Suspected poachers have cut about 5km of the electric fence around Murchison Falls National Park, Uganda’s largest conservation area. The Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) has reported this incident, which may cause human-wildlife conflicts in the region.
On Monday, the Warden in charge of Law enforcement, Mr. Movadi Turyatemba confirmed the vandalization of more than 5 kilometres of the electric fence around Murchison Falls National Park in Oyam District. He added that an investigation has been launched to find out who is behind the vandalisation and arrest the culprits.
He suspects poachers and possibly members of surrounding communities to be behind the vandalisation of the fences, creating openings through which wild animals could stray into the local communities.
“Every day we must send our team for inspections because they normally damage this fence at night, and more than 5 kilometres of fence were vandalised around Oyam district,” he confirmed to the press.
Mr. Turyatemba reported that the vandalised section is approximately 5km and the Uganda Wildlife Authority suspects poachers to be behind the destruction of the section of the park. The affected areas are in the parishes of Juma parish, Zambia parish, Akuridia parish and Bombay parish, in the sub-counties of Myene and Kamdini, Oyam district.
The suspicion surrounding nearby communities should, however, be distinguished from evidence against particular individuals. The account provided does not establish who cut the fence or confirm the motive behind each damaged section. Establishing those details would help avoid blaming residents who may themselves depend on the barrier for protection.
He warns that the now-open part of the park could allow wild animals to stray into the neighboring communities, thus increasing the human-wildlife conflicts that have been reduced since UWA erected the fence.
The damage raises questions about how the affected boundary can be secured while investigations continue. Identifying the people responsible and restoring the damaged sections are separate tasks, both of which matter to residents living close to the park. An investigation alone cannot close the openings left in the fence.
Repair work would need to address the condition of the affected fence as a whole. Replacing cut wires may be only one part of restoring a functioning barrier. Inspection can help determine whether other components have been damaged and whether the repaired sections connect properly with the remaining fence.
In 2022, the Uganda Wildlife Authority embarked on a project to install 126 kilometres of electric fencing around the Murchison Falls National Park to curb wildlife conflicts in areas of Buliisa, Masindi, Nwoya, Oyam and Kiryandongo Districts.
The residents in the areas complained about frequent invasions of wild animals into the communities destroying crops and at times threatening life.
For households near the boundary, the concern extends beyond damage to property. A family that loses part of its harvest may have less food available and less produce to sell. Repeated losses can also make residents feel that the costs of living beside a protected area fall heavily on them.
The initiative also aimed at reducing poaching and illegal entries into the protected area. By establishing clear boundaries, the Uganda Wildlife Authority hoped to foster peaceful coexistence between humans and wildlife while preserving the rich biodiversity of the Murchison Falls Conservation Area.
Electric fencing requires continued care after installation. Vegetation, damaged posts, and broken connections can affect how a barrier functions. This makes maintenance part of the original conservation investment, rather than an occasional response after destruction has occurred. A fence offers less protection when faults remain unnoticed, or repairs are delayed.
Regular inspection also creates an opportunity to identify weak points before they become larger gaps. However, the length of a protected boundary can make this work demanding. Reports from people living nearby could help direct attention to damaged sections, provided there is a clear and accessible way to contact park staff.
Human Wildlife Conflicts in Uganda’s National Parks
Human wildlife conflicts are still a major challenge around protected areas in Africa
In Uganda, communities around Uganda’s national parks face challenges, and incidents of animals invading farms and human settlements are common, causing crop destruction and even loss of life due to elephantine incursions.
As a result, local communities at times also kill wild animals, wiping out valuable animal species. There have been reports of lion poisoning in the Queen Elizabeth National Park in the past five years. The population of lions in Lake Mburo National Park was also wiped out by the pastoral communities that live adjacent to the park.
According to UWA, human–wildlife conflicts remain a national challenge, and the conservation body asserts that this issue can be best confronted through electric fencing of Uganda’s national parks, among other solutions.
A practical response to conflict also needs to consider what happens after an animal crosses the boundary. Residents need clear guidance on reporting an incident and keeping people away from danger. Trying to surround, chase, or confront a large wild animal can expose people to further harm during an already tense situation.
Discussion between park authorities and neighboring villages can help identify where problems occur most often. Farmers may be able to describe repeated entry points or explain when guarding crops becomes difficult. Such information can guide decisions about inspections and response arrangements without assuming that the same approach suits every settlement.
Trust will also depend on how concerns are handled. Residents who report damaged fencing or crop losses need to know that their information has been received. Clear explanations about the next steps can reduce uncertainty, particularly where people fear another encounter with wildlife before a damaged section is repaired.
For the affected communities, the immediate priority is a secure boundary and a reliable response to wildlife entering settlements. The longer task is keeping that protection working through routine maintenance, cooperation with residents, and investigations that establish responsibility for deliberate damage. These measures would address both the damaged infrastructure and the concerns of people living nearby.
