Human-Wildlife Conflict in Shukla Phanta National Park (A Case Study of Piperiya, Bankatti and Nimbhukheda Wards of Bheemdatta Municipality, Kanchanpur District, Nepal)

Abstract

The success of conserving biological resources in protected areas depends on the extent of support, positive attitudes and perceptions of local people towards their establishments. Crop yield losses and livestock depredation were the major problems observed in most wards of Shukla Phanta Wildlife Reserve. The study aimed at exploring the humanwildlife

conflict in terms of crop damage, livestock depredation, human causalities, it assessed the wildlife conservation perception and tolerance level of the local people to losses caused by the wild animals and management of human-wildlife conflict. The present study was conducted in Piperiya, Bhankatti and Nimbhukheda wards of bufferzone around the SNP. . The survey was done in 160 households by questionnaire method from Jan. 2016 to Jan. 2017. The total value of crop yield losses due to wildlife damage for Wards located in the study area is about NRs. 17,55,365(16104.24US$) during one year period. Comparatively, Piperiya (ward no.13) were most destructed than Bankatti and Nimbhukheda. The paddy and wheat crops were suffered maximum damage contributed tothe total loss. Major wildlife agents responsible for crop damage were wild boar Elephant, spotted deer as followed by Jackal and hares. The average livestock holding 95.6% of per household. The total value of livestock losses at prevailing market rates is about NRs.8,3000 (7614.67US$) in the study area annually. Five people were injured in wild animals attacked among them one person was killed by wild boar and four person were wounded by Elephant during this year. The perceptionrelative to wildlife conservation was negative and people could tolerate the loss of livestock to some extent but not human loss or causalities. The main animals for livestock were leopard, Jackal, and for human causalities animal responsible were wild boar and Elephant.Park animals visit crop land due to inadequate amount of food in the protected area, tastes of agricultural crops, lack of good and effective barriers. Park is affected by allowing the feral cattle and domesticated buffalo inside the reserve, herb and grass collection and fishing. Threating,electric fencing, making thorny dog watchingand keeping cow headsare preventing methods used by local people and those are partially effective. Construction oftrenches,maintenance of barbed wire fence,promotion of agro-forestry,fair and quick disbursement of compensation for losses and community Forestry programme, habitat conservation and change in crop plantation was recommended only an alternative that would mitigate this conflict.