SANParks.org Forums

Aahh! The Good Ole' Pafuri Camp site!!!

Hi WTM

All through the ages, there have been various attempts to get tourist accommodation at Pafuri.
Most have fallen by the wayside - more urgent projects needing the funding being the usual reason for this.
Of late, it was mentioned as a possible project thanks to the funds that DEAT gave for the GLTP, but it was felt that tents at Punda Maria Camp would make more sense from a tourism point of view as they diversify the present tourism product at that camp.
These tents have been "constructed" - have a look at them, they are really beautiful.
Now, because the Makuleke Contractual Park/Wilderness Safaris are building a tented camp on the opposite side of the river, it is doubtful whether we'll ever build a tourism facility at that present site, simply to preserve the wilderness feel of the area.
Remember, there are a number of wonderful tourist facilities in the Makuleke area and anyone who loves the outdoors should look at this as a possible alternative destination.
The other two developments in the area are an old research camp (which won't be developed at this stage) and the TEBA facility.
TEBA was used by the Chamber of Mines to recruit mine workers and is still owned by them but there is negotiations ongoing in this regard.

Kind regards
KNP Spokesman

I'm with WTM on this. Would be great to be able to stay in this area. No huts just camping and maybe a few safari tents. No electricity

Pafuri is so spectacular that its a shame there isnt some way of having a very small, extremely low impact (but comfortable) camp in the vicinty, does not have to be right there, anywhere around the Luvuvhu would be great.

Something similar to Tamboti, with some basic tents and some luxury ones but fewer would be perfect!
I for one need a certain amount of electricity, hot water, fridge etc.. to enjoy myself, but these could be catered for with solar power.
maximum of 40/50 guests.
I guarantee you KNPS that the demand IS there, so much so that it will probably have almost 100% occupancy throughout the year!
That, coupled with the minimal capital layout would indeed be profitable, the Makuleke will do well either way!

PLEASE SANPARKS, PLEASE THINK ABOUT THIS ONE SERIOUSLY!!!!!!!!!! ACTUALLY THERE WOULD BE SO MANY WILLING DONORS THAT YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO SPEND A CENT!!!

Hi WTM and others

I stand to be corrected here (of course) but I am still not sure whether there was any tourist facility at Pafuri, other than the present picnic site.
In my office, I have a photostatted copy of a circa 1930s-odd tourist map (complete with Rabelais as an entrance post) and pre-Pafuri Entrance Gate and its road link but it doesn't show anything other than the Crook's Corner road "loop".
I spoke to Danie Pienaar (Dr "Tol" Pienaar's son) who is one of my constant sources of information on the history of the KNP and he doesn't know of a camping site there either.
All we know is the existence of a scientific research camp that was washed away during the floods and (of course) the TEBA facility.
But, seriously, there will be a tented camp built soon on the other side of the Luvuvhu River in the Makuleke Contractual Park which you will be able to try out.
I understand that a "global" (for want of a better word) Environmental Impact Assessment - EIA - on the whole Pafuri area to find out whether it can support another tourist facility could be supported (not financially - environmentally!) will be done soon which should give us the proper guidance in this regard.

And just so that you understand, even limited impact facilities like camping sites have an environmental impact of sorts on an area and so any development like this would need to go through this process, no matter what the demand for it is.
Remember, SANParks is first and foremost a conservation organization and anything we do has to comply with environmental law.
Check out the article "Bush Notes: Kruger's not for sale" on page 31 of May 2005 Getaway.
I quote the 5th paragraph:
"There is a misconception that tourism, specifically lodges, doesn't impact on the environment.
They do.
They leave a footprint because to function they need roads, services, waterholes and so on."

Thanks for the subject - it has got me in a bit of a twist!

Kind regards
KNP Spokesman

Thank you most sincerely KNPS!

I fully understand what you have said and would NEVER want anything to happen that would compromise the aspect of the park that is the pinnacle of importance, the very basis of the park's existence - conservation-.

If however, it should ever be ascertained that something would indeed be possible, without adding new roads etc... then please know that I would gladly offer my assistance.

Thanks KNPSM,

I think you made it very clear to us and me especially and I agree with that 100%. I am looking forward to the Makuleke camp if possible. Please keep us up to date on when it would be finished etc.

Kind regards
WTM.

Dear Forumites
Good morning to you all!

Just a short note, there has been a lodge up and running in the Makuleke Contractual Park for a while now. It is called The Outpost and is run by Wilderness Safaris.
I think the tented camp (that will open soon) on the Luvuhvu River is an alternative for this.

Just on the subject of Wilderness and running tourism in conservation areas.
The idea is indeed to move away from intensive operations - like the SANParks main camps in KNP - towards low impact products like tented camps (Tamboti etc), camping sites (Maroela etc - look out for a new one opening in the Mopani area soon!) and Wilderness Activities (walking trails, mountain bike trails etc).
This is why most of the tourism activities and facilities in the newer parks are smaller, more "wilderness"-orientated and have lower environmental impact.
Most seem to be on stilts (this not only gives a better view, but it also lowers the "footprint" on the ground) and most use wood/tents etc rather than solid structures as then it is easier to rehabilitate the area.
If ever you get the chance, have a look at the new SANParks administered camps in Marakele and Mapungubwe National Parks (among others) and you'll see what I mean.
The advantages are numerous and include:
* Less people, therefore you feel more "exclusive";
* Demand for things like water, sewerage and other necessities is less;
* Overall impact on the environment is considerably less; etc, etc

Hope this explains why we don't just open facilities because of demand (although this is one of the major considerations).

Kind regards
KNP Spokesman

Thanks KNPSM.

It makes a great deal of sense. Environment impact is not something you can read about in your nromal batman DC comics. That I think we need to remember.

Regards
WTM.

I have to add some more here.

I would hate to drive around in the Pafuri with cars flowing around there like a peacefull monday morning drive on the N1 through Midrand at 7:00 just because of a new camping facility we forced to open.

Paufri should always remain as it is now. The true and real Kruger rustic experience. Humanize it and you'll destroy it.

KNPSM where exactly does these Makuleke camps lie?

Why I love Pafuri...



Can u get more beautiful than this?

Pafuri road from picnic spot to Crookes corner.



Nyala loop end view.

That area is by far my most favourite spot in the whole of KNP. To Frank at Pafuri Picnic Spot - You were brilliant! If it wasn't for you my birding list would have grown nothing. Gosh he knows his birds. Beautifully kept and clean, busy with some maintenance here and there, but not inconvenient.

Noticed that as well. Believe a lot of trees rotted away due to
the floodwaters

Just for those who did not know. Pafuri has the lowest rainfall quantity in the Park. Amazing if you think of how green and dense the flora is up there.