Local attitudes to the proposed translocation of blue sheep Pseudois nayaur to Sagarmatha National Park, Nepal
JONA T H A N H. HANSON,MAURICE SCHUTGENS,RIN ZI N P. LAMA ACHYUT ARYA L and MAHESHWAR DHAK A L
Abstract Translocations are an important tool for the con- servation of biodiversity, but although ecological feasibility studies are frequently conducted prior to implementation, social feasibility studies that consider how local communi- ties perceive such projects are less common. The transloca- tion of blue sheep Pseudois nayaur to Sagarmatha National Park, Nepal, has been proposed, to reduce livestock depre- dation by snow leopards Panthera uncia by providing an al- ternative prey base in addition to the small population of Himalayan thar Hemitragus jemlahicus. This study used systematic sampling, a quantitative questionnaire and quali- tative interviews within the Park to provide data on the so- cial viability of the proposed translocation. Quantitative analysis revealed moderate levels of support but qualitative analysis suggested that there are significant concerns about the proposal. In addition,multiple regression analysis found that women and livestock owners were significantly less supportive, although the model had low explanatory power. Potential crop damage and competition for forage were frequently cited as concerns, especially amongst those with a high level of dependence on natural resources. Given the mixed response to the proposed translocation of blue sheep to the Everest region, alleviating the reservations of local residents is likely to be key to any further consul- tation, planning or implementation.
Keywords Attitudes, blue sheep, human–wildlife conflict, Panthera uncia, Pseudois nayaur, Sagarmatha National Park, snow leopard, translocation
JONATHAN H. HANSON* (Corresponding author) Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 3EN, UK E-mail
jonnyhanson61@hotmail.com
MAURICE SCHUTGENS Space for Giants, Nanyuki, Kenya
RINZIN P. LAMA Workgroup on Endangered Species, J.F. Blumenbach Institute of Zoology and Anthropology, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
ACHYUT ARYAL† Charles Perkins Centre, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
MAHESHWAR DHAKAL Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation, Kathmandu, Nepal
*Also at: Jubilee, 47b Glenarm road, Larne, BT40 1DT, UK †Also at: Department of Forest and Resource Management, Toi Ohomai Institute of Technology, Rotorua, New Zealand
Received 4 August 2017. Revision requested 2 October 2017. Accepted 18 January 2018. First published online 5 November 2018.
Supplementary material for this article is available at
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605318000157
Introduction
paid to their role in promoting human–wildlife coexistence. Unlike the term human–wildlife conflict, understandings of human–wildlife coexistence distinguish between impacts on humans caused by wildlife, and conflicts between humans over wildlife, typically between wildlife conservationists and those involved in alternative land uses (Marchini, 2014; Redpath et al., 2015; Mishra et al., 2016). Conflict scenarios frequently involve large mammals, especially carnivores (Ripple et al., 2014), and translocation has been suggested as a means to remove problem individuals and promote human–carnivore coexistence (Inskip & Zimmerman, 2009; Treves et al., 2009). The translocation of prey species to reduce livestock depredation by predatory species, how- ever, has received limited consideration. In comparison to the biological and ecological aspects of conservation translocations, the socio-economic and polit- ical ramifications are poorly understood or have been neglected altogether (Armstrong & Seddon, 2008), despite IUCN guidelines that promote social feasibility assess- ments as a necessary complement to biological assessments (IUCN/SSC, 2013). A number of studies, however, have ex- plored these dimensions, including translocations of prairie dogs Cynomys spp. in theUSA (Reading&Kellert, 1993) and of European bison Bison bonasus in Lithuania (Balčiauskas & Kazlauskas, 2014). Qualitative data can enhance such as- sessments (White et al., 2005), allowing insights into the varying factors that influence attitudes towards large mam- mals (Kansky & Knight, 2014), and the intrinsic and extrin- sic motivations that influence these attitudes (De Young, 1996; Richardson & Loomis, 2009). Intrinsic motivations refer to reasons related to nature in and of itself, and extrin- sic motivations refer more to the impacts of, or use of, na- ture, whether positive or negative. In Sagarmatha National Park, Nepal, the translocation of
A
a population of blue sheep Pseudois nayaur to increase the availability of wild prey and thus decrease the number of livestock depredations by snow leopards Panthera uncia
Oryx, 2020, 54(3), 344–350 © 2018 Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605318000157
lthough translocations are an important tool for the conservation of biodiversity, less attention has been
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
