Abstract: Applied ecology lies at the intersection of human societies and natural systems. Consequently, applied ecologists are constantly challenged as to how best to use ecological knowledge to influence the management of ecosystems (Habel et al. 2013). As Hulme (2011) has pointed out, to do so effectively we must leave our ivory towers and engage with stakeholders. This engagement is especially important and challenging in areas of the world where poverty, weak institutions and poor governance structures conspire to limit the ability of local communities to contribute to biodiversity conservation. These communities often bear disproportionate costs in the form of curtailed access to natural resources, ecosystem services, and developmental
programmes, and also suffer wildlife-caused damage, including injuries or loss of human life, and economic
and psychological impacts (Madhusudan & Mishra 2003). It is well-recognized that conservation efforts in large parts of the world historically have been perceived to be discriminatory by local people (Mishra 2016). The need for engagement with local communities is therefore embedded in the 2020 Aichi biodiversity targets and is widely thought to be critical to the success of conservation efforts. However, although the need for engagement is clear, as ecologists and practitioners we often have little formal training in how we should engage with local communities and how we can recognize the pitfalls and opportunities provided by developing genuine partnerships. The practical challenges of achieving effective engagement are considerable (Agrawal & Gibson 1999; Waylen et al. 2010, 2013), and such forays are fraught with difficulties and ethical considerations (Chan et al. 2007). When they are done badly, conservation interventions
can damage relationships and trust, and lead to serious injustice to local people and setbacks for ecological
outcomes (Duffy 2010). Much has been written on knowledge exchange and participatory research approaches (e.g. Reed et al. 2014 and references therein). This Practitioner’s Perspective
seeks to focus on the next logical step: the elements that practitioners and researchers need to consider when
engaging with communities to effect conservation. Engagement around the management of protected areas
has been discussed and formalized (e.g. Dudley 2008). Considerable literature has also emerged, particularly
from Africa, on the use and co-management of natural resources, commonly referred to as community-based natural resource management or CBNRM (e.g. Fabricius 2004; Roe, Nelson & Sandbrook 2009; Child & Barnes
2010). There have been attempts to draw general principles for CBNRM (e.g. Thakadu 2005; Gruber 2010). In
the related field of community-based conservation, however, while there have been efforts to draw lessons (e.g. Berkes 2004), little exists in terms of frameworks or guidelines for effectively working with local communities to effect biodiversity conservation in multi-use landscapes
(Mishra 2016). The eight principles for community-based conservation outlined here (Fig. 1) build on ideas developed in fields as diverse as applied ecology, conservation and natural
resource management, community health, social psychology, rural development, negotiation theory, and ethics
(see Mishra 2016). They have been developed, challenged and tested through 20 years of community experience andour own research on the endangered snow leopard Panthera uncia and its mountain ecosystems, in South and Central Asia. We suspect that with contextual adaptations, their relevance for applied ecologists and practitioners may be universal.

Abstract: The snow leopard Panthera uncia coexists with the wolf Canis lupus throughout most of its distribution range.
We analysed the food habits of snow leopards and wolves in their sympatric range in the Karakoram mountains of Pakistan. A total of 131 genotyped scats (N = 74, snow leopard; N = 57, Tibetan wolf) were collected during the cold periods (i.e. winter and spring) of 2011 and 2012 in the Hushey valley. Large mammals, i.e. livestock and ibex, accounted for 84.8 and 83.1% of the diet (relative frequency) of the snow leopard and the wolf, respectively. Domestic prey was the staple of the diet of both snow leopards (66.6%) and wolves (75.1%). Ibex Capra ibex, the only wild ungulate in our study area, contributed 18.2 and 16.9%of relative frequencies in the
diets of the snow leopard and the wolf, respectively. In winter, the snowleopard heavily relied on domestic sheep (43.3%) for food, whereas the wolf preyed mainly on domestic goats (43.4%). Differently from other study areas, both snow leopards and wolves showed no apparent prey preference (Jacobs
index: snow leopard min. − 0.098, max. 0.102; Tibetan wolf min. − 0.120, max. 0.03). In human depauperate areas, with livestock and only a few wild prey, should competitive interactions arise, two main scenarios could be expected, with either predator as a winner. In both cases, the best solution
could primarily impinge on habitat restoration, so that a balance could be found between these predators, who have already coexisted for thousands of years.

Abstract: The snow leopard Panthera uncia is globally
threatened and reliable information on its abundance,
distribution and prey species is a prerequisite for its conservation.
In October-November 2014 we assessed the distribution
of the snow leopard in the recently established Api
Nampa Conservation Area in the Nepal Himalayas.
Within selected blocks we conducted sign surveys and
counted the number of bharal Pseudois nayaur, its principal
wild prey, along transects totalling 106 km.We recorded 203
putative snow leopard signs at an encounter rate of 1.91
signs/km. Generalized linear models of the number of
signs detected per transect showed that elevation had a positive
influence and human activities a negative influence on
sign encounter rate; prey abundance had only a weak positive
influence on sign encounter rate. Within the effectively
surveyed area of c. 2002 km2, we counted 527 bharal at an estimated
density of 2.28 animals/km2. Recruitment of bharal
was low, estimated at 48 kids/100 adult females, most likely a
result of poor or overgrazed rangeland. We estimate
the total number of bharal in this conservation area to be
.>1,000, a prey base that could sustain 6-9 snow leopards.
Based on our field observations, we identified human disturbance
and habitat degradation associated with extraction
of non-timber forest products, livestock grazing, and poaching
as the main threats to the snow leopard. Standardized
sign surveys, preferably supplemented by sampling with
remote cameras or with genetic analysis of scats would
provide robust baseline information on the abundance of
snow leopards in this conservation area.

Abstract: Translocations are an important tool for the conservation
of biodiversity, but although ecological feasibility
studies are frequently conducted prior to implementation,
social feasibility studies that consider how local communities
perceive such projects are less common. The translocation
of blue sheep Pseudois nayaur to Sagarmatha National
Park, Nepal, has been proposed, to reduce livestock depredation
by snow leopards Panthera uncia by providing an alternative
prey base in addition to the small population of
Himalayan thar Hemitragus jemlahicus. This study used
systematic sampling, a quantitative questionnaire and qualitative
interviews within the Park to provide data on the social
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 consultation,
planning or implementation.

Abstract: Livestock depredation by large carnivores is a global conservation challenge, and mitigation measures to reduce livestock losses are crucial for the coexistence of large carnivores and people. Various measures are employed to reduce livestock depredation but their effectiveness has rarely been tested. In this study, we tested the effectiveness of tall fences to reduce livestock losses to snow leopards Panthera uncia and wolves Canis lupus at night-time corrals at the winter camps of livestock herders in the Tost Mountains in southern Mongolia. Self-reported livestock losses at the fenced corrals were reduced from a mean loss of 3.9 goats and sheep per family and winter prior to the study to zero losses in the two winters of the study. In contrast, self-reported livestock losses in winter pastures, and during the rest of the year, when herders used different camps, remained high, which indicates that livestock losses were reduced because of the fences, not because of temporal variation in predation pressure. Herder attitudes towards snow leopards were positive and remained positive during the study, whereas attitudes towards wolves, which attacked livestock also in summer when herders moved out on the steppes, were negative and worsened during the study. This study showed that tall fences can be very effective at reducing night-time losses at corrals and we conclude that fences can be an important tool for snow leopard conservation and for facilitating the coexistence of snow leopards and people.