Your detailed and thorough post due by Wednesday@MIDNIGHT for full credit (A). Partial credit (C) can be earned by posting late, which is better than a ZERO.
Remember, weekly blogging is worth 1/3 of your entire semester grade.
Be sure to communicate with Dr. W as needed - rob.williams@madriver.com.
Read and blog
ECOTOURISM – WHO OWNS PARADISE?, Chapter 9 (South Africa: People and Parks
under Majority Rule)
1) THESIS: IYOW, post a single sentence that captures the thesis for EACH CHAPTER/ SECTION of our reading.
2) EVIDENCE: Post and number THREE specific observations from EACH CHAPTER/SECTION of our reading(s) that supports your thesis.
Use 2-3 sentences for each observation, and combine direct quotations from the text (AUTHOR's LAST NAME, 27), with IYOW analysis.
3) QUESTION: Include in your post a SINGLE SPECIFIC question you'd ask the class based on our readings.
Thesis: The apartheid is an extremely large aspect of South Africa’s tourism industry and has the ability to improve it or destroy it.
ReplyDeleteFact 1: “While Wilderness Safaris and CC Africa were among South Africa’s ecotourism pioneers in providing tangible benefits to host communities, today a growing number of South African tourism companies are involved in what is known globally as the Travelers’ Philanthropy movement” (Honey, 383). This wasn’t surprising to me that wilderness safaris are the biggest ecotourism pioneers because they’re so popular. Tourists want to see the animals when they’re visiting this part of the world.
Fact 2: “Ecotourism is playing a dual role in the new South Africa: helping to reintegrate South Africa into the world economy and helping to redress grievances and redistribute wealth to the country’s rural poor” (Honey, 390). I think it’s extremely important to be able to take the money from ecotourism and also help other places that need it specifically in that country because that can only improve other locations.
Fact 3: “South Africa’s system of national, provincial, and homeland parks has long been considered among the world’s best protected and most carefully tended” (Honey, 391). I think it’s great that they’re able to protect it so much and make sure that everything is preserves. I would hope with the amount of ecotourism in the future they’re able to keep it that way.
Question: Could the apartheid destroy or improve South Africa’s tourism industry?
Thesis: Ecotourism and tourism are becoming a larger part of South Africa’s economy but was created through aparthieds and at expense to the people.
ReplyDelete1. The chapter begins with discussing the creation of their largest national park, Kruger National Park.This park was supposed to be a great opportunity for tourism and for conservation. However, this took place during the apartheid, and the land at the time was owned by the Makuleke village. They burned down the village and dropped off the people on a barren piece of land that the country deemed unimportant enough to give the villagers. This quote describes what happened, “The men from this village of three thousand, who were off working in the gold mines and white-owned farms of apartheid-run South Africa, returned to find smoking ruins; they were told that their land had been incorporated into Kruger National park.” (Honey 345). This shows that even when things look like they are going well for a country and they are creating national parks, there is often times someone that had to sacrifice for that to happen.
2. After the apartheid ended South Africa wanted to embrace ecotourism and conservation. Game hunting had been the main source of money coming from ecotourism from the National Parks. The people, however, were not allowed to hunt in the parks, because it was conserved land. “Throughout the country, marginalized and impoverished communities on the edges of the parks demanded that parkland from which they had been evicted be returned to them; that they be given access to firewood, plants, grazing pastures, water, and other resources inside the parks, and that they get real economic benefit from tourism.” (Honey 351) The new ecotourism model no longer included game hunting and gave restitions to those who had been removed from their land land. They were no allowed to hunt and use the land for resources as long as they did not exploit it.
3. The ecotourism scorecard for South Africa is pretty high. “Ecotourism is playing a dual role in the new South Africa: helping to reintegrate South Africa into the world economy and helping to redress grievances and redistribute wealth to the country’s rural poor.” (Honey 390). This quote summarizes the main goals of ecotourism in South Africa. The tourism is mainly centered around trying to bring in tourists in order to have a better relationship with the world and fix the mistakes they made with their people. The Only flaw is that the tourism is very anthropocentric. Many of the goals of ecotourism in South Africa is to benefit people in some way. Most of their goals are not about protecting and bettering our planet.
Question: Is the country doing enough to right the wrongs they did their people?
Thesis: South Africa has faced many challenges and changes with the before and after of their apartheid, but they are actively trying to strengthen their ecotourism industry.
ReplyDelete1. “South Africa has built some of the world’s top scientifically managed, best-policed, most luxurious, least expensive, and most exclusive national parks” (348). While exclusivity is not a characteristic of a strong ecotourism destination, South Africa has done exceptionally well as maintaining and conserving their parks. However, most of their parks were initially formed by forcing the locals out of their homes and often into overcrowded communities or shantytowns.
2. “Following the elimination of apartheid, South Africa’s tourism attractions…have been opened and diversified in terms of race, national origin, and, to a degree, class” (354). The post-apartheid dedicated its efforts to reorganizing park operations, carrying out substantial land redistribution, and developing programs so that nearby people would benefit. Land reform programs benefited 6.6 million people, so the country did try to compensate for those who they displaced, though, it was not on the same level as the hurt they caused.
3. Certification programs have also been founded to give credibility to businesses that follow certain principles. South Africa’s Tourism Grading Council (TGCSA) is a quality assurance certification program awarding one to five stars based on internationally accepted criteria regarding facilities, amenities, and service. Fair Trade in Tourism South Africa (FTTSA) was launched in 2002 and is an independent NGO that wants to integrate fair trade principles (fair share, democracy, respect, reliability, transparency, and sustainability) into the country. This enables more transparency and knowledge for the travelers and country itself.
Questions: Is there a way to form a national park without forcing people out of their homes? What can be done to truly compensate for these people’s losses?
THESIS: Ecotourism in South Africa began on a foundation of apartheid and exploitation, and although there is still a long way to go, things are beginning to turn around, and locals are being offered more and more opportunity for involvement.
ReplyDelete1. South Africans were forced out of their homes to make room for more national park land with fires and other types of violence. This caused an understandable uprise of anger, which led to a decision by Nelson Mandela that they should be able to move back onto their land. However, they were forced to crowd not small spaces of land, and denied their right to hunt and fish. "It was only with the advent of colonial game reserves that indigenous Africans began to view wildlife with hostility" (Honey 350).
2. When Richard's Bay Minerals wanted to strip-mine the dunes of St. Lucia's game reserve, they attempted to get locals on board with promises of new jobs and the rebuilding of the dunes. "In 1993, the Campaign to Save St. Lucia collected some three hundred thousand signatures, including Nelson Mandela's, on petitions to stop the mining" (Honey 368). This attempted stripping of the dunes is yet another example of how South Africans have been taken advantage of and lied to about their land and what is happening to it.
3. As tourism and ecotourism progressed in South Africa, locals did start to be more involved, and more priority was placed on the wellbeing and incorporation of locals. "In South Africa today, local communities are involved in ecotourism in a number of ways. These range from entitlement to empowerment models and and from passive to more active engagement" (Honey 393). With a priority on using locally made goods, employing locals, and ensuring that tourism does not infringe on local rights, ecotourism in South Africa is progressing much better than it ever has in the past.
QUESTION: In every example of ecotourism we have read about there have been examples of indigenous exploitation in creating ecotourism opportunities. Is there a way to implement ecotourism without this exploitation?
Thesis: in spite of the positive beginnings of tourism in South Africa things have not gone the best for them in this field over the years, this is not to say they have no hope of improvement.
ReplyDelete1: The tourism industry has in many ways acted as a boon for the nation even if it is not perfect. “Ecotourism is playing a dual role in the new South Africa: helping to reintegrate South Africa into the world economy and helping to redress grievances and redistribute wealth to the country’s rural poor” (Honey, 390). this duel function is a great thing, but only when looked at in isolation from all the other things that have happened. When looked at alone one might thing the tourism industry has been nothing but good while in fact it fits into a much more gray area.
2: The establishment of national parks in south Africa did not go well. Practically no respect for the locals was given to the point that people were forced from their homes to make room for them. Needless to say this did not make people happy at all, it does not do to anger your population with the creation of things that are meant to help them. That kind of action can only lead to the people resisting further attempts to accomplish other things in the same vain even if they are more thought out. It was only with the advent of colonial game reserves that indigenous Africans began to view wildlife with hostility" (Honey 350).
3. When we look at the South African Ecotourism industry from just a conservation angle they have done quite a good job. The parks that can be found their are very well preserved. The problem starts when we try and take into account the local culture. As Ecotourism is both of these things it can not be said that the South African culture is doing a great job.
Question: Is there such a thing as ends justifying the means?
ECO goes BOOM!
ReplyDeletell posts below this line = C/LATE.
W
Thesis: Although the foundation on which South Africa’s tourism and ecotourism industries are built are questionable, they have put in the work to create a successful and responsible situation for both local people, the environment, and tourist operations.
ReplyDeleteEvidence #1: During the times of apartheid, the local Makuleke people were evicted from their lands and South Africa’s park system was built purely around the idea of pleasing white consumers, no matter the impact that mindset might have on the existing communities, culture, or ecosystems. “Invariably, the colonial state chose to protect wildlife instead of the local Africans. In times of drought or when water was scarce, Africans were forced to move out. “From 1948 [the year apartheid officially began],” recounted villager James Maluleke, “the park started bringing in lots of elephants. They [the authorities] said people are coming to see the animals so it is better that you move”” (Honey 350).
Evidence #2: “The new South Africa widely and innovatively embraced ecotourism, based largely around the game parks” (Honey 351). In post-apartheid South Africa, the new government focused on basically picking up the pieces from the mess the colonial rule had left behind. Their efforts were successful in starting to reverse the damage done to the local people under apartheid. “In South Africa, more than elsewhere, ecotourism is defined as synonymous with local community involvement, profit sharing, and empowerment through tourism projects and conservation programs….At the end of apartheid, the new government committed itself to reorganizing park operations, carrying out substantial land redistribution, and developing programs so that people on the periphery would begin to benefit from the parks and from tourism. Since then, the South African government undertook its land restitution program to provide a legal mechanism for equitably redistributing land to those who lost access to it through expropriation of land for parks, commercial agriculture, and other purposes during apartheid” (Honey 351-352). Even more than giving land back, the new South African government has worked to implement models and engagement opportunities to emphasize the local involvement of ecotourism. “More than other countries examined in this book, ecotourism in South Africa is grounded in the principle that it must involve and benefit local communities” (Honey 393).
Evidence #3: “Cohesive and vocal rural communities with clear sets of demands, strong leadership, and political skills learned through the struggle against apartheid” (Honey 384). South Africa is the prime example (that I’ve seen so far) of the difference an admittance of wrongdoing, working to fix what had been broken, and understanding the wants and desires of all parties involved can make in developing responsible and genuine ecotourism.
Question: If the post-apartheid government had turned the land and resources back to the original occupants as it had been desired, what would that have meant for conservation efforts and ecotourism going forward?
Thesis: South Africa has had a very rough past. The future is looking brighter for South Africa than in many other nation, much to the hope of ecotourists everywhere, maybe we will see this nation pioneer a lot of ecotourist programs for the rest of sub-saharan Africa.
ReplyDelete1) “South Africa’s parks and reserves were created as an emergency response to the decimation of wildlife that began as European settlers ceased and fenced land for ranches, agriculture, mines, and towns,” (Honey, 349) Why is this not at all surprising. I wonder if us white folk are ever going to understand the latent hypocrisy in almost everything we do, especially when considering international cultures or nations. 200 years ago we were destroying the exact thing that bring us there now. Not to mention, South African whites are historically, some of the worst people to have walked the earth. At least some slivers of good came from all of that evil.
2) “without public support and revenue from visitors, the Park’s future was severely limited, if not doomed,” (Honey, 355) You know, maybe if they didn’t horribly oppress two-thirds of their population both socially and economically, they could almost have internal tourism that would help stimulate the economy. Too bad they are a bunch of racist twits. Seriously though if we could see the native South African population increase their homes and economic situation, they could then visit in-nation parks, help provide for conservation either via work, donations or taxes. Instead they have an extreme reliance on other nations to support themselves, and still most of that money never goes to the hundreds of thousands of people who live in the shanty towns.
3) “The international trade, travel, and investment boycott of a partied South Africa helped end white rule. This represents the best example to date of how tourists can play a constructive role in assisting popular democratic struggles,” (Honey, 394) This cuts right through a lot of the cynicism that I was pushing earlier on in this chapter. I can’t help it, I really hate a lot of things about white South Africans. It’s not good, but I’m somewhat racist towards them. I’m trying to change that. Anyways, I do see ecotourism as a global force for change in a lot of growing nations, hopefully only for good though. I think that it is one of the easier ways for a nation to take a hard look at its own shortcomings, and forces it to look at solutions.
Question: Do we owe it to nations such as South Africa to visit and see how they have improved over the years? Shouldn’t we visit sites of contention to learn about past mistakes and how to create future successes?