424 G. Khanal et al.
TABLE 1 Results of transect surveys for snow leopard Panthera uncia signs conducted at six sites within Api Nampa Conservation Area (Fig. 1) during October–November, 2014.
Site
Tinkar Nampa Ghusa Sitaula
Khandeswori Rapla Total
Total transect length (km)
39.14 23.62 20.62 9.57 5.64 7.62
106.21
No. of transects
21 11 8 5 3 3
51
No. of signs (per km)
92 (2.35) 43 (1.82) 36 (1.75) 16 (1.67) 8 (1.42) 8 (1.05)
203(1.91)
(Pearson correlation coefficients were all,0.60) and hence all were used in the regression analyses. Elevation was the most important variable in determining the encounter rate of snow leopard signs along transects, followed by a negative effect of human use (Tables 2 & 3). Snow leopard signs were also positively associated with number of bharal detected from the transect, but the relationship was not sta- tistically significant (Table 3). We counted a total of 527 individual bharal in 32 groups, comprising 30%males, 38% females, 14% yearlings and 18% young (Table 4), with amean group size of 16.5 (range 6–48). The highest density of bharal was in the Tinkar block and the lowest in Sitaula, and the greatest numbers of bharal were sighted at 4,000–4,500 m(Fig. 2). The overall density of bharal within the effectively surveyed area of c. 200 km2 was estimated to be 2.28 ± SE 0.49/km2. The adult sex ratio was female biased, with 77 males/100 adult females. Overall recruitment rate was 48 young/100 females. The ratio of yearlings to young was 0.83 : 1, indicating a 17% mortality rate of kids, assuming a stationary age structure and similar recruitment rate to that of the previous 2 years. Approximately 18,100 kg of bharal biomass was estimated to be available within the effectively sampled area. This biomass could support 3–4 snow leopards. Based on our occupancy surveys, c. 600 km2 of suitable habitat is
No. of scrapes (per km)
40 (1.02) 19 (0.8) 15 (0.72) 8 (0.83) 4 (0.71) 3 (0.39) 89 (0.84)
No. of pugmarks (per km)
31 (0.79) 14 (0.59) 12 (0.58) 4 (0.41) 3 (0.53) 3 (0.39) 67 (0.63)
No. of scats (per km)
16 (0.41) 8 (0.34) 8 (0.39) 3 (0.31) 1 (0.17) 2 (0.26) 38 (0.35)
available for bharal and snow leopards in Api Nampa. With an estimated density of 2.28 bharal/km2 in the sur- veyed blocks, we estimate that the suitable habitat (31%or 600 km2 of the whole 1,903 km2 protected area) could sup- port a minimum of 1,000 bharal. Considering 40 kg as the mean weight of an individual bharal, this total population is c. 40,000 kg of biomass, which, based on the predator–prey ratio (Oli, 1994), could sustain 6–9 snow leopards.
Discussion
Our study provides the first evidence of snow leopard pres- ence in Api Nampa Conservation Area, Nepal. The infor- mation on the estimated number of snow leopards and bharal biomass and density reported here will help in setting up priorities for conservation, research and management.
Snow leopard distribution
We recorded snow leopard presence in five of the six blocks surveyed. Although the rate at which we encountered snow leopard signs (1.9/km for all blocks combined) was lower than reported in other protected areas of Nepal (Kanchenjunga Conservation Area: 5.4 signs/km, Thapa,
TABLE 2 Poisson regression models describing the occurrence of the snow leopard in Api Nampa Conservation Area (Fig. 1) during October–November 2014, ranked according to the Akaike information criterion adjusted for small sample size (AICc).
Model1 Elevation + HumanDist
Elevation + HumanDist + Prey Elevation
Prey + Elevation Prey + HumanDist HumanDist Prey
Invariant/null
K2 3
4 2 3 3 2 2 1
AICc
241.47 242.46 252.95 254.17 258.27 267.10 290.46 305.60
ΔAICc3 0.00
0.99
11.48 12.70 16.80 25.63 44.99 64.13
1Elevation (m); HumanDist, presence/absence of recent human use of the area; Prey, number of bharal encountered. 2Number of parameters. 3Difference between the AICc value of the best-supported model and successive models. 4Akaike model weight.
Oryx, 2020, 54(3), 421–428 © 2018 Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605318000145 loglink
−117.48 −146.79 −124.35 −123.83 −125.88 −131.43 −143.11 −151.76
Wi 4
0.62 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
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
