| Home | << 1 2 3 >> |
|
Froede, K. and J., R. (2001). Snow Leopard Manual Field Study Techniques for the Kingdom Nepal. Kathmandu, Nepal: WWF Nepal.
Abstract: The publication of this manual aims sharing and facilitating the study on snow leopard and its prey species among mid-level professionals interested in conducting fieldwork on their own. The manual is derived from the 1996 “Snow Leopard Survey and Conservation Handbook” written by Dr. Rodney Jackson and Dr. Don Hunter and published by International Snow Leopard Trust (ISLT) based in seatle, Washington, USA. The first section introduces the topic, the second and third section deal with presence/ absence and abundance survey methods. The various survey-froms with instructions are given in the annexes.
|
|
Wolf, M., & Ale, S. (2009). Signs at the Top: Habitat Features Influencing Snow Leopard Uncia Uncia Activity in Sagarmatha National Park, Nepal. Journal of Mammalogy, 90(3), 604–611.
Abstract: We used logistic regression to examine factors that affected the spatial distribution of sign (scrapes, feces, footprints, spray or scent marks, and rubbing sites) in a newly reestablished population of snow leopards (Uncia uncia) in Sagarmatha (Mount Everest) National Park, Nepal. Our results indicate that terrain and human activity were the most important factors determining the spatial distribution of leopard activity, whereas presence of their major prey species (Himalayan tahr [Hemitragus jemlahicus]) had only a moderate effect. This suggests that localities at which these animals are active represent a trade-off between suitable habitat and avoidance of potential risk from anthropogenic origins. However, the influence of prey presence was likely underestimated because of the methodology used, and likely weighed in the trade-off as well.
|
|
McCarthy, K., Fuller, T., Ming, M., McCarthy, T., Waits, L., & Jumabaev, K. (2008). Assessing Estimators of Snow Leopard Abundance (Vol. 72).
Abstract: The secretive nature of snow leopards (Uncia uncia) makes them difficult to monitor, yet conservation efforts require accurate and precise methods to estimate abundance. We assessed accuracy of Snow Leopard Information Management System (SLIMS) sign surveys by comparing them with 4 methods for estimating snow leopard abundance: predator:prey biomass ratios, capture-recapture density estimation, photo-capture rate, and individual identification through genetic analysis. We recorded snow leopard sign during standardized surveys in the SaryChat Zapovednik, the Jangart hunting reserve, and the Tomur Strictly Protected Area, in the Tien Shan Mountains of Kyrgyzstan and China. During June-December 2005, adjusted sign averaged 46.3 (SaryChat), 94.6 (Jangart), and 150.8 (Tomur) occurrences/km. We used
counts of ibex (Capra ibex) and argali (Ovis ammon) to estimate available prey biomass and subsequent potential snow leopard densities of 8.7 (SaryChat), 1.0 (Jangart), and 1.1 (Tomur) snow leopards/100 km2. Photo capture-recapture density estimates were 0.15 (n = 1 identified individual/1 photo), 0.87 (n = 4/13), and 0.74 (n = 5/6) individuals/100 km2 in SaryChat, Jangart, and Tomur, respectively. Photo-capture rates (photos/100 trap-nights) were 0.09 (SaryChat), 0.93 (Jangart), and 2.37 (Tomur). Genetic analysis of snow leopard fecal samples provided minimum population sizes of 3 (SaryChat), 5 (Jangart), and 9 (Tomur) snow leopards. These results suggest SLIMS sign surveys may be affected by observer bias and environmental variance. However, when such bias and variation are accounted for, sign surveys indicate relative abundances similar to photo rates and genetic individual identification results. Density or abundance estimates based on capture-recapture or ungulate biomass did not agree with other indices of abundance. Confidence in estimated densities, or even detection of significant changes in abundance of snow leopard, will require more effort and better documentation. |