The effectiveness of statutory anti-grazing regulation depends not only on legal restrictions but also on the governance arrangements through which policies are implemented and disputes are managed. This study examines how perceived enforcement practices, institutional capacity, stakeholder participation, and local conflict-management mechanisms relate to perceptions of armed farmer–herder conflict in Benue State, Nigeria. A quantitative cross-sectional survey was conducted in Guma, Logo, Katsina-Ala, and Ukum Local Government Areas. Of 400 planned respondents, 382 valid questionnaires were analysed using descriptive statistics and Goodman–Kruskal Gamma coefficients in IBM SPSS Statistics, with significance assessed at the 0.05 level. Perceived biased or politicised enforcement was positively associated with perceived attack escalation (γ = .319, p < .001). Associations were also observed between conflict perceptions and herder participation in policy planning (γ = .224, p < .001), weak traditional dispute-resolution mechanisms (γ = .247, p < .001), and dialogue platforms (γ = −.333, p < .001). However, perceived incomplete enforcement across local government areas, insufficient rural government presence, and the adequacy of Livestock Guard training were not statistically significantly associated with the relevant conflict perceptions. The findings highlight the importance of examining statutory regulation alongside procedural fairness, inclusive policymaking, and locally accessible mechanisms for managing disputes. The study contributes a governance-oriented interpretation of anti-grazing regulation while recognising that its cross-sectional, perception-based evidence establishes associations rather than causal effects or independently verified changes in armed attacks.