Snow Leopard Bibliography -- Query Results

Nowell, K., Li, J., Paltsyn, M., Sharma, R. K. (2016). An ounce of prevention: Snow Leopard Crime Revisited. Abstract: Snow Leopard poaching and trafficking – referred to herein as Snow Leopard crime – is revisited 13 years after TRAFFIC’s first report on the subject, Fading Footprints: The Killing and Trade of Snow Leopards (Theile, 2003). This report builds on a preliminary analysis published in May 2016 (Maheshwari and von Meibom, 2016). It addresses a major information gap concerning the linkage between retaliatory killing for livestock depredation and poaching for trade, and the scale at which both are taking place. The focus is on 12 Snow Leopard range countries: Afghanistan, Bhutan, China, India, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. There is little evidence of illegal trade in Snow Leopards outside these countries. Two sets of data were developed in the research for this report. The first is a Snow Leopard crime database containing records of seizures (legal actions taken by government authorities) and observations (reports of Snow Leopard killing, capture or trade, including market surveys). The database contains records dating back to 1989 (which are discussed in Annex 1), but the analysis focuses on the period since the release of Fading Footprints, the first TRAFFIC report: 2003-June 2016. Seizures are a function of law enforcement effort, effectiveness and publicization, as well as the magnitude of illegal trade, and so observations are an important component of the analysis, particularly for countries where few seizures are made or reported. However, detailed observations are not regularly published, and may be are biased toward countries where there is more effort, so a simple multiple choice survey was designed for Snow Leopard experts. Completed by 42 of them in 2016, and covering all 12 range countries, the survey asked experts for their total number of known cases, case outcomes, and reasons for killing Snow Leopards. Based on the average number of cases known to experts over the average of nine years spent working in their geographic areas of knowledge, 221-450 Snow Leopards were estimated to have been poached annually since 2008. With the average rate of poaching detection estimated by experts at less than 38%, these numbers could be substantially higher. Of these, 55% are killed in retaliation for livestock depredation, 21% killed for trade and 18% taken by non-targeted methods such as snares. Although retaliatory killing is estimated to account for roughly half of Snow Leopard poaching (55%), experts estimate that there is a 50-50 chance (48%) that a poaching attempt will take place after a depredation incident. On average, experts estimate that 60% of retaliatory and non-targeted poaching incidents result in an attempt to sell; accounting for differences in this estimate between countries, a total of 108-219 Snow Leopards potentially enter into illegal trade. Over 90% of annual Snow Leopard poaching is estimated to occur in five range countries: China (103-236), Mongolia (34-53), Pakistan (23-53), India (21-45) and Tajikistan (20-25). Given the uncertainties about population numbers, as well as the low rate of poaching detection, it is difficult to assess the impact of this offtake on the viability of the species. Snow Leopard range is used as a proxy for Snow Leopard population numbers; most national Snow Leopard population estimates are derived from extrapolating study site densities across likely range. Although China had by far the highest number of seizures and observations (309 Snow Leopards from 2003-2016) and the highest annual poaching estimate, its share of Snow Leopard crime was not disproportionate to its large share (at least 60%) of Snow Leopard range. Countries flagged for having disproportionate shares of crime levels relative to share of range included Afghanistan and Russia (seizures and observations), and Nepal and Pakistan (annual poaching estimates). China and Russia were most frequently identified as destinations for animals poached in other countries. The expert survey indicates that the scale of Snow Leopard crime is more serious than apparent from the annual average number of Snow Leopard seized (18) or observed (34) from 2003-2016. This could be in part due to the challenges of law enforcement in the Snow Leopard’s remote montane habitat. Indeed, the survey found that an average of 23% of known cases were investigated by authorities, and only 14% prosecuted. The minimum number of Snow Leopards in the seizures and observations database fell by 43% from the first half of the analysis period (2003-2009) compared to the second (2010-June 2016) (from 451 to 259). However, the decline was in the number of Snow Leopards observed in trade and in market surveys, which fell by 80% (from 280 to 54), with the largest decline taking place in China. There were more market surveys in the first half of the analysis period (13) than the second (5), but they TRAFFIC report: An Ounce Of Prevention: Snow Leopard Crime Revisited xi were repeated in the same places (Kabul, Afghanistan and cities in western China), and far fewer skins were seen (for example, 60 skins in the Chinese city of Linxia in 2007, compared to one in 2011). The numbers of Snow Leopards in other observations were roughly equivalent for the two periods (108 in the first and 100 in the second), but the numbers in trade observations fell by 46% (from 52 to 28). Otherwise, the number of Snow Leopards seized rose by 16% (from 115 to 133), and the number of individual seizure cases rose by 77% (from 44 to 78). The number of poached Snow Leopards seized doubled (from 31 to 60), and the observed number of poached Snow Leopards also increased by 14% (from 56 to 64). The number of Snow Leopards in trade seizures was the same in both periods (55), and the number smuggled roughly equivalent (29 seized in the first period, and 24 seized and observed in the second). There are three possible interpretations of this situation of rising numbers of Snow Leopards poached (as measured by seizures and observations), steady numbers in smuggling and trade seizures, and steeply declining numbers in trade observations and market surveys. It could be that the limitations of available data and the authors’ inability to collect all of it has resulted in an incorrect picture. It is apparent that illegal trade has become more clandestine and difficult to detect in most countries, so that secondly, it could be increasing, as indicated by the apparent rise in poaching numbers. However, the number of Snow Leopards seized in large cases (more than 3 Snow Leopards per case), indicative of organized trafficking activity, declined from 60 in the 2003-2009 to 23 in 2010-2016. This points to a third possibility: that trade (and perhaps demand) is declining, possibly due to increased enforcement, but local people continue to opportunistically sell Snow Leopards they poached primarily to protect livestock. With skins being the main Snow Leopard product type in trade (78%), the primary motive for buyers appears to be for display, with some observations of skins hanging on walls in homes and restaurants, as well as stuffed taxidermy specimens. Priced in the thousands of US dollars, skins have been described as a “symbol of wealth and power.” However, there probably exists very little in the way of a definable consumer segment deliberately seeking out such items. They are most likely purchased opportunistically – “impulse buys” – and most consumers probably only buy one in their lifetime. Once in a home, the illegal possession has very low probability of detection, and moreover law enforcement authorities may be reluctant to investigate in such situations. The purchase itself also has a low probability of detection, as indicated by the sharp decline in observed numbers of Snow Leopard skins being offered for sale. While growing personal wealth in Asia has been highlighted as a primary driver of illegal wildlife trade, poverty is also recognized as a driver, and the Snow Leopard trade may be more driven by rural people in Snow Leopard habitat attempting to make money and make up for livestock losses to predators than by wealthy people placing orders for luxury household decorations. Unlike the demand-driven Tiger trade (Annex 2), to which it otherwise bears many similarities, the market for Snow Leopards may be more a function of supply, and actions should focus on the communities living near Snow Leopards to reduce incentives to poach and sell. This notion is reflected in the aphorism behind the title of this report: an ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure. Preventing livestock losses, offsetting the costs of losses and improving community support for Snow Leopard conservation are the most important approaches to tackling the problem of Snow Leopard trafficking. Recommendations focus on addressing the leading cause of Snow Leopard poaching (retaliatory killing/Human-Wildlife Conflict) as well as measures to stem illegal trade, and are primarily targeted at the 12 Snow Leopard range countries. They are aligned with existing recommendations and planned actions, including CITES recommendations, draft Decisions and consultant’s reports around implementation of Resolution Conf. 12.5 (CITES 2015, 2016; Nowell and Pervushina, 2014); the Global Snow Leopard and Ecosystem Protection Program (GSLEP, 2013, 2015, n.d.); the SLN’s Snow Leopard Survival Strategy (SLN, 2014); and WWF’s Snow Leopard Species Action Plan (WWF, 2015 and Sharma, 2016). There was also an informal discussion about recommendations to address poaching and illegal trade at the Second China Snow Leopard Forum, held in Urumqi, Xinjiang province 24-26 August 2016 (B. Weckworth, Panthera, pers. comm.). Recommendations are grouped according to four primary actors in Snow Leopard conservation: 1) governments of Snow Leopard range countries; 2) communities living in Snow Leopard range; 3) conservation organizations and Snow Leopard experts; and 4) donor governments and agencies. https://snowleopardnetwork.org/b/show.php?record=1447
Li, J., McCarthy, T. M., Wang, H., Weckworth, B. V., Shaller, G. B., Mishra, C., Lu, Z., Beissinger, S. R. (2016). Climate refugia of snow leopards in High Asia. Biological Conservation, (203), 188–196. Abstract: Rapidwarming in High Asia is threatening its unique ecosystemand endemic species, especially the endangered snow leopard (Panthera uncia). Snow leopards inhabit the alpine zone between snow line and tree line, which contracts and expands greatly during glacier-interglacial cycles. Here we assess impacts of climate change on global snow leopard habitat from the last glacial maximum (LGM; 21 kyr ago) to the late 21st century. Based on occurrence records of snow leopards collected across all snow leopard range countries from 1983 to 2015, we built a snow leopard habitat model using the maximum entropy algorithm (MaxEnt 3.3.3k). Then we projected this model into LGM, mid-Holocene and 2070. Analysis of snow leopard habitat map from LGM to 2070 indicates that three large patches of stable habitat have persisted from the LGM to present in the Altai, Qilian, and Tian Shan-Pamir-Hindu Kush-Karakoram mountain ranges, and are projected to persist through the late 21st century. These climatically suitable areas account for about 35% of the snow leopard's current extent, are large enough to support viable populations, and should function as refugia for snow leopards to survive through both cold and warm periods. Existence of these refugia is largely due to the unique mountain environment in High Asia, which maintains a relatively constant arid or semi-arid climate. However, habitat loss leading to fragmentation in the Himalaya and Hengduan Mountains, as well as increasing human activities, will present conservation challenges for snow leopards and other sympatric species. Keywords: Snow leopard, Habitat, Climate change, Refugia, High Asia, Conservation https://snowleopardnetwork.org/b/show.php?record=1449
Chetri, M., Odden, M., Wegge, P. (2017). Snow Leopard and Himalayan Wolf: Food Habits and Prey Selection in the Central Himalayas, Nepal. Plos, (12(2)), 2–16. Abstract: Top carnivores play an important role in maintaining energy flow and functioning of the ecosystem, and a clear understanding of their diets and foraging strategies is essential for developing effective conservation strategies. In this paper, we compared diets and prey selection of snow leopards and wolves based on analyses of genotyped scats (snow leopards n = 182, wolves n = 57), collected within 26 sampling grid cells (5×5 km) that were distributed across a vast landscape of ca 5000 km2 in the Central Himalayas, Nepal. Within the grid cells, we sampled prey abundances using the double observer method. We found that interspecific differences in diet composition and prey selection reflected their respective habitat preferences, i.e. snow leopards significantly preferred cliff-dwelling wild ungulates (mainly bharal, 57% of identified material in scat samples), whereas wolves preferred typically plain-dwellers (Tibetan gazelle, kiang and argali, 31%). Livestock was consumed less frequently than their proportional availability by both predators (snow leopard = 27%; wolf = 24%), but significant avoidance was only detected among snow leopards. Among livestock species, snow leopards significantly preferred horses and goats, avoided yaks, and used sheep as available. We identified factors influencing diet composition using Generalized Linear Mixed Models. Wolves showed seasonal differences in the occurrence of small mammals/ birds, probably due to the winter hibernation of an important prey, marmots. For snow leopard, occurrence of both wild ungulates and livestock in scats depended on sex and latitude. Wild ungulates occurrence increased while livestock decreased from south to north, probably due to a latitudinal gradient in prey availability. Livestock occurred more frequently in scats from male snow leopards (males: 47%, females: 21%), and wild ungulates more frequently in scats from females (males: 48%, females: 70%). The sexual difference agrees with previous telemetry studies on snow leopards and other large carnivores, and may reflect a high-risk high-gain strategy among males. https://snowleopardnetwork.org/b/show.php?record=1450
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. Keywords: community engagement, conservation, conservation programmes, Panthera uncia, partnership, snow leopard, stakeholder engagement https://snowleopardnetwork.org/b/show.php?record=1451
Kashkarov, E. (2017). THE SNOW LEOPARD OF KIRGIZIA: NATIONAL SHAME OR NATIONAL PRIDE.239–253. Abstract: Article examines the problems existing in conservation of the snow leopard in Kirgizia after break-up of the USSR. Unfortunate situation is common to most of the 14 countries in the snow leopard range, but seems especially sharp to Kirgizia. Yet half of the century ago Kirgizia has had about 1.5 thousand of the snow leopards, and today there remains no more than 1/10. In Soviet time Kirgizia was a global supplier of the snow leopards for the zoo-export � to create a reserve number of endangered cats in captivity. Today, at least half of the snow leopards in the Zoos of the world are individuals, caught in Kirgizia or their descendants. Since independence, Kirgizia has set new records. In Sarychat-Irtash reserve � the best for the snow leopard in Central Asia, and probably in the whole range � this species was completely destroyed after 3 years of reserve opening... and 17 years later � revived... Situation comes presently back to the worst-case scenario, and not only for the snow leopard. Author shows how work in this direction social and economic levers, and what kind future he would like to see in Kirgizia, where he lived for 12 years and was at the forefront of pioneering research of the snow leopard and its conservation. Keywords: snow leopard, irbis, ibex, mountain sheep, conservation, range, reserve, monitoring, cameratrap, Sarychat, Kirgizia, Central Asia. https://snowleopardnetwork.org/b/show.php?record=1454
Kashkarov, E. (2017). ZOOGEOGRAPHICAL DISCOVERIES IN WESTERN BERINGIA.208–217. Abstract: Among zoogeographical discoveries of the frontier of XXI century there is nothing more interesting than discoveries of Rodion Sivolobov in Western Beringia. Beringia has surprised us by paleontological discoveries many centuries ago, and also surprised by modern one. Somehow they came out of attention of all International environmental foundations and Academies of the world, as if on purpose to show their professional incompetence. It is the only way to describe the organization, not to notice the appearance of such big cats as the Snow leopard and Amur tiger for 5,000 kilometers from the border of main range, as well as large Pleistocene relict � the Irkuyembear. All three endangered species of mammals found by Sivolobov in Koryakia and Chukotka, and for the snow leopard he took the world's first photo in Beringia. New facts suggests two things: (1) the ancient refuges of big cats locate to Koryakia and Chukotka much closer of main ranges, (2) global warming, changing natural environment on the waves of hundred-year rhythms, periodically pushing irbis and tiger on the ways of ancient Beringian migrations stored in their genetic memories. Irkuyem is a contemporary of the mammoth. 209 Unlike it, this bear lived up to our days, but remained undetected even by the large “mammoths” of science. Keywords: zoogeographical discoveries, Snow leopard, Irbis, Amur tiger, Irkuyem-bear, global warming, hundred-year rhythm, Beringia, Koryakia, Chukotka. https://snowleopardnetwork.org/b/show.php?record=1455
Sivolobov, R. (2017). ENDANGERED SPECIES OF KORYAKIA AND CHUKOTKA: IRBIS, TIGER AND THE IRKUYEM-BEAR.225–233. Abstract: After 30 years of searching for the mysterious Beringian snow cat in vast space of Koryakia and Chukotka one of the five cameras recorded finally this beast at night in September 2014. This is not so much a sensation as a real scientific discovery, saying that the hearts of the snow leopard population resettlement are not in 5000 km from the main range boundaries, but much closer. Where? � will show further studies. In addition to the snow leopard in the North-Eastern Asia, it found two more endangered large mammal species: the Amur tiger and the relict of the Ice Age � the Irkuyem-bear. Author has given these animals his life and his article devoted to this topic. Keywords: endangered species, Beringian snow cat, Snow leopard, Irbis, Amur tiger, Irkuyem-bear, camera-trap, Koryakia, Chukotka https://snowleopardnetwork.org/b/show.php?record=1456
Suryawanshi, K. R., Redpath, S., Bhatnagar, Y. V., Ramakrishnan, U., Chaturvedi, V., Smout, S. C., Mishra, C. (2017). Impact of wild prey availability on livestock predation by snow leopards. Royal Society Open Science, , 1–11. Abstract: An increasing proportion of the world�s poor is rearing livestock today, and the global livestock population is growing. Livestock predation by large carnivores and their retaliatory killing is becoming an economic and conservation concern. A common recommendation for carnivore conservation and for reducing predation on livestock is to increase wild prey populations based on the assumption that the carnivores will consume this alternative food. Livestock predation, however, could either reduce or intensify with increases in wild prey depending on prey choice and trends in carnivore abundance. We show that the extent of livestock predation by the endangered snow leopard Panthera uncia intensifies with increases in the density of wild ungulate prey, and subsequently stabilizes. We found that snow leopard density, estimated at seven sites, was a positive linear function of the density of wild ungulates�the preferred prey�and showed no discernible relationship with livestock density. We also found that modelled livestock predation increased with livestock density. Our results suggest that snow leopard conservation would benefit from an increase in wild ungulates, but that would intensify the problem of livestock predation for pastoralists. The potential benefits of increased wild prey abundance in reducing livestock predation can be overwhelmed by a resultant increase in snow leopard populations. Snow leopard conservation efforts aimed at facilitating increases in wild prey must be accompanied by greater assistance for better livestock protection and offsetting the economic damage caused by carnivores. Keywords: apparent competition, apparent facilitation, conservation conflicts, indirect interactions, predator� prey interactions, snow leopard https://snowleopardnetwork.org/b/show.php?record=1457
Murali, R., Lkhagvajav, P., Saeed, U., Kizi, V. A., Nawaz, M. A., Bhatnagar, Y. V., Sharma, K., Mishra, C. (2017). VALUATION OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES IN SNOW LEOPARD LANDSCAPES OF ASIA. Abstract: Snow leopards occur in Asia�s high mountain ranges of the Himalayas, Hindu Kush, Karakoram, Pamir, Tien Shan, Kunlun, Altai and Sayan. In all the 12 countries where they occur, snow leopards face intensifying threats to their survival, including habitat fragmentation and degradation due to increasing human populations, mining and developmental projects, poaching and illegal wildlife trade, weak law enforcement, inadequate involvement of local people in conservation efforts, and depletion of natural prey populations due to hunting by people and overgrazing by livestock. To address the urgent needs of conservation of the snow leopard and the sustainable development of mountain peoples, the Governments of snow leopard range countries came together and agreed to invest efforts to conserve snow leopards in 23 large landscapes across its range under the Global Snow Leopard Ecosystem Protection Program (GSLEP). These landscapes where the snow leopards occur are inhabited by agro-pastoral and pastoral peoples who depend on well functioning ecosystems for ecosystem services, i.e., the benefits that humans derive from nature. Many threats that impact snow leopards also impact the well-being of people living in these landscapes. However, till date, there have been no studies that have attempted to quantify peoples� dependence on ecosystem services in snow leopard landscapes, or understand the impacts that alternate land-use decisions such as mining or infrastructure can have on the ecosystem services and on the local people who are dependent on them. In this report, we provide the first assessment of the economic value of provisioning ecosystem services � the material goods from ecosystems � used by local people in five study sites from four GSLEP landscapes: Spiti Valley and Changtang region of Ladakh in India�s Hemis-Spiti Landscape, Gurez Valley in the Himalayan Landscape of Pakistan, Tost Nature Reserve in the South Gobi Landscape of Mongolia, and the Sarychat region in the Central Tien Shan Landscape of Kyrgyzstan. In study sites that had both pastoral and agro-pastoral communities, we estimated ecosystem services separately for the two production systems.The average value (± SE) of ecosystem services per household amongst the agro-pastoral communities of Gurez Valley (4125 ± 190 USD/HH/yr) was 2.5 times the average local household income. In the agro-pastoral communities of Spiti Valley (3964 ± 334.8 USD/HH/yr) it was 3.6 times the average local household income, while it was 3.7 times amongst the agro-pastoral communities of Changtang (15083 ± 1656 USD/HH/yr). Amongst the pastoral communities, the value of ecosystem services used by households was several times higher than the average household income: it was 26.1 times amongst the pastoral communities of Changtang (79303 ± 9204 USD HH/yr), 38.7 times among communities in Tost Nature Reserve (150100 ± 13290 USD/HH/yr), and 7.4 times among the pastoral communities of Sarychat (25473 ± 5236 USD/HH/yr). It was lower, although still substantial at 0.6 times, for the downstream agro-pastoral communities living outside the landscape boundary in Sarychat (2094 ± 189 USD/HH/yr). Our work reveals substantially high levels of dependence of local communities on ecosystem services provided by snow leopard landscapes of Asia. The estimated economic value of provisioning ecosystem services used by human households in these landscapes ranged from 0.6 to up to 40 times the local annual household incomes. This economic support that nature provides people is critical for humanity but remains hidden and unaccounted for. Land use change decisions, especially those that are damaging for nature and biodiversity, must start accounting for the value of ecosystem services in their cost-benefit analyses. https://snowleopardnetwork.org/b/show.php?record=1458
Khatoon, R., Hussain, I., Anwar, M., Nawaz, M. A. (2017). Diet selection of snow leopard (Panthera uncia) in Chitral, Pakistan. Turkish Journal of Zoology, (14), 914–923. Abstract: Snow leopard (Panthera uncia) is an elusive endangered carnivore found in remote mountain regions of Central Asia, with sparse distribution in northern Pakistan, including Chitral and Baltistan. The present study determined the food habits of snow leopard, including preferred prey species and seasonal variation in diet. Fifty-six scat samples were collected and analyzed to determine the diet composition in two different seasons, i.e. summer and winter. Hair characteristics such as cuticular scale patterns and medullary structure were used to identify the prey. This evidence was further substantiated from the remains of bones, claws, feathers, and other undigested remains found in the scats. A total of 17 prey species were identified; 5 of them were large mammals, 6 were mesomammals, and the remaining 6 were small mammals. The occurrence of wild ungulates (10.4%) in the diet was low, while livestock constituted a substantial part (26.4%) of the diet, which was higher in summer and lower in winter. Mesomammals altogether comprised 33.4% of the diet, with palm civet (Paguma larvata) as a dominant (16.8%) species, followed by golden marmot (Marmota caudate) (8.8%), which was higher in winter. There was a significant difference in seasonal variation in domestic livestock and small mammals. The livestock contribution of 26.4% observed in the present study indicates a significant dependence of the population on livestock and suggests that the study area is expected to be a high-conflict area for snow leopards. The results of the current study would help improve the conservation efforts for snow leopards, contributing to conflict resolution and effective management of this endangered cat. Keywords: Snow leopard, conservation, seasonal variation, diet composition, Chitral, Pakistan https://snowleopardnetwork.org/b/show.php?record=1459

Nowell, K., Li, J., Paltsyn, M., Sharma, R. K. (2016). An ounce of prevention: Snow Leopard Crime Revisited.

Abstract: Snow Leopard poaching and trafficking – referred to herein as Snow Leopard crime – is revisited 13 years after TRAFFIC’s first report on the subject, Fading Footprints: The Killing and Trade of Snow Leopards (Theile, 2003). This report builds on a preliminary analysis published in May 2016 (Maheshwari and von Meibom, 2016). It addresses a major information gap concerning the linkage between retaliatory killing for livestock depredation and poaching for trade, and the scale at which both are taking place. The focus is on 12 Snow Leopard range countries: Afghanistan, Bhutan, China, India, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. There is little evidence of illegal trade in Snow Leopards outside these countries.
Two sets of data were developed in the research for this report. The first is a Snow Leopard crime database containing records of seizures (legal actions taken by government authorities) and observations (reports of Snow Leopard killing, capture or trade, including market surveys). The database contains records dating back to 1989 (which are discussed in Annex 1), but the analysis focuses on the period since the release of Fading Footprints, the first TRAFFIC report: 2003-June 2016. Seizures are a function of law enforcement effort, effectiveness and publicization, as well as the magnitude of illegal trade, and so observations are an important component of the analysis, particularly for countries where few seizures are made or reported. However, detailed observations are not regularly published, and may be are biased toward countries where there is more effort, so a simple multiple choice survey was designed for Snow Leopard experts. Completed by 42 of them in 2016, and covering all 12 range countries, the survey asked experts for their total number of known cases, case outcomes, and reasons for killing Snow Leopards.
Based on the average number of cases known to experts over the average of nine years spent working in their geographic areas of knowledge, 221-450 Snow Leopards were estimated to have been poached annually since 2008. With the average rate of poaching detection estimated by experts at less than 38%, these numbers could be substantially higher. Of these, 55% are killed in retaliation for livestock depredation, 21% killed for trade and 18% taken by non-targeted methods such as snares. Although retaliatory killing is estimated to account for roughly half of Snow Leopard poaching (55%), experts estimate that there is a 50-50 chance (48%) that a poaching attempt will take place after a depredation incident. On average, experts estimate that 60% of retaliatory and non-targeted poaching incidents result in an attempt to sell; accounting for differences in this estimate between countries, a total of 108-219 Snow Leopards potentially enter into illegal trade. Over 90% of annual Snow Leopard poaching is estimated to occur in five range countries: China (103-236), Mongolia (34-53), Pakistan (23-53), India (21-45) and Tajikistan (20-25).
Given the uncertainties about population numbers, as well as the low rate of poaching detection, it is difficult to assess the impact of this offtake on the viability of the species. Snow Leopard range is used as a proxy for Snow Leopard population numbers; most national Snow Leopard population estimates are derived from extrapolating study site densities across likely range. Although China had by far the highest number of seizures and observations (309 Snow Leopards from 2003-2016) and the highest annual poaching estimate, its share of Snow Leopard crime was not disproportionate to its large share (at least 60%) of Snow Leopard range. Countries flagged for having disproportionate shares of crime levels relative to share of range included Afghanistan and Russia (seizures and observations), and Nepal and Pakistan (annual poaching estimates). China and Russia were most frequently identified as destinations for animals poached in other countries.
The expert survey indicates that the scale of Snow Leopard crime is more serious than apparent from the annual average number of Snow Leopard seized (18) or observed (34) from 2003-2016. This could be in part due to the challenges of law enforcement in the Snow Leopard’s remote montane habitat. Indeed, the survey found that an average of 23% of known cases were investigated by authorities, and only 14% prosecuted.
The minimum number of Snow Leopards in the seizures and observations database fell by 43% from the first half of the analysis period (2003-2009) compared to the second (2010-June 2016) (from 451 to 259). However, the decline was in the number of Snow Leopards observed in trade and in market surveys, which fell by 80% (from 280 to 54), with the largest decline taking place in China. There were more market surveys in the first half of the analysis period (13) than the second (5), but they
TRAFFIC report: An Ounce Of Prevention: Snow Leopard Crime Revisited xi
were repeated in the same places (Kabul, Afghanistan and cities in western China), and far fewer skins were seen (for example, 60 skins in the Chinese city of Linxia in 2007, compared to one in 2011). The numbers of Snow Leopards in other observations were roughly equivalent for the two periods (108 in the first and 100 in the second), but the numbers in trade observations fell by 46% (from 52 to 28). Otherwise, the number of Snow Leopards seized rose by 16% (from 115 to 133), and the number of individual seizure cases rose by 77% (from 44 to 78). The number of poached Snow Leopards seized doubled (from 31 to 60), and the observed number of poached Snow Leopards also increased by 14% (from 56 to 64). The number of Snow Leopards in trade seizures was the same in both periods (55), and the number smuggled roughly equivalent (29 seized in the first period, and 24 seized and observed in the second).
There are three possible interpretations of this situation of rising numbers of Snow Leopards poached (as measured by seizures and observations), steady numbers in smuggling and trade seizures, and steeply declining numbers in trade observations and market surveys. It could be that the limitations of available data and the authors’ inability to collect all of it has resulted in an incorrect picture. It is apparent that illegal trade has become more clandestine and difficult to detect in most countries, so that secondly, it could be increasing, as indicated by the apparent rise in poaching numbers. However, the number of Snow Leopards seized in large cases (more than 3 Snow Leopards per case), indicative of organized trafficking activity, declined from 60 in the 2003-2009 to 23 in 2010-2016. This points to a third possibility: that trade (and perhaps demand) is declining, possibly due to increased enforcement, but local people continue to opportunistically sell Snow Leopards they poached primarily to protect livestock.
With skins being the main Snow Leopard product type in trade (78%), the primary motive for buyers appears to be for display, with some observations of skins hanging on walls in homes and restaurants, as well as stuffed taxidermy specimens. Priced in the thousands of US dollars, skins have been described as a “symbol of wealth and power.” However, there probably exists very little in the way of a definable consumer segment deliberately seeking out such items. They are most likely purchased opportunistically – “impulse buys” – and most consumers probably only buy one in their lifetime. Once in a home, the illegal possession has very low probability of detection, and moreover law enforcement authorities may be reluctant to investigate in such situations. The purchase itself also has a low probability of detection, as indicated by the sharp decline in observed numbers of Snow Leopard skins being offered for sale. While growing personal wealth in Asia has been highlighted as a primary driver of illegal wildlife trade, poverty is also recognized as a driver, and the Snow Leopard trade may be more driven by rural people in Snow Leopard habitat attempting to make money and make up for livestock losses to predators than by wealthy people placing orders for luxury household decorations. Unlike the demand-driven Tiger trade (Annex 2), to which it otherwise bears many similarities, the market for Snow Leopards may be more a function of supply, and actions should focus on the communities living near Snow Leopards to reduce incentives to poach and sell. This notion is reflected in the aphorism behind the title of this report: an ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure. Preventing livestock losses, offsetting the costs of losses and improving community support for Snow Leopard conservation are the most important approaches to tackling the problem of Snow Leopard trafficking.
Recommendations focus on addressing the leading cause of Snow Leopard poaching (retaliatory killing/Human-Wildlife Conflict) as well as measures to stem illegal trade, and are primarily targeted at the 12 Snow Leopard range countries. They are aligned with existing recommendations and planned actions, including CITES recommendations, draft Decisions and consultant’s reports around implementation of Resolution Conf. 12.5 (CITES 2015, 2016; Nowell and Pervushina, 2014); the Global Snow Leopard and Ecosystem Protection Program (GSLEP, 2013, 2015, n.d.); the SLN’s Snow Leopard Survival Strategy (SLN, 2014); and WWF’s Snow Leopard Species Action Plan (WWF, 2015 and Sharma, 2016). There was also an informal discussion about recommendations to address poaching and illegal trade at the Second China Snow Leopard Forum, held in Urumqi, Xinjiang province 24-26 August 2016 (B. Weckworth, Panthera, pers. comm.).
Recommendations are grouped according to four primary actors in Snow Leopard conservation: 1) governments of Snow Leopard range countries; 2) communities living in Snow Leopard range; 3) conservation organizations and Snow Leopard experts; and 4) donor governments and agencies.

https://snowleopardnetwork.org/b/show.php?record=1447

Li, J., McCarthy, T. M., Wang, H., Weckworth, B. V., Shaller, G. B., Mishra, C., Lu, Z., Beissinger, S. R. (2016). Climate refugia of snow leopards in High Asia. Biological Conservation, (203), 188–196.

Chetri, M., Odden, M., Wegge, P. (2017). Snow Leopard and Himalayan Wolf: Food Habits and Prey Selection in the Central Himalayas, Nepal. Plos, (12(2)), 2–16.

Abstract: Top carnivores play an important role in maintaining energy flow and functioning of the ecosystem,
and a clear understanding of their diets and foraging strategies is essential for
developing effective conservation strategies. In this paper, we compared diets and prey
selection of snow leopards and wolves based on analyses of genotyped scats (snow leopards
n = 182, wolves n = 57), collected within 26 sampling grid cells (5×5 km) that were distributed
across a vast landscape of ca 5000 km2 in the Central Himalayas, Nepal. Within the
grid cells, we sampled prey abundances using the double observer method. We found that
interspecific differences in diet composition and prey selection reflected their respective
habitat preferences, i.e. snow leopards significantly preferred cliff-dwelling wild ungulates
(mainly bharal, 57% of identified material in scat samples), whereas wolves preferred typically
plain-dwellers (Tibetan gazelle, kiang and argali, 31%). Livestock was consumed less
frequently than their proportional availability by both predators (snow leopard = 27%; wolf =
24%), but significant avoidance was only detected among snow leopards. Among livestock
species, snow leopards significantly preferred horses and goats, avoided yaks, and used
sheep as available. We identified factors influencing diet composition using Generalized Linear
Mixed Models. Wolves showed seasonal differences in the occurrence of small mammals/
birds, probably due to the winter hibernation of an important prey, marmots. For snow
leopard, occurrence of both wild ungulates and livestock in scats depended on sex and latitude.
Wild ungulates occurrence increased while livestock decreased from south to north,
probably due to a latitudinal gradient in prey availability. Livestock occurred more frequently
in scats from male snow leopards (males: 47%, females: 21%), and wild ungulates more frequently
in scats from females (males: 48%, females: 70%). The sexual difference agrees
with previous telemetry studies on snow leopards and other large carnivores, and may
reflect a high-risk high-gain strategy among males.

https://snowleopardnetwork.org/b/show.php?record=1450

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.

Keywords: community engagement, conservation, conservation programmes, Panthera uncia, partnership, snow leopard, stakeholder engagement

https://snowleopardnetwork.org/b/show.php?record=1451

Kashkarov, E. (2017). THE SNOW LEOPARD OF KIRGIZIA: NATIONAL SHAME OR NATIONAL PRIDE.239–253.

Kashkarov, E. (2017). ZOOGEOGRAPHICAL DISCOVERIES IN WESTERN BERINGIA.208–217.

Sivolobov, R. (2017). ENDANGERED SPECIES OF KORYAKIA AND CHUKOTKA: IRBIS, TIGER AND THE IRKUYEM-BEAR.225–233.

Suryawanshi, K. R., Redpath, S., Bhatnagar, Y. V., Ramakrishnan, U., Chaturvedi, V., Smout, S. C., Mishra, C. (2017). Impact of wild prey availability on livestock predation by snow leopards. Royal Society Open Science, , 1–11.

Murali, R., Lkhagvajav, P., Saeed, U., Kizi, V. A., Nawaz, M. A., Bhatnagar, Y. V., Sharma, K., Mishra, C. (2017). VALUATION OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES IN SNOW LEOPARD LANDSCAPES OF ASIA.

Abstract: Snow leopards occur in Asia�s high mountain ranges of the Himalayas, Hindu Kush, Karakoram, Pamir, Tien Shan, Kunlun, Altai and Sayan. In all the 12 countries where they occur, snow leopards face intensifying threats to their survival, including habitat fragmentation and degradation due to increasing human populations, mining and developmental projects, poaching and illegal wildlife trade, weak law enforcement, inadequate involvement of local people in conservation efforts, and depletion of natural prey populations due to hunting by people and overgrazing by livestock.
To address the urgent needs of conservation of the snow leopard and the sustainable development of mountain peoples, the Governments of snow leopard range countries came together and agreed to invest efforts to conserve snow leopards in 23 large landscapes across its range under the Global Snow Leopard Ecosystem Protection Program (GSLEP).
These landscapes where the snow leopards occur are inhabited by agro-pastoral and pastoral peoples who depend on well functioning ecosystems for ecosystem services, i.e., the benefits that humans derive from nature. Many threats that impact snow leopards also impact the well-being of people living in these landscapes. However, till date, there have been no studies that have attempted to quantify peoples� dependence on ecosystem services in snow leopard landscapes, or understand the impacts that alternate land-use decisions such as mining or infrastructure can have on the ecosystem services and on the local people who are dependent on them.
In this report, we provide the first assessment of the economic value of provisioning ecosystem services � the material goods from ecosystems � used by local people in five study sites from four GSLEP landscapes: Spiti Valley and Changtang region of Ladakh in India�s Hemis-Spiti Landscape, Gurez Valley in the Himalayan Landscape of Pakistan, Tost Nature Reserve in the South Gobi Landscape of Mongolia, and the Sarychat region in the Central Tien Shan Landscape of Kyrgyzstan. In study sites that had both pastoral and agro-pastoral communities, we estimated ecosystem services separately for the two production systems.The average value (± SE) of ecosystem services per household amongst the agro-pastoral
communities of Gurez Valley (4125 ± 190 USD/HH/yr) was 2.5 times the average local household income. In the agro-pastoral communities of Spiti Valley (3964 ± 334.8 USD/HH/yr) it was 3.6 times the average local household income, while it was 3.7 times amongst the agro-pastoral communities of Changtang (15083 ± 1656 USD/HH/yr). Amongst the pastoral communities, the value of ecosystem services used by households was several times higher than the average household income: it was 26.1 times amongst the pastoral communities of Changtang (79303 ± 9204 USD HH/yr), 38.7 times among communities in Tost Nature Reserve (150100 ± 13290 USD/HH/yr), and 7.4 times among the pastoral communities of Sarychat (25473 ± 5236 USD/HH/yr). It was lower, although still substantial at 0.6 times, for the downstream agro-pastoral communities living outside the landscape boundary in Sarychat (2094 ± 189 USD/HH/yr).
Our work reveals substantially high levels of dependence of local communities on ecosystem services provided by snow leopard landscapes of Asia. The estimated economic value of provisioning ecosystem services used by human households in these landscapes ranged from 0.6 to up to 40 times the local annual household incomes. This economic support that nature provides people is critical for humanity but remains hidden and unaccounted for. Land use change decisions, especially those that are damaging for nature and biodiversity, must start accounting for the value of ecosystem services in their cost-benefit analyses.

https://snowleopardnetwork.org/b/show.php?record=1458

Khatoon, R., Hussain, I., Anwar, M., Nawaz, M. A. (2017). Diet selection of snow leopard (Panthera uncia) in Chitral, Pakistan. Turkish Journal of Zoology, (14), 914–923.