Impact of wildlife on food crops and approaches to reducing human wildlife conflict in the protected landscapes of Eastern Nepal

Dahal, Nabin Kumar; Harada, Kazuhiro; Adhikari, Sudha; Sapkota, Ramesh Prasad; Kandel, Saroj

doi:10.1080/10871209.2021.1926601

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A recent study by Dahal et al (2022), found that 38% of respondents believed that electric fencing would reduce crop depredation in Eastern Nepal. This underscores the importance of physical barriers as a mitigation measure.…”

Section: Overall Conflict Pattern and Mitigation Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, a study in different protected areas in Bangladesh found that 64% of respondents reported crop losses due to elephant and wild boar attacks (Raihan Sarker & Røskaft, 2010), while a study conducted across four Indian states reported that 71% of households claimed crop damages were the highest (Karanth & Kudalkar, 2017). Similarly, a study in Eastern Nepal showed that 77% of the respondents reported crop depredation by wildlife attacks (Dahal et al, 2022).…”

Section: Overall Conflict Pattern and Mitigation Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Eliciting community‐preferred policy alternatives for achieving workable coexistence in a human‐dominated landscape: Insights from Chitwan National Park, Nepal

Ferdin,

Lee,

Dhungana

et al. 2023

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human‐wildlife conflict is a global issue that poses a major threat to biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. Wildlife adapted to human‐modified landscapes in developing countries can threaten the safety and livelihood of local communities. In such landscapes, where people and wildlife compete for resources, community involvement is promoted to achieve workable coexistence. We used a choice experiment methodology approach to identify community‐preferred policy alternatives in Chitwan National Park in south‐central Nepal. The results indicated that conflicts between the local community and wildlife are on the rise, crop damage being the highest form of damage and most perceived compensation and fencing as conflict‐mitigation tools. The choice experiment showed that residents have a positive preference for enhancing livelihood diversification skills, cultivating buffer crops, promoting alternative livelihoods, and strengthening rapid response teams. We identified concerned mitigators who are younger age group, encountered and concurred that HWC is increasing, and agreed that fencing and compensation are conflict‐mitigation tools. We designed scenario planning using community‐preferred policy alternatives to assist the park management. This is the first‐choice experiment study to design an evaluation framework under community resilience perspectives to achieve workable coexistence. Our study has potential implications for promoting coexistence in a human‐dominated landscape.

show abstract

Section: Overall Conflict Pattern and Mitigation Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Overall Conflict Pattern and Mitigation Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eliciting community‐preferred policy alternatives for achieving workable coexistence in a human‐dominated landscape: Insights from Chitwan National Park, Nepal

Ferdin,

Lee,

Dhungana

et al. 2023

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…e respondents' family size was categorized based on the number of family members. 41 (43.2%) of the respondents belonged to medium family size, that is, 3-6 family members; 34 (35.8%) belonged to high family size (6)(7)(8); 15 (15.8%) belonged to low (2-3 members); and 5 (5.3%) belonged to very high, that is, greater than 8 family members. e minimum number of family members of the respondent was 1, and the maximum was 9. e mean was 5.8. e distance of the human settlement to the forest habitat of wild animals was categorized as follows: 60 (63.2%) respondents were near, 25 (26.3%) were at medium distance, and 10 (10.5%) were far.…”

Section: Sociodemographic Characteristics Of the Respondentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As human populations expand into areas where wild animals exist, competition for resources and confrontation arises [7]. Human encroachment on wild animals' habitats and the absolute exploitation of natural resources serve to shrink core areas of wild animals, which leads to conflicts between humans and wild animals [8]; for example, the conflict among the farmers, pastoralists, and baboons usually happens due to crop raiding and killing young goats and lambs. Human-wild animal conflict occurs when growing human populations overlap with the established wild animals' territory, creating reduction of resources or loss of life of people and/or wild animals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human-Wild Animal Conflict in Banja Woreda, Awi Zone, Ethiopia

Derebe

Tsegaye

2022

International Journal of Forestry Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human-wild animal conflict has serious conservation consequences, both for populations of wild animals and for the people who live around wild animals’ habitats. The aim of this study was to assess the human-wild animal conflict in Banja Woreda, Awi Zone, Ethiopia. First, the area was selected purposively because it is expected to be prone to a high level of human-wild animal conflict, and then the selected areas were stratified based on the distance to wild animals’ habitats. A total of 95 household heads (HHs) from the two kebeles were interviewed using structured and semistructured questionnaires. Additional information was also gathered through focus group discussions (FGDs), key informant interviews, and personal observation during data collection. About 84 (88%) of the respondents replied that wild animals had an effect on the livelihood of the local communities through both crop and livestock loss. The crop and animal loss was different across the distance categories of the study area ( P < 0.05 ). The highest proportion of loss was reported in the closest settlement than far-located settlements. The chi-square association test shows that there was a significant association ( P < 0.05 ) between livelihood activity across crops and domestic animal loss. The farmers who led their livelihoods in both farming and livestock activity reported higher animal and crop losses than the only farming or livestock activity. The crop types that were more raided by wild animals were maize and potato. The risks of crop raiding were significantly different among crop varieties ( P < 0.05 ). Wild animals affected crops in different development stages, and mature stage ranked the first followed by fruiting stage. Crop growth stages that were attacked by wild animals showed significant variations ( P < 0.05 ). Of the crop type that was attacked by wild animals, potato was highly attacked, which reaches to 113.8 quintals (28%), followed by maize 96 quintals (23%) and small millet 74.7 quintals (18%) within three years. The loss of crops in the kebeles was not significantly different ( P > 0.05 ). Wild animals also affected the domestic animals; accordingly, 79 (83.2%) of the respondents replied that wild animals attacked all domestic animals and the remaining 16 (16.8%) said wild animals attacked goats, sheep, and chickens. However, the animal loss in the kebeles was not significantly different ( P > 0.05 ). The trend of the population status of wild animals was significantly different among the perceptions of respondents ( P < 0.05 ). The settlement near the forest habitat of wild animals and habitat loss due to agricultural expansion and deforestation were the major causes of conflict. The proportion of the causes of human-wild animal conflict in the area was significantly different ( P < 0.05 ). According to the respondents, the most effective controlling mechanisms of the conflict were guarding, followed by fencing and slipping at night in cropland. Out of the total number of respondents, 65 (68.4%) said guarding is the most effective conflict control mechanism, for protecting both crop and livestock. To limit the negative impact of human-wild animal conflict, good wild animal habitat management is required, such as minimizing agricultural expansion and overgrazing, demarcating the forest habitats for wild animals only, and creating awareness among local communities.

show abstract

“…Bhatta and Joshi (2020) found that paddy was the major crop damaged followed by wheat and maize, but our study finds wheat (Triticum aestivum) is the most damaged crop followed by paddy (Oryza sativa), mustard (Brassica campestris), maize (Zea mays), pulses, peanuts (Arachis hypogaea), vegetables and others. Dahal et al (2021) concluded paddy was the most vandalized crop and the elephant was the major contributor to the overall damage.…”

Section: Crop Damagementioning

confidence: 99%

An Assessment of Human-Wildlife Conflict in Basanta Corridor: a Case Study from Kailari Rural Municipality, Nepal

Joshi

Ojha

Khadka

et al. 2022

IJSEI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The human-wildlife conflict (HWC) has always been a subject of concern for conservationists and people living in the proximity of forests. Nepal has witnessed increasing incidents of HWC at an alarming rate in the last few years. The study was carried out to understand the causes and trends of HWC in Kailari Rural Municipality and the perception of people towards wildlife conservation. The major tools used for the data collection were key informant interviews and questionnaire surveys. The data collected from the field was analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. This study showed that crop plundering, human injuries & death, livestock injuries, and killing by wildlife was the common form of HWC and the animals with high incidents of conflict were a monkey, wild boar, elephant, tiger, blue bull, deer, and rabbit in recent years. The main crops damaged in the area were wheat, paddy, maize, peanuts, mustard, etc. The problematic animals were found to be monkeys, rabbits, and wild boars. The study concluded that tigers and elephants attack were the major problems in the areas near Dudhwa National Park (India). None of the respondents have got compensation for the loss of crops, livestock, and even in case of human casualties. Most of the respondents believed that animals come to the cropland due to farmland nearer to forest areas and lack of food for the animals.

show abstract

Impact of wildlife on food crops and approaches to reducing human wildlife conflict in the protected landscapes of Eastern Nepal

Cited by 8 publications

References 44 publications

Eliciting community‐preferred policy alternatives for achieving workable coexistence in a human‐dominated landscape: Insights from Chitwan National Park, Nepal

Eliciting community‐preferred policy alternatives for achieving workable coexistence in a human‐dominated landscape: Insights from Chitwan National Park, Nepal

Human-Wild Animal Conflict in Banja Woreda, Awi Zone, Ethiopia

An Assessment of Human-Wildlife Conflict in Basanta Corridor: a Case Study from Kailari Rural Municipality, Nepal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About