Human–Tiger Panthera Tigris Conflict and Its Perception in Bardia National Park, Nepal
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Human–tiger Panthera tigris conflict and its perception in Bardia National Park, Nepal B ABU R. BHATTARAI and K LAUS F ISCHER Abstract Human–wildlife conflict is a significant problem Wang & Macdonald, 2006). An increase in the human that often results in retaliatory killing of predators. Such population has resulted in increased incidence of conflict conflict is particularly pronounced between humans and between people and carnivores (Graham et al., 2005; tigers Panthera tigris because of fatal attacks by tigers on Woodroffe et al., 2005a). This often results in retaliatory humans. We investigated the incidence and perception of persecution, which is a significant threat to large carnivores human–tiger conflict in the buffer zone of Bardia National (Mishra et al., 2003; Treves & Karanth, 2003; Nyhus & Park, Nepal, by interviewing 273 local householders and Tilson, 2004). Thus, conservation measures to protect large 27 key persons (e.g. representatives of local communities, carnivores can be controversial and may lack support Park officials). Further information was compiled from from local communities (Graham et al., 2005). the Park’s archives. The annual loss of livestock attributable Large carnivores play a significant role in ecosystem to tigers was 0.26 animals per household, amounting to an functioning, with their absence inducing changes in annual loss of 2% of livestock. Livestock predation rates were predator–prey relationships and inter-specific competition particularly high in areas with low abundance of natural (Treves & Karanth, 2003). Many carnivores serve as prey. During 1994–2007 12 people were killed and a further important umbrella and flagship species, benefiting other four injured in tiger attacks. Nevertheless, local people threatened species and attracting funding for wider generally had a positive attitude towards tiger conservation conservation benefits (Linkie & Christie, 2007). However, and were willing to tolerate some loss of livestock but not large carnivores are generally highly threatened, having human casualties. This positive attitude indicates the been extirpated from many areas as a result of conflict, potential for implementation of appropriate conservation hunting for skins and use in traditional medicine (Weber measures and we propose mitigation strategies such as & Rabinowitz, 1996), prey depletion (Karanth & Stith, 1999; education, monetary compensation and monitoring of Mishra et al., 2003) and habitat loss (Weber & Rabinowitz, tigers. 1996; Kolowski & Holekamp, 2006). Previous studies on human–tiger conflict have largely Keywords Human casualties, human–wildlife conflict, focused on livestock depredation, human casualties and large carnivore, livestock depredation, Nepal, Panthera retaliation killings (Nyhus & Tilson, 2004; Muhammed tigris, retaliation, tiger et al., 2007; Gurung et al., 2008). In contrast, we investigated both the incidence of human–tiger conflict and its human dimension because effective conflict mitigation requires Introduction knowledge of the underlying human and environmental drivers (Thorn et al., 2012). Our study built on existing data uman–wildlife conflict arises when humans and on the level of resource extraction from the Park, predator– animals compete for limited resources (Graham H prey relationships and competition among predators et al., 2005; Wang & Macdonald, 2006). Major causes of (Brown, 1997; Allendorf et al., 2007; Wegge et al., 2009; conflict include crop raiding, property damage and live- Thapa & Chapman 2010; Thapa & Hubacek, 2011). Earlier stock depredation by wildlife (Gurung et al., 2008; Inskip & studies have shown that killing carnivores is not exclusively Zimmermann, 2009). Conflicts are particularly serious if motivated by livestock depredation or economic drivers they involve human casualties or if the local people are so but that factors such as perception, fear and personal, poor that any loss of livestock directly affects their quality environmental and social motivations may be even more of life. Consequently, serious conflict often arises in important in driving conflict than the damage incurred areas where large carnivores occur (Polisar et al., 2003; (Dickman, 2010; Marchini & Macdonald, 2012; Thorn et al., 2012). The human dimension is often ignored in conflict studies (Dickman, 2010) or considered only in terms of BABU R. BHATTARAI Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation, general attitudes towards conservation, which has limited Kathmandu, Nepal value in designing interventions (Dickman, 2010; St John KLAUS FISCHER (Corresponding author) Zoological Institute and Museum, et al., 2010). We therefore investigated people’s attitudes University of Greifswald, J.-S. Bachstraße 11/12, D-17489 Greifswald, Germany. fi fi E-mail klaus.fi[email protected] towards a speci c target (tiger conservation) in a speci c – Received 20 August 2012. Revision requested 8 January 2013. area. We investigated the perception of human tiger Accepted 4 March 2013. First published online 13 March 2014. conflict by local people and considered gender differences, © 2014 Fauna & Flora International, Oryx, 48(4), 522–528 doi:10.1017/S0030605313000483 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.40.139, on 30 Sep 2021 at 21:03:19, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605313000483 Human–tiger conflict in Nepal 523 81°0'0"E 81°20'0"E 81°40'0"E N China 28°40'0"N Nepal Kailali India Shivapur Surkhet Thakudwara Suryapatuwa LEGEND International boundary Salyan District boundary Dhadhawar 28°20'0"N National Park Bardiya Study village development Deudakla committee Belawa Buffer zone FIG. 1 Location of study communities in the buffer zone of Bardia National Park, 0 5 10 20 Banke km Nepal. The rectangle on the inset shows the location of the main map in Nepal. cultural perspectives and the effect of education on people’s daily living (Brown, 1997; Thapa & Chapman, 2010; Thapa attitudes towards tiger conservation. & Hubacek, 2011). Subsistence agriculture is sufficient to support lifestyles in only 42% of households; the re- maining households rely on additional income. Domestic Study area animals are needed for farming and one pair of ploughing ff 425 220 The study was carried out in six villages in the buffer zone oxen or bu alo costs c. USD , which is equivalent to ’ ff of Bardia National Park, western Nepal (Fig. 1). The buffer days earnings for an unskilled man. The study area su ered zone includes 17 communities, from which we randomly heavily from political insurgency in the decade prior to the ’ chose three from an area of high prey density (Thakurbaba, study, which hindered the area s development. As a result, Shivapur Ekikrit, Suryapatuwa) and three from an area most local people are poor and do not have access to even of low prey density (Baghkhor, Deudakala, Dhadhawar), basic health and adequate sanitation facilities. The agricul- 32 8 which lie under the local government units of Thakurdwara, tural sector contributes nearly one third ( . %) of ’ 2012 Shivapur, Suryapatuwa, Bel Dhadhawar, and Deudakala, Nepal s gross domestic product (IndexMundi, a), 367 2007 55 1 respectively. The number of communities studied was which was USD per capita in , when . % of the < 1 25 2008 limited by time and resource constraints. The areas of low population had an income of USD . per day. In 25 and high prey density were defined based on the extensive % of Nepalese people were living below the national 2012 local knowledge of park rangers, game wardens and game poverty line (IndexMundi, b). scouts. The area of high prey density is characterized by fl wide alluvial oodplains and associated dynamic vegetation Methods communities, mostly floodplain grasslands and riverine forests. Stands further away from the floodplains of Karnali We used a structured questionnaire survey to obtain River are dominated by sal Shorea robusta forests. In data on perceived human–tiger conflict (Table 1). In total contrast, the area of low prey density is characterized by the 273 households (Thakurdwara, 69; Shivapur Ekikrit, 63; narrow valley of the river Babai, with early successional Suryapatuwa, 38; Belawa, 40; Deudakala, 33; Dhadhawar, 30) plant communities occurring only close to the river, and were included. All questions were closed-ended for with the drier slopes dominated by sal forests. The more ease of quantitative analyses. Interviews were conducted undulating landscape of the latter area makes it drier, with primarily with the head of the household, although other higher forest coverage, resulting in lower prey density family members often participated to formulate a collective because of a shortage of grassland. response. Interviews were conducted in participants’ The study area supports a population of c. 18 breeding homes during March–May 2009 and each interview lasted tigers (GoN, 2009) and is characterized by high human 45–60 minutes. We validated the interview data on livestock −2 population density (211 km ; GoN, 2012). Local communi- depredation and human casualties by cross-checking ties rely on subsistence agriculture but also on forest with neighbours, National Park archives and key persons, resources such as timber, firewood and fodder for their to minimize exaggeration. Key persons were official © 2014 Fauna & Flora International, Oryx, 522–528 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.40.139, on 30 Sep 2021 at 21:03:19, subject to the Cambridge Core terms