Tourism products in protected areas have a specific social carrying capacity for tourists. This refers to the relationship between the visitors’ (tourists’) experience and the quality and quantity of their interaction with other visitors to the same recreation site or, in this instance, the wildlife viewing site (Ferreira & Harmse 1999). Outdoor recreation managers first used the term ‘carrying capacity’ in the early 1960s to determine the maximum number of visitors that could use a recreational area without destroying its essential qualities (Ferreira & Harmse 1999). Ferreira and Harmse assert that this concept is fundamental within an African national park’s context, where the tourism potential is in danger of being over-exploited.

Middleton and Hawkins (1998) defined tourism carrying capacity (TCC) as ‘the level of human activity an area can accommodate without the area deteriorating, the resident community being adversely affected, or the quality of visitors’ experience declining’.

Various dimensions influence crowding perception, but three substantial factors have been found in this regard:

This section will first attend to previous work conducted on crowding in the KNP, followed by research conducted on behavioural issues at crowding in other nature-based destinations. One of the first studies found on crowding in the KNP is that of Ferreira and Harmse (1999), who focused on the social carrying capacity of the park. The study revealed that the management policy regarding tourism carrying capacity in 1999 showed early warning signs of tourist congestion. The study aimed to establish a sustainable scale for tourism development in the park by using the concept of carrying capacity as a planning tool. Their study suggested the following management methods to relieve traffic congestion during the peak season and public holidays in the park: restrictions on coach access to particular roads; declaring certain roads as one-way routes during peak periods; tarring more roads to relieve the congestion on the southern circle roads; building future picnic spots for day visitors away from the camps; and refurbishing specific camps (Satara, Skukuza and Lower Sabie) to create a high-quality product and restrict day visitors to these camps.

In 2014, Ferreira and Harmse conducted a second study on crowding at the KNP. The research aimed to ascertain what has changed in tourism infrastructure, the superstructure and visitor management since 1997. The study was conducted on the large numbers of day visitors, the allocation of access (Wild Cards for local visitors) and the changes in the landscape matrix on the southwestern border of the KNP. Their research found that day-visitor numbers have increased, as did crowding (congestion) of tourist traffic over weekends, public holidays and holidays in the park’s southern region, which impacted visitors’ wildlife-viewing experience in the region. The study’s most important finding was that the park’s mechanisms to manage crowding (as mentioned in the introduction) have yet to be implemented successfully in the southern region. This can impact the wildlife experiences of visitors, consequently resulting in unfavourable word-of-mouth reports that will adversely affect future earnings of the park (Ferreira & Harmse 2014).

Ballantyne et al. (2017) conducted a study in the KNP regarding stakeholders’ perceptions of, and solutions to, traffic congestion problems in the park’s southern region. Solutions to crowding and congestion include booking and entry systems that can reduce congestion at gates, more active and visible traffic control, enforcement of traffic violations, a need to address the use of open safari vehicles (OSV), reducing vehicle numbers and separating OSVs from self-drive visitors by opening new routes.

Brett’s (2018) research relooked the development of the KNP in South Africa by giving a systematic layout of the park’s development since its establishment. The author concluded that the park’s southern region is seen as crowded. The study proposed the following four recommendations to help alleviate the problems caused by an increasing influx of visitors: Firstly, OSVs should be better managed and fewer vehicles carrying a higher number of visitors should be encouraged. Secondly, a park-and-ride system should be introduced, which could include value-adding initiatives such as meals cooked by local people in the bush or allowing drivers to access roads closed to the general public. Thirdly, peripheral developments should be developed. This entails that all new tourism-related products should be on the borders of the park’s southern region. Fourthly, regional branding should be encouraged. Here, consideration should be given to the separate branding of the KNP’s four regions and the retention of the far northern region as a remote wilderness.

As the focus of this research was to examine behavioural issues in crowded protected areas, the work of Arnberger and Haider (2007) was investigated, as this was the only study that could be found regarding behavioural issues of visitors. The study investigated the influence of place attachment and experience by using history on the perception of depreciative visitor behaviour, recreation impacts and crowding in an urban national park. The results showed that visitors with higher place attachment and previous experience in the park were more sensitive to social and environmental site conditions. Therefore, they might be more affected by crowding.

Social effects (also an area investigated by this research) of visitor crowding and visitors’ expectations and satisfaction were researched by Kalisch and Klaphake (2007) in Hallig Hooge National Park, Germany. They found that the most sensitive visitor group comprised the non-guided day visitors, whereas guided visitors were much more tolerant of crowding. Furthermore, the study found that perceptions of crowding seem to have had only a slight impact on visitor satisfaction.

From the studies investigated, crowding is not unique to the KNP. However, it is alarming that crowding remains a problem in the KNP (results of this study show this) after various studies were conducted with different solutions that were proposed, specifically regarding wildlife sightings. This indicates that a better understanding is required to solve the issues of crowding. This study will be the first to examine visitors’ behaviour and feelings in these crowded areas.

At the current rate, it is predicted that the number of visitors to the KNP will double within 11 years; according to Brett (2018), the number could even double by 2029. Balancing the many and often conflicting demands placed on the park will require considerable foresight and skilled management. More effective management of visitors, particularly during peak holiday periods, and innovative solutions to the problems created by visitor crowds remain urgent research priorities. Brett (2018) states that managers of protected areas must balance the need to maintain protected areas and be financially self-sufficient. To provide services that facilitate crowding effectively, managers must understand and incorporate tourist preferences and tolerance levels for infrastructure and activities, as well as use restrictions and other attributes of the park and protected areas (Hearne & Salinas 2002), because visitor management is vital in providing tourists with worthy experiences.

Based on the Dictionary of Tourism (Zelenka & Pásková 2012, as cited in Zelenka & Kacetl 2013:6), visitor management is defined as:

It is part of destination management, mainly in protected areas and destinations that systematically build sustainable tourism.

Visitor management is essential to manage tourism impacts, particularly in national parks where the environment is critical. Customarily, this was carried out by diverting tourists from the so-called ‘honey pots’ (in this case, overcrowded areas in the southern section of the KNP) or by hardening areas (e.g., resurfacing paths and footpaths) with high visitor numbers (Swarbrooke 1999). Mason (2008) adds that there are two main ways to manage crowding of visitors: firstly, by controlling the number of visitors – either by limiting numbers to match capacity or spreading the number throughout the year – rather than having them concentrated in a focused tourist season. Secondly, by adapting the resources to enable the park to cope with the volume of visitors, thereby becoming less impacted and modifying visitor behaviour in the crowded area.

Visitor management is therefore viewed as the regulating of visitors; such regulation may relate to the prevention of access to specific areas or sites.

The study was approved by the Faculty of Economic Management Sciences ethics community at North-West University (Ethics number NWU-01872-22-A4). The study was also approved by the scientific committee of SANParks, with the following project number CRO/2022/11.

The following considerations were taken into account to ensure that the data were collected ethically:

Twenty participants were overnight visitors and three were day visitors. Regarding the number of visits per year by the overnight visitors, it was found that they visit the park an average of 2.44 times a year and stay an average of 16 days in the park. Participant 7 had the most extended stay, namely 90 days, followed by Participant 4, who stayed for 38 days. The shortest stay was 2 days (Participants 5 and 7). Regarding the day visitors, it was found that they visit the park at least 17 times a year, with Participants 14 and 15 indicating 30 times and 20 times per year, respectively. They stay for only 1 day (day visitors). Of the 23 participants interviewed, only one was an international visitor (Participant 6). The participant indicated that she used to live in South Africa but had emigrated to Australia 20 years ago.

Most of the participants reside in Gauteng (10), followed by Mpumalanga (8), with two participants from KwaZulu-Natal and one participant each from the Western Cape, North-West province and Australia (international), respectively.

Considering whether participants visited other national parks in South Africa, 16 participants indicated that they did (‘yes’), six said ‘no’ and two said ‘rarely’. Most participants indicated their preferred accommodation type as camping (10 participants), followed by chalets (7 participants). Participant 1 stated camping, depending on the length of stay; if it is longer, the visitor prefers to stay in a chalet. Participants 11, 14, 20 and 23 indicated camping and chalets. Participant 15, a day visitor, said they chose to stay outside the park.

From the data analysis, the following main themes (motivations) emerged: proximity, wildlife, availability, attributes and tradition (Table 1).

The first theme, the accessibility to the southern region, emerged from the responses of numerous participants who indicated that they have family in this area, which is why they visit the southern region (as stated by Participant 2: ‘I have family in Nelspruit [Mbombela], therefore I am staying in this area’, and that it is easily accessible from their place of origin, this is supported by participant 3 statement that ‘[It is] easy to access from KwaZulu-Natal’. For the second theme, wildlife, the participants felt that this section of the park has more wildlife and a wider variety as well as more predators, as Participant 16 indicated that ‘one is guaranteed to see wildlife like leopards and lions’. Availability was the third theme identified, as participants indicated that this was the only region (rest camps) where they could find accommodation. Participant 17 said that ‘other places in the park were full’. The fourth theme identified was the attributes. This refers to reasonable accommodation, shaded trees to camp under, scenic beauty, good facilities and good picnic areas. Participant 10 said, ‘I like Berg-en-Dal, lots of shade and trees’. The last theme was that it had become a tradition. The participants indicated that they always visit this part of the park and it has become a tradition, as Participant 12 said that ‘it has been a tradition, is coming to the park for 40 years’.

Participants were asked to identify areas in the park’s southern section where they experienced crowding. The following places, where there are sightings especially leopards and lions and, to some extent, elephants were mentioned: Lower Sabie restaurant; Skukuza Rest Camp; Lower Sabie Rest Camp; roads; Afsaal Picnic Site; Crocodile Bridge entrance; reception at Skukuza; bathrooms at camping areas in Skukuza and Berg-en-Dal; camping area in Berg-en-Dal Rest Camp; anything south of Satara Rest Camp and entrance gates to Skukuza and Malelane Rest Camps. This falls in line with the work of Brett (2018) and Ballantyne et al. (2017), in which it was indicated that crowded regions in the southern section of the park include wildlife sightings, day visitor areas and areas where people can stop to relax, eat and drink and buy needed supplies.

The next aspect that the researchers wanted to understand better was how crowded areas make visitors feel. As seen from the results (Table 2), most of the feelings revealed were about wildlife sightings. Therefore, it was necessary to determine the feelings that tourists experience in crowded areas. The areas where crowding was studied in the park’s southern section were picnic areas with restaurants, picnic areas without restaurants, campsites, ablution facilities at campsites, parking at camps or camping areas and wildlife sightings, where three scenarios were given, namely where there were fewer than five vehicles, between five and ten vehicles and ten plus vehicles (Ballantyne et al. 2017; Moore 2022; Slabbert 2022).

The first identified theme was belligerent, meaning ‘feeling angry or upset’ (Macmillan Dictionary 2023). Words that participants used are ‘frustrated’, ‘angry’, ‘annoyed’, ‘upset’, ‘cross’, ‘negative’ and ‘give me a headache’. Participant 12 felt ‘frustrated with people that do not stay by the rules’. Participant 13 said, ‘Cannot do anything, cannot get through, makes one frustrated’. This was also the theme with the most responses and it could therefore be viewed as important. The research of Kim and Yoon (2020) regarding the feelings of tourists at crowded tourist destinations revealed that visitors predominantly feel anger when areas are crowded. It confirms the current finding of this research and can be seen as a general feeling of tourists when they are in crowded tourist areas.

The second theme identified was content, meaning a state of tranquillity or quietness about a situation (Merriam-Webster Dictionary 2023); this cannot be better explained than in the words of Participant 6, ‘just the way it is’. Participant 1 said, ‘I am fine, not angry. Depend on the sighting; if leopard or lion’. This was the theme with the second-largest number of participants.

The third theme identified was expectations. This is best explained by the words of Participant 14: ‘Jealous, I want to see the animals’. The words of Participant 13 were, ‘[I was] excited that there was something to see’. This finding is unexpected and new to the researchers, as one would expect the first identified theme (belligerent) in the research as a possible theme but not expectations. The research indicates that some participants are excited when they arrive at a crowded area, because that suggests there might be some fascinating wildlife or sought-after game such as lions, leopards or elephants to see; they therefore do not mind the crowds at the sighting.

The last theme identified is disappointment, which means defeated in expectation or hope (Merriam-Webster Dictionary 2023), as stated by Participant 18, ‘I know there is something but not sure I will see it’. This finding shows that some visitors do not mind the crowding but are more concerned that they will not see the animals other visitors see because of the crowded number of vehicles at the sighting.

The following section determined the behaviour of visitors in crowded areas by asking why they stayed or left the crowded area. Crowding at park facilities such as picnic sites and restaurants revealed one theme: to eat.

Ballantyne et al. (2017) identified various mechanisms to manage congestion (crowding) at entrances gates, for example, creating a new online booking system to speed up vehicle entry into the park; providing three different queueing areas at gates (one for day-visiting self-drivers, one for open safari vehicles and one for overnight visitors); providing regular, ongoing ‘service quality’ training for gate reception staff and preventing vehicles from using the park for transit purposes. Still, this problem of crowding exists and needs thoughtful attention from the KNP management to implement the solutions.

A significant number of participants from this research indicated that the restaurants in Skukuza were critical areas where crowding was experienced. The research is the first to identify the Skukuza restaurants as problematic regarding crowding. There are currently two restaurants, Cattle Baron and The Station Restaurant (South African National Parks 2023a). The problem here is that people need to eat and have no other alternative than to wait to be seated, especially day visitors. This is difficult to manage, as people migrate through the park to different areas and rest camps; therefore, no one knows how many will arrive at restaurants and rest camps’ communal areas. The most plausible solution is to improve service in order to streamline the time people must wait to be served or to implement a pre-booking system (develop a booking application) where only people with reservations can enter the restaurants.

An interesting finding is that some visitors are willing to accept the crowding at wildlife sightings, because they know that it often indicates that there is something particularly interesting or valuable to see, for example, predators or some of the Big Five (elephant, rhino, lion, leopard and buffalo). This could add to the excitement of the experience and allow visitors to see sought-after species. Therefore, some visitors’ behaviour is to join crowded wildlife sightings. The research also revealed that crowding rarely occurs at sightings of common species such as kudu, eland and impala. One of Ballantyne et al.’s (2017) recommendations is to reframe visitor expectations from just seeing the Big Five to experiencing the whole Kruger environment. This research agrees with Ballantyne et al.’s view that the focus should be on more than just the Big Five. To change these circumstances, marketing and branding conducted by SANParks should focus on the KNP as a tourism destination and omit the Big Five theme. This can be done by emphasising its accommodation facilities, restaurants and other existing sites such as geological and archaeological areas. Zelenka and Kacetl (2013) state that visitor flows could be optimised by influencing the tourists’ activities and behaviour in relation to the area, which may decrease crowded areas significantly.

An additional aspect is that the behaviour of tourists at wildlife sightings contributes to the crowded wildlife sightings dilemma. For example, visitors do not follow road traffic regulations (e.g., stopping on the right side of the road) and therefore obstruct other visitors, which could create hazardous situations and impede traffic flow; this notion was confirmed by Ballantyne et al. (2017) and Brett (2018). Additionally, when visitors linger for a long time at a sighting or do not move to allow others to see, it can create a bottleneck and limit the number of people who can enjoy the experience. It is essential for visitors to be aware of the impact of their behaviour and to act responsibly and respectfully when visiting wildlife areas.

A possible solution is for management at the park to consider developing a code of conduct that people must sign to indicate that they pledge to adhere to the rules and regulations. The idea of a code of conduct is supported by the research of Mason (2005). It is recommended that this signed code of conduct be displayed in visitors’ vehicles by putting up a small window display with a specific number located on it to prove that they have signed the pledge. Visitors might then be more cautious, as they could be reported to management by sending the allocated number to a call centre. Park management can incentivise visitors who did sign the code of conduct. Adding more signage in the park regarding rules, behaviour at sightings and traffic regulations could also reduce crowding. This would serve as a constant reminder of the rules and regulations. Educating visitors about behaviour at crowded sightings is therefore crucial.

Visitors at crowded wildlife sightings experienced various feelings, which were revealed for the first time in this research for the KNP. The results identified feelings of frustration, anger and disappointment, as well as feelings of contentment and excitement. Kim and Yoon (2020) identified two feelings (i.e., anger and sympathy) at crowded tourist destinations such as historical sites. These results showed that anger weakens tourists’ environmentally responsible behaviour (e.g., driving off the road or speeding), whereas sympathy might strengthen it.

Environmentally responsible behaviour refers to actions by visitors that minimise negative impacts on the environment and promote sustainability (Newsome, Moore & Dowling 2013). This includes a commitment to conserve natural resources, reduce pollution and preserve ecosystems for current and future generations. Some examples of environmentally responsible behaviour are the following: In this research, anger and frustration were expected feelings that tourists feel at crowded sightings, but what was interesting was that some people became excited. The main reason for becoming excited was that there might be some fascinating wildlife to view, as numerous vehicles at a sighting equal the possibility of one of the Big Five. Disappointment was also identified as a feeling that visitors felt at crowded wildlife sightings, mainly because there was a possibility that they would not see what the other visitors saw, as there were too many vehicles and the specific animal might move off before they have had a chance to see it.