i

Royal Government of Bhutan

Ministry of Agriculture and Forests

Department of Forests and Parks

Wildlife Conservation Division

Assessment on Impact of Human-Wildlife Conflict Management Intervention to the local

communities.

March 2013

ii

Table of contents

Summary 1

1. Introduction 3

2. Study approaches 4

2.1. Review of literature 4

2.2. Study area 12

2.3. Data collection 13

2.4. Data analysis 15

3. Results 16

3.1. Socio-economic characteristics of the respondents 16

3.2. Livelihood systems, sources of food and cash and threats 16

3.3. Traditional guarding practices 23

3.4. WCD’s interventions and its impacts on communities 24

4. Conclusion 30

5. Recommendations 31

6. References 33

1

Summary

Most farming communities in Bhutan suffer from wildlife: crops are destroyed, domestic stock

killed and sometimes homes destroyed and people attacked. Such incidences have undermined

livelihoods, loss of lives and abandonment of farmlands. These damages if not abated could

result in lower food security, reduced health and lower school attendance leading to anti-

conservation feelings within the affected communities. Past studies have reported that local

farmers preferred to eliminate wildlife and their habitat. Realizing the potential of HWC to

hijack Bhutan’s conservation efforts, Bhutan’s Wildlife Conservation Division (then Nature

Conservation Division) developed the first national strategy, the Bhutan Human-Wildlife

Conflicts Management Strategy through exhaustive consultations with national and international

stakeholders, and drew on past publications.

After its endorsement, the Conservation division has initiated select interventions

(electric fencing, trip wire alarm, insurance scheme) in high damage areas. This is study is part

of WCD’s effort to monitor and assess how the interventions has impacted the beneficiaries

socio-economically. In particular, the study focused on: how members of local communities

view and judge interventions (community based insurance program and electric fencing)

intended to reduce human wildlife conflicts as in crop damage, livestock predation and time

spent guarding these resources.

Results from this study carried out in 7 geogs of Singhe, Lhamoizingkha, Langchenphug,

Norbugang, Tashichooling, Ura, and Dangchu, indicate that electric fencing was a great success

saving communities large amount of crop and guarding times, thereby achieving the original goal

of reducing conflicts and alleviating poverty. Overall, communities in the 7 geogs harvested

9770kf of crops (mainly rice) with a mean increased yield of 976kg for each household reporting

an increase. Using local selling prices, each household gained an equivalent of Nu.25, 454 from

increase crop yield. With the fence in place, communities saved a total of 12, 570 nights with

each of the household on average saving 110 nights. As a result communities are better off and

happier. The insurance program was active only in Dangchu geog, and can be attributed to the

fact that livestock herding is perhaps the primary livelihood activity, while in the rest of the

geogs, farming of crops may have demanded community’s time and effort instead of insurance

2

program. In general, farmers were aware of WCD’s efforts to mitigate conflicts, and expressed

overwhelming support for HWC interventions.

Top sources of food were rice and maize for communities in the southern geogs, potato

for Ura, and livestock rearing for Dangchu geogs. Primary sources of cash incomes were from

sale of areca nut, potato, and dry chili.

3

1. Introduction

Conflict between people and wildlife is a serious problem that must be addressed if

conservation is to succeed. And, perversely, conservation success often leads to increased

conflict as wildlife populations grow. The often-significant financial and labor (spent in guarding

and building other protective measures) losses farmers and livestock owners endure at the hands

of wildlife, lead to revenge killing, and antipathy toward wildlife, protected areas and their

managers. Yet the support of these same rural people is essential to making any conservation

program work.

Realizing the importance of fundamental information for making policy decisions to

maintain this sensitive harmony between people and wildlife, Bhutanese researchers have

proposed possible solutions for Bhutan, where human-wildlife conflict is a significant obstacle to

enlisting and maintaining rural support for conservation. Wang and his colleagues (Wang and

Macdonald, 2006; Wang et al, 2006a, 2006b, Wang, 2008) have examined human-wildlife

conflict in detail and made numerous recommendations to ease the pressure of human wildlife

conflicts and urged the Government of Bhutan to develop amalgamate these recommendations

into a national strategy.

Recently in 2008, the Royal Government of Bhutan approved the Bhutan Human

Wildlife Conflict Management Strategy, which is a self-explicit recognition of the scale of the

conflict and the Government’s commitment to reduce it. Since then much progress has been

made in implementing the strategy with multi-pronged interventions including electric fencing,

establishment of sound and light repellents, formation of guarding team, promotion of alternative

livelihoods to offset losses, community based compensation schemes, and a recent activity worth

mentioning is the creation of the HWC endowment fund. As HWC is a complex issues which

changes with changing socio-economic and environmental conditions, it is crucial that

authorities monitor and assess interventions so that expected results may be achieved. At the

requirement of WCD, the report is based on a study that attempted to:

- Assess the benefits from interventions put in place by the Department of Forests and Park

Services;

4

- Evaluate the effectiveness of the mitigation and other innovative measures in reducing

conflicts and enhancing livelihoods of the affected communities especially the vulnerable

groups;

- Identify beneficial and effective interventions that have the potential for scaling up to the

national level.

The following report presents the findings of the survey.

2. Study Approaches

2.1. Review of Literature

Realizing the critical need to address the basic concerns, needs and aspirations of the

local people if conservation is to succeed, authorities around the world have implemented

various interventions to reduce conflicts and maintain a win-win situation. Some of these

interventions include cash compensation, protection measures, wildlife population management,

etc. Locals meet these interventions with mixed results mostly owing to poor understanding of

the scientific specifics of conflicts, poor management, lack of sustainable funds and poor

acceptance.

Compensation

Compensation is one such an intervention that is widely tried around the world. This

scheme which is aimed at compensating people for losses to wildlife are used in some places but

they are fraught with difficulties of verifying claims, fairly assessing the value of livestock or

crops lost to wildlife, disbursing funds, and, for the farmer, dealing with cumbersome and

lengthy claims procedures. In some cases, such schemes actually exacerbate the problem,

increasing farmers’ animosity toward wildlife and conservation policies and the officials who try

to carry them out. Direct compensation is also unsustainable, as it represents a continual drain on

the coffers of the cash-strapped governments or, in many cases the NGOs that fund them.

Compensation programs have been adopted in many countries to reduce wildlife-human

conflicts and they are generally believed to be worth their costs, especially in reducing animosity

5

in agricultural communities (Conover, 2002). Many respondents that Allen and McCarthy (2001)

interviewed in Mongolia suggested that the government should compensate herders for losses

due to snow leopard predation. Farmers in the U.S. have argued that wildlife are managed by the

government, and therefore, the government should be liable for any damages inflicted on private

property by wildlife, just as farmers are liable if their domestic animal destroyed a neighbor’s

property (Conover, 2002). In addition agricultural landowners provide much of the wildlife

habitat throughout the U.S. and the world, and wildlife-inflicted damage to crops, livestock and

other property is among the costs of maintaining wildlife populations. Hence, cooperation of

farmers is essential for successful conservation of wildlife. Realizing this fact, most agencies in

the U.S. and Canada maintain some form of program to address wildlife-inflicted damage, and

many provide consultation services, direct abatement and subsidies for fences and dispersal

devices (Conover, 2002). Some states maintain compensation programs to reimburse agricultural

landowners for wildlife-inflicted damage (Yoder, 2002). The compensation and abatement

programs also inexpensively generate damage data as a byproduct, which would otherwise have

to be obtained through costly surveys. These data can be used to make very important inferences

regarding wildlife population densities, hotspots and prices of livestock and agricultural

commodities, as well as the extent of economic losses, all of which can be used for management

planning and policy formulation purposes.

Compensation may be problematic in other parts of the world, as it can be a drain on the

financial resources of governments and protected areas. In many developing countries,

compensation is not a viable option, as it requires huge budgets. Also, there is a lack of effective

means for validating claims, dispensing funds and minimizing potential fraudulent claims. If

compensation is to be implemented, it should be targeted at disadvantaged individuals who have

suffered depredation losses, rather than at an entire community. Studies from Trans-Himalayan

region indicate that there is dissatisfaction with the system used by governments to compensate

villagers for livestock losses (Saberwal, et al., 1994; Maikhuri, et al., 2001). Eighty-six percent

of the respondents (N= 61) interviewed by Saberwal, et al. (1994) complained that compensation

levels for livestock kills were too low in comparison to the purchase price of replacement

animals. Furthermore, 81% of the respondents stated that they did not file for compensation upon

losing livestock to lions because of the procedural problems associated with filing such claims.

Problems cited included excessive travel to report losses, the likelihood that an official would not

6

be available to register a reported livestock depredation within the mandatory reporting period

(less than 24 hours after the kill), subjective assessment by the officials of the worth of

depredated livestock and difficulties associated with receiving payments for settlements

(Maikhuri, et al., 2001; Saberwal, et al., 1994). Villagers living adjacent to Nepal’s Royal Bardia

National Park were allowed to collect grass for a period of two weeks as a compensation for

damage caused by wildlife. More than 70% of the respondents (N=181), stated this as a reason

for positive attitudes towards the Park (Mishra, 1982; Sharma, 1990; Studsrod and Wegge,

1995). Studsrod and Wegge (1995) also warned that a well-established system of compensation

might serve to attract more immigrants to the protected areas.

Experiences in Italy found that compensation programs alone were not effective in

reducing conflicts or in preventing illegal, private efforts to control wolf numbers (Cozza, et al.,

1996; Ciucci and Boitani, 1998). In addition, under some conditions, financial compensation for

predator attacks may actually encourage a state of permanent conflict. Considering the abysmal

record of compensation schemes elsewhere, direct monetary compensation should be considered

cautiously and only in the cases involving losses due to species of conservation importance

(Naughton-Treves, 1998). Because compensation involves an instant financial incentive, such

programs may help change livestock farmers’ attitudes toward predators and improve their

communication with wildlife managers). In this context, compensation should not be seen as the

only means of managing depredation problems, but should be effectively integrated into a

broader strategy in which preventative husbandry practices play a critical role, and whereby

claims involving faulty husbandry practice should be either reduced or denied (Wang and David,

2006).

Fencing

Electric fencing is a modern solution and can include solar, battery operated, or

electricity fences. This if erected properly are more durable due to reduced physical pressure

from animals and also has the potential to deter multi species which is a major problem with

other means of protection as they are species specific. However, electric fencing needs higher

investment in both establishment and maintenance and is not therefore easily accessible to

farmers in resource-limited communities especially in developing countries (Hoare, 1992).

7

Electric fences have been successfully used in India, Kenya, Namibia and other nations. For

instance in Namibia, electric fencing has proved to be the only long-term deterrent to elephants

and has reduced human-elephant conflict on a very large scale. Inspite of high cost of installation

and maintenance, it was demonstrated that electric fencing is cost effective to the community by

means of reduced elephant attacks, which intern has allowed the farmers to harvest increased

yield.

Bhutan and HWC

Bhutan is widely recognized for its unusually high levels of biological diversity, which

arise due to its position at the meeting of four bio-geographic divisions and the many different

habitats that exist along an enormous elevation gradient. Though small in size, Bhutan is a

primary steward of some of the world’s most exceptional mega-fauna, many of which are

endangered elsewhere in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas. For centuries a strong religious and

cultural ethos based on Buddhism has provided a safe refuge for this extraordinary richness.

Beginning in 1993, Bhutan has steadily gained international recognition for its organized

conservation efforts, including the establishment of an extensive network of protected areas, and

interconnecting biological corridors. Indeed, about 51% of the country’s total land area of 38,394

km2 (NSB, 2007) has been set aside for conservation, and 60% of the country is mandated by the

Constitution of Bhutan to remain in forest cover for all times. The protection of nature and the

environment is central to governmental efforts to promote Gross National Happiness for all

Bhutanese and serves as an ideal for governments everywhere.

As an agrarian-based society, almost 70% of Bhutan’s population depends directly on

crop and/or livestock production for their livelihood. Bhutan’s conservation policy allows

farmers to remain in protected areas, and corridors, and some of the country’s poorest

communities can be found within these areas. Hence, the Royal Government of Bhutan is faced

with promoting long-term economic and social development programs aimed at poverty

alleviation in these rural areas, while simultaneously protecting the natural resources that

uniquely characterize this country. Finding a balance is the basis for sustainable development.

8

The quest to find new paths for conservation and sustainable development is a worldwide

issue and presents many obstacles. One major challenge in a country like Bhutan, with large

populations of mega-fauna living in close proximity to rural communities, is the conflicts that

arise between humans and wildlife. The loss of crops, livestock, and/or human lives to wildlife

represents social and economic costs that jeopardize livelihoods, exacerbate poverty, and may

lead to retaliation against conservation programs. Bhutan’s recent move to democracy may open

a new process for concentrating local resistance to conservation policies, possibly leading to

detrimental changes to certain wildlife populations. Clearly, rural livelihoods and conservation

are inseparably linked. If conservation efforts are to succeed, then human-wildlife conflicts must

be reduced. Hence, there is an urgent need to address the concerns of Bhutanese farmers by

designing and implementing a comprehensive proposal focused on understanding and managing

such conflicts.

One of the main contributors to human wildlife conflicts is predation of livestock by

carnivores, especially tigers (NCD, 2004; Wang and Macdonald, 2006; Wang et al., 2006;

Sangay and Karl 2008). Tigers are listed in the Schedule I of the Forest and Nature Conservation

Act 1995, meaning that they are totally protected species in Bhutan. With such rules in place, the

killing of wild animals listed in schedule I is non-negotiable. A corollary of this legislation then,

is that compensation should be given to owners of livestock that are killed by these predators.

Regardless, conflict between people and wildlife is a serious problem that must be addressed if

conservation of tigers and other carnivores is to succeed.

In Bhutan’s subsistence agricultural systems, livestock are an important source of draught

power, food, and supplemental cash income as well as means of transportation. Livestock are

highly valued and expensive to purchase. The loss of a yak, cow, or mule to carnivore predation

could be a devastating blow to a family (Wang and Macdonald, 2006). Retaliation killing of

predators emerges as a major issue. For instance, dholes, assumed to be major predators of

livestock, were almost eliminated from Bhutan due to retaliatory killings using poison in the late

1970s and early 1980s. Similarly, wolves are found in Bhutan, but only occasionally in the

higher alpine areas, as they are still not able to establish stable populations due to consistent

persecution by yak herders.

9

Poisoning of predators is indiscriminate and, although anecdotal evidence exists of tigers

falling victim to poisoning, hard evidence is lacking. Still, the low density of tigers of 1/200 km2

(Wang, 2008) is a cause for concern. Carnivore population viability is intricately linked to the

herbivore prey density (including livestock). Free-range grazing of livestock in the forests may

be displacing wild herbivores as natural prey for carnivores. Wang (2008) concluded that natural

prey density is low in tiger habitats, which are crowded with livestock. As a consequence of low

food resources in the forests, natural prey species clustered around human settlements and

entered into direct conflict with humans through crop damage (Wang, 2008). Thus, tigers and

other large carnivores have an indirect impact on crop loss to herbivores. Healthy and balanced

populations of predators and prey likely result in lower depredation of livestock and reduced

crop damage by wildlife (Wang, 2008). There is an urgent need for management interventions

targeted to enhance this natural balance.

The loss of livestock to tigers causes food shortages, as some people are totally

dependent on the livestock for their livelihood. For example, the income of local people are often

dependent on cattle for dairy products, and horses for labor, thus the loss of these animals causes

heavy losses for the farmers. In many cases, loans are taken by the farmers just to purchase

livestock like cattle and mules. In such cases, if tigers kill the mules, the owners suffer a huge

loss and this leads to negative attitudes towards wildlife. Guarding dogs used for the protection

of livestock and crops are expensive, but large predators often kill them. Sometimes large

carnivores kill four to five calves in one attack. In such cases, the cash compensation is not a

long-term solution.

Charismatic large carnivore species such as tigers often have been used as flagship

species for wildlife conservation and protected area management. Conflicts between large

carnivores and farmers must be resolved if conservation is to succeed into the next century.

Farmers are the people closest to the environment and they understand it better than most people.

It is therefore of great importance to gain their support in conservation efforts. They must be

involved with conservation efforts and there must exist some mechanism to reward them for their

sacrifices, be it livestock loss or crop damage. While compensation may reduce hostility towards

tigers and improve farmers’ attitudes towards conservation, co-management may make them

more responsible for conserving their environment (Wang, 2008).

10

The Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) and the Department of Forests (DoF) have been

aware of this growing need. Accordingly, the Nature Conservation Division (NCD) took the

initiative to develop a plan to address human-wildlife conflicts for the Royal Government’s 10th

Five-Year Plan (10 FYP). Consequently, a National Strategy, the first of its kind for Bhutan and

likely any other nation, was developed through workshops and meetings with various

stakeholders. This proposal presents much of the plan, whose overall goal is to reduce human-

wildlife conflicts, while at the same time ensuring the conservation of tigers and other threatened

wildlife and alleviating rural poverty.

This is an ambitious and unprecedented proposal that is focused on human welfare,

poverty alleviation, and wildlife conservation. Unfortunately, many conservation initiatives

worldwide have been at the cost of rural livelihoods, a pattern that must be changed if people and

nature ever hope to exist in harmony. The Royal Government of Bhutan accepted this challenge

and has designed a comprehensive proposal that meets the King’s vision for the people of

Bhutan and the country’s rich natural heritage. Through a critical examination involving multiple

stakeholders, a concrete proposal was developed to understand and mitigate human-wildlife

conflicts in Bhutan. Results from this work will not only provide a critical guide for action by

managers, researchers, and communities in Bhutan. This proposal most certainly work towards

alleviating poverty and improving livelihoods for rural Bhutanese while protecting the mega-

fauna that characterize this Kingdom. Moreover, it provides inspiration and a model to design

comprehensive proposals to resolve human-wildlife conflicts elsewhere, thereby further

enhancing Bhutan’s leadership role in conservation worldwide.

Ensuing the endorsement of this strategy, WCD (then the NCD) initiated interventions

targeted at reducing human-wildlife conflicts and alleviate poverty. Electric fencing, insurance

scheme, sound and light alarm etc has been implemented in high conflict areas (see Table 1 for

details). To effectively manage these interventions, seven Geog Environmental Conservation

Committees have been formed in Dangchu, Nubi, Bjena, Tsamang, Chimung, Lhamoizingkha,

and sipsoo. To sustain interventions the endowment fund for human wildlife conflict

management was also launched in 2009. Since then the WCD has raised a total of Nu. 4.0

million.

11

Table 1: Showing details of interventions and investment made by DoFPS, since 2008.

Activities Distance (Km) Cost (BTN) Year Location Dzongkhag

Ele

ctri

c fe

nci

ng

4.5 2,900,000 2009 Singhe Sarpang

2.55 116,000 2008 Taraythang Sarpang

2.114 809,000 2010 Umling Sarpang

10 651,000 2011 Lhamoizingkha Dagana

6.7 994,308 2010 Sipsoo Samtse

1.71 1,005,962 2011 Dina Samtse

0.8 470,625 2011 Jitti Samtse

5 16,91210 2011 Jomotsangkha S/Jongkhar

Insu

ran

ce

300000 Sipsoo Samtse

2,36,596 Lhamoizingkha Dagana

300,000 Lachenphug S/Jongkha

300,000 Dangchu Wangdue

315,359 Nubi Trongsa

225,000 Tsamang Mongar

300,000 Chimung P/Gatshel

300,000 Bjena Wangdue

300,000 Dhur Bumthang

300,000 Naji-Korphu Trongsa

Note: Source: WCD, DoFPS. Insurance scheme is active only in Dangchu

12

2.2. Study area

The study was conducted in the communities where WCD has implemented fencing and

compensation schemes (Figure 1, and Table 1). The study area comprised of elephant infected

areas along the southern belt of the country and one in western and one in central Bhutan.

<INSERT STUDY AREA MAP HERE>

13

2.3. Data collection

Primary data was collected through respondent interviews with members of the Geog

Conservation Committee, Beneficiaries, caretakers, and wildlife and forestry officials. Areas

where WCD has implemented crop protection and livestock insurance program were included in

the study. In each of these areas, respondents were randomly selected to represent atleaast 25%

of the total population. Interview was carried out from January-February 2013. This information

was supplemented by focus group discussion and conversations with wildlife officials wherever

possible.

Interviews were carried out to ascertain perceptions, facts and figures on the impacts of

HWC interventions, identify best practices and the opportunities that WCD can build on. In

particular, the study attempted to:

1. Assess how members of local communities view and judge interventions (community based

insurance program and electric fencing) intended to reduce human wildlife conflicts as in crop

damage, livestock predation and time spent guarding these resources;

2. Quantify economic and social benefits accrued as a result of these interventions;

3. What are the major socio-economic and demographic factors that determine and maintain

local support for these interventions? And vice versa.

14

Table 2. Details of study area and respondents selected (2013)

Dzongkhag Dungkhag Geog Village Type of HWC

interventions

Total Beneficiaries

(N)

No. of Beneficiaries

surveyed (N)*

Sarpang Singhe Sangaythang Electric fencing 22 6

Sarpang Singhe Shisarthang Electric fencing 36 9

Sarpang Lhamoizingkha Lhamoizingkha Kuendrelthang Electric fencing 44 11

Sarpang Lhamoizingkha Lhamoizingkha Lungseltsa Electric fencing 30 8

Sarpang Lhamoizingkha Lhamoizingkha Farmgaon/Beletar Electric fencing 84 20

Sarpang Lhamoizingkha Lhamoizingkha Sibsooni Electric fencing 37 10

Samdrup

Jongkhar

Jomotsangkha Langchenphug Langchenphug Electric fencing 50 13

Samtse Norbugang Dupijora Electric fencing 50 13

Samtse Norbugang Kirney Electric fencing 16 4

Samtse Sipsu Tashicholing Peljorling A& B Electric fencing 80 18

Samtse Sipsu Tashicholing Belbotang/Jogimar

ang/Narjantsa

Electric fencing 140 34

Samtse Sipsu Tashicholing Singyegang Electric fencing 90 24

Bumthang Ura Ura Trip wire alarm 16 4

Wangdue Dangchu Dangchu Insurance 28 7

Total 723 181

* 25% of the total beneficiaries were selected to statistically represent the population

15

2.4. Data analysis

Informational data either qualitative or quantitative generated through respondent interview

were compiled in an excel database, cleaned and analyzed using statistical tools (STATPLUS,

EXCEL) to derive inferences. Data for statistical analysis were first subjected to preliminary

descriptive analysis including normality test and subsequently subjected to appropriate tests.

Excel also was used to analyze and compare data in terms of actual numbers, proportions

and means using charts and tables. The statistical package STATPLUS wherever necessary.

Sample distributions were examined for shape, outliers and normality using descriptive statistics.

Where required, outliers were removed and standard transformations, non-parametric tests were

performed. Unless otherwise stated, a 95% significance level was used to accept or reject null

hypotheses.

Data for age was normal with a mean of 45; thus, those who were and younger than 45

were grouped together and those above 45 years were grouped as another. The national land

ownership ceiling for Bhutan is 5 acres, thus all those who had five acres or less of land were

grouped into one group and those with more then five acres into another group.

Impact of WCD’s interventions was primarily assessed by the quantity of increased yield

and time spent guarding farms at night. Fair market value was used to ascertain economic gains

resulting from increased yield from crops and reduced time (nights) for guarding farms.

16

3. Results

3.1. Socio-economic Characteristics of the respondents

The gender ration of the sample population selected for interview (51% male, 49%

female) closely represented the national gender ration (49% male, 51% female). The mean age of

the respondents was 45 and majority of the respondents fell below the mean age (54%). This is

good news, as the villages seem to hold more productive labor force. A large majority of the

respondents also had some level of schooling (65%) including non-formal education while the

rest are illiterate. Significantly large number of respondents (82%) owned less then or equal to 5

acres of land. This is consistent with the national land ownership ceiling of 5 acres (Table 3).

However, 18% of the respondents owned more than 5 acres of land with one respondent owning

17 acres in Ura geog. Few of the respondents have reported lack of enough land for agriculture

has kept the in poverty.

3.2. Livelihood systems sources of food, cash and threats

Understanding the sources of livelihood including food security, sources of major food,

cash incomes, farming systems along with wildlife ecological data is critical in ascertaining the

causes of conflicts and therefore inevitable for decisions making especially regarding

interventions. Interventions without understanding these fundamentals of humans and wildlife

could prove to be short lived with devastating impacts.

Food security and threats

Securing enough food to sustain their families round the year is the primary goal of large

majority of farmers in Bhutan. Figure 2 shows food security situation in the study goegs. Over

all, large majority of the farmers are always food self sufficient (64%) followed by 28% who

have mostly enough food. Amongst the study geogs, Dangchu topped the list with 100% always

food self sufficient, followed by Lachenphug (77%), Ura (75%), Norbugang (65%) with Singhe

geog reporting only 20% who always have enough food. Nine percent of the farmers are mostly

17

struggling to feed their families. Most of these farmers again fall in Singhe (27%) and

Tashicholing (17%) geogs (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Food Self sufficiency as reported by respondents in study sites (2013).

Figure 2a-g shows food sources as ranked by the respondents in descending order of

importance. With exception of Dangchu and Ura geogs, irrigated rice was overwhelmingly

ranked as the top source of food source, followed by maize, vegetables, and livestock products.

In Ura, respondents ranked potato as the top source of food, followed by barley, and vegetables,

while in Dangchu respondents ranked chili as the top food source followed by livestock and

potato. These food sources also reflect the influence of ecological and climatic influence on the

food productivity as well as food habits of the farmers. While rice is perceived as the top staple

food of Bhutanese farmers, unfavorably harsh climatic conditions in Dangchu and Ura (both high

altitude geogs) have forced them to grow chili, potato, barley coupled with livestock herding.

Traditionally, dangchu from “Sha” area has been known for their chili.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Pe

rce

nt

Geog

Always enough Mostly enough Mostly not enough

18

Table 3. Demographic profile of respondents participating in HWC interventions (N=181; 2013).

Geogs

Variables

Singhe

N (%)

Lhamoizingkha

N (%)

Langchenphug

N (%)

Norbugang

N (%)

Tashicholing

N (%)

Ura

N (%)

Dangchu

N (%)

Total

N (%)

Male 6 (40) 22 (45) 7 (54) 9 (53) 43 (57) 1 (25) 3 (43) 91 (51)

Female 9 (60) 27 (55) 6 (46) 8 (47) 33 (43) 3 (75) 4 (57) 89 (49)

>45 6 (40) 26 (53) 7 (54) 5 (29) 38 (50) 1 (25) 0 (0) 83 (46)

<45 9 (60) 23 (47) 6 (46) 12 (71) 38 (50) 3 (75) 7 (100) 98 (54)

Literate 3 (20) 11 (22) 4 (31) 8 (47) 33 (43) 1 (25) 3 (43) 63 (35)

Illiterate 12 (80) 38 (78) 9 (69) 9 (53) 43 (57) 3 (75) 4 (57) 118 (65)

>5 10 (67) 6 (12) 2 (15) 4 (24) 8 (11) 3 (75) 0 (0) 33 (18)

<5 5 (33) 43 (88) 11 (85) 13 (76) 68 (89) 1 (25) 7 (100) 148 (82)

19

Fig 3a. Food sources as ranked by the respondents in Singhe geog.

Fig 3b. Food Sources as ranked by respondents in Trashiholing geog

Fig 3c. Food Source as ranked by respondents in Norbugang geog

Fig 3d. Food source as ranked by respondents in Langchenpug geog.

0

20

40

60

80

100

Irrigatedrice

Maize millet Maize millet Vegetables

Source 1 Source 2 Source 3

Ranked food source

Percent Frequency

010203040506070

Irrigatedrice

Maize maize vegetable livestock vegetable

Source 1 source 2 Source 3

Ranked Food Source

Percent Frequency

0102030405060708090

100

irrigatedrice

maize maize millet millet vegetable

Source 1 Source 2 Source 3

Ranked Food Source

Percent Frequency

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Irrigated rice Maize Vegetables Millet

Source 1 Source 2 Source 3

Ranked Food Source

Percent Frequency

20

Fig 3e. Food sources as ranked by respondents in Lhamoizingkha geog.

Fig 3f. Food sources as ranked by respondents in Ura geog.

Fig 3g. Food sources as ranked by respondents in Dangchu geog.

0

20

40

60

80

100

Irrigated rice Maize Vegetable livestock

Source 1 Source 2 Source 3

Ranked Food Source

Percent Frequency

020406080

100120

Potato Barley Vegetables

Source 1 Source 2 Source 3

Pe

rce

nt

Ranked food source

Percent Frequency

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Chilli livestock Potato

Source 1 Source 2 Source 3

Pe

rce

nt

Ranked food source

Percent Frequency

21

Elephants still remain the top threat to food security in Langchenphug, Norbugang, and

Tashicholing geogs and number 2 threat in Singye and Lhamoizingkha geogs (Table 4). This is

perhaps a direct indication of the efficacy of the electric fencing, which were reported to be more

effective in Singye and Lhamoizingkha geogs. From the results in table 4, it is also clear wild

pigs as a threat to food security been ranked either as top threat (in Singye & Ura geogs) or as

number 2 threats in others. Overall, elephants and wild pigs are the two biggest threat to food

security in the study areas. This perhaps calls for a redesign in electric fencing to target both

elephants and wild pigs.

In Dangchu where herding livestock is a major livelihood source, livestock kills by wild

predators such as tigers and leopards have been ranked as threat 1 and threat 2. This is if taken

with a pinch of salt is good news for carnivore conservation as it indicates that these high profile

cats, which are disappearing in other parts of the world, are present in Bhutan. However, past

studies in Bhutan (Wang and Macdonald, 2006) reported that livestock predation is mainly

caused by lax herding in deep forest. Other emerging threats to food security are related to

droughts, lack of irrigation & land and damage by Indian cattle from across the boarder.

Table 4. Ranking of major threats to food security as reported by respondents (2013)

Geogs

Threats

Singhe

(N=49)

Lhamoi

Zingkha

(N=49)

Langchen

phug

(N=13)

Norbugang

(N=17)

Tashi

choling

(N=76)

Ura

(N=4)

Dangchu

(N=7)

Threat 1 Wild pig Deer, pigs,

monkeys

Elephant Elephant Elephant Wild pig Tiger

Threat 2 Elephant Elephant Wild pig Monkeys Wild pig Birds and

bear

Leopard

Threat 3 Drought

and

irrigation

Irrigation

and land

Rabbit Indian cattle Rabbit none Wild pig

22

Cash income and threats

Areca nut is by top source of cash for people in Lhamiozingkha, Langchenphug,

Norbugang, and Tashicholing geogs where it has been ranked as the most important source by

the respondents. Respondents in Dangchu and Ura ranked potato as the top cash earners. These

findings implies that any future interventions targeted at boosting cash incomes in the study areas

should target improving value chain system (from production through marketing) of areca nut

and potato. All geogs displayed homogeneity in that they ranked farms products such as

vegetables, fruits, and livestock products as number 2 cash earners, except for farmers in

Lhamoizingha whose number 2 cash source is from remittance and business. Ura farmers also

sold high value mushitake mushroom and medicinal plants (Table 5).

Sources of threat to cash income are not significantly different from the threats to food

sources. Top threats rests with Elephants (Langchenphug, Norbugang, Tashcholing geogs), wild

pigs (Singhe, Lhamoizingkha, and Ura geogs), and tigers (Dangchu geog). In Singhe and

Lhamoizingkha geogs elephants came as the number 2 threat to cash income with leopard in

Dangchu geog. Wildpig and elephants are reported as the top 2 threats to cash income sources

thus requiring future HWC interventions to be sensitive to these species (Table 6).

Table 5. Cash income source as ranked by respondents (from most important to least) 2013.

Geogs

Source ranked

Singhe

(N=49)

Lhamoi

Zingkha

(N=49)

Langchen

phug

(N=13)

Norbugang

(N=17)

Tashi

choling

(N=76)

Ura

(N=4)

Dangchu

(N=7)

Source 1 Wage

labor

Areca nut Areca nut Areca nut Areca nut Potato Potato

Source 2 Farm

products

Remittance,

business/veh

icle hiring

Livestock

products

Vegetables Farm

products

Mushroo

m

Dry chili

Source 3 None Vegetables,

poultry,

oranges

Vegetable Livestock

products

Livestock

products

Medicinal

plants

Butter

23

Table 6. Ranking of major threats to cash income as reported by respondents (2013)

Geogs

Threats

Singhe

(N=15)

Lhamoi

Zingkha

(N=49)

Langchen

phug

(N=13)

Norbugang

(N=17)

Tashi

choling

(N=76)

Ura

(N=4)

Dangchu

(N=7)

Threat 1 Wild pig Wild pig,

deer,

monkey

Elephant Elephant

damage

Elephant Wild pig Tiger

Threat 2 Elephant Elephant Wild pig Monkey Wild pig Birds and

bear

Leopard

Threat 3 Drought Irrigation Rabbit Peacock Rabbit None Wild dog

3.3. Traditional guarding practices

Because human wildlife conflicts is as old as the history of human civilization itself

(Conover 2002), humans and wildlife have evolved to co-exists. One of the strategies for this co-

existence is guarding crops, livestock, and property against wildlife. Overall, guarding although

labor intensive is the most popular methods of crop and property protection. Over the years this

has gotten some innovation to ease the drudgery involved in guarding. Some of these innovations

included locally made scarecrows, nobels, banging of metals, shouting through loudspeakers, use

of fire crackers, etc. The single most popular method of guarding in the study area consisted of

the combination of throwing fireball (includes fire crackers), watchtower, shouting, and group

chasing (Table 7). Blank firing by forestry officials has been reported by respondents in some

geogs to complement traditional guarding. Surprisingly few of the respondents in Sighe (6%),

Lhamoizingkha (6%), and Tashicholing (5%) had no idea about traditional guarding practices.

Interms of gender involvement in guarding exercise, it is the task of men with every

geogs reporting over 93% men. This is perhaps due to the fact that women are more confined to

looking after the home chores and children. While there is very little involvement of women in

guarding, absence of men from home to help with home chores could be an indirectly increase

24

the burden to look after homes. So any attempt to reduce guarding time may alleviate this burden

and make families happier.

Table 7. Traditional crop/property protection as reported by respondents (N=172; 2013)

Geogs

Protection Method

Singhe

%

Lhamoi

zingkha

%

Langchen

phug

%

Norbugang

%

Tashi

choling

%

Ura

%

Throwing fireball,

watchtower, shouting

and group chasing

87

94

100

100

95

100

Blank firing 7 0 0 0 0 0

No Idea 6 6 0 0 5 0

Involved in guarding

Women (%) 7 4 6 6 4 0

Men (%) 93 96 94 94 96 100

3.4. WCD’s interventions and its impacts on communities

Following from the ambitious HWC management strategy, WCD implemented some of

the priority interventions in conflict hotspots across the country. Interventions ranged from sound

and light alarms, trip wire fencing, electric fencing, through community based insurance

program. This study in particular looked at the impact of electric fencing and insurance program

on affected communities. For any intervention to be successful, community must be fully aware,

involved, and supportive.

25

Awareness

Almost 100% of all the respondents reported that they are not only aware of electric

fencing but also knew it was initiated by WCD. Livestock insurance program did not get

implemented except in Dangchu geog where farmers were fully aware of the program as well as

who initiated it (Table 8).

Table 8. Percent awareness about WCD’s intervention, as reported by the respondents (N=181;

2013).

Geogs

Awareness

Singhe

(N=15)

%

Lhamoi

Zingkha

(N=49)

%

Langchen

phug

(N=13)

%

Norbugang

(N=17)

%

Tashi

choling

(N=76)

%

Ura

(N=4)

%

Dangchu

(N=7)

%

Electric

fencing

100 98 100 100 99 100 X

Insurance

program

X X X X X X 100

WCD 100 98 100 100 100 100 100

Economic gains to the community thereof (2013)

Most human wildlife conflict interventions are targeted at reducing losses to wildlife

thereby bringing social and economic gains to the affected communities. Failure of any

intervention to result in significant economic and social gains is guaranteed to lose public

support and fail to achieve its intended goals. Electric fencing carried out by WCD in affected

communities is geared towards reducing crop and property losses to wildlife, enhance food

security, and reduce guarding. Table 9 presents the economic impact of WCD’s interventions.

The impact of electric fencing was assessed by using increased yield reported for their major

crops and then valuing it interms of money using local sale rates (Source: DAMS, MoAF, 2013).

26

Total number of guarding nights reduced was also collected and then assessed for its economic

value using 2/3 the government approved daily wage (Nu150/day). Discussions were held as to

whether or not to use the full daily wage rate as night labor may be more expensive, however to

avoid over estimation, only 2/3 was used). The results here indicate that electric fencing as a

hugely successful intervention with 73% of the respondents reporting increased yield as a result

of fencing. Overall, respondents have reported that they harvested 9,770 kilograms (Kg) more in

the last one year a mean increase of 976kg. Using local selling prices, increased yield was valued

at a total saving of NU.332,592.00 with those household reporting an increase saving an

equivalent of Nu. 25,454, which is 21% of the per capita GDP (NSB, 2011).

Respondents from Lhamoizingkha geog reported the highest amount of yield increase

(28,692kg, equivalent of Nu. 1,004,22) followed by Norbugang (11,410kg, equivalent of Nu.

399,350) followed by Singhe (8,015kg, equivalent of Nu.280,525) geogs. The lowest increase

was reported by a lone respondent in Tashicholing (450kg valued at Nu.191,250) geog.

However, when assessed for only those households reporting the increase, Ura reported the

highest mean yield increase per household (hh) at 1417 kg of potato (valued at Nu.47,813). This

was closely followed by Langchenphu (967kg, valued at Nu.17,409) and Lhamoizingkha (755kg,

valued at Nu.26,425) geogs. Langchenphug inspite of reporting higher increase compared to

Lhamoizingkha has lower value interms of Nu because of lower selling prices.

When compared against the national per capita GDP (Nu.120,876; NSB, 2011), Ura

respondents saved a whooping 39%, followed by Norbugang (22%), Singhe (16%) with the

lowest for Tashicholing (13%).

One of the major benefits of electric fencing is also the time reduced in guarding crops

and property especially at night, which bears high social and economic costs. Table 9 shows

impressive impact with 100% respondents reporting reduced guarding in Singhe (1,530nights

reduced), Langchenphu (4,745 nights reduced), and Norbugang (1,650 nights reduced).

Respondents from Tashiholing reported no reduction in the number of nights spent on guarding.

Overall, 66% of the respondents reported a reduction of 12,570 nights as a result of electric

fencing. Highest mean number of nights reduced was reported in Langchenphug (365 nights

reduced), followed by Singhe (102 nights reduced), Lhamoizingkha (98 nights reduced),

Norbugang (97 nights reduced) with Tashicholing and Ura reporting no reduction. These reduced

27

Table 9. Impact of WCD’s interventions and economic gains thereof (N=174; 2013)

1mean value per household reporting increase (with mean value taking all respondents in consideration in parenthesis)

2Total Nu

saved per household for those reporting increased yield. Figure in parenthesis represents total Nu save taking all respondents into

consideration

Geogs

Impact variables

Singhe

(N=15)

Lhamoi

Zingkha

(N=49)

Langchen

phug

(N=13)

Norbugang

(N=17)

Tashi

choling

N=76)

Ura

(N=4)

Overall

(N=174)

Increased yield reported 100% 75% 100% 88% 1% 75% 73%

Quantity increased (kg) 8,015 28,692 5803 11410 450 4250 9,770

Mean increase (Kg)1 534 755 (586) 967 (484) 761 (671) 450 (5.9) 1417 976

Total amount saved 280,525 1,004,220 104454 399,350 15750 191,250 332,592

Total amount saved/hh2

18,702 26,425

(20,494)

17,409

(8,705)

26,623

(23,491)

15750 (207) 47,813 25,454

Amount saved/hh as a % of per

capita GDP3 120876

16 22 14 22 13 39 21

Reduced guarding reported 100% 98% 100% 100% 0% 0% 66%

Total nights reduced 1,530 4,645 4,745 1,650 0 0 12,570

Mean no of nights reduced/hh 102 98 365 97 0 0 110

Total amount saved/hh (Nu) 10,200 9,800 36,500 9,700 0 0 11,033

Total amount saved (Nu) 153,000 464,500 474,500 165,000 0 0 209,500

WCD investment on fencing 2,900,000 651,000 16, 91210 994,308 4,545,308

28

mean nights translated into an equivalent mean monetary savings of Nu.36,500; 10,200; 9,800;

and 9,700, respectively. Overall,110 mean nights were reduced for respondents reporting

reduction with an equivalent saving of Nu 11,000 per hh. At this rate, the farmers have probably

recovered the investment made by WCD in savings, especially if we combine the savings from

yield increase and reduced guarding. The results also implies that in communities where electric

fencing has been a success, families would have had time to spent together and hence reducing

the drudgery of running homes and looking after children by women.

Overall, the results indicate a highly successful intervention, which perhaps can become a

biggest contributing factor to enhancing food security, alleviating poverty, reducing drudgery for

vulnerable groups, not to mention of the other social and psychological affects on the

communities which will translate into positive attitudes towards conservation and WCD.

Community support for WCD’s intervention

Table 10 shows that majority of the respondents (82%) were very supportive of the

interventions so far implemented by WCD, while 7% were not supportive with remaining 11%

reporting indifferent. This indicates great achievement as well as huge potential for the

interventions to both improve as well as scale up to national level. No support and indifferent

were 100% contributed by respondents from Tashicholing geog where electric fencing remains

as failure, mainly due to lack of public support and involvement.

Farmer support for intervention is further confirmed by their support (100%) for the jobs

done by caretakers (Table 11). When asked about their salaries for their caretakers, 84% of the

respondents said the salaries were either very good or good. Fourteen percent of the respondents

reported care taker salary as poor and suggested increase and split the amount equally between

communities and the government or each household (hh) paying 200 Ngultrum. Given, only

small number of farmers feel this way, WCD may not have to take actions to increase their

salaries yet.

29

Table 10. Impact of WCD interventions on respondent support (N=181; 2013)

Geogs

Variable

Singhe

N (%)

Lhamoi

Zingkha

N (%)

Langchen

phug

N (%)

Norbugang

N (%)

Tashi

choling

N (%)

Ura

N (%)

Dangchu

N (%)

Overall

N (%)

Very

supportive

15 (100) 47 (96) 13 (100) 17 (100) 45(59) 4 (100) 7 (100) 148 (82)

No

supportive

0 2 (4) 0 0 11 (15) 0 0 13 (7)

Indifferent 0 0 0 0 20 (26) 0 0 20 (11)

Table 11. Impact of WCD’s interventions on respondents support for caretakers (%)

Geogs

Caretaker

Singhe

(N=15)

Lhamoi

Zingkha

(N=49)

Norbugang

(N=17)

Overall

(N=19)

Job done well 100 100 100 100

Salary very good 27 69 18 38

Salary good 60 18 59 46

Salary poor 13 12 17 14

Suggestion Increase salary to 6000 (3000 from communities and 3000 from

Government. Or pay 200/hh

Challenges in implementation of interventions

The nature of challenges encountered in the implementation of WCD’s intervention

programs by both the GECC and caretakers have been compiled in Table 12. GECC members

were of the opinion that there is lack of timely monitoring of the interventions by WCD and geog

officials. In some instances there is also lack of proper repair and maintenance of fencing. In

addition, communities often fail to pay their contributions in time. Compared to the

30

overwhelming success of the intervention especially the electric fencing in Singhe,

Lhamoizingkha, and Norbugang, these challenges are almost systemic and can be improved with

very little effort on the part of the partners.

Table 12. shows the nature of challenges encountered in implementation of WCD interventions

by both the GECC and caretakers.

Challenges faced by Nature of challenge

Gog Environment

Conservation

Committee (GECC)

- Timely monitoring by WCD and goegs

- Timely fee payment by communities

- Lack of repair/maintenance

Care takers - Poor salary

- No payment

- Poor equipment

4. Conclusion

Human wildlife conflicts are complex requiring highly successful interventions that are

sensitive to the needs of ecosystem and society at large. Failure to balance this need will lead to

either ecological disaster which may bring devastating impact on the survival of humans and

other animals or not receive enough community support for the intervention to succeed. Going

by the findings of this study, electric fencing is a winner, saving huge amount of crops and

property not to mention of significant reduction in number of nights spent on guarding. Reduced

guarding in particular has enabled men to spend more time at home helping women and children,

thereby reducing home related drudgery for women and children. Electric fencing has resulted in

food secured and happy families in the study geogs. Livestock insurance program on the other

hand did not take off except in Dangchu geog where it received full support. Two claims were

also made by communities for kills by tigers, which indicates a healthy ecosystem. One logical

reason why compensation program did not take off in other communities could be influenced by

the fact that agriculture crops rather than livestock is their primary source of livelihood. In the

light of these findings, following recommendations are proposed:

31

5. Recommendations

1. Electric fencing using based on Singhe geog method is recommended for scaling up to

areas infected with wild pest. The designed may be improved to target multiple species

including wildpig, which may require reducing the gap between the ground level and

electric line. High initial investment must not discourage government from scaling up

electric fencing in highly infected areas as the cost recovery or savings to the farmers

resulting from this intervention is significant.

2. Replace all solar powered fences to actual electric fencing.

3. Caretakers must be fully trained in repair and maintenance of electric fencing including

basic knowledge on how electric fencing operates.

4. Bringing communities to successful areas like Singhe and Lhamoizingkha must be

continued so that the affected communities can see for themselves the benefits of the

intervention.

5. To bring about and encourage community acceptance and participation in interventions

especially insurance program, there is a need to incorporate conservation education into

the program. This will help create awareness about conservation, the long term goal of

interventions, and build community’s support for it.

6. WCD’s contribution towards the insurance program should be doubled to increase

interest earnings which will help gain community’s’ interest in the program.

7. This report should be published and information disseminated to the general public,

especially those affected, geogs officials, forest officials, politicians, and donors to bring

about general awareness and support for HWC interventions.

8. Extra effort must be invested into raising enough funds both at home and abroad to

support HWC intervention programs. To sustain HWC management programs,

Government of Bhutan must be persuaded to allocate funds on an annual basis to both

show the national and international partners that HWC management is a priority for

Bhutan and encourage them to support it.

9. Because communities differ in their ability and willingness to implement and maintain

communal interventions, policies to address conflicts must be flexible and adaptable.

10. There is a need to monitor, adapt, and modify interventions.

32

6. References

Ciucci, P., and Boitani, L. 1998. Wolf and dog depredation on livestock in central Italy. Wildlife

Society Bulletin. 26:504-514.

Conover, M.R. 2002. Resolving human-wildlife conflicts. Lewis Publishers, Baca Raton,

Florida, USA.

Cozza, K., Fico, R., Battistini, M.L.1996. The damage-conservation interface illustrated by

predation on domestic livestock in central Italy. Biological Conservation. 78:329-336.

Hoare, R.E. 1992. A decision support system for managing human-elephant conflict situation in

Africa. IUCN/SSC African Elephant Specialist Group (HECWG) – IUCN.

Maikhuri, R.K., Nautiyal, S., Rao, K.S., Saxena, K.G., 2001. Conservation policy-people

conflicts: a case study from Nanda Devi biodiversity reserve (a World Heritage Site, India).

Forest Policy Economics 2, 355–365.

McCarthy, T., 2000. Ecology and conservation of snow leopards, Gobi brown bears, and wild

Bactrian camels in Mongolia. Ph.D. thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, USA.

Mishra, H.R. 1982. Balancing human need and conservation in Nepal’s Royal Chitwan Park.

Ambio. 11:246-251.

NCD. 2004. Bhutan Biodiversity Conservation Complex: Living in Harmony with the Nature.

Nature Conservation Division, Department of Forests, Ministry of Agriculture, Thimphu, Bhutan.

58p.

NSB. 2007. Bhutan at a Glance. National Statistical Bureau, Royal Government of Bhutan,

Thimphu Bhutan.

Saberwal, V.K., Gibs, J.P., Chellam, R., Johnsingh, A.T.J., 1994. Lion-human conflict in the Gir

forest, India. Conservation Biology 8, 501–507.

Sharma, U.R. 1990. An overview of park-people interaction in Royal Chitwan National Park,

Nepal. Landscape and Urban Planning. 19:133-144.

33

Studsrod, J.E., Wegge, P., 1995. Park-people relationships: the case of damage caused by park

animals around the Royal Bardia National Park, Nepal. Environmental Conservation 22, 133–

142.

Naughton-Treves, L., A. Treves, C. Chapman, and R. Wrangham. 1998. Temporal patterns of

crop raiding by primates: linking food availability in croplands and adjacent forest. Journal of

Applied Ecology 35:596–606.

Wang, S. W. 2008. Understanding Ecological Interactions Among Carnivores, Ungulates and

Farmers in Bhutan's Jigme Singye Wangchuck National Park. PhD. Dissertation. Cornell

University, Ithaca, New York, USA. 137 p.

Wang, S. W., and D. W. Macdonald. 2006. Livestock predation by carnivores in Jigme Singye

Wangchuck National Park, Bhutan. Biological Conservation 129: 558-565.

Wang, S. W., P. D. Curtis, and J. P. Lassoie. 2006a. Farmer perception of crop damage by wildlife

in Jigme Singye Wangchuck National Park, Bhutan. Wildlife Society Bulletin 34 (2): 359-365.

Wang, S. W., J. P. Lassoie, and P. D. Curtis. 2006b. Farmer attitudes towards conservation in

Jigme Singye Wangchuck National Park, Bhutan. Environmental Conservation 33 (2): 148-156.

Wang, S.W. and Macdonald, D.W. 2006. Predation losses by carnivores in Jigme Singye

Wangchuck National Park, Bhutan. Biological Conservation, 129:558-565.

Yoder, J. 2002. Estimation of wildlife-inflicted property damage ad abatement based on

compensation program. Land Economics. 78:45-59.