Haramaya

HARAMAYA UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF NATURAL AND COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGY
THREAT TO WILDLIFE AND CONSERVATION PRACTICED IN
GARAMULATA LENCHA FOREST, GERAWA
A SENIOR PROJECT SUBMITTED TO

THE DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE BACHELOR DEGREE OF SCIENCE IN
BIOLOGY
ABDURAMAN JEMAL
ID №:- 2971/07
ADVISOR:- TEMESGEN ..(MSc)
MARCH, 2017
Haramaya, Oromiya, Ethiopia

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
First of all I would like to thank my advisor Temesgen Tola. This project would not have
been materialized without the encouragement, constructive advice, and helpful suggestion .
Finally we would like to take thanks for Haramaya University College of natural and
computational science department of biology for giving us this opportunity which may
have a considerable contribution to our future career.
LIST OF ABBREVATION AND ACRONOMY

HWC—Human and Wildlife conflict
ABSTRACT
This research was conducted in Oromia regional state, east hararghe zone,girawa woreda lencha
kebele. This study had assessed the threat to wild life and their conservation practice. For the
purpose of this study primary data was used by the researcher . This primary data would collected
from household by using questionnery and observation. The researcher was carried out on the 20
selected household from lencha kebele. Generally the government should formulate rule and
regulation for the local people.
1. introductoin............................................................................1
1.1 Background of study----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
1.2 Statement of the problem----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
1.3 Objectives of the Study-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4

1.3.1 Specific objectives are:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
1.4 Significance of the Study-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
2.litreture review....................................................................................................4
2.1 Conservation Discourse-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
2.2 Participation and conservation----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
2.3 Biodiversity----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
2.4 Cause of wildlife loss----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
2.5Ecological and economic impacts of wildlife loss-------------------------------------------------------------------4

3.methods and materials.......................................................5
3.1 study site description----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
3.2 study design---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
3.3 Data Types and Sources------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
3.4 Data size-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
3.5 Data Collection Methods-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4

3.5.1 Document review----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
3.5.2 Interviews-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
3.5.3 Key informant interview--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
3.5.4 Observational methods----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
3.6 Data Analysis-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4

4.RESULT AND DISCUSSION..................................................................................................8
5.CONCLUSION AND RECOMENDATION...........................................................................10
5. 1 CONCLUSION----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
5.2. Recommendation--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
5. REFERENCES--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
.
1. Introduction
1.1 Background of study
Human negative interaction between people and wildlife has recently become one of the
fundamental aspects of wildlife management as it represents the most widespread and complex
challenge currently being faced by the conservationist around the world. Human negative
interaction arises mainly because of the loss, degradation and fragmentation of habitats through
human activities such as, logging, animal husbandry, agricultural expansion, and developmental
projects (Fernando, P. et al.,2005). Consequently, it leads to greater contact and conflict with
humans as wild animals seek to fulfill their nutritional, ecological and behavioral needs
(Sukumar, R. 1990). The damage to human interests caused by contact with such animals can
include loss of life or injury, threats to economic security, reduced food security and livelihood
opportunities. The rural communities with limited livelihood opportunities are often hardest hit
by conflicts with wildlife. Without mitigating Human negative interaction the results are further
impoverishment of the poor, reduced local support for conservation, and increased retaliatory
killings of wildlife causing increased vulnerability of wildlife populations. Understanding the
ecological and socio-economical context of the HWC is a prerequisite to bring about an efficient
and long-term management of wildlife and its habitats(Sukumar, R. 1990).
Human wildlife conflict is one of the major threats to house hold food security and rural
incomes. In Africa, the great dependence of a large proportion of the human population for their
survival on land, coupled with the presence of many species of large mammals leads to many
sources of conflict between people and wildlife (Hill, C. M. 1998).
As human populations have grown demands on the limited resources have increased and the
intensity of conflicts between conservation authorities and local people has escalated. Dispute
over land-use between the local people and wildlife conservation agencies is becoming a serious
challenging problem in developing countries like Ethiopia (IIED, 1994: 15).
As conservation rules are broken, rendering enforcements impracticable and costly. The change
in attitude and increased killing of animals, their shrinking habitats and the economic decline of
many African countries, have led to a growing consensus among conservationists and
international conservation organization that the American national park model, commonly
referred as ìfences-and finesî approach, has failed to protect wildlife in the continent (IIED,
1994). As a result, conservationists have been searching for viable and sustainable alternatives or
a lasting solution since the late 1970ís and early 1980ís (IIED, 1994).
The most appealing alternative approach for the conservationists was to establish agreements
between communities living adjacent to wildlife areas and the conservation authority that
promised co-operation, partnership and the equitable distribution of wildlife costs and benefits.
However, before any alternative strategies can be implemented the relationship between the
wildlife and the local people must be clearly understood. In many parts of Africa, the conflict
between local people and wildlife is probably the major conservation issue at the present.
Conservation attitudes of local people living adjacent to wildlife habitats are strongly influenced
1
by problems associated with wildlife.which has been a source of long standing conflict with the
local community.
Local communities who are unable to control the losses and damage that may be caused by
wildlife are more likely to develop a negative attitude towards the wildlife and to the rules and
regulations of wildlife conservation.
A number of studies have indicated that people who perceived benefits and enjoy unrestricted
access to natural resources, usually support wildlife conservation efforts and protected areas
(Kellert, 1985b; McNeelly, 1988; Hartup, 1994 cited in Zelalem,1995).For the conservation of
natural resources to be effective, the attitudes of the local communities towards the conservation
programme and, above all, their attitude towards the resource to be protected must be studied so
that the communities perceived needs and aspirations can be taken into account (Infield, 1988;
Fiallo and Jacobson, 1995).
1.2 Statement of the problem

Protection of wildlife and the natural environment has had limited success in African including
Ethiopia. Despite measures for conserving resources increasing areas of wildlife habitat are
being destroyed. As a result, uncontrolled expansion of agriculture and grazing coupled with
illegal harvesting of forests and other products have been threatening the functioning of the
protected area systems in many parts of the country.
Conservation policies and strategies, viewing conservation in departure from human activities
and human interest have proven a failure. Policy makers and conservationists give little attention
to institutional and social dimensions in managing natural resources. Conservations realities are
overwhelmingly social, cultural, and economic and political. The success or failures are squarely
dependent on the extent to which these realities are appreciated. Researchers have the view that
natural resource managements and conservation cannot be merely viewed with instrumental
reasoning rather it is more importantly a social discourse shaped and influenced by social
process, institutions, livelihood related human activities and social organizations.
There are positively contributing attribute like indigenous managements, informal rules and
socio cultural reality that demand exploration and systemically organized information. However,
systematically organized information and knowledge has not yet existed on past and
contemporary property right relations, community perspective ,world view, attitude and the role
of different actors influencing the management of the sanctuary. More over the outcome of this
study is expected to contribute knowledge about the importance of forum shopping for
addressing overlapping interest of administrative and development bodies influencing the
management of wildlife in garamulata lencha forest.
2
1.3 Objectives of the Study
The overall objective of the research is to investigate threat to wildlife facing and management
wildlife at lencha forest in garamulata and to assess the local people's attitude towards protection
of wild life conservation in the area.
1.3.1 Specific objectives are:
 To investigate prevailing opportunities and constraints in the managing wildlife

 To assess the local people's attitude towards protection of wildlife.
 To know the conservation method that practicing in the area.
1.4 Significance of the Study
In Ethiopia agriculture is the main stay of significant population that generate its livelihood
source from natural resource. There has been competing interest of natural resource demand
between agrarian rural population and nature preserving goal of wildlife in many unprotected
area. Garamulata lencha forest has been one of unprotected area facing similar situation which
requires critical examination of the opportunities and constraints in managing wildlife of
garamulata. The study will be directly beneficial societies by giving awareness creation to
conservation and wildlife management. Moreover lesson will be drawn to suggest further
research on ways for effective arrangements on natural resource managements among stake
holders with multiple and contrasting interest and value while facing comparable problems in the
country.
3
2. Literature review
2.1 Conservation Discourse

The past few decades have witnessed a transition in the approach of protected area
implementation, from the traditional, exclusionary approach commonly implemented in the
1970s and 80s towards an approach that seeks to directly link biodiversity conservation with
local livelihoods. Many conservationists today believe that unless local livelihoods and
conservation are made to be compatible, there is no future for conservation. A broad approach
protected areas with agricultural communities is far more likely to succeed than plans that are too
narrowly based on conservation areas. Ecological, economic, and socio-political have to be
addressed together. Tenure units and a fugitive resource (its access rights move with it), provides
an incentive for landowners to cooperate and integrate their conservation goals at a level greater
than the management unit(McKean, M. A., 2000)
2.2 Participation and conservation

Many scholars working in the area agree that it is impossible to establish a universal definition of
participation. Platt refers to three types of participation of local communities and individuals
which are physical participation; mental participation, decision making, organization and
management; emotional participation assuming responsibility, power and authority. Nelson and
Wright (1995) refer to three models giving the extent of people's participation: cosmetic
participation; co-opting participation; empowering participation. Nelson and Wright
(1995),defines participation as combining effective economic policies, equitable access to basic
social and economic services and broader participation in the orientation of government policies
and programs. Nelson and Wright (1995, p 7) refer to a definition, produced in 1991 by George
that participation is "Co-determination and power sharing throughout the programed cycle".
Identifies three further models: collaboration people are involved only in implementation;
community development grassroots participation only after needs, priorities and programs are
developed; empowerment people identify their own needs with no external assistance. Faughnan
and Kellagherdefine participation as "taking part in activities in a way designed to influence
events whether in areas of policy formulation, implementation or evaluation" (Reynolds and
Healy, 1993).
2.3 Biodiversity
In response to the climatic variety, many species are only present in certain areas of the country,
where their climatic requirements are met. As extended high elevation levels are rather unique in
Africa, the mountains are rich in species that have only developed there, so the degree of
endemism in Ethiopia's mountain range is quite high proportionately to the total number of
species in the country. The species diversity in the cool mountains, though, is much lower than in
the hot moist lowlands, as in general, species diversity is highest in hot moist areas. With about
6000 species recorded for the country about 10% of which is endemic – the plant diversity of
4
Ethiopia is the highest in Northern Africa for the same latitude. The on-line database of the
Ethiopian Flora Network lists 140 red-data species for Ethiopia. Many flowers are of
extraordinary beauty and contribute to the splendor of Ethiopia's dramatic landscapes. With
about 320 species of mammals, Ethiopia is one of Africa's most diverse countries for mammals.
A great selection of the famous African mammals is still present in the country. This diverse
wildlife, which includes 36 endemic species of mammals. Potentially, could make Ethiopia one
of the top safari destinations in Africa. The species whose conservation state is considered to be
globally concerning, include 5 critically endangered, 8 endangered, 12 near-threatened species
and 27 vulnerable species. For the survival of all those globally concerning species, Ethiopia
plays a critical role. For a lot of people who decide to visit Africa their main interest is to view
large mammals in great variety, large numbers and at close proximity.
Yet, the large mammal populations can't be compared with the wildlife spectacles of Kenya or Tanzania,
but this may change considerably, once effective management comes in place. There are remnant
populations of Elephants,Loxodontaafricana, (an estimated 850), Lions, Panteraleo,(an estimated 1,000
and an endemic subspecies) and of most large ungulates. Spotted Hyaenas,Crocutacrocuta, are present
throughout the country. However, the remnant 1 or 2 populations of Black Rhino, Dicerosbicornis, that
are rumouredto still survive in the country have remained illusive to the eyes of professional biologists for
many decades. Of the fauna, the best known taxon is the avifauna; more than 860 species of birds have
been registered for the country, making Ethiopia the most bird species rich country in Africa
(DaanVreugdenhil et al.,2013 )
2.4 Cause of wildlife loss

The principle cause of habitat loss is human activity. These activities include the land and
resources use, all the production and consumption and the waste that discarded. Each human
activity contributes to the main causes of species loss; habitat loss, climate change, invasive
species, pollution, and unsustainable promote of species
Forest loss and degradation is mostly caused by the expansion of agricultural land and as well as
over grazing. Increasing food production is also one reason for the conversion of natural habitats
to agricultural land.
2.5Ecological and economic impacts of wildlife loss

Wildlife is essential component of nature and ensures the survival of human species by providing
food, fuel, shelter, medicines, and other resources for human kind. But whenever loss of wildlife
occurs in the area all things mentioned above may not available to human kind. The control
methods to conserve and management also mentioned on above specific objectives under halting
of wildlife loss by providing protected area, promoting sustainability ,slowing climate changes,
preventing of introduction of species, and information/education. Now we will focused on the
threat to wild life management and their conservation practices at garamulata lencha forest in
Girawa haraghe zone, Oromiya region.
5
3.MATERIAL AND METHOD
3.1 study site description
Girawa is one of the district in the Oromia Region of Ethiopia . Part of the East HarargheZone , Girawa is
bordered on the south by GolaOda , on the west by Meyyu muluke, on the north by KurfaChele, and on
the east by Fedis . The altitude of this district ranges from 500to 3230 meters above sea level; Gayle is the
highest point; other significant peaks include Mount GaraMuleta. A survey of the land in Girawa
(released in 1996) shows that 54.3% is arable or cultivable, 4.4% pasture, 1.2% forest ,21.8% built-up,
and the remaining 18.3% is considered degraded or otherwise unusable.
The 2007 national census reported a total population for this district of 240,173, of whom 121,751 were
men and 118,422 were women; 5,893 or 2.45% of its population were urban dwellers.
3.2 study design

In this study, qualitative research design primarily data were used and pertinent quantitative
research result at secondary levels would be also used from the previous study. Mainly to study
the institutional arrangements and its implication over the use and conservation of the wildlife of
garamulatelenca forest was studied on the basis qualitative research methods such as field
research, historical interview approach, and key informants interview. This study primarily was
used the qualitative research methodology. Primary and secondary source of data would be used
and analyzed for this study. The primary sources of data were gathered from key informant
interviews, and observation.
The secondary source of information was obtained from books, articles, and previous studies
reports. Outcome of quantitative survey result was used to characterize, develop pattern and
substantiate the study outcome. Pertinent data of survey result such as household demographic
socio economic characteristics, asset ownership, livestock conditions, and so on were taken to be
used where appropriate.
3.3 Data Types and Sources
Mainly qualitative data would be gathered from sample respondents. In addition secondary data
would be collected from historical maps, study reports and records. The data would be collected
through key informant interviews, and observation. The author designed selecting interviewees
from three categories of elders youth and knowledgeable persons representing three predominant
livelihood bases from agricultural, both mixed crop production and livestock keeping as well as
purely pastoral living in past.
Accordingly, the selections of interviewees would be made together with the village community
leadership.
6
3.4 Data size
In the study area, there are2,850 population and 275 household (source: kebele administration).
Due to time, money and other constraints only sample of 20 individual household heads would
be surveyed, using a random sampling technique those household would be selected. Random
sampling technique would be used to include all possibility and to gave equal chance for all the
aspect of the community
3.5 Data Collection Methods
3.5.1 Document review
Historical documents were results of individual and social as well as organizational accounts of
the past. Such documents were valuable source of information and relevant documents would be
refereed and used. Thus document reviews would be made on the assessment report of boundary
demarcation and study report on the cover of the forest and biodiversity of the wildlife in the
lencha forest from the kebele.
3.5.2 Interviews
Checklists of questions would be used as flexible guides. A question coming from the
Interviewee’s response, observations of things around was used for unstructured interview.
Interview guide of various types would be used for different organization to get respective
information.
3.5.3 Key informant interview
The issue of resource use, tenure regimes, evolution of property regime and respective
institutional arrangement assessed through historical interview. Key people such as traditional
leaders or elders would be interviewed to collect information about history and social relations
within the village and respective property relation over government regimes and across. The key
informants would be selected on the basis their knowledge of resource and social history in the
area. Moreover the member would be composed of experience from different livelihood basis
7
and ecological areas. Interview with the key informants dealt with: historical situation, major
causes, and impacts of changes of governing policies, current and past perception on wildlife
conservation and concern about livelihood issues among local communities, and their
recommendation to tackle the problems. The interview would be made with NGO, and
government staffs, and perception of the community.
3.5.4 Observational methods

Observation was an important source of qualitative data evaluation for deep understanding of the local
community worldviews, attitudes and concerns, direct observation and participant observation would be
an important component of the data collection of this research. Direct observation would be made on the
people feeling and way of expression while discussed wild life issues and their influence on their daily
life and their reaction would be categorized to be analyzed to assess the attitude and worldview of local
people towards the wildlife.
3.6 Data Analysis
In this study data analysis involves examining, evaluating, synthesizing and contemplating the coded
data. The collected data would be categorized, coded and analyzed. Simple content analysis and
explanation building used and the analysis would be made both during and after data collection.
Secondary survey would be adapted and combined with qualitative data
The overall objective of the research is to investigate threat to wildlife facing and management wildlife at
lenca forest in garamulata and to assess the local people's attitude towards protection of wild life
conservation in the area.
To investigate prevailing opportunities and constraints in the managing wildlife
To assess the local people's attitude towards protection of wildlife.
To know the conservation method that practicing in the area.
8
9
10
11
4(20%) were illiterate , 6(30%) were grade 2-5, 7(35%) were grade 6-10 and the least 3(15%)
were above grade 10.
Table 4.2 the main cause wild life loss in the study area.
No Respondent answer No of respondent Percentage
1 Losing of their habitat 6 30%
2 Conflict between them4 20%

selves
3 Hunting 10 50%
4 Total 20 100%
Table 4.2 show that the farmer practice respondents of the main facilitator wild life lost.
According to the above table showed that 50% of the respondents replied that the main cause of
wild life loss in their locality was hunting (sukumar. R 1990). The other respondents responded
that conflict between themselves and losing of their habitat.
Table 4.3 which have responsibility to conserve wild life.
12
No Respondent answer No of respondent Percentage
1 Government 7 35%
2 Society 3 15%
3 Individual person 10 50%
4 Total 20 100%
The above table clearly showed that half of the total respondents replied that all individual had
the responsibility to conserve wild life.
Not only this, but also the government and society were responsible to conserve wild life. For all
the above information all of them had responsible to protect threat to wild life.
5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5. 1 CONCLUSION
The study and its surrounding were observed during the survey time and various description
about threat to wild life and conservation practice were dealt with local residence and concerned
bodies on this issues. From general understanding of the study we conclude the followings. In
the finding the main Couse of wild life lose were hunting and loosing of their habitat. This losing
of habitat were caused by over population to found agricultural land. Even though the study area
favorable for many wild animals. There were a number of consequent of losing wild life in the
study area were the loss of the tourism place and the stability of the environment would decrease.
13
Generally, the low education of the residence in the locality also a great problem on how to
utilize natural resources and how to conserve as well. According to the finding giving the
prevalent education to the community would be decisive factor to minimize threat of wild life.
5.2. Recommendation
 Most farmer did not have education to conserve wild life. So the community should be
learned.
 The effort should be taken by the government to conserve wild life
 Once conservation structure constructed, it should be maintained whenever necessary.
5. References
DaanVreugdenhil, Astrid M. Vreugdenhil, TamiratTilahun, AntenehShimelis and
ZelealemTefera2013. gap analysis of the protected areas system of ethiopia. 12,13.
Fernando, P., E. Wikramanayake, D. Weerakoon, L. K. A. Jayasinghe, M. Gunawardene, and H.
K. Janaka. 2005.Perceptions and patterns of human-elephant conflict in old M and new
settlements in Sri Lanka: insights for mitigation and management. Biodiversity and
Conservation 14:2465-2481
14
Fiallo, E.B. and S.K. Jacobson (1995) Local communities and protected areas: attitudes of rural
residents towards conservation and Machalilla National Park. Environmental Conservation,
22:241-249.
Hill, C. M. 1998. Conflicting Attitudes Towards Elephants Around the Budungo Forest Reserve.
Environ. Conser. 25: 244-250.
McKean, M. A., 2000. Common property: What is it, what is it good for, and what makes it
work? In Wiersum, K.F and Ir.G. Verschoor. 2004, Community based conservation and
rural development (part 2). Forest and mature conservation policy group .Rural
Development Sociology Group. Wageningen Agricultural University
Nelson, N. and S. Wright (Eds), 1995. Power and Participatory Development: Theory and
Practice. Intermediate Technology.
Sukumar, R. 1990. Ecology of the Asian elephant in southern India. II. Feeding habits and crop
raiding patterns. Journal of Tropical Ecology 6:33-53.
Zelalem, T., 1995. Community participation in the conservation of natural habitat inMenz area of
North Shoa. Proceedings of Participatory wildlife Management Workshop. Ministry of
Naturals Resource Development and Environmental Protection (MNRDEP) and FARM
Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.IIED( International Institute for Environment and
Development), 1994. Whose Eden: An Overview of Community Approaches to Wildlife
Management. IIED, London, UK.
Appendix(questionnary).
15
This questionares are to collect data concerning on threat to wild life and thier conservation
practice in gara mulata lencha forest. The questionary will be prepared by english language and
translated to Afan oromo.
Personal information.
1.kebele______
2.Age. A. 24_27 B.32_35 C.28_31 D.36_39. E .above 39
3.Sex. A. Male. B. Female
4.Ethnic group. A. Oromo B. Amhara. C. other
5.Educational status. A. illitrate B. grade 6_10. C.grade1_5
D.above grade 10
6. What is the main cause for lossing of wild life at gara mulata lencha forest ?
A.lossing of their habitats B.conflict between their groups
C. Hunting D. all.
7. what are the main effect come by the lossing of wild life arround your locality ?
A. the stablization of the environment will deacres.
B. the income of our government will decrease.
C.desertification will come.
D. all
8.what are the main advantage of wild life conservation arround your area?
16
A. re freshing of your environment
B. when it will conserved it become the suorce of income for your government
C.it will be center of turism
D. all of the above
E. Other_______
9.According to your view is there any effective method of wild life conservation around your
locality? A. Yes B. No
10. .Wich of the following have the responsiblity for protection of wild life ?
A.soceity B. all individual person
C. Our government only D.all have responsable to protect the wild life
17

Haramaya

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Haramaya

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Haramaya

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

HARAMAYA UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF NATURAL AND COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCES

A SENIOR PROJECT SUBMITTED TO

Haramaya, Oromiya, Ethiopia

LIST OF ABBREVATION AND ACRONOMY

1.2 Statement of the problem----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4

1.3 Objectives of the Study-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4

1.4 Significance of the Study-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4

2.2 Participation and conservation----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4

2.4 Cause of wildlife loss----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4

2.5Ecological and economic impacts of wildlife loss-------------------------------------------------------------------4

3.2 study design---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4

3.3 Data Types and Sources------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4

3.4 Data size-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4

3.5 Data Collection Methods-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4

3.6 Data Analysis-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4

5.CONCLUSION AND RECOMENDATION...........................................................................10

1.2 Statement of the problem

1.3.1 Specific objectives are:

 To investigate prevailing opportunities and constraints in the managing wildlife

1.4 Significance of the Study

2.1 Conservation Discourse

2.2 Participation and conservation

2.4 Cause of wildlife loss

2.5Ecological and economic impacts of wildlife loss

3.2 study design

3.3 Data Types and Sources

3.5 Data Collection Methods

3.5.1 Document review

3.5.3 Key informant interview

3.5.4 Observational methods

3.6 Data Analysis

1.3.1 Specific objectives are:

To investigate prevailing opportunities and constraints in the managing wildlife

To assess the local people's attitude towards protection of wildlife.

To know the conservation method that practicing in the area.

1.3.1 Specific objectives are:

To assess the local people's attitude towards protection of wildlife.

To know the conservation method that practicing in the area.

1.3.1 Specific objectives are:

To investigate prevailing opportunities and constraints in the managing wildlife

To assess the local people's attitude towards protection of wildlife.

To know the conservation method that practicing in the area.

1.3.1 Specific objectives are:

To investigate prevailing opportunities and constraints in the managing wildlife

To assess the local people's attitude towards protection of wildlife.

To know the conservation method that practicing in the area.

1.3.1 Specific objectives are:

To investigate prevailing opportunities and constraints in the managing wildlife

To assess the local people's attitude towards protection of wildlife.

To know the conservation method that practicing in the area.

1.3.1 Specific objectives are:

To investigate prevailing opportunities and constraints in the managing wildlife

To assess the local people's attitude towards protection of wildlife.

To know the conservation method that practicing in the area.

1.3.1 Specific objectives are:

To investigate prevailing opportunities and constraints in the managing wildlife

To assess the local people's attitude towards protection of wildlife.

To know the conservation method that practicing in the area.