| |
Abstract |
Snow leopards and agropastoral communities have co-existed in snow leopard range countries for centuries. The vulnerable snow leopard forms and maintains the entire ecosystem, serving as an indicator species of a healthy alpine ecosystem. However, snow leopards, on the other hand, habitually kill livestock, occasionally killing 100 or more livestock in a single night, resulting in snow leopard retaliation. Thus, the snow leopard is becoming more threatened, so more attention should be paid. Therefore, numerous conservation mitigation strategies have been applied to maintain human-snow leopard coexistence in countries of the snow leopard range. However, such implemented conservation strategies lacked a thorough assessment of their achievements or shortcomings in protecting the snow leopard and enhancing community tolerance. Therefore, we systematically examined and evaluated peer-reviewed articles and book chapters on existing and implemented mitigation measures. We use the software Publish or Perish to achieve this, and we assess using the Preferred Reporting of Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) review approach. We thoroughly analyzed 42 papers and book chapters that were condensed human- snow leopard co-existence-related literature published in English from 2010 to 2023. Almost 90% of the papers were country-specific, with the remaining papers covering regional or snow leopard ranges countries. Nepal had the most papers, followed by China, India, and Mongolia; however, Afghanistan, Bhutan, Pakistan, Russia, and Tajikistan each had<10%, but there was no single document from Kazakhstan or Kyrgyzstan. Predator-proof corral, improved herding practices, and community-based insurance programs were three of the key recommendations that were more than 10 to 22 times proposed interventions. There are site-specific sociocultural situations and environments that require long-term action-oriented research that is area-specific rather than short-term and generic interventions. We identified a large knowledge gap in snow leopard research, specifically a lack of evidence that demonstrates and quantifies the effects of conservation actions, and strongly advise that it be further researched. |
|
