- In 1973, Nepal’s government established Chitwan National Park, to fight pervasive poaching and habitat degradation, and deployed the military Nepal Army to protect threatened species such as rhinos and tigers.
- The role of the force, which still guards the national parks, remains controversial: proponents credit it with saving wildlife, while critics say it militarized conservation and sidelined Indigenous communities.
- The Maoist conflict from 1996-2006 severely impacted national parks across the country, leading to increased poaching and habitat destruction. But post-conflict initiatives strengthened protection measures, including advanced surveillance and community involvement, says Babu Krishna Karki, a retired general who headed the military’s conservation operations.
- In an interview with Mongabay, Karki emphasizes that the military’s role in national parks is temporary, as it envisages a future where local communities take over conservation efforts.
KATHMANDU — In the 1970s, Nepal’s government faced major challenges conserving the fertile flood plains of the country’s south. The region is the natural habitat of the iconic greater one-horned rhino (Rhinoceros unicornis) and Bengal tiger (Panthera tigris), and their populations were declining rapidly due to poaching and conflict with humans. The forested banks of the Narayani River were also being degraded at unprecedented levels.
To address these problems, then government at the time decided to establish the country’s first national park, Chitwan, now a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
The main idea behind the undertaking was to revive the population of rhinos (as well as tigers and other threatened species) by preventing poaching and habitat destruction, Similarly, the park would help manage land degradation and conserve the region’s outstanding flora and fauna. And the park’s operations, led by local communities, would help them and the government generate revenue from tourism. To achieve these objectives, the government decided to deploy the military.
This deployment, to Chitwan and the other protected areas that would follow over the years, was a turning point in the country’s conservation history. Proponents say Nepal would have lost its rhinos and tigers without their active role, while critics label it militarized conservation that marginalizes local communities, the traditional custodians of the land. Half a century on, the debate continues.
Few people are better placed to reflect on the military’s role in conservation in Nepal than Babu Krishna Karki, a retired military general who worked at several national parks in various capacities during his 34 years in the armed forces.
His last assignment before retiring in 2018 was to head the military’s Directorate of National Parks and Wildlife Reserves, where he had a front seat to the military’s conservation activities. Karki now serves as patron of the NGO Bird Conservation Nepal (BCN) and volunteers as a member of the Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy at the IUCN, the global wildlife conservation authority.

Karki spoke with Mongabay’s Abhaya Raj Joshi recently. The following interview has been translated from Nepali and edited for length and clarity.
Mongabay: Reflecting on the Nepal military’s role in conservation, let’s go back to the early days. How did your predecessors recount those days?
Babu Krishna Karki: To begin with I would like to make it clear that the things I say in this interview are solely based on my opinion and observations, and I don’t represent the military.
The whole idea of modern conservation in Nepal began with the establishment of the world-famous Chitwan National Park. It was a milestone in the country’s history.
Faced with the challenge of land grabs, encroachment and deteriorating forests and riverine ecosystems, the future of the iconic one-horned rhino and its habitat were in peril. To put an end to this, the government sent a Nepal Army garrison to patrol Chitwan.
Major Narraj Thapa, whom I consider to be my role model, was chosen to lead the “rhino patrol.” Thapa, who had earned a reputation for being a resolute and bold leader, disregarded the threat of malaria, and even his deteriorating health, to rid the jungle of land grabbers.
“Bhālu Bhuttē” (a colloquial expression with no literal translation), as he was infamously named by the encroachers, achieved remarkable success and he was promoted to colonel. Chitwan underwent a remarkable transformation, offering permanent peace to the rhinos. Consequently, the park earned its place as a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
He never gave orders from the comfort of a permanent barracks. Thapa rather led a small mobile unit to patrol the vast wilderness. After Chitwan National Park was fortified, the colonel took on the task of creating similar reserves and parks in Bardiya, Shuklaphanta and Koshi Tappu.
Mongabay: What is the situation now? How many soldiers are deployed in the protected areas?
Babu Krishna Karki: When the Army first undertook this task, it didn’t have its permanent barracks, nor did it have enough soldiers. The Army didn’t shoulder this responsibility of patrolling the national parks because it had the resources or the expertise to do. It did so because it was committed to safeguarding Nepal’s natural resources.
In fact, the Army has paid a heavy price for its work in national parks. A total of 116 soldiers have died on duty and many more have been physically incapacitated. These sacrifices, however, have only strengthened its resolve.
Currently, approximately 8,000 personnel, nearly 10% of its force, are deployed within protected areas. They patrol 14 national parks and reserves, including Chitwan, Parsa, Banke, Bardiya, Shukla, Khaptad, Rara, Shey-Phoksundo (Dolpa), Langtang, Sagarmatha, Makalu Barun and Shivapuri.
The Army has also put in place different structures to make its conservation work efficient. For example, within the headquarters, there’s the Directorate of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation, led by a brigadier general. The directorate is in charge of operational strategies, administration and logistics of units working inside protected areas.

Mongabay: Whenever we talk about protected areas in Nepal, the issue of human rights violations, use of force against communities also come up. What is your take on the issue?
Babu Krishna Karki: The Army is very sensitive about respecting the human rights of communities it works with. We must understand that the Army works under the civil administration of the national park. It doesn’t even have its own place to hold suspects. Whenever an arrest is made, it is made by the park authorities; we are not authorized to do it.
Also, the soldiers always try to talk to the people who break the law and warn them not to do it again. They have been trained to refrain from using force unless it’s absolutely necessary. That the Army achieved the “zero-poaching” target without firing a single shot is also a testament to its values. The personnel prioritize deterrence over force, which is by its very nature preventive.
The Army considers itself as the core security of the national park, with community-based antipoaching units working on the periphery. Its job is to support the community and help fight against poachers who may be armed.
Mongabay: The decade-long Maoist conflict (1996-2006) was one of the major events in Nepal’s recent history. How did it impact conservation?
Babu Krishna Karki: The conflict indeed had a major impact on conservation. One of the early rounds of peace talks between the rebels and the government was organized in Bardiya, where I was in charge of the Army unit.
I still remember that during their stay in Bardiya, the then rebel negotiation team confidently declared that they weren’t against conservation, and that protecting nature was a part of our future road map. But their actions contradicted this.
After the failure of the talks, they targeted the national parks and its remote outposts. The Army wasn’t prepared for this.
The national parks soon turned into strongholds for the rebels. This exacted a heavy toll on the rhinos, especially in Bardiya. Dozens of rhinos translocated from Chitwan were killed, rendering the Babai Valley devoid of the animals. It was a similar case with tigers. In Parsa and Shuklaphanta, their numbers plummeted to 4 and 8 and 18 in Bardiya. This led conservationists to imagine a future where tigers would no longer roam these parks.
Because the Army couldn’t extensively patrol the national parks, timber smuggling surged. This has been described as one of the darkest periods for conservation in Nepal.
Mongabay: What was the aftermath of the conflict like?
Babu Krishna Karki: When the peace accord was finally signed in 2006, national parks lay desolate, local communities estranged, conservation teams fractured, partner organizations disoriented, and young conservationists disheartened. The conflict had also impacted the vital bond between the Nepal Army and civilians.
The Army took full responsibility for the situation and committed to a “do or die” mission to restore the national parks and repopulate the wildlife as soon as possible.
To honor this commitment, the force elevated its national park duty from a secondary responsibility to a primary mission. The leadership decided to assign the best of the force to national park duty, and conduct specialized monitoring. Field units were equipped with more resources, and cutting-edge communication capabilities.
Dog squads were mobilized, and troops adopted real-time smart patrolling techniques. A joint operations room was established, to facilitate coordination between park officials and security. To deter illegal activities, the Army also employed surveillance aircraft equipped with high-resolution cameras. Posts destroyed by the rebels were also rebuilt and protected area boundaries were reinforced.
To fight illegal wildlife trade, the Nepal Army started collaborating with the Nepal Police’s Central Investigation Bureau [CIB]. It further encouraged the mobilization of local youth to bolster surveillance in buffer zones, deter suspicious activity by outsiders, and sharpen intelligence-gathering networks. This led to the establishment and operation of community-based antipoaching units, empowering communities to take ownership of their natural heritage.
To enhance its conservation efforts, the Nepal Army established the Directorate of Forest and Environment Security, a specialized body that has become integral to activities like afforestation, wetland creation, and their ongoing preservation. After decades of working in conservation, the army also launched the School of Nature Conservation to train its human resources in its conservation duty.

Mongabay: The Army has been saying that its work in the protected areas is part of its temporary mission and that it will leave someday. Could you explain how?
Babu Krishna Karki: Yes, the national park duty is part of a temporary mission. The Army understands that in the long run it is the communities themselves that will be aware and capable of conserving the flora and fauna.
When the community is fully literate and has adequate economic resources, the Army’s job will be done, and it will return to its barracks. I am hopeful that the day will come soon.
That is why the Army advocates for a future with zero illegal intrusions into conservation areas, zero human-wildlife conflict, zero wildlife casualties on highways, and zero ecological damage from wildfires or human-induced disasters.
It envisions a day when illegal wildlife trafficking is eradicated and conservation efforts remain free from political influence or pressure. These aspirations align with the Nepal Army’s broader goal of establishing green governance, where remote and impoverished buffer zone communities can thrive under good governance and equitable prosperity.
Mongabay: What would be the immediate steps you’d recommend the government to achieve this goal?
Babu Krishna Karki: To improve the effectiveness of the Army’s efforts, it is crucial to equip the paramilitary Armed Police Force [APF], which has been stationed at the borders, with specialized training and resources. The government needs to enable them to join conservation teams. This would be instrumental in curbing cross-border illegal trade.
With some conservation areas still lacking direct Army presence, it is also vital to improve cooperation with the CIB. This would unite all agencies into an extensive, coordinated force that can tackle poaching as well as wildlife crime.
Banner image: Babu Krishna Karki with his camera photographing wildlife. Image courtesy of Babu Krishna Karki.
Abhaya Raj Joshi is a staff writer for Nepal at Mongabay. Find him on 𝕏 @arj272.
Introducing wildlife crime to Nepal’s law enforcement: Interview with Prasanna Yonzon