Human-Wildlife Conflict (HWC) is fast becoming a serious threat to the survival of many endangered species in the world. The lack of access to forest resources for the local community residing in the buffer zones of national parks has created conflict between the national parks, the people residing in these areas and wildlife. This study focused on to analyze the situation of human-wildlife interface of people living near the park. Direst field observation, questionnaire survey of households (n=88), on-site focal group discussions, and key informant interviews were used for data collection. The study revealed that Paddy was the primary crop accounting about 34% of the economic value of total production. Peoples in the study area perceived that crop depredation was the major problem caused by the wild animals. Among crops, the damage to Paddy was high. A total average damage of Paddy per year per household (HH) was 115.2 Kg. Economic value of average annual damage per year per HH accounted for NRs, 9211.4. About 70% respondents responded that the poor availability of food in the forest was the main problem. In case of measures to control HWC, most of them have applied different local technologies. Among them participatory method, noise making and scare row construction were the common. Most of the local people believed that, cases of the HWC was increasing and will increase in the future. Hence, promotion of income generating activities, alternative energy, and improved livelihood strategies can reduce the HWC indirectly through decreasing the dependency in forest resources. Conservation awareness program and people participation are other major aspects that should be considered to mitigate the human wildlife conflict.
| Published in |
International Journal of Natural Resource Ecology and Management (Volume 4, Issue 6)
This article belongs to the Special Issue Forest and Wildlife Management |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ijnrem.20190406.12 |
| Page(s) | 164-172 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2019. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Buffer Zone, Conservation, Forest, Human-wildlife Conflict, Resources
| [1] | WWF. (2006). “FACTSHEET: Human-animal conflict”, World Wildlife Fund, Switzerland. |
| [2] | Dowie, M. (2011). Conservation refugees: the hundred-year conflict between global conservation and native Peoples. MIT Press. |
| [3] | Woodroffe, R., Thirgood S., and Rabinowitz, A. (2005). The future of coexistence: resolving human-wildlife conflicts in a changing world. Conserv Biol Ser Camb. |
| [4] | Dickman, A. J., Macdonald, E. A., and Macdonald, D. W. (2011). A review of financial instruments to pay for predator conservation and encourage human-carnivore coexistence. Proc Natl Acad Sci U. S. A.; 108: 13937–13944. pmid: 21873181. |
| [5] | Peterson, M, N., Birckhead, J. L., Leong, K., Peterson, M. J., and Peterson, T. R. (2010). Rearticulating the myth of human-wildlife conflict. Conserv Lett; 3: 74–82. |
| [6] | White, P. C., and Ward, A. I. (2011). Interdisciplinary approaches for the management of existing and emerging human–wildlife conflicts. Wildl Res; 37: 623–629. |
| [7] | Treves, A. (2007). “Balancing the Needs of People and Wildlife: When Wildlife Damage Crops and Prey on Livestock” J. People and wildlife. No. 7; August 2007. |
| [8] | WWF. (2007). “A Case Study on Human-Wildlife Conflict in Nepal (With particular reference to Human-Elephant Conflict in Eastern and Western Terai regions)”, World Wildlife Fund, Kathmandu, Nepal: pp 47-48. |
| [9] | Shrestha, D. B., and Paudyal, A. (2007). “When Mega Vertebrates Makes Ranch their home” Envirostation, Contemporary Issues, e-facts Vol 1 (3) August 2007, Kathmandu, Nepal. Retrieved from: www.envirostation.com.np |
| [10] | Distefano, E. (2010): “Human-Wildlife Conflict worldwide: collection of case studies, analysis of management strategies and good practices”. Retrieved from: www.fao.org/sard/common/ecg/1357/en/hwc_final.pdf on 4 May 2019. |
| [11] | Lamsal, S. (2008). “Socio-economic status, Vegetation analysis, Rhino conservation and land use change in Amarapuri Buffer Zone VDC of Chitwan National Park, Nepal’’. |
| [12] | KMTNC, (1996). King Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation, Annual report 1995/1996. |
| [13] | Woodroffe, R. (2000). Predators and people: using human densities to interpret declines of large carnivores. Anim Conserv; 3: 165–173. |
| [14] | Primack, R. B., Paudel, P. K., and Bhattarai, B. P. (2013). Conservation biology: A primer for Nepal. 1 ed.. Kathmandu, Nepal: Dreamland Publication. |
| [15] | Acharya, K. P., Paudel, P. K., Neupane, P. R., and Köhl, M. (2016). Human-Wildlife Conflicts in Nepal: Patterns of Human Fatalities and Injuries Caused by Large Mammals. PLoS ONE 11 (9): e0161717. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0161717 |
| [16] | CNP. (2019). Chitwan National Park (CN)P) Kasara, Chitwan. Annual Report Fiscal year 2018/2019. Department of National Park and Wildlife Conservation (DNPWC). Ministry of Forest and Environment, Government of Nepal. Kathmandu, Nepal. |
| [17] | Arkin, H., and Colton, R. R. (1963). Tables for Statisticians (2nd ed.), Barnes and Noble, Incorporated, New York, 55 p. |
| [18] | Sharma, A. (2000). Wildlife Corridor Management: Analysis of Biodiversity and Socioeconomics in the Buffer Zone of the Royal Chitwan National Park, Nepal. M.Sc. dissertation, Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand. |
| [19] | Awasthi, B., and Singh, N. B. (2015). Status of Human wildlife conflict and Assessment of Crop damage by Wildl animals in Gaurishankar Conservation Area, Nepal. Journal of Institute of Science and Technology, 20 (I): 107-111. |
| [20] | Mackenzie, C. A., and Ahabyona, P. (2012). Elephants in the garden: Financial and social costs of crop raiding Ecological Economics, 75: 72–82. |
| [21] | Warren, Y., Buba, B., and Ross, C. (2007). Patterns of crop-raiding by wild and domestic animals near Gashaka Gumti National Park, Nigeria. International Journal of Pest Management, 53. |
| [22] | Sukumar, R. (1994): “Wildlife-human conflict in India: an ecological and social perspective”. In: Guha, R. (ed.) Social Ecology, Oxford University Press, New Delhi: pp. 303-317. |
| [23] | Sherchan, R., and Bhandari, A. (2017). Status and trends of human-wildlife conflict: A case study of Lelep and Yamphudin region, Kanchenjunga Conservation Area, Taplejung, Nepal. Conservation Science (Conerv. Sci.), 5: 19-25. |
| [24] | DNPWC. (2019). Department of National Park and Wildlife Conservation (DNPWC). Annual Report Fiscal year 2018/2019. Ministry of Forest and Environment, Government of Nepal. Kathmandu, Nepal. |
| [25] | Rohini, C. K., Aravindan, T., Das, K. S. A., and Vinayan, P. A. (2016). Patterns of Human-Wildlife Conflict and People’s Perception towards Compensation Program in Nilambur, Southern Western Ghats, India. Conservation Science (Conerv. Sci.), 4: 1-6. |
| [26] | WWF. (2005). “Human wildlife conflict manual 2005: Wildlife management series”, WWF-World Wide Fund for Nature Southern African Regional Program Office (SARPO). |
| [27] | WWF. (2008). “Common Ground-Solutions for reducing the human, economic and conservation costs of human wildlife conflict” World Wildlife Fund-International, Species Program: pp 27. |
| [28] | Shrestha, R. K., and Alavalapati, J. R. R. (2007). “Linking Conservation and Development: An Analysis of Local People’s Attitude Towards Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, Nepal” J. Environment, Development and Sustainability, Volume 8, Issue 1, Pp 69-84. |
| [29] | Allendorf, T. D. (2007). “Residents’ attitudes toward three protected areas in southwestern Nepal” J. Biodiversity and Conservation (2007) 16: 2087–2102, Springer Netherlands. |
| [30] | Hill, C. M. (1997). Crop-raiding by wild vertebrates: the farmer’s perspective in an agricultural community in western Uganda. International Journal of Pest Management, 43. |
| [31] | Kumssa, T., and Bekele, A. (2013). Human wildlife conflict in Senkele Swayne’s Hartebeest Sanctuary, Ethiopia. Journal of Experimental Biology and Agricultural Sciences, 1. |
APA Style
Pramod Ghimire. (2019). Analysis of Human Wildlife Conflict in Buffer Zone Area: A Study from Chitwan National Park, Nepal. International Journal of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, 4(6), 164-172. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijnrem.20190406.12
ACS Style
Pramod Ghimire. Analysis of Human Wildlife Conflict in Buffer Zone Area: A Study from Chitwan National Park, Nepal. Int. J. Nat. Resour. Ecol. Manag. 2019, 4(6), 164-172. doi: 10.11648/j.ijnrem.20190406.12
AMA Style
Pramod Ghimire. Analysis of Human Wildlife Conflict in Buffer Zone Area: A Study from Chitwan National Park, Nepal. Int J Nat Resour Ecol Manag. 2019;4(6):164-172. doi: 10.11648/j.ijnrem.20190406.12
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ijnrem.20190406.12,
author = {Pramod Ghimire},
title = {Analysis of Human Wildlife Conflict in Buffer Zone Area: A Study from Chitwan National Park, Nepal},
journal = {International Journal of Natural Resource Ecology and Management},
volume = {4},
number = {6},
pages = {164-172},
doi = {10.11648/j.ijnrem.20190406.12},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijnrem.20190406.12},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijnrem.20190406.12},
abstract = {Human-Wildlife Conflict (HWC) is fast becoming a serious threat to the survival of many endangered species in the world. The lack of access to forest resources for the local community residing in the buffer zones of national parks has created conflict between the national parks, the people residing in these areas and wildlife. This study focused on to analyze the situation of human-wildlife interface of people living near the park. Direst field observation, questionnaire survey of households (n=88), on-site focal group discussions, and key informant interviews were used for data collection. The study revealed that Paddy was the primary crop accounting about 34% of the economic value of total production. Peoples in the study area perceived that crop depredation was the major problem caused by the wild animals. Among crops, the damage to Paddy was high. A total average damage of Paddy per year per household (HH) was 115.2 Kg. Economic value of average annual damage per year per HH accounted for NRs, 9211.4. About 70% respondents responded that the poor availability of food in the forest was the main problem. In case of measures to control HWC, most of them have applied different local technologies. Among them participatory method, noise making and scare row construction were the common. Most of the local people believed that, cases of the HWC was increasing and will increase in the future. Hence, promotion of income generating activities, alternative energy, and improved livelihood strategies can reduce the HWC indirectly through decreasing the dependency in forest resources. Conservation awareness program and people participation are other major aspects that should be considered to mitigate the human wildlife conflict.},
year = {2019}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Analysis of Human Wildlife Conflict in Buffer Zone Area: A Study from Chitwan National Park, Nepal AU - Pramod Ghimire Y1 - 2019/10/09 PY - 2019 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijnrem.20190406.12 DO - 10.11648/j.ijnrem.20190406.12 T2 - International Journal of Natural Resource Ecology and Management JF - International Journal of Natural Resource Ecology and Management JO - International Journal of Natural Resource Ecology and Management SP - 164 EP - 172 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2575-3061 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijnrem.20190406.12 AB - Human-Wildlife Conflict (HWC) is fast becoming a serious threat to the survival of many endangered species in the world. The lack of access to forest resources for the local community residing in the buffer zones of national parks has created conflict between the national parks, the people residing in these areas and wildlife. This study focused on to analyze the situation of human-wildlife interface of people living near the park. Direst field observation, questionnaire survey of households (n=88), on-site focal group discussions, and key informant interviews were used for data collection. The study revealed that Paddy was the primary crop accounting about 34% of the economic value of total production. Peoples in the study area perceived that crop depredation was the major problem caused by the wild animals. Among crops, the damage to Paddy was high. A total average damage of Paddy per year per household (HH) was 115.2 Kg. Economic value of average annual damage per year per HH accounted for NRs, 9211.4. About 70% respondents responded that the poor availability of food in the forest was the main problem. In case of measures to control HWC, most of them have applied different local technologies. Among them participatory method, noise making and scare row construction were the common. Most of the local people believed that, cases of the HWC was increasing and will increase in the future. Hence, promotion of income generating activities, alternative energy, and improved livelihood strategies can reduce the HWC indirectly through decreasing the dependency in forest resources. Conservation awareness program and people participation are other major aspects that should be considered to mitigate the human wildlife conflict. VL - 4 IS - 6 ER -
Information
Email: