|
Fox, J. L. (1974). An ecological survey of the proposed Langtang National Park.
Abstract: Reports probable sighn of snow leopard at two high elevation points in the Langtang National Park
|
|
|
Schaller, G. B., Hong, L., Talipu, J., & Mingjiang, R. Q. (1988). The snow leopard in Xinjiang, China. Oryx, 22(4), 197–204.
Abstract: Snow leopards live in the mountains of Central Asia, their range stretching from Afganastan to Lake Baikal in Eastern Tibet. They are endangered throughout their range, being hunted as predators of mains livestock and for their skin. Much of the snow leopards range lies in China, but not enough is known about its staus there for effective conservation. As part of a project to assess China's high altitude wildlife resources the authors conducted a survey in Xinjiang- a vast arid region of deserts and mountains. Although the snow leopard and other wildlife have declined steeply in Xinjiang in recent decades, the cta still persists and one area has the potential to become one of the best refuges for the species in its entire range. Its future in XInjiang, howevere, depends on well protected reserves, enforcement of regulations against killing the animal, and proper managemnt of the prey species.
|
|
|
Cunha, S. F. (1994). Summits, snow leopards, farmers, and fighters: Will politics prevent a national park in the high Pamirs of Tajikistan? Focus; New York, 44(1), 17–22.
Abstract: Tajikistan is the smallest, poorest and one of the most culturally diverse of the former Soviet Republics. The physical and cultural geography of the Pamir Mountains in Tajikistan are described, and recent legislative action taken to create a proposed park and civil strife that may stop the park's creation are discussed.
|
|
|
Filonov K.F. (1996). Large terrestrial mammals in the reserves of Russia: their status and prospects of conservation.
Abstract: The authors make an analysis of fauna of large mammals in 68 nature reserves. There are 10 carnivores and 17 ungulates. Wolf, brown bear, wolverine and lynx appeared to be more widely spread. Dhole, snow leopard, tiger, Himalayan bear have limited distribution and low density. Hey have recorded in a few nature reserves. Among the ungulates wild boar, musk deer, red deer, roe deer, moose, reindeer and aurochs are more widely spread.
|
|
|
Bannikov A.G. (1966). Mountains of Middle Asia and Kazakhstan.
Abstract: The data on geographical location, plants and animals of mountain nature reserves of Middle Asia and Kazakhstan are given. Snow leopard and its preys (wild ibexes and sheep) were recorded in both Almaty and Aksu Jabagly nature reserves.
|
|
|
Mallon, D. P. (1991). Status and Conservation of Large Mammals in Ladakh. Biological Conservation, 56(1), 101–119.
Abstract: The distribution and status of large mammals was surveyed in a 15 000 km2 study area in Ladakh, India. Snow leopard Panthera uncia, wolf Canis lupus, ibex Capra ibex and bharal Pseudois nayaur have an almost continuous distribution throughout; Ladakh urial Ovis vignei, Tibetan argali Ovis ammon, wild ass Equus kiang and brown bear Ursus arctos have a limited distribution. Snow leopard prefer lower altitudes and rocky, undisturbed areas. Ibex and bharal occupy similar rocky habitats but their ranges are mostly separate, with a small area of overlap. The Ladakh urial shows signs of recovery from an earlier decline. Natural resources are widely used for fuel, fodder and grazing, but favourable factors include a low human population, low level of hunting and the existence of some uninhabited and undisturbed areas. A comprehensive Protected Area Network has been proposed.
|
|
|
Ismagilov M.I. (1983). Protection of rare mammals in Kazakhstan.
Abstract: The following rare mammals can be found in nature reserves of Kazakhstan: argali, goitered gazelle, kulan, snow leopard, stone marten, Tien Shan brown bear, manul, Turkistan lynx, Menzbier's marmot, and porcupine. The rest of rare mammal species (three insectivorous species, seven rodent, eight predator, and two ungulate species) are outside of protected areas and require special protection measures.
|
|
|
Bhatnagar, Y. V. (2008). Relocation from wildlife reserves in the Greater and Trans-Himalayas: Is it necessary? (Vol. 6).
Abstract: The Greater and Trans-Himalayan tracts are cold deserts that have severe seasonal and resource scarce environments. Covering the bulk of Indian Himalayas, they are a rich repository of biodiversity values and ecosystem services. The region has a large protected area (PA) network which has not been completely effective in conserving these unique values. The human population densities are much lower (usually < 1 per sq km) than in most other parts of the country (over 300 to a sq km). However, even such small populations can come into conflict with strict PA laws that demand large inviolate areas, which can mainly be achieved through relocation of the scattered settlements. In this paper, I reason that in this landscape relocation is not a tenable strategy for conservation due to a variety of reasons. The primary ones are that wildlife, including highly endangered ones are pervasive in the larger landscape (unlike the habitat 'islands' of the forested ecosystems) and existing large PAs usually encompass only a small proportion of this range. Similarly, traditional use by people for marginal cultivation, biomass extraction and pastoralism is also as pervasive in this landscape. There does exist pockets of conflict and these are probably increasing owing to a variety of changes relating to modernisation. However, scarce resources, the lack of alternatives and the traditional practice of clear-cut division of all usable areas and pastures between communities make resettlement of people outside PAs extremely difficult. It is reasoned that given the widespread nature of the wildlife and pockets of relatively high density, it is important to prioritise these smaller areas for conservation in a scenario where they form a mosaic of small 'cores' that are more effectively maintained with local support and that enable wildlife to persist. These ideas have recently gained widespread acceptance in both government and conservation circles and may soon become part of national strategy for these areas.
|
|
|
Koshkarev E.P. (1990). Key areas of snow leopard's habitat as main conservation objects (Vol. Part. 1.).
Abstract: The most vulnerable key areas within the snow leopard habitat are East Kazakhstan (an area of 48,000 square km) with no protected areas network established, and South Siberia (131,000 square km), where snow leopard is protected in three nature reserves. These areas are distant from main part of the habitat, isolated and have more extreme conditions. In Central Asia's key area (213,000 square km) linked to a main Chinese-Afghani part of the habitat, snow leopard was found in 11 nature reserves and two national parks. For reliable protection of this species it would be expedient to strengthen the role of the mountain nature reserves by means of extension and amalgamation of the areas, and other measures.
|
|
|
Chundawat, R. S., & Rawat G.S. (1990). Food Habits of Snow Leopard in Ladakh, India.
Abstract: The snow leopard has remained little studied in the past, and most of the information available is either in the form of natural history or anecdotal notes. The inaccessibility of the terrain and its secretive habits make this one of the more difficult animals to study in the wild. In the past decade, several ecological surveys were conducted in India, Nepal, China and Mongolia, which gave us information on the status and distribution of snow leopard (Jackson, Mallon, Fox, Schaller, Chundawat) A detailed study in Nepal through light on its secretive habits ( Jackson and Ahlborn, 1989). Even then little is known about its feeding habits. The present paper discusses this aspect from a study which was part of a detailed study conducted on the ecology of snow leopard in India from October 1987 to Feburary 1990.
|
|