Abstract:
Although human - wildlife conflicts are a common phenomenon in different parts of the world, they have become a major challenge for conservationists in the 2lst century. Major causes of conflicts include human population increases leading to encroachment on wildlife habitats and dispersal areas and development of land for agriculture and other activities that are in competition with conservation. This study assessed types, nature and causes of human - wildlife conflict as well as their impact on wildlife conservation and management within and around Chyulu Hills National Park. The study used the descriptive study design. The target population consisted of the local community living around the park and staff from Kenya Wildlife Service and other conservation organisations. A sample of 169 respondents were interviewed. Of this, 149 respondents were randomly selected from the local community living around the park and 20 purposively selected from among the key informants. A sample of 169 was appropriate for this study and was able to cater for possible dropouts occasioned by experimental mortality which is a threat to internal validity or refusal by respondents to participate. Data was collected using questionnaires, key informant interviews, focused group discussions and review of secondary data. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics including frequencies and percentages while hypotheses’ testing was done using the chi square test and results tested at the 0.05 level of significance. Results identified elephants as the most problematic wild animal in the study as reported by 70% of the respondents. Types and nature of human-wildlife conflicts experienced include crop damage (89.3%) and livestock predation (73.2%). Human deaths and injuries were the least mentioned. Lack of proper mitigation measures to mitigate was reported by 63.8% of the respondents as the main cause of increased human wildlife conflicts outside the park. Communities suggested mitigation measure such as erection of electric fences (76.5%), translocation of animals (17.4%), revenue sharing (15.4%) and frequent patrols among others. The study concluded that HWC impacted negatively to both people and wildlife and called for empowering local communities in order to improve their attitudes towards conservation. Land use planning and environmental education was also recommended to reduce conflicts in the study area.
