Human–Wildlife Conflict in Eswatini (2026): Status & Solutions

Quick Answer: The Current State of Human–Wildlife Conflict in Eswatini

Human–wildlife conflict in Eswatini has intensified since 2025, particularly along the southern border with South Africa and in rural settlements adjacent to protected areas. Bush pigs, hyenas, and jackals are destroying crops and killing livestock in communities bordering inadequately maintained game reserves, while simultaneously raising the risk of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) transmission to domestic cattle.[1] At the same time, ranger enforcement of wildlife protection laws has created tensions with local communities who hunt for sustenance or cultural reasons, raising human rights concerns.[2] A new five-year, US$48 million biodiversity initiative launched in May 2026 acknowledges that conservation cannot succeed without addressing community needs and livelihood security.[3]

Why Human–Wildlife Conflict Matters in Eswatini

Eswatini is a small kingdom (17,364 km²) with diverse ecosystems and a wildlife recovery story spanning over 50 years. Since the 1960s, conservation efforts—led by organisations like Big Game Parks—have restored populations of rhino, elephant, and antelope after near-total extermination.[4] However, this success has created a paradox: as wildlife populations grow in bounded conservation areas, human settlements increasingly overlap with animal territories, and cross-border wildlife movements have become harder to manage.[5]

The rural poor—particularly in the southern Shiselweni region and along the Lubombo landscape—bear the heaviest costs. Crop raids, livestock predation, and disease outbreaks threaten food security and income, while conservation law enforcement sometimes uses lethal force against community members hunting for subsistence or engaging in cultural practices.[2] Without tangible conservation benefits reaching local households, support for protected areas erodes, and poaching or snare-setting may increase.

The Cross-Border Crisis: Harloo Private Reserve and the Lavumisa Communities

A stark example of institutional neglect emerged in early 2026 along the Eswatini–South Africa border. Harloo Private Reserve, a hunting and wildlife operation in South Africa's KwaZulu-Natal province, shares a boundary with the Lavumisa chiefdom in southern Eswatini, encompassing the settlements of Chibini, Mgampondo, and Vuvu.[1]

Harloo's boundary fence—originally designed as a veterinary cordon to control foot-and-mouth disease—has deteriorated to the point of collapse. Local resident Senzo Dlamini photographed the "leaning fence" in February 2026, a visual metaphor for institutional failure.[1] As a result:

• Uncontrolled wildlife incursions: Bush pigs, jackals, and hyenas have established permanent populations in the Lavumisa–Nquthu forests, crossing freely into community farmland and grazing areas.[1]
• Livestock and crop losses: Predation and foraging damage have eroded household food security and income for subsistence farmers.[1]
• Disease risk: Bush pigs come into contact with buffalo—primary carriers of FMD—and can transmit the virus to domestic cattle. Hyenas and jackals, while not cloven-hoofed, may contract and spread FMD by feeding on infected carcasses.[1] A widespread FMD outbreak in Eswatini's livestock would devastate rural livelihoods and regional trade.

Xolile Shongwe, conservation secretary at Eswatini's Big Game Parks National Wildlife Authority, stated unequivocally: "It is in the interest of any reserve to keep its fence in good condition—to prevent losses and respect neighbouring communities."[1] However, as of March 2026, Harloo Private Reserve's owner, Edmond Rouillard, had not responded to repeated requests for comment on mitigation strategies or community engagement plans.[1]

Systemic Threats Driving Human–Wildlife Conflict

Habitat Fragmentation and Border Fences

Eswatini's conservation areas—Hlane Royal National Park, Mlilwane Wildlife Sanctuary, Mantenga Nature Reserve, and private reserves—are small and bounded by fences that restrict wildlife movement and concentrate populations.[4] Over 50 years, wildlife populations have grown, but natural migrations and population balance are difficult to maintain without "radical peaks and troughs," requiring active management through capture, translocation, and culling.[4]

Boundary fences between reserves and adjacent communities, if poorly maintained, fail to contain wildlife and simultaneously block disease surveillance. The repurposing of veterinary cordons for game management—as seen at Harloo—has compounded the problem.[1]

Elephant Density and Agricultural Conflict

Elephant populations in southern Africa, including Eswatini, have grown significantly over the past two decades. Fencing has penned-in these populations, increasing elephant density in high-conflict areas and raising the likelihood of crop raids, property damage, and human fatalities in adjacent agricultural zones.[5] Opening fences and permitting wildlife corridors may reduce localized elephant density over time, but this requires transboundary coordination and community acceptance.

Poaching and Subsistence Hunting

While rhino poaching has declined significantly since the 1980s due to intensive anti-poaching efforts, wildlife trafficking networks continue to operate in Eswatini, and local communities sometimes hunt without permits to feed their families.[2] Game rangers, tasked with enforcing wildlife protection laws, face a moral and practical dilemma: they must protect animals while witnessing community poverty and food insecurity. Some rangers have reported using excessive force, raising human rights concerns and eroding community trust.[2]

As one ranger noted in interviews, "In the current circumstances, people will end up taking the law into their own hands, which is a situation that we do not want. The use of excessive force in my view does not only violate human rights but also undermines the credibility of the conservation efforts."[2]

Climate and Livelihood Vulnerability

The Lubombo landscape—Eswatini's primary conservation and tourism zone—faces mounting climate stress, invasive alien species, and ecosystem degradation.[3] Rural communities in and around protected areas experience high poverty levels and depend heavily on subsistence agriculture, grazing, and natural resource harvesting. Climate variability exacerbates both human and wildlife vulnerability, increasing competition for water and forage.

What Eswatini Is Doing: Policy, Programmes, and Partnerships

The Eswatini Big Five Nature Reserve Project (2026–2031)

In May 2026, Eswatini launched a landmark five-year biodiversity initiative to address the conservation–community nexus. The project, officially titled "Establishment of the Eswatini Big Five Nature Reserve," is backed by US$5.23 million in direct grants from the Global Environment Facility (GEF), with a total value of approximately US$48 million including co-financing from the Government of Eswatini, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), conservation organisations, and private sector partners.[3]

Project scope: The initiative will consolidate a Big Five Nature Reserve across approximately 87,000 hectares in the Lubombo landscape, a region spanning Mozambique, South Africa, and Eswatini (the Lubombo Transfrontier Conservation Area and UNESCO-recognised Biosphere Reserve).[3]

Key objectives:[3]

• Strengthen biodiversity protection and ecosystem resilience.
• Establish gender-inclusive community benefit-sharing and livelihood programmes.
• Integrate human–wildlife conflict management into conservation design.
• Enhance eco-tourism infrastructure and positioning Eswatini as a competitive wildlife destination.
• Support climate adaptation and invasive species management.

Community engagement: During project preparation, 827 community members were consulted, with women representing 55% of participants, embedding gender responsiveness throughout governance, benefit-sharing, and livelihood design.[3] This marks a significant shift from top-down conservation toward community-centred approaches.

Ranger Training and Human Rights in Law Enforcement

Recognising the tension between ranger duties and community welfare, the Lubombo Transfrontier Conservation Area (TFCA) COVID-19 response programme invested in ranger capacity-building. Between 2020 and 2024, 53 rangers in Eswatini received formal training in Human Rights in law enforcement, alongside 67 rangers and environmental monitors from partner countries.[6] Training curricula included:

• 4x4 off-road driving and difficult terrain navigation.
• Snake handling and identification.
• River guide training.
• Level one first aid.
• Alien invasive plant control.

This training is intended to improve ranger professionalism, accountability, and community relations, reducing the likelihood of excessive force and building legitimacy for conservation enforcement.

Wildlife Management and Population Control

Big Game Parks and affiliated conservation authorities manage wildlife populations through game capture, translocation, and culling programmes tailored to habitat capacity and conservation priorities.[4] Over 50 years, Big Game Parks has successfully restocked the Sabi Sand Game Reserve (South Africa) with wildebeest and KwaZulu-Natal with Nyala, and has distributed surplus stock to most parks and game areas in Eswatini, a sign of successful population recovery and inter-reserve cooperation.[4]

Infrastructure and Equipment Investment

The TFCA COVID-19 relief grant supported critical infrastructure for anti-poaching and conflict response:

• One vehicle and ranger equipment purchased for the Eswatini National Trust Commission.[6]
• Ranger uniforms and field equipment procured for enhanced patrol capability and detection of illegal activities.[6]
• Water sources established within parks to reduce wildlife encroachment into neighbouring communities.[6]

Policy Review: The Game Amendment Act

Activists and human rights advocates are calling for a review of Eswatini's Game Amendment Act to ensure that conservation enforcement does not occur at the expense of human life and dignity.[2] Proposed reforms include:

• Protection for Emaswatis who are hunting legally (hunting is an important cultural practice) or simply walking near reserves, ensuring they are not killed without due process.[2]
• Stronger accountability mechanisms for ranger use of lethal force.[2]
• Integration of community livelihood and food security into conservation law.

How Tourism and Protected Areas Fund Conflict Mitigation

Eswatini's wildlife tourism sector generates significant revenue for conservation and community development. Visitors to Hlane Royal National Park and Mlilwane Wildlife Sanctuary contribute directly to park management, ranger salaries, and anti-poaching patrols. The May 2026 biodiversity project explicitly aims to strengthen eco-tourism infrastructure and positioning Eswatini as a competitive wildlife destination, with longer-term economic resilience for local communities as a goal.[3]

Travellers booking safari experiences on SafariFind support these initiatives directly: park fees fund ranger training, community benefit-sharing schemes, and wildlife management programmes that reduce conflict and protect species.

Results, Setbacks, and Ongoing Challenges

Conservation Successes

Over 50 years, Eswatini's wildlife recovery is undeniable. Rhino, elephant, and antelope populations have been restored from near-extinction. Rhino poaching has declined significantly since the 1980s, and anti-poaching law enforcement has intensified, with marked improvements in reduced poaching incidents and enhanced wildlife management within conservation areas.[6] International partnerships with zoos and conservation agencies have yielded productive collaboration on endangered species programmes.[4]

Persistent Challenges

Institutional neglect of cross-border issues: The Harloo Private Reserve case demonstrates that private reserve operators may not prioritize boundary maintenance or community engagement, and Eswatini's regulatory oversight may be insufficient to enforce accountability.[1]

Insufficient integration of human well-being: A 2025 evaluation of cross-regional wildlife conservation programmes in eastern and southern Africa found that human well-being and livelihoods were not sufficiently featured in conservation project design.[7] Human–wildlife conflict was identified as a "pressing issue" that was not integrated into most programme implementation, aside from late-stage initiatives like community-based insurance schemes.[7]

Ranger burnout and moral injury: Game rangers in Eswatini face dangerous working conditions, witnessing colleague injuries and deaths from poachers, while simultaneously confronting community poverty.[2] Without adequate support, mental health resources, and clear human rights frameworks, ranger morale and legitimacy erode.

Community distrust: Recurring human–wildlife conflict, combined with perceived conservation-first policies and ranger enforcement tactics, has reduced community trust in park management.[7] Without rebuilding this trust and demonstrating tangible livelihood benefits, communities may withdraw cooperation, making conservation and conflict mitigation harder.

Transboundary coordination gaps: Wildlife movements do not respect political borders. Eswatini's small size and land-locked position mean that effective conflict mitigation requires coordination with South Africa and Mozambique on fence management, wildlife corridors, and disease surveillance.[5] Regional cooperation frameworks are developing but remain incomplete.

How Travellers and Visitors Can Help

• Book safaris responsibly: Choose protected areas and lodges that demonstrate transparent community benefit-sharing, ranger training investments, and human rights commitments.
• Support community-based tourism: Seek out experiences that directly benefit local communities—cultural tours, community conservancies, and lodge employment—to create economic incentives for wildlife coexistence.
• Educate yourself and others: Understand the complexity of human–wildlife conflict: it is not simply a conservation problem, but a livelihood, human rights, and development issue.
• Advocate for accountability: Support organisations calling for transparency in cross-border reserve management, ranger human rights training, and community-led conflict mitigation.
• Minimise your footprint: Follow park rules, stay on designated trails, and respect wildlife distance guidelines to reduce stress on animals and habitats.

Looking Ahead: 2026–2031 and Beyond

The May 2026 launch of the Eswatini Big Five Nature Reserve Project represents a turning point. By explicitly integrating conservation, community livelihoods, and human–wildlife conflict management, the initiative acknowledges that the old model—wildlife protection at the cost of human welfare—is neither ethical nor sustainable.[3]

Success will depend on:

• Sustained funding and political will: US$48 million over five years is substantial, but implementation requires continued government commitment and donor patience.
• Accountability for cross-border operators: Eswatini must enforce boundary maintenance and community engagement standards on private reserves like Harloo, with clear penalties for non-compliance.
• Ranger empowerment and protection: Game rangers must be equipped, trained in human rights, and supported psychologically to carry out their dual mandate: wildlife protection and community respect.
• Community benefit realisation: Livelihood programmes, tourism employment, and benefit-sharing must reach rural households quickly and visibly, rebuilding trust in conservation.
• Transboundary coordination: Eswatini, South Africa, and Mozambique must harmonise fence management, wildlife corridor policies, and disease surveillance protocols to reduce conflict and disease risk.

Last reviewed August 2026. Conservation data changes — see the cited sources for the latest figures.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is human–wildlife conflict, and why is it happening in Eswatini?

Human–wildlife conflict refers to negative interactions between humans and wild animals—crop raids, livestock predation, injury, or death—typically where human settlements overlap with animal territories. In Eswatini, it is driven by habitat fragmentation, inadequate boundary fences on private reserves, growing wildlife populations in bounded areas, and rural communities' dependence on agriculture and grazing. The Harloo Private Reserve case illustrates how institutional neglect of fence maintenance can intensify conflict and disease risk.

Which animals are causing the most conflict in Eswatini?

Bush pigs, jackals, and hyenas are the primary conflict species in southern Eswatini, particularly along the Lavumisa border region. They destroy crops, kill livestock, and—in the case of bush pigs—can transmit foot-and-mouth disease to domestic cattle by contact with infected buffalo. Elephants also pose conflict in agricultural areas, with fencing increasing localized density and raising the risk of raids and human fatalities.

Is Eswatini's wildlife recovering, or are populations declining?

Eswatini's wildlife populations have recovered dramatically over 50 years, with rhino, elephant, and antelope restored from near-extinction. Rhino poaching has declined significantly since the 1980s. However, this success has created a paradox: as populations grow in bounded conservation areas, human–wildlife conflict has intensified, and managing natural migrations and population balance without intensive culling is difficult.

What is the Eswatini Big Five Nature Reserve Project?

Launched in May 2026, this US$48 million five-year initiative aims to establish a consolidated Big Five Nature Reserve across 87,000 hectares in the Lubombo landscape, funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and co-financed by the Government of Eswatini, UNDP, and private partners. It integrates biodiversity protection, community livelihood programmes, human–wildlife conflict management, and eco-tourism development, with gender-inclusive governance and benefit-sharing.

How are rangers trained to handle human–wildlife conflict?

Rangers receive training in wildlife monitoring, anti-poaching patrols, habitat protection, and human–wildlife conflict response. Since 2020, Eswatini has invested in Human Rights training for rangers to improve accountability and reduce excessive force. Training also covers 4x4 driving, snake handling, first aid, and invasive species management to enhance professional capability and community legitimacy.

What is foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), and why does it matter in Eswatini?

Foot-and-mouth disease is a highly contagious viral disease affecting cloven-hoofed animals (cattle, buffalo, pigs). In Eswatini, bush pigs—which cross from South Africa via failing boundary fences—can transmit FMD to domestic livestock by contact with infected buffalo. A widespread FMD outbreak would devastate rural livelihoods and regional livestock trade, making fence maintenance a disease control priority.

How do tourism and safari visits support conflict mitigation?

Tourism revenue from safaris at Eswatini's protected areas—Hlane Royal National Park, Mlilwane Wildlife Sanctuary, and others—funds ranger salaries, anti-poaching patrols, and park management. The May 2026 biodiversity project explicitly aims to strengthen eco-tourism to create economic incentives for wildlife coexistence and support community livelihood programmes that reduce human–wildlife tension.

What are the main criticisms of Eswatini's conservation approach?

Critics argue that conservation has been pursued at the expense of human welfare, with rangers sometimes using excessive force against community members hunting for subsistence or engaging in cultural practices. A 2025 evaluation found that human well-being and community livelihoods were insufficiently integrated into conservation programmes. Activists are calling for a review of the Game Amendment Act to strengthen human rights protections and ranger accountability.

What happened at Harloo Private Reserve?

Harloo Private Reserve, a hunting operation in South Africa's KwaZulu-Natal province bordering Lavumisa communities in Eswatini, has failed to maintain its boundary fence, which was originally designed as a veterinary cordon. Since its deterioration, bush pigs, jackals, and hyenas have established permanent populations in Lavumisa, causing crop and livestock losses and raising FMD transmission risk. As of March 2026, the reserve owner had not responded to requests for mitigation or community engagement plans.

How can I help address human–wildlife conflict when visiting Eswatini?

Book safaris through responsible operators that demonstrate transparent community benefit-sharing, ranger training, and human rights commitments. Support community-based tourism experiences, stay on designated trails, respect wildlife distance guidelines, and advocate for accountability in cross-border reserve management. By visiting, you generate revenue for ranger salaries, anti-poaching efforts, and livelihood programmes that reduce conflict.

What is the Lubombo Transfrontier Conservation Area?

The Lubombo TFCA is a transboundary conservation landscape spanning Eswatini, South Africa, and Mozambique, encompassing the Lubombo Biosphere Reserve—a UNESCO-recognised region of global biodiversity significance. It is the focus of Eswatini's May 2026 Big Five Nature Reserve Project and faces challenges including ecosystem degradation, invasive species, habitat fragmentation, and community poverty.

Will opening fences reduce human–wildlife conflict?

Research suggests that opening or removing fences to permit wildlife corridors may reduce localized elephant density over time by allowing natural dispersal, thereby decreasing conflict in high-risk agricultural areas. However, this requires transboundary coordination with South Africa and Mozambique, community acceptance, and disease surveillance systems to manage FMD and other zoonotic risks. It is not a simple solution.