and the European Union will also assist in capacitating the national parks so that it can engage in conservation efforts.

Tourism and Hospitality Industry minister Walter Mzembi who strongly spoke out against the invasion of Save Conservancy by Zanu PF officials in 2012 declined to comment, referring all questions to Kasukuwere.

Zanu PF loyalists, particularly from Masvingo province, parcelled out the conservancy among themselves before embarking on an orgy of wildlife hunting, sparking local and international outrage.

Pabst alluded to the invasions when he singled out former deputy minister Shuvai Mahofa, describing her as "notorious" after she "grabbed Savuli ranch within the conservancy and has poached many animals. She has tried to poach rhinos too," he said.

quote:

"About 35% of the conservancy is foreign-owned and this will not be affected by the indigenisation," he explained adding that "another 34% will not be affected because it is already in indigenous hands. However the 51% to be indigenised will come from the remainder which is currently in the hands of white Zimbabweans."

Sounds like coming out of a crooked Wall Street consultant!

100%=120%!

"this is going to lead to the creation of a significant national park"

Mucking forons couldn't create a single significant mud brick let alone a significant national park!

Can anyone on the ground in Zim enlighten us on what is actually going on. It is beyond confusing with the 35%, 34%, 51% new math and various categories?????

All it really appears to say is that indigenization policies will continue to destroy the Save.

putting lipstick on a pig does not make it beautiful. love the new Zim math, though.

Many of the present operators/ PHs in the Save have given their life's blood to make it what it is,. Here's wishing them all the very best outcome possible...

to those "White Zimbabweans"...those who actually made the Save into what became! When "indigenized"...it will be reduced to rubble and charcoal like the other "indigenized" places throughout Africa...Google the west side of Maswa in TZ sometime...even on the satellite map...you can see the line of demarcation between "indigenized" Africa (brown rubble) and non-"indigenized (green) African bush.

quote:

Originally posted by hunt99:
Can anyone on the ground in Zim enlighten us on what is actually going on. It is beyond confusing with the 35%, 34%, 51% new math and various categories?????

All it really appears to say is that indigenization policies will continue to destroy the Save.

The way I read it is that the current ownership breakdown is:
35% Foreign-Owned
34% Currently Indigenous
31% White Zimbabwean-Owned (sic)
100%

and the new breakdown will be

35% Foreign-Owned
51% Indigenous
14% White Zimbabwean-Owned
100%

So 17% of the 31% white-Zim-owned land will be indigenized, leaving just 14% of the Save' in the hands of those who made it into what it is today (or once was and may someday be again).

Now that might not seem fair or just or reasonable, but there are a lot of black Zimbabweans who would probably argue that prior to colonization, Zimbabwe was 100% indigenized and the means and methods used to expropriate their land weren't exactly fair or just or reasonable.

Now y'all can piss and moan about it, but things are tough all over, and it will be up to the remaining white-Zim-owners, IN FULL COOPERATION with the post Mugabe government and local tribal leaders, to make the best of it.

Now some might think that history has shown that that will never work, that conditions will continue to deteriorate and that I'm fantasizing (or delusional) ... and some of them will even argue for a return to white-rule.

It is they who are delusional (amongst other things).

At least the Save still exists, and everyone involved wants it to continue on - as one of the world's premier hunting destinations and a model of sustainable-use - something that the whole world can look up to and learn from.

Hope springs eternal.

I do suggest that someone ask Nakihunter for his weighty views on this particular subject. The maths make no sense to me but they will no doubt be crystal clear to good ol' Naki.

SteveGI

If you think that the Save will be (in your words) " a world's premier hunting destinations and a model of sustainable-use" after five years of black ownership, you're not only delusional, you're barking bloody mad & completely doolally tat.

I'll give it no more than three years before it's completely & utterly destroyed.

That said, I could be wrong so perhaps you (or Naki or anyone else) can direct us to a single example anywhere in Africa where forced black ownership has been a success?

Some of us have been in the thick of it ..... others live in a dreamworld.
Keep dreaming!

The operators in the Save have obviously struck the best deal they can, and believe they can make it work. Who is to judge this from the outside?

That being said it IS instructive that it is OK to be a foreign land owner but not to be a white Zim landowner...how is that - for the Zim Govt. to blatantly admit that the land redistribution exercise is a direct attack on white Zimbabweans, not whites.

Good luck to all the real guys in the SAVE, we know who they are.

Like giving Indians Americas back.
That will make it fine country right?
Before white man entered Africa, lots of places were uninhabitated by Africans, Africans were taking land, lives and slaves from each other.
Then white man came to Africa, made it more hospitable and livable and for that white man has always been evil.
White man made mistake in a lot of places, because he didn't become majority.
I don't wanna sound like racist, but facts are facts and white man somehow is ahead of the game called civilization. He had longer run at this.
That being said, too bad black Africans have not learned.
Hopefully one day they will and then they will all be better off.
Right now without other continents financial aid, Africa would simply explode like a volcano.
Too bad for all this. Love the place and love to hunt there and the people on the ground there are wonderful. Their politicians should learn from ground up.

I also wish the real owners who have lost so much the best of luck & time will tell how it works out but let's not forget the new black 'shareholders' will either be already on the banned list or will be put on the banned list & it'd be unfair not to point out that the takeover will in turn possibly/almost certainly mean a Lacey Act violation for any Americans who hunt there.

Reading between the lines of the new "agreement" they are going to give National Parks a stake rather than individual politicos, which is a way better deal. I think and hope this is the case.

If I am right then it is probably the best outcome for the wildlife (and the original owners) that has yet happened in Zim since all the BS started.

And you guys will continue to have a great place to hunt with great people, lets hope!

quote:

That said, I could be wrong so perhaps you (or Naki or anyone else) can direct us to a single example anywhere in Africa where forced black ownership has been a success?

I am sure Nakihunter will guide us here and holds the solution to any problem that might raise his head, and also morally defend the move even there is not a single thread of evidence of success anywhere else.

I am sure Nakihunter will come in with authority, just like he knows the history of South Africa so intimately - in fact better than anyone of us South Africans.

Santa Claus

Boarkiller : One of the best posts ever made on this forum concerning indigenisation. Hopefully over time some resolution can come about that is in the best interest of all groups [including wildlife] doubtful but hopeful. I have been to Zim once and can say that my heart goes out the few white Zims left. Is it gonna change doubtful, it is right not a chance. The only difference in North America is that the natives are NOT the majority. Just remember that Canada and the U.S are just 2 or 3 generations of colonization different from Zim. Our ancestors left Europe to get away from oppression, loss of civil liberties and huge government : how many generations did it take to get back to the same thing! difference the only like me

People can put all the lipstick on the pig they want...but...at the end of the day...it is STILL A PIG.

Make no mistake about it..."indigenization" of the Save is NOT a positive thing and we should all keep our perspectives straight that it is NOT.

All this sh!t about Corey and old black rhino bull that needs culling...just watch how fast the last ones are alleviated from the Save with "indigenization"...there is where we could use some outrage...and media coverage...dam!

The intial post is a bit misleading. Basically 35 % is foreign owned and exempt from indigenisation ,34 % of the remaining properties have taken on some form of indigenous partner. The remaining 31 % of properties are required to take on 51% indigenous partnership. That 51% is made up of National Parks ,Communities and new farmers. There are discussions going on between the 3 parties on each one's shareholding. The old (white) farmers will now be 49% of their original properties. How it will all work is still under discussion. What is critical is that the original owners run the properties like they were .There is quite a lot of emphasis from the Minister of parks that white farmers are key in the success of the Save. All we can do is make the best of a bad situation. There is talk of linking the SVC with the trans fronteir nat park and also returning the previously invaded properties to the SVC which will hopefully boost the Save.

quote:

Originally posted by Neil Duckworth:
The intial post is a bit misleading. Basically 35 % is foreign owned and exempt from indigenisation ,34 % of the remaining properties have taken on some form of indigenous partner. The remaining 31 % of properties are required to take on 51% indigenous partnership. That 51% is made up of National Parks ,Communities and new farmers. There are discussions going on between the 3 parties on each one's shareholding. The old (white) farmers will now be 49% of their original properties. How it will all work is still under discussion. What is critical is that the original owners run the properties like they were .There is quite a lot of emphasis from the Minister of parks that white farmers are key in the success of the Save. All we can do is make the best of a bad situation. There is talk of linking the SVC with the trans fronteir nat park and also returning the previously invaded properties to the SVC which will hopefully boost the Save.

quote:

Originally posted by Neil Duckworth:
The intial post is a bit misleading. Basically 35 % is foreign owned and exempt from indigenisation ,34 % of the remaining properties have taken on some form of indigenous partner. The remaining 31 % of properties are required to take on 51% indigenous partnership. That 51% is made up of National Parks ,Communities and new farmers. There are discussions going on between the 3 parties on each one's shareholding. The old (white) farmers will now be 49% of their original properties. How it will all work is still under discussion. What is critical is that the original owners run the properties like they were .There is quite a lot of emphasis from the Minister of parks that white farmers are key in the success of the Save. All we can do is make the best of a bad situation. There is talk of linking the SVC with the trans fronteir nat park and also returning the previously invaded properties to the SVC which will hopefully boost the Save.

Hi Neil,
You probably don't remember me from Adam. But I sat in Chenjie camp with you a couple of nights in Chewore when you were just coming back from Mokore. It was the first week in June of 2006. I was hunting with Nigel Theisen and you were there visiting with James Rosenfels and spent the night as none were at the Duckworth camp but staff. You had just lost a tracker to an ele while hunting plains game in Mokore and had attempted to stop with a .30-06...I believe. Anyway...reminiscing.

The point I was trying to make was that for us tourist hunters...we should recognize "indigenization" as a BAD thing and not just shrug it off. Certainly...for you guys...you have to just make a plan. Hats off to the old Rhodesian families still hanging on. Big John Rosenfels and family have not faired as well.

Hello Neil,

As always, it was great seeing you & Gary at the show. Our best to you guys , to Shayle & Mel, and to your folks.

We are hoping that all that you & your familiy have done for the local tribespeople will be taken into consideration as all these new decisions are being made & sorted out.

All the very best, Joe & Ruth Lippincott

quote:

Originally posted by Neil Duckworth:
The intial post is a bit misleading. Basically 35 % is foreign owned and exempt from indigenisation ,34 % of the remaining properties have taken on some form of indigenous partner. The remaining 31 % of properties are required to take on 51% indigenous partnership. That 51% is made up of National Parks ,Communities and new farmers. There are discussions going on between the 3 parties on each one's shareholding. The old (white) farmers will now be 49% of their original properties. How it will all work is still under discussion. What is critical is that the original owners run the properties like they were .There is quite a lot of emphasis from the Minister of parks that white farmers are key in the success of the Save. All we can do is make the best of a bad situation. There is talk of linking the SVC with the trans fronteir nat park and also returning the previously invaded properties to the SVC which will hopefully boost the Save.

Neil, thanks for the clarification! This explains the strange math in the original story and hopefully those with a better understanding of the political gyrations in Zim can help keep the rest of us informed.

Thanks to all in the US for the moral support, we'll soldier on, you have to be resilient to survive in Africa..

http://www.swradioafrica.com/2...vancy-into-nat-park/


No plans to turn Save Valley Conservancy into Nat Park

Posted by Alex Bell on Tuesday, January 21, 2014 in Indigenisation, Tourism, Wildlife

Save Valley Conservancy
By Alex Bell
SW Radio Africa
21 January 2014

Authorities at the Save valley Conservancy have denied claims that plans are underway to turn the area into a national park, after reports quoted the new tourism minister as saying this was in the pipeline.

The Zimbabwe Independent last week quoted Minister Saviour Kasukuwere, the former Indigenisation Minister, as saying that negotiations with the Conservancy would result in the establishment of “a significant national park”.

“We are moving ahead to indigenise Save Valley Conservancy and this is going to lead to the creation of a significant national park. I will provide specifics later but you can rest assured that it will be indigenised,” said Kasukuwere.

The paper also quoted the Conservancy’s Vice Chairperson, Wilfried Pabst. as confirming this was going to happen. But Pabst told SW Radio Africa on Tuesday that the Zim Independent ‘misunderstood’.

“No, the Conservancy will not be turned into a national park. That’s not the idea. The Conservancy will stay the way it is,” Pabst said.

He explained that indigenisation negotiations are under way with the government, “but the details still need to be ironed out.”

Part of the proposals currently on the table include protection for foreign investors, whose land makes up an estimated 36% of the Conservancy. Pabst said that “no one is going to get involved in the Conservancy if it affects any foreign investors. Foreign investors are safe, as they should be.”

This is despite Zimbabwe’s indigenisation laws explicitly stating that foreign owned businesses are meant to hand over 51% of their shareholding to indigenous Zimbabweans.

Pabst, a German investor, said instead that the only section of the Conservancy that could face these requirements are the estimated 36% of properties where “there is a hodge-podge of white and black Zimbabweans owning and sharing properties.”

“I say these properties may be affected, because many of these properties are already indigenised, but the partners just need to be recognised,” Pabst said.

He explained that in the event that some properties are earmarked for indigenous takeover, the National Parks authority would seek out financially stable investors as the new partners. Pabst said that certain criteria will be met to ensure there is not any abuse of authority or any financial losses.

“If they (potential investors) have already received or invested in a farm in Zimbabwe then they won’t be considered. This means the gang of people in Masvingo who’ve been trying to jambanja the Conservancy, they won’t be considered,” Pabst said.

He added: “The other criteria is that if someone has created a property and infrastructure and reputation worth millions, it will have to be recognised and paid for.”

To contact this reporter email alex@swradioafrica.com or follow on Twitter

The 14% left better not get over confident either, these chimps just keep chipping away.