โฆ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
By Sonam Choden
Human-elephant conflict (HEC) continues to grow as a serious concern in many parts of southern Bhutan, especially in areas bordering forested regions. One such affected area is Baepoteng-Kangdoongphu Chiwog under Tashichhoeling Gewog, where farmers have repeatedly suffered crop damage and property losses due to wild elephants.
The proximity of Tashichhoeling to West Bengal, India- near Gorumara National Park and Chapramari Wildlife Sanctuary- has resulted in frequent elephant movements across the border, particularly during the cropping season. Crops such as maize, paddy, banana, and areca nut attract elephants, making farms near forest edges vulnerable to raids.
Between 2024 and 2025, elephant depredation severely affected local agriculture, with particular damage to areca nut plantations. Twelve households reported the loss of 156 areca nut trees, with individual losses ranging from 6 to 21 trees. These repeated incidents have caused significant economic loss and worsened food insecurity among these families. Changes in land use have also intensified the problem, as privately registered lands have reverted to dense secondary forests that elephants now use as semi-permanent refuges.
A recent incident on July 22, 2025, illustrates the ongoing challenge. Elephants destroyed banana and areca nut trees, as well as a vegetable garden, causing extensive damage. They also tried to break the window of a house belonging to Kul Bahadur Subba. Another resident, Ranjit Gurung, experienced damage when elephants demolished part of his kitchen wall and destroyed household items including a rice cooker. His areca nut plantation was also affected. These events highlight an increasing trend of wildlife encroaching on human settlements.
Man Raj Subba, a farmer from Kandoongphu, reported elephants in his locality for fifteen consecutive days in July. The most severe damage occurred on the night of July 16, when his areca nut trees, maize, vegetables, home garden, and protective fencing were destroyed. โThe elephants came at night when we were sleeping,โ he said. โBy morning, everything was gone- the fence, the crops, even the garden I had just planted.โ
As the sole breadwinner for a family of four, he described the impact as devastating for his householdโs food security and economic stability. โThis was supposed to be our harvest. Now we have nothing. I don’t know how we will survive until the next season,โ he added.
In response, the local community built a protective fence, but budget constraints limited it to half its planned length, making it ineffective. Residents are now manually collecting stones to build a temporary 180-foot stone wall to block the main elephant access route. While the labor is voluntary, lack of funds for materials remains a key obstacle. โIf we had support for cement and tools, we could finish the wall in a day,โ Man Raj said. Despite multiple complaints and forest officialsโ visits to document damage, no follow-up mitigation or compensation has been provided. โThey come, they take notes, and then they leave. We never hear back,โ he said, expressing frustration.
Ganga Rama Subba, another farmer from the same village, reported similar damage during elephant visits that destroyed 10 to 20 areca nut trees. Like Man Raj, he expressed concern over the unpredictability of farming and the lack of options to protect crops or recover losses.
The emotional toll is significant. Man Raj described staying awake until 2:00 AM each night to guard his fields. โI canโt sleep peacefully. I stay up watching and listening. Still, they manage to sneak in after I fall asleep,โ he said. He compared the damage to a football field after a match, trampled and in disarray.
Victims reported that many mitigation efforts initiated by the forestry department over the past decade have been largely ineffective. A 6.7 km solar-powered electric fence built in 2010 with WWF Bhutan and UNDP support was never completed, leaving large areas exposed. Agave plants introduced in 2014 as a biotic barrier failed to grow and offered no protection. Other measures- such as watchtowers, siren warning systems, and habitat enrichment through waterholes and bamboo plantations- have had limited effect. While camera traps, sound alerts, and bio-fencing were introduced in nearby areas, farmers in Kangdoongphu say these have done little to deter elephants or protect livelihoods. The prevailing view among farmers is that despite promises and pilot projects, meaningful and sustained solutions have not materialized.
Community engagement and education form part of the HEC strategy. Awareness campaigns have been conducted through Drungkhag-level forums, Quick Response Teams (QRTs), and school outreach programs. Participatory planning encourages local ownership of mitigation measures. However, the absence of a formal compensation mechanism for crop loss remains a major concern. Although forest officials verify and document damage, no institutional financial support exists, leaving affected families vulnerable.
Long-term solutions proposed include extending solar electric fencing, GPS collaring of elephants to track movement, and habitat restoration through enrichment plantations. Capacity building, solar-powered lighting, and wireless communication devices for QRTs are also under consideration. The success of these initiatives will depend on strong collaboration between forest authorities and local communities.
The human-elephant conflict in Kangdoongphu Chiwog illustrates the ongoing challenge at the intersection of rural livelihoods and wildlife conservation in Bhutanโs southern borderlands. Despite a decade of interventions, escalating damage to crops, property, and the mental well-being of residents reveals the shortcomings of current measures. The lack of timely support, both in physical protection and compensation, leaves communities to face this challenge largely alone. Addressing the issue requires a shift toward a well-resourced, community-focused approach that recognizes the full human cost of conservation.