park management plan marakele park management plan - SANParks

This plan was prepared byDr Stefanie Freitag-Ronaldson, Charles Trenneryand Fhatuwani Hendrick Mugwabanawith significant inputs and help from Dr Harry Biggs, Dr Rina Grant Biggs,Llewellyn Foxcroft, Navashni Govender, Dr Holger Eckhardt, Jacques Venter, DrAndrew Deacon, Hendrik Sithole, Nick Zambatis, Dr Ian Whyte, Dr Mike Knight,Dr Stephen Holness, Antionet van Wyk, Edgar Nevuvhalani, Arrie Schreiber,Angela Gaylard, André Spies, Sibongile Masuku Van Damme.M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N3

This management plan is hereby internally accepted and authorised as the legal requirement formanaging Marakele National Park as stated in the Protected Areas Act.DATE: 31 MARCH 2008AUTHORISATION______________________________Fhatuwani Hendrick MugwabanaPark Manager – Marakele National Park______________________________M MagakgalaRegional Manager – Northern Region______________________________Paul DaphneExecutive Director Parks______________________________Sydney SoundyChief Operating Officer______________________________Dr David MabundaChief ExecutiveRecommended to SANParks BoardName: _____________________________ Date: __________Ms Cheryl CaroulusChairperson – SANParks BoardRecommended to the Department of Environmental Affairs and TourismM A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A NName: _____________________________ Date: ___________Mr Marthinus van SchalkwykMinister – Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism4 5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYMarakele is one of the younger national parks in South Africa, initiated in 1986,proclaimed in 1994 as Kransberg National Park and expanded over the years fromthis core area to the current proclaimed area of some 90 000 ha and it is still in aphase of considerable expansion. The most important existing contractual agreementincludes Marakele Park (Pty) Ltd with respect to some 15 753 ha. FloristicallyMarakele is exceptionally rich, with representatives typical of fynbos, forest andKalahari systems. A rich diversity of plant species as well as plant communities andhabitats give Marakele a high conservation value and it lies on the edge of theSANBI delineated central bushveld biodiversity hotspot.The broad-level desired state of Marakele National Park has been set in conjunctionwith stakeholders in an explicit and focused way, highlighting key objectiveswhich need attention in the next 5 year management cycle. The desired state ofMarakele is based on a jointly agreed-upon vision and mission, vital attributes andhigh level objectives, developed in conjunction with stakeholders through theadaptive planning process. It is primarily set around biodiversity conservation andcooperative governance foci with a suite of thresholds, defining acceptable endpointsor envelopes around the biophysical desired state, for monitoring performancerelative to the desired state.Some aspects of the desired state are still open-ended, requiring longer-termstrategic decisions within the context of cooperative governance, as well as withinSANParks’ core values, for example evaluation of alternative tourism and developmentmodels as well as boundary and large mammal herbivory scenarios.Gaining an understanding of vegetation communities, their interactions with herbivory,especially elephant utilisation, and ongoing baseline inventorisation andunderstanding of biodiversity heterogeneity patterns, processes and functions arepriorities. It is recognised that in this park it is essential to engage all partners andkey stakeholders and build the sustaining trusting cooperation that is so essentialfor the long-term success of Marakele.Park consolidation and expansion requires ongoingefforts backed by broad-scale constituency building andcooperative governance to enhance understanding andbuy-in for longer-term goals. This will be greatly facilitatedby making very explicit the variety of ecosystemgoods and services that the park can and will deliver tostakeholders. Hand-in-hand with these efforts are thereal need to address socio-political threats, especiallythrough ongoing conflict around elephant and predatormanagement options. Additional threats requiringattention are the impacts of rampant development inthis region on the wilderness character and sense ofplace within and around the park as well as cultural heritageaspects.Given the desired state, the cross-links and priorities, thebroad costing for the five-year drive towards achievingthe desired state outlines both existing and projectedbudgets and costs. This costing includes all resources(but excludes research facilitation costs which are internalisedelsewhere in the organisation) believed to berequired to achieve realistic progress towards thedesired state. The fact that the resources required arehigher than historically allocated to Marakele NationalPark is the result of this report having made explicit whatis actually required to achieve that. Development of asmall but effective research facility will also greatlyenhance the potential of Marakele to attract muchneededresearch and monitoring partners.M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N89

National DecisionMaking ContextPark DecisionMaking ContextStrategic ReviewMonitorProcess overviewNational & International LegislationSANParks Strategic FrameworkVision, Policies, Values, Objectives, Norms,Standards, IndicatorsProtected Area PolicyFrameworkPark Desired State5-Year CycleAdaptiveManagement ReviewSouth African National Parks (SANParks) has adopted an overarching park managementstrategy that focuses on developing, together with stakeholders, andthen managing towards a ‘desired state’ for a National Park. The setting of a parkdesired state is done through the adaptive planning process (Rogers 2003). Theterm ‘desired state’ is now entrenched in the literature, but it is important to notethat this rather refers to a ‘desired set of varying conditions’ rather than a staticstate. This is reinforced in the SANParks biodiversity values (SANParks 2006) whichaccept that change in a system is ongoing and desirable. Importantly, a desiredstate for a park is also not based on a static vision, but rather seeks refinementthough ongoing learning and continuous reflection and appropriate adaptationthrough explicit adoption of the Strategic Adaptive Management approach.The ‘desired state’ of a park is the parks’ longer-term vision (30-50 years) translatedinto sensible and appropriate objectives though broad statements of desiredoutcomes. These objectives areAnnual CycleImplementationand OperationsOVERVIEW OF THE SANPARKSMANAGEMENT PLANNING PROCESSPark Management PlanAnnual Operations Planderived from a park’s keyattributes, opportunities andthreats and are informed by thecontext (international, nationaland local) which jointly determineand inform managementstrategies, programmes andprojects. Objectives for nationalparks were further developedby aligning withSANParks corporate strategicobjectives, but defining themin a local context in conjunctionwith key stakeholders. Theseobjectives are clustered orgrouped into an objectiveshierarchy that provides theframework for the ParkManagement Plan. Within thisdocument only the higher levelobjectives are presented.However, more detailed objectives,down to the level ofoperational goals, have been(or where necessary are currently being) further developedin conjunction with key stakeholders and specialists.This approach to the management of a National Park isin line with the requirements of the NationalEnvironment Management: Protected Areas Act No. 57of 2003 (NEM: PAA). Overall the Park Management Planforms part of a National Planning framework for protectedareas as outlined in the figure on the left.Park Management Plans were not formulated in isolationof National legislation and policies. Management planscomply with related national legislation such as theNational Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act,national SANParks policy and international conventionsthat have been signed and ratified by the South AfricanGovernment.Coordinated Policy Framework Governing ParkManagement PlansThe SANParks Coordinated Policy Framework providesthe overall framework to which all Park ManagementPlans align. This policy sets out the ecological, economic,technological, social and political environments ofnational parks at the highest level. In accordance withthe NEM: Protected Areas Act, the Coordinated PolicyFramework is open to regular review by the public toensure that it continues to reflect the organisation’s mandate,current societal values and new scientific knowledgewith respect to protected area management. Thisdocument is available on the SANParks website.Key functions of Park Management PlansThe key functions of this management plan are to:• ensure that the Park is managed according to thereason it was declared.• be a tool to guide management of a protected areaat all levels, from the basic operational level to theMinister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism;• be a tool which enables the evaluation of progressagainst set objectives.• be a document which can be used to set up key performanceindicators for Park staff.• set the intent of the Park, and provide explicit evidencefor the financial support required for the Park.This Management Plan for Marakele National Parkcomprises four broad sections1. The background to and outline of the desired state ofthe Park and how this was determined.2. A summary of the management strategies, programmesand projects that are required to movetowards achieving the desired state (obviously thesestrategies, programmes and projects can extend overmany years but here we present the managementfocus until 2010).3. An outline of the Strategic Adaptive Managementmethodology and strategies that will ensure that thePark undertakes an adaptive approach to management.It focuses park management on those criticalstrategic issues, their prioritisation, operationalisationand integration, and reflection on achievementsto ensure that the longer-term desired state isreached.4. Presentation of a high level budget.M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A NFigure 1: Protected Areas planning framework1011

1. BACKGROUND TO AND FORMULATION OF THE DESIRED STATE FOR THE PARKThis section deals with the setting of a park desired state through the adaptiveplanning process (Rogers 2003), from the general to the specific, focusing onunique attributes of Marakele National Park. In the case of Marakele National Park,this was done entirely in conjunction with stakeholders and contractual partners.Invitation letters were sent to all major stakeholders and there were advertisementsin the local newspapers. The turnout was very good with representationfrom the Farmers Association, surrounding lodges, The Department of Agriculture,Economic Development & Environment as well as District and Local Municipalitiesthroughout the process.The term ‘desired state’ is now entrenched in the literature, but it is important tonote that this rather refers to a ‘desired set of varying conditions’ rather than astatic state. This is reinforced in the SANParks biodiversity values (SANParks 2006)which accept that change in a system is ongoing and desirable.1.1 The fundamental decision-making environmentThe three pillars of the decision-making environment are seen as the vision statement,the context, and thirdly, the values and operating principles. Althoughderived through a process, the mission is stated upfront, but much of the supportingmaterial which helped form it is captured under other headings further downthe document. As mentioned above, much of sections 1.1 and 1.2 were derivedthrough stakeholder engagement using the adaptive planning approach, and thusreflect a shared desired state derived jointly by integrating stakeholders’ desiresand SANParks’ mandate. This has resulted in a change in the vision for the park(from that historically derived by SANParks) and a suite of jointly agreed-upon highlevel objectives for this park. The expansion of these high level ideas were presentedas part of an integrated proposal of a management plan at a public meetingheld in terms of the NEM: Protected Areas Act on 4 September 2006.1.1.1 MissionINTRODUCTIONThe concept of an overarching vision for the broad cooperative governance spectrum(predominantly within the Waterberg Biosphere Reserve) emerged throughthe stakeholder workshops as one which will be crucial for the success of MarakeleNational Park within this regional context. Jointly, it was agreed that “we are proudstakeholders in the Waterberg Biosphere Reserve, with Marakele National Park asa “jewel in the crown”. The Waterberg Biosphere Reserve is a preferred adventureeco-tourism destination rooted in inclusive and honourable public/private partnerships.As partners we promote community participation and empowerment to bal-ance economic and social development with conservationof our ecological and cultural heritage”.Nestled within this broad context, the mission forMarakele National Park (SANParks) in the partnership isarticulated as “we promote the wise, efficient and integratedmanagement of the biodiversity « of Marakele tomaintain, or repair, a wilderness character, and associatedbenefits to regional economic, social and educationaldevelopment.”SANParks recognises the need to balance the biodiversityand wilderness aspects of this park with the opportunitiesthat it presents for stimulating regional developmentand that this must all be effected through inclusive andhonourable cooperative governance approaches.« Biodiversity refers to the species diversity, habitat (structural)diversity and diversity of ecosystem processes.1.1.2 ContextThe range of values as well as social, technological ecological,economic, legal and political facts, conditions,causes and surroundings that define the circumstancesrelevant to Marakele National Park provide the “context”for decisions and are therefore important elements of anydecision making environment. These contextual issues arebroadly outlined below.1.1.2.1 Location and BoundariesTable 1: Private land included, by proclamation, into the national park by written permission of the landownerMarakele National Park is situated in the LimpopoProvince, roughly 15 km northeast of Thabazimbibetween latitudes 24 o 15’ and 24 o 32’ south and longitudes27 o 30’ and 27 o 40’ east. The park lies on theextreme south-western quadrant of the Waterberg massifand its adjoining lowlands to the west ((Map 1 – presentedin Appendix of Maps). The Kwaggasvlakte section ofthe park is currently disconnected from the main area ofthe park by the provincial Hoopdal road. Marakele is situatedin an area made famous by the works of poet andauthor Eugene Marais. There are a number of contractuallyincluded parcels of land which contribute to achievingthe vision and overall desired state of this national park asoutlined in Table 1 below.Marakele National Park falls under the Waterberg DistrictMunicipality and covers three local municipalities, namelyThabazimbi, Lephalale and Modimolle Municipalities.Marakele National Park is linked to the Waterberg DistrictMunicipality’s integrated development plan and all projectsare submitted to the municipality.The park’s airspace is regulated by Section 47 of theProtected Areas Act as 2500 ft (762 meters) above thehighest point (1800 meters on Marakele). Currently thereis only 1 helicopter landing pad available and in use onZandspruit.TITLE DEED FARM PORTION EXTENT OWNER SECTION GG PROCLA PERIOD RESTRICTIONSNODATET21440/2001 Remainder Portion 0 67.9290 CCG108 2B(1)(b) 22335 2001/05/29of Hoopdaal 96T21441/2001 Hoopdaal 96 Portion 6 42.8266 CCG108 2B(1)(b) 22335 2001/05/29T21441/2001 Hoopdaal 96 Portion 7 192.2528 CCG108 2B(1)(b) 22335 2001/05/29T21440/2001 Hoopdaal 96 Portion 11 222.6003 CCG108 2B(1)(b) 22335 2001/05/29T96214/1999 Diamant 228 Portion 19 1284.7980 CCG108 2B(1)(b) 22335 2001/05/29T4635/2001 Klipdrift 231 Portion 2 873.6626 CCG108 2B(1)(b) 22335 2001/05/29T96214/1999 Klipdrift 231 Portion 3 873.6626 CCG108 2B(1)(b) 22335 2001/05/29T96214/1999 Klipdrift 231 Portion 4 873.6626 CCG108 2B(1)(b) 22335 2001/05/29T96214/1999 Klipdrift 231 Portion 5 873.6626 CCG108 2B(1)(b) 22335 2001/05/29T4806/2001 Retseh 594 Portion 0 878.9510 CCG108 2B(1)(b) 22335 2001/05/29T3295/2001 Remainder Portion 0 1708.0761 CCG108 2B(1)(b) 22335 2001/05/29of Waterval 267T30444/2001 Remainder of Portion 0 1997.5010 CCG108 2B(1)(b) 22492 2001/07/27 30 yearsBuffelspoort 265T41029/1994 Vygeboom- Portion 4 534.4720 Aapiesrivier- 2B(1)(b) 16527 1995/07/14fontein 239park CCT74496/1991 Waterval 267 Portion 1 1713.0640 NPT of SA 2B(1)(b) 25562 2003/10/17T74496/1991 Jagtersrus 418 Portion 0 1000.0000 NPT of SA 2B(1)(b) 25562 2003/10/1750 years from14 July 1995and shall contimuethereafteruntil terminatedby 6months notice99 years from17 October2003 with anoption torenew for further25 yearDevelopmentby the ownerNoneM A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N1213

this is reflected in the regional Integrated Development Plan that is focussed ontourism, agriculture and mining. The levels of unemployment within the urbanisedcommunities in the Thabazimbi Municipal Area are relatively high (Table 1).Particularly high unemployment and low income levels are found in Regorogile,with many of the youth not attending school. There are also a number of farmbasedworkers with varying levels of employment and literacy. This poor previouslydisadvantaged community contrasts sharply with other stakeholders.The mining sector plays a major role in job creation and has been the major economicengine of this region. Much hope is centred on the emerging biospherereserve concept (the Waterberg Biosphere Reserve is registered with UNESCO)and recent developments and upswings in nature-based tourism opportunities(including ecotourism and hunting) as an alternate long-term socio-economic driverwithin the region. This is evidenced by both the many and varied existing agreementsbetween parties as well as by the diversity of tourism infrastructure externalto the park which caters for the upper and lower income eco-tourist market,although there is much less available for middle income tourists.1.1.2.6 International and national contextAs in all parks, a wide range of national legislation is relevant to Marakele NationalPark. Areas of high relevance in the case of Marakele include biodiversity and culturalheritage legislation. Marakele’s situation and contribution to the UNESCOregisteredWaterberg Biosphere Reserve forms an important component of theinternational context for this park.Table 2: Immediate Community Analysis (taken from STATS SA data from the last national census)Community Population No of households % households % female headed % unemployed personswith income households with over the age of 18 years< R600 p/m income < R600 p/mThabazimbi 4 416 1 323 29,2% 15,3% 23,6%Regorogile 7 605 2 299 45,5% 21,4% 33,8%1.1.3 Values and Operating PrinciplesOur values are the principles we use to evaluate the consequencesof actions (or inaction), to propose and choosebetween alternative options and decisions. Values maybe held by individuals, communities, organisations oreven society and the values articulated below reflect thevalues of the individuals in the Marakele stakeholdergroup, including SANParks and the contractual partners.• We have mutual respect for cultural, economic andenvironmental differences within and across theregional spectrum of cooperation and agreements.• Recognising that ecosystems and biodiversity arecomplex, and that we will seldom have all the informationwe want to make decisions, we adopt a ‘learningby doing’ approach to their management.• We have a culture of honesty, cooperative sharing ofexpertise, and of empowerment and advancement ofall parties.• Clear definition of each stakeholder group’s expectations,and how we balance the distribution of costsand benefits, helps us avoid conflict.• We keep our expectations and the distribution ofcosts and benefits within the cooperative governancerelationships explicit, transparent and within biodiversityconstraints.These should be read in conjunction with the SANParks’overarching conservation values, namely that we:• Respect the complexity, as well as the richness anddiversity of the socio-ecological systems making upeach national park and the wider landscape and context;respect the interdependency of the formativeelements, the associated biotic and landscape diversity,and the aesthetic, cultural, educational and spiritualattributes and leverage all these for creative anduseful learning.• Strive to maintain natural processes in ecosystems,along with the uniqueness, authenticity and worth ofcultural heritage, so that these systems and their elementscan be resilient and hence persist.• Manage with humility the systems under our custodianship,recognising and influencing the wider socioecologicalcontext in which we are embedded.• Strive to maintain a healthy flow of ecosystem andcultural goods and services (specifically preservingcultural artefacts), and to make these available, alsothrough access to national parks, thereby promotingenjoyment, appreciation and other benefits for people.• When necessary, intervene in a responsible and sustainablemanner, complementing natural processes asfar as possible, using only the level of interferenceneeded to achieve our mandate.• Do all the above in such a way as to preserve alloptions for future generations, while also recognizingthat systems change over time.• Acknowledge that conversion of some natural andcultural capital has to take place for the purpose ofsustaining our mandate, but that this should nevererode the core values above.• More detail about the above and listings of othermore generic corporate SANParks values and operatingprinciples, as well as a list of generic policies, areavailable (SANParks 2006).1.2 Vital attributes underpinning the valueproposition of the parkThe following vital attributes (i.e. the few most importantcharacteristics/properties of the system to be managed;these may be social, technical, ecological, economicand/or political) have been identified, together withstakeholders, as making this park unique, or at least veryspecial in its class. Important determinants and threatshave also been identified. Determinants are those factorsor processes that determine, strengthen or ensure persistencewhile threats are those factors or processes thatthreaten, erode or inhibit these attributes or their determinants.Threats can also be factors within, or outside, apartnership that undermine its values and inhibit the pursuitof the mission or future desired state.This information helps focus the exact formulation of parkobjectives, which must strengthen positive determinantsand weaken or remove threats, so that objectives areappropriate to the uniqueness and special nature of thisnational park. In this way the management plan is customizedin its fullest local extent, without detracting fromsome of its more generic functions. These vital attributeshelp us develop the real value proposition of the park.Vital attributes of Marakele National Park:• There is a diversity of stakeholders, each of whichbrings knowledge and expertise to the cooperationbut SANParks is recognised as being able to provideparticular skills in conservation and tourism.• Marakele is an important element of the IUCN-recognisedWaterberg Biosphere Reserve and falls within aSouth African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI)recognised biodiversity hotspot.• Eco-tourism provides a long term economic option inthe region. There is currently a good diversity ofadventure tourism activities and infrastructure in theregion based on both cultural (pioneer country) andresource (wildlife and outdoor) markets.• The mountain massif provides a large altitudinalrange, a wide-open-space visual aesthetic and associatedbiodiversity within a short distance. Many headwaterstreams arise within the park.M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N1617

• Vital biodiversity attributes include the vulture breeding colonies, cycads, anda very wide range of vegetation types from Kalahari bushveld in the lowlands,to fynbos elements on the mountain.• The area is malaria and bilharzia free and located near a large regional market(Gauteng).Key determinants of these vital attributes:• A local topography that presents a spectacular and undeveloped massif.• High ecological integrity of the diverse landscapes and vegetation types.• A regional land use that is highly compatible with biodiversity and NationalProtected Area conservation.• Good tourist flow from regional, national and international sources.• The core conservation area is a declared National Park and is within a SANBIrecognised biodiversity hot spot.Key threats to Marakele vital attributes and determinants:• There is currently a low level of trust among stakeholders and partners andlines of communication, accountability and decision-making between these arepoor.• There are currently no established ‘rules of the game’ for the spectrum ofcooperation and agreements.• There is no clear, agreed upon economic model for either the MarakeleNational Park, or Waterberg Biosphere Reserve, making it difficult to assess theeconomic viability of the park or potential tourism products.• Development within Marakele and it surroundings is currently proceeding withoutproper guidelines. Regional guidelines are being developed but must stillbe implemented.• Marakele does not currently seem to be delivering to tourist expectations, particularlyin respect of being a ‘big five’ park. Poor roads also contribute totourist dissatisfaction.• There is no clear strategy for conservation of Marakele itself, or for its role inthe Greater Marakele Region. It is therefore difficult to (1) judge the biodiversityconstraints for development, (2) provide the basis for effective biodiversitymanagement (including management of elephant and predator populationsand alien species), and (3) define cost/benefit relationships of resource sharingamong partners and collaborators.• The possible expansion of mining activities along the southern park boundaryconstitutes a significant threat, especially to the ambience of the park and surrounds.1.3 Setting the details of the desired state forMarakele National ParkThe desired state is based on a collectively developedvision of a set of desired future conditions (that are necessarilyvarying), integrating ecological, socio-economic,technological, political and institutional perspectiveswithin a geographical framework. The vision (within contextand values), vital attributes of Marakele and objectives(which are aimed at overcoming threats to ensurethe persistence of vital attributes and/or their determinantsfor this national park), together with the thresholdsof potential concern (TPCs) and the zonation plan togethermake up the desired state of Marakele National ParkIn the adaptive management of ongoing change in socioecologicalsystems, thresholds of concern are the upperand/or lower limits of flux allowed, literally specifying theboundaries of the desired state. TPCs specify the measurable“boundaries” of the desired state, flowing out ofthe objectives developed for the park. If monitoring (orbetter still monitoring in combination with predictivemodeling) indicates certain or very likely exceedancesbeyond these limits, then mandatory managementoptions of the adaptive cycle are prompted for evaluationand consideration.The park’s Conservation Development Framework (whichincludes a zonation plan) details the spatial targets andconstraints through specification of strategic land useintent for the Marakele National Park for the next 20-30years. However, for Marakele, a comprehensive spatiallybasedregionally-embedded framework, which includesmultiple scales of detail still needs to be pulled together,and this full CDF will be available at the first iteration ofthis plan in 5 years time.1.3.1 An objectives hierarchy for Marakele National ParkUsing the Marakele mission, context and values, andbearing in mind particularly the vital attributes (all ofwhich were articulated jointly with stakeholders), the followingset of park objectives have been determined,which together with the specific articulated thresholds ofpotential concern and zonation plan outline the broadambit of the desired state of the park.Figure 2: Desired state articulation (components shown in orange blocks) within the overall strategic adaptive management frameworkas embraced by SANParks.M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N18 19

Outlined below (Figures 3a and 3b) are the first two high-level tiers of the objectiveshierarchy developed for Marakele. In order for Marakele to move towardsrealising it’s jointly agreed-upon mission, there will need to be particular attentiongiven to the development and nurturing of a relationship based on trust and equitableempowerment across the full cooperative governance spectrum within andaround this park. There will need to be a concerted biodiversity conservationeffort, underpinned by the location of Marakele within a national biodiversity priorityarea, with specific attention being paid to ecosystem processes. Furthermore,in order to maintain the unique and dwindling wilderness resource, park managementmust focus on both influencing and instituting appropriate economic modelsand development around and within the park. Such an approach is necessitatedto both service the broader aims of the Waterberg Biosphere Reserve as wellas the national custodianship mandate of SANParks and Marakele itself. Furtherdetails can be found in Appendix 1.1.3.2 Thresholds of concern and other exact conservation targetsAs suggested above, thresholds of potential concern (TPCs) are the upper and/orlower limits of ecosystem flux allowed, literally specifying the boundaries of thedesired state. Considering the biophysical objectives stated in Figures 3a and 3babove and the detail in Supporting Document 1, the following TPCs are provisionallytabled for Marakele National Park:a. Vegetation composition TPCs – These will be set for indicator plant species inthe mountain sourveld area, specifically for species that would indicate whenthese areas are changing at unacceptable rates. These TPCs are proposedsince this is a unique landscape, and broad community changes may not besensitive enough to indicate unacceptable increased levels of utilisation.b. Woody structure/abundance and herbaceous cover TPCs - Over time, as thevegetation adjusts to impacts of herbivory (from which it had effectively beenprotected for decades), a change in the dominant species could be included asa TPC. Nevertheless, TPCs should not be too conservative, and should allowvariation between impact tolerant and intolerant communities, and be measuredacross multiple scales.Figure 3(a): An objectives hierarchy for Marakele National Park – the mission and highest level objectives.M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N20 21

c. Herbivore TPCs - These TPCs are recommended as starting points until suchtime as generated understanding suggests a need for amendment. These initialTPCs reflect on species that are newly established within the park, however,when the park is well established a TPC for a change in dominant speciesmay be developed to specify anticipated trajectories of unacceptable increasesin or dominance of one species over others.d. Invasive alien TPCs - Alien threat and invasion TPCs will be applied as per perceivedrisk at Marakele, including TPCs for new invasions, spread and densificationof selected established invaders.e. TPCs for species of conservation concern – TPCs have been set for the globallycritically endangered black rhino (specifically the south-western Dicerosbicornis bicornis) such that a TPC is triggered with any unexplained nonincreasein population growth rate between two surveys.In addition, in future, once long-term river flow and quality data have been evaluated,TPCs may be set for these parameters as an indicator of the water-relatedgoods and services Marakele is delivering to surrounding areas.1.3.3 Conservation Development FrameworkA full Conservation Development Framework (CDF) has not yet been set forMarakele National Park. However a sensitivity value map has been produced((Appendix 2 - Map 5) and a practical zonation (further discussion under 2.1.1;Appendix 2 - Maps 3-6) is available and in use to guide development. There willbe a full CDF available at the first iteration of this plan in 5 years time. The worktowards a full CDF will, by its very nature, also ensure greater and more integratedalignment with the regional Spatial Development Framework (SDF) andIntegrated Development Plans (IDP). This will be essential to achieving theMarakele desired state in the medium- to long-term and will be a priority goingforwards. An issue of particular stakeholder interest is SANParks’ intention towork towards deproclamation of a section of the Hoopdal road (which currentlyseparates the Kwaggasvlakte section of the park from the main area of the park).Figure 3(b): An objectives hierarchy for Marakele National Park – the next level of resolution of the biodiversity objectives.M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N22 23

THE PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENTPLANNING FRAMEWORK2. PROGRAMMES TO ACHIEVE THE DESIRED STATEThis section deals with all the discrete, but often interlinked, programmes whichmake up the approaches to issues, and lead to the actions on the ground.Together they are the park’s best attempt to achieve the desired state specified inPart 1 above. Each subsection in this management plan is a summary of the particularprogramme, invariably supported by details in the appended Lower LevelProgrammes.The various programmes are classified into the five “real-world” activity groupingsas reflected in the SANParks biodiversity custodianship framework (Rogers 2003),namely Biodiversity and Heritage Conservation, Sustainable Tourism, Building Cooperation,Effective Park Management, and Corporate Support. CorporateSANParks policies provide the guiding principles for most of the subsections, andwill not be repeated here, except as references and occasionally key extracts.Within each of these groups, the last section entitled “Other Programmes” dealsunder one heading briefly with programmes which have relevance to MarakeleNational Park, but which have been deemed sufficiently small as to not requiretheir own subsection and reference to a fully-fledged lower-level plan.2.1 Biodiversity and Heritage Conservation2.1.1 Zonation ProgrammeThe primary objective of a park zoning plan is to establish a coherent spatial frameworkin and around a park to guide and co-ordinate conservation, tourism and visitorexperience initiatives. A zoning plan plays an important role in minimizing conflictsbetween different users of a park by separating potentially conflicting activitiessuch as game viewing and day-visitor picnic areas whilst ensuring that activitieswhich do not conflict with the park’s values and objectives (especially the conservationof the protected area’s natural systems and its biodiversity) can continuein appropriate areas.The zoning of Marakele National Park was based on an analysis and mapping ofthe sensitivity and value of a park’s biophysical, heritage and scenic resources; anassessment of the regional context; and an assessment of the park’s current andplanned infrastructure and tourist routes/products; all interpreted in the context ofpark objectives.Overview of the use zones of Marakele National ParkThe summary of the use zoning plan for MarakeleNational Park is shown in Appendix 2 - Map 4. Fulldetails of the use zones (including high resolutionmaps), the activities and facilities allowed in each zone,the conservation objectives of each zone, the zoningprocess, the Park Interface Zones (detailing park interactionwith adjacent areas) and the underlying landscapeanalyses are included in Appendix 1: MarakeleNational Park Zoning Plan.Remote Zone: This is an area retaining an intrinsicallywild appearance and character, or capable of beingrestored to such and which is undeveloped and roadless.There are no permanent improvements or anyform of human habitation. It provides outstandingopportunities for solitude with awe inspiring naturalcharacteristics, with sight and sound of human habitationand activities barely discernable and at far distance.The conservation objectives for this zone requirethat deviation from a natural/pristine state should beminimized, and existing impacts should be reduced.The aesthetic/recreational objectives for the zone specifythat activities which impact on the intrinsically wildappearance and character of the area, or which impacton the wilderness characteristics of the area (solitude,remoteness, wildness, serenity, peace etc) will not betolerated. In Marakele NP, Remote areas were designatedin the rugged mountain areas in the centre and easternareas of the park. The zones were designated toinclude most landscapes with high environmental sensitivityand value.Primitive Zone: The prime characteristic of the zone isthe experience of wilderness qualities with access controlledin terms of numbers, frequency and size ofgroups. The zone shares the wilderness qualities of theRemote zone, but with limited access roads and thepotential for basic small-scale self-catering accommodationfacilities such as a bushcamp or small concessionlodges. Views of human activities and developmentoutside of the park may be visible from this zone. Theconservation objectives for this zone require that deviationfrom a natural/pristine state should be small andlimited to restricted impact footprints, and that existingimpacts should be reduced.The aesthetic/recreational objectives for the zone specifythat activities which impact on the intrinsically wildappearance and character of the area, or which impacton the wilderness characteristics of the area (solitude,remoteness, wildness, serenity, peace etc) should berestricted and impacts limited to the site of the facility.Ideally visitors should only be aware of the facility orinfrastructure that they are using, and this infrastructure/facilityshould be designed to fit in with the environmentwithin which it is located in order to avoid aestheticimpacts. In Marakele NP, Primitive areas weredesignated to buffer Remote areas from higher useareas and activities outside the park, as well as to protectmost of the remaining sensitive areas (such aslower mountains in the west and east) from high levelsof tourist activity. Almost all highly and moderately sensitiveenvironments that were not included within theRemote zone were included in this zone. Primitive areaswere also designated in valleys with relatively low environmentalsensitivity to allow access to Remote areas aswell as to contain the infrastructure required for managementand tourist activity in these areas (e.g. trailhuts and access roads). The plains in the contractualpark were designated Primitive, as the controlledaccess associated with Primitive is compatible with theactivities undertaken by the concessionaires. It is possiblethat these areas may be rezoned once the contractshave expired. In areas where Remote zones border onthe park boundary, a 100m wide Primitive zone wasdesignated to allow park management access tofences.Low Intensity Leisure Zone: The underlying characteristicof this zone is motorized self-drive access with thepossibility of small basic camps without facilities such asshops and restaurants. Facilities along roads are limitedto basic self-catering picnic sites with toilet facilities.This is the highest level of development and tourist usecurrently anticipated in Marakele NP. The conservationobjectives for this zone specify some deviation from anatural/pristine state is allowed, but care should betaken to restrict the development footprint.The aesthetic/recreational objectives for the zone specifythat activities which impact on the relatively naturalappearance and character of the area should berestricted, though the presence of larger numbers ofvisitors and the facilities they require, may impact onthe feeling of “wildness” found in this zone. LowIntensity Leisure areas were designated in the currentgame viewing area (Kwaggasvlakte), around currentaccommodation and other infrastructure, and in theareas around the planned new road network. Plainsareas with low environmental sensitivity south ofMarakele Pty Ltd were also included in this zone toallow for potential expansion of game viewing areasnorth of the mountains.The existing access road to the Sentech Towers wasinclude in the Low Intensity Leisure Zone despite it traversinghighly sensitive and valuable environments, as itis a key part of the park’s tourist infrastructure and theimpacts associated with its construction have alreadybeen incurred. The zoning along this road wasdesigned to preclude the possibility of expansion ofinfrastructure along this access road. A Low IntensityM A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N24 25

Leisure Zone was designated in the Vygeboomfontein area to accommodateexisting contractual obligations.Special Management Overlays of Marakele National ParkSpecial management overlays which designate specific areas of the park thatrequire special management interventions have not yet been identified inMarakele National Park.Overview of the Park Interface Zone of Marakele National ParkThe Park Interface Zones shows the areas within which landuse changes couldaffect a national Park. The zones, in combination with guidelines, serve as a basisfor a) identifying the focus areas in which park management and scientists shouldrespond to EIA’s, b) helping to identify the sort of impacts that would be importantat a particular site, and most importantly c) serving as the basis for integratinglong term protection of a national park into the spatial development plans ofmunicipalities (SDF/IDP) and other local authorities. In terms of EIA response, thezones serve largely to raise red-flags and do not remove the need for carefully consideringthe exact impact of a proposed development. In particular, they do notaddress activities with broad regional aesthetic or biodiversity impacts.Marakele National Park has three Park Interface Zone categories. The first two aremutually exclusive, but the final visual/aesthetic category can overlay the others(Appendix 2 - Map 6).Priority Natural Areas: These are key areas for both pattern and process that arerequired for the long term persistence of biodiversity in and around the park. Thezone also includes areas identified for future park expansion. Inappropriate developmentand negative land-use changes should be opposed in this area.Developments and activities should be restricted to sites that are already transformed.Only developments that contribute to ensuring conservation friendly landuseshould be viewed favorably.Catchment Protection Areas: These are areas important for maintaining keyhydrological processes within the park. Inappropriate development (dam construction,loss of riparian vegetation etc.) should be opposed. Control of alien vegetation& soil erosion as well as appropriate land care should be promoted.Viewshed Protection Areas: These are areas where development is likely toimpact on the aesthetic quality of the visitor’s experience in a park. Within theseareas any development proposals should be carefullyscreened to ensure that they do not impact excessivelyon the aesthetics of the park. The areas identified areonly broadly indicative of sensitive areas, as at a finescale many areas within this zone would be perfectlysuited for development. In addition, major projects withlarge scale regional impacts may have to be consideredeven if they are outside the Viewshed Protection Zone.Current status and future improvementsThe current park use zonation is based on the same biodiversityand landscape analyses undertaken for aConservation Development Framework (CDF); howevercertain elements underlying the CDF such as a tourismmarket analysis are not yet fully incorporated into thepark use zonation. A full CDF will be developed forMarakele National Park within the current update cycle.Remote areas will be investigated for possible formaldeclaration as Wilderness Area in terms of Section 22 ofthe PAA. Special management overlays which designatespecific areas of a park that require special managementinterventions (e.g. areas requiring rehabilitation) willalso be identified.This zonation is believed to support as best as possiblethe values and objectives in the desired state for thispark. Once all components of a CDF are available, thezonation map will be revised and amended and shouldsupport Marakele’s desired state in an even morerefined and effective way.2.1.2 Water in the Landscape ProgrammeGuided by general SANParks principles in this regard(SANParks 2006), the key water in the landscape issuescomprise an interlinked water flow and river-riparianwetlandapproach in Marakele, focusing on:1. Ensuring mountain catchment function throughmaintenance of ecosystem processes in order toensure a continuous supply of good quality water tosurrounding environments and downstream users.Focus will need to be placed on collation and evaluationof DWAF flow and quality data and utilisationof this data to set first stab TPCs for Marakele’s contributionto the delivery of these ecosystem goodsand services. Thereafter ongoing monitoring andevaluation will be required.2. Evaluation, monitoring and management of potentiallysensitive wetland areas (sensitive to fire andherbivore management regimes in particular) andpotentially sensitive riparian areas (particularly toelephant impacts) will require careful integration ofhabitat, animal impact and vegetation monitoringprogrammes.3. Rehabilitation of damaged or redundant structuresimpacting flow and other ecosystem processes. Thiswill firstly require an inventorisation of all wetlands,rivers, dams, waterholes and boreholes and anassessment and prioritisation for phased removal ofman-made structures impacting negatively on thesystem. In conjunction with the herbivory programme,it is likely that certain dams will be prioritisedfor rehabilitation. Cognisance will need to betaken of exotic fish within these systems which havethe ability to severely impact aquatic ecosystemhealth and functioning.These three focus areas will consume much of ourenergy and will demand an integration of researchand monitoring efforts to support the desired state ofMarakele (lower level plan detailed in SupportingDocument 3).2.1.3 Fire ProgrammeThe natural frequency of lightning-induced fires inMarakele results in sections of the park burning almostevery second year, normally at the end of Septemberjust before the rains. Fire should thus be managed in themountainous sourveld areas of the park with a natural,lightning-induced ‘laissez faire’ approach. Low-lyingsweetveld areas should be burnt by point ignitions setby management early in the fire season (April – June) tosimulate natural ignition sources. This will have theeffect of breaking up fuel loads and forming a patchmosaic, hypothesised to maximise biodiversity.However, this system will need to be applied in a flexiblemanner, able to adapt to annual variations in climaticconditions and biomass production.Certain vegetation types within Marakele are thought tobe fire-sensitive. This includes the Widdringtonia community,the vlei areas, as well as the forest in mountaingorges. At this stage we do not recommend that fire isspecifically kept out of such areas. Rather, it must firstbe determined whether these vegetation communitiesare truly fire sensitive or whether fire merely hamperstheir growth and that in areas were fire is infrequent,these vegetation communities have flourished. If thecommunities are proven fire sensitive, fire managementfor these areas will be revised. In the interim, cooler,lower intensity fires (early in the fire season) should be setin these areas and fire should not be actively kept out.Fire as a tool to assist with the control of bush thickeningor encroachment should be considered on certainareas on Kwaggasvlakte. We propose thatDichrostachys cinerea encroached areas are strategicallyselected, targeted and monitored for effectiveness ofthe fire management approach. This will entail applicationof cool summer low intensity fires after an initial hotfire application to cause maximum topkill when fuelloads are highest in September / October just beforethe spring rains.M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N26 27

Fire safety issues will need to be addressed through appropriate and effective firebreakswhich should be burnt in the beginning of winter, to a minimum width of 5meters and burnt at night. However, exact standards will need to be agreed uponthrough the upcoming Fire Protection Association rules and regulations. Marakelewill need to make a concerted effort to establish or become a member of a FireProtection Association to assist in achieving fire safety and security aims for thepark and neighbouring areas. Details of all these aspects are provided in the lowerlevel plan (Supporting Document 4).2.1.4 Herbivory Programme, including Elephant ManagementThis follows the general guidance of SANParks’s corporate herbivory policy as wellas that related to the provision of artificial water for herbivores. Likewise, introductionof herbivores and predators is governed by central policy (SANParks 2006).The inherent vegetation and topographic heterogeneity of this park has positivespin-offs for floral and faunal species richness and biodiversity and Marakele has awide diversity of large mammal species after numerous reintroduction efforts.The challenge lies in managing a complex mosaic of sweet, mixed and sourbushveld types in a relatively small park under various scenarios of herbivore use.Utilisation of the landscape by especially larger herbivores such as elephant mayresult in significant changes to the vegetation, particularly certain plant communitiessuch as ‘tall closed woodland’, ‘short closed woodland’ and the ‘termitariumthickets’. The nutrient-rich low-lying areas are likely to develop natural hotspots ofhigh utilisation, requiring monitoring as these areas are likely to indicate when herbivorenumbers are reaching levels where their impact may be exceeding thethreshold of concern. The mountain areas represent more unique vegetation typesin South Africa, and although not heavily utilised by herbivores, are more sensitiveto their impacts. TPCs in these areas thus differ substantially form those set for theplains areas (see Supporting Document 5).While impacts of medium- and smaller-sized herbivores will likely be regulated bypredation, rainfall and associated availability of herbaceous material and browse,these factors are unlikely to control larger herbivores such as rhino and elephantwhich are likely to require more active management. Herbivore impacts will bemeasured by the stated TPCs and adaptive management and ecosystem flux simulationapplied where possible. It must be noted that elephant numbers in Marakelemay increase substantially over a short time when the fence between Marakele andWelgevonden Private Game Reserve is removed in future, which is expected toresult in an influx of elephants. The ultimate decision regarding the management ofelephant will depend heavily on the finalisation of theDEAT norms and standards for elephant managementand the outcomes of the Elephant Assessment but froma practical point of view, it will be difficult, if possible atall, to restrict elephants only to certain areas of the parkor to exclude them from others.Due to the extensive drainage system bisectingMarakele, artificial water provision is not necessary andis not encouraged and should revert to the initial naturaldistribution of water. Any establishment of artificialwater points in the sweetveld areas must be well consideredand restricted. The animal impacts to wetlands inthe mountainous areas need to be monitored to avoidexcessive trampling of the vegetation and compactionof the soil. Fences should only be considered as anoption to exclude animals from certain very sensitiveand unique areas, but this can only be used in practicefor very small vegetation communities, more as aresearch than management tool.Future research must focus on herbivory in the contextof the topographical variability of the park and theresponse of different feeder classes to seasonal changesin order to fulfill their nutrient requirements. The interactionsbetween herbivores and plants at various spatialand temporal scales and the resultant outcomes haveimportant and far-reaching implications for management.Monitoring efforts must focus on vegetation,large animals (aerial surveys and dung counts), smallervertebrates and invertebrates, degradation, backgroundclimatic information.The highest risk to achieving a successful effective herbivoreplan is posed by a possible collapse in collaborationand co-operation between various stakeholders.Mutual agreements and open communication channelsare vital and will have to be fostered continuously iflong-term success in co-operative management is to bemaintained. Predation is an added challenge requiringattention. Marakele is currently not in a position to supportlarge numbers of carnivores on a sustainable basis.In the meantime, contractually introduced carnivoresmust be monitored and may require more intensivemanagement.Further introduction or augmentation of species must infuture be critically evaluated against the desired stateand the opportunity costs of management concentratingon non-core objectives must be minimised if thecore objectives are to be met.2.1.5 Predator Management ProgrammeCheetah, wild dog, lion and spotted hyena have beenreintroduced to Marakele National Park in the past, themain objectives having been to (a) enhance biodiversity,specifically by introducing predation as an importantecological process; (b) improve the ecotourism value ofthe area, and (c) improve a species’ conservation statusby contributing to metapopulation strategies of globallyendangered species.SANParks is contractually bound and thus currently haslegal obligations to provide for a ‘big five’ experience(which specifically includes lion) for the Marakele ParkPty (Ltd) contractual partners, as well as to their currentconcession holders. These legally binding agreementsmust be balanced with the desired state of the park,which has been set with wider stakeholder inputsaccording to the best-practice adaptive planning frameworkfor protected area planning.The decision to temporarily remove wild dog fromMarakele (made in 2007) due to high risk and legal ramificationsof frequent breakout events will be re-evaluatedwithin the next 5-year cycle, particularly sinceSANParks has committed to the metapopulation managementapproach for this globally threatened species.Lion, in particular, are a charismatic predator, valued fortheir contribution to tourist experience as it is currentlymarketed, particularly by the contractual partners.However, lion are also considered a high risk specieswith large range requirements, potentially rapid populationgrowth and significant impacts on prey populations(which are also an important element of the wildlifetourism experience).For this species particularly, targeted research and monitoringneeds to be undertaken in collaboration withpartners and neighbours (particularly WelgevondenPrivate Nature Reserve) and thresholds of potential concernset as a matter of priority, in order to track andmanage their impacts (both ecological and socio-political)within predetermined acceptable flux limits that arejointly agreed upon by stakeholders as supporting thedesired state of Marakele. This must be addressed as amatter of urgency within the next 5 years. Importantly inthis regard, Marakele will be able to contribute to thewider debate around extent to which natural processescan take place without intervention in medium-sizedparks (see Supporting Document 6).2.1.6 Disease Management ProgrammeMarakele has a prolific diversity of indigenous vectorbornand viral diseases and the major managementchallenge is to prevent exotic disease introduction tothe park, particularly related to buffalo introductions(see Supporting Document 7). Currently the buffalo inMarakele are testing positive for a Theileria species andongoing tests are being conducted to confirm its typeand origin. Nevertheless, the Department of Agriculturehas sufficient evidence to suggest that this is T. parva,the cause of theileriosis. Marakele has thus been issueswith a quarantine notice and all buffalo will need to beremoved from this national park within the next months,as feasibility dictates. After the quarantine period,ongoing monitoring of reintroduced animals will beM A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N28 29

equired and any buffalo to be introduced in future must be rigorously tested toprevent buffalo-associated diseases from accidentally being introduced to thepark. Further resources will also be required to test the buffalo occasionally tokeep track of their disease status. Fence maintenance, to the standard wherebreak-outs of species like buffalo are prevented, is essential.Anthrax may occur in the park and encouragement for standard vaccination forthis disease in domestic stock will significantly reduce any risk of possible diseasetransmission between the park and domestic stock in the surrounding area. Rabiesand distemper can pose a threat to carnivores in particular in Marakele so vigilanceand communication will be required regarding the status of these diseases surroundingthe park. Apart from the uncertainty of the Theileria status of the buffaloin the park, no major disease threat is present from the park to neighbouringcommunities.Prevention of disease introduction and active surveillance (through adequate passivesurveillance) of any disease event must be undertaken by management inMarakele National Park.2.1.7 Pollination ProgrammeMarakele, with its high diversity of vegetation types and rare and threatened plantspecies, requires an understanding of the sustainability of pollination systems toensure that the biodiversity aspects of the desired state can be met in the longterm. In particular, dioecious species such as Podocarpus latifolius andEncephalartos species might be at risk due to potential imbalances and dispersalof the sexes due to anthropogenic influences (including poaching and over-utilisationof these plants). Currently, this programme (Appendix 8) focuses mainly onresearch and understanding of pollination systems for important and vulnerableplants and their pollinators.2.1.8 Invasive Alien Biota ProgrammeThe principles concerning this are well-established in SANParks (SANParks 2006)and Working for Water, whose co-operation plays a critical role in the control ofalien plants in Marakele.The invasion of Marakele by alien species is fortunately relatively limited in comparisonwith some other national parks, however, continued vigilance and sustainedmanagement are required to maintain the current status. Main threats arefrom invasions of black wood, queen of the night, lantana, guava, bramble andlarge-mouth bass (more detail is provided in Appendix 9).The SANParks Invasive Species Control Unit (ISCU), actingas the implementing agent of the Working for Waterproject in SANParks, has largely been responsible forthe control of alien plants in Marakele. The ISCU hasdelineated 97 treatment areas for alien plant controlacross Marakele. Of these most are at various stages offollow-up treatment, with the rest planned for initialcontrol operations in the coming years. In addition, parkrangers as well as SANParks Honorary Rangers havebeen involved in and continue to support Marakele inthe control of alien plants at former homesteads andabandoned infrastructure. In the case of the alien mammals,birds and fish, an assessment is needed to determinethe current or potential biodiversity impacts ofeach. Following this, management actions must be prioritisedand implemented where necessary and feasible.A system of TPCs as well as objectives for invasivespecies research, management and awareness(Supporting Document 1, Figure 3 a & b; SupportingDocument 9) has been established in Marakele and thiswill contribute to meeting the desired state of this park.2.1.9 Species of Special Concern ProgrammeThe SANParks approach for prioritising species of specialconcern, which then require appropriate monitoringand TPCs, emphasises native South African and nationalpark species which are globally critically endangeredor endangered. In the Marakele context (SupportingDocument 10) these species are currently recogised asblack rhino (Diceros bicornis) [and wild dog (Lycaon pictus),although these have been removed from the parkat this stage]. TPCs and monitoring for black rhino arespecified. Regional metapopulation managementstrategies in which SANParks is involved may necessitateconsideration of inclusion of such species in ourplanning, if compatible with existing major park objectives.Although no plant or small vertebrate species inMarakele are classified as globally critically endangeredor endangered, the Waterberg cycad, Encephalartoseugene-maraisii, is listed as vulnerable and should bemonitored due to threat from illegal harvesting activities.Similarly there are a number of vulnerable birds andreptiles, as well as the pangolin, but no structured programmesare developed for these. General biodiversitysurveys will be required in Marakele to refine specieslists, especially for small vertebrates and invertebratesto further assess this programme.2.1.10 Park Expansion ProgrammePark expansion is governed by SANParks principles andpolicies and the expansion of Marakele remains importantfor SANParks in its attempt to establish an ecologicallyviable protected area in the western WaterbergMountain catchment area (Supporting Document 11).The objective is to create a park that primarily conservesthe Waterberg bushveld landscape, with its associatedecological patterns and processes through a mosaic ofcooperation agreements and public-private partnerships.Initial visions were for a 3 000 km 2 protected area,but a systematic conservation initiative identified anarea of 1 784 km 2 in line with an even larger WaterbergBiosphere Reserve. The desired state identified throughthe systematic conservation planning process attemptsto consolidate an ecologically viable park around theMatlabas-Mamba River catchment through cooperativeconservation agreements; protect the importantWaterberg altitudinal diversity; and provide a viableeco-tourism product as part of the economic engine forthe region, particularly in the light of fading iron oremining and agricultural activities.The current 67 800 ha large park (52 074 ha state ownedand 15 753 ha Marakele Pty Ltd contractually includedprivate land) conserves three different vegetation typeswhile the desired state for the park would see the additionof another vegetation type (the central sandybushveld) to the park. This greater park will include, bymanagement arrangement, the 330 km 2WelgevondenPrivate Game Reserve, 90 km 2Matla Mamba GameReserve, the 40 km 2 Sterkfontein and 20 km 2 Hoopdalsections. However, towards meeting this larger park anumber of short-term priority consolidation areas forSANParks have been identified, including a western andsouthern block which could be included via either contractualor acquisition means. In addition, SANParksneed to consider the buy-back of current contractualland.The expansion of the park falls in line with the nationalstrategic objective (SO 5) in the NBSAP (2005) ofexpanding the national protected area towards 12% ofthe terrestrial and 20% of the coastal environment.2.1.11 Rehabilitation ProgrammeWidespread rehabilitation is taking place in the parkusing principles contained in an overall rehabilitationframework (SANParks 2006). Marakele is still in a phaseof expansion and most, if not all the properties purchased,were previously used for farming operationsand park management endeavours to reverse the negativeimpacts caused by historical agricultural land use byidentifying and rehabilitating areas in a structured andprioritised manner to support biodiversity and wildernessgoals. The most important areas to be restored orrehabilitated within Marakele are the terrestrial fieldlayer (relatively limited unnatural erosion, but extensivebush encroachment or bush thickening and old croppinglands), redundant infrastructure (primarily old roadsand 4x4 tracks as well as gravel/borrow pits, bushcamps, old farm buildings and old metal fence postsand fencing), and aquatic systems (mainly catchmentM A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N30 31

dams). The main management objectives and actions should be implemented asfar as financially and practically possible, namely rehabilitation of the terrestrialfield layer to restore the physical and aesthetic nature of Marakele to an acceptablestate, removal of all redundant man-made structures and items, and, wherenecessary, stabilisation and restoration of the hydrological processes to an acceptablelevel. These efforts will support longer-term achievement of the desired statefor this park. The main risks lie with insufficient funding and a lack of staff to follow-upmanagement and monitoring of the rehabilitation and restoration efforts.Details are provided in Supporting Document 12.2.1.12 Cultural Resource ProgrammeThis programme (Appendix 13) is advised by SANParks policy on cultural resourcemanagement. During 2001-2002 a heritage inventory and Cultural HeritageManagement Plan were developed for Marakele National Park and adjacent properties,identifying 130 tangible heritage sites, including Stone Age surface scatters,historic cemeteries, historic farmsteads and outbuildings as well as Early andLate Iron Age sites. Intangible resources were also documented, including traditionaland medicinal uses of plants. Evaluations of the significance, conservationstatus and utilisation options of all the heritage resources were accompanied bydetailed recommendations for plan implementation. Specific heritage resourceobjectives for the park in the next 5-10 years include further development andupdating of the heritage inventory, implementation of the Cultural HeritageManagement Plan and development of appropriate Heritage Site ManagementPlans for those sites that have been identified for educational, research and/ortourism purposes (Supporting Document 13).2.1.13 Other Programmes under Biodiversity and Heritage ConservationSmaller issues in Marakele National Park include problem animal management(Supporting Document 14), and natural resource utilisation. Currently there are nocommunity-based resource use projects within the park. Both of these enjoy guidancefrom SANParks’ corporate principles.2.2 Sustainable TourismThis heading clearly also cross-links to the ZonationProgramme provided in 2.1.1. as well as to the CDF,once completed. The tourism lower level plan is outlinedin Supporting Document 15.2.2.1 Sustainable Tourism ProgrammeThe park lies some 250 km north of Johannesburg,near Thabazimbi with Tlopi Tented and ModikelaCamps, Bontle Camping Site and the day visitors’ area,which can be accessed by normal sedan car. In total, thepark can accommodate 260 people per night. The averagebed nights sold for the park is 45.8% and averageunit nights sold is 50.66%. This is considered good inthis relatively new park. This park’s proximity toGauteng should give it a competitive advantage,although most of its visitors at this stage are day visitors.Currently, the park offers self-guided drives, a 4x4route, bird watching, day walks and game drives. Thepark has a linked road network of 38 km, although thiswill change towards May 2007, after the completion ofthe newly developed internal roads and entrance to thepark. Marakele is currently still divided into two parts(namely Kwaggasvlakte section and the greaterMarakele National Park) by a public gravel road, theHoopdal Road.Strengths of Marakele include the wilderness experience,the large number of game farms in the area thatprovide a source of day visitors, the new Tlopi TentedCamp, the world’s largest breeding colony of Cape vulturesand the park being a well known 4x4 destination.The park is well situated to capitalise on the Gautengmarket. There are a number of opportunities for naturebasedactivities, such as guided wilderness trails, abseilingand horse safaris as well as the development ofbirding packages. Nevertheless, there are a number ofsignificant weaknesses and threats, including the poorroad network, deteriorating during the rainy season, ashortage of activities for tourists visiting the park, limitedaccess to certain “prime” game-viewing areas of thepark (real or perceived) due to contractual and concessionagreements, restricted development options dueto terrain, limited marketing, staff shortages, a need fortraining and unreliable telephone connections affectingservice (e.g. RoomSeeker and credit card machines).The local IDP indicates that tourism in the area is welldeveloped although it is poorly marketed. Proposedregional strategies to improve tourism to the areainclude upgrading of roads linking to MarakeleNational Park, development of a tourism centre, moreeffective marketing, a tourism office in the Thabazimbimunicipal building, upgrading the airfield and website.A gap analysis indicates that there is a need for moreaccommodation, more tourist activities, such as hikingtrails, wilderness trails and guided game drives, providingmore tourist facilities, such as picnic areas and hidesat water holes, a day visitor area with braai facilities andswimming pool, an environmental education centre,staff training and better marketing of the park/cluster.Nevertheless, all these options must be considered andweighed up against the desired state of the park,including its zonation, and the important objective ofgenerating and applying a development and economicmodel to Marakele that is appropriate to its biodiversitycharacteristics, wilderness character and is explicit ofthe distribution of costs and benefits within and acrossvarious cooperative arrangements (see SupportingDocument 1). It is only in doing this that Marakele canstrive to fulfil both its park mission as well as the broadervision developed jointly for the cooperative governancespectrum. This will require intensive and dedicatedeffort in the near and medium-term future, and parkmanagement and SANParks will need to be ever-mindfulof this pressing need.Commercial and Community activities: Marakele PtyLtd has two commercial lodges on the contractual land,namely Marataba concession and Kubu lodge (still at itsdevelopmental stage). Commercial DevelopmentDivision to provide the mechanisms in place to monitorimpact of these commercial activities. However, wehave also had the discussions with the owners of a farmto the west of the railway. With regards to these discussionsit should be noted that potential commercialactivities are evaluated on a continuous basis (some ofthese might be closely linked to park expansion).However, the Strategic Plan for Commercialisation(SPfC) which is an approved SANParks strategy documentis used to prioritise commercial projects. In addition,the process that is followed to initialize such projectsfollows the National Treasury approved toolkit.There are currently no written agreements for use ofnatural resources by local communities.2.3 Building Co-operationTransparent, trusting co-operative, collaborative andmutually beneficial relationships with the broader parkcommunity are essential to the sustainability ofMarakele National Park (see sections 1.1.3 and 1.2 aswell as Supporting Document 1). The park will have tomaintain existing, and identify and implement newopportunities for sustaining new relationships betweenitself and surrounding communities and broader parkusers. Similarly, co-operative relationships need to beestablished and nurtured with all spheres of governmentand other stakeholders to ensure that regional initiativesand developments contribute to, not compromise,the attainment of the overall desired state andobjectives for this park. Three key People andConservation programmes will run from Marakele duringthe next 5 year period, detailed below.M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N32 33

2.3.1 Environmental Education and Interpretation ProgrammeMarakele provides a number of different educational and awareness-buildingopportunities to help build constituencies in support of SANPark’s conservationand broader environmental endeavours. It focuses particularly on schoolchildrenand youth groups (examples from a wide range of projects are Kids in Parks,Morula Kids, special calendar days, Junior honorary rangers, special interest groupdays), and on teachers and curricular linkages, but also to an extent on guided andunguided activities, and interpretive material for tourists (Appendix 16). It is foreseenthat all these thrusts will be continued over the next five year period, withstaff training and additional capacity being critical, and effective research andmonitoring should be developed around key aspects. Development of a multifunctionalenvironmental education and interpretation centre at Modikela camp issuggested and this will much improve logistics and outputs. A high risk is theshortage of capacitated and experienced staff and general limited capacity.2.3.2 Stakeholder Relationship Management ProgrammeThis programme (Supporting Document 17) strives to establish and maintainmeaningful and beneficial relationships with a wide range of stakeholders, in a waythat is as beneficial as possible to core park values and aims, and its overall desiredstate. Although it has grown organically in response to various needs, the co-operativegovernance thrust in the South African constitution is leading to its intensification.The overall stakeholder list of those involved is obviously very wide, andincludes appropriate departments from all levels of government; national agencies(especially conservation NGOs and research institutions); contractual and businesspartners of many kinds, local communities, employees, customers and the media.It also includes composite and bridging structures such as park forums, joint managementboards, tourism bodies, associations and neighbours.Marakele has a fully functional Park Forum with quarterly meetings with full representationof different interested parties and the local municipalities. The futureplan is to have a dedicated councillor from each of the three local municipalities inthe Park Forum. Nevertheless, the park’s links to planning structures such as integrateddevelopment plans and strategic development frameworks needs moreregular and deeper involvement in the next 5 years to build further co-operativeinstitutional capacity and to ensure regular positive interaction. Attention needs tobe given to monitoring progress in this sphere.2.3.3 Local Socio-Economic Development ProgrammeThis programme aims at contributing effectively to localeconomic development, economic empowerment andsocial development in communities and neighbouringareas adjacent to the park (Supporting Document 18).To do this the park must participate more effectively inmunicipal integrated development plans and continueparticipating in appropriate government programmes(especially Working for Water, Expanded Public WorksProgrammes (EPWP), etc.) in a way which not only producesshort-term job opportunities but also contributesto local skills development. Opportunities include supportinglearnerships, implementing needs-related trainingprogrammes and creating useful exit strategies(after short-term employment) and business opportunitiesfor participants. SANParks needs to keep up andexpand its reputation as a reliable and meaningful vehiclefor such government expenditure – major opportunitiespresenting themselves in the next 5 years beingrelated to alien plant clearing, and infrastructure development.Other local opportunities are not provided forsufficiently within the park at this time (including localcurio selling, cultural dancers, etc.) and this requiresattention. The establishment of appropriate and ongoingmonitoring indicators and criteria requires expansionbeyond the EPWP projects and research.Important risks to this programme relate to a relianceon donor funding.2.4 Effective Park ManagementEffective park management is essentially a means to anend, namely the enablement of our achieving thedesired state in the three core areas above.2.4.1 Environmental Management - Statement of IntentDevelopments, activities and operational issues inMarakele National Park are currently governed bySANParks conservation values and discipline principles,policies and standard practices. At present the parkdoes not have a specific environmental programme toaddress the overall requirements of implementing theSANParks policies. However, it is Marakele’s intent todetail the needs and requirements for establishing theappropriate environmental management approachesfor developments, activities and operational issueswithin the park in the next 5 year period.2.4.2 Infrastructure Development ProgrammeIn line with SANParks principles, such as “touch theearth lightly”, focus in the next 5 years in terms oftourism infrastructure is on the upgrading and constructionof 60 km of sedan-friendly gravel roads and provisionof easy access between the mountainous easternand western sweetveld portion of the park. There is anurgent need to upgrade the Kwaggasvlakte perimeterfence to a predator-proof fence and to upgradeModikela Bush Camp as a multi-purpose EnvironmentalInterpretation and Education centre. Proposed newinfrastructure includes development of a day visitor’sfacility, game-fencing on Zandfontein, construction of anew small rest camp with amenities, construction of awilderness trails camp, contractual resettlement obligationsand new staff accommodation. Details andspecifics, also relating to budgetary implications, areprovided in Supporting Document 19.2.4.3 Safety and Security ProgrammeMarakele contains the highest point in the Waterberg,is home to approximately a third of the world’s populationof Cape vulture and a number of endemic faunaand flora, including a significant proportion of theWaterberg cycad as well as globally critically endangeredblack rhino. In addition, a significant proportionof the park is privately owned by Marakele Park Pty(Ltd) and smaller other contractual partners, with 28official access points. Security is also highly compromisedthrough the public Hoopdal road separating thepark in two, and visitors needing to unlock and openunmanned gates. This, combined with its megaherbivoreand predator populations as well as its proximityto Gauteng has safety and security, as well as risk implications.The strategic intent of the safety and security plan is tofirstly ensure that effective visitor and employee safetymeasures are in place, and secondly to ensure thattourist perceptions are managed in order to protect thebrand and reputation of SANParks and SA Tourism atlarge. This document (Supporting Document 20) comprehensivelyaddresses both the strategic and operationalaspects of visitor safety and security within theframework set out by the SANParks Security Plan. Dailypark activities, implemented to mitigate many illegalactivities, form an important part of this plan.Nevertheless, issues around visitor and staff safety andsecurity, environmental crime, cash in storage and transit,access control and infrastructure (including document)security still pose challenges.Rollout of the Environmental Management Inspectorprogramme will assist with implementation of enforcementand compliance in terms of environmental legislationwhile the Protected Area Management Audit(PAMA) highlights areas requiring additional attention.The safety and security strategy and operational planwill be continuously developed and updated from monitoringand evaluation feedback. Indicators are not yetadequately developed but would include measuressuch as numbers of violent and non violent attacks peryear, incident records, and tourism perception indicatorssuch as positive and negative media measures.M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N34 35

2.4.4 Other Programmes under Effective Park ManagementAn essential complementary function of park effectiveness is maintaining adequatehuman resources to provide a conservation, supporting and visitor service.Staff capacity-building requirements and needs are aimed at the continuous developmentof all levels of skills through both formal and in-service training and educationto improve understanding, encourage a sense of pride in the organisationand increase levels of efficiency and self fulfillment. These needs are generallyincorporated into divisional targets, individual performance evaluations and developmentplans.2.5 Corporate SupportAgain, these are enabling initiatives to achieve the desired state for Marakele asparticularly outlined in 2.1 – 2.3 above.2.5.1 Research Support ProgrammeGiven the many open-ended questions in the biodiversity, development and governanceobjectives (e.g. around elephant management, catalysing understandingof costs and benefits of different boundary scenarios and evaluation of alternativedevelopment themes within an appropriate economic model for the park;Supporting Document 1), a significant research thrust is seen as imperative. Thiscannot be achieved in Marakele without explicit commitment around the supportingenvironment, for instance researcher accommodation to help attract visitingresearchers at reasonable project cost. The necessary databases, technical andherbarium support have also been highlighted as catalysts which will help achievethe desired state. Equally, liaison with research and biodiversity partners in theregion is essential to this success – in particular Marakele Park Pty (Ltd) andWelgevonden Private Game Reserve as well as SANBI and numerous academicinstitutions. Research and monitoring programmes should, whenever necessary,be formulated in partnership with them.2.5.2 HIV/AIDS ProgrammeHIV/AIDS requires attention as it is spreading at analarmingly fast rate in South Africa, as well as withinSANParks, including Marakele. As an integral componentof the Employee Assistance Programme, it isaccorded priority within the SANParks programming.The programme will form the basis on which all employeesworking within Marakele National Park, permanentand temporary, as well as their families, will be madeaware of HIV/AIDS and assisted when infection hasoccurred. Temporary employees working within thegovernmental Expanded Public Works Programme, ofwhich Working for Water and Poverty Relief:Infrastructure Development is currently functioningwithin Marakele, will also be made aware of HIV/AIDSthrough these projects’ training programmes(Supporting Document 21).2.5.3 Other Programmes under Corporate SupportSANParks is necessarily a risk adverse organisationmindful of the importance of the sustainability of ourorganisation to society as a whole. However, stakeholdersand the Board recognise that engaging risk is alsoat the core of SANParks business, and that risk-taking isa choice. SANParks Board and management are thusfully committed to and accountable for effectiveCorporate Risk Management in ensuring that SANParksbusiness objectives are met and that continued, sustainedgrowth and biodiversity management areachieved. Risk management is based on the principlethat a risk-averse and cautious approach is applied,which takes into account the limits of current knowledgeabout the consequences of decisions and actions.M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N36 37

ADAPTIVE AND INTEGRATIVE STRATEGIESTO SUSTAIN THE DESIRED STATE3. ADAPTIVE AND INTEGRATIVE STRATEGIES TOSUSTAIN THE DESIRED STATESection 1 has dealt with the desired state for Marakele, and Section 2 with all thespecific programmes which are believed necessary to achieve that jointly-agreedfuture state. However, the desired state cannot be effectively maintained withoutexplicit attention being given to prioritisation, integration, operationalisation, andabove all, reflection and adaptation according to the principles in the SANParksbiodiversity custodianship framework (Rogers 2003).3.1 Key prioritisation, integration and sequencing issuesThe broad-level desired state of Marakele has been set in conjunction with stakeholdersin an explicit and focused way, highlighting key objectives which needattention in the next 5 year management cycle. Although some of these are as yetopen-ended and require longer-term strategic decisions to be made within thecontext of cooperative governance, as well as within SANParks’ core values, someof these objectives require short-term actions and evaluations of alternativesbefore the most effective long-term decisions are foreclosed or prejudiced e.g.tourism and development models as well as boundary and large mammal herbivoryscenarios.In addition, understanding of vegetation communities, their interactions with herbivory,especially elephant utilisation, and ongoing baseline inventorisation andunderstanding of biodiversity heterogeneity patterns, processes and functions arepriorities. It is thus important, in the next 5 year cycle, to carry out those critical initialsteps required to lay the foundation for longer-term success and thus achievementof an agreed-upon desired state for this park. In the context of park consolidationand expansion, this requires ongoing multi-pronged efforts but these mustbe backed by broad-scale constituency building and cooperative governance toenhance understanding and buy-in for longer-term goals. This will be greatly facilitatedby making very explicit the variety of ecosystem goods and services that thepark can and will deliver to stakeholders. Hand-in-hand with these efforts are thereal need to address socio-political threats, especially through ongoing conflictaround elephant and predator management options (also including damage-causingcarnivores affecting neighbouring farmers and park-neighbour relationships).Additional threats requiring attention and management focus, or at least consideration,are the impacts of rampant development in this region on the wildernesscharacter and sense of place within and around the park as well as cultural heritageaspects.The unique Marakele biodiversity and its associatedambience and ‘sense of place’ should be maintained orre-instated but should not be overcome by inappropriatefinancially-driven goals to become economically selfsustainableor a ‘big-animal’ ‘high-impact’ tourism destination,not least because of the imposed cost of managingthese, and the difficulty they pose for focusing staffand other resources on the real challenges and longertermpriorities. Ongoing tourism development must bein line with SANParks’ tourism values of providing qualitynature-based experiences and must address all importantcooperative governance objectives, also seriouslyconsidering alternatives.EPWP poverty relief and research funding, can at timesarrive out of synchrony with planned timetables forsequencing events, and this reality has to be dealt withas best as possible, particularly in the light of the infrastructuredevelopment programme. Nevertheless,Marakele’s now clearly articulated goals will hopefullyhelp unify our need for these with the timing of theresource. It will be a great pity if our immediate decisionsforeclose or prejudice longer-term more appropriateoptions that we did not fully evaluate or consider atthe time.On the other hand, we cannot wait indefinitely beforemaking management decisions, and initial considerations,together with stakeholders, should allow us tostart in the right direction. Similarly, elephant and predatormanagement options will need to be consideredand implemented on the basis of best available knowledge,with an explicit effort to conduct confirmatoryresearch along the way and adoption of the adaptivemanagement learning-by-doing approach.It is anticipated that some difficult trade-offs will need tobe made along the way in reaching the desired state ofMarakele and it is recognised that in this park it is essentialto engage all partners and key stakeholders andbuild the sustaining trusting cooperation that is soessential for the long-term success of this park. If a balanceis not struck between the energy demands neededto deal with immediate threats and crises, and thenecessity of laying the all-important groundwork forlonger-term strategic success, objectives and definitionof the jointly agreed-upon desired state will fail. Thisplan should provide structured assistance for the criticaldecision-making way forward but, obviously, requiresongoing evaluation and adjustment.3.2 Steps to OperationalisationGiven the desired state, and the above cross-links andpriorities, the next step is for park management to usethis guidance to draw up a detailed plan of action downto annual operational level and wherever necessarydown to the level of tasks and duties. The Park Managermust be satisfied that all this serves the desired state ascontained here. A further cross-check is contained in theBalanced Scorecard system implemented by SANParks,which serves not to replace any objectives contained inthis plan, but to support their effective implementation.To help meld this synergy, a cross-tabulation of theimportant objectives of this plan and explicit ways inwhich these are reinforced by key performance areas inthe Balanced Scorecard must be developed, with thetwo systems adjusted into harmony where necessary.Furthermore, the broad staff and finance costing for thefive-year drive towards achieving the desired state, ascontained in Supporting Document 22, outlines bothexisting and projected budgets and costs. Care must betaken to not under-estimate costs because of historicaloperations or financial limitations. This costing includesall resources (but excludes research facilitation costswhich are internalised elsewhere in the organisation)believed to be required to achieve realistic progresstowards the desired state as outlined here.The fact that the resources required are higher than historicallyallocated to Marakele National Park is the resultof this report having made explicit what is actuallyrequired to achieve that. For instance, even the cost ofminimalist monitoring to evaluate the desired state, nowessential to our goals, particularly in the face of elephant-relatedherbivory impacts and managementoptions, is a significant new expense not historically carriedby the park. Development of a small but effectiveresearch facility will also greatly enhance the potential ofMarakele to attract much-needed research and monitoringpartners.3.3 Key Ongoing Adaptive Management andEvaluation InterventionsLack of informative and effective feedback, which shouldstimulate proper reflection by managers, is the commonestunderlying cause of failure of adaptive management,and hence of reaching the desired outcomes weset for parks. The hallmark of adaptive management isongoing learning, and this only results if users applytheir minds to the adaptive cycle (Biggs and Rogers2003). This section aims to detail generic procedures butin the way that they are most likely to be used specificallyin Marakele National Park, by which the integrity ofthese feedbacks, and hence learning, will be guaranteed.• Feedback that the management action as decidedupon and specified, is carried out as such:- Thisresponsibility lies with line-function management,and will be reported on via SANParks regionalreporting structures to the Executive Director: Parks.Failure to check this feedback on managementaction could easily happen at Marakele due to its relativelyremote location and limited staff capacity.M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N38 39

Nevertheless, the evaluation of herbivore impacts and different tourism developmentmodels requires prioritisation and focused attention.• Feedback whenever a TPC specifying the endpoints of any biodiversity objectiveis violated, or is credibly predicted to be violated in the future:- Thisrequires that a disciplined monitoring programme be put in place, that the custodianof the particular programme duly reports the exceedance to a competent,preferably formally constituted, joint science-management forum, whichincludes the Park Manager. This must lead to a documented managementresponse, recognising that the “do nothing response” may also be a specificjustifiable response. The suite of biophysical, but particularly vegetation-herbivoreinteraction TPCs in Marakele is relatively focused and monitoring for thesemust be commissioned as soon as possible if we are to have some idea ofwhere we find ourselves relative to the desired state. Experience shows that itis far better to have roughly defined preliminary TPCs (and improve these later,something which then tends to happen automatically) than wait years for perfectones to be developed.• Feedback that the predicted outcome of a management intervention, inresponse to the exceedance of a TPC, is achieved, or what materialisedinstead in its place:- This is usually directly measurable by checking whetherthat same TPC returned to within its acceptable limits after management actionwas initiated. In Marakele, this follow-up should be formally done through (atleast) a quarterly meeting of a science-management forum where the bestadaptive decision must be taken in the light of this evaluation. Some obviousoutcomes likely to be of major learning value in this regard are interactiveeffects of herbivory on Marakele’s highly diverse ecosystem and differentialrehabilitation strategies for degraded veld. Additional issues requiring suchfeedback, but for which no TPCs are set, include progress towards buildinginclusive and honorable cooperation arrangements and steps towards applyingappropriate development and tourism models in the light of biophysical andsocial objectives and targets.• Feedback to SANParks Head Office of the overall performance of Marakelerelative to its stated objectives:- This will be done via an annual State ofBiodiversity Report for Marakele National Park as well as other incidentalreporting. It is clear that Marakele will, for several themes, take many years toprogress towards the desired state (rehabilitation and consolidation / expansion)or will require a changing and adapting approach to management in theface of all-important partnership and governance scenarios. Nevertheless,thresholds need to be developed for these themes, although explicit interim“targets” may also assist in tracking progress inthese cases.• Feedback as to whether organisational or societalacceptance of the consequence of an interventionis still, as agreed on previously, acceptable:- This isa longer-term adaptive evaluation, and if expectationsare roughly met, can be dealt with at the timeof the 5-yearly public meeting held to review themanagement plan. If, however, significant unintendedconsequences materialised that have shortertermimpacts, it will be the responsibility of the science-managementforum to sense this, reflect on it,and make an appropriate recommendation to thePark Manager. The areas this is most likely to occurare the methods and rationale for large game stockingas well as for elephant and large predator management;the cost and effectiveness of Marakeleengaging in wild dog and other metapopulationmanagement strategies in future and how this interactswith other core biodiversity and socio-economicgoals and balancing requirements. Strides inassessing and developing appropriate economicand development models for this park will need toalso be made within the broader cooperative governancesphere. At times, feelings of lack ofprogress and even hopelessness may need to becountered.• Feedback as to whether the monitoring programmeand list of TPCs is parsimonious and effective:-This is the responsibility of the scientific custodiansinvolved, but overall responsibility for the programmeas a whole rests with the science-managementforum. It is broadly challenged during each 5-yearly revision cycle. It is anticipated in Marakelethat the costs of carrying out a very basic set of vegetationand biodiversity monitoring procedures islikely to raise eyebrows, and will need ongoingmotivation, justification and adjustment and finetuning.Attention will also need to be given todeveloping thresholds and monitoring for othernon-biodiversity related socio-political aspects,such as progress towards promoting communityparticipation and empowerment and building astrong cooperative spectrum supportive of the aspirationsof the park.• Feedback as to whether overall park objectivesneed adjustment in the longer-term:- This is dealtwith effectively at the 5-yearly review step.However, in the case of perceived ‘emergencies’the Park Manager is constrained within the limits ofagreement. It is likely that monitoring proceduresfor vegetation-herbivory interactions, associatedhabitat integrity and biodiversity patterns will beperceived as onerous and that suggestions will ariseover time to scrap or downgrade these. This will bea crucial debate, especially around SANParks obligationto balance elephant conservation withbroader biodiversity heterogeneity maintenancegoals and responsibilities, as well as the integrationof differing management objectives in contractualand state-owned sections of the park.• Feedback regarding, or at least latent preparationfor, surprises:- By definition these cannot be predicted.It will, however, be an explicit obligation ofthe Park Manager to take responsibility to stimulatecontingency and risk management assessments.From an ecosystem perspective, dealing with suchsurprises is best dealt with by generating scenariosand we must aim for at least one structured scenarioplanning session per 5 year cycle. It is suggestedthat scenarios significantly appropriate in theMarakele situation revolve around cooperative governance,partnership and constituency building successes,particularly including approaches to balancingour biodiversity conservation mandate withappropriate ecotourism and accompanying economicmodels as well as with herbivory impact managementoptions. Scenarios around the relativepower of contractual versus other developmentaland stakeholder pressures (in terms of costs andbenefits and their distribution) and scenariosaround different futures regarding societal attitudesto elephant when traded off against other values insociety will be crucial. Formulating and contemplatingthese scenarios will significantly promote survivalvalue of this park into the future.If these obligatory feedbacks are effectively honoured,it is believed that Marakele National Park will be practicinga sound level of adaptive management, and inaccordance with our overarching values around complexsocio-ecological systems, will have the best chanceof achieving the desired state in a sustainable way.M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N40 41

Table 3: Marakele National Park Management Plan budget summary 2007-2010.Cat 1 Cat 2 Description 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010) 2010-2011 2007-2011(R) (R) (R) (R) (R)4. HIGH LEVEL BUDGET AND COSTINGP ROGRAMME4.1 Budgets and Staff required 2007 – 2010Without dedicated and approved budgets and the staff at hand to implement, thisManagement Plan is merely a paper exercise. The Park has undertaken an exerciseto integrate and prioritise the projects, programs and actions that are required tofor the period 2007-2010. Projects and programs presented in the plan are not a‘wish list’ of activities but are the set required to meet the long-term businessobjectives of ‘establishing’ the Park by 2030.The budget presented is divided in to 4 parts which firstly, summarises the currentpark operational and maintenance budgets; secondly, presents the Park developmentbudgets, thirdly estimated land acquisition costs and finally future operation.Aside from land acquisition costs which are treated as non-scheduled expenditure,Marakele will have an average funding deficit of R57 million per year over the next4 years as this portion of the total funds required have not been secured.Staffing requirements are present as the number of current (2007) permanent staffposition to the number of future required position. An estimate of the total numberof project is also made.4.1.1 Park operational and maintenance budgetsMarakele expects to generate R 35,409,144 in incomes between 2007 and 2010from current products and services. When compared to a capped expenditurebase of R 55,552,073 million for financial year 2007.4.1.2 Park development budgetsBUDGET AND COSTINGMarakele is a young establishing park and as such is undergoing a strong biodiversityrehabilitation and tourism product services development phase. A number ofprojects and programs, based on sound scoping, have been presented. Notenough funds have been secured so far to meet the requirements for the expectedpark development plan. Several applications for funding have been submittedto DEAT for approval.MRNP: Current Operational BudgetA. Income Conservation Fee -188,444 192,289 196,214 200,218 777,165A. Income Retail Gross Profit 5,782 5,900 6,020 6,143 23,845A. Income Tourism Income -1,782,073 1,818,441 1,855,552 1,893,421 7,349,487A. Income Other Income -15,315 15,627 15,946 16,271 63,159B. Expenditure Human Resource 3,255,392 3,519,342 3,804,694 4,113,182 4,446,684B. Expenditure Depreciation 305,729 311,968 318,335 324,831 331,460B. Expenditure Maintenance 306,005 325,537 346,316 368,421 391,937B. Expenditure Operating Costs 1,551,772 1,650,821 1,756,192 1,868,290 1,987,542B. Expenditure Finance Costs 14 11 13 15 53Total Operations 5,823,295 6,225,550 6,674,739 7,157,676MRNP: CAPEXC. CAPEX Infrastucture Staff Accommodation 200,000 800,000 1,0 00 000Total: CAPEX 200,000 800,000 1,0 00 000Extended Public Works Program ApplicationD. EPWP Infrastructure Rest camp 13,000,000 13,000,000I Trails camps 5,000,000 5,000,000I Day visitors centre 2,500,000 2,500,000I Fence upgrade 3,500,000 3,500,000I Conference facilities 4,500,000 4,500,000I Road network 10,000,000 10,000,000Total: EPWP 38,500,000 38,500,000Working for Water-WetlandsE. WfW Biodiversity Management All Projects 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 6,000Total: WFW 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 6,000Unfunded ProjectsF. UFP Park acquisition & rehab Biodiversity Projects 100,000 90,000 83,000 273,000Soil erosion control 2,000,00 2,000,000Removal of redundantstructures 2,400,000 2,400,000F. UFP Park Development Infrastructure Projects 34,000 33,000 38,000 105,000Total: UFP 4,534,000 123,000 121,000 4,778,000SummaryTotal Income (A) 1,991,614 2,032,257 2,073,732 2,116,053 8,213,656Total Committed Budgets (B, C) 5,618,898 5,824,095 6,241,496 6,674,739 7,157,676Total Budgets Applied For (D, E) 38,501,500 38,501,5000Total Uncommitted Budgets (F) 4,534,000 123,000 121,000 4,778,000M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N42 43

4.1.3 Land acquisitionProperty prices in the Thabazimbi area are relatively expensive. Current Marakeleowes R90 million to a private individual to ensure the benefits and access of allSouth Africans and the world to its core area. Estimates of purchasing privatelyowned conservation worthy land required by the park range from between R300million if no additional development rights have been secured to R660 millionwhere development rights have been secured. These purchases do not form partof the normal budgeting schedule as they are subject to negotiations with privatelandowners and are unpredictable by nature.4.1.4 StaffingThe Park currently has 48 permanent staff on its establishment. This is expected togrow to at least 80 as a result of the park expanding. There is a need for more FieldRangers and additional Marketing and Tourism personnel which is currently understaffed (although regionally active SANParks staff are based in Pretoria). Contractstaff members are expected to increase with an increase of more farms to be incorporatedinto the Park on its expansion plan.In line with the requirements to cost the implementation of the management planto move towards achieving the desired state, an overall costing programme hasbeen developed, a summary of which is outlined in Table 3 below. The more thandoubling of the current annual costs (as available in 2006/2007) for 2007/2008 isdue to park expansion and rehabilitation requirements as well as substantial parkdevelopment needs for this young park (specifically for tourism, including roads,and supporting infrastructure development. If these needs are addressed, thisfunding requirement decreases sharply in subsequent financial years. The increase(doubling) in demand for operational funds is directly linked to associated costs toenable the park to move towards its desired state as specified in the various programmesand lower level plans drawn up as part of this management plan. Linkedto this is the need for some additional staff to fulfill certain roles to enable the parkto roll out the management plan and to ensure effective service levels to the customersof the park. This budgeting process also makes provision for aspects thathave not historically been budgeted for (including rehabilitation, monitoring andknowledge generation and management costs), nevertheless, these are seen asparamount to support progress towards a jointly agreed-upon desired state forMarakele.REFERENCESREFERENCESBIGGS, H.C. & K.H. ROGERS. 2003. An adaptive system to link science, monitoringand management in practice. Pp. 59-80. In: DU TOIT, J.T., ROGERS, K.H.& H.C. BIGGS (eds.). The Kruger Experience. Ecology and Management ofSavanna Heterogeneity. Washington: Island Press.NBSAP. 2005. South Africa’s National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan.Department of Environmental Affairs & Tourism, Pretoria. 108 pp.ROGERS, K.H. 2003. A Biodiversity Custodianship Framework for SANParks. AProtected Area Management Planning Framework. Unpublished document.SANParks, Pretoria.SANPARKS. 2006. Policy framework governing park management plans.Unpublished document, SANParks, Pretoria.VAN STADEN, P. 2001. An ecological study of the plant communities of theMarakele National Park. Unpublished MSc dissertation, University of Pretoria,Pretoria.M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N4445

MARAKELE NATIONAL PARK ZONING PLAN1. INTRODUCTIONThe primary objective of a park zoning plan is to establish a coherent spatial frameworkin and around a park to guide and co-ordinate conservation, tourism and visitorexperience initiatives. A zoning plan plays an important role in minimizing conflictsbetween different users of a park by separating potentially conflicting activitiessuch as game viewing and day-visitor picnic areas whilst ensuring that activitieswhich do not conflict with the park’s values and objectives (especially the conservationof the protected area’s natural systems and its biodiversity) can continuein appropriate areas. A zoning plan is also a legislated requirement of theProtected Areas Act, which stipulates that the management plan, which is to beapproved by the Minister, must contain “a zoning of the area indicating what activitiesmay take place in different sections of the area and the conservation objectivesof those sections”.The zoning of Marakele National Park was based on an analysis and mapping ofthe sensitivity and value of the park’s biophysical, heritage and scenic resources;an assessment of the regional context; and an assessment of the park’s current andplanned infrastructure and tourist routes/products; all interpreted in the context ofpark objectives. This was undertaken in an iterative and consultative process. Thisdocument sets out the rationale for use zones, describes the zones, and providesmanagement guidelines for each of the zones.2. RATIONALE FOR USE ZONESAPPENDIX 1The prime function of a protected area is to conserve biodiversity. Other functionssuch as the need to ensure that visitors have access to the park, and that adjoiningcommunities and local economies derive benefits from the area, potentiallyconflict with and compromise this primary function. Use zoning is the primary toolto ensure that visitors can have a wide range of quality experiences without comprisingthe integrity of the environment.Further, people visit a park with differing expectations and recreational objectives.Some people are visiting a park purely to see wildlife as well as natural landscapes.Others wish to experience intangible attributes such as solitude, remoteness, wildness,and serenity (which can be grouped as wilderness qualities), while some visitto engage in a range of nature-based recreational activities, or to socialize in therest camp. Different people have different accommodationrequirements ranging from extreme roughing it upto luxury catered accommodation. There is often conflictbetween the requirements different users and differentactivities. Appropriate use zoning serves to minimizingconflicts between different users of a park by separatingpotentially conflicting activities such as game viewingand day-visitor picnic areas whilst ensuring that activitieswhich do not conflict with the park’s values and objectives(especially the conservation of the protected area’snatural systems and its biodiversity) can continue inappropriate areas. Use zones serve to ensure that highintensity facilities and activities are placed in areas thatare robust enough to tolerate intensive use, as well as toprotect more sensitive areas of the park from over-utilization.3. PARK USE ZONATION SYSTEMThe zoning systemSANParks has adopted a dual zoning system for itsparks. The system comprises:a. Visitor use zones covering the entire park, andb. Special management overlays which designate specificareas of a park that require special management interventions.The zoning of Marakele National Park is shown in Map 4,and summarised in Table One.The Zoning process and its linkage to the underlyingenvironmental analysisThe park use zonation plan is a lean version of theConservation Development Framework (CDF). The parkuse zonation is based on the same biodiversity and landscapeanalyses undertaken for a CDF. However, certainelements underlying the CDF may not be fully incorporatedinto the park use zonation. In particular, the parkuse zonation plan will usually not incorporate elementssuch as a full tourism market analysis. Typically the parkuse zonation approach is applied in smaller and developingparks such as Marakele National Park, though thelong term objective is to have a full CDF for all parks.The zoning for Marakele National Park was underpinnedby an analysis and mapping of the sensitivity and valueof a park’s biophysical, heritage and scenic resources.This analysis examined the biophysical attributes of thepark including habitat value (in particular the contributionto national conservation objectives), special habitatvalue (the value of the area to rare and endangeredspecies), hydrological sensitivity (areas vulnerable to disruptionof hydrological processes such as floodplainsand wetlands), topographic sensitivity (steep slopes),soil sensitivity (soils that are vulnerable to erosion) andvegetation vulnerability to physical disturbance. In addition,the heritage value and sensitivity of sites was examined(including archaeological, historical and current culturalaspects). The visual sensitivity of the landscape wasalso examined in order to identify sites where infrastructuredevelopment could have a strong aesthetic impact.This analysis was used to inform the appropriate use ofdifferent areas of the park, as well as to help define theboundaries between zones. The zoning was alsoinformed by the park’s current infrastructure and tourismproducts, as well as the regional context (especially linkagesto neighbouring areas and impacts from activitiesoutside the reserve). Planned infrastructure and tourismproducts were also accommodated where these wereM A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N46 47

Table 1: Summary of Use Zone Characteristicscompatible with the environmental informants. These were all interpreted in thecontext of the park objectives. This was undertaken in an iterative and consultativeprocess.Map 5 shows the relationship between the use zoning and the summary productsof the biodiversity and landscape sensitivity-value analysis. This indicates that thezoning in this park was highly successful in including most of the environmentallysensitive and valuable areas into zones that are strongly orientated towardsresource conservation rather than tourist use. Table 2 summarises the percentagearea of the park covered by each zone, as well as the percentage of the highlyenvironmentally sensitive and valuable areas (defined as areas with values in thetop quartile of the sensitivity value analysis) that are in each zone. Almost 86% ofthe park is covered by zones that are strongly conservation orientated in terms oftheir objectives (i.e. Remote and Primitive), with just under 37% being in the moststrongly conservation orientated zone (Remote).This reflects the “wilderness” orientated focus of the park’s objectives very well.The correlation between the spatial distribution of environmentally sensitive habitatsand the conservation orientated zones is very strong in this park, with theRemote zone containing over 80% of the highly sensitive habitats even though itcovers less than 40% of the surface area Conversely, the tourist orientated LowIntensity Leisure zone covers approximately 14% of the park yet contains less than2% of the most sensitive habitats. Encouragingly, over 98% of the park’s most sensitivehabitats are contained in conservation orientated zones.Table 2: Summary of the percentage area of the park covered by each zone, as well as the percentage of the highly environmentallysensitive and valuable areas (defined as areas with values in the top quartile of the sensitivity value analysis) that arein each zone.*Wilderness areas need to be investigated and officially designated.M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N48 49

Remote ZoneCharacteristicsThis is an area retaining an intrinsically wild appearance and character, or capableof being restored to such, and which is undeveloped and roadless. There are nopermanent improvements or any form of human habitation. It provides outstandingopportunities for solitude with awe inspiring natural characteristics. If presentat all, sight and sound of human habitation and activities are barely discernableand at far distance. The zone also serves to protect sensitive environments fromdevelopment impacts and tourism pressure.Visitor activities and experienceActivities: Access is strictly controlled and on foot. Groups must be small, and caneither be accompanied by a guide or unaccompanied. Several groups may be inarea at the same time, but if necessary densities and routes should be defined sothat no signs can be seen or heard between the groups. The principles of “Pack itin Pack it out” must be applied.Interaction with other users: There is no interaction between groups. The numbersof groups within the area will be determined by the ability to ensure that there isno interaction between groups.Objectives of the zone (Limits of acceptable change)Biophysical environment: Deviation from a natural/pristine state should be minimized,and existing impacts should be reduced.Aesthetics and recreational environment: Activities which impact on the intrinsicallywild appearance and character of the area, or which impact on the wildernesscharacteristics of the area (solitude, remoteness, wildness, serenity, peace etc) willnot be tolerated.FacilitiesType and size: No facilities are provided. Should overnight facilities be required toserve this zone, these should be placed in the adjoining zones.Sophistication of facilities: No facilities except self carriedportable tents. Guidelines for washing, ablution andcooking must be defined according to the “Pack it inPack” it out principles. Camping only at designated sites.Audible equipment and communication structures:None.Access and roads: Public access is non-motorized.Vehicular access and parking is provided in the adjoiningPrimitive zone. Established footpaths may be providedwhere erosion risks occur.Location in ParkIn Marakele NP, Remote areas were designated in therugged mountain areas in the centre and eastern areas ofthe park. The zones were designated to include mostlandscapes with high environmental sensitivity and value.Primitive ZoneCharacteristicsThe prime characteristic of the zone is the experience ofwilderness qualities with the accent on controlled access.Access is controlled in terms of numbers, frequency andsize of groups. The zone shares the wilderness qualitiesof Wilderness Areas and Remote zones, but with the provisionof basic self-catering facilities and access. It alsoprovides access to the Remote zone and WildernessAreas. Views of human activities and development outsideof the park may be visible from this zone.This zone has the following functions:• It provides the basic facilities and access to serveWilderness Areas and Remote zones.• It contains concession sites and other facilities whereimpacts are managed through strict control of themovement and numbers of tourists, for example if alltourists are in concession safari vehicles.• It serves as a buffer to the fringe of the park and otherzones, in particular Wilderness and Remote.• It serves to protect sensitive environments from highlevels of development.Visitor activities and experienceActivities: Access is controlled in terms of numbers, frequencyand size of groups. Activities include hiking, 4x4drives and game viewing. Access is controlled eitherthrough only allowing access to those with bookings forspecific facilities, or alternatively through a specific bookingor permit for a particular hiking trail or 4x4 route.Several groups may be in area at the same time, butaccess should be managed to minimize interactionbetween groups if necessary.Interaction with other users: Interaction between groupsof users is low, and care must be taken in determining thenumber and nature of facilities located in the area inorder to minimize these interactions.Objectives of the zone (Limits of acceptable change)Biophysical environment: Deviation from a natural/pristinestate should be small and limited to restricted impactfootprints. Existing impacts should be reduced. Any facilitiesconstructed in these areas, and activities undertakenhere should be done in a way that limits environmentalimpacts. Road and infrastructure specifications should bedesigned to limit impacts.Aesthetics and recreational environment: Activitieswhich impact on the intrinsically wild appearance andcharacter of the area, or which impact on the wildernesscharacteristics of the area (solitude, remoteness, wildness,serenity, peace etc) should be restricted andimpacts limited to the site of the facility. Ideally visitorsshould only be aware of the facility or infrastructure thatthey are using, and this infrastructure/facility should bedesigned to fit in with the environment within which it islocated in order to avoid aesthetic impacts.FacilitiesType and size: Facilities are small, often very basic, andare distributed to avoid contact between users.Alternatively facilities designed for high levels of luxury,but limited visitor numbers can be accommodated here(e.g. controlled access private camps or concession sites).M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N5051

Sophistication of facilities: Generally facilities are small, basic and self-catering,though concession facilities may be significantly more sophisticated.Audible equipment and communication structures: None.Access and roads: Vehicular access to facilities is limited to low-spec roads, often4x4 only. Tourist and game viewing roads are 4x4 only. Established footpaths areprovided to avoid erosion and braiding.Location in ParkIn Marakele NP, Primitive areas were designated to buffer Remote areas from higheruse areas and activities outside the park, as well as to protect most of theremaining sensitive areas (such as lower mountains in the west and east) from highlevels of tourist activity. Almost all highly and moderately sensitive environmentsthat were not included within the Remote zone were included in this zone.Primitive areas were also designated in valleys with relatively low environmentalsensitivity to allow access to Remote areas as well as to contain the infrastructurerequired for management and tourist activity in these areas (e.g. trail huts andaccess roads). The plains in the contractual park were designated Primitive, as thecontrolled access associated with Primitive is compatible with the activities undertakenby the concessionaires. It is possible that these areas may be rezoned oncethe contracts have expired. In areas where Remote zones border on the parkboundary, a 100m wide Primitive zone was designated to allow park managementaccess to fences.Low Intensity Leisure ZoneCharacteristicsThe underlying characteristic of this zone is motorized self-drive access with basicself-catering facilities. The numbers of visitors are higher than in the Remote andPrimitive zones. These camps are without modern facilities such as shops andrestaurants. Relatively comfortable facilities are positioned in the landscape retainingthe inherent natural and visual quality which enhances the visitor experience ofa more natural and self providing experience. Access roads are low key, preferablygravel roads and/or tracks to provide a more wild experience. Facilities alongroads are limited to basic self-catering picnic sites with toilet facilities. In someparks, large busses and open safari vehicles are not permitted.Visitor activities and experienceActivities: Self drive motorized game viewing, picnicking,walking, cycling, game viewing, rock climbing, hiking,adventure activities.Interaction with other users: Moderate to highObjectives of the zone (Limits of acceptable change)Biophysical environment: Deviation from a natural/pristinestate should be minimized and limited to restrictedimpact footprints as far as possible. However, it isaccepted that some damage to the biophysical environmentassociated with tourist activities and facilities willbe inevitable.Aesthetics and recreational environment: Althoughactivities and facilities will impact on the wild appearanceand reduction of the wilderness characteristics ofthe area (solitude, remoteness, wildness etc) isinevitable, these should be managed and limited toensure that the area still provides a relatively naturaloutdoor experience.FacilitiesType and size: Picnic sites, view sites, information centres,ablution facilities, parking areas, education centresetc. Small self-catering (including camping) camps oflow to medium density. Additional facilities can includeswimming pools. Trails for 4x4 trails can also be provided.Day visitor site are not placed within the camps. Dayvisitor sites must relate to the general self-catering characteristicof the zone.Sophistication of facilities: Self contained self-cateringunits with bathroom facilities. Camp sites will includeablution facilities. These camps are without modernfacilities such as shops and restaurants.Audible equipment and communication structures: Cellphone coverage in vicinity of camps. Code of use for cellphones and radios required to retain relative level ofsolitude.Access and roads: Motorized self drive sedan caraccess (traditional game viewing) on designated routeswhich are preferably gravel roads. In some parks, largebusses and open safari vehicles are not permitted.When busses are permitted some roads should be designatedas accessible to self drive only. Roads are secondarygravel tourist roads or minor game viewing roads.Location in ParkLow intensity leisure is the highest level of developmentand tourist use currently anticipated in Marakele NP.Low Intensity Leisure areas were designated in the currentgame viewing area (Kwaggasvlakte), around currentaccommodation and other infrastructure, and in theareas around the planned new road network. Plainsareas with low environmental sensitivity south ofMarakele Pty Ltd were also included in this zone to allowfor potential expansion of game viewing areas north ofthe mountains. The existing access road to the SentechTowers was include in the Low Intensity Leisure Zonedespite it traversing highly sensitive and valuable environments,as it is a key part of the park’s tourist infrastructureand the impacts associated with its constructionhave already been incurred. The zoning along thisroad was designed to preclude the possibility of expansionof infrastructure along this access road. A LowIntensity Leisure Zone was designated in theVygeboomfontein area to accommodate existing contractualobligations.4. PARK INTERFACE ZONEThe Park Interface Zones shows the area within whichlanduse changes could affect a national Park. The zonesin combination with guidelines will serve as a basis fora. identifying the areas in which park management andscientists should respond to EIA’s,b. helping to identify the sort of impacts that would beimportant at a particular site, and most importantlyc. serving as the basis for integrating long term protectionof a national park into the spatial developmentplans of municipalities and other local authorities.In terms of EIA response, the zones serve largely to raisered-flags and do not remove the need for carefully consideringthe exact impact of a proposed development.In particular, they do not address activities with broadregional pollution impacts. These areas need to beentrenched within the park system as well as with municipalstructures (SDF/IDP). Further, investigation of formallegislative protection in terms of Protected NaturalEnvironments or similar legal instruments needs to beundertaken.The Park Interface Zone for Marakele NP has three overlayingcategories, namely priority natural areas, catchmentsprotection area, and a visual/aesthetic zone (Map 6).Priority Natural AreasThis zone aims to ensure the long term persistence ofbiodiversity, within and around the park, by identifyingthe key areas on which the long term survival of the parkdepends. This includes areas important to both biodiversitypattern (especially reasonably intact high prioritynatural habitats) and processes (ecological linkages,catchments, intact hydrological systems, etc.). This doesnot imply any loss of existing rights (e.g. current agriculturalactivities or legal extractive biodiversity use such asM A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N5253

fishing). Development proposals should be carefully screened to ensure that theydo not impact excessively on the aesthetics of the park. The areas identified areonly broadly indicative of sensitive areas, as at a fine scale many areas within thiszone would be perfectly suited for development. Further, very invasive developmentsoutside this zone would also have to be considered.Priority natural areas include areas identified for future park expansion as well asreasonably natural areas of high biodiversity value which are critical for the longtermpersistence of biodiversity within the park. These include adjacent naturalareas (especially high priority habitats) which function as an ecologically integratedunit with the park, as well as areas critical for maintaining ecological links andconnectivity with the broader landscape.Development guidelinesDevelopments within this zone area are likely to have an effect on the current andfuture park. Pending detailed investigation of the Interface Zone, developmentswithin this area should all be evaluated, and inappropriate developments and environmentallynegative land use changes (such as additional ploughing permits fornatural veld, urban expansion, intensification of landuse through golf estates etc)should be opposed. Developments with site specific impacts (e.g. a lodge on agame farm) should be favourably viewed if they contribute to ensuring conservationfriendly land use within a broader area. Further inappropriate developments,such as dam construction, excessive aquifer exploitation, and development resultingin the loss of riparian vegetation, should be opposed. In addition, the controlof alien vegetation, the control of soil erosion, and appropriate land care (e.g.appropriate stocking rates) should be promoted.Catchment Protection AreasThese are areas important for maintaining key hydrological processes (surface andgroundwater) within the park.Development guidelinesWithin these areas inappropriate development such as dam construction, loss ofriparian vegetation, and excessive aquifer exploitation should be opposed. Inaddition, the control of alien vegetation, the control of soil erosion, and appropriateland care (e.g. appropriate stocking rates) should be promoted.Viewshed protectionThese are areas where developments could impact onthe aesthetic quality of a visitors experience in a park.This zone is particularly concerned with visual impacts(both day and night), but could also include sound pollution.Development guidelinesWithin these areas any development proposals shouldbe carefully screened to ensure that they do not impactexcessively on the aesthetics of the park. The areas identifiedare only broadly indicative of sensitive areas, as ata fine scale many areas within this zone would be perfectlysuited for development. In addition, major projectswith large scale regional impacts may have to beconsidered even if they are outside the ViewshedProtection Zone.5. CURRENT STATUS AND FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS:The current park use zonation is based on the same biodiversityand landscape analyses undertaken for aConservation Development Framework (CDF); howevercertain elements underlying the CDF such as a tourismmarket analysis are not be fully incorporated into thepark use zonation. A full CDF will be developed forMarakele National Park within the current update cycle.Remote areas will be investigated for possible formaldeclaration as Wilderness Area in terms of Section 22 ofthe PAA. Special management overlays which designatespecific areas of a park that require special managementinterventions (e.g. areas requiring rehabilitation) will alsobe identified.6. REFERENCES:Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism. 2003.National Environmental Management: Protected AreasAct (Act 57 of 2003). Department of EnvironmentalAffairs and Tourism, Pretoria.SANParks. September 2005. Sensitivity-Value analysisManual. Unpublished. SANParks , Pretoria.SANParks. November 2005. CDF Planning Manual.Unpublished. SANParks , Pretoria.M A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N5455

APPENDIX 2Map 1 – Regional MapM A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N56 57

Map 2 – Physical features of the parkM A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N58 59

Map 3 – Land tenure and park expansionM A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N60 61

Map 4 – Zoning MapsM A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N62 63

Map 5 – Zoning with sensitivity valueM A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N64 65

Map 6 – Buffer areas or interface zonesM A R A K E L E N A T I O N A L P A R K • P A R K M A N A G E M E N T P L A N66 67

Map 7 – Infrastructure and development68

MARAKELE NATIONAL PARKP O Box 800THABAZIMBI0380Tel: (014) 777 1745Fax: (014) 777 1866