|
|
Tuyatsatsral, T., Ganbold, B., Ganbat, O., Enkhee, C., & Nyambat, N. (2009). Buy Sheep Program and Environmental Planning of Herder Communities Assessment Report. Mongolia: WWF Mongolia.
Abstract: Apparently with the decrease of number of globally endangered snow leopard due to reduction of prey species and loss of habitat, new approaches have been initiated to mitigate conflicts between herders and wildlife, ensuring local participation and building up stakeholders’ responsibility in nature conservation through supporting and guiding of local communities in participation and implementation of collaborative management in sustainable natural resource use. Actually, herder communities, aimed to protect the nature become one of that approaches and made it common consideration, especially in the buffer zones of the Turgen mountain SPA, Tsagaanshuvuut SPA and Gulzat local protected areas of Uvs aimag, where WWF MPO, UNDP and MNET are performing projects, such as “Community based conservation of biodiversity in the mountain landscapes of the Mongolia’s Altai Sayan ecoregion”. Since 2007, in Uvs aimag, particularly in Khaliunbulag bag of Khovd soum, WWF MPO initiated the compensation scheme for herders, aimed to mitigate conflicts between herders and snow leopard, reducing their loss caused by snow leopard and to support them mentally as well.
Current assessment focused on performance evaluation of “Buy sheep” program in Khaliunbulag bag and capability of herder communities , that are established around protected areas, in developing their yearly environmental workplan, including its implementation process.
|
|
|
|
Mishra, C., Young, J. C., Fiechter, M., Rutherford, B., Redpath, S. M. (2017). Building partnerships with communities for biodiversity conservation: lessons from Asian mountains. Journal of Applied Ecology, , 1–9.
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.
|
|
|
|
Olaf, R. P., Edmonds, B., Gittleman, J., & Purvis, A. (1999). Building large trees by combining phylogenetic information: a complete phylogeny of the extant Carnivora (Mammalia). Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 74, 143–175.
Abstract: One way to build larger, more comprehensive phylogenies is to combine the vast amount of phylogenetic information already available. We review the two main strategies for accomplishing this (combining raw data versus combining trees), but employ a relatively new variant of the latter: supertree construction. The utility of one supertree technique, matrix representation using parsimony analysis (MRP), is demonstrated by deriving a complete phylogeny for all 271 extant species of the Carnivora from 177 literature sources. Beyond providing a `consensus' estimate of carnivore phylogeny, the tree also indicates taxa for which the relationships remain controversial (e.g. the red panda; within canids, felids, and hyaenids) or have not been studied in any great detail (e.g. herpestids, viverrids, and intrageneric relationships in the procyonids). Times of divergence throughout the tree were also estimated from 74 literature sources based on both fossil and molecular data. We use the phylogeny to show that some lineages within the Mustelinae and Canidae contain significantly more species than expected for their age, illustrating the tree's utility for studies of macroevolution. It will also provide a useful foundation for comparative and conservational studies involving the carnivores.
(Received June 2 1998)(Revised November 27 1998)(Accepted December 16 1998)
|
|
|
|
WWF Mongolia. (2008). Brief report of the trainning on wool organized in centre of Uvs aimag. Mongolia: Author.
Abstract: In training held on 21-28 December of 2007 were attended 5 people in total: 2 members of Uureg community and 3 members of Argalt-kharig community of Sagil soum.
The training on processing wool and producing felt organized everyday between 08.15 and 22.00 and started in time as it was planned. During the training the members of two communities actively participated and did class work well.
|
|
|
|
Burgelo T.B. (1986). Brief information of snow leopard.
Abstract: This article describes the encounters with snow leopard and their traces in various areas of Kazakhstan. In the Aksu Djabagly nature reserve, population of snow leopard does not exceed 10-12 animals. There were found remains of moral, argali, ibex, small birds, red-tailed marmot, hare (Lepus talai), mouse rodents and plants. One encounter with snow leopard is known to have occurred in the Greater Almaty Canyon in 1971-1981. There are no less than 25 snow leopards in the Jungar Ala-Tau. Snow leopard was found in the Aksu river valley, ridge Saur, and South Altai. The following number of snow leopards was kept in Kazakhstan's zoos, as of January 1, 1984: two males in Alma-Ata, one female in Chimkent. In 1976, one cub was born in the Alma-Ata zoo.
|
|
|
|
Koivisto, I., Wahlberg, C., & Muuronnen, P. (1977). Breeding the snow leopard (Panthera Uncia) at the Helsinki Zoo 1967-1976. Int.Zoo Yearbook, 17, 39–44.
|
|
|
|
Clevenger, S., S. (1979). Breeding snow leopards in the north 40.
|
|
|
|
Rieger, I. (1982). Breeding ounces, Uncia uncia (Schreber, 1775) in zoological gardens. In L. Blomqvist (Ed.), International Pedigree Book of Snow Leopards, Vol. 3 (Vol. 3, pp. 49–50). Helsinki: Helsinki Zoo.
|
|
|
|
Isenbugel, E., Weilenmann, P., & Rubel, A. (1994). Breeding of snow leopards in the zoo of Zurich: veterinary aspects. In J.L.Fox, & and D.Jizeng (Eds.), (pp. 201–202). Usa: Islt.
|
|
|
|
Doherty, J., & Wharton, D. (1988). Breeding Management of the Snow Leopard at the New York Zoological Park. In H.Freeman (Ed.), (pp. 173–179). India: International Snow Leopard Trust and Wildlife Institute of India.
Abstract: Since 1996, the Bronx Zoo has produced 48 snow leopard cubs. Some of the cubs born in the last several years are the great-great grandchildren of the Bronx male Sherpa born in 1966. These five generations have all been bred and reared in the Zoological Park's Lion House which opened in 1903......Instead we will focus primarily on mangement and manipulation for cub production.
|
|
