KwaZulu/Natal’s People and Parks conference was a new=20 milestone in conservation policy, reports Ann Eveleth
THE future of game reserves in KwaZulu/Natal will de-pend=20 on how the question of land reform is resolved in that=20 province. This was the central issue to emerge from a=20 landmark conference about conservation and community=20 development held in Durban this month.
For many communities living on the fringes of nature=20 reserves, the prospect of benefiting from conservation=20 marks a turning point. Long forced to contend with mere=20 crumbs from nature’s cornucopia, the communities are=20 looking to the new South Africa to restore their ancient=20 reciprocal relationship with the environment.
Official recognition of this relationship underpinned the=20 recent People and Parks conference in the Kwa-Zulu/Natal=20 Midlands, aimed at “Afri-canising” conservation policy in=20 the province.
“Historically, whites have regarded the African landscape=20 as an Eden needing European protection from the=20 depredations of blacks,” Rams Rammutla, communications=20 director of the National Parks Board, told the more than=20 100 delegates, ranging from parks authorities to community=20
“This is a most surprising point of view when one considers=20 that, before white settlement, our subcontinent — indeed,=20 the continent — abounded with an enormous variety of=20 wildlife species as well as pristine wilderness.”
George Hughes from the Natal Parks Board echoed the view,=20 adding that the “cash economies brought by the white=20 settlers” were responsible for the disappearance of=20 wildlife from the province’s hinterland.
Describing the “principle breakdown in apartheid=20 conservation” as its “neglect of the human factor”,=20 Rammutla said anger over forced removals, combined with “a=20 lack of access to parks, a lack of employment opportunities=20 in parks, and the paramilitary and over-zealously vigilant=20 attitude on the part of the parks authorities”, had=20 alienated people from nature conservation.
In what he described as “a milestone conference”, delegates=20 from several communities aired their grievances to parks=20 authorities and conservationists, and together the=20 stakeholders outlined some far-reaching proposals for the=20 future of conservation and ecotourism.
Central to these proposals was a call for the restructuring=20 of conservation authorities through the formation of=20 district, provincial and national councils, with each=20 council bearing representatives from all stakeholders.
District councils would be formed along Reconstruction and=20 Development Programme demarcations. They would comprise=20 parks authorities and local community representatives.
Delegates also called for the drafting of a new legal=20 framework governing parks and conservation.
But the most persistent question asked by communities was:=20 “Whose land is it anyway?”=20
Rammutla chided middle-class whites, who seemed to think=20 conservation was “non-political. Nature conservation=20 requires land. Land is a vital natural resource and its=20 allocation is firmly embedded within the political arena,”=20 he said.
With land claims emanating from local communities,=20 traditional leaders, the provincial government, and many=20 other stakeholder, delegates agreed that settling=20 outstanding questions of land ownership through the land=20 restitution and redistribution process was a fundamental=20 requirement for repairing the relationship between people=20 and parks. =20
Conference chairman Lawrence Schlemmer said the main issue=20 was clear: “People want a share of the money generated by=20
Schlemmer warned, however, against unrealistic=20 expectations: “Ecotourism cannot undo three centuries of=20 colonialism. It does not generate enough money.”
Conference delegates argued that communities must be=20 empowered to obtain greater benefits from eco-tourism than=20 simply acquiring jobs as cooks and cleaners for private=20 enterprises on the parks’ peripheries. Parks and the=20 government need to initiate capacity-building programmes to=20 enable more people to benefit from local eco-tourism=20
Community representatives added that Parks infrastructure=20 must be extended to benefit the surrounding communities.
As Ndlaza pointed out: “Even if a local person has work in=20 a camp inside the reserve, he can drink fresh water there,=20 but when he goes home, he has only raw water to drink. You=20 find people with guns looking after the game inside the=20 parks, while people outside are dying from crime and=20 violence, but there are no police”.
Ndlaza said ecotourism in this context involved a kind of=20 “staged authenticity”: “If a person visits the beach in=20 Durban, he will say what a beautiful place it is. But he=20 hasn’t seen the shacks. The same is true of the parks.”
19