scholarly journals Human-Wildlife Conflict around Belo-Bira Forest, Dawro Zone, Southwestern Ethiopia

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Getahun Shanko ◽  
Bekele Tona ◽  
Barena Adare
Keyword(s):  
Group Discussion ◽  
Forest Edge ◽  
Crop Damage ◽  
Crocuta Crocuta ◽  
Papio Anubis ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
Southwestern Ethiopia ◽  
Key Informant ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict ◽  
Continuous Problem

Human-wildlife conflict (HWC) is a continuous problem in the world and has a significant impact on both human and wildlife populations. This study was conducted to investigate the HWC around Belo-Bira Forest, Dawro zone, southwestern Ethiopia. We collected data from October 2019 to March 2020 through semistructured questionnaires, focus group discussion, direct observation, and key informant interviews. Our results show that crop damage and livestock predation were common problems caused by Papio anubis, Cercopithecus aethiops, Crocuta crocuta, Canis aureus, and Potamochoerus larvatus. Human population growth, habitat disturbance, proximity to natural forest, and competition between wildlife and livestock are the identified causes of HWC. Moreover, the study identified guarding and fencing as dominant traditional methods used to reduce HWC in our study area. Therefore, local communities can minimize crop loss by using the most effective method in an area, and crops such as wheat, maize, and teff should not be grown near the forest edge.

scholarly journals Status and trends of human-wildlife conflict: A case study of Lelep and Yamphudin region, Kanchenjunga Conservation Area, Taplejung, Nepal

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roshan Sherchan ◽  
Ananta Bhandari
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Focus Group Discussion ◽  
Loss Rate ◽  
Group Discussion ◽  
Crop Damage ◽  
Conservation Area ◽  
Severe Problem ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
Kanchenjunga Conservation Area ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict

Aim Human-wildlife conflict is one of the major challenges in Kanchenjunga Conservation Area. It may erode public support in wildlife conservation. Here, we review the extent to which wildlife damages livestock and crops. Location Lelep and Yamphudin region, Kanchenjunga Conservation Area, Taplejung, Nepal Materials and methodsThe study employed a combination of surveying methods such as focus group discussion, key informant interview and field observation from 21 July to 06 August 2013. Focus group discussion was done primarily with the representatives of snow leopard conservation committee in Lelep and Yamphudin. Key Findings Livestock depredation in Ghunsa valley, Lelep village development committee was increasing with an annual average loss rate of 11% in ten years (2005- 2014). Despite community-based insurance schemes, loss has increased to 28% from 17.2% in 2014. No retaliatory killings of snow leopards were reported since 2005, which may be attributable to the insurance scheme. In Yamphudin, the average annual livestock loss rate was 4.7% from 2005 to 2014, mostly by wild dogs. Similarly, crop damage was a severe problem in Yamphudin, mostly by the Himalayan black bear, palm civet, barking deer, rhesus monkey and porcupine. Conservation implication Although strict guarding was effective to reduce conflict, alternative strategy is needed that requires minimum human involvement. Premium and relief amount is inadequte. It therefore needs a thorough revision. Predator proof corals in Lonak, Dhudhpokhari, Ramjer and Dasa pasture can be effective means to reduce the potential conflict.

scholarly journals Coexistence between human and wildlife: the nature, causes and mitigations of human wildlife conflict around Bale Mountains National Park, Southeast Ethiopia

BMC Ecology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sefi Mekonen
Keyword(s):  
National Park ◽  
Local Community ◽  
Group Discussion ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Crop Damage ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Human Settlement ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict

Abstract Human–wildlife conflict occurs when the needs and behavior of wildlife impact negatively on humans or when humans negatively affect the needs of wildlife. To explore the nature, causes and mitigations of human wildlife conflict, the coexistence between human and wildlife assessment was conducted around Bale Mountains National Park. Data were collected by means of household questionnaires, focus group discussion, interview, field observation and secondary sources. The nature and extent of human wildlife conflict in the study area were profoundly impacted humans, wild animal and the environment through crop damage, habitat disturbance and destruction, livestock predation, and killing of wildlife and human. The major causes of conflict manifested that agricultural expansion (30%), human settlement (24%), overgrazing by livestock (14%), deforestation (18%), illegal grass collection (10%) and poaching (4%). To defend crop raider, farmers have been practiced crop guarding (34%), live fencing (26%), scarecrow (22%), chasing (14%), and smoking (5%). However, fencing (38%), chasing (30%), scarecrow (24%) and guarding (8%) were controlling techniques to defend livestock predator animals. As emphasized in this study, human–wildlife conflicts are negative impacts on both human and wildlife. Accordingly, possible mitigate possibilities for peaceful co-existence between human and wildlife should be create awareness and training to the local communities, identifying clear border between the closure area and the land owned by the residents, formulate rules and regulation for performed local communities, equal benefit sharing of the local communities and reduction of human settlement encroachment into the national park range. Generally, researcher recommended that stakeholders and concerned bodies should be creating awareness to local community for the use of wildlife and human–wildlife conflict mitigation strategies.

scholarly journals Analysis of Human-Wildlife Conflict in Buffer Zone Area: A Case Study of Shuklaphanta National Park, Nepal

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 28-45
Author(s):  
Maheshwari Bhatta ◽  
Rajeev Joshi
Keyword(s):  
National Park ◽  
Wildlife Conservation ◽  
Group Discussion ◽  
Buffer Zone ◽  
Crop Damage ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Wild Animals ◽  
Livestock Depredation ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict

This article is based on a study carried out in buffer zone of Shuklaphanta National Park (SNP), which lies in Kanchanpur district of Nepal. It is aimed to assess nature and extent of crop damages, livestock depredation and human casualties, and to identify local people's attitude towards wildlife conservation and management. Primary data was collected through preliminary field visit, questionnaire survey of households, key informant interviews, focus group discussion and direct field observation. Paddy was major crop damaged by wild animals, followed by wheat and maize. Wild boar followed by elephant and deer were found as the most problematic animals causing crop damage, while common leopard was found as the major culprit for livestock depredation. The proximity to the national park was found determining factor to the extent of damage caused by the wild animals. People’s attitude towards wildlife conservation was found to be positive; however, more than 85% of respondents showed dissatisfaction towards park authorities’ effort for conflict management. Active participation of local people in conservation and awareness program can play a vital role to reduce and mitigate the human wildlife conflict at community level.

scholarly journals Human-Wildlife Conflict Mitigation Impacts Community Perceptions around Kibale National Park, Uganda

Diversity ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 145
Author(s):  
Lev Kolinski ◽  
Krista M. Milich
Keyword(s):  
National Park ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Kibale National Park ◽  
Crop Damage ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Papio Anubis ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict ◽  
Conflict Mitigation

The attitudes of community members living around protected areas are an important and often overlooked consideration for effective conservation strategies. Around Kibale National Park (KNP) in western Uganda, communities regularly face the threat of crop destruction from wildlife, including from a variety of endangered species, such as African elephants (Loxodonta africana), common chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), and red colobus monkeys (Piliocolobus tephrosceles), as well as other nonhuman primates, including olive baboons (Papio anubis). These frequent negative interactions with wildlife lead many community members to resent the park and the animals that live within it. To mitigate these issues, community members around KNP partnered with researchers to start a participatory action research project to reduce human-wildlife interactions. The project tested four sustainable human-wildlife conflict mitigation strategies: digging and maintaining trenches around the park border, installing beehive fences in swampy areas where trenches could not be dug, planting tea as a buffer, and growing garlic as a cash crop. These physical exclusion methods and agriculture-based deterrents aimed to reduce crop destruction by wild animals and improve conditions for humans and wildlife alike. We conducted oral surveys with members of participating communities and a nonparticipating community that border KNP to determine the impact of these sustainable human-wildlife conflict mitigation strategies on attitudes toward KNP, wildlife officials, and animal species in and around KNP. We found that there is a positive correlation between participation in the project and perceived benefits of living near KNP. We also found that respondents who participated in the project reported more positive feelings about the Uganda Wildlife Authority, the organization that oversees KNP. This research will help inform future conservation initiatives around KNP and other areas where humans and animals face conflict through crop damage.

scholarly journals HUMAN-WILD MAMMAL CONFLICT IN A HUMAN DOMINATED MIDHILL LANDSCAPE: A CASE STUDY FROM PANCHASE AREA IN CHITWAN ANNAPURNA LANDSCAPE, NEPAL

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-38
Author(s):  
Jagan Nath Adhikari ◽  
Bishnu Prasad Bhattarai ◽  
Tej Bahadur Thapa
Keyword(s):  
Group Discussion ◽  
Black Bear ◽  
Economic Loss ◽  
Crop Raiding ◽  
Wild Mammal ◽  
Livestock Depredation ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
Main Crop ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict

   Issues of human wildlife conflict (HWC) always challenges in conservation and management. Crop raiding, property damage, livestock depredation and human casualties are the most common forms of conflict. It was investigated the issues of human wild mammal conflict in and around the Panchase area in Chitwan Annapurna Landscape of Nepal from March 2017 to April 2018 using semi-structured questionnaires and focal group discussion. Wide spread human wildlife conflict was observed in Panchase area. Monkey, muntjac deer, porcupine and rabbit were the main crop raider that resulted in total economic loss of US$ 29.56 per household (HH). Overall economic loss by livestock depredation was estimated US$ 11254.54 (US$ 112.54/HH). Leopard contributed to the highest cases of livestock depredation. A total of five human attack cases were recorded including one fatal and four injuries. Himalayan black bear contributed to 80 % of the total attacks and 20 % by leopards. Present study focused on the issues and status of conflicts in the Panchase area, a representative of midhills and Chitwan Annapurana Landscape. This study suggests that future study related to mitigation and preventing methods should be conducted to minimize the issues of human wildlife conflicts.

scholarly journals Assessment Of Human-Wildlife Conflict And Its Implication For Conservation at sundarpur, Udayapur, Eastern Nepal

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 15-30
Author(s):  
Chandramani Aryal ◽  
Manoj Pokharel
Keyword(s):  
Wildlife Conservation ◽  
Household Surveys ◽  
Crop Raiding ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
Wildlife Species ◽  
Key Informant ◽  
Observation Method ◽  
Sloth Bear ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict ◽  
Direct Observation Method

This study was carried out to document the prevailing situation of human-wildlife conflict in Sundarpur of Udayapur district, Nepal where significant numbers of sloth bear along with other troublesome wildlife species occur. Data about conflict and people's perception towards wildlife conservation was collected using household surveys supplemented by key informant interviews and direct observation method. Monkeys (93%) and elephants (86%) were found to be major animals involved in conflict mostly resulting into crop raiding, which was the major form of conflict as reported by (95%) of respondents. Livestock depredation cases were mostly by common leopard (84%) and sloth bear was involved in majority of human attack cases (90%). According to respondents, the trend of conflict was found to be increasing for elephants (63%) and monkeys (73%) while it was found to be decreasing for sloth bear (64%), wild boar (85%), and leopard (46%), where people believed natural attraction of wildlife towards crops/livestock to be the major driving factor of conflict. Despite the prevalence of conflict most of the respondents showed positive attitude towards wildlife conservation in Sundarpur. This implies a better future for wildlife conservation in this area if the issues associated with human-wildlife conflict are addressed effectively.

scholarly journals Survey of human-leopard (Panthera Pardus) conflict in Ayubia National Park, Pakistan

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 39-46
Author(s):  
Nabeel Awan ◽  
Atif Yaqub ◽  
Muhammad Kamran
Keyword(s):  
National Park ◽  
Crop Damage ◽  
Mitigation Measures ◽  
Panthera Pardus ◽  
Important Species ◽  
Livestock Depredation ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
Community Based Conservation ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict

Wildlife populations are at a risk of extinction mainly because of human-wildlife conflict (HWC). The present study was designed to evaluate the ongoing HWC with special reference to Common Leopard (Panthera pardus) in Ayubia National park through field study as well as a literature-based approach. Questionnaire interview surveys were designed for wildlife officials working in the park and the locals who bear the cost for leopard conflict through livestock depredation and crop damage. The study showed that human-leopard conflict in the study area has been increasing. More than 60% of people considered livestock depredation as the major reason for their negative perception towards the common leopard. Among livestock, goats were more vulnerable which showed that leopards mostly preferred smaller prey. A number of reported human injuries and deaths on account of Human-Leopard conflict in the study area helped conclude that human-wildlife conflict is a significant issue. Mitigation measures may hence be recommended, such as livestock compensation schemes and community-based conservation approaches, etc. It is critical to avoid human-Leopard conflict not only to keep the public and their property safe but also to help conserve this important species of common leopard (Panthera pardus).

scholarly journals Status of Human-Wildlife Conflict and Assessment of Crop Damage by Wild Animals in Gaurishankar Conservation Area, Nepal

2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bairam Awasthi ◽  
Nanda Bahadur Singh
Keyword(s):  
Animal Species ◽  
Black Bear ◽  
Participatory Approach ◽  
Wild Animal ◽  
Crop Damage ◽  
Crop Loss ◽  
Conservation Area ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
The Status ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict

This study tries to explore the status of Human-Wildlife Conflict (HWC) within the Gaurishankar Conservation Area (GCA), Nepal. The maximum damage of maize (39%) and potato (30%) crops were reported due to wildlife in the study area. Major wildlife pests were monkey, porcupine, goral, barking deer, jackal and Himalayan black bear. About ninety five percent of respondents reported crop damage problem was increasing in the area after GCA establishment. Fair and quick disbursement of compensation for crop loss and regular monitoring of the wild animal needed to be adopted to reduce human-wildlife conflicts. Change in cropping and crop composition, particularly cultivation of high value medicinal plants were also suggested. The findings suggest participatory approach to manage problematic animal species in GCA.Journal of Institute of Science and Technology, 2015, 20(1): 107-111

scholarly journals Human-elephant conflict in the buffer zone of Chitwan National Park, Nepal

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-43
Author(s):  
Deepa Dangol ◽  
Anuj Ghimire ◽  
Salina Banskota Bhattarai
Keyword(s):  
National Park ◽  
Winter Season ◽  
Buffer Zone ◽  
Forest Edge ◽  
Crop Damage ◽  
Spatial And Temporal Patterns ◽  
Significant Relation ◽  
Elephant Conservation ◽  
Chitwan National Park ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict

The interaction between human and wildlife sharing same resources often result negative outcomes and are referred as the human wildlife conflict which affects not only humans but also the wild species. Such conflicts, especially from the mega-herbivores such as elephants has become one of the major management challenges for the Chitwan National Park (CNP), Nepal. Spatial and temporal patterns of human elephant conflict (HEC) in the buffer zone of CNP were analyzed using park data and questionnaire survey conducted among three hundred and ninety residents of thirteen buffer zone user committees (BZUC) within Chitwan district from October 2016 to May 2017. Five hundred and forty-three HEC incidents including three human deaths and two human injuries were reported in BZUC from January 2013 to April 2017. Crop damage was found to be the most common type of damage caused by elephants and were higher during post-monsoon. Property damage incidents were higher during the winter season. There was a negative association between the number of HEC incidents and distance from the forest edge of the national park. However, no significant relation of HEC incidents was observed with average monthly temperature and rainfall. Despite of increasing HEC incidents, majority of people (77%) had positive attitude towards elephant conservation and considered elephants as nation’s treasure.

scholarly journals Patterns of Human-Wildlife Conflict and People’s Perception towards Compensation Program in Nilambur, Southern Western Ghats, India

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chelat Kandari Rohini ◽  
Tharemmal Aravindan ◽  
Karumampoyil Sakthidas Anoop Das ◽  
Pandanchery Arogyam Vinayan
Keyword(s):  
Local Community ◽  
Crop Damage ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Community Perception ◽  
Wildlife Conflict ◽  
Wildlife Species ◽  
Conservation Implications ◽  
Compensation Program ◽  
Human Wildlife Conflict ◽  
North And South

Aim: The aim of this research was to examine patterns of human-wildlife conflict and assess community perception towards compensation program implemented to ameliorate human-wildlife co-existence.Location: North and South Forest Divisions, Nilambur, South India.Material and Methods: Data were collected from the official archives of applications made by victims or their families at Divisional Forest Office, Nilambur North and South Forest Division, for the period 2010–2013. The data included (a) types of conflict, (b) wildlife species involved in the conflict, (c) dates of application made by applicants, (d) dates of final decision made by concerned authority and (d) relief amount sanctioned. People’s perceptions towards compensation program were gathered using a questionnaire survey (n=179).Key findings: Crop damage was the most common type of conflict, followed by property damage, injury and death by wildlife attack. Crop damage was contributed mainly by elephant (Elephas maximus) (59%) and wild boar (Sus scrofa) (32%). The other wildlife species involved in conflict were bonnet macaque (Macaca radiata) (3.8%), leopard (Panthera pardus) (3.3%), Malabar giant squirrel (Ratufa indica) (0.47%), porcupine (Hystrix indica) (0.29%), Guar (Bos gaurus) (0.95%) and Sambar deer (Cervus unicolor)(0.29 %). On average, people took 13 days to claim compensation, which received decisions in 90 days. The majority of respondents (67%) were not satisfied with the compensation schemes. The main causes of such dissatisfaction were (a) allocation of insufficient money for the compensation (46.6%), (b) prolonged and difficult administrative procedures to make claims (20%), (c) people’s convictions that compensation scheme does not eradicate the conflict (20%) and (d) disbelief on the officials involved in compensation program (6.6%).Conservation implications: Our results suggest that compensation program has not gained acceptance among local community as an effective strategy to mitigate human-wildlife conflict. Although it may reduce hostile attitude towards wildlife, alternative approaches are urgently needed that avoid conflicts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document