Abstract:
In the recent past human wildlife conflict (HWC) have brought conversation in its entirety due to
its wider prevalence, dominance and related consequences in the agrarian sector of the country.
Evidences show that there is no doubt that it causes economic, social and environmental
damages. This study focused on identification of economic, social and environmental impacts of
HWC on paddy, maize, groundnut, green gram and cowpea farming families in Moneragala and
Amapara Districts. This is a multi-method study and interviewed 243 farmer families who were
selected by using stratified random sampling technique for questionnaire survey. In addition,
focus group discussions (n=39) with 720 farmers, key person interviews (n=25), direct
observations (n=39) and participatory observation (n=01) and transect walks were carried out
in the selected villages (n=39). Villages were purposively selected based on the expertise
knowledge where HWC was prevailing in the highest degree. Annual yield/crop damage due to
wildlife was calculated by authors using the formula constructed through intensive literature
review. However, calculations were mostly based on assumptions of the farmers. Accordingly,
annual average yield loss is 30% and it extends as paddy 19%, maize 21%, groundnut 38%,
green gram 35% and cowpea 36%. Composition of total damage is divided into three major
groups such as wild elephants (38%), birds (36%) and other animals (26%). The average annual
costs for protecting one acre of crop from wild animals were in between Rs.2,361.00 and
Rs.33,830.00, respectively for materials and labor whilst the average crop protection duration is
34 days annually. The night protection is mostly conducted (89%) by male household heads.
Less protection for family members, accidents for humans, travelling and sanitation concerns
can be identified as social issues. Small or medium electric fences, thunder flyers, crackers and
electric torches are the most prominent control measures. Sound pollution, mixing chemicals to
environment and life risks for threatening animals are identified as significant environmental
issues. Cost of production increases while decreasing the quantity of harvest. Consequently,
farming communities are living under pressure and practice legal protection methods as well as
illegal methods. Cultivating non-food crops such as medicinal, flower and foliage, some spices
etc. and directing to off-farm occupations were identified as major coping strategies in dealing
with those socioeconomic issues. Prompt actions such as improving the quality, food, water and
habitat availability of forests while promoting electric fences and air rifles as protection
measures.
