Interesting survey. Will the non-consumptive wildlife tourists (aka - ecotourists) surveyed be willing to pay additional anti-poaching fees to protect South Africa's flora and fauna?

***
Lowvelder (September 18, 2017)

Survey on anti-poaching fee for parks concluded

MBOMBELA – A survey among SANParks visitors, as to whether they would be willing to pay an additional anti-poaching fee for visiting national parks, was recently concluded by the SANParks Tourism Research Unit. Ike Phaahla, media specialist of the organisation, confirmed that the survey received 5 000 responses.

The study was conducted with SANParks clients only. According to the hosting website (www.surveymonkey.com), the survey has now been concluded. Phaahla said the research unit embarked on this initiative to gauge the response of overnight visitors and Wild Card members to the suggestion for such a levy. Members of a private forum who lobby to “keep conservation areas pure, natural and green” aired concerns about such a levy, foreigners alleging that the wild card for them “is already terribly expensive, with an extra on top being just too much”.

Some stated that they already stay outside the park because the accommodations have become too expensive, and that they would not be able to visit the parks if they had to pay another levy. Phaahla emphasised that there is a lot of pressure on SANParks due to criminal elements plundering natural resources including the elephant and rhino – two of the Big 5 animals that drive tourism and are important to the ecosystem.

“The costs of anti-poaching to SANParks have increased by 334 per cent since 2008, which is not sustainable, hence the suggestion by the unit,” he said. Phaahla stated that the results will be collated and whatever decision the SANParks board and executive team take will be communicated. “SANParks will communicate the results of the survey in due time, and will share whatever decision has been taken by the board and the executive committee.”
***

Not surprising at all. It's sooo much easier to tell people what to do than to actually do the heavy lifting. Case in point - the anti-hunting crew have no concept or appetite to fund the costs necessary to replace the conservation benefits, revenues, jobs and food supply associated trophy hunting. And tourism and photographic safaris do not begin to make up for the many financial benefits associated with trophy hunting.

Well, we have some off the cuff statements, but what were the results of the survey? Did I miss them somewhere?

The net, net is, the majority of park visitors do not want to pay more in order to protect wildlife.

Shocker.

And what folks say they would theoretically pay vs what they will actually pay are two different things as well.

I am surprised this has not been a mandatory charge before. Perhaps it should be marketed as security patrols for the safety of the greenies

Give it to private sector and let outfits like Hemmersbach, (which is already operational in the Kruger, BTW) Chengeta, IAPF, &c. source the funding. Levies collected by governments in Africa never go where they are meant to. Or they fund the activists' agendas.