Abstract: The Himalayan mountain range extends in a broad arc from Pakistan through India, Nepal, Bhutan and China. With elevations ranging from approximately 300 meters in the plains at the base of the mountains to the peaks well over 8,000 meters (Mt Everest 8,848 m). The Himalaya is the tallest and most complex of the world mountain regions (Striffler, 1985). The Himalaya can be divided into three physiographic zones. These includes the lower foothills usually describe as sub-Himalaya and represented by the Siwalik Hills which extend along most of the Himalaya with elevation seldom exceeding 1000 m. The second zone is the middle Himalaya also called Outer Himalaya or the lesser Himalaya with elevation ranges from 600 meters to over 3000 m. Interspersed within the middle zone are occasional larger to small valleys and river basins. The third zone is the great Himalaya or Inner Himalaya zone that covers higher mountain areas, the snow clad peaks and trans-Himalayan harsh climatic dry areas (HMG Nepal, 1977; Kaith, 1960). The glaciers and natural springs have drained the whole area and created a vast area as wetlands supplemented by different lake system in different elevations.

Abstract: As part of a project looking at the history of ‘colonial forestry’ I have been studying forest and land management in India during the period from about 1860 to 1920. The subject is of interest because the forest conservation policies and management practices developed in India at that time later became a template for early forest policies and practices in Australia (where I have worked nearly all of my life as a forester), New Zealand, South Africa and the United States of America.
An unexpected outcome of my research was to find that 19th and early 20th century Indian foresters were also deeply concerned about Indian wildlife, and that in their published writings on this issue can be discerned some of the earliest concepts of professional wildlife management.
The outcome was unexpected because a notable aspect of forestry in India in the 19th century was the widespread love of hunting wild animals, or shikar, amongst officers of the Indian Forest Service. Sometimes this was done in the line of duty, a forester being called out to dispatch a rogue elephant or a man-eating tiger. But hunting was also regarded by many (especially those who had transferred from the Army into the Forest Service) as a sport, a contest between man and beast. And despite his firepower, it was a contest in which 19th century man did not always come out on top.

Abstract: Managing wildlife-caused damage to human interests has become an important aspect of contemporary conservation management. Conflicts between pastoralism and carnivore conservation over livestock depredation pose a serious challenge to endangered carnivores worldwide, and have become an important livelihood concern locally. Here, we first review the primary causes of these conflicts, their socio-ecological correlates, and commonly employed mitigation measures. We then describe a community-based program to manage conflicts over livestock depredation by snow leopards Panthera uncia and wolves Canis lupus. A threats-based conceptual model of conflict management is presented. Conflicts over livestock depredation are characterized by complex, multi-scale interactions between carnivore and livestock behavioral ecology, animal husbandry, human psyche, culture, world-views, and socio-economic and education levels of affected peoples. A diversity of commonly employed conflict-mitigation measures is available. They aim at (i) reducing livestock depredation through better livestock herding, use of physical, chemical or psychological barriers, removal of carnivores, and use of livestock guard animals, (ii) offsetting economic losses through damage compensation and insurance programmes, and (iii) increasing peoples’ tolerance of carnivores through indirect approaches such as conservation education and economic incentives. For effective management, conflicts need to be understood along two important dimensions, viz., the reality of damage caused to humans, and the psyche and perceptions of humans who suffer wildlife caused damage. The efficacy of commonly used mitigation measures is variable. A combination of measures that reduce the level of livestock depredation, share or offset economic losses, and improve the social carrying capacity for carnivores will be more effective in managing conflicts than standalone measures