Prater, S. H. (1971). The Book of Indian Animals: The snow leopard, or ounce, Panthera uncia (Schreber). (Vol. Third, pp. 69–70).
|
Poyarkov, A. D., Munkhtsog, B., Korablev, M. P., Kuksin, A. N., Alexandrov, D. Y., Chistopolova, M. D., Hernandez-Blanco, J. A., Munkhtogtokh, O., Karnaukhov, A. S., Lkhamsuren, N., Bayaraa, M., Jackson, R. M., Maheshwari, A., Rozhnov, V. V. (2020). Assurance of the existence of a trans-boundary population of the snow leopard (Panthera uncia) at Tsagaanshuvuut – Tsagan- Shibetu SPA at the Mongolia-Russia border. Integrative Zoology, (15), 224–231.
Abstract: The existence of a trans-boundary population of the snow leopard (Panthera uncia) that inhabits the massifs of Tsagaanshuvuut (Mongolia) – Tsagan-Shibetu (Russia) was determined through non-invasive genetic analysis of scat samples and by studying the structure of territory use by a collared female individual. The genetic analysis included species identification of samples through sequencing of a fragment of the cytochrome b gene and individual identification using a panel of 8 microsatellites. The home range of a female snow leopard marked with a satellite Global Positioning System (GPS) collar was represented by the minimum convex polygon method (MCP) 100, the MCP 95 method and the fixed kernel 95 method. The results revealed insignificant genetic differentiation between snow leopards that inhabit both massifs (minimal fixation index [FST]), and the data testify to the unity of the cross-border group. Moreover, 5 common individuals were identified from Mongolian and Russian territories. This finding clearly shows that their home range includes territories of both countries. In addition, regular movement of a collared snow leopard in Mongolia and Russia confirmed the existence of a cross-border snow leopard group. These data support that trans-boundary conservation is important for snow leopards in both countries. We conclude that it is crucial for Russia to study the northern range of snow leopards in Asia.
|
Poulton, S. M. C. (1980). A report on the feasibility of an ecological study of the snow leopard in northern India.
|
Portland Zoological Society. (1976). Snow leopards, animals of the month (Vol. 5).
|
Phillips, L. G. (1981). Palpebral coloboma in three snow leopards.
|
Phillips, L. (1980). Post-mortem records, Henry Doorly Zoo, Omaha, Nebraska.
|
Turnbull-Kemp, P. (1967). The Leopard. (pp. 68–69).
|
Anonymous. You can help save the snow leopard.
|
Anonymous. (1980, 1 January). She's all washed up. New York Daily News.
|
Mishra, C., Suryawanshi, K. (2014). Managing conflicts over livestock depradation by Large Carnivores. In SOUTH ASIAN ASSOCIATION FOR REGIONAL COOPERATION – Human-Wildlife Conflict in the Mountains of SAARC Region – Compilation of Successful Management Strategies and Practices (pp. 27–47).
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
|