Abstract: During a six-week period in Hemis National Park, Ladakh, India, snow leopards killed 10 sheep and goats and one leopard gained access to a livestock pen and killed many of the animals inside. Dholes also killed sheep and goats, and a wolf killed a young horse. Residents routinely remove snow leopard cubs from their dens to limit future damage by this species. How to deal with the plight of the people living in the area while still protecting the endangered species are major concerns of the International Snow Leopard Trust, which manages Hemis National Park. lgh.

Abstract: Livestock depredation by the endangered snow leopard (Panthera uncia) _is an increasingly contentious issue in Himalayan villages, especially in or near protected areas. Mass attacks in which as many as 100 sheep and goats are killed in a single incident inevitably result in retaliation by local villagers. This article describes a community-based conservation initiative to address this problem in Hemis National Park, India. Human-wildlife conflict is alleviated by predator-proofing villagers' nighttime livestock pens and by enhancing household incomes in environmentally sensitive and culturally compatible ways. The authors have found that the highly participatory strategy described here (Appreciative Participatory Planning and Action-APPA) leads to a sense of project ownership by local stakeholders, communal empowerment, self-reliance, and willingness to co-exist with
snow leopards. The most significant conservation outcome of this process is the protection from retaliatory poaching of up to five snow leopards for every village's livestock pens that are made predator-proof._

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.