A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Natural Resource Management

Thesis (M. Sc.) - Asian Institute of Technology, 2018

Crop damage by wildlife, a serious form of human-wildlife conflict (HWC) impacts the livelihood of local people and also erodes their support toward conservation around Protected Areas. Effective mitigation measures are vital to manage HWC for balancing conservation and livelihood. In this context, a perception study of 154 households (HHs) was conducted in two sites adjacent to Bardia National Park (BNP) of Nepal. The risk of wildlife was found high in crop yield affecting majority of people (83%). Elephant and deer have been perceived as pest wildlife affecting mainly the paddy, wheat and lentil while risk of rhino has been decreased due to electric fence. The mean annual damage area, quantity and economic loss was 0.47 ha, 4.76 quintals and US$ 128 which was 34.6%, 14.6% and 16% of mean annual cultivated area, harvested quantity and harvested value respectively for those affected HHs. In response, electric fence, crop guard through watch tower and wildlife chasing were the major mitigation measures implemented by local people. Electric fence was found only effective to rhino while low effective for elephant. Elephant was found a hard to control wildlife by any means while rest of the wildlife can be controlled to some extent by guarding and chasing. Lack of effective mitigation measures had incurred high costs to locai people not only in economic terms but also increased indirect costs. The majority respondents (58.4%) hold positive attitude while a considerable proportion of respondents (33.8%) hold neutral attitude toward conservation despite of high costs and low benefits perceived from conservation. Crop damage was found as the major factor influencing the attitude of local people along with indirect costs, education and residency status. Only education shows positive impact upon attitude among all significant factors. Results suggest that the urgency of immediate suppo1t in effective . mitigation measures to create human-wildlife co-existence rather than focusing on benefits. Investing on mitigation measures is recommended rather than dispersing the financial resources in other topics.