A growing wave of human wildlife conflict in western Nepal is placing rural women at heightened risk, particularly in forest-edge communities surrounding Bardiya National Park, where daily survival activities are bringing them into dangerous proximity with wild animals.
In villages like Madhuwan, women routinely enter nearby forests at dawn to collect fodder, firewood, and other essentials. These same areas are also key wildlife corridors used by animals such as tigers and leopards, creating frequent and often deadly encounters. Recent incidents have highlighted the severity of the situation, with multiple fatalities reported within weeks, many involving women engaged in routine tasks like cutting grass or grazing livestock.
The increasing danger is closely linked to a broader social shift. Large-scale male migration for work often to cities or abroad has left women responsible for agriculture and household livelihoods. This “feminization of labour” has pushed more women into forests, significantly increasing their exposure to risk.
Data from local forest authorities show that a large proportion of fatal attacks occur during everyday activities. Nearly one-third of incidents happen while herding cattle, and another third while cutting grass. Most of these encounters take place not deep inside forests or villages, but along forest edges zones where human activity and wildlife movement overlap.
The situation is particularly severe in the Khata corridor, a forest stretch linking Bardiya with India’s Katarniaghat Wildlife Sanctuary. This corridor has emerged as a hotspot for conflict, with most attacks occurring within one kilometre of forest boundaries.
Despite Nepal’s widely praised conservation success including a significant rise in tiger populations the human cost of this achievement is becoming increasingly visible. The country now hosts around 355 tigers, more than double its population since 2009. However, this recovery has coincided with persistent or rising fatalities in certain regions.
Experts say the issue is not simply about more animals, but about changing landscapes. Forest fragmentation and increased “edge zones” have intensified interactions between people and wildlife. These are the same areas where women carry out daily subsistence work, making conflict almost unavoidable.
Adding to the challenge is the lack of representation of women in conservation decision-making. Despite being the most affected group, women make up less than 15 per cent of the national park workforce and remain largely excluded from policy discussions that shape wildlife management strategies.
Local communities, especially those from marginalized and forest-dependent backgrounds, face limited alternatives. For many, entering the forest is not a choice but a necessity. Livelihood needs such as feeding livestock often outweigh the risks, forcing women to return to dangerous areas day after day.
The issue has also entered the political arena, with growing public anger leading to protests and demands for stronger safety measures, compensation for victims, and in some cases, the removal of “problem animals.” Experts warn that such responses may offer short-term relief but fail to address deeper structural challenges.
Conservationists emphasize the need for long-term solutions, including improved access to fodder resources, early-warning systems, safer forest-use practices, and community-based conflict mitigation strategies. They argue that balancing wildlife protection with human safety requires a more inclusive approach that considers the realities faced by local communities.
As debates continue, daily life in these villages remains unchanged. Women continue to walk into forests each morning, navigating fear and necessity. For many, the goal is not eliminating risk, but simply returning home safely.