Using data collected from 217 respondents living near the Kafue National Park in Zambia, we assess how households value alternative policy interventions aimed at minimizing poaching. Building on the current debate on community-based wildlife conservation policy, we presented households with different combinations of agro-inputs packs donation, access to a micro-credit facility and donation of dairy cows for milking. These were proposed as alternative policy interventions to compliment the traditional command and control policy framework, implemented through a rise in frequency of game patrols and increase in minimum jail sentences for poaching offenses. We use a discrete choice experiment to estimate policy preferences and potential trade-offs between poaching and proposed alternative policy instruments. Our findings show that increase in each of the proposed interventions could significantly contribute to the well-being of respondents, potentially reducing the number of hunting trips a poacher would make per month. Similarly, a rise in the deterrent interventions have significant, but weak effect on respondents' choice to poach. The above carrot and stick instruments could be deferentially applied based on cost and effectiveness of each combination to achieve desired goals.