South Africa is discussing changing the name of the world-famous reserve

South Africa’s world-famous Kruger National Park could become known by a new name if some local politicians get their act together.

The extensive wildlife reserve, then called Sabi Game Reserve, was renamed in 1926 to honor Paul Kruger. He was president in the late nineteenth century of what was known as the Republic of South Africa, which forms part of what is now eastern South Africa.

For Afrikaners, descendants of 17th-century European settlers, Kruger is revered as a hero who led the resistance against British colonialism.

But to the majority of South Africans, he is seen as a remnant of the country’s racist past, having been one of those responsible for expelling black Africans from their lands and excluding them from having a say in the running of the republic.

Many of South Africa’s cities, towns, roads and other major infrastructure facilities have been given new names since the end of the system of legal apartheid, known as apartheid, and the beginning of the democratic era in 1994. Although sometimes controversial, these decisions have been justified as a means of breaking with what came before – both apartheid and the colonial era.

But Kroger’s proposed name change not only touches on history, it could have an impact on the country’s fragile economy.

The national park, home to elephants, lions, hippos, leopards and many other animals, attracts nearly a million visitors annually and is a jewel in the crown of South Africa’s tourism industry.

Some argue that Kroger’s name change could threaten that.

Part of the park is located in Mpumalanga province, and in September, when the country celebrated Heritage Month, representatives of the opposition Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) tabled a motion in the region’s legislature to change Kroger’s name.

“How do we celebrate our heritage as South Africans when we still have our beautiful national parks named after apartheid architect Paul Kruger,” EFF representative Rulani Kibbe was quoted as saying in a rousing speech. Although this speech is not historically accurate, as segregation was introduced in its legal form decades after Kruger’s death, the speech reflects the way some view it.

The EFF also proposed renaming other major landmarks in the province, including the Kruger Mpumalanga International Airport.

But in a hurry to remove Kruger’s association with the park is the EFF, which is its national leader Controversial MP Julius Malemabrought up another problematic name: Skukuza.

Skukuza, which means “he who cleans” in the Tsonga language, is the nickname given to the park’s first ranger, James Stephenson-Hamilton, who was known for, among other things, evicting poachers and black communities who lived in the park in its early days.

The South African newspaper Sunday World quoted the leader of the NDF in Mpumalanga, Colin Sidibe, as acknowledging the grave mistake committed by the party.

“We are still communicating with the land claimants in the Kruger National Park and the people who were staying there because they said Skukuza is not the right name. He was the man who kicked them out of the park,” Sidibe said.

The Afrikaans pressure group AfriForum condemned the EFF’s proposal as “cheap politics and evidence that the political thirst for power in the region trumps informed or responsible decision-making.”

The group pledged to launch legal challenges to any attempts to rename the park without due process and criticized the EFF for criticizing the name it bears.

“The Kruger National Park was created thanks to Kruger’s vision (and) to ignore Kruger’s contribution to the creation of the country’s most important national park…is opportunistic and blatantly spreading lies,” AfriForum’s Marais de Waal said in response to the news.

The name change proposal was adopted by the provincial legislature after receiving support from its largest party, the African National Congress, which is in power at the national level, and Umkhonto Wesizwe.

Although it is not legally binding, as there is a national process any name change must go through, critics have warned that if approved it could hurt the tourism sector, which contributes about 9% to the country’s economy.

Tourism expert Professor Elmarie Slabbert told the BBC that this could have “serious consequences… and may weaken the international recognition of this park and of South Africa as a tourist destination that we have built over many years.”

There will also be the cost of having to rename the park.

“We need to respect Aboriginal heritage,” admitted the academic, who is a research director at North-West University’s School of Tourism Management.

“But the impact on the economy will be so significant that we need to decide where to spend our money. We have a high unemployment rate at this time and I think that is where the money should go.”

More than 30% of the working-age population is unemployed – what the World Bank classifies as one of the worst unemployment rates on record – and youth unemployment rates are even higher.

But economics is not the only basis on which the name change decisions were based.

The need to address past inequalities in the country was deemed vital.

For example, the name of former Prime Minister Hendrik Verwoerd, a key figure in the implementation of apartheid, has been removed from many places.

Other changes include the city of Port Elizabeth. Named after the wife of a 19th-century British official, it is now called “Jakbirha”, a Xhosa word meaning the river that runs through it. King William’s City, after William IV, now became Qonce, also referring to the river.

Johannesburg International Airport, formerly known as Jan Smuts – in honor of the former prime minister – is now called OR Tambo, after the anti-apartheid leader and former president of the African National Congress.

Some cities, such as the capital Pretoria, have retained their titles but the local government areas to which they belong have been renamed.

Many other renaming ideas have been mooted, including renaming the coastal town of Port Alfred in the Eastern Cape, which commemorates Queen Victoria’s second son. Some even suggested changing the name of the country to Azania.

Many of these proposals have divided public opinion, and to ensure that changes are not made on a whim, there is an extensive legal process that must be completed.

It is administered by the South African Geographical Names Council (SAGNC) and begins with the submission of an application either by individuals, communities or institutions to the body’s regional branch.

The proposal is being discussed and could lead to a public consultation. Once this is completed, the name change plan is sent to the national office.

Dr Nkadiming Mahosi, president of SAGNC, told the BBC that if it was believed to meet “all the requirements”, a recommendation would be made to the Minister of Sports, Arts and Culture for a final decision.

“What is happening here (in the Mpumalanga Legislative Council) is not consistent with what national law stipulates… (and) is political point scoring,” he said.

As a national landmark, and the fact that different government departments will need to have a say, Kruger is unique, Dr Mahosi added.

Then there are many bureaucratic hurdles that must be negotiated before the Kruger name disappears from tourism brochures.

But the discussion revealed the sensitivities that still exist about how to deal with the country’s past and the legacy of those who ruled it.