Determinants of local residents’ attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve, Kenya.

Determinants of local residents’ attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve, Kenya. | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Determinants of local residents’ attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve, Kenya. Douglas O. Onyancha, Hellen Ipara, Johnstone K. Kimanzi, Maaike A. Versteegh, and 1 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6362611/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Local residents’ attitudes and perceptions about protected areas are among the key factors that determine the success of conservation efforts. This paper examines determinants of local residents’ attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve (RNR) and its surroundings in Kenya. The study used household surveys, questionnaires, focus group discussions (FGDs), and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) to collect data from local residents bordering RNR, local leaders and Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) staff. Questionnaires consisting of closed and open-ended questions were distributed to 20 randomly selected heads of households in seven administrative locations giving a total of 140 respondents. In addition, 30 key informants were purposely selected from among KWS staff (5), local leaders (10), leaders of self-help groups (7), religious leaders (3), and village elders (5). Results showed that local residents’ perceptions were primarily associated with education level, occupation, forms of land use, crop and livestock invasion by wildlife from RNR, benefit-sharing and interaction between RNR staff and the local community. Both crop and livestock raiding were the most serious human-wildlife conflicts reported around RNR. Logging (28%) and charcoal burning (25%) were the major illegal activities in RNR (χ2 = 50.60, df = 6, p < 0.001). Slightly over thirty percent of the respondents (32.4%) strongly agreed that RNR is a useful resource to be conserved. For conservation goals to be achieved, there is need for involvement of local residents in conservation programs, promotion of wildlife conservation awareness, increased benefit-sharing and adoption of sustainable enterprise programs to alleviate poverty and illegal activities. Wildlife conservation Attitudes and perceptions Illegal activities Benefits Protected areas Rimoi National Reserve Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 INTRODUCTION Local communities living adjacent to protected ecosystems play a pivotal role in the success of any conservation undertaking (Simasiku et al., 2024 ). Hence, understanding how people perceive and relate to their natural environments is indispensable to conservation action. While perceptions can be harnessed for positive conservation engagement (Costa et al., 2013 ), it has been documented that both attitudes and perceptions are critical issues in people’s lives since they reflect their values and thoughts, help develop knowledge, improve overall welfare, and change their reality (Bitanyi et al., 2012 ). A study about the concepts of attitudes and perceptions of local residents towards wildlife and conservation by Tessema et al., ( 2019 ) reveals a portrait of the local population and its vision of the world of conservation. Consequently, understanding how people perceive and relate to their environment have proven very useful aspects in environmental education programs because they help to carry out a process of evaluation that identifies the needs in each area for the planning of suitable goals and aims (Rodney et al., 2003 ). However, traditional knowledge has been poorly documented and therefore neglected in many conservation programs over the years. Studies on the relationship between human societies and their environment should include economic, social and psychological factors (Shibia, 2010 ). Despite this, social and cultural analyses have not been considered in most discussions about sustainable wildlife management in developing economies (Mogomotsi et al., 2020 ). However, the present valorization of these factors is viewed as a paradigm shift whereby traditional knowledge has become essential to development (Senanayake, 2006 ). The Earth’s Summit which is also referred to as United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro in Brazil in 1992 considered the paradigm shift an important landmark in this regard (Lanchberry, 1996 ). Consequently, attitudes associated with economic usage of resources have altered the environment, damaging ecosystems that sustain the basic needs of populations (Florian et al. , 1999; Garekae et al., 2016 ). The creation of protected areas has often been considered a foreign concept and outgrowth of western conservation needs and values by local communities in developing countries (Shibia, 2010 ). The concept was introduced to developing countries by colonial administrations and is presently being adopted and promoted by developing nations as a commitment to various international conventions. In Kenya and other parts of Africa, many protected areas among them Rimoi National Reserve have been established based on this concept. However, due to the livelihood implications caused by protected area establishment, local residents perceive it as a liability (Shibia, 2010 ) since their establishment often transforms the area from primary provision of subsistence resources for local use to provision of aesthetic benefits. Further, the establishment of protected areas often denies local people access to traditional resources and also disenfranchises them of their indigenous access and use rights (Mamo et al., 2018 ). As a consequence, local residents living in close proximity to protected areas have over the years developed either negative or antagonistic attitudes towards these areas and their wildlife resources, as well as protected area management authorities. A lack of congruence between conservation initiatives and local perceptions on conservation areas of concern and actions for their protection has been found in many protected areas (Costa et al., 2013 ). Rimoi National Reserve in Kenya which is managed by Kenya Wildlife Service is among the protected areas experiencing serious conservation challenges and needs critical interventions to develop and strengthen mutual relationship between local residents and the reserve. Destruction of habitats, especially in the past years has been the prime cause of reduction of the range and number of elephants and other wildlife species, in and around Rimoi National Reserve. Reports of poaching and devastating human and wildlife conflicts by elephants and other wildlife had been on the rise, prompting the local media to raise alarm after fact-finding excursions. Accelerated conflicts have had implications on local residents’ attitudes and perceptions thus culminating in hostility and resentment towards Rimoi National Reserve and its wildlife (Kiringe et al., 2007 ). Therefore, in this study we sought to determine the attitudes and perceptions of the local residents towards wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve, assess the influence of selected socio-demographic factors (gender, age, occupation, period of residence, form of land use, distance from reserve) on local residents’ attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation, and determine the effects of wildlife conservation benefits, problematic wildlife species, illegal activities and relationship of local residents with Kenya Wildlife Service staff on attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation. RESEARCH METHODS Study area Rimoi National Reserve is located in Kerio Valley 13km off the spectacular Iten-Kabarnet road (Fig. 1 ). It is situated in the western half of the Kerio Valley, on the lower side of Keiyo escarpment between 35.60314, 0.945406 and 35.55566, 0.539439. Kerio River divides Rimoi National Reserve and Lake Kamnarock National Reserve (LKNR). The two reserves lie parallel to one another and they function as one ecosystem for the animals that occupy them. Rimoi National Reserve was established in February 1983 and the main attraction is the about 300 elephants. Other wildlife found within the National Reserve includes warthogs, antelopes, birds and unique indigenous plants like acacia trees. The Reserve is small, averaging 66km 2, set at bottom of the Great Rift Valley in Elgego-Marakwet County. It is protected by the Kenya Wildlife Service with support from the County Government of Elgeyo-Marakwet. Within the reserve are numerous hills where camping sites can be developed for viewing the elephant population as they come to drink water along River Kerio. The general climate of Keiyo district is a warm to hot tropical climate. The annual mean temperatures on Keiyo escarpment and the Kerio valley ranges from 25°C to 28°C, while on the highland annual mean temperature ranges from 18°C to 22°C. The erratic rains experienced in the area limit both agricultural and livestock production. Due to the nature of the climate, poor soils and rugged terrain, 60% of the people live below the poverty line. This has led to overexploitation of natural resources in and around the Reserve putting a strain on them hence the need to develop alternative sources of livelihood, like ecotourism for which the area has a lot of potential. Research design The study employed a descriptive research design whereby opinions of local residents on various aspects of the reserve were investigated, explored, examined and described to determine their attitudes and perceptions, as well as factors that influence them. Target population The study targeted local residents living within 10km perimeter from Rimoi National Reserve boundary who included local farmers, pastoralists, Kenya Wildlife Service employees and local leaders around the Reserve. Sampling technique A list of all households in the seven locations bordering Rimoi National Reserve namely Kitany, Tuilong, Twakeu, Kapchemu, Koibarak, Mon and Arror was developed with the assistance of the village elders. The study employed systematic sampling technique in choosing households where every 20th household in the list of every sampled location was selected for questionnaire administration. The first household was selected randomly from the first 20 households and thereafter every 20th household was automatically included in the sample (Kothari, 2004 ). The study targeted a sample size of 140 households in total, 20 households from each of the 7 Locations. In addition, 30 key informants were purposively selected from among Kenya Wildlife Service staff, Self Help Groups and local leaders. In total, 170 respondents were selected for the study. Data collection and analysis We utilized questionnaire surveys, focus group discussions and key informant interviews. We distributed questionnaires to local community members drawn from sampled households to gauge their attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife and wildlife conservation. The questionnaires which consisted of both closed and open-ended questions were administered to 140 respondents of whom 20 were drawn from sampled households in each of the seven administration Locations bordering Rimoi National Reserve. This was considered to be sufficient to minimize the sampling error. The heads of households responded to the questionnaires. In their absence, any member of the household aged 18 years and above was interviewed. During the interview, the questions were verbally translated to Kiswahili language and Kalenjin dialect whenever it was deemed necessary. We carried out pilot testing on a sample of 20 respondents dawn from Kabulwa, Kitany, Biretwo and Arror, to determine the reliability and validity of the research instruments. To systematically collect data from Focus group discussions, 10 participants from randomly selected households were chosen to form a focus group discussion group. In total, 18 out of the 30 planned focus group discussions were held. Twelve Focus group discussionss failed to take place due to lack of quorum occasioned by communication challenges. Every effort was however, made to ensure that the membership of the groups encompasses representatives across gender, age, education and occupation. In addition, the study also purposively selected and interviewed 30 key informants drawn from Kenya Wildlife Service staff (5), local leaders (10), self-help groups (SHG) (7), village elders (5) and religious leaders (3). All statistical analyses were conducted using R software, version 4.3.2. The following R packages were utilized in the analysis: dplyr (Wickham et al., 2023 ) for data manipulation, ggplot2 (Wickham 2016 ) and ggpiestats (Patil 2021 ) for data visualization. Descriptive statistics in form of frequency and percentage were used to analyze the respondent’s socio-demographic characteristics using the psych package. A five-point Likert scale method ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree was used to analyze attitudes of local residents towards wildlife conservation. The polr function was used to perform logistic regressions. Diagnostic tests for multicollinearity and heteroscedasticity were conducted using the car and emmeans packages. Binary logistic regression was also used to analyze the influence of socio-demographic factors on the importance of Rimoi National Reserve conservation and involvement of the local community in conservation. Nominal logistic regression was used to analyze data on the usefulness of Rimoi National Reserve, problematic wildlife species, illegal activities, benefits accruing from wildlife conservation and other related variables. Peason’s chi-square test was also performed to test relationship between variables. In all cases, significance was considered with a 95% confidence interval. RESULTS Socio-demographic Characteristics of respondents The majority of the respondents (59%, n = 139) comprised of males, 57% were aged above 36 years and 43% were aged between 18 and 36 years. Most of the respondents (79%) had formal education, with 42% having attained certificate of secondary education, and thus the majority was fairly informed of their environment. The unemployed local residents constituted the highest respondents (63.0%). A high percentage of respondents (78%) were residents by birth and a majority (72%) resided within 4 km from the reserve boundary and this may explain the rampant cases of human-wildlife conflicts in the study area. Sixty percent of the respondents had stayed in the study area for more than 25 years. Most of the respondents (61%) were mixed farmers followed by those practicing pure agriculture (31%), whereas 4% practiced livestock keeping and 3% engaged in other forms of land use such as quarrying. Local residents’ attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve Slightly over thirty percent (32.4%) of the respondents strongly agreed with the statement that Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource, 27.3% agreed with the statement while 15.8% disagreed with the statement, or strongly disagreed (23%). The responses differed significantly (χ2 = 40.17, df = 4, p < 0.001, Fig. 2 ). Additionally, 38.8% of the respondents strongly disagreed that their lives could have been better if Rimoi National Reserve was not there, followed by those who strongly agreed (27.3%) and lastly those who agreed with the statement (2.9%) (Fig. 3 ). Results showed that 76% of the respondents indicated that they supported conservation of wildlife in Rimoi National Reserve while (24%) did not. The response differed significantly (χ2 = 36.27, df = 1, p < 0.001) between the respondents. For those who indicated that they did, 47.5% pointed out that they did so because the reserve supported tourism, followed by 43.4% who supported wildlife conservation for future generation. For those who did not support conservation of Rimoi National Reserve, 54.3% indicated it was due to human-wildlife conflicts followed by lack of benefits accruing from conservation (45.7%). The majority (81%) of the respondents indicated that they had never been involved in any conservation activities in and around Rimoi National Reserve, while a few (19%) indicated that they did and the responses differed significantly (χ2 = 51.98, df = 1, p < 0.001). Of the respondents who indicated that they had been involved in conservation activities, majority (81%) were involved in tree planting, while a few (11%) were involved in fencing the park and reserve cleaning (7%) (Fig. 4 a). Of the respondents who indicated that they had never been involved in any conservation activities in and around Rimoi National Reserve, the majority (56%) indicated that they were not aware of any conservation activities, a few (29%) did not know why they were not involved and 15% had never been given an opportunity to carry out wildlife conservation activities (Fig. 4 b). The study found out that there were no community-based conservation programs established around Rimoi National Reserve. Figure 4 b Opinions why respondents are not involved in conservation activities in Rimoi National Reserve Influence of socio-demographic factors on local residents’ attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve Education, forms of land use and period of residence influenced local respondents’ attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve. Results further revealed that education (χ2 = 61.423, df = 4, p < 0.001), forms of land use (χ2 = 18.627, df = 4, p = 0.001) and period of residence (χ2 = 11.908, df = 3, p = 0.008) had a significant difference with the respondents’ level of agreement that Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource as shown in Table 1 . All local residents who had attained tertiary and university level of education (100%) strongly agreed that Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource. Over half (58%), who had attained primary level education agreed with the statement that Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource while 46% of those who indicated that they strongly disagreed with the statement did not have any form of formal education. Lastly, while 50% of the respondents who practiced livestock keeping disagreed with the statement that Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource, 40% of the respondents who practiced pure agriculture strongly disagreed, and only 17% of the livestock keepers strongly agreed with the statement. Shorter-term local residents agreed more than the longer-term residents that Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource. Eighty seven percent of the respondents who had resided in Rimoi area for 5–10 years agreed that Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource, while 57% of those who had resided for 11–16 years agreed with the statement. Of the residents who had stayed for more than 25 years, 51% agreed that Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource (Table 2 ). Table 1 Results on respondents’ views whether Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource across socio-demographic characteristics Variable Chi.sq value DF P Gender 2.869 1 0.090 Age 2.656 4 0.620 Education 61.423 4 < 0.001 Occupation 4.835 2 0.090 Residence 1.031 1 0.310 Residence period 11.908 3 0.008 Forms of land use 18.627 4 0.001 Note : Significant p values < 0.05 are indicated in bold Table 2 The influence of education, forms of land use and period of residence on the respondents’ response on whether RNR was a useful resource Variable Category Is RNR Useful Resource? Strongly agree (%) Agree (%) Neutral (%) Disagree (%) Strongly disagree (%) Education None 4 21 4 25 46 Primary 9 58 0 6 27 Secondary 37 22 2 22 17 Post secondary 100 0 0 0 0 University 100 0 0 0 0 Forms of Land use Agriculture 30 26 0 5 40 Bee keeping 0 0 0 67 33 Livestock keeping 33 17 0 50 0 Mixed farming 35 31 2 18 14 Others 0 0 0 0 100 Period of Residence 5–10 years 88 12 0 0 0 11–15 years 57 43 0 0 0 16–20 years 27 27 6 15 24 > 25 years 25 26 0 20 29 From the results in Table 3 below, the level of education had a significant influence on the respondent’s level of agreement that life could have been better if Rimoi National Reserve was not there (χ2 = 86.554, df = 4, p < 0.001). Respondents who had not attained formal education strongly agreed (35.7%) that their lives could have been better if Rimoi National Reserve was not there while those who had attained secondary education (59.3%) strongly disagreed with the statement (Table 4 ). Further, respondents without formal education preferred the reserve be converted into farming land since it was fertile. Table 3 Results of respondents’ views on the statement that life could have been better if Rimoi National Reserve was not there across respondents’ socio-demographic characteristics Variable Chi.sq value DF P Education level 86.554 4 < 0.001 Forms of land use 16.035 4 0.003 Gender 3.203 1 0.070 Occupation 9.516 2 0.010 Period of residence 18.491 3 < 0.001 Distance from reserve 8.863 4 0.060 Note : Significant p values < 0.05 are indicated in bold Table 4 The influence of education, forms of land use, period of residence and occupation on the respondents’ response on whether life could have been better if RNR was not there Variable Category Could life have been better if RNR was not there? Strongly agree (%) Agree (%) Neutral (%) Disagree (%) Strongly disagree (%) Education None 35.7 7.1 14.3 21.4 21.4 Primary 48.5 0 0 33.3 18.2 Secondary 13.6 3.4 6.8 16.9 59.3 Post secondary 0 0 0 70.0 30.0 University 44.4 0 11.1 0 44.4 Forms of Land use Agriculture 48.8 4.7 4.7 30.2 11.6 Bee keeping 33.3 0 0 0 66.6 Livestock keeping 0 0 16.6 0 83.3 Mixed farming 16.5 2.4 7.1 24.7 49.4 Others 100 0 0 0 0 Period of Residence 5–10 years 0 0 0 25.0 75.0 11–15 years 28.6 14.3 7.1 21.4 28.6 16–20 years 39.4 0 3.0 39.4 18.2 > 25 years 25.0 2.4 8.3 19.0 45.2 Occupation Employed 23.5 0 23.5 41.2 11.8 Un-employed 32.2 4.6 5.7 18.4 39.1 Self-employed 17.1 0 0 31.4 51.4 Forms of land use had a significant effect on the respondent’s level of agreement that life could have been better if Rimoi National Reserve was not there (χ2 = 16.035, df = 4, p = 0.003) (Table 3 ). In cross tabulation with various forms of land use, majority of those who strongly agreed with the statement that life could be better if Rimoi National Reserve was not there practiced pure agriculture (48.8%), while 11.6% strongly disagreed with the statement. Whereas 16.5% of those who practiced mixed farming strongly agreed with the statement alluded above, 49.4% strongly disagreed with the same statement (Table 4 ). The period of residence had a significant influence on the respondent’s level of agreement that life could have been better if Rimoi National Reserve was not there (χ2 = 18.491, df = 3, p < 0.001) (Table 3 ), with those who had lived for a shorter period around Rimoi National Reserve disagreeing more than those who had lived there for a longer period. Of the respondents who had lived around Rimoi National Reserve for 5–10 years, 75% strongly disagreed with the statement that their lives could have been better if the reserve was not there (Table 4 ). Over forty percent (41.2%) of those that had formal employment disagreed with the same statement alluded to above while the majority 51.4% of those who were self-employed strongly disagreed that their lives could have been better without the existence of the reserve. The majority (57.5%) of the unemployed respondents disagreed with the statement that their lives could have been better if Rimoi National Reserve was not established, while 36.8% of the unemployed respondents felt that Rimoi National Reserve should not have been established due to the Human Wildlife Conflicts (HWCs) they experienced (Table 4 ). The unemployed respondents also felt that the authorities were more concerned with wildlife than human welfare. Influence of benefits accrued on local residents’ attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation Slightly over 50% of the respondents (51.1%) strongly disagreed with the statement that money from Rimoi National Reserve has helped many schools in the study area followed by 16.5% who disagreed with the statement leading to a significant difference between responses (χ2 = 87.01, df = 4, P < 0.001) (Table 3 ). Eighty-three (59.7%) respondents strongly disagreed with the statement that many students around Rimoi National Reserve have benefited from scholarships through wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve compared to those who strongly agreed (2.9%) while (9.4%) were not sure and these responses were significantly different (χ2 = 155, df = 4, P < 0.001) (Table 3 ). Regarding the statement that wildlife conservation has provided employment to local residents, 58 respondents (41.7%) strongly disagreed while 26(18.7%) strongly agreed, leading to a significant difference between those who agreed and those who disagreed with the statement given (χ2 = 43.48, df = 4, p < 0.001) (Table 3 ). Findings from Key Informant Interviews and Focus Group Discussions revealed that local residents felt that they were given a low deal on employment opportunities. They expressed dissatisfaction with the fact that Rimoi National Reserve management comprises of people whose origin is from outside Rimoi. Eighty-two respondents (59.0%) strongly disagreed with the statement that money from Rimoi National Reserve has helped develop health facilities around Rimoi National Reserve, followed by those who disagreed (24.5%) leading to a significant difference between those who agreed and those who disagreed with the statement given (χ2 = 150.96, df = 4, P < 0.001) (Table 3 ). Table 3 Benefits that accrue to the local community from wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve Statement Strongly agree Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly disagree F %F F %F F %F F %F F %F Money from RNR has helped many schools in this area. 10 7.2 17 12.2 18 12.9 23 16.5 71 51.1 Many students around RNR have benefited from scholarships from wildlife conservation in RNR. 4 2.9 6 4.3 13 9.4 33 23.7 83 59.7 Wildlife conservation has provided employment to local residents. 18 12.9 26 18.7 22 15.8 15 10.8 58 41.7 Money from RNR has helped develop health facilities around RNR. 6 4.3 8 5.8 9 6.5 34 24.5 82 59.0 Effects of problematic wild animals on attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation Most of the respondents (65.5%) pointed out that wild animals were problematic, 30.2% disagreed with the statement and 4.3% were undecided (Fig. 5 ). Most of those who regarded wild animals as problematic constituted those that had their homesteads and farms close to Rimoi National Reserve boundary and those that lived along the elephant migratory corridor. Forty seven percent of the respondents pointed out that elephants are the most problematic wild animals in Rimoi National Reserve followed by baboons (21%), monkeys (16%), hyenas (12%) and crocodiles (2%) (Fig. 6 ). The responses differed significantly (χ2 = 119.26, df = 5, p < 0.001). Regarding the question on how often respondents encountered wildlife around Rimoi National Reserve, 41.7% indicated very often, 18.7% stated always, 17% stated sometimes, 15.1% indicated that they had never encountered wildlife with the least (7%) stating rarely (Table 4 ). These responses were significantly different (χ2 = 33.46, df = 4, p < 0.001)). Regarding the question on where the respondents encountered wild animals around Rimoi National Reserve, 49% stated on their farmlands, 36% indicated in the nearby bushes, while 12% indicated along the roads (Table 4 ). The majority (56%) of the respondents indicated that their encounter with wild animals was frightening, while 27% indicated that it was exciting (Table 4 ). The responses differed significantly (χ2 = 54.44, df = 3, p < 0.001). The respondents felt that the presence of wild animals posed a danger to their lives. Table 4 Respondents’ encounter with wildlife around Rimoi conservation area Statement Category F % F Chi. sq How often have you encountered wild animals in this area? Never 21 15 χ2 = 33.46, df = 4, p = 0.001 Rarely 10 7 Some times 24 17 very often 58 42 Always 26 19 Total 139 100 What was your experience during the encounter? bad 9 7 χ2 = 103.95, df = 4, p < 0.001 exciting 34 27 frightening 71 56 normal 8 6 very bad 4 3 Total 126 100 Where did you encounter the wild animals? Near homestead 4 3 χ2 = 54.44, df = 3, p < 0.001 Bushes 46 36 Farmland 63 49 Roadside 15 12 Total 128 100 Effects of illegal activities on attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation There was a significant difference in responses pertaining to illegal activities taking place in Rimoi National Reserve (χ2 = 50.60, df = 6, p < 0.001). Logging for construction posts and sale (28.1%), charcoal burning (25.2%) and fuel wood collection and sale (15.8%) were the major illegal activities carried out around Rimoi National Reserve (Fig. 7 ). Relationship between local residents and the Kenya Wildlife Service staff and its influence on attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation. A small proportion of respondents (28.1%) described their relationship with the Kenya Wildlife Service staff as good, followed by 25.9% who were not sure, 19.4% indicated that it was bad and 17.3% reported very bad (Table 5 ). The responses however, differed significantly (χ2 = 11.045, df = 4, p = 0.03). Most of the respondents (65%) stated that they had never had a confrontation with Kenya Wildlife Service officials which was significantly higher than those who indicated they had (χ 2 = 87.42, df = 2, p < 0.001) with crop damage by wildlife (47%) being the significant cause of their confrontation (χ2 = 31.13, df = 5, p < 0.001). Other causes of confrontation included charcoal burning (16%), trespass (13%), logging (11%), livestock attack (9%) and firewood collection (4%). Table 5 Local residents’ relationship with Kenya Wildlife Service officials Statement Category F %F Chi. Square value How do you describe your relationship with KWS staff? Very bad 24 17.3 χ2 = 11.04, df = 4, p = 0.03 Bad 27 19.4 Not sure 36 25.9 Good 39 28.1 Very good 13 9.4 Total 139 100 Have you ever had a confrontation with KWS staff? No 91 65 χ2 = 87.42, df = 3, p < 0.001 Yes 47 34 No response 1 1 Total 139 100 What was the cause of confrontation. Charcoal burning 7 16 χ2 = 31.13, df = 5, p < 0.001 Logging 5 11 Trespass 6 13 Livestock attack 4 9 Fire wood collection 2 4 Crop damage 21 47 Total 45 100 DISCUSSION Attitudes and perceptions towards conservation This study established that Rimoi National Reserve is seen as a useful resource by the local communities, despite the restrictions to the locals brought about by the designation of national reserve. This could be due to the benefits derived from the reserve such as firewood and herbs collection, ecological value, increased business opportunity derived from tourism activities as well as employment among others. These research findings concur with those of Ellis et al., ( 2017 ) and Barthwal & Mathur ( 2012 ) who reported about local community access to benefits from conservation directly or indirectly through ecological, socio-cultural, and economic benefits among others. Despite this, the local community living around Rimoi National Reserve did not appreciate indirect benefits linked to natural resources such as ecological benefits probably due to lack of awareness coupled with high levels of poverty. Similar observations have been made about other communities living adjacent to protected areas. This study established that wildlife in Rimoi National Reserve is perceived as problematic by the local residents. This could be attributed to crop raids, livestock attacks, and property damage by wildlife around Rimoi National Reserve. During the Focus group discussions, participants reported that farmers around Rimoi National Reserve incur great losses due to crop damage by wildlife. Crops such as maize, bananas, sorghum, millet, paw-paws, mangoes, tomatoes and other fruits, which are cultivated in most farms around Rimoi National Reserve are known to attract wild animals. More often, wild animals stray from Rimoi National Reserve and invade neighbouring farms causing great damage to crops. Despite the presence of an electric fence small animals such as baboons, monkeys, squirrels, and hares often manoeuvre through them. The elephants which cause the greatest damage to crops around Rimoi National Reserve, stray through the unfenced part of Rimoi National Reserve to the adjacent farms. The instances of farm invasion by wild animals around Rimoi National Reserve are most reported during the dry season when water and food resources scarcity intensifies. The local community around Rimoi National Reserve expressed a willingness to support wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve despite the problems caused by wildlife in the area. This study also established that the local community around Rimoi National Reserve is not involved in conservation programs, thus making the local community to lack a sense of ownership and responsibility for wildlife in Rimoi National Reserve. Influence of socio-demographic factors on local residents’ attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation From the results, it was established that forms of land use, occupation, periods of residence and education level of the respondents influenced their attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation. Respondents who had stayed around Rimoi National Reserve for more than 10 years expressed more positive attitudes towards wildlife and wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve than those who had stayed for a shorter period. The reasons for this were not clear but could be related with greater cultural attachment and more resource utilization by longer-term residents than shorter-term residents. On occupation, employed local residents showed more positive attitudes towards wildlife conservation than those who were unemployed. This can be attributed to the fact that employed residents are most likely to be more educated than those who are unemployed, thus, more likely to appreciate wildlife and wildlife conservation due to exposure. Unemployed local residents are more likely to be involved in charcoal production, logging, firewood collection, game hunting among other illegal activities than employed local residents. These exposes unemployed residents to more HWCs than employed residents. Local residents who had acquired formal education showed more positive attitudes towards wildlife and wildlife conservation than those who had no formal education. This can be attributed to the fact that educated individuals can link wildlife conservation with both direct and indirect benefits that accrue from wildlife. Individuals without formal education tend to link conservation more to direct benefits. This agrees with the findings of Megaze, et al., ( 2017 ) and Sitati et al. , (2003) who argued that specific factors that affect respondents’ attitudes and perceptions include: social-economic and demographic characteristics of people like age which influence the way people think; ethnicity, religion, place of residence in relation to a protected area, duration/period or length of residency, membership in conservation organizations, participation in conservation activities, type of training for example natural resources or wildlife based, past experiences for example human-wildlife conflict, relocation to create room for protected areas (PA), denial of access to traditional resources locked in PA or denial of ownership rights, and access to benefits. As Ebua et al., ( 2011 ) puts it, when people are denied benefits and access from natural resources, they develop negative attitudes and engage in activities that are detrimental to conservation thus making the future of the wildlife uncertain especially for large mammals. Most local residents living adjacent to Rimoi National Reserve are small scale farmers, practicing mixed farming mainly for subsistence. Thus, the major crops grown near Rimoi National Reserve boundary such as maize, sorghum, millet, bananas and fruits have compounded human-wildlife conflicts in Rimoi conservation area. The influence of benefits on attitudes and perceptions towards conservation The amount and type of benefits received is a factor which influences the attitudes and perceptions of local people towards wildlife conservation (Msigwa et al., 2023 ). Local residents getting good benefits are more likely to have positive attitudes and perceptions, and poor benefits are more likely to have negative or antagonistic attitudes towards conservation, protected areas and their wildlife (Munaw 2023 ). The perceived benefits and a sense of ownership are critical determinants of the success of the management and conservation of protected ecosystems (Simasiku et al., 2024 ). For example, the majority of the respondents strongly disagreed that money from the reserve has helped local residents in the area through scholarships, development of health facilities, construction of infrastructure and other social amenities as well as provision of employment to local residents. From results of focus group discussions that were conducted, it was pointed out that only two out of the more than nine public schools in the area have benefited from funds arising from wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve. This corroborates with findings of McManus et al, ( 2015 ) and Wright (2023) that many local people around conservation areas do not receive benefits and yet they bear the costs of living with wildlife. It has been reported that a rapid decline of wildlife has been noted in areas where benefits have not accrued to the local community (Norton-Griffiths, 2000 ; Deryabina et al., 2015 ). This is because the community tries to engage in other land-use practices that are not only detrimental to wildlife population, but also result in increased conflicts which derails conservation efforts (Masiaine et al., 2020 ). Most local residents adjacent to Rimoi National Reserve are small scale farmers, practicing mixed farming mainly for subsistence. Findings of this study have shown that by denying people benefits and access to natural resources, they develop negative attitudes and engage in activities that are harmful to conservation, which concurs with other documented results (Mutanga et al., 2015 ). This leads to uncertainty in conservation especially of large mammals like elephants and a sharp decline of wildlife populations outside protected areas. Influence of problematic wild animals on attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation Research findings indicates that elephants, baboons, hyenas and monkeys were the most problematic wild animals in the area. A significantly higher proportion of respondents indicating that elephants were the most problematic wildlife species around Rimoi National Reserve could be due to several reasons. Elephants are known to cause massive destruction of property such as water pipes, water tanks and fences and also cause great damage to crops when they invade farms. During the focus group discussions, respondents pointed out that in one instance, elephants raided and wiped out a whole banana and paw-paw plantation around Rimoi National Reserve. This forced the community to demonstrate in a bid to capture the attention of the authorities to have the elephants driven back to the reserve. When elephants raid the villages, the normal routine of the people is distracted. People will not attend to their businesses as usual and children stop going to schools fearing an attack by the elephants. Results concur with that of De Boer and Baquete ( 1998 ) who reported that local people incur losses and spend huge amounts of money in repairing damages (Boast, 2014 ) caused by wild animals like elephants, baboons, hippopotamus, mongoose and guinea fowl around conservation areas (Kariuki, 2013 ). Baboons are known to destroy house roofs and plastic water tanks and are a great nuisance as they trample on house roofs (Kariuki, 2013 ). Incurring of costs always suffocates conservation efforts amongst people especially those who suffer from direct agricultural losses, property destruction and human injury (Katswera et al., 2025 ). Rimoi National Reserve is partially fenced off leaving a migratory corridor to the north for elephants. Electric fencing is an intervention that is thought to be highly effective in mitigating human-wildlife conflicts as reported by Ferguson and Hanks ( 2010 ). Despite the presence of an electric fence, baboons are able to jump over or pass under the fence and invade the farms that are close to the park boundary causing major losses (Kariuki, 2013 ). The electric fence, however, is effective in minimizing losses as most large mammals are barred from moving out of the park. Despite this, the effectiveness of fences as a conflict mitigation measure, with a view to changing local people by Nyhus et al., ( 2005 ) who argues that the solution is limited because animals like elephants and baboons are known to go through the electrified fences causing havoc to farms (Kariuki, 2013 ). Besides this, elephants are known to stray, through the unfenced migratory corridor, and find their way to farms, destroy crops and cause damage to property. This leads to heightened negative attitudes and perceptions by the local community towards wildlife due to the cost they bear as a result of living close to a wildlife protected area. Some communities resort in killing wild animals by spearing, snaring or poisoning them which also strains the relationship between the local community and the authorities. Effects of illegal activities on conservation areas Respondents pointed out that there were illegal activities happening in and around Rimoi National Reserve such as logging for timber and construction posts, poaching wild animals for game meat and trophy hunting, charcoal burning, as well as fuel wood collection for sale. Other illegal activities reported include honey collection, livestock grazing and collection of medicinal herbs. People found engaging in illegal activities were punished through imposition of fines, imprisonment and provision of services. Such victims and the members of their families were likely to develop negative attitudes toward the reserve and its management. This finding agrees with those of a similar study conducted in Uganda by Katswera et al., ( 2022 ) that the hostility shown in the handling of victims illegally found in wildlife-protected areas by the park management negatively impacts on local people’s attitudes and perceptions towards the parks and wildlife. These illegal activities have led to habitat disturbance and destruction and sharp decline of wildlife species in and around Rimoi National Reserve. Some wild animals and birds have become locally extinct such as the leopard from the region. Moreover, the study observed that some of the Kenya Wildlife Service officials managing Rimoi National Reserve had stayed at Rimoi National Reserve for more than 3 years. The long stay could have caused too much familiarity with the environment and local residents consequently leading them to compromise on the conservation agenda. Effect of relationship of local residents with Kenya Wildlife Service staff on attitudes and perceptions towards conservation Findings of the study showed mixed reactions concerning the relationship between local residents and Kenya Wildlife Service staff managing Rimoi National Reserve. A good proportion of respondents was not sure how to describe their relationship with Kenya Wildlife Service officials. Residents who had experienced a confrontation with the Rimoi National Reserve managers expressed negative attitudes towards the park and its wildlife, unlike those who had not. During focus group discussions, participants pointed out that some of the Kenya Wildlife Service officials colluded with residents to carry out illegal activities such as logging and charcoal production. Probably this explains the existence of a seemingly balanced good-bad relationship between the Kenya Wildlife Service officials and the local residents. In some of the sampled locations Rimoi National Reserve staff managers were regarded as foreigners who were not only controlling the use of natural resources, but also enjoying the resources at the expense of the local residents. Resentment from the local residents increased when human-wildlife conflicts arose and the reserve managers failed to address them appropriately. As Gulte et al., ( 2023 ) puts it, the success of conservation programs through protected areas may depend on the ability of park managers to pacify biodiversity conservation goals with social and economic issues and to promote greater compliance of local communities with protected areas’ conservation strategies. The foregoing study findings agree with other studies among them Katikiro et al., ( 2015 ) and Hill et al ( 2015 ) that park managers are hostile to the local people and that this has hindered local people’s participation in wildlife conservation. The alleged harassment by park officials has resulted to local residents in being made to be very disenchanted about the value of the park and its wildlife. The negative relationship increases intensity when wild animals invade farms, kill livestock and destroy their properties (Hill et al., 2015 ; Gulte et al., 2023 ). The hostility is further heightened especially if the conflict involves human injury or death. More often the Park Authority misconstrues the chasing away of wild animals as harassing the wild animals and the authorities become very hostile to the local people (Moreto et al., 2016 ). This in turn aggravates the local people’s negative attitude. From the results of the current study, the attitudes, perceptions and the behaviour of the reserve authorities can be discerned and as pointed by Mutanga et al ( 2016 ) the relationship between the local people and wildlife conservation is depicted through behaviour, decisions, practices and actions. Whereas the reserve management may actually mean well by enforcing the law, there is need to treat the local people fairly and with respect, as they are key stakeholders in conservation and tourism development. CONCLUSION This paper has examined determinants of attitudes and perceptions of local residents towards wildlife and wildlife conservation in RNR. The study established that socio-demographic factors particularly education level, occupation, period of residence and forms of land use influenced local residents’ attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation. Likewise, access to opportunities, benefit sharing and community involvement in conservation programs and decision making greatly shaped perceptions. Based on the results, it is evident that as much as the residents have innate love for wildlife, they could be disgruntled due to the cost they bear as a result of living in close proximity to the reserve coupled with poor relationship with conservation officials. Wild animals compete daily with the local community over resources and livelihoods. Poverty and lack of awareness are formidable enemies to wildlife and conservation of natural resources. A poor population adjacent to protected areas pose many challenges including unregulated exploitation of resources, engagement in illegal activities and other practices that may not be in tandem with conservation. Mitigating these challenges, requires innovative and proactive approaches (Mogomotsi et al., 2020 ). These include the presentation and documentation of traditional knowledge, an idea that is mostly neglected by many conservation programs. For sustainable wildlife conservation, not only there is need to understand how people perceive and interact with their environment but also incorporate traditional knowledge in conservation programs. Park management and conservation crusaders need to focus on community livelihood improvement, economic empowerment, promotion of conservation education and awareness, and involvement of local residents in conservation programs to improve attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation and protected areas. Declarations Ethics Statement This research was done following clearance from the University of Eldoret, Kenya Wildlife Service (Elgeyo-Marakwet office), and local chiefs. Before administering the questionnaires, participants filled consent forms to permit their information to be used. Verbal consent was also sought from key informants and locals that participated in focus group discussions. All participants were assured of anonymity and confidentiality. Clinical Trial Number This declaration is not applicable. Competing Interests The authors declare no competing interests. Funding This article was written with the financial assistance of the Erasmus Plus KA171 International Credit Mobility (ICM). Author Contribution D.O.O: Conceptualization, research design, data collection, literature, data analysis, wrote the initial draft and subsequent drafts. H.I: Conceptualization, study design, subsequent drafts, supervision, validation, project leadership and editing. J.K.K: Study design, supervision, conceptualization, editing and project leadership. M.A.V: formal analysis, editing, subsequent drafts and validation. B.I.T: funding acquisition, editing and validation.All authors read, reviewed and approved the manuscript. Acknowledgement We thank the communities adjacent to Rimoi National Reserve for participation and giving information. Acknowledgement also goes to the local administrators: chiefs, sub-chiefs and village elders, as well Rimoi National Reserve staff for their support and cooperation during the study. The study has been financially supported by the authors and the Erasmus Plus ICM exchange program between the University of Eldoret and the University of Groningen. Data Availability The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be made available in this publication or upon reasonable request from the corresponding author. Data is also provided as supplementary information files. References Barthwal, S. C., & Mathur, V. B. (2012). Teachers' Knowledge of and Attitude Toward Wildlife and Conservation: A Case Study from Ladakh, India. Mountain Research and Development , 32 (2), 169–175. Bitanyi, S., Nasje, M., Kusiluka, J. M., Chenyambuga, W., & Kaltenburn, B. (2012). Awareness and Perceptions of Local People About Wildlife Hunting in Western Serengeti Communities. Tropical Conservation Science Journal , 5 (2), 208–226. Boast, L. K. (2014). Exploring the causes of and mitigation options for human-predator conflict on game ranches in Botswana . How is coexistence possible?. Costa, S., Casanova, C., Sousa, C., & Lee, P. (2013). The Good, The Bad and The Ugly: Perceptions of Wildlife in Tombali (Guinea-Bissau, West Africa). J Primatol , 2 , 110. 10.4172/2167-6801.1000110 Deryabina, T. G., Kuchmel, S. V., Nagorskaya, L. L., Hinton, T. G., Beasley, J. C., Lerebours, A., & Smith, J. T. (2015). Long-term census data reveal abundant wildlife populations at Chernobyl. Current Biology , 25 (19), R824–R826. De Boer, W. F., & Baquete, D. S. (1998). Natural Resource Use, Crop Damage, and Attitudes of Rural People in the Vicinity of the Maputo Elephant Reserve. Mozambique Environmental Conservation , 25 , 208–218. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892998000265 Ebua, V. B., Agwafo, T. E., & Fonkwo, S. N. (2011). Attitudes and perceptions as threats to wildlife conservation in the Bakossi area, South West Cameroon. International Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation , 3 (12), 631–636. Ellis, E. A., Montero, J. A. R., Gómez, I. U. H., Porter-Bolland, L., & Ellis, P. W. (2017). Private property and Mennonites are major drivers of forest cover loss in central Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico. Land Use Policy , 69 , 474–484. Ferguson, K., & Hanks, J. (2010). Fencing Impacts: A review of the environmental, social and economic impacts of game and veterinary fencing. Africa with particular reference to the Great Limpopo and Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Areas . Mammal Research Institute. http://www.wcsahead.org/gltfca_grants/grants.html Florian, G., & Kaiser Sybille Wölfing & Urs Fuhrer, (1999). ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDE AND ECOLOGICAL BEHAVIOUR, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Volume 19, Issue 1, Pages 1–19, ISSN 0272–4944. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1998.0107 Garekae, H., Thakadu, O. T., & Lepetu, J. (2016). Attitudes of Local Communities Towards Forest Conservation in Botswana: A case study of Chobe Forest Reserve, International Forestry Review, Volume 18, Number 2, June 2016, pp. 180–191(12) Commonwealth Forestry Association. https://doi.org/10.1505/146554816818966318 Gulte, E., Tadele, H., Haileslassie, A., & Mekuria, W. (2023). Perception of local communities on protected areas: lessons drawn from the Bale Mountains National Park, Ethiopia. Ecosystems and People , 19 (1). 10.1080/26395916.2023.2227282 Hill, W., Byrne, J., & Pickering, C. (2015). The ‘hollow-middle’: why positive community perceptions do not translate into pro-conservation behaviour in El Vizcaíno Biosphere Reserve, Mexico. International Journal of Biodiversity Science Ecosystem Services & Management , 11 (2), 168–183. 10.1080/21513732.2015.1036924 Hunt, C., & Stronza, A. (2014). Stage-based tourism models and resident attitudes towards tourism in an emerging destination in the developing world. Journal of Sustainable Tourism , 22 (2), 279–298. Kariuki, P. (2013). Local Residents’ Attitudes and perceptions A Study of Lake Nakuru National Park and its environs, Kenya (Doctoral dissertation, Moi University). Katikiro, R. E., Macusi, E. D., & Deepananda, K. A. (2015). Challenges facing local communities in Tanzania in realising locally-managed marine areas. Marine Policy , 51 , 220–229. Katswera, J., Mutekanga, M. N., & Twesigye, C. K. (2025). Biodiversity Conservation and Threat Reduction in Kibale and Queen Elizabeth Conservation Areas, Uganda. East African Journal of Biophysical and Computational Sciences , 1 (1), 1–22. Retrieved from https://journals.hu.edu.et/hu-journals/index.php/eajbcs/article/view/97 Katswera, K., Mutekanga, N. M., & Twesigye, C. F. (2022). Community Perceptions and Attitudes towards Conservation of Wildlife in Uganda. Journal of Wildlife and Biodiversity , 6 (4), 42–65. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6522377 Kiringe, J. W., Okello, M. M., & Ekajul, S. W. (2007). Managers’ perceptions of threats to the protected areas of Kenya: prioritization for effective management. Oryx . 2007;41(3):314–321. 10.1017/S0030605307000218 Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research Methodology (Second Revised Edition) . New Age International. Lanchberry, J. (1996). The Rio Earth Summit. In D. H. Dunn (Ed.), Diplomacy at the Highest Level. Studies in Diplomacy . Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-24915-2_14 Masiaine, S., Pilfold, N., Moll, R. J., O’Connor, D., Stacy-Dawes, J., Ruppert, K., Roloff, G., & Montgomery, R. A. (2020). : Landscape-level changes to large mammal space use in response to a pastoralist incursion, Ecological Indicators 121 (2021) 107091 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.107091 Mamo, M., Gure, A., Kebede, F., & Abie, K. (2018). : Challenges, Attitude and Perception of Local Communities Towards Conservation of Alledeghi Wildlife Reserve, Eastern Ethiopia, Journal of Natural Sciences Research , www.iiste.org ISSN 2224–3186 (Paper) ISSN 2225 – 0921, Vol.8, No.2, 2018. Moreto, W. D., Brunson, R. K., & Braga, A. A. (2016). Anything we do, we h the communities’: law enforcement range community–ranger relations in Wildlife Protected Areas in Uganda. British Journal of Criminology , 57 (4), 924–944. Mutanga, C. N., Gandiwa, E., Muboko, N., & Vengesayi, S. (2016). : Prospects for wildlife conservation: Local community views and factors influencing conservation relationships in Zimbabwe. Annals of Social and Behavioural Sciences 2 (2016) ISSN: 2415 – 0851. McManus, J. S., Dickman, A. J., Gaynor, D., Smuts, B. H., & Macdonald, D. W. (2015). Dead or alive? Comparing costs and benefits of lethal and non-lethal human–wildlife conflict mitigation on livestock farms. Oryx , 49 (4), 687–695. Megaze, A., Balakrishnan, M., & Belay, G. (2017). Human–wildlife conflict and attitude of local people towards conservation of wildlife in Chebera Churchura National Park, Ethiopia. African Zoology , 52 (1), 1–8. Mogomotsi, P. K., Mogomotsi, G. E. J., Dipogiso, K., Phonchi-Tshekiso, N. D., Stone, L. S., & Badimo, D. (2020). : An Analysis of Communities’ Attitudes Toward Wildlife and Implications for Wildlife Sustainability. Tropical Conservation Science . 2020;13. 10.1177/1940082920915603 Msigwa, F. F., Mombo, F. M., Brehoney, P., & Kimaro, M. H. (2023). Community Perceptions and socio-demographic influence on trophy hunting in Rungwa Game Reserve, Tanzania. Open journal of Ecology , 13 (9), 606–620. Munaw, H. Z. (2023). Factors Influencing the Attitudes of Local Community towards Protected Areas, Case Study on Ambatara Protected Area Forest Conservation, Northwest Ethiopia. East African Journal of Forestry and Agroforestry , 6 (1), 238–253. https://doi.org/10.37284/eajfa.6.1.1372 Mutanga, C. N., Vengesayi, S., Muboko, N., & Gandiwa, E. (2015). Towards harmonious conservation relationships: A framework for understanding protected area staff-local community relationships in developing countries. Journal for Nature Conservation , 25 , 8–16. Norton-Griffiths, M. (2000). : Wildlife Losses in Kenya: An Analysis of Conservation Policy, Natural Resource Modelling Volume 13, Number 1, Spring 2000. Nyhus, P. J., Osofsky, S. A., Ferraro, P., Madden, F., & Fischer, H. (2005). Bearing the costs of human-wildlife conflict: the challenges of compensation schemes. Conservation Biology Series-Cambridge- , 9 , 107. Patil, I. (2021). Visualizations with statistical details: The ‘ggstatsplot' approach. Journal of Open-Source Software , 6 (61), 3167. 10.21105/joss.03167 Rodney, J., Wangchuk, R., & Dadul, J. (2003). Local People’s Attitudes toward Wildlife Conservation in the Hemis National Park . With Special Reference to the Conservation of Large Predators, Sonoma. Senanayake, S. G. J. N. (2006). : Indigenous Knowledge As A Key To Sustainable Development, Journal of Agricultural Sciences , Volume 01 Issue 1. http://repo.lib.sab.ac.lk:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/812 Shibia, M. G. (2010). Determinants of Attitudes and Perceptions on Resource Use and Management of Marsabit National Reserve, Kenya. Journal Human Ecology , 30 (1), 55–62. Simasiku, E., Hove, K., Kairu, J., Awala, S. K., Lukubwe, M., Kasinda, E., & Chataa, A. (2024). Community livelihoods and perceptions of the Sikunga Fish Protected Area in the Zambezi Region, Namibia. Journal of Wildlife and Biodiversity , 8 (2), 327–354. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11106501 Sitati, N. (2003). Human–elephant conflict in Trans Mara district adjacent to Masai Mara National Reserve. PhD Thesis. University of Kent, Canterbury, UK . Tessema, M. E., Wakjira, K., & Asefa, A. (2019). Threats and their relative severity and driving forces in the African Elephant range wildlife protected areas of Ethiopia. International Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation , 11 , 187–198. Wickham, H. (2016). ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer-Verlag New York. ISBN 978-3-319-24277-4. Wickham, H., François, R., Henry, L., Müller, K., & Vaughan, D. (2023). _dplyr: A Grammar of Data Manipulation_. R package version 1.1.4. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=dplyr Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files Rimoidata.csv Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6362611","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":451458399,"identity":"0972a8f5-835c-48cf-a746-ae04dffe3f39","order_by":0,"name":"Douglas O. Onyancha","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Eldoret","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Douglas","middleName":"O.","lastName":"Onyancha","suffix":""},{"id":451458400,"identity":"6baae452-221b-4b59-9133-b1c4fdd54de7","order_by":1,"name":"Hellen Ipara","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Eldoret","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hellen","middleName":"","lastName":"Ipara","suffix":""},{"id":451458401,"identity":"cb8a57a9-1768-4273-8f27-4fc1d41b9fe0","order_by":2,"name":"Johnstone K. Kimanzi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Eldoret","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Johnstone","middleName":"K.","lastName":"Kimanzi","suffix":""},{"id":451458402,"identity":"a2e79aa4-5fc1-42ef-a343-5deed98e9490","order_by":3,"name":"Maaike A. Versteegh","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Groningen","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Maaike","middleName":"A.","lastName":"Versteegh","suffix":""},{"id":451458403,"identity":"ab5953ac-60d8-4e3a-be08-710a88fd19d7","order_by":4,"name":"B. Irene Tieleman","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Groningen","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"B.","middleName":"Irene","lastName":"Tieleman","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-04-02 15:23:10","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6362611/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6362611/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":82171932,"identity":"b5664a4b-1571-4cbe-b98b-8b6407455f2c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-07 10:12:58","extension":"jpeg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":460599,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eRimoi National Reserve and bordering administrative locations\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6362611/v1/35ee3d771885c664c42b1340.jpeg"},{"id":82171924,"identity":"12bd1f4e-be38-4661-9659-17642f67e282","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-07 10:12:57","extension":"jpeg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":45759,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eOpinion on Rimoi National Reserve being a useful resource\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6362611/v1/892e8d30155c2f981089e4b6.jpeg"},{"id":82173082,"identity":"485459a9-17f2-4d8c-af55-797eefbef208","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-07 10:28:58","extension":"jpeg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":39362,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eViews on the statement that life could have been better if Rimoi National Reserve was not there\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6362611/v1/9bc910e2edbbc0b94a0249b0.jpeg"},{"id":82171929,"identity":"c846eacf-a70f-49f2-a7da-9926bc29ec31","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-07 10:12:58","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":17316,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4a \u003c/strong\u003eConservation activities in Rimoi National Reserve which involve local residents\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4b \u003c/strong\u003eOpinions why respondents are not involved in conservation activities in Rimoi National Reserve\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage411.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6362611/v1/4bbf1f0be97f20d0ed9579f0.png"},{"id":82172181,"identity":"f4415864-248b-4ff2-b840-3be4f083677e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-07 10:20:58","extension":"jpeg","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":56714,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eRespondents’ opinions on response to the statement that wild animals around Rimoi National Reserve are problematic\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage6.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6362611/v1/c829b6fc694de12c480b83e8.jpeg"},{"id":82173360,"identity":"34fde755-a91b-4925-961b-c3d127a5e9fe","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-07 10:36:57","extension":"jpeg","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":62756,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe most problematic wildlife animals in Rimoi National Reserve\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage7.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6362611/v1/7670c72897d326e9bf3e9749.jpeg"},{"id":82173085,"identity":"4d08e5b9-b9ea-4b14-80ce-065fa1f2fe34","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-07 10:28:58","extension":"jpeg","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":173037,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eIllegal activities taking place in Rimoi Conservation Area\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage8.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6362611/v1/d59dfb83c81ad5fb1c6ac5ee.jpeg"},{"id":84303991,"identity":"037301fa-ec74-4238-a702-b9ddee64c70b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-10 11:17:09","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":2413628,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6362611/v1/d33a0e99-89ea-49cf-8aa8-77f8dcd5acf4.pdf"},{"id":82173084,"identity":"fd91f28b-2665-4117-ad75-c1f573f3fc53","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-05-07 10:28:58","extension":"csv","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":97486,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Rimoidata.csv","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6362611/v1/d48d1c1659d5fc1d1f42066d.csv"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Determinants of local residents’ attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve, Kenya.","fulltext":[{"header":"INTRODUCTION","content":"\u003cp\u003eLocal communities living adjacent to protected ecosystems play a pivotal role in the success of any conservation undertaking (Simasiku et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Hence, understanding how people perceive and relate to their natural environments is indispensable to conservation action. While perceptions can be harnessed for positive conservation engagement (Costa et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e), it has been documented that both attitudes and perceptions are critical issues in people\u0026rsquo;s lives since they reflect their values and thoughts, help develop knowledge, improve overall welfare, and change their reality (Bitanyi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). A study about the concepts of attitudes and perceptions of local residents towards wildlife and conservation by Tessema et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) reveals a portrait of the local population and its vision of the world of conservation. Consequently, understanding how people perceive and relate to their environment have proven very useful aspects in environmental education programs because they help to carry out a process of evaluation that identifies the needs in each area for the planning of suitable goals and aims (Rodney et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). However, traditional knowledge has been poorly documented and therefore neglected in many conservation programs over the years.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudies on the relationship between human societies and their environment should include economic, social and psychological factors (Shibia, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Despite this, social and cultural analyses have not been considered in most discussions about sustainable wildlife management in developing economies (Mogomotsi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). However, the present valorization of these factors is viewed as a paradigm shift whereby traditional knowledge has become essential to development (Senanayake, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). The Earth\u0026rsquo;s Summit which is also referred to as United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro in Brazil in 1992 considered the paradigm shift an important landmark in this regard (Lanchberry, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1996\u003c/span\u003e). Consequently, attitudes associated with economic usage of resources have altered the environment, damaging ecosystems that sustain the basic needs of populations (Florian \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, 1999; Garekae et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe creation of protected areas has often been considered a foreign concept and outgrowth of western conservation needs and values by local communities in developing countries (Shibia, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). The concept was introduced to developing countries by colonial administrations and is presently being adopted and promoted by developing nations as a commitment to various international conventions. In Kenya and other parts of Africa, many protected areas among them Rimoi National Reserve have been established based on this concept. However, due to the livelihood implications caused by protected area establishment, local residents perceive it as a liability (Shibia, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e) since their establishment often transforms the area from primary provision of subsistence resources for local use to provision of aesthetic benefits. Further, the establishment of protected areas often denies local people access to traditional resources and also disenfranchises them of their indigenous access and use rights (Mamo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). As a consequence, local residents living in close proximity to protected areas have over the years developed either negative or antagonistic attitudes towards these areas and their wildlife resources, as well as protected area management authorities. A lack of congruence between conservation initiatives and local perceptions on conservation areas of concern and actions for their protection has been found in many protected areas (Costa et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRimoi National Reserve in Kenya which is managed by Kenya Wildlife Service is among the protected areas experiencing serious conservation challenges and needs critical interventions to develop and strengthen mutual relationship between local residents and the reserve. Destruction of habitats, especially in the past years has been the prime cause of reduction of the range and number of elephants and other wildlife species, in and around Rimoi National Reserve. Reports of poaching and devastating human and wildlife conflicts by elephants and other wildlife had been on the rise, prompting the local media to raise alarm after fact-finding excursions. Accelerated conflicts have had implications on local residents\u0026rsquo; attitudes and perceptions thus culminating in hostility and resentment towards Rimoi National Reserve and its wildlife (Kiringe et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTherefore, in this study we sought to determine the attitudes and perceptions of the local residents towards wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve, assess the influence of selected socio-demographic factors (gender, age, occupation, period of residence, form of land use, distance from reserve) on local residents\u0026rsquo; attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation, and determine the effects of wildlife conservation benefits, problematic wildlife species, illegal activities and relationship of local residents with Kenya Wildlife Service staff on attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"RESEARCH METHODS","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStudy area\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eRimoi National Reserve is located in Kerio Valley 13km off the spectacular Iten-Kabarnet road (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). It is situated in the western half of the Kerio Valley, on the lower side of Keiyo escarpment between 35.60314, 0.945406 and 35.55566, 0.539439. Kerio River divides Rimoi National Reserve and Lake Kamnarock National Reserve (LKNR). The two reserves lie parallel to one another and they function as one ecosystem for the animals that occupy them. Rimoi National Reserve was established in February 1983 and the main attraction is the about 300 elephants. Other wildlife found within the National Reserve includes warthogs, antelopes, birds and unique indigenous plants like acacia trees. The Reserve is small, averaging 66km\u003csup\u003e2,\u003c/sup\u003e set at bottom of the Great Rift Valley in Elgego-Marakwet County. It is protected by the Kenya Wildlife Service with support from the County Government of Elgeyo-Marakwet. Within the reserve are numerous hills where camping sites can be developed for viewing the elephant population as they come to drink water along River Kerio.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe general climate of Keiyo district is a warm to hot tropical climate. The annual mean temperatures on Keiyo escarpment and the Kerio valley ranges from 25\u0026deg;C to 28\u0026deg;C, while on the highland annual mean temperature ranges from 18\u0026deg;C to 22\u0026deg;C. The erratic rains experienced in the area limit both agricultural and livestock production. Due to the nature of the climate, poor soils and rugged terrain, 60% of the people live below the poverty line. This has led to overexploitation of natural resources in and around the Reserve putting a strain on them hence the need to develop alternative sources of livelihood, like ecotourism for which the area has a lot of potential.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eResearch design\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study employed a descriptive research design whereby opinions of local residents on various aspects of the reserve were investigated, explored, examined and described to determine their attitudes and perceptions, as well as factors that influence them.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eTarget population\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study targeted local residents living within 10km perimeter from Rimoi National Reserve boundary who included local farmers, pastoralists, Kenya Wildlife Service employees and local leaders around the Reserve.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eSampling technique\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA list of all households in the seven locations bordering Rimoi National Reserve namely Kitany, Tuilong, Twakeu, Kapchemu, Koibarak, Mon and Arror was developed with the assistance of the village elders. The study employed systematic sampling technique in choosing households where every 20th household in the list of every sampled location was selected for questionnaire administration. The first household was selected randomly from the first 20 households and thereafter every 20th household was automatically included in the sample (Kothari, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). The study targeted a sample size of 140 households in total, 20 households from each of the 7 Locations. In addition, 30 key informants were purposively selected from among Kenya Wildlife Service staff, Self Help Groups and local leaders. In total, 170 respondents were selected for the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eData collection and analysis\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe utilized questionnaire surveys, focus group discussions and key informant interviews. We distributed questionnaires to local community members drawn from sampled households to gauge their attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife and wildlife conservation. The questionnaires which consisted of both closed and open-ended questions were administered to 140 respondents of whom 20 were drawn from sampled households in each of the seven administration Locations bordering Rimoi National Reserve. This was considered to be sufficient to minimize the sampling error. The heads of households responded to the questionnaires. In their absence, any member of the household aged 18 years and above was interviewed. During the interview, the questions were verbally translated to Kiswahili language and Kalenjin dialect whenever it was deemed necessary. We carried out pilot testing on a sample of 20 respondents dawn from Kabulwa, Kitany, Biretwo and Arror, to determine the reliability and validity of the research instruments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo systematically collect data from Focus group discussions, 10 participants from randomly selected households were chosen to form a focus group discussion group. In total, 18 out of the 30 planned focus group discussions were held. Twelve Focus group discussionss failed to take place due to lack of quorum occasioned by communication challenges. Every effort was however, made to ensure that the membership of the groups encompasses representatives across gender, age, education and occupation. In addition, the study also purposively selected and interviewed 30 key informants drawn from Kenya Wildlife Service staff (5), local leaders (10), self-help groups (SHG) (7), village elders (5) and religious leaders (3).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll statistical analyses were conducted using R software, version 4.3.2. The following R packages were utilized in the analysis: dplyr (Wickham et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) for data manipulation, ggplot2 (Wickham \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) and ggpiestats (Patil \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) for data visualization. Descriptive statistics in form of frequency and percentage were used to analyze the respondent\u0026rsquo;s socio-demographic characteristics using the psych package. A five-point Likert scale method ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree was used to analyze attitudes of local residents towards wildlife conservation. The polr function was used to perform logistic regressions. Diagnostic tests for multicollinearity and heteroscedasticity were conducted using the car and emmeans packages. Binary logistic regression was also used to analyze the influence of socio-demographic factors on the importance of Rimoi National Reserve conservation and involvement of the local community in conservation. Nominal logistic regression was used to analyze data on the usefulness of Rimoi National Reserve, problematic wildlife species, illegal activities, benefits accruing from wildlife conservation and other related variables. Peason\u0026rsquo;s chi-square test was also performed to test relationship between variables. In all cases, significance was considered with a 95% confidence interval.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"RESULTS","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSocio-demographic Characteristics of respondents\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe majority of the respondents (59%, n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;139) comprised of males, 57% were aged above 36 years and 43% were aged between 18 and 36 years. Most of the respondents (79%) had formal education, with 42% having attained certificate of secondary education, and thus the majority was fairly informed of their environment. The unemployed local residents constituted the highest respondents (63.0%). A high percentage of respondents (78%) were residents by birth and a majority (72%) resided within 4 km from the reserve boundary and this may explain the rampant cases of human-wildlife conflicts in the study area. Sixty percent of the respondents had stayed in the study area for more than 25 years. Most of the respondents (61%) were mixed farmers followed by those practicing pure agriculture (31%), whereas 4% practiced livestock keeping and 3% engaged in other forms of land use such as quarrying.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eLocal residents’ attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSlightly over thirty percent (32.4%) of the respondents strongly agreed with the statement that Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource, 27.3% agreed with the statement while 15.8% disagreed with the statement, or strongly disagreed (23%). The responses differed significantly (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;40.17, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdditionally, 38.8% of the respondents strongly disagreed that their lives could have been better if Rimoi National Reserve was not there, followed by those who strongly agreed (27.3%) and lastly those who agreed with the statement (2.9%) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResults showed that 76% of the respondents indicated that they supported conservation of wildlife in Rimoi National Reserve while (24%) did not. The response differed significantly (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;36.27, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) between the respondents. For those who indicated that they did, 47.5% pointed out that they did so because the reserve supported tourism, followed by 43.4% who supported wildlife conservation for future generation. For those who did not support conservation of Rimoi National Reserve, 54.3% indicated it was due to human-wildlife conflicts followed by lack of benefits accruing from conservation (45.7%).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe majority (81%) of the respondents indicated that they had never been involved in any conservation activities in and around Rimoi National Reserve, while a few (19%) indicated that they did and the responses differed significantly (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;51.98, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Of the respondents who indicated that they had been involved in conservation activities, majority (81%) were involved in tree planting, while a few (11%) were involved in fencing the park and reserve cleaning (7%) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ea). Of the respondents who indicated that they had never been involved in any conservation activities in and around Rimoi National Reserve, the majority (56%) indicated that they were not aware of any conservation activities, a few (29%) did not know why they were not involved and 15% had never been given an opportunity to carry out wildlife conservation activities (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003eb). The study found out that there were no community-based conservation programs established around Rimoi National Reserve.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003eb Opinions why respondents are not involved in conservation activities in Rimoi National Reserve\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eInfluence of socio-demographic factors on local residents\u0026rsquo; attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducation, forms of land use and period of residence influenced local respondents\u0026rsquo; attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve. Results further revealed that education (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;61.423, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), forms of land use (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;18.627, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.001) and period of residence (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;11.908, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.008) had a significant difference with the respondents\u0026rsquo; level of agreement that Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource as shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. All local residents who had attained tertiary and university level of education (100%) strongly agreed that Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource. Over half (58%), who had attained primary level education agreed with the statement that Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource while 46% of those who indicated that they strongly disagreed with the statement did not have any form of formal education. Lastly, while 50% of the respondents who practiced livestock keeping disagreed with the statement that Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource, 40% of the respondents who practiced pure agriculture strongly disagreed, and only 17% of the livestock keepers strongly agreed with the statement. Shorter-term local residents agreed more than the longer-term residents that Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource. Eighty seven percent of the respondents who had resided in Rimoi area for 5\u0026ndash;10 years agreed that Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource, while 57% of those who had resided for 11\u0026ndash;16 years agreed with the statement. Of the residents who had stayed for more than 25 years, 51% agreed that Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResults on respondents\u0026rsquo; views whether Rimoi National Reserve is a useful resource across socio-demographic characteristics\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChi.sq value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.869\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.090\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.656\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.620\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e61.423\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.835\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.090\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResidence\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.031\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.310\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResidence period\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.908\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.008\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eForms of land use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.627\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.001\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cb\u003eNote\u003c/b\u003e: \u003cb\u003eSignificant p values\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05 are indicated in bold\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe influence of education, forms of land use and period of residence on the respondents\u0026rsquo; response on whether RNR was a useful resource\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategory\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"6\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIs RNR Useful Resource?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStrongly agree (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAgree (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNeutral (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDisagree (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStrongly disagree (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"1\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNone\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e46\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"1\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrimary\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"1\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecondary\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"1\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePost secondary\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"1\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUniversity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"1\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eForms of Land use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAgriculture\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"1\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBee keeping\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"1\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLivestock keeping\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"1\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMixed farming\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"1\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOthers\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"1\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePeriod of Residence\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u0026ndash;10 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e88\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"1\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11\u0026ndash;15 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"1\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16\u0026ndash;20 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"1\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;25 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"1\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrom the results in Table \u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e below, the level of education had a significant influence on the respondent\u0026rsquo;s level of agreement that life could have been better if Rimoi National Reserve was not there (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;86.554, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Respondents who had not attained formal education strongly agreed (35.7%) that their lives could have been better if Rimoi National Reserve was not there while those who had attained secondary education (59.3%) strongly disagreed with the statement (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). Further, respondents without formal education preferred the reserve be converted into farming land since it was fertile.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResults of respondents\u0026rsquo; views on the statement that life could have been better if Rimoi National Reserve was not there across respondents\u0026rsquo; socio-demographic characteristics\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChi.sq value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducation level\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e86.554\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eForms of land use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.035\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.003\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.203\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.070\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.516\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.010\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePeriod of residence\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.491\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDistance from reserve\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.863\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.060\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003e\u003cb\u003eNote\u003c/b\u003e: \u003cb\u003eSignificant p values\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05 are indicated in bold\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe influence of education, forms of land use, period of residence and occupation on the respondents\u0026rsquo; response on whether life could have been better if RNR was not there\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategory\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"5\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCould life have been better if RNR was not there?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStrongly agree (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAgree (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNeutral (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDisagree (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStrongly disagree (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNone\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e35.7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrimary\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e48.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecondary\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e59.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePost secondary\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e70.0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30.0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUniversity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eForms of Land use\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAgriculture\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e48.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBee keeping\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e66.6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLivestock keeping\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e83.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMixed farming\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e49.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOthers\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePeriod of Residence\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u0026ndash;10 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e75.0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11\u0026ndash;15 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28.6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28.6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16\u0026ndash;20 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e39.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e39.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;25 years\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e45.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmployed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e41.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUn-employed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e32.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e39.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSelf-employed\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e31.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eForms of land use had a significant effect on the respondent\u0026rsquo;s level of agreement that life could have been better if Rimoi National Reserve was not there (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;16.035, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.003) (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). In cross tabulation with various forms of land use, majority of those who strongly agreed with the statement that life could be better if Rimoi National Reserve was not there practiced pure agriculture (48.8%), while 11.6% strongly disagreed with the statement. Whereas 16.5% of those who practiced mixed farming strongly agreed with the statement alluded above, 49.4% strongly disagreed with the same statement (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe period of residence had a significant influence on the respondent\u0026rsquo;s level of agreement that life could have been better if Rimoi National Reserve was not there (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;18.491, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e), with those who had lived for a shorter period around Rimoi National Reserve disagreeing more than those who had lived there for a longer period. Of the respondents who had lived around Rimoi National Reserve for 5\u0026ndash;10 years, 75% strongly disagreed with the statement that their lives could have been better if the reserve was not there (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOver forty percent (41.2%) of those that had formal employment disagreed with the same statement alluded to above while the majority 51.4% of those who were self-employed strongly disagreed that their lives could have been better without the existence of the reserve. The majority (57.5%) of the unemployed respondents disagreed with the statement that their lives could have been better if Rimoi National Reserve was not established, while 36.8% of the unemployed respondents felt that Rimoi National Reserve should not have been established due to the Human Wildlife Conflicts (HWCs) they experienced (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). The unemployed respondents also felt that the authorities were more concerned with wildlife than human welfare.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eInfluence of benefits accrued on local residents\u0026rsquo; attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSlightly over 50% of the respondents (51.1%) strongly disagreed with the statement that money from Rimoi National Reserve has helped many schools in the study area followed by 16.5% who disagreed with the statement leading to a significant difference between responses (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;87.01, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). Eighty-three (59.7%) respondents strongly disagreed with the statement that many students around Rimoi National Reserve have benefited from scholarships through wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve compared to those who strongly agreed (2.9%) while (9.4%) were not sure and these responses were significantly different (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;155, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding the statement that wildlife conservation has provided employment to local residents, 58 respondents (41.7%) strongly disagreed while 26(18.7%) strongly agreed, leading to a significant difference between those who agreed and those who disagreed with the statement given (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;43.48, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). Findings from Key Informant Interviews and Focus Group Discussions revealed that local residents felt that they were given a low deal on employment opportunities. They expressed dissatisfaction with the fact that Rimoi National Reserve management comprises of people whose origin is from outside Rimoi.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEighty-two respondents (59.0%) strongly disagreed with the statement that money from Rimoi National Reserve has helped develop health facilities around Rimoi National Reserve, followed by those who disagreed (24.5%) leading to a significant difference between those who agreed and those who disagreed with the statement given (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;150.96, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBenefits that accrue to the local community from wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"11\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c11\" colnum=\"11\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStatement\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStrongly agree\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAgree\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNot sure\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDisagree\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c11\" namest=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStrongly disagree\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e%F\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e%F\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e%F\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e%F\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e%F\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoney from RNR has helped many schools in this area.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMany students around RNR have benefited from scholarships from wildlife conservation in RNR.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23.7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e83\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e59.7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWildlife conservation has provided employment to local residents.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e41.7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoney from RNR has helped develop health facilities around RNR.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e34\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e82\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e59.0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eEffects of problematic wild animals on attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eMost of the respondents (65.5%) pointed out that wild animals were problematic, 30.2% disagreed with the statement and 4.3% were undecided (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). Most of those who regarded wild animals as problematic constituted those that had their homesteads and farms close to Rimoi National Reserve boundary and those that lived along the elephant migratory corridor.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eForty seven percent of the respondents pointed out that elephants are the most problematic wild animals in Rimoi National Reserve followed by baboons (21%), monkeys (16%), hyenas (12%) and crocodiles (2%) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). The responses differed significantly (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;119.26, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding the question on how often respondents encountered wildlife around Rimoi National Reserve, 41.7% indicated very often, 18.7% stated always, 17% stated sometimes, 15.1% indicated that they had never encountered wildlife with the least (7%) stating rarely (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). These responses were significantly different (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;33.46, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001)).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding the question on where the respondents encountered wild animals around Rimoi National Reserve, 49% stated on their farmlands, 36% indicated in the nearby bushes, while 12% indicated along the roads (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). The majority (56%) of the respondents indicated that their encounter with wild animals was frightening, while 27% indicated that it was exciting (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). The responses differed significantly (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;54.44, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). The respondents felt that the presence of wild animals posed a danger to their lives.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab6\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRespondents\u0026rsquo; encounter with wildlife around Rimoi conservation area\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStatement\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategory\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e% F\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChi. sq\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHow often have you encountered wild animals in this area?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNever\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eχ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;33.46,\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003edf\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4,\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ep\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRarely\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSome times\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003every often\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e42\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlways\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTotal\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e139\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e100\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhat was your experience during the encounter?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ebad\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eχ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;103.95,\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003edf\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4,\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ep\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eexciting\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e34\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003efrightening\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e56\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003enormal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003every bad\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTotal\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e126\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e100\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhere did you encounter the wild animals?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNear homestead\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eχ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;54.44,\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003edf\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3,\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ep\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBushes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e46\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e36\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFarmland\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e63\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRoadside\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTotal\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e128\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e100\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eEffects of illegal activities on attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThere was a significant difference in responses pertaining to illegal activities taking place in Rimoi National Reserve (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;50.60, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;6, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Logging for construction posts and sale (28.1%), charcoal burning (25.2%) and fuel wood collection and sale (15.8%) were the major illegal activities carried out around Rimoi National Reserve (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eRelationship between local residents and the Kenya Wildlife Service staff and its influence on attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation.\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA small proportion of respondents (28.1%) described their relationship with the Kenya Wildlife Service staff as good, followed by 25.9% who were not sure, 19.4% indicated that it was bad and 17.3% reported very bad (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). The responses however, differed significantly (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;11.045, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.03). Most of the respondents (65%) stated that they had never had a confrontation with Kenya Wildlife Service officials which was significantly higher than those who indicated they had (χ\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;87.42, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) with crop damage by wildlife (47%) being the significant cause of their confrontation (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;31.13, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Other causes of confrontation included charcoal burning (16%), trespass (13%), logging (11%), livestock attack (9%) and firewood collection (4%).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab7\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLocal residents\u0026rsquo; relationship with Kenya Wildlife Service officials\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStatement\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategory\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e%F\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChi. Square value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHow do you describe your relationship with KWS staff?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVery bad\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eχ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;11.04,\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003edf\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4,\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ep\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBad\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNot sure\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e36\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGood\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e39\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVery good\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTotal\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e139\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e100\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHave you ever had a confrontation\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ewith KWS staff?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e91\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eχ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;87.42,\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003edf\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3,\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ep\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e47\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e34\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo response\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTotal\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e139\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e100\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"6\" rowspan=\"7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhat was the cause of confrontation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCharcoal burning\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"6\" rowspan=\"7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eχ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;31.13,\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003edf\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5,\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ep\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLogging\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTrespass\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLivestock attack\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFire wood collection\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCrop damage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e47\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTotal\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e45\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e100\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"DISCUSSION","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eAttitudes and perceptions towards conservation\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study established that Rimoi National Reserve is seen as a useful resource by the local communities, despite the restrictions to the locals brought about by the designation of national reserve. This could be due to the benefits derived from the reserve such as firewood and herbs collection, ecological value, increased business opportunity derived from tourism activities as well as employment among others. These research findings concur with those of Ellis et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) and Barthwal \u0026amp; Mathur (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e) who reported about local community access to benefits from conservation directly or indirectly through ecological, socio-cultural, and economic benefits among others. Despite this, the local community living around Rimoi National Reserve did not appreciate indirect benefits linked to natural resources such as ecological benefits probably due to lack of awareness coupled with high levels of poverty. Similar observations have been made about other communities living adjacent to protected areas.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study established that wildlife in Rimoi National Reserve is perceived as problematic by the local residents. This could be attributed to crop raids, livestock attacks, and property damage by wildlife around Rimoi National Reserve. During the Focus group discussions, participants reported that farmers around Rimoi National Reserve incur great losses due to crop damage by wildlife. Crops such as maize, bananas, sorghum, millet, paw-paws, mangoes, tomatoes and other fruits, which are cultivated in most farms around Rimoi National Reserve are known to attract wild animals. More often, wild animals stray from Rimoi National Reserve and invade neighbouring farms causing great damage to crops. Despite the presence of an electric fence small animals such as baboons, monkeys, squirrels, and hares often manoeuvre through them. The elephants which cause the greatest damage to crops around Rimoi National Reserve, stray through the unfenced part of Rimoi National Reserve to the adjacent farms. The instances of farm invasion by wild animals around Rimoi National Reserve are most reported during the dry season when water and food resources scarcity intensifies. The local community around Rimoi National Reserve expressed a willingness to support wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve despite the problems caused by wildlife in the area. This study also established that the local community around Rimoi National Reserve is not involved in conservation programs, thus making the local community to lack a sense of ownership and responsibility for wildlife in Rimoi National Reserve.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eInfluence of socio-demographic factors on local residents\u0026rsquo; attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrom the results, it was established that forms of land use, occupation, periods of residence and education level of the respondents influenced their attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation. Respondents who had stayed around Rimoi National Reserve for more than 10 years expressed more positive attitudes towards wildlife and wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve than those who had stayed for a shorter period. The reasons for this were not clear but could be related with greater cultural attachment and more resource utilization by longer-term residents than shorter-term residents. On occupation, employed local residents showed more positive attitudes towards wildlife conservation than those who were unemployed. This can be attributed to the fact that employed residents are most likely to be more educated than those who are unemployed, thus, more likely to appreciate wildlife and wildlife conservation due to exposure. Unemployed local residents are more likely to be involved in charcoal production, logging, firewood collection, game hunting among other illegal activities than employed local residents. These exposes unemployed residents to more HWCs than employed residents. Local residents who had acquired formal education showed more positive attitudes towards wildlife and wildlife conservation than those who had no formal education. This can be attributed to the fact that educated individuals can link wildlife conservation with both direct and indirect benefits that accrue from wildlife. Individuals without formal education tend to link conservation more to direct benefits. This agrees with the findings of Megaze, et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) and Sitati \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e, (2003) who argued that specific factors that affect respondents\u0026rsquo; attitudes and perceptions include: social-economic and demographic characteristics of people like age which influence the way people think; ethnicity, religion, place of residence in relation to a protected area, duration/period or length of residency, membership in conservation organizations, participation in conservation activities, type of training for example natural resources or wildlife based, past experiences for example human-wildlife conflict, relocation to create room for protected areas (PA), denial of access to traditional resources locked in PA or denial of ownership rights, and access to benefits. As Ebua et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e) puts it, when people are denied benefits and access from natural resources, they develop negative attitudes and engage in activities that are detrimental to conservation thus making the future of the wildlife uncertain especially for large mammals. Most local residents living adjacent to Rimoi National Reserve are small scale farmers, practicing mixed farming mainly for subsistence. Thus, the major crops grown near Rimoi National Reserve boundary such as maize, sorghum, millet, bananas and fruits have compounded human-wildlife conflicts in Rimoi conservation area.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eThe influence of benefits on attitudes and perceptions towards conservation\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe amount and type of benefits received is a factor which influences the attitudes and perceptions of local people towards wildlife conservation (Msigwa et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Local residents getting good benefits are more likely to have positive attitudes and perceptions, and poor benefits are more likely to have negative or antagonistic attitudes towards conservation, protected areas and their wildlife (Munaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). The perceived benefits and a sense of ownership are critical determinants of the success of the management and conservation of protected ecosystems (Simasiku et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). For example, the majority of the respondents strongly disagreed that money from the reserve has helped local residents in the area through scholarships, development of health facilities, construction of infrastructure and other social amenities as well as provision of employment to local residents. From results of focus group discussions that were conducted, it was pointed out that only two out of the more than nine public schools in the area have benefited from funds arising from wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve. This corroborates with findings of McManus et al, (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) and Wright (2023) that many local people around conservation areas do not receive benefits and yet they bear the costs of living with wildlife.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt has been reported that a rapid decline of wildlife has been noted in areas where benefits have not accrued to the local community (Norton-Griffiths, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e; Deryabina et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). This is because the community tries to engage in other land-use practices that are not only detrimental to wildlife population, but also result in increased conflicts which derails conservation efforts (Masiaine et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Most local residents adjacent to Rimoi National Reserve are small scale farmers, practicing mixed farming mainly for subsistence. Findings of this study have shown that by denying people benefits and access to natural resources, they develop negative attitudes and engage in activities that are harmful to conservation, which concurs with other documented results (Mutanga et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). This leads to uncertainty in conservation especially of large mammals like elephants and a sharp decline of wildlife populations outside protected areas.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eInfluence of problematic wild animals on attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearch findings indicates that elephants, baboons, hyenas and monkeys were the most problematic wild animals in the area. A significantly higher proportion of respondents indicating that elephants were the most problematic wildlife species around Rimoi National Reserve could be due to several reasons. Elephants are known to cause massive destruction of property such as water pipes, water tanks and fences and also cause great damage to crops when they invade farms. During the focus group discussions, respondents pointed out that in one instance, elephants raided and wiped out a whole banana and paw-paw plantation around Rimoi National Reserve. This forced the community to demonstrate in a bid to capture the attention of the authorities to have the elephants driven back to the reserve. When elephants raid the villages, the normal routine of the people is distracted. People will not attend to their businesses as usual and children stop going to schools fearing an attack by the elephants. Results concur with that of De Boer and Baquete (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e) who reported that local people incur losses and spend huge amounts of money in repairing damages (Boast, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) caused by wild animals like elephants, baboons, hippopotamus, mongoose and guinea fowl around conservation areas (Kariuki, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Baboons are known to destroy house roofs and plastic water tanks and are a great nuisance as they trample on house roofs (Kariuki, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Incurring of costs always suffocates conservation efforts amongst people especially those who suffer from direct agricultural losses, property destruction and human injury (Katswera et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRimoi National Reserve is partially fenced off leaving a migratory corridor to the north for elephants. Electric fencing is an intervention that is thought to be highly effective in mitigating human-wildlife conflicts as reported by Ferguson and Hanks (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Despite the presence of an electric fence, baboons are able to jump over or pass under the fence and invade the farms that are close to the park boundary causing major losses (Kariuki, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). The electric fence, however, is effective in minimizing losses as most large mammals are barred from moving out of the park. Despite this, the effectiveness of fences as a conflict mitigation measure, with a view to changing local people by Nyhus et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e) who argues that the solution is limited because animals like elephants and baboons are known to go through the electrified fences causing havoc to farms (Kariuki, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Besides this, elephants are known to stray, through the unfenced migratory corridor, and find their way to farms, destroy crops and cause damage to property. This leads to heightened negative attitudes and perceptions by the local community towards wildlife due to the cost they bear as a result of living close to a wildlife protected area. Some communities resort in killing wild animals by spearing, snaring or poisoning them which also strains the relationship between the local community and the authorities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eEffects of illegal activities on conservation areas\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eRespondents pointed out that there were illegal activities happening in and around Rimoi National Reserve such as logging for timber and construction posts, poaching wild animals for game meat and trophy hunting, charcoal burning, as well as fuel wood collection for sale. Other illegal activities reported include honey collection, livestock grazing and collection of medicinal herbs. People found engaging in illegal activities were punished through imposition of fines, imprisonment and provision of services. Such victims and the members of their families were likely to develop negative attitudes toward the reserve and its management. This finding agrees with those of a similar study conducted in Uganda by Katswera et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) that the hostility shown in the handling of victims illegally found in wildlife-protected areas by the park management negatively impacts on local people\u0026rsquo;s attitudes and perceptions towards the parks and wildlife.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese illegal activities have led to habitat disturbance and destruction and sharp decline of wildlife species in and around Rimoi National Reserve. Some wild animals and birds have become locally extinct such as the leopard from the region. Moreover, the study observed that some of the Kenya Wildlife Service officials managing Rimoi National Reserve had stayed at Rimoi National Reserve for more than 3 years. The long stay could have caused too much familiarity with the environment and local residents consequently leading them to compromise on the conservation agenda.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eEffect of relationship of local residents with Kenya Wildlife Service staff on attitudes and perceptions towards conservation\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFindings of the study showed mixed reactions concerning the relationship between local residents and Kenya Wildlife Service staff managing Rimoi National Reserve. A good proportion of respondents was not sure how to describe their relationship with Kenya Wildlife Service officials. Residents who had experienced a confrontation with the Rimoi National Reserve managers expressed negative attitudes towards the park and its wildlife, unlike those who had not. During focus group discussions, participants pointed out that some of the Kenya Wildlife Service officials colluded with residents to carry out illegal activities such as logging and charcoal production. Probably this explains the existence of a seemingly balanced good-bad relationship between the Kenya Wildlife Service officials and the local residents.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn some of the sampled locations Rimoi National Reserve staff managers were regarded as foreigners who were not only controlling the use of natural resources, but also enjoying the resources at the expense of the local residents. Resentment from the local residents increased when human-wildlife conflicts arose and the reserve managers failed to address them appropriately. As Gulte et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) puts it, the success of conservation programs through protected areas may depend on the ability of park managers to pacify biodiversity conservation goals with social and economic issues and to promote greater compliance of local communities with protected areas\u0026rsquo; conservation strategies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe foregoing study findings agree with other studies among them Katikiro et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) and Hill et al (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) that park managers are hostile to the local people and that this has hindered local people\u0026rsquo;s participation in wildlife conservation. The alleged harassment by park officials has resulted to local residents in being made to be very disenchanted about the value of the park and its wildlife. The negative relationship increases intensity when wild animals invade farms, kill livestock and destroy their properties (Hill et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Gulte et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). The hostility is further heightened especially if the conflict involves human injury or death.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMore often the Park Authority misconstrues the chasing away of wild animals as harassing the wild animals and the authorities become very hostile to the local people (Moreto et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). This in turn aggravates the local people\u0026rsquo;s negative attitude. From the results of the current study, the attitudes, perceptions and the behaviour of the reserve authorities can be discerned and as pointed by Mutanga et al (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) the relationship between the local people and wildlife conservation is depicted through behaviour, decisions, practices and actions. Whereas the reserve management may actually mean well by enforcing the law, there is need to treat the local people fairly and with respect, as they are key stakeholders in conservation and tourism development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"CONCLUSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis paper has examined determinants of attitudes and perceptions of local residents towards wildlife and wildlife conservation in RNR. The study established that socio-demographic factors particularly education level, occupation, period of residence and forms of land use influenced local residents\u0026rsquo; attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation. Likewise, access to opportunities, benefit sharing and community involvement in conservation programs and decision making greatly shaped perceptions. Based on the results, it is evident that as much as the residents have innate love for wildlife, they could be disgruntled due to the cost they bear as a result of living in close proximity to the reserve coupled with poor relationship with conservation officials.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e Wild animals compete daily with the local community over resources and livelihoods. Poverty and lack of awareness are formidable enemies to wildlife and conservation of natural resources. A poor population adjacent to protected areas pose many challenges including unregulated exploitation of resources, engagement in illegal activities and other practices that may not be in tandem with conservation. Mitigating these challenges, requires innovative and proactive approaches (Mogomotsi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). These include the presentation and documentation of traditional knowledge, an idea that is mostly neglected by many conservation programs. For sustainable wildlife conservation, not only there is need to understand how people perceive and interact with their environment but also incorporate traditional knowledge in conservation programs. Park management and conservation crusaders need to focus on community livelihood improvement, economic empowerment, promotion of conservation education and awareness, and involvement of local residents in conservation programs to improve attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation and protected areas.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eEthics Statement\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research was done following clearance from the University of Eldoret, Kenya Wildlife Service (Elgeyo-Marakwet office), and local chiefs. Before administering the questionnaires, participants filled consent forms to permit their information to be used. Verbal consent was also sought from key informants and locals that participated in focus group discussions. All participants were assured of anonymity and confidentiality.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eClinical Trial Number\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis declaration is not applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eCompeting Interests\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis article was written with the financial assistance of the Erasmus Plus KA171 International Credit Mobility (ICM).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eD.O.O: Conceptualization, research design, data collection, literature, data analysis, wrote the initial draft and subsequent drafts. H.I: Conceptualization, study design, subsequent drafts, supervision, validation, project leadership and editing. J.K.K: Study design, supervision, conceptualization, editing and project leadership. M.A.V: formal analysis, editing, subsequent drafts and validation. B.I.T: funding acquisition, editing and validation.All authors read, reviewed and approved the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe thank the communities adjacent to Rimoi National Reserve for participation and giving information. Acknowledgement also goes to the local administrators: chiefs, sub-chiefs and village elders, as well Rimoi National Reserve staff for their support and cooperation during the study. The study has been financially supported by the authors and the Erasmus Plus ICM exchange program between the University of Eldoret and the University of Groningen.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be made available in this publication or upon reasonable request from the corresponding author. Data is also provided as supplementary information files.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarthwal, S. C., \u0026amp; Mathur, V. B. (2012). Teachers' Knowledge of and Attitude Toward Wildlife and Conservation: A Case Study from Ladakh, India. \u003cem\u003eMountain Research and Development\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e32\u003c/em\u003e(2), 169\u0026ndash;175.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBitanyi, S., Nasje, M., Kusiluka, J. M., Chenyambuga, W., \u0026amp; Kaltenburn, B. (2012). Awareness and Perceptions of Local People About Wildlife Hunting in Western Serengeti Communities. \u003cem\u003eTropical Conservation Science Journal\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e(2), 208\u0026ndash;226.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBoast, L. K. (2014). \u003cem\u003eExploring the causes of and mitigation options for human-predator conflict on game ranches in Botswana\u003c/em\u003e. How is coexistence possible?.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCosta, S., Casanova, C., Sousa, C., \u0026amp; Lee, P. (2013). The Good, The Bad and The Ugly: Perceptions of Wildlife in Tombali (Guinea-Bissau, West Africa). \u003cem\u003eJ Primatol\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e, 110. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.4172/2167-6801.1000110\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4172/2167-6801.1000110\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDeryabina, T. G., Kuchmel, S. V., Nagorskaya, L. L., Hinton, T. G., Beasley, J. C., Lerebours, A., \u0026amp; Smith, J. T. (2015). Long-term census data reveal abundant wildlife populations at Chernobyl. \u003cem\u003eCurrent Biology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e25\u003c/em\u003e(19), R824\u0026ndash;R826.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDe Boer, W. F., \u0026amp; Baquete, D. S. (1998). Natural Resource Use, Crop Damage, and Attitudes of Rural People in the Vicinity of the Maputo Elephant Reserve. \u003cem\u003eMozambique Environmental Conservation\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e25\u003c/em\u003e, 208\u0026ndash;218. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892998000265\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1017/S0376892998000265\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEbua, V. B., Agwafo, T. E., \u0026amp; Fonkwo, S. N. (2011). Attitudes and perceptions as threats to wildlife conservation in the Bakossi area, South West Cameroon. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e(12), 631\u0026ndash;636.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEllis, E. A., Montero, J. A. R., G\u0026oacute;mez, I. U. H., Porter-Bolland, L., \u0026amp; Ellis, P. W. (2017). Private property and Mennonites are major drivers of forest cover loss in central Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico. \u003cem\u003eLand Use Policy\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e69\u003c/em\u003e, 474\u0026ndash;484.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFerguson, K., \u0026amp; Hanks, J. (2010). Fencing Impacts: A review of the environmental, social and economic impacts of game and veterinary fencing. \u003cem\u003eAfrica with particular reference to the Great Limpopo and Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Areas\u003c/em\u003e. Mammal Research Institute. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://www.wcsahead.org/gltfca_grants/grants.html\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://www.wcsahead.org/gltfca_grants/grants.html\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFlorian, G., \u0026amp; Kaiser Sybille W\u0026ouml;lfing \u0026amp; Urs Fuhrer, (1999). ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDE AND ECOLOGICAL BEHAVIOUR, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Volume 19, Issue 1, Pages 1\u0026ndash;19, ISSN 0272\u0026ndash;4944. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1998.0107\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1006/jevp.1998.0107\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGarekae, H., Thakadu, O. T., \u0026amp; Lepetu, J. (2016). Attitudes of Local Communities Towards Forest Conservation in Botswana: A case study of Chobe Forest Reserve, International Forestry Review, Volume 18, Number 2, June 2016, pp. 180\u0026ndash;191(12) Commonwealth Forestry Association. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1505/146554816818966318\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1505/146554816818966318\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGulte, E., Tadele, H., Haileslassie, A., \u0026amp; Mekuria, W. (2023). Perception of local communities on protected areas: lessons drawn from the Bale Mountains National Park, Ethiopia. \u003cem\u003eEcosystems and People\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e19\u003c/em\u003e(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1080/26395916.2023.2227282\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/26395916.2023.2227282\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHill, W., Byrne, J., \u0026amp; Pickering, C. (2015). The \u0026lsquo;hollow-middle\u0026rsquo;: why positive community perceptions do not translate into pro-conservation behaviour in El Vizca\u0026iacute;no Biosphere Reserve, Mexico. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Biodiversity Science Ecosystem Services \u0026amp; Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(2), 168\u0026ndash;183. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1080/21513732.2015.1036924\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/21513732.2015.1036924\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHunt, C., \u0026amp; Stronza, A. (2014). Stage-based tourism models and resident attitudes towards tourism in an emerging destination in the developing world. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Sustainable Tourism\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e22\u003c/em\u003e(2), 279\u0026ndash;298.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKariuki, P. (2013). \u003cem\u003eLocal Residents\u0026rsquo; Attitudes and perceptions A Study of Lake Nakuru National Park and its environs, Kenya\u003c/em\u003e (Doctoral dissertation, Moi University).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKatikiro, R. E., Macusi, E. D., \u0026amp; Deepananda, K. A. (2015). Challenges facing local communities in Tanzania in realising locally-managed marine areas. \u003cem\u003eMarine Policy\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e51\u003c/em\u003e, 220\u0026ndash;229.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKatswera, J., Mutekanga, M. N., \u0026amp; Twesigye, C. K. (2025). Biodiversity Conservation and Threat Reduction in Kibale and Queen Elizabeth Conservation Areas, Uganda. \u003cem\u003eEast African Journal of Biophysical and Computational Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;22. Retrieved from \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://journals.hu.edu.et/hu-journals/index.php/eajbcs/article/view/97\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://journals.hu.edu.et/hu-journals/index.php/eajbcs/article/view/97\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKatswera, K., Mutekanga, N. M., \u0026amp; Twesigye, C. F. (2022). Community Perceptions and Attitudes towards Conservation of Wildlife in Uganda. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Wildlife and Biodiversity\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(4), 42\u0026ndash;65. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6522377\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5281/zenodo.6522377\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKiringe, J. W., Okello, M. M., \u0026amp; Ekajul, S. W. (2007). Managers\u0026rsquo; perceptions of threats to the protected areas of Kenya: prioritization for effective management. \u003cem\u003eOryx\u003c/em\u003e. 2007;41(3):314\u0026ndash;321. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1017/S0030605307000218\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1017/S0030605307000218\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKothari, C. R. (2004). \u003cem\u003eResearch Methodology (Second Revised Edition)\u003c/em\u003e. New Age International.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLanchberry, J. (1996). The Rio Earth Summit. In D. H. Dunn (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eDiplomacy at the Highest Level. Studies in Diplomacy\u003c/em\u003e. Palgrave Macmillan. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-24915-2_14\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/978-1-349-24915-2_14\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMasiaine, S., Pilfold, N., Moll, R. J., O\u0026rsquo;Connor, D., Stacy-Dawes, J., Ruppert, K., Roloff, G., \u0026amp; Montgomery, R. A. (2020). : Landscape-level changes to large mammal space use in response to a pastoralist incursion, \u003cem\u003eEcological Indicators\u003c/em\u003e 121 (2021) 107091 \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.107091\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.107091\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMamo, M., Gure, A., Kebede, F., \u0026amp; Abie, K. (2018). : Challenges, Attitude and Perception of Local Communities Towards Conservation of Alledeghi Wildlife Reserve, Eastern Ethiopia, \u003cem\u003eJournal of Natural Sciences Research\u003c/em\u003e, www.iiste.org ISSN 2224\u0026ndash;3186 (Paper) ISSN 2225\u0026thinsp;\u0026ndash;\u0026thinsp;0921, Vol.8, No.2, 2018.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMoreto, W. D., Brunson, R. K., \u0026amp; Braga, A. A. (2016). Anything we do, we h the communities\u0026rsquo;: law enforcement range community\u0026ndash;ranger relations in Wildlife Protected Areas in Uganda. \u003cem\u003eBritish Journal of Criminology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e57\u003c/em\u003e(4), 924\u0026ndash;944.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMutanga, C. N., Gandiwa, E., Muboko, N., \u0026amp; Vengesayi, S. (2016). : Prospects for wildlife conservation: Local community views and factors influencing conservation relationships in Zimbabwe. \u003cem\u003eAnnals of Social and Behavioural Sciences\u003c/em\u003e 2 (2016) ISSN: 2415\u0026thinsp;\u0026ndash;\u0026thinsp;0851.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcManus, J. S., Dickman, A. J., Gaynor, D., Smuts, B. H., \u0026amp; Macdonald, D. W. (2015). Dead or alive? Comparing costs and benefits of lethal and non-lethal human\u0026ndash;wildlife conflict mitigation on livestock farms. \u003cem\u003eOryx\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e49\u003c/em\u003e(4), 687\u0026ndash;695.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMegaze, A., Balakrishnan, M., \u0026amp; Belay, G. (2017). Human\u0026ndash;wildlife conflict and attitude of local people towards conservation of wildlife in Chebera Churchura National Park, Ethiopia. \u003cem\u003eAfrican Zoology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e52\u003c/em\u003e(1), 1\u0026ndash;8.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMogomotsi, P. K., Mogomotsi, G. E. J., Dipogiso, K., Phonchi-Tshekiso, N. D., Stone, L. S., \u0026amp; Badimo, D. (2020). : An Analysis of Communities\u0026rsquo; Attitudes Toward Wildlife and Implications for Wildlife Sustainability. \u003cem\u003eTropical Conservation Science\u003c/em\u003e. 2020;13. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1177/1940082920915603\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/1940082920915603\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMsigwa, F. F., Mombo, F. M., Brehoney, P., \u0026amp; Kimaro, M. H. (2023). Community Perceptions and socio-demographic influence on trophy hunting in Rungwa Game Reserve, Tanzania. \u003cem\u003eOpen journal of Ecology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e(9), 606\u0026ndash;620.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMunaw, H. Z. (2023). Factors Influencing the Attitudes of Local Community towards Protected Areas, Case Study on Ambatara Protected Area Forest Conservation, Northwest Ethiopia. \u003cem\u003eEast African Journal of Forestry and Agroforestry\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(1), 238\u0026ndash;253. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.37284/eajfa.6.1.1372\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.37284/eajfa.6.1.1372\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMutanga, C. N., Vengesayi, S., Muboko, N., \u0026amp; Gandiwa, E. (2015). Towards harmonious conservation relationships: A framework for understanding protected area staff-local community relationships in developing countries. \u003cem\u003eJournal for Nature Conservation\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e25\u003c/em\u003e, 8\u0026ndash;16.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNorton-Griffiths, M. (2000). : Wildlife Losses in Kenya: An Analysis of Conservation Policy, Natural Resource Modelling Volume 13, Number 1, Spring 2000.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNyhus, P. J., Osofsky, S. A., Ferraro, P., Madden, F., \u0026amp; Fischer, H. (2005). Bearing the costs of human-wildlife conflict: the challenges of compensation schemes. \u003cem\u003eConservation Biology Series-Cambridge-\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e9\u003c/em\u003e, 107.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePatil, I. (2021). Visualizations with statistical details: The \u0026lsquo;ggstatsplot' approach. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Open-Source Software\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(61), 3167. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.21105/joss.03167\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.21105/joss.03167\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRodney, J., Wangchuk, R., \u0026amp; Dadul, J. (2003). \u003cem\u003eLocal People\u0026rsquo;s Attitudes toward Wildlife Conservation in the Hemis National Park\u003c/em\u003e. With Special Reference to the Conservation of Large Predators, Sonoma.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSenanayake, S. G. J. N. (2006). : Indigenous Knowledge As A Key To Sustainable Development, \u003cem\u003eJournal of Agricultural Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, Volume 01 Issue 1. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://repo.lib.sab.ac.lk:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/812\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://repo.lib.sab.ac.lk:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/812\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShibia, M. G. (2010). Determinants of Attitudes and Perceptions on Resource Use and Management of Marsabit National Reserve, Kenya. \u003cem\u003eJournal Human Ecology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e(1), 55\u0026ndash;62.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSimasiku, E., Hove, K., Kairu, J., Awala, S. K., Lukubwe, M., Kasinda, E., \u0026amp; Chataa, A. (2024). Community livelihoods and perceptions of the Sikunga Fish Protected Area in the Zambezi Region, Namibia. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Wildlife and Biodiversity\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e8\u003c/em\u003e(2), 327\u0026ndash;354. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11106501\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5281/zenodo.11106501\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSitati, N. (2003). Human\u0026ndash;elephant conflict in Trans Mara district adjacent to Masai Mara National Reserve. \u003cem\u003ePhD Thesis. University of Kent, Canterbury, UK\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTessema, M. E., Wakjira, K., \u0026amp; Asefa, A. (2019). Threats and their relative severity and driving forces in the African Elephant range wildlife protected areas of Ethiopia. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e, 187\u0026ndash;198.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWickham, H. (2016). ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer-Verlag New York. ISBN 978-3-319-24277-4.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWickham, H., Fran\u0026ccedil;ois, R., Henry, L., M\u0026uuml;ller, K., \u0026amp; Vaughan, D. (2023). _dplyr: A Grammar of Data Manipulation_. R package version 1.1.4. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://CRAN.R-project.org/package=dplyr\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=dplyr\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Wildlife conservation, Attitudes and perceptions, Illegal activities, Benefits, Protected areas, Rimoi National Reserve","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6362611/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6362611/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eLocal residents\u0026rsquo; attitudes and perceptions about protected areas are among the key factors that determine the success of conservation efforts. This paper examines determinants of local residents\u0026rsquo; attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve (RNR) and its surroundings in Kenya. The study used household surveys, questionnaires, focus group discussions (FGDs), and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) to collect data from local residents bordering RNR, local leaders and Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) staff. Questionnaires consisting of closed and open-ended questions were distributed to 20 randomly selected heads of households in seven administrative locations giving a total of 140 respondents. In addition, 30 key informants were purposely selected from among KWS staff (5), local leaders (10), leaders of self-help groups (7), religious leaders (3), and village elders (5). Results showed that local residents\u0026rsquo; perceptions were primarily associated with education level, occupation, forms of land use, crop and livestock invasion by wildlife from RNR, benefit-sharing and interaction between RNR staff and the local community. Both crop and livestock raiding were the most serious human-wildlife conflicts reported around RNR. Logging (28%) and charcoal burning (25%) were the major illegal activities in RNR (χ2\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;50.60, df\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;6, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Slightly over thirty percent of the respondents (32.4%) strongly agreed that RNR is a useful resource to be conserved. For conservation goals to be achieved, there is need for involvement of local residents in conservation programs, promotion of wildlife conservation awareness, increased benefit-sharing and adoption of sustainable enterprise programs to alleviate poverty and illegal activities.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Determinants of local residents’ attitudes and perceptions towards wildlife conservation in Rimoi National Reserve, Kenya.","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-05-07 10:12:53","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6362611/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"2f3ba769-ab7c-4f82-9c48-4ec4de3c4db0","owner":[],"postedDate":"May 7th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-06-10T11:08:51+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-05-07 10:12:53","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6362611","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6362611","identity":"rs-6362611","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}