Abstract: The habitat for both humans and snow leopards in Central Asia is marginal, the ecosystem fragile. The struggle for humans to survive has often, unfortunately, brought them into conflict with the region's dwindling snow leopard populations. Herders commonly see leopards as a threat to their way of life and well-being. Efforts to improve the living conditions of humans must consider potential impacts on the environment. Likewise, conservation initiatives cannot ignore humans as elements of the landscape with a right to live with dignity and pride. Based on these principles, the International Snow Leopard Trust has developed a new conservation model that addresses the needs of all concerned.
We call it Snow Leopard Enterprises..

Abstract: It describes geographical, soil, climatic and hydrological features of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan. Types of economic activities including fur-trade are described, too. Game preserves are classified, and list of game fauna species inhabiting these republics is given. Snow leopard lives in rocky mountains and is hunted very rarely.

Abstract: A high percentage of rare species in Central Asia experience limited conditions for distribution. Geographic centers with higher species diversity are generally constrained in terms of territory: they are formed when ranges overlap. But in Central Asia and along its borders with Russia, centers of biodiversity overlap at the very marginal edges of ranges. Central Asian species cross into Russian territory, where desert and steppe are replaced by thick forest. Here the northern borders of their ranges are sharply fragmented and isolated. Typical examples for Central Asia are the ranges of the cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus), Asian leopard (Panthera pardus caucasica), striped hyena (Hyaena hyaena), Bukhara deer (Census elaphus bactrianus), markhor (Capra falconeri), blue sheep (Pseudois nayauf) and argali (Ovis ammon). In Russia are the Altai subspecies of argali, the Siberian argali (O.a.ammon), the mountain goat (Capra sibirica), Mongolian gazelle (Procapra gutturosa), snow leopard (Uncia uncia), Pallas' cat (Felis manul), dhole (Cuon alpinus), grey marmot (Marmota baibacina), Mongolian marmot (M. sibirica) and tolai hare (Lepus tolai). Where the numbers o f individuals has fallen to extreme lows, the most effective mechanism for species survival may be supporting the integrity of ranges, in order to preserve population exchanges between neighboring groups. The geographic location of reserves and other protected territories is vitally important for the survival of Central Asian species, given the acute fragmentation of their ranges. These reserves should include significant, viable centers of population the key places. Wherever the creation of permanent protected territories is impossible, a new tactic must be found, such as introducing temporary limitations on the use of land for agriculture and hunting. But all protected territories, whether temporary or permanent, should be connected, forming a core and periphery. The marginal range areas must not be forgotten, if total protection of endangered populations is to be accomplished.

Abstract: In 1980-s, in Central Asia there were 1,500-1,700 snow leopards: 800-900 in Kyrgyzstan, 500 in Tajikistan, 200 in Kazakhstan, and 100 in Uzbekistan. During the last century the number of snow leopard was constantly decreasing, though a its drastic reduction was observed after the collapse of the Soviet Union because of increased poaching for snow leopard and its objects of prey. The highest level of poaching was observed to occur in Kyrgyzstan. Kyrgyzstan's population of snow leopard reduced to 200 animals. A decrease of snow leopard number in other parts of its habitat with less intense hunting (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, south-west Kyrgyzstan) was mostly because of depletion of food resources (population of ungulates reduced five eight times). The reasons are corruption and unemployment. In order to improve the situation it is required to improve regulatory framework and replicate existing positive experience in economic motivation of nature protection activities.

Abstract: Asia’s rangelands and mountains are strongholds for several endemic ungulate species. Little is known about the ecology of these species because of the region’s remoteness and the lack of robust scientific studies. Hunting, habitat modification, increased livestock grazing, disease and development are the major threats to the species. There is an urgent need for better monitoring to identify the size, distribution and dynamics of the populations of these species, and the threats to them, for effective conservation. The feasibility of standard scientific monitoring is greatly influenced by the remoteness of the region, the pre-existing scientific ideology, lack of expertise in the latest monitoring
methods and awareness of biases and errors, and low capacity and logistical and financial constraints. We review the existing methods used for monitoring ungulates, identify the practical and institutional challenges to effective monitoring in Central Asia and categorize the methods based on various criteria so that researchers can plan better monitoring studies suited to particular species. We illustrate these issues using examples from several contrasting ungulate species. We recommend that scientific surveys should be complemented by increases in participatory monitoring, involving local people. The future of ungulate monitoring in Central Asia lies in a better recognition of the existing errors and biases in monitoring programmes and methods, allocation of more monitoring effort in terms of manpower, finances and logistics, understanding of robust scientific
methods and sampling theory and changing the scientific culture, as well as a commitment to ensuring that we monitor the things that matter.