| |
Abstract |
In the 1960s, the endangered snow leopard was locally extirpated from the Sagarmatha (Mt. Everest) region of Nepal. In this Sherpa-inhabited high Himalaya, the flourishing tourism since the ascent of Mt Everest in 1953, has caused both prosperity and adverse impacts, the concern that catalyzed the establishment of Mt. Everest National Park in the region in 1976. In the late 1980s, there were reports that some transient snow leopards may have visited the area from adjoining Tibet, but no biological surveys exist to confirm the status of the cats and their prey. Have snow leopards finally returned to the top of the world? Exploring this question was the main purpose of this research project. We systematically walked altogether 24 sign transects covering over 13 km in length in three valleys, i.e. Namche, Phortse and Gokyo, of the park, and counted several snow leopard signs. The results indicated that snow leopards have made a comeback in the park in response to decades of protective measures, the virtual cessation of hunting and the recovery of the Himalayan tahr which is snow leopard's prey. The average sign density (4.2 signs/km and 2.5 sign sites/km) was comparable to that reported from other parts of the cats' range in the Himalaya. On this basis, we estimated the cat density in the Everest region between 1 to 3 cats per 100 sq km, a figure that was supported by different sets of pugmarks and actual sightings of snow leopards in the 60 km2 sample survey area. In the study area, tahr population had a low reproductive rate (e.g. kids-to-females ratio, 0.1, in Namche). Since predators can influence the size and the structure of prey species populations through mortality and through non-lethal effects or predation risk, snow leopards could have been the cause of the population dynamics of tahr in Sagarmtha, but this study could not confirm this speculation for which further probing may be required. |
|
| |
Abstract |
The Ladakh urial (Ovis vignei vignei) is a highly endangered animal (IUCN Red List 2000) listed in the Appendix 1 of CITES and Schedule 1 of the Indian Wildlife Protection Act 1972. Its numbers had been reduced to a few hundred individuals in the 1960s and 70s through hunting for trophies and meat (Fox et al. 1991, Mallon 1983, Chundawat and Qureshi 1999, IUCN Red List 2000). However, with the protection bestowed by the IWPA 1972, and resultant decrease in hunting, the population seems to have shown a marginal increase to about 1000-1500 individuals in its range in Ladakh (Chundawat and Qureshi 1999, IUCN Red List 2000). Although the species had in the past, been able to coexist with the predominantly Buddhist society of Ladakh, the recent increase in the population of both humans and their livestock has placed immense pressures on its habitat (Shackleton 1997, Chundawat and Qureshi 1999, Raghavan and Bhatnagar 2003). This is especially important considering that the Ladakh urial habitat coincides with the areas of maximum human activity in terms of settlements, agriculture, pastoralism and development, in Ladakh (Fox et al. 1991, Chundawat and Qureshi 1999, Raghavan and Bhatnagar 2003). Increased developmental activities such as construction of roads, dams, and military bases in these areas have also increased the access to their habitat. This has consequently made the species more vulnerable to the threats of poaching and habitat destruction (Fox et al. 1991, Chundawat and Qureshi 1999, Raghavan and Bhatnagar 2002). Pressure from increased livestock grazing is one of the major threats faced by the species today (Shackleton 1997, Fox et al. 1991, Mallon 1983, IUCN Red List 2000 Chundawat and Qureshi 1999, Raghavan and Bhatnagar 2003). In the impoverished habitat provided by the Trans-Himalayas, there is great competition for the scarce resources between various animal species surviving here (Fox 1996, Mishra 2001). The presence of livestock intensifies this competition and can either force the species out of its niche (competitive exclusion) by displacing it from that area or resource, or lead to partitioning of resources between the species, spatially or temporally, for coexistence (Begon et al. 1986, Gause 1934). |
|
