Status and conservation of the snow leopard Panthera uncia in Api Nampa Conservation Area, Nepal
GOP A L KHANA L,LAXMAN PRASAD POUDY AL,BIS H N U PRASAD DEV K O T A RISHI RANAB H A T and P ER WEGGE
Abstract The snow leopard Panthera uncia is globally threatened and reliable information on its abundance, distribution and prey species is a prerequisite for its conser- vation. In October–November 2014 we assessed the distri- bution of the snow leopard in the recently established Api Nampa Conservation Area in the Nepal Himalayas. Within selected blocks we conducted sign surveys and counted the number of bharal Pseudois nayaur, its principal wild prey, along transects totalling 106 km.We recorded 203 putative snow leopard signs at an encounter rate of 1.91 signs/km. Generalized linear models of the number of signs detected per transect showed that elevation had a posi- tive influence and human activities a negative influence on sign encounter rate; prey abundance had only a weak posi- tive influence on sign encounter rate. Within the effectively surveyed area of c. 200 km2, we counted 527 bharal at an es- timated density of 2.28 animals/km2. Recruitment of bharal was low, estimated at 48 kids/100 adult females, most likely a result of poor or overgrazed rangeland. We estimate the total number of bharal in this conservation area to be .1,000, a prey base that could sustain 6–9 snow leopards. Based on our field observations, we identified human dis- turbance and habitat degradation associated with extraction of non-timber forest products, livestock grazing, and poach- ing as the main threats to the snow leopard. Standardized sign surveys, preferably supplemented by sampling with remote cameras or with genetic analysis of scats would provide robust baseline information on the abundance of snow leopards in this conservation area.
Keywords Api Nampa Conservation Area, bharal, Nepal, Panthera uncia, Pseudois nayaur, snow leopard
GOPAL KHANAL* (Corresponding author) Department of Forests, Ministry of Forests and Environment, Government of Nepal, Singhadurbar Kathmandu, Nepal. E-mail
khanal.joshipur@
gmail.com
*Also at: Centre for Ecological Studies, Lalitpur, Nepal
LAXMAN PRASAD POUDYAL and RISHI RANABHAT Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation, Ministry of Forests and Environment, Government of Nepal, Kathmandu, Nepal
BISHNU PRASAD DEVKOTA Institute of Forestry, Pokhara Campus, Pokhara, Nepal
PER WEGGE Faculty of Environmental Sciences and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, Norway
Introduction
carnivores (Snow Leopard Network, 2014). Its patchy distri- bution spans c. 2.8 million km2 of high mountains across 12 Asian countries (McCarthy et al., 2016). Based on field stud- ies, extrapolation of density estimates to non-surveyed areas, expert opinion and interviews, the global population is estimated to be 7,446–7,996, and in 2017 the species was re- categorized, from Endangered to Vulnerable, on the IUCN Red List, suggesting that threats to snow leopards have di- minished (McCarthy et al., 2017). Nevertheless, burgeoning livestock grazing pressure on its natural prey (Mishra et al., 2004), poaching (Li & Lu, 2014; Nowell et al., 2016), and escalating conflicts with herder communities over livestock depredation (Bagchi & Mishra, 2006; Suryawanshi et al., 2013) continue to threaten the species. As many as 221–450 snow leopards are killed annually in retaliation by herder communities or as a result of becoming accidentally ensnared in traps set for other species (Nowell et al., 2016). Habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation from infra- structure development (Zaller, 2016), resource extraction (Farrington, 2016) and changing climate patterns (Li et al., 2016) have exacerbated anthropogenic impacts on snow leopard habitat. In 2013 governments of the snowleopard range countries
T
Received 5 July 2017. Revision requested 15 January 2018. Accepted 18 January 2018. First published online 30 August 2018. Oryx, 2020, 54(3), 421–428 © 2018 Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605318000145
initiated the Global Snow Leopard Ecosystem Protection Program to combat threats and strengthen transnational collaboration for snow leopard conservation (Snow Leopard Working Secretariat, 2013). Knowledge of the abundance and distribution of the snow leopard across its range is central to the success of the Programme, but reliable information on population status and local threats is un- available for large parts of the species’ range, both within and outside protected areas. Less than 15% of the species’ distribution range has been adequately surveyed (Snow Leopard Network, 2014). As a result, conservation decisions, including those of the Program, are based in part on extra- polations of density estimates to non-surveyed areas. Assessments of snow leopard conservation status in unsur- veyed regions across the species’ range are thus urgently re- quired for informing management decisions. The 13,000 km2 of suitable habitat in the Nepal Himalayas has been estimated to support 301–400 snow
he snow leopard Panthera uncia, although globally threatened, is one of the least studied large mammalian
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148
