The myth of compensation for wildlife-related damages
Summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
At a glance
- Farmers in Nepal are increasingly frustrated by wildlife, including monkeys and elephants, destroying crops and livestock, leading to rural outmigration.
- A government compensation program for wildlife-related damages exists but is plagued by a cumbersome application process, low payout caps, and insufficient funds, leaving many claims pending.
- Conservationists and officials are seeking alternative funding from various organizations, but limited resources and the rising cost of claims strain the national budget.
Farmers across Nepal are voicing growing anger over escalating wildlife attacks that decimate crops, livestock, and property, threatening human safety and making agriculture unprofitable. This escalating crisis is fueling rural outmigration as communities bear the brunt of conservation costs.
Monkeys, elephants, tigers, and other animals are increasingly encroaching on farmlands and communities, leading to significant losses. In response, some villages have even boycotted parliamentary elections to protest the government's inaction.
The government's compensation scheme, introduced in 2009 and revised in 2023, offers partial reimbursement for damages. However, the process is notoriously difficult, requiring extensive documentation and long waits for meager payments. Many victims abandon claims due to the arduous procedure and low payout caps, such as a maximum of Rs10,000 for annual crop damage, regardless of actual loss.
With claims totaling Rs136 million in 2025 and hundreds of thousands still pending, the financial burden on the government is unsustainable. Officials are now urging conservation organizations and local groups to contribute funds, but these resources are limited and fragmented, highlighting the deep challenges in addressing the human-wildlife conflict in Nepal.
Originally published by Kathmandu Post. Summarized and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.