**3. Conclusion**

**Figure 7.** Evolution of elephants [36].

152 National Parks - Management and Conservation

**Figure 8.** Hapoor and the elephant family tree [36].

**Figure 9.** Interior view of the Ulwazi Interpretation Center [36].

High expectations are placed on national parks namely that they have to enhance local economies, conserve natural and cultural heritage as well as provide an ever-increasing number of visitors with experiences in nature [17]. Washburn explains that '[t]he survival of the national park system in the twenty-first century depends on how it interacts with society and how much society values it. The Interpretation Program is the primary means by which the National Park Service engages diverse publics with their national parks, providing access to meanings, establishes relevance and connects people and communities to national heritage [42]'.

Considering the interpretation initiatives taken by SANParks, one would agree that there is clearly an effort to improve the current situation. SANParks' interpretation plans predominantly focus on the soft interpretation examples [43, 44]. These authors explain that one should consider interpretation on a continuum where the one end, hard interpretation, refer to economical, physical and regulatory strategies to manage visitors and on the other end, soft interpretation, use educational strategies to manage visitors. The question is, therefore, whether national parks should only consider soft/educational interpretation strategies or should they also consider the hard interpretation strategies as part of the interpretation plans? Similarly, interpretation can be categorized into primary, secondary and tertiary interpretation based on easily identifiable characteristics. Primary and secondary interpretation's explanation is similar to that of soft interpretation but what is interesting is that tertiary education is considered to enhance the experience with the more noticeable examples of interpretation. Limited research is available on the correlation between hard and soft interpretation to support the notion of including hard interpretation into the interpretation plans of SANParks. This is probably why SANParks have separate visitor interpretation plans and visitor management plans [24, 39]. But what is clearly noticeable from SANParks' initiatives for visitor interpretation or visitor management plans is the fact that these plans form part of their responsible tourism mandate rather than sustainable tourism mandate [29]. Although similar on minimizing negative impacts, there is a common consensus that responsible and sustainable tourism should not be used interchangeably [45]. Responsible tourism has an emphasis on competitive advantage, involving communities, triple bottom line diversity and promotion of sustainable use of local resources [45]. This is a valuable lesson that other national parks can also take from SANParks. The interpretation plans of SANParks therefore go beyond the message of sustainability but also include an awareness of local cultures (history, stories, legends and myths), incorporating local communities (employment) and more of visitor enjoyment emphasis.
