Challenges For Human-wildlife Coexistence

According to a report from the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation, wildlife attacks in Nepal led to 39 deaths and nearly 200 injuries in the fiscal year 2079/80. The report also highlights that wildlife caused damage to 531 houses and sheds, with 10,426 incidents of wildlife-related damage recorded during this period. The Department attributes this rise in conflict to increasing population density and unplanned land use around protected areas, which have degraded and reduced wildlife habitats. As a result, animals are leaving their natural habitats and entering human settlements, causing significant human and economic losses. The report points out that human casualties, along with damage to crops, houses, and livestock, are the consequences of this escalating human-wildlife conflict. This issue is not confined to protected areas but affects most regions of the country, posing a threat to both human-wildlife coexistence and environmental sustainability.

Human encroachment

All living beings on earth have an equal right to the natural resources available. However, humanity is so selfish that, in order to satisfy its unlimited needs, it exploits natural resources to the extent of infringing on the basic rights of other creatures to survive. The excessive human exploitation of nature has not only challenged the earth's carrying capacity but also placed wildlife that depends on natural resources in jeopardy. As human encroachment on their natural habitats and food sources increases, wildlife often becomes aggressive to protect their existence or ventures into human settlements and farmlands in search of food. This inevitable intrusion by wildlife leads to economic and physical damages, sparking conflicts between humans and wildlife. The damage and harm caused by both sides while trying to fulfill their respective needs is what constitutes human-wildlife conflict. Although the increase in forested areas and the rising numbers of wild animals are significant factors contributing to this conflict, the consequences affect both parties. On one side, humans suffer financial and personal losses, and on the other, retaliatory actions by humans cause harm to the wildlife.

Wildlife causes damage to human lives, livestock, and crops, while humans attack, injure, and kill animals, engage in illegal poaching, destroy habitats, and fragment forests. This situation fosters negative perceptions about forests, wildlife, and biodiversity among the general public and diminishes local communities' interest and participation in conservation efforts. Although the conflict between humans and wildlife began with the dawn of human civilisation, population growth and increased human needs have exacerbated the issue. In Nepal, human-wildlife conflict, particularly around protected areas and beyond, results in significant annual losses of life, livestock, and millions of rupees worth of agricultural damage. In the Tarai region, people are attacked by rhinos and tigers, while in the hilly areas, leopards kill people and livestock, and wild animals destroy crops.

Sometimes wildlife that damages crops or kills livestock falls victim to human retaliation. Elephants and rhinos get electrocuted by electric fences meant to protect crops, leopards die in traps, monkeys are shot, hares are poisoned, and badgers are smoked and trapped in pits. Such activities are examples of human-wildlife conflict, where both parties suffer harm. The expansion of forested areas and the increase in wildlife populations in the hills, coupled with growing pressures on forests and habitat loss, force wildlife to enter human settlements, causing more frequent damage. Similarly, deforestation, forest fragmentation, and biodiversity degradation push many wild animals into villages in search of food. Habitat destruction, food scarcity, forest encroachment, overgrazing, and health issues among wildlife are all contributing factors to human-wildlife conflict.

Despite discussions on community participation in biodiversity conservation, equitable sharing of benefits from natural resources, and human-wildlife coexistence, these ideas have not been effectively implemented in practice. While some attention has been given to addressing human-wildlife conflict near protected areas, similar concerns in other government and community forests have not been adequately addressed. As a result, residents outside protected areas do not receive compensation for damages caused by wildlife, except in cases involving large animals like rhinos and tigers near protected zones. Although some locals receive compensation for losses caused by wildlife, others living near non-protected forests only face hardships. Local governments have shown some initiative in compensating for crop and other damages caused by monkeys and other wildlife, but this is not yet institutionalised across all municipalities.

Nepal, known for its rich biodiversity, is home to many animals that live outside protected areas in forests where locals work to protect them despite the harm wildlife inflicts. The growing perception among people that troublesome wildlife should not be protected poses a significant threat to conservation efforts.

Wildlife management

Managing wildlife is a scientific process. If all the needs of wildlife are met in their natural habitats, they do not enter human settlements. However, when food and shelter are scarce in the forests and wildlife populations increase, the invasion of human settlements by wildlife becomes more common. Effective wildlife management requires habitat management, monitoring and scientific studies of wildlife behaviour and populations, and translocation for population control. Conservation efforts should also focus on utilising and managing wildlife. Providing benefits and compensation to local people for the harm caused by wildlife is essential for human-wildlife conflict management.

To minimise human-wildlife conflict, preventive measures such as electric fencing, barbed wire, trenches, and living barriers should be implemented to separate agricultural and residential areas from forests. Alternative agricultural systems, including planting crops that wildlife does not prefer or consume, such as fish farming, beekeeping, and fruit cultivation, can also be effective. Building secure enclosures for livestock, raising awareness about safety measures against predators, and disseminating information about relief and compensation programmes to the public are crucial steps. Moreover, installing an early warning system, the construction and maintenance of infrastructure for damage prevention, and the provision of insurance for people and livestock can help mitigate human-wildlife conflict. Existing laws should be updated to include compensation for damage caused by animals like monkeys. Local governments, being closest to the people, should be made active and responsible actors for managing human-wildlife conflict and fostering coexistence.

(The author is a government officer and an environmental researcher. ecologist.aryal@gmail.com)