The Ghana Heritage Conservation Trust has taken note of a video currently circulating on social media regarding an interaction between a visitor and staff of Kakum National Park.
In the interest of providing accurate information, the Trust wishes to clarify that the visitor was not denied access to the Park because of an intention to take photographs or publish content on social media.
The visitor informed Park Management that he had received authorization from the Honourable Minister responsible for Tourism to undertake media recording within the Park. In accordance with established operational procedures governing filming and other commercial media activities, Park staff requested written authorization or official confirmation of the stated approval before granting permission for the activity to proceed.
As no documentary evidence or official verification was available at the time, the visitor was respectfully advised to await confirmation or comply with the applicable procedures governing such activities.
The officers on duty acted in accordance with established operational protocols designed to ensure consistency, accountability and the proper management of Ghana's protected heritage sites. These procedures are applied fairly and uniformly to all individuals and organizations undertaking similar activities within the Park.
The Ghana Heritage Conservation Trust remains committed to professionalism, transparency and the highest standards of visitor service while safeguarding the integrity of Kakum National Park and Ghana's natural heritage.
The accompanying video provides further context to the events in question.
4 months agokwekutours
You mentioned that he paid only for the canopy walk but later realized he intended to record videos in the forest. However, visitors must pass through the forest before accessing the canopy walk, so I’m not sure I understand that explanation. I’ve visited Kakum several times and have seen many visitors carrying professional cameras—not just phones. Was he using a phone or a professional camera? And even if it was a professional camera, what led you to conclude that he was producing commercial content or a documentary that required a professional videography fee? He’s a content creator, and it’s not unusual for content creators to document their visits to Kakum. Based on both your account and his, it seems clear that one side is not presenting the full picture. Regarding the authorization letter, is there any reason to keep referring to it? It wasn’t produced at the time, and several hours have passed (almost a day I guess) without it being provided. It seems unlikely that it will surface now. On the issue of discrimination, my concern is different. But the waiting time imposed on visitors often results in an unnecessary waste of their valuable time. There are occasions when site guides are already available, yet visitors are still made to wait. If guides are present and ready to work, what is the justification for delaying visitors instead of allowing the tour to proceed promptly?
More posts
